from:"Gregory Williams"

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar tagging app

2020-11-08 Thread Gregory Williams

On Sun, 2020-11-08 at 15:17 +, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> On 19/10/2020 20:14, Gregory Williams wrote:
> > I've now got round to updating the code on my solar comparison site
> Suggestion for further improvement:  When a building is identifiable
> associated with a set of generators, only count one for comparison
> against the FIT data.  Then (say) a house with panels on two
> different
> roof-faces will not over-count for the geographical region.
> 
> (I just found an LSOA with 4 of 13 mapped.  But 2 were on one home.
> A terrace too, so now I must split it, so the 1 on another home in
> the block is really distinct)

Jeremy,

That certainly is one reason why the "completeness" figure is just a
guide, rather than an absolute. Perhaps you've seen that there are, for
example, some regions that have greater than 100% "completeness", and
I'm sure that multiple installations on a property does contribute to
this. Comparison with the FiT register will always never be perfect,
since as external observers we don't really know whether the multiple
sets of modules on a property are part of the same or separate FiT
contracts.

If the multiple instances on property have the same roof orientation
then you could use a multipolygon to collate those instances together.
Obviously this wouldn't be suitable for the multiple-roof scenario that
you describe, though.

You've also, pointed towards one of the gotchas that only counting a
single installation per property would currently have in many places.
We've got plenty of places where a terrace of houses have only been
mapped as a single building. Thus several installations, each on
separate properties, would only appear to be one installation when on a
single terrace building. It does, of course, give an incentive to go
out and map the addresses individually, of course! :-)

I'll consider how implementing this may be done in the code, but I
think it'll need some general tidying of it first; so wouldn't
necessarily be available straight away.

BTW, the code does actually do something similar already wrt solar
farms, to avoid overcounting the individual lines of modules in a
plant.

Cheers,

Gregory
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar tagging app

2020-10-19 Thread Gregory Williams

I've now got round to updating the code on my solar comparison site to
cater for these different ways of tagging the orientation. It considers
these tags in this order:

- generator:orientation=*
- direction=*
- tilted=no

Regular users of the site may have noticed that I also recently added
counts of mapped orientations and module counts to the chart on the
summary page. A noticeable jump in the counts for orientation should be
seen in tomorrow morning's update.

Cheers,

Gregory

On Tue, 2020-10-06 at 20:44 +0100, Dan S wrote:
> Let's officially change over to "direction" then. I've edited the
> wiki
> page to reflect that.
> 
> Best
> Dan
> 
> Op di 6 okt. 2020 om 19:40 schreef Jeremy Harris :
> > On 06/10/2020 16:44, Russ Garrett wrote:
> > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_United_Kingdom/Rooftop_Solar_PV
> > 
> > One difference I make vs. that is "direction" rather than
> > "generator:orientation".  In iD, at least, you get a nice visual
> > of the view-angle then.
> > 
> > I use a point and a module-count.  If it's flat, I use "tilted:no"
> > rather than a direction.
> > 
> > https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/YLx  is my current "look for missing
> > tags" hunter.  Pick your area then hit the Run button.
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >   Jeremy
> > 
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar tagging app

2020-10-05 Thread Gregory Williams

Thanks Russ!

I was only thinking of a similar idea just the other day. I've already
gone through probably a couple of hundred installations. Perhaps a
future extensions could allow:
- A "Are you sure that's a PV system?" option -- I've seen perhaps a
couple where I'm not sure whether it's actually a PV system. Perhaps a
check from another imagery source, or a ground survey, could clear
things up?
- Click twice to measure the orientation (although perhaps more suited
to using on a computer, rather than a mobile / tablet?)

Cheers,

Gregory

On Sun, 2020-10-04 at 15:41 +0100, Russ Garrett wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I got annoyed with tagging the number of modules in solar generators,
> so I put together a quick crowdsourcing app to collect this data:
> 
> https://solartagger.ru.dev/
> 
> It's definitely a lot quicker than trying to do this in an editor!
> 
> Once we have panel counts that multiple people have agreed on, I'll
> batch insert the data into OSM using a new account - I will update
> this list once that is happening.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar Power mapping update Q2 2020

2020-07-02 Thread Gregory Williams

Thanks Jerry, and thanks to everyone that's continued to contribute
more coverage.

The next quarter's update to the FiT register should be published in
the next few days. So I hope to find time to update the site to use
that soon.

I continue to be amazed at the steady progress in the coverage. Though,
as you say, there are quite a few areas where the imagery either just
isn't clear enough to untangle the ambiguities, or is clear but isn't
recent enough.

Personally, I've recently been trying to concentrate on a mixture of
areas with less than 10% coverage, and on the lightly-mapped LSOA
hotspots that my tool picked out.

Cheers,

Gregory

On Thu, 2020-07-02 at 18:56 +0100, SK53 wrote:
> We passed a couple of milestones a few days ago:
> 20% of FIT totals
> 170k individual panels mapped (excluding those in solar farms)
> In terms of coverage there are now well over 50 LAs (all in England &
> Wales) with more than 50% of solar installations mapped, with around
> 10 exceeding 80%. Areas with good coverage are:
> Scottish Central Belt: helped no doubt by more atomic data much of
> the Central Belt is around 20% mapped.
> North-East (former Tyne & Wear): Newcastle, Gateshead, Sunderland and
> North & South Tyne.
> North Wales: Conwy, Flint, Denbigh & Wrexham. Most panels in the
> first three are in the coastal resort towns, but reasonable rural
> coverage.
> North West: recent activity has been around Preston, Blackburn Wigan
> and Chorley.
> East Midlands: mainly Leics & Notts. Improved & recent imagery for
> Leicester made a huge difference.
> West Midlands: Warwickshire, Worcestershire & Herefordshire are
> roughly in the 20-30% zone. ALso extending into the South Wales
> valleys. brianboru's detailed mapping in the latter is another good
> index of rural coverage. 
> South Coast: Bournemouth area & Southampton, all at over 50%
> More rural areas continue to be challenging: older imagery which is
> often difficult to interpret doesn't help. I've experimented in
> places where every building is already mapped by stepping through
> each building, but still one may only find 20% of the number in FIT.
> 
> London and immediately adjacent areas also have relatively little
> mapped. Imagery can be a problem, but also finding panels in older
> and/or larger housing with more complex roof shapes is hard.
> 
> One thing I'm continually amazed at is how many places have buildings
> mapped, which is very helpful for this task. However in a couple of
> places: Ribble Valley & Leicester - it is clear that better imagery
> would allow existing building outlines to be improved, but also that
> plenty of buildings have been extended, demolished or replaced. This
> type of activity lends itself to combined work using tools such as
> Tasking Manager or MapRoulette and might be worth considering in the
> future for a quarterly project.
> 
> There's still no shortage of places where a lot of panels can be
> mapped quickly, although more systematic mapping of a single LA often
> requires a couple of passes over imagery. 
> 
> Looking forward to achieving the next milestones of 200k & 25%.
> 
> Jerry
> 
> Personally, I'm concentrating on areas adjacent to the existing well-
> mapped (50%+) areas with the aim of extending these areas.
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar panels 150k up

2020-05-12 Thread Gregory Williams

On Tue, 2020-05-12 at 11:08 +0100, SK53 wrote:
> Just would like to point out that we passed the 150,000 mark of solar
> panels mapped in the UK. Dan & Jez are best informed about solar
> farms, so the rest of this update is on small domestic rooftop
> installations.
> 
> A number of us continue to spend time mapping rooftop panels, and,
> although progress is not at the heady rate of last Summer, this has
> resulted in improved coverage of a number of local authorities. These
> are the activities of which I'm aware, there are no doubt others I've
> missed:
> I mainly aim to push reasonably well-mapped LAs over various
> thresholds (50%, 60% & 80% are the ones I find most useful), and to
> try & create a contiguous band of well-mapped (>50%) across England &
> Wales. Recently I've worked on Flintshire, Hinckley & Bosworth and
> Vale Royal.
> gurglypipe continues to spread out beyond Lancaster into South Lakes
> to the N & Ribbledale and to the S
> brianboru continues to pick up a significant number of installations
> across Herefordshire & the Welsh Valleys as part of general mapping
> work
> Gregory Williams continues to focus on hotspot unmapped LSOAs
> MapRoulette users make a steady contribution by converting panels
> mapped as nodes to areas
> Gregory has recently updated the FIT data to March which added
> perhaps 20,000 additional installations. To deal with these he had to
> change the LA boundaries used to incorporate unitary authorities
> (affecting Cheshire, Cornwall, Wiltshire, Shropshire, Northumberland
> & perhaps others). One consequence is that some well-mapped districts
> dropped below thresholds, so I've been working over the last few days
> to restore them if possible (Ashford, Hart & Rugby still to be hauled
> back over 50%). Very kindly, he agreed to retain the original
> district boundaries on a distinct web page, because I found working
> with the old districts of large rural counties more useful than the
> new boundaries.

The distinct web page is at:
http://osm.gregorywilliams.me.uk/solar_2001/

I also hope to soon have LSOA-level detail on the Scottish pages, which
should help with locating PV installations from aerial imagery more
easily -- I'm conscious that it's a bit difficult at the moment, with
the areas being so physically large.

> 
> As well as adding new panels here's still plenty to do with the ones
> already mapped: adding buildings under mapped panels, adjusting
> position, adding number of panels and orientation. 
> 
> Thanks to all who have contributed.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jerry
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar panels quarterly project progress

2019-07-31 Thread Gregory Williams

Last night I updated my solar mapping comparison tool to include coverage of 
Scotland. Unfortunately it had only covered England and Wales up until now 
because my comparison with the FiT register data was performed at the LSOA 
level. For Scotland, the comparison is being performed just at the local 
authority level. The tool is here:

http://osm.gregorywilliams.me.uk/solar/index.html
Some other recent additions that I've made to the tool are:

  *
A "Last updated" column -- showing the date of the last addition / change to a 
solar panel object here;
  *
A "FiT" layer, showing the relative number of PV installations that the FiT 
register has for this area, regardless of whether we've mapped them yet in OSM. 
I.e. a way to seek out where installations are situated, such that a survey can 
be planned;
  *
An "OSM objects" layer, that shows the location of each OSM-mapped PV 
installation, to help keep track of progress in systematically surveying for PV 
installations.

I'm hoping to find time to add further functionality over the coming weeks.

Gregory

Sent from 
Mailspring,
 the best free email app for work
On Jul 30 2019, at 9:05 pm, Dan S  wrote:
Hi all,

The current quarterly project is: solar panels. The good news: we've hit 25,000!
(From a baseline of fewer than 5,000 at the start of the year.)
https://twitter.com/mclduk/status/1156274870625472513

Great work folks. It'd be great to find a way to get other people to
help spot solar panels in their own neck of the woods. But we're on
our way!

Dan

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tools to support solar panel mapping?

2019-06-24 Thread Gregory Williams

I was thinking the same thing on the "hot-spots" functionality the other day.
I've just added that now. There's now a layer chooser, allowing choice between
"Comparison" (as before) and "FiT", which colours between the least and most
installations according to the FiT register in that local authority.

I'll try to address the other points as I get time -- all good points.

Updated version should appear online over the next few minutes.

Regards,

Gregory

Sent from
Mailspring<https://link.getmailspring.com/link/cfdcd41e-c871-4269-8a5a-c6f2690d1...@getmailspring.com/0?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fgetmailspring.com%2F&recipient=dGFsay1nYkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D>,
the best free email app for work
On Jun 24 2019, at 7:52 pm, SK53 wrote:
A few other things:

*
In practice we have relatively little mapped, so identifying 'hot-spot' LSOAs
quickly would be very useful. I just had a browse around and found a few with
around 50 FIT installations around the village of Selston (Ashfield District).
I haven't got them all, but am pleased to have added 125 quickly. I still only
managed to find 32 in one LSOA when the fit installation count is 51: I suspect
this is related to imagery date, rather than me missing obvious ones. The 50
installation threshold is a pretty high percentage of properties and represents
good bang for buck.
*
For the same reason sortable listings would be nice (also true on Robert's
various pages).
*
Cornwall has a large number (17k+), finding hotspots in a big county is very
useful.
*
From a QA viewpoint a count of location=roof or generator:location=roof might
be useful as well. All the FIT installs are likely to be of this type.

Jerry

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 at 19:41, Gregory Williams
mailto:greg...@gregorywilliams.me.uk>> wrote:
Thanks Jerry. I've spotted the bug and am regenerating the output now.

Regards,

Gregory

Sent from
Mailspring<https://link.getmailspring.com/link/4ae8c29b-ecc5-4d09-9329-484dfb9dd...@getmailspring.com/0?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fgetmailspring.com%2F&recipient=c2s1My5vc21AZ21haWwuY29t>,
the best free email app for work
On Jun 24 2019, at 3:28 pm, SK53
mailto:sk53@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Gregory,

I suspect this does not currently take account of roof-top solar power mapped
as nodes. My last tally for Nottingham is a total of 4,385 solar PV generators
(3,760 mapped as nodes, 625 as ways), compared with your total of 621. I added
solar panels on 3 houses on Saturday (one with 2 .generators because they face
in different directions). It would be massively helpful if nodes could be added.

In general it is much, much easier to map roof top solar as nodes, perhaps with
an estimate of the number of modules in the panel(currently we use
generator:solar:modules for this). Once one has one's eye in for a particular
area and sets of imagery it's best to capture the data as quickly as possible.
Mapping panels as areas is more complex, for relatively small gain. I did this
for a single area initially, and now tend to do it in two cases: a) larger
panels on schools, commercial buildings etc; and b) newly observed panels
noticed as part of general surveying or just casually. The choice of which to
do will depend on panel density in a neighbourhood, and whether buildings are
already mapped.

Regards,

Jerry

On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 21:20, Gregory Williams
mailto:greg...@gregorywilliams.me.uk>> wrote:
All,

I've also been working on a comparison tool for OSM solar mapping, as compared
with the FiT register. I've just placed an initial version here:

http://osm.gregorywilliams.me.uk/solar<https://link.getmailspring.com/link/9144b288-8b95-41e3-89bb-577401924...@getmailspring.com/0?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fosm.gregorywilliams.me.uk%2Fsolar&recipient=dGFsay1nYkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D>
My version compares at LLSOA level and then aggregates them up to their local
authorities and the whole country. It's been pretty much inspired by Robert
Whittaker and Greg RS's ever-useful comparison tools. It's functional, but
still needs some polish. Known issues include:

*
Currently updated manually. I currently hope to update every few days, and
eventually daily;
*
The tool differentiates between solar plants and generators, and avoids
counting individual generators in a plant. Currently, though, it counts plants
towards completeness, even though it's likely that these are solar farms in
excess of the size used in the FiT register;
*
Only the number of installations is used for comparison at present, not the
electricity output;
*
There are only maps on the local authority pages at the moment, not on the
country summary page.

I aim to add some more functionality to the site over the next few days and
weeks.

Regards,

Gregory

Sent from
Mailspring<https://link.getmailspring

Re: [Talk-GB] Tools to support solar panel mapping?

2019-06-24 Thread Gregory Williams

Thanks Jerry. I've spotted the bug and am regenerating the output now.

Regards,

Gregory

Sent from
Mailspring<https://link.getmailspring.com/link/4ae8c29b-ecc5-4d09-9329-484dfb9dd...@getmailspring.com/0?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fgetmailspring.com%2F&recipient=dGFsay1nYkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D>,
the best free email app for work
On Jun 24 2019, at 3:28 pm, SK53 wrote:
Hi Gregory,

Regards,

Jerry

On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 at 21:20, Gregory Williams
mailto:greg...@gregorywilliams.me.uk>> wrote:
All,

I've also been working on a comparison tool for OSM solar mapping, as compared
with the FiT register. I've just placed an initial version here:

I aim to add some more functionality to the site over the next few days and
weeks.

Regards,

Gregory

Sent from
Mailspring<https://link.getmailspring.com/link/9144b288-8b95-41e3-89bb-577401924...@getmailspring.com/1?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fgetmailspring.com%2F&recipient=dGFsay1nYkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D>,
the best free email app for work
On Jun 10 2019, at 8:37 pm, Dan S
mailto:danstowell%2b...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi all,

Following up on this thread about tools to support solar mapping -
just to say that thanks to Sylwia Mielnicka there's a map of
completeness-per-postcode-district:
https://bl.ocks.org/SylwiaOliwia2/cf0d679e81a7c8bfee189ec364bb
I think this is going to get set up to run daily updates or similar.
Discussion forum:
<http://openclimatefix.discourse.group/t/plot-solar-panels-not-added-to-osm-yet/56/3>

There's also a chance that we can get this at higher granularity (for
England and Wales) at least, by using LSOAs rather than postcode
districts. Another person has said they'll have a go at merging the
two granularities.

Best
Dan

Op do 23 mei 2019 om 08:57 schreef Dan S
mailto:danstowell%2b...@gmail.com>>:

Related to the idea of solar panel mapping, I've had a request for
info about what sort of software tools might help support this work.
We might be using some of the familiar tools (e.g. streetcomplete,
openinframap, ... even tasking manager?).

It'd be useful to have something like
completeness-by-postcode-district. Unlike Robert's postbox tools, we
don't have any official ID numbers for the items-to-map, we just have
some official stats (to be taken with a pinch of salt) about how many
are in each postcode district - but still, that could be a start.

I'd also be interested in some tool that predicts where to look, which
might be based on analysing imagery, but perhaps more realistically
based on some mix of heuristics and official data.

Any thoughts?

Best
Dan

Re: [Talk-GB] Tools to support solar panel mapping?

2019-06-23 Thread Gregory Williams

All,

I've also been working on a comparison tool for OSM solar mapping, as compared 
with the FiT register. I've just placed an initial version here:

http://osm.gregorywilliams.me.uk/solar
My version compares at LLSOA level and then aggregates them up to their local 
authorities and the whole country. It's been pretty much inspired by Robert 
Whittaker and Greg RS's ever-useful comparison tools. It's functional, but 
still needs some polish. Known issues include:


  *
Currently updated manually. I currently hope to update every few days, and 
eventually daily;
  *
The tool differentiates between solar plants and generators, and avoids 
counting individual generators in a plant. Currently, though, it counts plants 
towards completeness, even though it's likely that these are solar farms in 
excess of the size used in the FiT register;
  *
Only the number of installations is used for comparison at present, not the 
electricity output;
  *
There are only maps on the local authority pages at the moment, not on the 
country summary page.

