Re: [Talk-GB] Talk-GB Digest, Vol 33, Issue 24
talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to > talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > talk-gb-ow...@openstreetmap.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > >1. Re: Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels (Peter Childs) > > > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:41:59 +0100 > From: Peter Childs > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels > Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > 2009/6/13 Peter Miller : > >> On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote: >> >> 2009/6/11 Ed Loach : >> >> And here is the current OSM guidance:- >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level >> >> In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other >> >> countries >> >> within OSM we might want to do the following for England >> >> (Scotland >> >> and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):- >> >> UK (admin_level=2) >> >> England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4) >> >> English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also >> >> admin_level=4 >> >> as per NUTS) >> >> Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5) >> >> County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6) >> >> Districts ?(admin-level=8) ?districts / London boroughs / >> >> metropolitan >> >> boroughs. >> >> >> Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does >> not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of >> how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding >> Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me. >> >> It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags which >> used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing ways >> (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/rivers >> where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary you will need >> to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just add a >> 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways. >> The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by knowledge >> is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line if you are >> lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I also check >> wikipedia as a cross check >> > > Given that Medway is less than 50 years old that could be a problem. > > > Not necessarily - if you know from local knowledge which areas are included in Medway, you could use the boundaries marked on NPE to guide you as to where the 'new' boundary is - I've used this principle to map some of the 'new' (!974, FGS!) North Yorks/ Cumbria boundary, using the old district boundaries - might not be perfect, but if someone knows different... Phil James ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Map of Trace data, was: Re: Stitching Aerial Photographs (John Robert Peterson)
John Robert Peterson wrote: Do we have anything that will draw map tiles of the trace data? (I'd like this for another project anyway: checking whether traces exist for an area when out with a mobile device) +1 for that; it's a real pain when people don't include source data, especially for rural areas, and whilst it is possible to view the traces (if any) in potlatch, it's a long winded way of finding out what still needs surveying. Phil James ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Map of Trace data, was: Re: Stitching Aerial Photographs (John Robert Peterson)
Thanks for that, but bearing in mind I am not a programmer, how does it help me? :-\ I don't know the ID for any tracks there may or may not be in the area i (may) want to map, and I can't find a way in OSM to reveal any GPS trace ID other than a GPS Trace filename, (not even with my own traces). if there is a way to reveal the ID, please let me know. Thanks, Phil James OJ W wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Phil James wrote: > >> John Robert Peterson wrote: >> >> Do we have anything that will draw map tiles of the trace data? (I'd like >> this for another project anyway: checking whether traces exist for an area >> when out with a mobile device) >> > > if it's a public gpx, then look for it at > http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~ojw/gpx > > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Virgin Train Traces (Richard Mann)
wrote: > A quick look at oepnvkarte indicates we have all of Virgin's operating > routes already. Maybe some of the traces aren't great, but I think some > tracing off NPE ought to fix that, surely? > > While positional info is probably in the trains (though I don't remember it > ever being discussed in the context of Pendolino or Voyager), the effort > required to extract it is probably several times greater than simply carting > your own GPS around. > > Richard-- > > NPE tracing is not that accurate, certainly in Lancs/Yorks - the Morecambe - Skipton line is fairly approximate in several areas. The Yahoo imagery is so small as to be next to useless, especially now so many other ways are mapped. I interpreted John McKerrels email to be an attempt to save someone the time (and expense?) of actually getting GPS traces themselves. I wonder if other operators would be as helpful? Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] latest garmin cyclemap img
talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 11:36:21 + > From: andrew > Subject: [Talk-GB] latest garmin cyclemap img > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > The site where I downloaded my last one is not available. Where is the most > up to date source of the garmin gmapsupp.img with contours available? > > AJH > > > > I get mine from talkytoasteruk http://sites.google.com/site/talkytoasteruk/ukmaps - there is a routable version of OSM with NASA contour data, though not specifically the cyclemap version. Phil (tali'sman) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Landform Panorama data
I've had a look at the height data, and it appears that it is incomplete (many tiles are missing altogether). Does anyone know why? I realise that it is the only dataset that won't be updated, but presumably they have a full set. I haven't been able to find an explanation, and the information about it online suggests it is a full set, though the downloaded index shows it to be partial. I thought one of you 'more closely involved ;-) ' guys might know. Regards Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey Landform Panorama data
Aah! Thanks Richard, I've had a closer look now (I'd only quickly skimmed the SD folder). I took the file numbers to be the same as the sheet references on the First Series sets - don't know why - especially as they are derived from 1:50k data! Just as a matter of interest, I'm viewing the files in Openoffice. The drawing app. provides a quick and easy way to view the files graphically. Phil. talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > > > > I've had a look at the height data, and it appears that it is incomplete > > (many tiles are missing altogether). Does anyone know why? I realise > > that it is the only dataset that won't be updated, but presumably they > > have a full set. I haven't been able to find an explanation, and the > > information about it online suggests it is a full set, though the > > downloaded index shows it to be partial. I thought one of you 'more > > closely involved ;-) ' guys might know. > > > Presumably any ones which are missing are the ones which are out to sea and therefore have no contours in them? e.g. the 100x100km grid square "SV" only contains sv80.dxf - as that's the only square which has any land in it (the Scilly Isles) For the ones on land - there should be 25 files per larger-grid square., i.e. each file represents a 20x20km square. I've by no means checked every one on my download, but a look at quite a few squares show that I have all the ones I expcet to have for those squares. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] tracing lakes with Potlatch
> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 13:37:58 +0100 > From: Henry Gomersall > Subject: [Talk-GB] tracing lakes with Potlatch > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Message-ID: <1270557478.9949.39.ca...@whg21-laptop> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Dear All, > > I've been keen for a while to improve the lake and tarns outlines in the > lake district. It seems the current data is a little coarse and could be > improved. The (fairly poor) aerial imagery seems plenty good enough to > get a decent outline, but Potlatch won't allow zooming beyond a certain > level in this region, which makes it difficult. Is this something the > Potlach 2 will allow? Also, is it worth bothering, as it seems some of > the new OS datasets will have decent lakes and rivers. > > Cheers, > > Henry > I've been tracing from the OS 1:25k first series which Andy Robinson is uploading as a potlatch layer. (see http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.5384502410889&lon=-2.8754997253418&zoom=13and http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.3379497528076&lon=-2.28412628173828&zoom=13 ). You can trace at zoom level 17, and the rectification of the maps is pretty good (compare roads on the maplayer with gps traces). The yahoo imagery for rural areas is worse than useless, IMHO, and the NPE is not well rectified - a comment on the standard of the original mapping, not those who rectified the data for OSM use, I hasten to add. There are very few of the maps available in the Lakes at the moment, but I'm hopeful Andy will continue to upload once the furore over OSOpenData has settled a little. As for the comment from another contributor suggesting don't bother tracing - I say go for it, so long as you have local knowledge of the areas concerned - look further afield (Dales, N York moors etc if you know the areas) and get some detail on, but use the best source for tracing available; which at the moment is OS1:25k First Edition. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Project of the week - trace a village off of OSSV?, (Kai Krueger)
At risk of being a fly in the ointment, judging by the largely favourable responses to this idea, I for one would like to register myself as -1. Please don't map an area if you are not familiar with it. I have done some armchair mapping, but only where I am familiar with the area, and feel I can add value to the data I am entering. If you are that desperate for a 'complete' map, go out and do more surveying, or just use OS or other commercially available products. I just feel that blatant, blind copying of OS data is prostituting what I thought Open Street Map was meant to be about. OK, I've got my tin hat on: standing by for incoming... ;-) Phil. talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 12:07:33 +0100 > From: Kai Krueger > Subject: [Talk-GB] UK Project of the week - trace a village off of > OSSV? > To: 'talk-gb' > Message-ID: <4c0b8175.30...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hello everyone, > > I would like to suggest as a sort of "Project of the week" for the UK > for people to pick a random town or village somewhere in the UK that so > far has poor coverage and trace it's roads from OS OpenData StreetView. > > Despite the various claims over the years that the UK road will be "road > complete" by the "end of the year", the UK is still a far distance off > of that target. I have heard the numbers that so far we have on the > order of 50% of named roads (people who are working on OS - OSM > comparisons please correct me if I am wrong). Which is by no means a > small feat of achieving, but also not as high as one would like it to be. > > So let us try and accelerate this a bit by everyone picking a small > random town or village somewhere in the UK and trace the roads from > StreetView. It probably only takes about 10 - 20 minutes for a small > village and even a small town isn't too bad to do (if the weather is bad > and you can't go out). So with the help of OS data, we can get a big > step closer to where we would like to be and use it as a basis to > continue to improve beyond the quality of OS data or any other > commercial map provider. > > (If you are convinced already, then no need to read the rest of the email) > > I know that many people are opposed to "armchair mapping" or imports > (and btw I am not proposing a full scale import here, but manual tracing > instead) and so I'd like to counter some of the arguments most likely > going to be brought up against this sort of non local tracing: > > 1) OS data might have mistakes, be outdated and generally not as good as > what OSM aims for: Yes, no doubt OS has errors and can be outdated in > many places by a couple of years ( I have found more than enough of > those myself). Furthermore, all of the OS products released lack many of > the properties we are interested in like one way roads, turn and other > restrictions, POIs, foot and cycle ways and all the other things that > make OSM data such a rich and valuable dataset. So yes, the OS data will > clearly not replace any of the "traditional" OSM surveying techniques or > be the end of things. But it can be a great basis to build upon. > As a comparison, have a look (assuming you have a timecapsal ;-)) at > what the data of e.g. central London looked like in 2007. It already had > surprisingly many roads, but hardly any POIs or other properties that we > aim for now. Most of that came later in many iterations of improvement. > A single pass of "OSM" surveying is not any better than the OS data per > se. Also given that the errors introduced by tracing OS data are exactly > the same type of errors introduced by manual "OSM" surveying, i.e. > misspellings in roads, missing roads, outdated roads, ... We need to > have the tools to deal with this kind of maintenance anyway. It is the > iterations that make OSM data what it is, not the "first pass ground > survey". > Creating a blanket base layer from OS data allows us to much better > focus on the aspects that do distinguish us from every other map data > provider with having to "waste" as little as possible resources on the > "stuff everyone else has" too. > > 2) large scale imports and tracing hinders community growth: This > perhaps is the more important of the two arguments, as indeed what > distinguishes us from everyone else is the community and without the > community and its constant iterations and improvements, OSM data will > "bit rot" just as much as all other data. However I don't think there is > any clear evidence either way of what non local mapping does to > communities and it remains hotly debated. The negative effects claimed > are usually of the form a) The area looks complete, there is nothing > more to do, so why bother. Or, it isn't as much fun to add a POI than a > whole new village on a blank canvas. b) I pu
Re: [Talk-GB] Talk-GB Digest, Vol 45, Issue 17
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 13:18 Peter Miller wrote: There are indeed organisations which might gain from suing but the OS is not one of them. Regards, Peter The OS have a proven track record of calling in the lawyers at every opportunity. For example: http://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2010/01/30/bawdy-walking-book-cover-upsets-ordnance-survey If that's not a serious sense of humour bypass, I don't know what is! Phil. --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 100608-1, 08/06/2010 Tested on: 09/06/2010 10:27:58 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
