[Talk-GB] Somerset Levels

[Nick Austin]

Does anyone know what happened to the Somerset Levels super-relation?

I don't know how to search for deleted stuff so I can't look up it's
history to see what happened.

TIA.
Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update

[Nick Austin]

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Nick Whitelegg
 wrote:
>
> Incidentally, is just "knowing the footpaths" evidence enough to tag with
> "odbl=clean"? Or is there the risk that the footpath was created with "iffy"
> sources?

If the way was created by a declining contributor then most (if not
all) of it's nodes will have been created by the same person and
therfore every node will also need an odbl=clean. Because of this I
find that for ways that are highlighted in red on OSM Inspector it is
usually faster to delete the way and re-create it from Bing and/or GPS
traces.

This also applies if a way created was clean but subsequently a
declining contributor has re-adjusted its route. Every moved node is
now tainted and requires an odbl=clean (and/or re-creating).

Incidentally I believe that the behaviour of OSM Inspector has changed
a few weeks ago. Before then it didn't always show nodes that had
problems if it was included in a way with problems. Hence an area that
was checked with OSM Inspector a while back and declared clean ought
to be re-checked for bad nodes.

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hatfield Tunnel not appearing as a tunnel

[Nick Austin]

Ollie,

I've removed highway=motorway from inside relation 103623. This
appears to fix the problem but I've no idea why.

Nick.

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Nick Austin  wrote:
> I reckon It's the inclusion of the A1(M) relation (103623)
>
> I've remove it from one of the carriageways and it seems to render properly 
> now.
>
> You just need to identify what it is about that relation that is
> overriding the tunnel tag..
>
> Nick.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Oliver O'Brien  
> wrote:
>> Dear all
>>
>> Does anyone know why the Hatfield Tunnel:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.76493&lon=-0.23691&zoom=16&layers=M
>> …is not rendering as a tunnel on the standard osm.xml Mapnik render? It's 
>> osm_id 147479059
>>
>> I've checked and it had the tunnel=yes tag.
>>
>> As far as I can see other tunnels are rendering correctly, such as:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.6895&lon=0.09384&zoom=16&layers=M
>> …on the M25 - osm_id 4479450
>>
>> It doesn't seem to be a particular osm.xml rendering quirk or a caching 
>> issue, as my own custom maps are similarly ignoring its tunnel status.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Ollie
>>
>> p.s. RIP Osmarender on the OSM front page.
>> ___
>> 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] Hatfield Tunnel not appearing as a tunnel

[Nick Austin]

I reckon It's the inclusion of the A1(M) relation (103623)

I've remove it from one of the carriageways and it seems to render properly now.

You just need to identify what it is about that relation that is
overriding the tunnel tag..

Nick.


On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Oliver O'Brien  wrote:
> Dear all
>
> Does anyone know why the Hatfield Tunnel:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.76493&lon=-0.23691&zoom=16&layers=M
> …is not rendering as a tunnel on the standard osm.xml Mapnik render? It's 
> osm_id 147479059
>
> I've checked and it had the tunnel=yes tag.
>
> As far as I can see other tunnels are rendering correctly, such as:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.6895&lon=0.09384&zoom=16&layers=M
> …on the M25 - osm_id 4479450
>
> It doesn't seem to be a particular osm.xml rendering quirk or a caching 
> issue, as my own custom maps are similarly ignoring its tunnel status.
>
> Thanks
> Ollie
>
> p.s. RIP Osmarender on the OSM front page.
> ___
> 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] Remapping update

[Nick Austin]

I suppose it's too late to propose an odbl=extend tag, which would
indicate that the way is no longer allowed to be modified after 1st
April but that the way will remain on the slippy map for the next 6
months to allow re-mappers to replace the way?

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update

[Nick Austin]

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Robert Norris .
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nick%20Austin/edits
>
> I note the above user has been very busy with remapping efforts in Hampshire
> (with a healthy dose of odbl=clean tags too).

*waves*

I'm mainly doing roads, currently in and around Portsmouth (my
stomping ground from 10 years ago). I just won't have time for
footpaths.

There's a lot of railways across Southern England that have problems
but because I don't understand railway tagging I can't remap them. If
anyone wants to help...

Nick.

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

[Talk-GB] Bing Images

[Nick Austin]

I've not seen this before on Bing Images but it was bound to happen
sooner or later:

http://binged.it/xjBXPn

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Dorset County Council maps now offer OSM Mapnik as default base layer

[Nick Austin]

Good find.

Initial thoughts:
1) Judging by the status message that Firefox produces they are using
the OSM tile server. Is that allowed?
2) For some reason I can't get it to overlay Google Streetview over
Ordnance Survey maps.
2) If you flip the Google Streetview option on and off quickly you can
identify streets that OSM doesn't have yet.

Nick.

On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:55 PM, m902  wrote:
> I just noticed that Dorset County Council's public GIS service (Dorset
> Explorer) has been upgraded to version 3 which has Mapnik as a default base
> layer (it also offers Ordnance Survey as a base layer). See
> http://explorer.geowessex.com/.
>
> It does seem very slow, and has limited function compared to the previous
> version (it appears to be a complete replacement). Seems like a beta version
> really. But still potentially interesting, e.g. you can layer public rights
> of way onto Mapnik.
>
> Is anyone discussing this with Dorset's GIS team?
>
> Martin (m902)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Copyright issues of checking details on other websites

[Nick Austin]

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:58 AM, David Earl  wrote:
>
> To take a different example, the Royal Mail (still) claims database
> copyright over the PAF (postcode address file) database. Would crowd
> sourcing the address vs postcode data by each individual putting in their
> own data constitute database copyright infringement and if so who is the
> infringer?

There used to be a postcode crowsourcing project here:
http://www.freepostcodes.org.uk/

According to that site postcode data is available under an open licence.