I aim to add some more functionality to the site over the next few days and 
weeks.

Regards,

Gregory

Sent from 
Mailspring,
 the best free email app for work
On Jun 10 2019, at 8:37 pm, Dan S  wrote:
Hi all,

Following up on this thread about tools to support solar mapping -
just to say that thanks to Sylwia Mielnicka there's a map of
completeness-per-postcode-district:
https://bl.ocks.org/SylwiaOliwia2/cf0d679e81a7c8bfee189ec364bb
I think this is going to get set up to run daily updates or similar.
Discussion forum:


There's also a chance that we can get this at higher granularity (for
England and Wales) at least, by using LSOAs rather than postcode
districts. Another person has said they'll have a go at merging the
two granularities.

Best
Dan


Op do 23 mei 2019 om 08:57 schreef Dan S :

Hi

Related to the idea of solar panel mapping, I've had a request for
info about what sort of software tools might help support this work.
We might be using some of the familiar tools (e.g. streetcomplete,
openinframap, ... even tasking manager?).

It'd be useful to have something like
completeness-by-postcode-district. Unlike Robert's postbox tools, we
don't have any official ID numbers for the items-to-map, we just have
some official stats (to be taken with a pinch of salt) about how many
are in each postcode district - but still, that could be a start.

I'd also be interested in some tool that predicts where to look, which
might be based on analysing imagery, but perhaps more realistically
based on some mix of heuristics and official data.

Any thoughts?

Best
Dan

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tools to support solar panel mapping?

2019-05-24 Thread Gregory Williams

I note that the FiT register data does have the LLSOA for each entry. So I
think that could be used as a means of measuring completeness in a more
granular manner than local authority or the first half of the postcode. The OSM
data can also be determined per LLSOA. Both the number of installations and the
total generating capacity could be used. It'd never be perfect, but would help
to identify areas to survey on the ground.

Gregory

Sent from
Mailspring,
the best free email app for work
On May 23 2019, at 11:57 pm, Dan S wrote:
Thanks Rob - we're using the FiT register already, but please note
that it doesn't disclose any official IDs (for privacy reasons, I
presume) so there's no "primary key", no definitive way to join the
dots e.g. across different versions of the FiT data. The REPD has a
primary key but it only covers larger installations. Most
installations, even if we can find metadata for them, we can't find an
official ID, AFAIK?

Dan

Op do 23 mei 2019 om 23:03 schreef Rob Nickerson :

we don't have any official ID numbers for the items-to-map

I'm almost certain I have pointed it out here already, but in case not: any
solar PV installation which is receiving a subsidy will be registered and will
therefore have an ID. Larger installations are installed in the Renewable
Obligations register. Smaller sites are in the Feed In Tariff register.

The FiT register can be downloaded (in 3 parts) from:
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications-and-updates/feed-tariff-installation-report-31-march-2019

The RO register can be obtained from the following site. You need to click
"view public reports", then "Accredited Stations", Next set the page size to 25
and view the report. Once loaded you can then click the export drop down (the
save icon/floppy disk) and export the full register to a CSV.
https://www.renewablesandchp.ofgem.gov.uk/

P.S. this is good for almost all sites built up to now. Going forward then
other sources will need to be found* as the subsidy schemes have come to an end.

* there are none.

Best regards,
Rob

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Documenting prow_ref formats (Was: MapthePaths & Lancashire)

2018-07-18 Thread Gregory Williams

I think it's Non-Civil Parish.

Sent from Mailspring 
(https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/0?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fgetmailspring.com%2F&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D),
 the best free email app for work
On Jul 19 2018, at 2:14 am, Andrew Black  wrote:
>
> Surrey seems ot have a format of " Banstead NCP 123A". But existing entries 
> in OSM are "FP 37".
>
> What does NCP mean. I will enter then as f " Banstead FP 37" unless told 
> otherwise!
>
>
>
>
> On 14 July 2018 at 17:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
>  (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/1?redirect=mailto%3Arobert.whittaker%2Bosm%40gmail.com&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)>
>  wrote:
> > On 13 July 2018 at 19:26, Andrew Black  > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/2?redirect=mailto%3Aandrewdblack%40googlemail.com&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)>
> >  wrote:
> > > I am pondering a similar but simpler question. I would like to add a table
> > > listing each authority at 
> > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:prow_ref 
> > > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/3?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.openstreetmap.org%2Fwiki%2FKey%3Aprow_ref&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)
> > > describing the conventions used.
> >
> > I've been working on something like this already as part of my PRoW
> > Progress/Comparison tool at
> > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/ 
> > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/4?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Frobert.mathmos.net%2Fosm%2Fprow%2Fprogress%2F&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)
> >  . The tool needs to know
> > the format that's used in each area in order to correctly parse the
> > prow_ref values use in OSM, and to generate Right of Way numbers to
> > display. The formats are stored in my database as a regular expression
> > for parsing and a sprinf format string for generating the output. I've
> > been displaying the formats on the county and parish pages for some
> > time, but I've now added a page showing the formats for each county
> > where one is defined:
> >
> > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ 
> > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/5?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Frobert.mathmos.net%2Fosm%2Fprow%2Fref-formats%2F&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)
> > These are the formats currently used by my tool. They may not always
> > be the best one, as sometimes there didn't seem to be a consistent
> > format in use (either by the Council or in OSM), and so sometimes I've
> > just opted for my default "[Parish Name] [Type] [Number]" style. I can
> > add other counties on request. I'm also more than happy to amend any
> > of the formats already there if there's a consensus amongst local
> > mappers to use something different.
> >
> > One thing to be aware of though, is that the GIS data provided by the
> > councils is usually not the official Definitive Map, but just a
> > working representation of it. Often the council will assign reference
> > numbers to parishes, and segment numbers to the ways that are just for
> > internal convenience, and don't form part of the official PRoW number
> > as defined in the Definitive Map and Statement. My philosophy in the
> > above is to try to stick to the official numbering as used in the
> > Definitive Map and Statement.
> >
> > I plan to add a download of the data at
> > http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/ref-formats/ 
> > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/6?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Frobert.mathmos.net%2Fosm%2Fprow%2Fref-formats%2F&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)
> >  (probably in JSON
> > format) at some point so anyone else who wants to can make us of this
> > data more easily. I also have CSV files containing parish IDs and
> > names for the counties where it's necessary to do this translation,
> > which I can make available. For those using rowmaps data, sometimes
> > you'll find the parish name in the INFO field, but the presence and
> > format of this varies from county to county.
> >
> > Robert.
> > --
> > Robert Whittaker
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org 
> > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.com/7?redirect=mailto%3ATalk-GB%40openstreetmap.org&recipient=VGFsay1HQkBvcGVuc3RyZWV0bWFwLm9yZw%3D%3D)
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb 
> > (https://link.getmailspring.com/link/1531978742.local-ca768658-9c97-v1.2.2-96fb3...@getmailspring.c

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Postcode Error Reports

2016-11-16 Thread Gregory Williams


I think that most of the reduction was due to me going through the obvious 
formatting issues last weekend. I used an import from the Geofabrik GB extract 
into an osm2pgsql database looking at the addr:postcode and postal_code tags. 
The database enabled me to easily get the appropriate OSM object IDs such that 
I could download and fix each in turn using JOSM after using some judgement.

I've also fixed a few way-off postcodes when compared to the distances to that 
which OS OpenData CodePoint thought that their centroids were at -- things like 
postcodes in Edinburgh (EH) mistakenly typed in with an Enfield (EN) postcode 
-- also identified using my import into PostGIS. Cases which were less clear 
I've added notes for, to have local mappers review.

Gregory
⁣

Sent from BlueMail



On 16 Nov 2016 20:36, at 20:36, "Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)" 
 wrote:
>My daily report of addr:postcode value errors at
>http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postcodes/osm-errors.html seems to be
>being used by at least one other person, since the numbers of errors
>showing there has dropped significantly now. The page is regenerated
>daily, but unfortunately the data hasn't been refreshed for a few days
>now because the source data on which it relies (The Geofrabrik GB
>extract via the GB Taginfo instance) hasn't been updated in that time.
>
>I've also starting playing with a second report that lists location
>discrepancies of postcode-tagged OSM objects compared with the
>postcode centroid locations in Code-Point Open. This is less of an
>exact science, since postcodes will not all be located at the centroid
>for that postcode unit, and the allowable deviations vary depending on
>the unit. However, you can find an initial list of postcodes that are
>more than 1km from their official centroid at
>http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postcodes/location-errors.cgi -- there
>are about 1500 of them, although quite a few are in groups where the
>same postcode is on multiple neighbouring objects. Presumably most of
>the 1500 will be cases of a typo being made by an editor or in the
>data source they used, so they'll need manual checking and updating.
>
>If anyone fancies looking at any of these please feel free to dive in.
>If you find any false positives (i.e. errors in the processing, or
>postcodes that genuinely are that far from their centroid), please let
>me know, and I'll see if there's anything that can be improved in the
>tool, or if they need to be marked manually as ok.
>
>Robert.
>
>-- 
>Robert Whittaker
>
>___
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Changeset #36985172 revert request - Deal area, Kent

2016-02-04 Thread Gregory Williams

The JOSM reverter doesn't seem to be working at the moment, so I've 
used Frederick Ramm's perl reverter script [1] to perform the revert. A 
few relations seem to have been edited since (presumably the 
coastline). I've taken a cursory glance through the boundaries and 
route relations and they seem to be OK, but I'll try to sanity check 
the data in more depth after work tonight.


Gregory

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Revert_scripts

On Thu, 4 Feb, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Colin Smale  
wrote:

Thanks Gregory. The epicentre seems to be Ringwould village.


Colin

On 2016-02-04 17:50, Gregory Williams wrote:

I did the original mapping of Deal, so I'll take a look later, when 
I can get to a PC.


Gregory

Sent from my FairPhoneOn 4 Feb 2016 16:13, Andy Townsend 
 wrote:


On 04/02/2016 15:49, Colin Smale wrote:


Actually, this user has done a lot more damage, in many other 
changesets over the past few weeks... Methinks a candidate for a 
block pending contact... Anyone with an interest in the Deal area 
is recommended to check the area...ent



I'd suggest that a friendly "hello and welcome and by the way 
something seems to have gone a bit wrong" message would be more 
helpful at this time - it's technically much easier to sort out the 
data than it is to get a keen mapper back who was scared off 
because they don't understand what they've done wrong.  Currently I 
can see only 2 comments in changeset discussions (saying 
essentially "you broke stuff and I fixed it"; not offering to help).


Obviously any help and assistance would be better coming from 
someone in the local area; 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/oooc?zoom=9&lat=51.19266&lon=1.54631&layers=B00 
may be useful here to try and get someone local involved.


Cheers,

Andy (SomeoneElse)



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Changeset #36985172 revert request - Deal area, Kent

2016-02-04 Thread Gregory Williams

I did the original mapping of Deal, so I'll take a look later, when I can get 
to a PC.

Gregory

Sent from my FairPhoneOn 4 Feb 2016 16:13, Andy Townsend  
wrote:
>
> On 04/02/2016 15:49, Colin Smale wrote:
>>
>> Actually, this user has done a lot more damage, in many other changesets 
>> over the past few weeks... Methinks a candidate for a block pending 
>> contact... Anyone with an interest in the Deal area is recommended to check 
>> the area...ent
>
>
> I'd suggest that a friendly "hello and welcome and by the way something seems 
> to have gone a bit wrong" message would be more helpful at this time - it's 
> technically much easier to sort out the data than it is to get a keen mapper 
> back who was scared off because they don't understand what they've done 
> wrong.  Currently I can see only 2 comments in changeset discussions (saying 
> essentially "you broke stuff and I fixed it"; not offering to help).
>
> Obviously any help and assistance would be better coming from someone in the 
> local area; 
> http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/oooc?zoom=9&lat=51.19266&lon=1.54631&layers=B00
>  may be useful here to try and get someone local involved.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy (SomeoneElse)
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway bridge numbers

2013-04-09 Thread Gregory Williams

Yes, this is what I do. In fact the example which Chris picked out was done by 
me a few years ago when I cycled through the area. I’ve tagged quite a few 
bridges like this in Kent. You’ll also notice that I’ve included the operator, 
operator’s phone number, bridge name, etc. on the relation too when they’re 
included on the sign.

 

Railway structure numbers seem to have a letter portion, which denotes the 
line, and a sequential numeric portion. Occasionally there are places where an 
extra bridge has been added and these have a letter suffix, just like extra 
motorway junctions.

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

 

From: Chris Hill [mailto:o...@raggedred.net] 
Sent: 09 April 2013 14:55
To: Andy Mabbett; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Railway bridge numbers

 

Some railway bridges near me have already been added to a bridge relation, not 
by me, that includes the reference. See 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/446579 as an example. I don't know 
if this a good idea or not, nor if the number is what you have in mind.

Cheers, Chris
OSM User chillly

Andy Mabbett mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> > 
wrote:

All railway bridges (over- and under-) in the UK have a unique number.
often carried on a metal (more recently plastic) identification plate,
or painted on:

http://www.semgonline.com/structures/numbering.html

Among other things, these are used to speedily identify the bridge in
case of a vehicle strike which may pose a danger to trains or other
traffic:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/3563.aspx

Do we have a scheme for tagging UK railway bridges with their numbers?
I have looked on Wiki, and can't find anything, and my local bridges
are either not tagged; or tagged (for example) ref = B4124:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/103233329

which does not identify that number as being a NetworkRail reference
(if indeed it is, being on a road overbridge maintained by the local
authority).

If we do not have something more specific, I'm happy to draft
something for discussion.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk


  _  


Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org  
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] European Walking Route E2 / Staffordshire Way / Viking Way

2013-01-09 Thread Gregory Williams

(Ooops. I managed to send this directly to Nick; I meant to reply to group)

I know that E2 exists down here in Kent. In the past couple of years a number 
of new signs have been put up on the North Downs Way, which E2 follows. These 
include an insert with a European flag and E2 on them.

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Whitelegg [mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk]
> Sent: 09 January 2013 09:13
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] European Walking Route E2 / Staffordshire Way /
> Viking Way
> 
> 
> (Sorry for top posting and lack of quote marks, duff mail client)
> 
> FWIW I'm sure E2 exists. I remember recently reading something about the
> Pennine Way which suggests it was coincidental with the European route E2.
> 
> Wikipedia would appear to confirm:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E2_European_long_distance_path
> 
> Nick
> 
> -SomeoneElse  wrote: -
> To: talk-gb 
> From: SomeoneElse 
> Date: 09/01/2013 01:10AM
> Subject: [Talk-GB] European Walking Route E2 / Staffordshire Way / Viking
> Way
> 
> Does anyone know what's going on with European Walking Route E2?
> 
> I first spotted it when someone split the Staffordshire Way into 3 and added
> the middle relation to a new E2 super-relation.  I found that a bit odd, but 
> no
> odder than adding unsigned C-road references to the map.
> 
> 
> I've recently looked again and found that that super-relation is no more and a
> new series have been created:
> 
> West Midlands:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1976230
> (contains lots of the individual ways that also form the Staffordshire Way,
> and some others)
> 
> East Midlands:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1976182
> (contains lots of the individual ways that also form the Viking Way, and some
> others)
> 
> 
> These are in turn part of:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1959505
> 
> which consists of:
> Way Lower Lees Road (153526213)
> Way Henley Road (147988092)
> Way Henley Road (147988091)
> Relation European walking route E2, UK, West Midlands (1976230)
> Relation European walking route E2, UK, South East England (1976229)
> Relation European walking route E2, UK, East of England (1976183)
> Relation European walking route E2, UK, Yorkshire and the Humber (1976184)
> Relation European walking route E2, UK, East Midlands (1976182)
> Way Preston Road (152559211)
> 
> (a curious mixture of ways and relations)
> 
> which is in turn part of:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1956169
> 
> which is a European E2 super-relation.  Here "operator:uk" is defined as
> "Long Distance Walkers Association", which also seems odd.
> 
> But E2 isn't mentioned here at all:
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Europe/Long-
> distance_paths
> 
> The West Midlands part of E2 seems to miss the last 6-months's updates
> that I've made to the Staffordshire Way, which would suggest that
> defining this bit of E2 in terms of the middle bit of the Staffordshire
> Way would save whoever's updating it the job of manually editing it.
> 
> It's the same with the East Midlands piece, as can be seen here:
> 
> http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=11&lat=53.08111&lon=-
> 0.68741&hill=0
> 
> 
> Does anyone know where this mystery E2 is coming from?  I'm sure there
> are lots of sources on the web, but are any of them suitably licenced
> for inclusion in OSM?  I don't believe that I have ever (on the
> Staffordshire Way or the Viking Way) seen an E2 signpost on the ground.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andy
> 
> (this question was prompted by me trying to update
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Staffordshire_Way#Progress to say
> something sensible)
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Marking landuse and field boundaries

2013-01-03 Thread Gregory Williams

One feature that I've found that I now use quite frequently to help with the
problems associated with increasingly detailed mapping is the Filter panel
in JOSM. Now that, for example, there's lots of landuse, buildings, and
highways all in fairly close proximity I have filters to pick out, for
example, just the highways. That enables me to avoid accidentally selecting
an adjacent woodland to a highway when adding a maxspeed for example.

 

One of the levels of detail that I've been collecting recently is the
maxspeed of all the roads in my area. I have a filter set up such that roads
with a maxspeed are dimmed, such that I can easily see the places that I
still need to gather the data, and such that I don't miss tagging those
small portions of roads, like turning heads and bridges.

 

From: Nick Allen [mailto:nick.allen...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 02 January 2013 22:24
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Marking landuse and field boundaries

 

Steve,

Putting another perspective on this, one of my other hobbies is Scouting,
where I try to teach young people about maps & navigation. In this country
there is a tendency to assume that any navigation must involve OS maps, & I
try to widen their knowledge & get them to question the accuracy of anything
they are using for navigation. I've put in quite a few boundaries &
barriers, to OSM, and I produce paper maps for my Scouts to navigate by,
before I introduce them to compasses, GPS's & anything else that aids
navigation.

As a mapper, I do find that it is getting more & more difficult to alter or
add to data because we've added so much detail. I would like someone (sorry,
don't have any skills in the software department) to produce something that
aids in editing densely compacted data - certainly I've made my share of
mistakes in the past & then spent twice as long trying to correct them. 

I don't know about anyone else, but every so often I need a break from
walking residential streets collating address details, and a walk in the
countryside works for me.

Regards

Nick (Tallguy)

On 02/01/13 15:50, Steven Horner wrote:

I guess it depends on your uses for OSM, I come from a walking
backgroundwith GIS use in my day job, I have completed Mountain Leader
Training and I am interested in the possibilities of replacing Explorer maps
(one day) with OSM. For this to happen boundaries would be  useful although
not essential and their would be lot of other hurdles like Grids but that's
a different topic. 

 

I set this discussion away and expected different view points for and
against. My take on all this is if you are happy to go out and map them,
then do so. If someone else isn't interested in doing that then that's no
problem and if a user doesn't want that information shown on map it could be
removed from their rendering in the same way I wish it was available at
lower zoom levels.

 

OSM is different things to different people and that is part of the beauty
of it, in my mind the more detail the better the ability to view it our own
ways is available although I wish their was a way to turn some things on and
off more easily from Openstreetmap.org without rendering my own version.

 

 

 

On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Dave F. mailto:dave...@madasafish.com> > wrote:

On 31/12/2012 21:17, Steven Horner wrote:

Personally I would love to see fields (landuse) and the walls/fences that
make this up marked on OSM ...


I'm afraid I'm going to be a bit of a party pooper.

Whilst having all the boundary data in OSM would be nice, I'd hardly call it
essential. I do a lot of rural walking & always record & map any barriers
that are relevant to the path I'm on, but, personally,  I consider mapping
all hedges etc. a waste of time. Why bother if no one is ever going to use
that information by walking there?

I consider farmland as the base layer & therefore rarely map it as fields.

Cheers
Dave F.





 

-- 
   www.stevenhorner.com
   

    @stevenhorner
  

    0191 645 2265 

    stevenhorner






___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org  
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=

2013-01-02 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
> [mailto:robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 02 January 2013 11:23
> To: talk-gb
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=
> 
> On 31 December 2012 16:38, David Groom  wrote:
> > Not that I'm overly bothered, but since the wiki was only changed a
> > few hours ago, and tag info statistics seem to show a greater usage of
> > prow:ref, I'd have thought standardising on that (and changing the
> > wiki) would have been the better option.
> 
> Do you remember what figures were you looking at?
> 
> The taginfo data I'm looking at today at
> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=prow_ref is dated as
> "2013-01-02 00:58 UTC" and shows 670 uses of prow_ref, versus only 361 of
> prow:ref. Have things changed that much in a couple of days?
>

Sorry that's probably mainly down to me, but I never got round to emailing
this list. After reading the email the other day pointing out that prow_ref
is more in keeping with things like old_ref and int_ref and that prow:ref
implied a prow namespace I was inclined to agree. As somebody that's put in
quite a few prow:ref tags I went and changed them to prow_ref, but got
interrupted before I could send a quick email to the list.

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Unfit for motors - tagging for routing

2012-12-10 Thread Gregory Williams

"motor_vehicle=no" says that motor vehicles aren't legally allowed along the
road. That's not the case as Aidan has pointed out that these are the
blue-backed advisory signs. If going with the commonly-used tags then I
think that, whilst it's still technically not right,
"motor_vehicle=destination" would be a better "hack". However I don't like
hacks.

 

There are several roads near me marked "Unsuitable for HGVs", a similar
blue-backed advisory sign, which I've tagged with "hgv=unsuitable". I don't
know whether any of the routers actually do anything with this at the
moment, but I think that the best tagging for the "Unfit for motors" would
be the equivalent "motor_vehicle=unfit" or "motor_vehicle=unsuitable".
Personally I can't see any difference between saying "unfit" or
"unsuitable", so I'd be tempted to go with the one that's currently got the
greatest number of uses, "motor_vehicle=unsuitable" (though with only 11
uses according to taginfo it's hardly high!; 0 instances of
"motor_vehicle=unfit").

 

I think that changing the class of the road to service isn't the best way of
recording the data. These roads will quite often legally be an unclassified
highway and changing the class away from that just isn't accurate. In my
view it'd be better for the routers to start taking into account the
"x=unsuitable" style of tagging, though I realise that it's the usual
chicken and egg situation here when the use of such tags is currently very
sparse.

 

From: Aidan McGinley [mailto:aidmcgin+openstreet...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 10 December 2012 14:30
To: cotswolds mapper
Cc: talk-gb
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Unfit for motors - tagging for routing

 

  motor_vehicle=no
should suffice I would have thought?

On 10 December 2012 13:36, cotswolds mapper mailto:osmcotswo...@gmail.com> > wrote:

There are lots of roads where I map which have "Unfit for motors" signs
(blue/white advisory) but are normal maintained roads in limited but regular
use. Typically they are narrowish, with lots of bends and often steep. In
general anything up to maybe the size of a skip lorry can get through
(though some are too narrow), but what makes them unfit for motors is very
long stretches without passing places,so if you meet something coming the
other way, one of you has a very long, difficult reverse.

 

They are currently tagged in OSM as minor roads, which of course means they
are eligible for routing. As an example, most (all?) routing services (not
just OSM-based, Google Maps has the same problem) will route Chalford Hill
to Stroud along Dark Lane, but Dark Lane has an "Unfit for motors" sign.
It's the shortest and most direct route from the A419 to most of Chalford
Hill, but very few locals use it. 

 

I'd like to tag these roads so that routing services will avoid them, but
can't find any direct way of doing this. I've seen elsewhere that one mapper
has tagged similar roads as Service roads. This has two advantages: routing
services will ignore them(?); and service roads render differently so anyone
using the map visually will be less likely to use these roads. It's pushing
the current definition of service road rather a lot, but if you consider a
service road to be a road that should only be used to access locations
connected to the service road, then it seems within the spirit of the
definition.

 

There's a specific issue with Chalford Hill at the moment. Road closures
(due to collapsed retaining walls) mean that the popular routes to the
valley (Old Neighbourhood and to a lesser extent Coppice Hill) are closed
and likely to remain so for over a month. My local source (a parish
councilor) says that most locals are using a long diversion and avoiding
Dark Lane. (Traffic on Dark Lane has increased, and there was recently a
fist fight when two cars met and neither driver would reverse. Locals want
to make it temporarily one way, which would massively increase its
usefulness, but there's no quick way of doing this.)

 

My two questions:

 

1) Should OSM data discourage use of routes that locals -  who are likely to
be better than outsiders at coping with narrow lanes - avoid as too
problematic;

 

2) Is tagging usable but 'Unfit for motors' roads as service roads an
acceptable way of doing this or is there a better method (that is recognised
by current renderers and routing engines).

 

As my opinion on (1) is yes, I've tagged Dark Lane and a couple of even more
difficult roads as service roads, at least for the duration of the road
closures, but will happily revert the tag if there's a better way.

 

Rob


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org  
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Sittingbourne

2012-11-30 Thread Gregory Williams

Chris,

 

I fully agree with these points. I've done a reasonable amount of mapping in
Sittingbourne, but my mapping tends to be centred around highways rather
than landuse or buildings. I have updated some similar tagging to what you
describe on schools in the past such that the buildings are tagged with
building=school and the extent of their grounds is tagged with
amenity=school, rather than the previous building=yes + amenity=school on
the same buildings.

 

I believe that lots of the buildings have been derived from automated
OS_OpenData_StreetView tracing by OSM user SemanticTourist. That probably
explains why they appear to cover multiple actual buildings in reality and
that they shape doesn't always correspond terribly well to the crisper
buildings you can see in the Bing imagery there. You may have noticed that
the building coverage actually spreads beyond just Sittingbourne to quite a
sizable chunk of Swale borough centred on the town.

 

Thanks for the work you've done here so far. As far as I'm concerned as a
local mapper feel free to update the problematic tagging as you've
described. I'll probably be able to help out eventually, but am currently
concentrating on getting widespread maxspeed coverage in the eastern half of
Kent and would prefer to get this essentially complete before starting
another large mapping challenge.

 

Gregory

 

From: Chris Baines [mailto:cbain...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 29 November 2012 20:59
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Sittingbourne

 

I was looking at the OSM Inspector, and happened to notice a large red bit
over Sittingbourne [1], on closer inspection, there seems to loads of good
data for Sittingbourne in OSM. However in my opinion, its not presented
(tagged, ...) in the best way. 

The three issues that I have seen are:
 - landuse=residential building=yes tags on the buildings
   - in most cases this should just be building=house
 - building footprints are too big and often cover many houses
   - just need spiting up, one house, one building way
 - addr data separate from the building outlines
   - merge data per [3]

So, if anyone is having problems finding places to map... Also, if anyone
disagrees with the above assessment, please shout. I have already done a bit
of improvement here [2].

1: http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses

&lon=0.73599&lat=51.34400&zoom=14&overlays=buildings,buildings_with_addresse
s,postal_code,nodes_with_addresses_defined,nodes_with_addresses_interpolated
,no_addr_street,street_not_found,interpolation,interpolation_errors,connecti
on_lines,nearest_points,nearest_roads
2: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.335704

&lon=0.73662&zoom=18&layers=M
3: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

2012-10-31 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: Shaun McDonald [mailto:sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk]
> Sent: 31 October 2012 15:21
> On 31 Oct 2012, at 14:49, Matt Williams  wrote:
> 
> > On 31 October 2012 14:37, David Fisher  wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> The pedestrianised main shopping street in Croydon has a sign with
> >> the following wording: "Pedestrian Zone.  No vehicles except cycles
> >> and for loading 6pm-10am."
> >> How would you interpret that?  I see at least 3 possibilities:
> >>
> >> (a) Cycles permitted at any time; loading only permitted 6pm-10am
> >> (this is what I guess is the correct one)
> >> (b) Cycles and loading only permitted 6pm-10am (this would also make
> >> sense; i.e. cycling only outside shopping hours)
> >> (c) Restrictions apply 6pm-10am (clearly ludicrous!)
> >> (d) Something else?
> >>
> >> I'm guessing it's meant to be (a), but just thought I'd canvas
> >> opinion before tagging.
> >
> > I think I agree with (a). I would find it a little strange to disallow
> > cycling just during the day (why not just ban it entirely?).
> 
> The centre pedestrianised bit of Ipswich has cycling banned from 10:30am -
> 4:30pm. It does get pretty busy during that time.
> http://goo.gl/maps/ouha1

Canterbury also has a cycle ban in its pedestrianised high street between
10:30 and 16:00 for the same reason -- there's usually lots of people
walking about shopping and taking in the sights during the day. Keeping the
restriction to these times still allows people to commute to work by
bicycle.

As for the sign I think I'd interpret it slightly differently depending upon
the exact layout of the sign. I.e. whether the layout makes it clearer
exactly which highway users are bound by the time restriction. Also I think
my interpretation would differ between (a) and (b) depending upon which
restriction sign is shown at the top. Is it an empty red circle, or the "low
flying motorcycle" one? Do you have a photo that you could post?

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes

2012-10-09 Thread Gregory Williams

I've seen contraflow cycle lanes on the left and the right side of the road
in the UK, so thought I ought to just clarify the tagging - better to be
explicit rather than ambiguous.

From: Shaun McDonald [mailto:sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk] 
Sent: 09 October 2012 17:35
To: Gregory Williams
Cc: 'Richard Mann'; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes

Gregory,

I thought that cycleway=opposite_lane was the equivalent of
cycleway:right=lane.

And if it was a lane only on the left then it would be cycleway:left=lane.

Shaun

On 9 Oct 2012, at 17:28, "Gregory Williams" 
wrote:

Richard,

It looks good and useful. On the OSM side of things it looks like you've
missed handling cycleway=opposite_lane, since a place where I had that in
the data wasn't being rendered. I have since changed this to be
cycleway:right=opposite_lane though to be more accurate.

Cheers,

Gregory

From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 09 October 2012 16:15
To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
Subject: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes

As you may recall, DfT has made available a lot of cycle facility data. This
was processed and snapped to OSM geometry, and has been available for some
months for importing (subject to local review) using the Snapshot tool.
Further details here:
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project>
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project

I've reconciled the data for my area, but I found it a bit hard going.
Progress in other areas has been variable.

I'm particularly interested in cycle lane data, so I've produced a rendering
that compares DfT (Red) with OSM (Blue) data. Note that the DfT data is not
clear which side of the road cycle lanes are on.

 <http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/>
http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/

Quite a lot still missing.

So I've also generated tiles of the DfT cycle lane data (down to z17), for
use as a background in editors. In Potlatch, you can create a new background
by clicking on the Background drop-down, then Edit, then Add. The URL for
the tiles is:

 <http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/tilesDfT/$z/$x/$y.png>
http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/tilesDfT/$z/$x/$y.png

If any of you care to add cycle lanes in your area, that'd be most welcome.
It will also be interesting to see whether providing a background proves to
be an effective way of getting data reviewed and into OSM. If it's
successful, a similar approach can be used for other parts of the data.

Feedback welcome.

Richard

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes

2012-10-09 Thread Gregory Williams

Richard,

 

It looks good and useful. On the OSM side of things it looks like you've
missed handling cycleway=opposite_lane, since a place where I had that in
the data wasn't being rendered. I have since changed this to be
cycleway:right=opposite_lane though to be more accurate.

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

 

From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 09 October 2012 16:15
To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
Subject: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes

 

As you may recall, DfT has made available a lot of cycle facility data. This
was processed and snapped to OSM geometry, and has been available for some
months for importing (subject to local review) using the Snapshot tool.
Further details here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project

 

I've reconciled the data for my area, but I found it a bit hard going.
Progress in other areas has been variable.

 

I'm particularly interested in cycle lane data, so I've produced a rendering
that compares DfT (Red) with OSM (Blue) data. Note that the DfT data is not
clear which side of the road cycle lanes are on. 

http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/

 

Quite a lot still missing.

 

So I've also generated tiles of the DfT cycle lane data (down to z17), for
use as a background in editors. In Potlatch, you can create a new background
by clicking on the Background drop-down, then Edit, then Add. The URL for
the tiles is:

http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/tilesDfT/$z/$x/$y.png

 

If any of you care to add cycle lanes in your area, that'd be most welcome.
It will also be interesting to see whether providing a background proves to
be an effective way of getting data reviewed and into OSM. If it's
successful, a similar approach can be used for other parts of the data.

 

Feedback welcome.

 

Richard

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Updated GB cycle lanes map

2012-10-02 Thread Gregory Williams

From: Peter Childs [mailto:pchi...@bcs.org] 
Sent: 02 October 2012 12:24
Cc: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Updated GB cycle lanes map

Looking at it RSN18 (Medway) is missing on
http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/DualCycleNetworkMap/ however its on OSM
and viewable via Cycle Map on the main osm site

Peter.

It looks like all regional routes are missing. RCR15, RCR16, & RCR17 in East
Kent are also not shown. RCR12 from Tonbridge isn't shown either. Nor are a
number of other regional routes I know of elsewhere in the country. The Kent
ones are all in relations, but I think some of their constituent ways still
have some rcn_ref tags laying around.

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] This one is driving me potty

2012-09-25 Thread Gregory Williams

Brad,

I'm glad I could help.

The most important point is that the kink in the road was in no way down to
a mistake on your part. It looks like it's happened due to some (hopefully
very rare) bug in the code that's used on the servers for keeping up-to-date
with the changes in a stage a little ahead of actually generating the
updated map image.

Cheers,

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: Brad Rogers [mailto:b...@fineby.me.uk]
> Sent: 25 September 2012 16:38
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] This one is driving me potty
> 
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:17:44 +0100
> "Gregory Williams"  wrote:
> 
> Hello Gregory,
> 
> >I guess that for some reason or another the previous version of the
> >node, or at least the line geometry for the road which used it, was
> >still stored in the backing Postgres database used for rendering. Hence
> >it was being rendered based upon stale data.
> 
> Greg, I don't fully follow your explanation, as I don't have a good enough
> knowledge of OSM, but I'm grateful to you for what you've done.
> Already I can see that the road is whole again.
> 
> Thank you, one and all, for assistance.
> 
> --
>  Regards  _
>  / )   "The blindingly obvious is
> / _)radnever immediately apparent"
> Tired of doing day jobs with no thanks for what I do Do Anything You Wanna
> Do - Eddie & The Hotrods
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] This one is driving me potty

2012-09-25 Thread Gregory Williams

I've managed to remove the kink from the road with this changeset:

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/13247989

 

I loaded the data in JOSM and showed the Mapnik rendering as the background.
I then checked the history of the nodes near to the kink and found that the
then penultimate location of node 31790851 was at the point of the old kink
in the road that was still being rendered. Deleting that node from the road,
which to my eye doesn't really alter its geometry visually, has fixed the
issue.

 

I guess that for some reason or another the previous version of the node, or
at least the line geometry for the road which used it, was still stored in
the backing Postgres database used for rendering. Hence it was being
rendered based upon stale data.

 

Gregory

 

From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 25 September 2012 15:24
To: Jason Cunningham
Cc: TalkGB ML
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] This one is driving me potty

 

Delete and redraw? I've tweaked it slightly and some things have
re-rendered. But it is a bit odd.

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Jason Cunningham 
wrote:

 

On 25 September 2012 14:23, Brad Rogers  wrote:

If anybody can tell me how to go about rectifying break in Rackenford
Road in the following area

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.996550321579
 &lon=-3.73412847518921&zoom=16

I'd be very grateful.

 

The data within OpenStreetMap appears correct, and had been correct for
several months. The map used on the OpenStreetMap main page to display the
data is not updating (redrawing) to show the changes.
Not sure why this is happening because this map (mapnik) usually updates
very quickly.

I guess someone else might be able to answer why the map is out-of-date.