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Worrying Edits in Southampton

[Nick Austin]

This users entire contribution to OSM is just 6 changsets spread over
25 minutes:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mem0709/edits

It's most likely a beginner still learning how to edit.  I'd not
hesitate to revert everything that is even remotely suspect.

Nick.


On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Greg Auger  wrote:
> For instance this McDonald's was moved to a completely different
> location: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/345112185/history
> Other ways have removed tags:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/22800339/history
>
> It seems to me we should revert all of mem0709's edits (but I don't
> know how to do that)
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Greg Auger

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Contacting OS about errors in their data

[Nick Austin]

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Andrew Ainsworth wrote:
>> When I reported some errors recently I contacted
>> customerservi...@ordnancesurvey.co.uk
>> . They passed it onto
>> someone and then I received a reply saying they would resurvey and
>> correct it.
>
> May I suggest that you create a wiki page and collect these things
> there. This can later be used as a good argument for others to release
> data: "Look, these guys gave us their data and we helped them improve it

I listed the error I found here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Catalog_of_Errors

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OS StreetView accuracy: caution!

[Nick Austin]

Try searching for Blackbushe Airport

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM, David Ellams
 wrote:
>
> Nevertheless, my favourite OS FAIL remains the PRoW through a vat of
> sewage on the Landranger (courtesy of Bing):
>
> http://bit.ly/bHhDwW
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM shortlinks problem

[Nick Austin]

As a temp workaround use tinyurl.org

Your example becomes:
http://tinyurl.com/yf3fbec

Nick.

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Tom Chance  wrote:
> One for devs really but I'm not on the list. Perhaps someone could pass this
> on?
>
> I've noticed that the osm.org shortlinks ending with a dash "-" often don't
> work in emails. The dash gets missed off from the link. In my area, at
> least, this seems to move the centre slightly and switch from zoom level 17
> to 18.
>
> For example this:
> http://osm.org/go/euut_VcMR-
>
> Gets interpreted as this:
> http://osm.org/go/euut_VcMR
>
> Is there any chance the shortlinks could avoid ending in a punctuation mark?

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Bracknell Forest - vandalism?

[Nick Austin]

On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Tom Sutch  wrote:
> While browsing around Bracknell Forest I noticed that someone with a
> rather puerile sense of humour has christened many of the paths and
> tracks:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.37949&lon=-0.76253&zoom=15&layers=B000FTF
>
> Not sure whether this is vandalism or just a bit of 'fun' (I suspect
> the latter). I would go through and just remove all the names but I
> don't have sufficient local knowledge to determine which are genuine (I
> know The Devil's Highway is right, and I'm pretty sure that Poo Alley is
> wrong, but Ladies Mile could be either). Would anyone be able to help?

I used to live near there and went walking in those woods.  The paths
in the forest are not signposted so unless they were genuinely derived
from "local knowledge" they would have come from a copyrighted source.

For the moment do nothing.  There are scripts for handling copyright
violations & vandalism that can revert an entire changeset in one go
(i.e. an entire edit session).  The scripts only work if there are no
further edits on the ways & nodes in the changeset.

I believe this is the user responsible:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/barny1

His recent edits seem reasonable.  I'm currently on a mobile internet
connection so it's difficult for me to investigate further at the
moment.  My suggestion is that you review each changeset and compile a
list of those changesets that are suspect so that we know the extent
of the problem.  You also might want to send a message to him.  If the
names are genuine then adding a 'source' tag would avoid future
concerns.

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OS DG Vanessa Lawrence on the Future of mapping

[Nick Austin]

On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 8:43 AM, SteveC  wrote:
>
> On Jan 21, 2010, at 5:34 PM, Robert Scott wrote:
>
>> Perhaps it would be good to downplay Haiti, as it could give her a handle to 
>> say 'Of course projects like that are great for situations like Haiti but 
>> when it comes to real mapping...' allowing her to appear 'up with the new 
>> trend'.
>
> which is basically reasonable, it's not the OS' job to map Haiti
>
> perhaps some maps of the venue, or Southampton?

How about where the new Ordnance Survey offices are being built:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.93761&lon=-1.47093&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF

OSM may well have been the first with an online map of the building
and access road.  The roundabout to the South and nearby cycle path
are also new features.

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Estimating coverage

[Nick Austin]

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Peter Reed wrote:
> What do you think – should I be ignoring “motoway_link” in the totals,
> counting it as something else (and if so what?), do we just put this down to
> the way DfT count the numbers, or is it just coincidence that the “motorway”
> numbers are so close?

There are marker posts every 100 yards alongside the hard shoulder of all
motorways.  I don't think slip roads have marker posts so if the DfT are
calculating distance by counting the marker posts then excluding slip
roads sounds a reasonable thing to do.

Nick.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabout, ways and relationship policies

[Nick Austin]

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Nicholas Barnes wrote:
> Surely it's perfectly obvious that if a road goes underneath another
> road, there must be a bridge involved.

Or a tunnel.

Nick.

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

[Talk-GB] Out-of-copyright background in Potlatch.

[Nick Austin]

Potlatch appears to sometimes show he wrong the map tile when I select
the "out-of-copyright" map as background.

For example looking to the North West of Wick St. Lawrence:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=51.3916&lon=-2.9228&zoom=14
there is a misplaced tile from nearby Horsea.

Similarly at Clevdon:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=51.4345&lon=-2.858&zoom=14
The coastline is interrupted with a tile from nearby Nailsea.

A curious one near Burrington:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=51.3342&lon=-2.7469&zoom=14
This time the tile is only slightly displaced.

I spotted quite a few of these around North Somerset but many are
difficult to spot because the bits of the Somerset Levels all look
like each other.

Nick.

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