Jason

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed changes

2012-09-20 Thread Gregory Williams


>From: petermille...@gmail.com [mailto:petermille...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Peter Miller
>Sent: 20 September 2012 17:23
>To: Gregory Williams
>Cc: Chris Hill; Talk GB
>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed changes
>
>>On 20 September 2012 16:59, Gregory Williams
 wrote:
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Chris Hill [mailto:o...@raggedred.net]
>>> Sent: 20 September 2012 16:27
>>> To: Talk GB
>>> Subject: [Talk-GB] maxspeed changes
>>>
>>> It seems that PeterITO is once again making changes to speed limits,
this time
>>> changing limits that are tagged maxspeed=national to
>>> maxspeed=60 mph. The signs I see ( the round white sign with the black
>>> diagonal bar) does not say 60 mph it says national speed limit.
>>> Therefore I believe PeterITO is wrong to make the changes. Furthermore,
he
>>> seems to making them over a wide area which makes it an undiscussed mass
>>> edits and should probably be reverted as such.
>>>
>>> PeterITO, please explain what you are doing.
>>Presumably Peter is also adding source:maxspeed=UK:nsl_single, therefore
>>preserving the fact that the maxspeed data represents the national speed
>>limit at that point, rather than being explicitly signed as 60 mph?
>>Certainly that's how I tag national speed limits on single carriageways
here
>>in Kent.
>
> Correct. I did however use alternative maxspeed:type at times which also
> appears in the DB and which I feel is better than source:maxspeed which to
> my mind should be used for  'source:maxspeed=survey' or
> 'source:maxspeed=local authority spreadsheet-Dec12' or similar.
> However... lets leave that discussion to another day but either way not
> information has been lost by my edits and the data has been made more
> consistent.

That seems logical enough reasoning to me. I've just fallen into using the
source:maxspeed pattern really, but could quite easily use maxspeed:type
instead.

> Fyi, I changed one instance of 'maxspeed=30 mph;30mph' in Kent to
> 'maxspeed=30 mph' and left the instance of 'maxspeed=12 mph' alone
> (even though it does seem a bit unlikely).

Yep, I guess I or someone else merged two road sections together and just
didn't
notice the subtle difference in the tags. I used to use the 30mph form but
now use
30 mph, so it's fairly easy for this to have accidentally happened here in
East Kent.

I know where the maxspeed=12 mph is (at least I guess we're talking about
the
same instance :) ). It's a private estate on the edge of Whitstable and
really does
have that unusual speed limit.

> Re ITO Map, we have recently enabled 'clicks' on many of them. Click on
any
> coloured elements on the speed limit fixup map to see what the tagging
> currently shows. Many other maps also now support clicks.

That could be useful sometimes. Thanks.

> Finally. Be aware that we are still in the process of updating ITO Map
following
> the license change. If it is not updated tonight it should hopefully do so
tomorrow.
> It should then update daily. As such the speed limit fixup map still shows
the
> state of OSM before I made any changes.

I thought that'd be the case. You've got much more processing to handle than
when
I switched over my cycle parking heat map over to data post the license
change, so I'm
not surprised that it's taking several days. I look forward to seeing the
updates in all of
the ITO products for OSM. I use them frequently, and have even used them to
help
make my case when writing planning representations :-)

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] maxspeed changes

2012-09-20 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Hill [mailto:o...@raggedred.net]
> Sent: 20 September 2012 16:27
> To: Talk GB
> Subject: [Talk-GB] maxspeed changes
> 
> It seems that PeterITO is once again making changes to speed limits, this
time
> changing limits that are tagged maxspeed=national to
> maxspeed=60 mph. The signs I see ( the round white sign with the black
> diagonal bar) does not say 60 mph it says national speed limit.
> Therefore I believe PeterITO is wrong to make the changes. Furthermore, he
> seems to making them over a wide area which makes it an undiscussed mass
> edits and should probably be reverted as such.
> 
> PeterITO, please explain what you are doing.

Presumably Peter is also adding source:maxspeed=UK:nsl_single, therefore
preserving the fact that the maxspeed data represents the national speed
limit at that point, rather than being explicitly signed as 60 mph?
Certainly that's how I tag national speed limits on single carriageways here
in Kent.

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Temporary road closures

2012-07-12 Thread Gregory Williams

Some routing services, such as CycleStreets, update quite a bit more
frequently. Usually every day or two. So I think it's useful to make the
changes to benefit them so long as you've made reasonable effort to make it
clear that it'll need to be undone at some point.

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: Philip Barnes [mailto:p...@trigpoint.me.uk] 
Sent: 12 July 2012 19:37
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Temporary road closures

On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 17:46 +0100, J.Woollacott wrote:
> The challenge is to remember to remove the restriction at the end of 
> the event.
> 
> Always add a note as well explaining what's in place so somebody else 
> understands and doesn't 'fix it'
> 
> Jason W (UniEagle)
> 
Would it not be better to just let TMS deal with issues such as temporary
closures? I know TMS is not implemented yet, but there has been discussion
of doing so.

A downside is that routing/navigation applications seem to take months to
update the maps that they are using, so by the time the restriction makes it
into these applications it could have gone, and then remain in place in
these applications for months.

I really do feel that we should map what is permanent, otherwise how far do
we go? There has been a 50mph speed limit on the M6 in Birmingham since
April, should we re-tag that too?

Phil

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Temporary road closures

2012-07-12 Thread Gregory Williams

I usually add an item on OpenStreetBugs or a fixme tag to make sure that
there's something reminding us that we need to eventually revert the change.
If the duration of the temporary closure is clear then I also include in the
note the date that it's likely to need to be reverted, to avoid unnecessary
repeated checking of the state ahead of that time.

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: J.Woollacott [mailto:wool...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: 12 July 2012 17:46
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Temporary road closures

The challenge is to remember to remove the restriction at the end of the
event.

Always add a note as well explaining what's in place so somebody else
understands and doesn't 'fix it'

Jason W (UniEagle)

-Original Message-
From: Lester Caine
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2012 3:29 PM
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org >> 'talk-gb OSM List'
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Temporary road closures

Kev js1982 wrote:
> I've only bothered on really long term ones , the most glaring example 
> being in preston where it was in place for 24 months at least; our 
> where the road will reopen on a new alignment - e.g. A46 Newark to 
> Widmerpool

The main bridge in Evesham is due to close for many months and I certainly
think it's worth tagging when it happens as the alternative routes are
miles!

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve -
http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop -
http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] New section of Regional Cycle Route 90 near Brighton to map

2012-07-04 Thread Gregory Williams

According to this Highways Agency article there's a new section of Regional
Cycle Route 90 waiting to be mapped:

 

http://www.highways.gov.uk/news/pressrelease.aspx?pressreleaseid=424913

 

Are there any mappers in or near Brighton that fancy going out and adding it
to our coverage?

 

I mapped much of our RCR90 coverage there several years ago, but am a bit
tied up at the moment to pop over and map the new section.

 

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] England Cycling data feedback

2012-06-28 Thread Gregory Williams

I've managed to complete a substantial portion of the merging of the England
Cycling data for the areas that I've put my name down for (Ashford,
Canterbury, and Swale), so I thought I'd provide some feedback on what I've
seen. Once I'm merged with these I hope to do parts of some of the other
areas that I've cycled in several times (and can therefore remember the
detail well); I've already done some merging near my parents, which is in
the Stevenage excerpt.

 

The data is pretty good overall. The merging process has been easy; it's
taken me only a few days to merge in just over 2/3 of the ways from three
pretty large areas. Given the recent CycleStreets announcement showing how
they use many of the extra tags that this new data provides I'm looking
forward to the enhanced routes that it'll be able to find cyclists.

 

Whilst doing the merging I've noticed these things:

-  There's a mistake in the translation of choker traffic calming
measures. The translated data has traffic_calming=choking, but it should be
traffic_calming=choker.

-  It seems that the level of detail that the DfT data contains
about traffic calming measures isn't as fine-grained as ourselves. I've
encountered numerous roads where that translated data has
traffic_calming=cushion, but actually it's really traffic_calming=hump or
traffic_calming=table.

-  The existing traffic calming mapping that I've done here in Kent
is node based, rather than way based. I've done this because it's more
detailed and allows for determination of exactly which traffic calming
measures will be passed on a given journey - some roads have a variety of
different traffic calming measures down their length. Where the DfT data had
a traffic_calming key and I've already got the actual nodes mapped I haven't
copied across the traffic_calming key to the way, since it can be deduced
from the nodes and the presence on the way would just cloud the detail a
bit. I don't know whether CycleStreets uses the values from the nodes yet,
or whether it's just the ways? There are some places where the
traffic_calming tagging in the DfT data has enabled me to find places where
I hadn't managed to map the existing traffic calming measures for some
reason. So it's helped to increase our coverage too.

-  Some pedestrianised areas that I dealt with in Canterbury city
centre had some obscure tags in the DfT data, e.g. step_count=asphalt,
depth=yes, cycleway=yes. I obviously haven't copied the bits across that
weren't right, and it's pretty easy to spot them.

-  The DfT's translation hasn't taken into consideration the
distinction between cyclists being prohibited from using a highway (e.g.
some trunk roads) - i.e. bicycle=no, and where cyclists simply need to
dismount (e.g. the majority of footpaths) - i.e. bicycle=dismount, which
would be implied from a highway=footway, for example. So be careful to only
copy across bicycle=no when cyclists can't even walk their cycles there
(which is thankfully quite rare).

-  As has been mentioned before, the casing of cycleway:left=lane
and cycleway:right=lane wasn't translated correctly. Since these are pretty
obvious cases I did some mass translation of the cycleway:left=Lane and
cycleway:right=Lane to their lower case counterparts yesterday. Hopefully
I'll do that again to clear away any future merging issues. That should help
until Andy manages to get the case updated in the snapshots currently being
served.

-  Whilst largely fine, the lit key values seem to have a few
mistakes in rural areas. I wonder whether some of them have simply been
computed by looking at the proximity of the way to lighting column positions
in local highways / DfT data. Certainly I note that in some rural locations
where the street lighting cohabits a pole with telecoms cables etc. the DfT
data seems to say lit=no, where it should say lit=yes. I guess that's
because these poles aren't full lighting columns and so aren't stored as
such in the local highways databases. Just a guess though.

-  In some places the surface tagging in the DfT data hasn't always
been completely accurate. Whilst it doesn't make much difference to cycle
routing there are a few places where the DfT data says surface=asphalt where
it should actually say surface=concrete. Other places which do potentially
affect routing are DfT data instances where it says surface=dirt but
surface=compacted would be more accurate.

-  The level of detail in the DfT data varies; not all relevant keys
have been captured in all places. So it'd be good to have some renderings of
the maps looking for holes in the full coverage. I wonder whether ITO may be
able to help with this? Here are some examples of maps that could be useful
for helping us reach a more full coverage:

o   highway=cycleway without segregated tag

o   highway=cycleway or highway=footway without either of the est_width or
width tags

o   Places where we have est_width, suc

Re: [Talk-GB] Portsmouth cycle paths and routes

2011-09-23 Thread Gregory Williams

Indeed. It looks like it's mainly the university sites and arterial roads.
Does your main shopping area pretty much coincide with Oxford Uni's main
colleges? University of Kent in Canterbury and the city centre are separate
and you can see that there are lots of stands serving both:

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13
<http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13&lat=5
1.27838&lon=1.07101&layers=BT> &lat=51.27838&lon=1.07101&layers=BT

 

PS I wonder whether the stands at Oxford Brookes Uni don't have any capacity
tags. They don't glow anywhere near as much on the map.

 

 

From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 23 September 2011 10:52
To: Gregory Williams
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Portsmouth cycle paths and routes

 

Looks like there's only partial coverage in Oxford as well...

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13
<http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13&lat=5
1.75754&lon=-1.2523&layers=BT> &lat=51.75754&lon=-1.2523&layers=BT

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Gregory Williams
 wrote:

I'm primarily a cyclist and interested in ensuring that our cycle coverage
is great. Whilst looking at the Bing! aerial imagery in Portsmouth recently
I spotted some cycleways and cycle lanes which we don't have in our map.
They looked like they were in fairly established areas of the city so I
wonder whether there's any other cycling facilities that we're missing?
Portsmouth is a little far for me to go on a GPS mapping expedition, so I
was wondering if there are any more local cycle mappers that may be
interested in scouting out facilities. It seems that we've probably missed
quite a bit of cycle parking in Gosport too, given its density in
Portsmouth, but seeming absence in Gosport:

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13
<http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13&lat=5
0.80969&lon=-1.10888&layers=BT> &lat=50.80969&lon=-1.10888&layers=BT

 

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Portsmouth cycle paths and routes

2011-09-23 Thread Gregory Williams

The 20mph tagging seems pretty much in place for Portsmouth:

 

http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=5
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=5&lat=50.83306631256
292&lon=-1.0753752838074735&zoom=12>
&lat=50.83306631256292&lon=-1.0753752838074735&zoom=12

 

I don't know whether the 20mph blanket extended over to Gosport as well,
which is pretty much absent of any maxspeed tagging.

 

From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 23 September 2011 10:47
To: Gregory Williams
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Portsmouth cycle paths and routes

 

Last time I looked, there was a complete absence of 20mph tagging, as well.

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Gregory Williams
 wrote:

I'm primarily a cyclist and interested in ensuring that our cycle coverage
is great. Whilst looking at the Bing! aerial imagery in Portsmouth recently
I spotted some cycleways and cycle lanes which we don't have in our map.
They looked like they were in fairly established areas of the city so I
wonder whether there's any other cycling facilities that we're missing?
Portsmouth is a little far for me to go on a GPS mapping expedition, so I
was wondering if there are any more local cycle mappers that may be
interested in scouting out facilities. It seems that we've probably missed
quite a bit of cycle parking in Gosport too, given its density in
Portsmouth, but seeming absence in Gosport:

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13
<http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13&lat=5
0.80969&lon=-1.10888&layers=BT> &lat=50.80969&lon=-1.10888&layers=BT

 

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Portsmouth cycle paths and routes

2011-09-23 Thread Gregory Williams

I'm primarily a cyclist and interested in ensuring that our cycle coverage
is great. Whilst looking at the Bing! aerial imagery in Portsmouth recently
I spotted some cycleways and cycle lanes which we don't have in our map.
They looked like they were in fairly established areas of the city so I
wonder whether there's any other cycling facilities that we're missing?
Portsmouth is a little far for me to go on a GPS mapping expedition, so I
was wondering if there are any more local cycle mappers that may be
interested in scouting out facilities. It seems that we've probably missed
quite a bit of cycle parking in Gosport too, given its density in
Portsmouth, but seeming absence in Gosport:

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=13
 &lat=50.80969&lon=-1.10888&layers=BT

 

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Road route relations in the UK

2011-06-02 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: SomeoneElse [mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk]
> Sent: 2 June 2011 00:56
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Road route relations in the UK
> 
> When looking at a bit of the A1:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/34158443
> I happened to notice that it seems to belong to 6 route relations.
> 
> There's a bus route, an E road (both of which make sense) and 4 A1s
> (which don't), one of which (103597) seems to have a lot more versions
> than the others.
> 
> I have two questions:
> 
> 1) Why the need for 4 A1 route relations?

I haven't checked, but perhaps the number of members exceeds the limit for a
single relation (2000 members IIRC). Certainly that's why National Cycle
Route 1 is split across four separate relations. The A1 is a pretty lengthy
route and I can imagine that with all of the bridges along it it'll need
quite a few ways, especially when you consider that much of it is dual
carriageway.

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

2011-05-24 Thread Gregory Williams

Looking at the school data I see that it's not completely up-to-date. I note
that one school shows the previous head's name (the current head has been in
place for a couple of years) and doesn't reflect that it's recently become
an academy. This despite the fact that it's noted that it was last modified
yesterday.

 

So, based upon this admittedly isolated case, we shouldn't assume that all
of the data is current - we might have more up-to-date data than KCC.

 

From: TimSC [mailto:mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk] 
Sent: 23 May 2011 18:32
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Cc: noel.hat...@kent.gov.uk
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

 


I have been informed that the beta OpenKent site, with more data and
visualisation tools is here:

http://www.openkent.org.uk/

Some things that caught my eye: lists of librarys, GPs, opticians, pharmacy,
KCC offices, medway car parks, schools. This would be good for validation,
as I said. 

As well as what has already been mentioned (speed limits, etc), we could
also do with lists of post offices, alchohol licensed buildings, sure starts
(kindergartens), petrol stations (or petrol storage), public telephones*,
taxi ranks*, dentists*, arts centres, public art, law courts, crematoria,
fire stations, police stations, council grave yards*, markets*, prisons,
recycling points, public toilets, places of worship*, parks, landfills,
allotments, sports centres, tourist information offices, museums, highway
maintenance depots, quarries, planning permissions, amusements, auction
licenses, animal boardings, pet shops, tattoo shops, sex establishments,
horse riding establishments, gambling locations, zoos, trees (apparently the
highway authority has a tree database), park parks (including outside
medway), highway renaming, new highway designations, changes to rights of
way, all business premises  did I miss anything?! If that is too much,
we can prioritise our request to the council. We might start by asking for
data that no one else has on their map and that is hard to comprehensively
survey without their information. (Remember, I am not proposing to import
anything yet, just to check against what the council has.) Hackey council
has a list of many things they license, on the web [1], which is good for
ideas.

* that is if the council holds the data.

If people can think of more data sets, we can put together a doodle poll to
find the most wanted and to provide some justification (i.e. public demand)
for us requesting the data.

Btw, I found the parish data I was looking for in OS OpenData, so no need to
pester the council for that.

TimSC

[1] http://www.hackney.gov.uk/licensing.htm

On 23/05/11 16:10, Gregory Williams wrote: 

I've seen excerpts of that data in reports presented to the various Joint
Transport Board meetings, so yes they have it.

 

Gregory

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

2011-05-23 Thread Gregory Williams

I've seen excerpts of that data in reports presented to the various Joint
Transport Board meetings, so yes they have it.

 

Gregory

 

From: Steve Doerr [mailto:doerr.step...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 23 May 2011 14:57
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

 

I wonder if they would have data relating to on-street-parking restrictions?

Steve


On 23/05/2011 14:53, Gregory Williams wrote: 

Not strictly an OSM thing, but I'd also like to see traffic count data
released by KCC too.

 

Gregory

 

From: Gregory Williams [mailto:gregory.willi...@purplegeodesoftware.co.uk] 
Sent: 23 May 2011 10:56
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

 

Based upon previous discussions with KCC with my cycle campaigning hat on
the cycle parking data that KCC hold is far from exhaustive. Also it's of
the form "outside shop xyz, Some Road, Some Place". So, apart from giving us
clues of places to go out and look for cycle parking we haven't mapped yet,
it's not terribly useful. Luckily, as far as things go, I think I've mapped
pretty much all of the cycle parking in East Kent and quite a bit elsewhere
in the county, as is shown on the cycle parking heat map I maintain:

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=10
<http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=10&lat=5
1.14048&lon=0.63703&layers=BT> &lat=51.14048&lon=0.63703&layers=BT

 

I would be very interested in whether KCC are able to release data about
maximum speed limits and traffic calming measures in a form that OSM is able
to use. My personal preference would be to use this as something to compare
against, such that we can assess where our own data isn't complete, rather
than as something that would be imported.

 

Gregory

 

From: Tom Chance [mailto:t...@acrewoods.net] 
Sent: 22 May 2011 11:28
To: TimSC
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

 

Tim,

 

You might like to ask them to provide you with a list of geodata they hold
and that they can release (under the PSMA) without any restrictions. I got
such a list off Southwark Council and it gave me a few ideas of data that
would be useful including trees and cycle parking stands.

 

Tom

 

 

On 22 May 2011 11:11, TimSC  wrote:


Hi all,

I met people from Kent's OpenKent, which is a county council open data
initiative [1][2]. They explained their work and I told them about
openstreetmap and its community. They said Kent is not as well developed in
open data as some councils but they have a long term commitment to
improvement. They have some data sets available but they seem to be mainly
concerned with expenses, census data and school expenditure so far. They
said they are seeking ideas of what data to publish because they need to
prioritize their effort in getting the data for which there is a public
demand. If you have ideas, I suggest you get in touch. I expect other
councils have already done stuff that's interesting and it might be worth
making them aware. They also plan to showcase interesting data
visualisations based on their data or any Kent related data. It might be
good to get publicity for small projects. OpenKent is also seeking ideas and
feedback for a (web based?) data visualisation tool they are planning to
help the (non-technical) public use the data.

I tried to think of data that would be useful to mappers. Obviously the
rights of way data would be amazing. The council also holds the parish
boundaries data. Some government data sets use parish and electoral
boundaries as their areas, so that would be useful to do visualisations.
Also the Kent Heritage Tree Project [3] might like the parish boundaries, as
apparently many old trees are on or near these boundaries. Having lists of
public institutions, possibly with addresses, would be great to validate the
OSM database. We can quickly find any schools, public services that we
missed. I suspect we will avoid doing imports of data which is not really
GIS but we might add data to OSM to make visualisations and mash ups easier
(machine tags and data to link to their database rows).

Again, they said they would appreciate any ideas. I talked to Noel Hatch and
Matthew Kerr. Get in touch with them. :)

Regards,

TimSC

[1] http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/open_data.aspx
[2] http://openkent.blogspot.com/
[3] http://kentheritagetrees.btcv.org.uk/


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance

 
 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

2011-05-23 Thread Gregory Williams

Not strictly an OSM thing, but I'd also like to see traffic count data
released by KCC too.

 

Gregory

 

From: Gregory Williams [mailto:gregory.willi...@purplegeodesoftware.co.uk] 
Sent: 23 May 2011 10:56
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

 

Based upon previous discussions with KCC with my cycle campaigning hat on
the cycle parking data that KCC hold is far from exhaustive. Also it's of
the form "outside shop xyz, Some Road, Some Place". So, apart from giving us
clues of places to go out and look for cycle parking we haven't mapped yet,
it's not terribly useful. Luckily, as far as things go, I think I've mapped
pretty much all of the cycle parking in East Kent and quite a bit elsewhere
in the county, as is shown on the cycle parking heat map I maintain:

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=10
<http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=10&lat=5
1.14048&lon=0.63703&layers=BT> &lat=51.14048&lon=0.63703&layers=BT

 

I would be very interested in whether KCC are able to release data about
maximum speed limits and traffic calming measures in a form that OSM is able
to use. My personal preference would be to use this as something to compare
against, such that we can assess where our own data isn't complete, rather
than as something that would be imported.

 

Gregory

 

From: Tom Chance [mailto:t...@acrewoods.net] 
Sent: 22 May 2011 11:28
To: TimSC
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

 

Tim,

 

You might like to ask them to provide you with a list of geodata they hold
and that they can release (under the PSMA) without any restrictions. I got
such a list off Southwark Council and it gave me a few ideas of data that
would be useful including trees and cycle parking stands.

 

Tom

 

 

On 22 May 2011 11:11, TimSC  wrote:


Hi all,

I met people from Kent's OpenKent, which is a county council open data
initiative [1][2]. They explained their work and I told them about
openstreetmap and its community. They said Kent is not as well developed in
open data as some councils but they have a long term commitment to
improvement. They have some data sets available but they seem to be mainly
concerned with expenses, census data and school expenditure so far. They
said they are seeking ideas of what data to publish because they need to
prioritize their effort in getting the data for which there is a public
demand. If you have ideas, I suggest you get in touch. I expect other
councils have already done stuff that's interesting and it might be worth
making them aware. They also plan to showcase interesting data
visualisations based on their data or any Kent related data. It might be
good to get publicity for small projects. OpenKent is also seeking ideas and
feedback for a (web based?) data visualisation tool they are planning to
help the (non-technical) public use the data.

I tried to think of data that would be useful to mappers. Obviously the
rights of way data would be amazing. The council also holds the parish
boundaries data. Some government data sets use parish and electoral
boundaries as their areas, so that would be useful to do visualisations.
Also the Kent Heritage Tree Project [3] might like the parish boundaries, as
apparently many old trees are on or near these boundaries. Having lists of
public institutions, possibly with addresses, would be great to validate the
OSM database. We can quickly find any schools, public services that we
missed. I suspect we will avoid doing imports of data which is not really
GIS but we might add data to OSM to make visualisations and mash ups easier
(machine tags and data to link to their database rows).

Again, they said they would appreciate any ideas. I talked to Noel Hatch and
Matthew Kerr. Get in touch with them. :)

Regards,

TimSC

[1] http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/open_data.aspx
[2] http://openkent.blogspot.com/
[3] http://kentheritagetrees.btcv.org.uk/


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

2011-05-23 Thread Gregory Williams

Based upon previous discussions with KCC with my cycle campaigning hat on
the cycle parking data that KCC hold is far from exhaustive. Also it's of
the form "outside shop xyz, Some Road, Some Place". So, apart from giving us
clues of places to go out and look for cycle parking we haven't mapped yet,
it's not terribly useful. Luckily, as far as things go, I think I've mapped
pretty much all of the cycle parking in East Kent and quite a bit elsewhere
in the county, as is shown on the cycle parking heat map I maintain:

 

http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/maps/cycle-parking-heat-map/?zoom=10
 &lat=51.14048&lon=0.63703&layers=BT

 

I would be very interested in whether KCC are able to release data about
maximum speed limits and traffic calming measures in a form that OSM is able
to use. My personal preference would be to use this as something to compare
against, such that we can assess where our own data isn't complete, rather
than as something that would be imported.

 

Gregory

 

From: Tom Chance [mailto:t...@acrewoods.net] 
Sent: 22 May 2011 11:28
To: TimSC
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Kent Open Data, KCC

 

Tim,

 

You might like to ask them to provide you with a list of geodata they hold
and that they can release (under the PSMA) without any restrictions. I got
such a list off Southwark Council and it gave me a few ideas of data that
would be useful including trees and cycle parking stands.

 

Tom

 

 

On 22 May 2011 11:11, TimSC  wrote:


Hi all,

I met people from Kent's OpenKent, which is a county council open data
initiative [1][2]. They explained their work and I told them about
openstreetmap and its community. They said Kent is not as well developed in
open data as some councils but they have a long term commitment to
improvement. They have some data sets available but they seem to be mainly
concerned with expenses, census data and school expenditure so far. They
said they are seeking ideas of what data to publish because they need to
prioritize their effort in getting the data for which there is a public
demand. If you have ideas, I suggest you get in touch. I expect other
councils have already done stuff that's interesting and it might be worth
making them aware. They also plan to showcase interesting data
visualisations based on their data or any Kent related data. It might be
good to get publicity for small projects. OpenKent is also seeking ideas and
feedback for a (web based?) data visualisation tool they are planning to
help the (non-technical) public use the data.

I tried to think of data that would be useful to mappers. Obviously the
rights of way data would be amazing. The council also holds the parish
boundaries data. Some government data sets use parish and electoral
boundaries as their areas, so that would be useful to do visualisations.
Also the Kent Heritage Tree Project [3] might like the parish boundaries, as
apparently many old trees are on or near these boundaries. Having lists of
public institutions, possibly with addresses, would be great to validate the
OSM database. We can quickly find any schools, public services that we
missed. I suspect we will avoid doing imports of data which is not really
GIS but we might add data to OSM to make visualisations and mash ups easier
(machine tags and data to link to their database rows).

Again, they said they would appreciate any ideas. I talked to Noel Hatch and
Matthew Kerr. Get in touch with them. :)

Regards,

TimSC

[1] http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/open_data.aspx
[2] http://openkent.blogspot.com/
[3] http://kentheritagetrees.btcv.org.uk/


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
http://tom.acrewoods.net   http://twitter.com/tom_chance

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] User Stats over 400 000

2011-05-13 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: Sam Vekemans [mailto:acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 13 May 2011 09:32
> To: Bob Kerr
> Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] User Stats over 400 000
> 
> Is anyone taking a stap-shot, of month-over-month comparison of this
> data?
> Thanks,
> Sam
> 
> On 5/13/11, Bob Kerr  wrote:
> > See
> >
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/stats/data_stats.html
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Bob

Sam,

See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Stats

Cheers,

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

2011-03-18 Thread Gregory Williams

The performance is perfectly fine. It's faster than your OSM Analysis
service.

From: petermille...@gmail.com [mailto:petermille...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Peter Miller
Sent: 18 March 2011 16:42
To: Gregory Williams
Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

Incidentally, what has the performance been like? Has it felt slow for
anyone?

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

2011-03-18 Thread Gregory Williams

OK, ignore that. It's been pointed out to me that the wiki says tertiary
upwards.

From: Gregory Williams [mailto:gregory.willi...@purplegeodesoftware.co.uk] 
Sent: 18 March 2011 15:29
To: 'Peter Miller'; 'Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org'
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

Peter,

Is it intentional that highway=unclassified and highway=residential don't
seem to fall under "other" when they haven't got a maxspeed tag applied? For
example:

http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=5
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=5&bbox=129803.642408
365,6685618.390976917,135062.03015,6688424.948453283&layers=&base_style=
&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=129803.642408365,6685618.390976917,135062.03015,6688424.948453283&
layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

Brook Lane and Barnes Way don't have lines on top and don't have maxspeed
applied either.

Cheers,

Gregory

From: Gregory Williams [mailto:gregory.willi...@purplegeodesoftware.co.uk] 
Sent: 18 March 2011 15:15
To: 'Peter Miller'; 'Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org'
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

Peter,

A great service. It'll certainly help me with keeping track of where extra
details still need to be mapped.

I've noticed these small issues:

-   Ferry routes appear to be highlighted in red on the Water layer, but
this doesn't match anything in the key.
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3&bbox=100067.247138
86814,6641995.275980514,184201.48415728885,6686900.195601286&layers=&base_st
yle=&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=100067.24713886814,6641995.275980514,184201.48415728885,6686900.195601
286&layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

-   At zoom level 3 on the Water layer it appears to load overlay tiles
for that layer, but also displays the "You need to zoom in further to view
the overlay layer" warning.
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3&bbox=58000.1299815
7775,6619542.830379137,226268.60401842726,6709352.669620863&layers=&base_sty
le=&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=58000.12998157775,6619542.830379137,226268.60401842726,6709352.6696208
63&layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

-   Schools with names are incorrectly bordered with red (as Steve Doerr
has also just pointed out):
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=6
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=6&bbox=119108.430780
305,754.055789617,124366.820593955,6669560.613265983&layers=&base_style=
&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=119108.430780305,754.055789617,124366.820593955,6669560.613265983&
layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

A layer showing lighting would also be very useful. I realise that there's a
similar layer on the Wikimedia Toolserver, but it doesn't seem to get
updated:

http://toolserver.org/~osm/styles/?layers=B000F0TFF0FFF
<http://toolserver.org/~osm/styles/?layers=B000F0TFF0FFF&zoom=13&lat
=51.28253&lon=1.08301> &zoom=13&lat=51.28253&lon=1.08301

Cheers,

Gregory

From: Peter Miller [mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com] 
Sent: 18 March 2011 14:13
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

ITO are pleased to announce a set of new 'overlay maps' for OpenStreetMap
which can highlights some of the data layers, such as speed limits, highway
lane widths, whether rivers are navigable and if buildings have addresses
etc.

The service is still very much in beta and may suffer if many people jump on
it at the same time but lets see what happens.

The service is available here:
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main

And a wiki description is available here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ITO_Map

We are starting with a service for a bounding box that included the UK and
northern France, Holland, a bit of Germany and up to southern Norway and a
separate bounding box including the bay area, SF. The tiles will always be
based current daily diff planet data (with a 24 hour processing lag). We
should never serve old tiles from old data. If the service is noticeably
slow then please give it a break for a hour and then try again.

We will roll out the service to more areas as the system beds in and then
globally over the next few weeks assuming that the servers hold up.

We will gather feedback over the next week or so and then many some changes
to the service to iron out any wrinkles.

Regards,

Peter Miller
ITO World Ltd

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

2011-03-18 Thread Gregory Williams

Peter,

 

Is it intentional that highway=unclassified and highway=residential don't
seem to fall under "other" when they haven't got a maxspeed tag applied? For
example:

 

http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=5
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=5&bbox=129803.642408
365,6685618.390976917,135062.03015,6688424.948453283&layers=&base_style=
&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=129803.642408365,6685618.390976917,135062.03015,6688424.948453283&
layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

 

Brook Lane and Barnes Way don't have lines on top and don't have maxspeed
applied either.

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

 

From: Gregory Williams [mailto:gregory.willi...@purplegeodesoftware.co.uk] 
Sent: 18 March 2011 15:15
To: 'Peter Miller'; 'Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org'
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

 

Peter,

 

A great service. It'll certainly help me with keeping track of where extra
details still need to be mapped.

 

I've noticed these small issues:

-   Ferry routes appear to be highlighted in red on the Water layer, but
this doesn't match anything in the key.
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3&bbox=100067.247138
86814,6641995.275980514,184201.48415728885,6686900.195601286&layers=&base_st
yle=&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=100067.24713886814,6641995.275980514,184201.48415728885,6686900.195601
286&layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

-   At zoom level 3 on the Water layer it appears to load overlay tiles
for that layer, but also displays the "You need to zoom in further to view
the overlay layer" warning.
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3&bbox=58000.1299815
7775,6619542.830379137,226268.60401842726,6709352.669620863&layers=&base_sty
le=&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=58000.12998157775,6619542.830379137,226268.60401842726,6709352.6696208
63&layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

-   Schools with names are incorrectly bordered with red (as Steve Doerr
has also just pointed out):
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=6
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=6&bbox=119108.430780
305,754.055789617,124366.820593955,6669560.613265983&layers=&base_style=
&clear_map_history=true>
&bbox=119108.430780305,754.055789617,124366.820593955,6669560.613265983&
layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

 

A layer showing lighting would also be very useful. I realise that there's a
similar layer on the Wikimedia Toolserver, but it doesn't seem to get
updated:

 

http://toolserver.org/~osm/styles/?layers=B000F0TFF0FFF
<http://toolserver.org/~osm/styles/?layers=B000F0TFF0FFF&zoom=13&lat
=51.28253&lon=1.08301> &zoom=13&lat=51.28253&lon=1.08301

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

 

From: Peter Miller [mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com] 
Sent: 18 March 2011 14:13
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

 

ITO are pleased to announce a set of new 'overlay maps' for OpenStreetMap
which can highlights some of the data layers, such as speed limits, highway
lane widths, whether rivers are navigable and if buildings have addresses
etc.

The service is still very much in beta and may suffer if many people jump on
it at the same time but lets see what happens.

The service is available here:
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main

And a wiki description is available here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ITO_Map

We are starting with a service for a bounding box that included the UK and
northern France, Holland, a bit of Germany and up to southern Norway and a
separate bounding box including the bay area, SF. The tiles will always be
based current daily diff planet data (with a 24 hour processing lag). We
should never serve old tiles from old data. If the service is noticeably
slow then please give it a break for a hour and then try again.

We will roll out the service to more areas as the system beds in and then
globally over the next few weeks assuming that the servers hold up.

We will gather feedback over the next week or so and then many some changes
to the service to iron out any wrinkles.



Regards,


Peter Miller
ITO World Ltd

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

2011-03-18 Thread Gregory Williams

Peter,

 

A great service. It'll certainly help me with keeping track of where extra
details still need to be mapped.

 

I've noticed these small issues:

-   Ferry routes appear to be highlighted in red on the Water layer, but
this doesn't match anything in the key.
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3

&bbox=100067.24713886814,6641995.275980514,184201.48415728885,6686900.195601
286&layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

-   At zoom level 3 on the Water layer it appears to load overlay tiles
for that layer, but also displays the "You need to zoom in further to view
the overlay layer" warning.
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=3

&bbox=58000.12998157775,6619542.830379137,226268.60401842726,6709352.6696208
63&layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

-   Schools with names are incorrectly bordered with red (as Steve Doerr
has also just pointed out):
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=6

&bbox=119108.430780305,754.055789617,124366.820593955,6669560.613265983&
layers=&base_style=&clear_map_history=true

 

A layer showing lighting would also be very useful. I realise that there's a
similar layer on the Wikimedia Toolserver, but it doesn't seem to get
updated:

 

http://toolserver.org/~osm/styles/?layers=B000F0TFF0FFF
 &zoom=13&lat=51.28253&lon=1.08301

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

 

From: Peter Miller [mailto:peter.mil...@itoworld.com] 
Sent: 18 March 2011 14:13
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] new ITO Map service in beta

 

ITO are pleased to announce a set of new 'overlay maps' for OpenStreetMap
which can highlights some of the data layers, such as speed limits, highway
lane widths, whether rivers are navigable and if buildings have addresses
etc.

The service is still very much in beta and may suffer if many people jump on
it at the same time but lets see what happens.

The service is available here:
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main

And a wiki description is available here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ITO_Map

We are starting with a service for a bounding box that included the UK and
northern France, Holland, a bit of Germany and up to southern Norway and a
separate bounding box including the bay area, SF. The tiles will always be
based current daily diff planet data (with a 24 hour processing lag). We
should never serve old tiles from old data. If the service is noticeably
slow then please give it a break for a hour and then try again.

We will roll out the service to more areas as the system beds in and then
globally over the next few weeks assuming that the servers hold up.

We will gather feedback over the next week or so and then many some changes
to the service to iron out any wrinkles.



Regards,


Peter Miller
ITO World Ltd

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Visualising speed limits

2010-11-01 Thread Gregory Williams

Looks great. I think an OpenLayers Permalink anchor would make it even
better.

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andy Street
> Sent: 1 November 2010 16:39
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Visualising speed limits
> 
> On Sat, 2010-10-30 at 01:04 +0100, Andy Street wrote:
> > I've produced a similar map for the Hampshire rights of way network
> > ( http://hants.openstreetmap.org.uk/ ) so if I get some spare time
> this
> > weekend I might have a go at creating a maxspeed version.
> 
> Okay, here we go:
> 
> http://maxspeed.openstreetmap.org.uk/
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Visualising speed limits

2010-11-01 Thread Gregory Williams

I've also found the maxspeed colouring on the graphview JOSM plugin useful
for visualising maxspeed data:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Graphview

Cheers,

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Craig Wallace
> Sent: 30 October 2010 01:40
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Visualising speed limits
> 
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 21:22 +0100, "thomas van der veen"
>  wrote:
> 
> > Has someone actually done something like this already? Or does
> someone
> > would
> > like to join me and making a custom version of a map renderer that
> can do
> > this? should be relative simple, just looking for a couple of tags
> and
> > assign a colour accordingly. I have started looking at the Perl SVG
> > converter (couldn't get any of the XSLT converter produce proper
> SVG),
> > but it is a big beast.
> 
> One option:
> Use JOSM, and download the area you are interested in, and use a JOSM
> map style that highlights things with different speed limits in
> different colours
> See for instructions: http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Styles
> Note there are separate map styles for default maxspeed (kmh) and mph
> maxspeeds.
> 
> I find this is very useful while editing, as you can easily see how
> complete maxspeeds are for an area, and if there's any gaps etc.
> 
> Craig
> --
>   Craig Wallace
>   craig...@fastmail.fm
> 
> --
> http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users:
>   http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Location of 27,000 street lights in one council area

2010-10-12 Thread Gregory Williams

I wonder whether it may have been these ones in Norfolk:

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4631482

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4631508

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4631551

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4631742

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4632256

 

By the looks of things they've since been removed from OSM.

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

 

From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Peter Miller
Sent: 12 October 2010 13:40
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Location of 27,000 street lights in one council area

 

Tom Steinberg from MySociety writes:

"I was just talking to someone in a local council about the fact that they'd
opened up the location of 27,000 streetlights in their council area. They
wanted to know if FixMyStreet   could incorporate
them so that problem reports could be more accurately attached.
http://www.mysociety.org/2010/10/12/a-wish-list-for-geodata-on-fixmystreet/

Does anyone fancy finding out where this is and organising an import?


Regards,


Peter

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Use of OS OpenData in OSM

2010-07-22 Thread Gregory Williams

That looks much better now. It's certainly interesting to see that whole
counties, like Norfolk, appear to be sourced from OS OpenData. I know that
that isn't true, but I guess it's a just a side-effect of the last edit to
existing ways adding a source / source:name tag referencing OS, like adding
the name to an existing way. It may be interesting to differentiate between
source and source:name using different colours to get an idea of where it's
only the name that's been added.

 

From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Graham Jones
Sent: 21 July 2010 22:58
To: 80n
Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Use of OS OpenData in OSM

 

Hi,

 

I have tidied up my OS Opendata Map
(http://www.maps.webhop.net/osm_opendata).

 

The changes are:

*   Lines and dots are smaller so it looks less of a mess.
*   It excludes source tags containing '25k', 'os7' and 'photos', which
were giving quite a lot of false positives, especially in Scotland.  Let me
know if you see any others and I can exclude them.
*   I have left my original layer available as 'tiles1', but this is not
displayed by default - you can add it with the '+' control to see the
differences.
*   The about   page
has been updated to describe how it works better (still crude, but more
complicated SQL!).

There are still some surprising things here - for example National Cycle
Route 1 is highlighted, even though I know that the bits I added are not
from OS Opendata (see the bit from Whitby to Sunderland here
 ).   It seems that someone has tagged the relation (Relation
Number 9579) with 'OS_OpenData_StreetView' - I don't know why they would
have done this? 

 

Regards

 

Graham.

 

On 20 July 2010 23:40, Graham Jones  wrote:

Thank you all for your comments.
I'll not get into the licence change debate here - plenty of that on
osm-talk

-  I agree that there are a few surprises highlighted here.   There are a
couple of cycle tracks highlighted that I survryed myself, so I will have to
check the underlying data.  When I get home I will improve the filtering to
exclude os 1:25k references.
- I will see what I can do with the rendering as Gregory suggests.
- The supermarkets reference is copy-and-paste-itis on my behalf - sorry!
- Emilie is probably right that strictly I should be interested in history,
but I cant do that easily from a planet extract, and I don't think it will
matter too much with opendata being so recent.   A curious legal point is
that if a way was originally derived from os-opendata, but subsequently
re-surveyed, is it still derived from opendata?

Graham


Graham Jones
(from my phone)

On Jul 20, 2010 4:41 PM, "80n" <80n...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
mailto:robert.whittaker%2b...@gmail.com> >
wrote: > >...

What's more, because Produced Works can be published under a restrictive
license we couldn't get the additional data back by tracing either.  ODbL +
CT makes getting data back into OSM much harder than it is now by a massive
degree.

BTW, how would a corporation agree to the Contributor Terms anyway?  The
sign-up page only caters for individuals.  Has, for example, CloudMade,
agreed to the contributor terms yet and how could we tell if they had?

80n

 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




-- 
Dr. Graham Jones
Hartlepool, UK
email: grahamjones...@gmail.com

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] A quick question for the cyclists

2010-06-30 Thread Gregory Williams

Don't worry. There are a number of three-digit national routes appearing
now. That doesn't mean that there are at least 246 national routes. It's
just that the numbers have a little significance in the scheme of things,
like they do with road numbers.

So, in short, it's NCN.

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andy Street
> Sent: 30 June 2010 15:01
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] A quick question for the cyclists
> 
> I was out and about at the weekend when I came across this[0] sign for
> a
> cycle route and I'm not quite sure how to tag it. I was under the
> impression that national routes had red backgrounds and regional/local
> routes had blue but it seems to be a rather large number for a national
> route.
> 
> Can someone please explain to this poor confused pedestrian if this is
> ncn, rcn or lcn and why?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Andy
> 
> [0] http://www.andystreet.me.uk/DSC00728.JPG
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Post code map updated with a Code-Point Open layer

2010-04-01 Thread Gregory Williams

The Kent / Essex thing is simply an artefact of deriving the areas from
known points. The boundaries shown are in effect "we know based upon the
surrounding points that the boundary is approximately here".

I must say that I'm surprised at how well bits of OpenStreetMap's CT and
Code-Point Open's CT tally up. I collected much of CT simply via getting
postbox refs, and now that we've got most of them (83% last time I looked)
they are pretty alike.

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Colin Smale
> Sent: 1 April 2010 14:37
> To: Dave Stubbs
> Cc: Talk GB
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Post code map updated with a Code-Point Open
> layer
> 
> Looks really nice, with the colours as well!
> 
> Looking at the Thames east of London, the boundary down the river
> between Kent and Essex looks rather suspicious. There seem to be bits
> of
> Essex with a Kent postcode and vice versa. Is this a function of
> "clipping to the coastline" that you mention? I hope it's not
> representative for the accuracy of the rest of the data...
> 
> Colin
> 
> On 01/04/2010 15:15, Dave Stubbs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The Ordnance Survey OpenData released today contains a dataset called
> > Code-Point Open giving the coordinates of about 1.5 million
> postcodes.
> >
> > I've added a layer onto the postcode area map to show this data in
> the
> > same way it's been showing NPE, OSM and FreeThePostcode data for some
> > time.
> >
> > Go see it here:
> >
> > http://random.dev.openstreetmap.org/postcodes/?layers=000F0F0FBT
> >
> > There's still a few bugs to be worked out:
> >   - only 25% of the original dataset is actually used (generation
> > process uses too much RAM on my 32bit machine to do the whole thing)
> >   - not yet clipped to coastline
> >   - sub-codes ie: "SW18 1" only show where the prefix is 3 chars
> >
> > So nothing too serious :-)
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

2010-03-17 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Nick Whitelegg
> Sent: 17 March 2010 10:22
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering
> 
> >I wouldn?t take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely
> confident that it?s compatible with OSM?s license
> 
> Sorry, meant to raise this point in my last reply.
> 
> Would "any source" also include footpath signs with the number on? This
> is
> common practice on the Isle of Wight, and I myself have used these
> signs
> as a source before. These signs would be equivalent to road signs
> showing
> the road number, and will have been erected by the council - so I
> definitely can't see an issue there.

Ah, I did write that a bit ambiguously really I guess. I, and I think
virtually everyone surveying data in OSM, think that getting the refs from
the signs in-situ is perfectly fine. It's just like getting road refs or
street names from signs at the edge of the road.


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

2010-03-17 Thread Gregory Williams

I wouldn't take PRoW refs from any source unless I was completely confident
that it's compatible with OSM's license. It sounds like your Chiltern
Society map is an annotated OS map, therefore unsuitable.

 

Unfortunately I think it depends upon where you live as to how well the refs
are put up on signs. In the last few years I've found that my area of Kent
have done pretty well with getting refs displayed.

 

From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Bob Hawkins
Sent: 17 March 2010 08:52
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Footpath numbering

 

Footpaths and bridleways are numbered on definitive maps but rarely on
signposts or waymarks.  Often numbered on a parish or community basis (HA10,
for example), their use appears to be for legal puposes mainly, rather than
as an aid to navigation.  Having said that, my local Chiltern Society
footpath map is annotated with the definitve numbers.  So, I wonder what OSM
mappers in GB feel about adding the official numbers to such ways.  I
suspect copyright is an issue because the rights of way numbers will
invariably be on maps based upon the Ordnance Survey, unless anyone knows
that they are available from another source. 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network - filling the gaps

2010-03-08 Thread Gregory Williams



> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Peter Childs
> Sent: 8 March 2010 15:24
> To: Richard Fairhurst
> Cc: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network - filling the gaps
> 
> On 8 March 2010 14:46, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
> > Gregory wrote:
> >
> >> On 8 March 2010 02:23, Richard Fairhurst 
> wrote:
> >>> - *To complete the C2C*: Forest section near Keswick - the one gap
> in
> >>> our coverage of the NCN's most popular route!
> >>>
> >> The end of the mapped route is marked on the ground by some blood
> and
> >> ambulance track marks.
> >
> > That sounds awfully familiar. My C2C attempt ended in a similar heap
> > of blood and gristle at the bottom of a hill where I'd spotted the
> > signpost too late.
> >
> > One of the reasons to improve OSM's NCN coverage is that future
> > cyclists can be warned in good time by the map on their Garmin,
> rather
> > than having to squint for a little blue sign. :)
> >
> > cheers
> > Richard
> >
> >
> 
> Not a lot of use when the route goes through yet another gap that's
> not big enough for your bike, and you have to leap off, and go through
> sideways, holding your bike over you head yet  again, (This happens
> several times on NCN1 in Medway (and I'm not that fat really!) and
> that's when the route has not yet again taken some scenic diversion
> yet again around some bush
> 
> No help from any Garmin is going to help you follow and actual get
> along NCN1 (at about this point you give up and cycle along the A2
> (Which in this case has quite a nice cycle track along the side.)

Are you sure that you're following the official NCR1 through Medway, Peter?
Admittedly there are a few motorcycle inhibitors, but I've been able to take
a bike loaded with four panniers through there quite easily. I assume that
you turn your handlebars 45 degrees to pass through the motorcycle
inhibitors? (Oh, and if you're riding a tandem then I know that that's an
exception to the rule...).

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network - filling the gaps

2010-03-08 Thread Gregory Williams

I should point out that I've still got some of my data from last summer's
trip to be entered. This includes bits of NCR1, RCR30 in East Anglia, and
NCR13. However, I've been very busy lately hence not really managing to get
the data entered particularly fast.

There could be quite a bit more to do in Wales in the future with all of the
new NCN routes that are currently being proposed there.

Cheers,

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst
> Sent: 8 March 2010 10:24
> To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
> Subject: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network - filling the gaps
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> OSM's National Cycle Network coverage is astounding and one of the
> reasons why everyone loves OpenCycleMap.
> 
> With the sun finally emerging once again (yay) we've got the chance to
> fill some of the gaps and make it really useful. Anna and I went out on
> Saturday to map a recently opened section of National Route 45 (south
> of
> Worcester), and it occurred to me that a few afternoons like that would
> complete coverage of several high-profile routes.
> 
> So I had a look at the map and have identified a few that could be
> ticked off in an afternoon by nearby mappers. Obviously, some are
> already in hand - Gregory W cycled most of NCN 1 last year, for
> example,
> and I've got a few planned for this year.
> 
> == South ==
> 
> - *To complete NCN 3*: St Austell to Truro is only partly mapped
> 
> - *To complete NCN 4*: Tiny little section in north Bristol (near
> Catbrain!) needs doing
> 
> == Midlands ==
> 
> - *To complete Great Central Cycle Ride*: missing section through
> Daventry
> 
> == Wales ==
> 
> - *To complete Lon Teifi*: NCN 82 from Cardigan to Fishguard
> 
> == North ==
> 
> - *To complete the C2C*: Forest section near Keswick - the one gap in
> our coverage of the NCN's most popular route!
> 
> - *To complete the Pennine Cycleway*: NCN 68's alternative route via
> Burnley and the Leeds & Liverpool canal towpath is only partly mapped.
> 
> - *The new Way of the Roses*: a coast-to-coast route being launched
> this
> year, roughly Morecambe-Settle-Harrogate-York-Bridlington. East of York
> it's fully mapped. Morecambe to York is not yet fully signed. But it'd
> be great to have it mapped on OSM at launch.
> 
> - Hadrian's Cycleway (NCN 72) and the Reivers Route (NCN 10) could be
> completed with a little effort. A few gaps around Sheffield could also
> be completed fairly easily.
> 
> 
> Any takers? Or any other gaps in big routes that people have spotted?
> 
> cheers
> Richard
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Kent County Council Highways Gazetteer

2010-03-04 Thread Gregory Williams

[Snip]
> 
> A couple of questions about C-roads...
> 
> Is there a consensus about how these should be treated? Given that they
> are not a 'public-facing' classification (never appear on road signs or
> on any map you would buy from W. H. Smith's), I'm not sure we want the
> standard renderings cluttered up with them, do we? Should we invent a
> tag such as ref:internal (say) for these?
> 
No. That would be tagging for the renderer. Even if it's generally a
non-visible ref in the outside world (though I've seen three C-roads leak
onto signs in my travels) I believe that it's the render's choice as to
whether they should show up on the maps, not for us to say that there's
something "special" about the fact. A fact's a fact.

> Secondly, am I right in thinking that these are not unique references
> like the A- and B-roads? (Unique within the UK, that is.) In other
> words, whereas Wrotham Road near me is 'the A227', nearby Coldharbour
> Road is not 'the C364', it's just one of many C364s, albeit the only
> one
> in Kent? Should this be reflected in the tagging? I see in the States
> they use network=US:[state]:[county] to tag county roads.

I'm not sure whether they're nationally unique references, but they'll be
unique per authority and we've got pretty good bounding areas for those in
OSM now.

Gregory


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Cheshire Cycleway

2010-02-04 Thread Gregory Williams

I followed a bit of the Cheshire Cycleway on day 21 of my Three Corners
Cycle Ride last summer. So, my trace may be of some help to you:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Gregory%20Williams/traces/536286

Unfortunately I'm a bit busy at the moment to go through it again myself
with all the photos that I took. I've still got them archived away though.

Cheers,

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst
> Sent: 4 February 2010 12:48
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Cheshire Cycleway
> 
> The Cheshire Cycleway (RCN70, relation 23552) was an unholy mess of
> duplicate relations, uncontinuous parts, isolated ways and so on.
> 
> I've tried to fix it based on some acquaintance with the area, some
> Geograph photos, and some knowledge of rural cycle route design
> principles! If any locals (RichardB?) have a chance, you might like to
> review it and amend if necessary.
> 
> It still appears to be mostly unmapped north of Ellesmere Port.
> 
> cheers
> Richard
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Postboxes & Payphones

2009-11-10 Thread Gregory Williams

It's potentially better, but still wrong though. For a start I've come
across several cases of two postboxes with different refs that are located
side-by-side. It's a bit of a lottery whether it'll tie up the correct ref
here. Also, I've seen several instances of bad data in the Dracos set, e.g.
a postbox in the middle of a farmer's field, and another out at sea. Tying
up to a dodgy location in the first place will just result in dodgy data.

Personally I don't want to see the Dracos data imported into OSM either.
We've got plenty of people mapping on the ground now and we only need a
little patience to have mapped all of the boxes directly. As has been
mentioned before, the process of hunting down an elusive postbox often has
the benefit of some other missing feature getting mapped as well, just
because you happen to be in the neighbourhood.

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Ed Loach
> Sent: 10 November 2009 08:20
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Postboxes & Payphones
> 
> I just noticed a changeset from user elbatrop which although it says
> it was to "Tie 10 Royal Mail references to known postboxes", it has
> 1709 nodes in the changeset:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/3079245
> 
> Assuming this is import related, then linking a ref to a previously
> mapped postbox is probably the least likely to cause issues.
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes on whois records?

2009-09-07 Thread Gregory Williams

It's a .uk TLD, so I'll play safe and not derive from that then. I managed to 
miss that legal blurb at the end of the response.

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of James Davis
> Sent: 7 September 2009 13:37
> To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes on whois records?
> 
> Gregory Williams wrote:
> > I just happen to have looked up a whois record for a domain and it
> > helpfully has the registrant’s physical address and postcode. OSM is
> > always ticking away in the back of my mind, so I thought: I can
> > physically get to that address quite easily for mapping purposes, so
> > that postcode is helpful. I’m just wondering what the views of others
> > are on using whois records as means for getting a little geo-located
> > postcode data? The data in the record has probably been provided by
> the
> > registrant and not inadvertently derived from a copyright source in
> my view.
> 
> It may be okay with other tld's but not within .uk - from nominet's
> whois details...
> 
> "This WHOIS information is provided for free by Nominet UK the central
> registry for .uk domain names. This information and the .uk WHOIS are:
> 
> Copyright Nominet UK 1996 - 2009.
> 
> You may not access the .uk WHOIS or use any data from it except as
> permitted by the terms of use available in full at
> http://www.nominet.org.uk/whois, which includes restrictions on: (A)
> use
> of the data for advertising, or its repackaging, recompilation,
> redistribution or reuse (B) obscuring, removing or hiding any or all of
> this notice and (C) exceeding query rate or volume limits. The data is
> provided on an 'as-is' basis and may lag behind the register. Access
> may
> be withdrawn or restricted at any time."
> 
> Regards,
> 
> James
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Postcodes on whois records?

2009-09-06 Thread Gregory Williams

I just happen to have looked up a whois record for a domain and it helpfully
has the registrant's physical address and postcode. OSM is always ticking
away in the back of my mind, so I thought: I can physically get to that
address quite easily for mapping purposes, so that postcode is helpful. I'm
just wondering what the views of others are on using whois records as means
for getting a little geo-located postcode data? The data in the record has
probably been provided by the registrant and not inadvertently derived from
a copyright source in my view.

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Three Corner Cycle Ride (and OSM mapping)

2009-06-11 Thread Gregory Williams

All,

 

I just thought I'd let you all know about the charity cycle ride that
I'll be doing this summer in aid of the British Heart Foundation and all
of the associated mapping I'm planning to do for OSM as a result of it.
This Sunday I'm setting off from Canterbury to go via Dover, Land's End,
John O'Groats, and then back to Canterbury - about 3000 miles. I'm
keeping a blog online, which also has a link to my sponsorship page if
you're interested in supporting me:

 

http://www.threecornerscycleride.org.uk/

 

So, on to my planned OSM coverage. I'm using a mixture of the NCN and
other roads where the NCN is inconvenient. I hope to cover these
stretches of the NCN:

 

-   Kent's RCR16 from Canterbury to Dover. Already fully mapped, but
more tracks never do any harm!

-   NCR2 from Dover to Shoreham-by-Sea. Also following the small
sections of NCR2 that exist as far west as Poole.

-   Following the sections of NCR25 that exist from Poole to
Shillingstone. This should improve our NCR25 coverage by several miles.

-   A tiny section of Dorset's RCR41 west of Okeford Fitzpaine,
which I hope there'll be signing evidence for on the ground.

-   A short section of NCR26 between Bradford Abbas and Yeovil,
though we've already got this mapped.

-   NCR27 from near Exbourne to Hatherleigh.

-   NCR3 from Hatherleigh via Bude to Bodmin following braids that
we currently don't have mapped.

-   NCR32 from Bodmin via Padstow and Newquay to Truro. This should
add considerably to our coverage of this route.

-   NCR3 braid south from Truro to Bissoe, which we haven't got any
coverage for yet.

-   NCR3 between Truro and Land's End, using a different braid into
Truro. This'll add quite a bit to our coverage of this route.

-   NCR3 from London Apprentice (a little south of St. Austell) to
near Bodmin.

-   A small portion of NCR2 in Exeter.

-   NCR3 from Tiverton to Cossington, mainly mapped, but I believe
I'll cover one new braid.

-   NCR33 from Cossington to Brean, which isn't mapped at all yet.

-   NCR26 from Winscombe to RCR10 near Clevedon.

-   Short stretches of RCR10 near Clevedon, but trying to
concentrate on the upmapped NCR26 spur into Portishead.

-   NCR41 and RCR10 over the bridge with the M49 to the point that
that the routes diverge. Following RCR10 back to where they converge
again near Elberton. Following NCR41 from here to Gloucester, which
looks like it's pretty much mapped already.

-   Largely unmapped NCR45 from Stourport-on-Severn to Bridgnorth.

-   Unmapped NCR55 from Telford to Lilleshall.

-   RCR75 from Newport to just west of Audlem, closing the gap in
our coverage here.

-   RCR75 from Nantwich to Winsford, also closing a gap in our
coverage.

-   A short portion of NCR5 between Winsford and Northwich, which
we've already got mapped.

-   Join our existing RCR70 coverage near Great Budworth, leaving
near High Legh.

-   A short section of unmapped RCR82 at Shevington, near Wigan.
Also a tiny portion of RCR91 on my way out towards Eccleston.

-   Fully mapped RCR90 from NW of Preston to where it meets NCR6.
NCR6 from here to Hollins Lane, then rejoining RCR90 again shortly
afterwards to NCR69. Again all fully mapped.

-   A tiny portion of unmapped NCR71 at King's Meaburn.

-   A small portion of already-mapped NCR7 at Langwathby.

-   Unmapped NCR72 from near Warwick Bridge to near Carlisle.

-   Unmapped NCR7 from Carlisle to Longtown.

-   Fully mapped NCR74 from Gretna to A70 junction near Douglas.

-   Fully mapped NCR75 from Uddingston through Glasgow to NCR7. NCR7
from here to where it joins NCR1 relatively near Inverness, which should
vastly improve our coverage of the route.

-   NCR1 between John O'Groats back to Canterbury, with these
exceptions: NCR65 from Middlesbrough to Hessle, bits of NCR13 and RCR30
between Dereham and Sudbury [Hopefully this'll mean that we'll have 100%
coverage by the end of my travels, if you except the bit on the Orkneys
:-)]

 

Aside from the NCN mapping my route also takes in many roads that we
haven't got any coverage for yet. I'll also be trying to get lots of
POIs along the way: pubs, phone boxes, postboxes (with refs, of course),
my overnight accommodation (with postcodes when I get their business
cards), together with speed limits, height restrictions, etc.

 

I'll be entering my data from the road, but probably accumulating a bit
of a backlog at the same time because I've only got rest days planned
approximately once a week.

 

Also, for anybody that's within easy reach of London and Canterbury,
I've organised for one of our local cycle campaign's group rides to
coincide with my final day of cycling (22-Aug). So, I'd be glad to meet
others on this day. Details here:
http://www.spokeseastkent.org.uk/events.php

 

It should be a fun OSM summer!

 

Cheers,

 

Gregory

___

Re: [Talk-GB] Possibly using "highway=path" for country footpaths

2009-04-03 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of David Earl
> Sent: 3 April 2009 13:02
> To: Richard Mann
> Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Possibly using "highway=path" for country
> footpaths
>
> Well, you know my view on this. A cycleway is a cycleway if it is
> signed
> as a cycleway, not because it appears to be constructed to a standard
> that happens to be suitable for carrying bikes. Likewise bridleway,
> which in the UK permits cyclists to use it (by default).
> 
> And where did this arbitrary 2m come from? That would mean some signed
> cycleways in Cambridge wouldn't be marked as such because they are
> wider
> than 2m. Perhaps you are trying somehow to distinguish between a
> specially constructed cycleway and a road which has been converted for
> cycle use. But in my mind that's just a wider cycleway.
> 
> It will come as no surprise to you that I completely disagree with
your
> approach to this whole subject.

Indeed. Current guidance (though admittedly not always heeded) in the UK
is for a minimum of 2.5m wide for a cycleway. So only applying
highway=cycleway to ways less than 2m wide would mean that we can't add
any new cycleways that follow the guidance.

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Brewery tagging

2009-03-18 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Ed Loach
> Sent: 18 March 2009 10:37
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Brewery tagging
> 
> Hi
> 
> Does anyone have suggestions on how best to tag breweries if you only
> have a node and not a building= area? I've looked through the wiki and
> the "creating a proposal" page mentions:
> "you want a tag for a 'brewery' - consider searching for 'beer',
> 'manufacturing', 'alcohol', 'industrial', 'plant', 'works'"
> 
> I was at Farmers Brewery in Maldon last night and have tagged it as
> amenity=brewery for now, and then looked at other breweries that
sprang
> to mind to see how they were tagged. The Felstar Brewery is in a
> vineyard, so I've actually got that tagged as landuse=vineyard, and
one
> in Bury St Edmunds is tagged landuse=industrial (with a visitor centre
> attraction). Banks's (or is it Marstons these days) in Wolverhampton
> isn't tagged at all. Then I gave up searching and thought I'd ask here
> how others do it. I tried tagwatch and there are quite a few brewery=
> tags which I believe are to indicate who owns a given pub, and there
> are a couple of poi=brewery.

Yes, that's how I've been using brewery= recently, to tag who owns the
pub, e.g. brewery=Shepherd Neame, or brewery=Greene King. I've only
started doing this in the last few weeks though.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Trying to upload postbox

2009-01-21 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: 21 January 2009 20:43
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Trying to upload postbox
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I've recently tried to add a postbox to the OSM.  I opened the GPX in
> JOSM and edited the relivant details.  I then uploaded.  The next day,
> I opened JOSM and downloaded the map section (at the suggestion of
> someone from the IRC channel) and I can see the postbox amungst the
> data pulled down.  However, it has never appeared on the OSM.  Am I
> doing something totally daft?
> 
> The postbox is at 51.419319939 -0.167227853, on Devonshire Road and is
> tagged ref=SW19 77.
> 
> Mike.

You're doing nothing wrong. It's there on the map:

http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=51.419363364544196&lon=-0.1673871
1848297&zoom=17&layers=0B000F000F

I can think of two reasons that you couldn't see it:
(1) I see that you entered the data last Friday (the 16th). You looked
at the Mapnik rendering of the map (the default on
www.openstreetmap.org), which is gets updated on a weekly basis some
time starting each Wednesday. [It's on the Mapnik rendering now,
though.]
(2) You didn't zoom in far enough. Features like postboxes are only
shown on zoom levels 17 and 18 for Mapnik and just level 17 (there isn't
an 18) for Osmarender. Otherwise the maps would simply be too cluttered.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Locating postboxes - any photos around?

2009-01-14 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of LeedsTracker
> Sent: 14 January 2009 01:38
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb-theno...@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Locating postboxes - any photos around?
> 
> Apologies for cross-posting, and sorry if you already knew about this.
> I searched talk-gb via Google and found nothing, and this was new to
> me until a few days ago.
> 
> A nifty project that uses OSM to locate postboxes:
> http://www.dracos.co.uk/play/locating-postboxes/
> 
> If Royal Mail won't provide a map, then OSM and Dracos' project could
> do so in time, which could be useful PR for OSM.
> 
> Quote: "The Royal Mail supplied a list of every postbox's location -
> unfortunately, it did not have useful co-ordinates, only postcodes or
> sub-postcodes and some textual data. So I wrote this site: look up the
> postboxes near you by entering the first half of your postcode, locate
> one whose location you know on the map, pick which postbox you've
> located, and submit. The pages also include postbox last collection
> times, if we know them."
> 
> Even handier:
> "You can add postboxes and their references to OSM - use a key of ref,
> and this site will automatically pick them up every week or so."
> 
> I tend to map with a camera and take photos of the front plate of
> postboxes where possible. The reference needed is at the bottom of the
> plate, e.g. LS1 258
> 
> Hope this prompts a few more to join in! 6,654 postboxes located so
> far...
> 
> cheers,
> LT

It also makes for an interesting way to do mapping. In a few recent
lunchtimes I've been making a list of a few as-yet unreferenced
postboxes and going out to get the locations and references. I then map
other things I see on the way as well, e.g. I've been doing filling in
of roads where we don't have names.

Of course Royal Mail's descriptions for the locations of some of the
postboxes leave a little to be desired, but that's just part of the fun!

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Party this month?

2009-01-12 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Nick Whitelegg
> Sent: 12 January 2009 12:47
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Mapping Party this month?
> 
> Hello everyone,
> 
> Was there talk of another mapping party this month somewhere in the
> southwest on the 24/25th? If it's daytrippable from Southampton I
> should
> be able to make it. Was Yeovil an idea?

I emailed Andy Robinson a few days ago about the CloudMade parties. He
said that there won't be a January one and that the February one is
scheduled for the weekend of the 21st/22nd.

Cheers,

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans long-distance routes

2009-01-06 Thread Gregory Williams

Agreed. I think we'll have almost all of the NCN mapped by the end of
this year, so the "it's incomplete" argument won't even be valid. There
are places in the OS / Sustrans map where it doesn't match the ground.
I've since notified them of the necessary corrections, but it was much
simpler with OSM: Enter the data correctly in the first place and just
wait for the tiles to render.

Gregory Williams

From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Gregory
Sent: 6 January 2009 00:37
To: Richard Fairhurst
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans long-distance routes

It will be great when Sustran can make the decision to ditch their
crappy online map system (takes about half a day to load 1 tile) and use
OpenCycleMap in some way.

I started to read through that forum thread, it's really interesting and
good to see other people getting involved. I even spotted someone from
Devon going for mapping their area, wonderful to have hope that the West
Country will eventually be mapped.

Gregory Marler

2009/1/5 Richard Fairhurst 

Gregory Williams wrote:

> I'll be cycling most of NCR1 this summer as part of a round Britain
> cycle trip :-). So there will be only very short sections unmapped
> after that (if any). I'll also be covering some of the other
> unmapped NCN routes for parts of my trip.

Wow, sounds excellent. Let us know your itinerary when you know it so
the rest of us can plan our 2009 explorations accordingly!

If you're going through South Wales, it might be more fruitful from a
mapping point of view to follow NCN47 (largely unmapped) from
Carmarthen to Llanelli. And I'd recommend NCN47 from Fishguard to
Carmarthen, even though it's fully mapped: the journey over the
Preseli Hills is much more enjoyable IMO than the coastal route.

cheers
Richard

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

-- 
Gregory
nomoregra...@gmail.com
http://www.livingwithdragons.com

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans long-distance routes

2009-01-06 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst
> Sent: 5 January 2009 20:51
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans long-distance routes
> 
> Gregory Williams wrote:
> 
> > I'll be cycling most of NCR1 this summer as part of a round Britain
> > cycle trip :-). So there will be only very short sections unmapped
> > after that (if any). I'll also be covering some of the other
> > unmapped NCN routes for parts of my trip.
> 
> Wow, sounds excellent. Let us know your itinerary when you know it so
> the rest of us can plan our 2009 explorations accordingly!
> 
> If you're going through South Wales, it might be more fruitful from a
> mapping point of view to follow NCN47 (largely unmapped) from
> Carmarthen to Llanelli. And I'd recommend NCN47 from Fishguard to
> Carmarthen, even though it's fully mapped: the journey over the
> Preseli Hills is much more enjoyable IMO than the coastal route.
> 
Yes, since you announced the effective completion of NCR4 I was thinking
about mapping NCR47 instead. I note that there is a longer section of
unmapped NCR47 between Neath and just north of Pontypridd. So, I'm
tempted to map that section as well as the NCR47 section you mention.

The Fishguard -> Canterbury trip is principally to allow me to iron out
any issues ahead of the longer trip in the summer. I chose Fishguard
because it would allow me to get lots of NCN mapping done as well. So,
NCR47 needing some mapping is ideal as an alternative to NCR4. It'll
still enable me to do the Bristol to Bath path, which I've been
intending to cycle for a bit now.

I will putting online my itinerary for the summer trip online in due
course, once I've confirmed it all. In short the route is Canterbury ->
Dover (to take in that "corner" of the country) -> Lands End using bits
of NCR2, NCR3, and NCR27 -> John O'Groats using many different NCN
routes, but also quite a bit of non-NCN -> Canterbury using mainly NCR1,
but taking in bits of unmapped NCR65 and NCR13 along the way where we
already have NCR1 mapping.

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans long-distance routes

2009-01-05 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst
> Sent: 5 January 2009 10:48
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Sustrans long-distance routes
> 
> As of this weekend we have our first really long-distance National
> Cycle Network route substantially complete.
> 
> Route 4 is now done from London to Fishguard, including both 'braids'
> through Wiltshire. There are some tiny gaps in London and Bristol; the
> NCN route itself is incomplete in Newport, and I suspect Carmarthen;
> and Pontypridd could do with a little attention. Otherwise it's all
> there.

I'll be cycling most of NCR1 this summer as part of a round Britain
cycle trip :-). So there will be only very short sections unmapped after
that (if any). I'll also be covering some of the other unmapped NCN
routes for parts of my trip.

More details will follow in a few months.

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Announcement: Second City, Birmingham, and its surrounds completed

2008-12-23 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: talk-gb-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-gb-
> boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Andy Robinson (blackadder-
> lists)
> Sent: 23 December 2008 09:37
> To: t...@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb-
> westmidla...@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Announcement: Second City, Birmingham,and its
> surrounds completed
> 
> It is with great pleasure, and not just a little excitement, that I
can
> announce that the mappers in Birmingham having set the task of
> completing
> the whole of the city by Christmas have achieved just that.
> 
> "http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.4708&lon=-
> 1.8972&zoom=12&layers=0B00FT
> F"

Congratulations to everyone involved. A truly amazing effort!

Have a great Christmas!

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Request for UK address lists for postcode extraction

2008-12-01 Thread Gregory Williams

> One source I am exploring is planning application listings produced by
> the
> local authority. Which is I think were you had headed?

I'm not sure of the legal situation with planning data, but if things
seem fine with that then you might be interested to know that the
PlanningAlerts project have developed a number of screen scrapers for
various local authorities:

http://code.google.com/p/planningalerts/wiki/ExistingScrapers

Cheers,

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping parties - Dec/Jan/Feb

2008-11-26 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Robinson (blackadder-
> lists)
> Sent: 26 November 2008 10:51
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Mapping parties - Dec/Jan/Feb
> 
> Now that Winter is upon us I'm struggling a little to get the level of
> interest for the next three parties on the following dates:
> 
> Dec 13/14, 2008
> Jan 24/25, 2009
> Feb 21/22, 2009
> 

I'd be up for any of Plymouth, Yeovil, or Reading that have been
suggested in December. I'd be particularly interested in Yeovil, because
there's a campsite there that I'd like to check out.

Cheers,

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only

2008-09-30 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of LeedsTracker
> Sent: 30 September 2008 18:49
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
> 
> 2008/9/30 Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists)  [EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > Suggestions of different things to use in place of :left and :right
> > would be very welcome. I'd suggest keeping it defined in terms that
> > allow rendering without foreknowledge of which side of the road one
> > cycles/drives in a particular country.
> 
> Can't we use the direction of the way being tagged? E.g.
> cycleway:withway=
> cycleway:againstway=
> 
> If neither withway/againstway are given, assume both ways as default

If you did that then you'd need to know which side of the road you cycle
on in order to be able to render a lane on the correct side.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only

2008-09-30 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gregory Williams
> Sent: 30 September 2008 15:56
> To: Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists); talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Chadwick (mailing
> lists)
> > Sent: 30 September 2008 15:29
> > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
> >
> [Snip]
> >
> > We'll probably have to introduce a new tag to say on which side of
> the
> > road the cycle lane(s) lie, relative to the direction of the way's
> > arrow. What about adding something like:
> >
> >cycleway:left=
> >cycleway:right=
> >
> > and stating explicitly that the existing cycleway=* definition still
> > means both sides: cycleway=FOO would imply both cycleway:left=FOO
and
> > cycleway:right=FOO.
> 
> That seems sensible to me. It's something I've been wondering about as
> well. I'm aware of several places where there is a cycle lane only on
> one side of the road. For the moment they're tagged as if there is a
> lane on both sides.
> 
> Now we need to be able to render something like that. As noted in the
> comments on Andy Allan's blog post about rendering cycle lanes [1]
> Mapnik doesn't support rendering offset from the centre of a line. I
> think the same is true for Osmarender? I guess that it would be
> possible
> by manipulating the geometry accordingly in the Postgres query for
> Mapnik (though a tremendous hack).

First of all, here's the URL I managed to miss:

[1]
http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/shine/archives/2008/08/17/hill-colouring-o
n-the-cycle-map/#comment-42219

Secondly, I've just realised that manipulating the geometry like I
suggested above would be even worse -- it wouldn't be able to cope with
multiple zoom levels. Oh well, the idea was a hack anyway...

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only

2008-09-30 Thread Gregory Williams

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Chadwick (mailing
lists)
> Sent: 30 September 2008 15:29
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle lane in one direction only
> 
[Snip]
> 
> We'll probably have to introduce a new tag to say on which side of the
> road the cycle lane(s) lie, relative to the direction of the way's
> arrow. What about adding something like:
> 
>cycleway:left=
>cycleway:right=
> 
> and stating explicitly that the existing cycleway=* definition still
> means both sides: cycleway=FOO would imply both cycleway:left=FOO and
> cycleway:right=FOO.

That seems sensible to me. It's something I've been wondering about as
well. I'm aware of several places where there is a cycle lane only on
one side of the road. For the moment they're tagged as if there is a
lane on both sides.

Now we need to be able to render something like that. As noted in the
comments on Andy Allan's blog post about rendering cycle lanes [1]
Mapnik doesn't support rendering offset from the centre of a line. I
think the same is true for Osmarender? I guess that it would be possible
by manipulating the geometry accordingly in the Postgres query for
Mapnik (though a tremendous hack).

Gregory

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] reprojected NPE

2008-04-09 Thread Gregory Williams

I've just taken a look at the Canterbury tile. It looks good, although
I'd observe that there is a noticeable horizontal shift in places. Look
at Stone Street, for example (That's the B2068 Roman Road south of
Canterbury for non-locals on the list.).

Was it our email conversation the other day which sparked you to look at
this?

Gregory

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:talk-gb-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Sheerman-Chase
> Sent: 9 April 2008 18:55
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] reprojected NPE
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have put a small test version of the NPE map reprojected for more
> accurate use in JOSM. The URL is:
> 
> http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~timsc/wms/quickmap.php?
> 
> I have only uploaded 3 tiles each 0.1 by 0.1 degrees. The areas are
> Gravesend, Canterbury and Ashford, all in Kent. You might notice the
> grid lines are no longer horizontal and vertical unlike the GBOS NPE
> tiles.
> 
> I would appreciate feedback or suggestions. If feedback is positive, I
> will reproject the whole of the UK NPE and upload it to the dev
server.
> Also it may be worth adding the WMS to JOSM by default.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] NPE coverage

2008-03-28 Thread Gregory Williams

It might be a good idea for Potlatch to automatically add a default
source=NPE tag/value when tracing from this layer and within the
bounding box of the NPE coverage. It'll save a few seconds per way
that's traced and avoid it getting omitted by those not aware of it.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard
Fairhurst
Sent: 28 March 2008 08:04
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] NPE coverage

I've uploaded NPE tiles at zoom level 14 for the whole of Wales and  
the Marches, plus two areas requested individually (Birmingham and  
the Chilterns).

You can trace from them in Potlatch by making sure you're at zoom 14  
(hover over the 'Edit' tab and check the URL if you're not sure),  
then selecting the 'Out of copyright map' background.

South-east Wales and the Wye Valley has gone a bit (lot) bonkers - I  
think I might have input the wrong base co-ordinate for that sheet,  
so don't try tracing around there. The rest should be good though.

cheers
Richard

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration

2008-03-01 Thread Gregory Williams

Excellent idea, thanks for that. The height profile they give out on the
day is very approximate.

Just wondering, did you use a specific bit of software for that, or
simply extract the height values from the XML?

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: Andy Robinson (blackadder) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 29 February 2008 19:48
To: Gregory Williams; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: RE: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration

Gregory Williams wrote:
>Sent: 29 February 2008 3:55 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration
>
>Don't worry! I took a trace last year:
>
>http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Gregory%20Williams/traces/27079
>
>Gregory

Thanks for the link Gregory. I turned the trace into an elevation
profile,
that won't change much even if the route is altered this year.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Image:2007LondonToBrighton.jpg


Cheers

Andy

>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Jaggard
>Sent: 29 February 2008 15:19
>To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration
>
>The OSM cycling team will, of course, take twice as long to reach the
>finish
>line as any other team, on account of having to go twice round each
>roundabout and detour down any interesting-looking side roads...
>
>:-)
>
>Paul.
>
>-Original Message-
>Message: 1
>Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:34:33 -
>From: "Andy Robinson \(blackadder\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration
>   reminder!
>To: "'OSM Talk'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
>Message-ID:
>
>AAAB
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="us-ascii"
>
>A reminder that if you are thinking of joining the OSM team entering
the
>London to Brighton Bike Ride on June 15th you need to get your entry
>form in
>ASAP. Places go really quickly so don't dither if you plan to joint the
>fun.
>
>http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/London_to_Brighton_Bike_Ride
>
>
>Cheers
>
>Andy
>--
>
>
>___
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>___
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration

2008-02-29 Thread Gregory Williams

Don't worry! I took a trace last year:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Gregory%20Williams/traces/27079

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Jaggard
Sent: 29 February 2008 15:19
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration

The OSM cycling team will, of course, take twice as long to reach the
finish
line as any other team, on account of having to go twice round each
roundabout and detour down any interesting-looking side roads...

:-)

Paul.

-Original Message-
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:34:33 -
From: "Andy Robinson \(blackadder\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Talk-GB] London to Brighton Bike Ride - registration
reminder!
To: "'OSM Talk'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,

Message-ID:



Content-Type: text/plain;   charset="us-ascii"

A reminder that if you are thinking of joining the OSM team entering the
London to Brighton Bike Ride on June 15th you need to get your entry
form in
ASAP. Places go really quickly so don't dither if you plan to joint the
fun.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/London_to_Brighton_Bike_Ride


Cheers

Andy
--


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Oxford hi-res on Yahoo

2008-01-10 Thread Gregory Williams

http://maps.yahoo.com/broadband/#mvt=s&lat=52.949414&lon=-1.178971&mag=4

PS, I also discovered several other new areas of coverage last night.
See:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Yahoo%21_Aerial_Imagery/Coverage

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Russ Phillips
Sent: 10 January 2008 12:17
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Oxford hi-res on Yahoo

On Thu, January 10, 2008 12:00 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:24:09 -
> From: "Gregory Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Part of Nottingham also appears to have been added to the coverage.
:-)

That's good news. Do you have a URL or lat/lon?

Russ



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Oxford hi-res on Yahoo

2008-01-09 Thread Gregory Williams

Part of Nottingham also appears to have been added to the coverage. :-)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard
Fairhurst
Sent: 9 January 2008 15:22
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Oxford hi-res on Yahoo

Socks on IRC has just spotted Oxford has gone hi-res.

Any other additions?

cheers
Richard


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] A26

2007-12-15 Thread Gregory Williams

Should be a bit tidier now; I've fixed the classes there. Some of what
was marked as the A26 is actually the A228. Looking at NPE it's even
marked as such on there, so I'm not sure where the erroneous A26 came
from.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of OJW
Sent: 14 December 2007 20:57
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] A26

What colour is an A-road?

http://informationfreeway.org/?lat=51.267&lon=0.427&zoom=14&layers=B000F
000

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK spam(ish) - vote for walking and cycle paths

2007-12-12 Thread Gregory Williams

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Allan
Sent: 12 December 2007 14:53
To: Richard Fairhurst
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] UK spam(ish) - vote for walking and cycle paths

> Wikiproject-Sustrans-Connect2 anyone?

Created:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/WikiProject_Sustrans_Connect2

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Southwest UK mapping party

2007-07-21 Thread Gregory Williams

It was me that's been doing lots of tracing in the Southwest. I was just
trying to lay a framework of the roads to help with surveying others
from. I often find it easier to survey areas bounded my a number of
major roads in one go. It gave me something to do whilst the weather was
rubbish and I couldn't get out on my bike to get my own surveys where I
live.

It's quite possible that some of the roads have changed since NPE, but
not being local to the area I don't know that firsthand. Any other
source I might use for the references / class of roads would mean me
breaching copyright.

Someone more knowledgable about the area can relabel, and perhaps refine
my traces with a survey. If the original road now forms more than one
new road then the way can just be split at the appropriate point.

Well done on the 1M+ trackpoints in the Southwest. It'll be great to
have some more surveyed data in the area. BTW, I think there's a batch
upload script available somewhere.

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Newton
Sent: 21 July 2007 05:45
To: Richard Fairhurst
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Southwest UK mapping party

On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 09:28:09AM +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> OJW wrote:
> > I'm also "penciling-in" a week of Devon/North Cornwall exploration
in the
> > weekend of 31 August - 3rd September
> 
> Worth alerting Mike "tracing NPE maps" Calder? He's local:
> http://www.guillemotdesign.org/

In my holiday-mapping of Cornwall a few weeks ago I noticed someone had
been doing a lot of tracing (this was Southern Cornwall Helston/St.Ives/
Land's End). Unfortunately they haven't been taking into account that
many of the larger roads have changed recently. The A30, for instance,
is practically a completely different route.

However, most of the minor roads are still the same. Something for
NPE tracers to consider.

I need to work out how to upload all my 1M+ trackpoints, including
the Cornish bits. Grr for web interfaces ;).

-- 
Matthew

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] NCN refs - consistency

2007-07-11 Thread Gregory Williams

Yes, they're formal Sustrans routes, and in fact some of the earlier
ones that formed part of the network. I'm the Sustrans Volunteer ranger
for one of them (R17), and know the volunteer rangers for many of the
other routes in the area. Regional routes have a blue background behind
the number, instead of red.

-Original Message-
From: Andy Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 11 July 2007 11:52
To: Gregory Williams
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] NCN refs - consistency

On 7/11/07, Gregory Williams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All,
>
> I'd like to see a consistent format adopted as well.
>
> Many of the Kent routes are ones that I've input. I use the single
> letter followed by number format for the following reasons:
>
> - The letter is required because otherwise it's not clear whether you
> mean a national or a regional route. I live close to both regional
cycle
> route 17 and national cycle route 17. I suspect that the initial
letter
> may have been missed off by some people simply because there aren't
many
> regional routes in some places of the country. In Kent I'm aware of
six
> regional routes (11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18) as well as four national
routes
> (1, 2, 17, 18).

Out of interest, are these regional routes in Kent formally part of
the National Cycle Network, or some other regional network? On the
sign posts, does it say "NCN 17" or have 17 in white on a red
background, ala the NCRs? For instance, the London Cycle Network is
completely independent of the National Cycle network, and so have
different logos, numbering and so on.

I'd really prefer to break the different networks into different tags
somehow, as it's much easier to treat them separately without having
to have fuzzy text parsing of the values. Same way we have
highway=secondary instead of just parsing the reference number to try
and match B roads.

Andy

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] NCN refs - consistency

2007-07-11 Thread Gregory Williams

All,

I'd like to see a consistent format adopted as well.

Many of the Kent routes are ones that I've input. I use the single
letter followed by number format for the following reasons:

- The letter is required because otherwise it's not clear whether you
mean a national or a regional route. I live close to both regional cycle
route 17 and national cycle route 17. I suspect that the initial letter
may have been missed off by some people simply because there aren't many
regional routes in some places of the country. In Kent I'm aware of six
regional routes (11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18) as well as four national routes
(1, 2, 17, 18).
- The second letter "r", meaning route, is superfluous. We know it's a
route.
- Both NCR and NCN are in common use, but it would be just be more
confusing to use these. Especially as the last R/N in these means route
/ network, not regional / national.

BTW, I was the person that added to R79 to the Downs Link in Surrey /
West Sussex. So that's why it matches the format that I use in Kent.
I've also tagged portions of N12, N21, N57, and N61 outside of Kent in
the same way.

I think part of the reason that both the (N|R)x and (N|R)Rx formats are
in common use is that the wiki pages are inconsistent:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:reference
shows an example with the reference N54.

Whereas:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/WikiProject_United_Kingdom_Natio
nal_Cycle_Network
shows references like NR1 or Kent RR17.

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Allan
Sent: 10 July 2007 22:07
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] NCN refs - consistency

Hi all,

There's currently little national consistency with the ncn_ref values.
Variations are:
4 (digits only)
N4 (1 char prefix)
NR4 (2 char prefix)
NCN 4 (3 char prefix, and space)
NCN25 (3 char prefix, no space)
R79 (regional, 1 char prefix)
RR47 (regional, 2 char prefix)
proposed NR41 (free text)

>From looking at the coverage, the first and second are quite popular,
with the 1 char regional routes prevalent, especially in Kent. I'd
like to get some consistency, since it looks a mess on my renderings!

Personally, I prefer the digits only, but I'm not 'into' the national
cycle network much, so I'm interested to see if there is a convention
established elsewhere in print. The signposts I've seen have only the
route number. My personal feeling is that the N prefix is redundant.

I've started tagging London Cycle Network with an lcn_ref tag. Would
we be better off doing similar for the Regional Routes (rcn_ref)? I'd
like to render them differently (red for ncn, blue for lcn is my
current theme) and it's just easier for me to do so based on tags
rather than values.

I'd appreciate anyone's thoughts.

Cheers,
Andy

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Coastline

2007-06-30 Thread Gregory Williams

James,

(2013,1363) and (2014,1362) don't have any data within them. They can
both be marked as ocean in oceantiles_12.dat (They're currently marked
as tiles where a coastline cuts through them.). I've marked them as such
in my copy of the file and they both render to ocean now. If my
[EMAIL PROTECTED] client manages to find time when the upload queue on dev
isn't full then those revised tiles will get uploaded then.

I don't have svn checkin access to upload my revised oceantiles_12.dat.
So, please could somebody that does have access make the aforementioned
changes and upload this when convenient.

(2012,1364), the tile with the island, appears correctly configured in
oceantiles_12.dat as a tile which is intersected by coastline. I can't
see anything wrong with the island's coastline way: The water is on the
right-hand side of the segments, they're in sequence and appear to be
contiguous as far as I can tell. I've also tried the steps at:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tiles%40home/Dev/Interim_Coastli
ne_Support#Debugging

I don't end up with any ways that get tagged as open.

It's also baffling me why this is being rendered inverted.

Gregory

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James
Sent: 30 June 2007 13:16
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Coastline

Hello all,
I have three tiles in my area which have the blue/white inverted. the
tiles are: 2012 1364, 2013 1363, 2014 1362 at zoom level 12 i have
looked at the coastline, and everything looks in order. i think they
might be wrong in "oceantiles.dat". how could i fix this? here is a
link to the area:
http://www.informationfreeway.org/index.php?lat=51.419837821310715&lon=-
3.0531366143028165&zoom=11&layers=B000F00

Kind regards,

James Olney

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] [Party] SE Kent Mapping Party

2007-04-30 Thread Gregory Williams

I can provide Internet connectivity (wired only; not wireless) on
Saturday.

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Black
Sent: 30 April 2007 15:34
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Party] SE Kent Mapping Party

 

OpenStreetMap is coming to the South-East of England.

When:  Sat 12th - Sun 13th May

Where: Canterbury and surrounding villages

See: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/South_East_Tip 

Hope to see as many of you as possible there.  

-- 
Nick Black

http://www.blacksworld.net 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb

88 matches

Mail list logo