Re: [Talk-gb-london] Update on TfL CID conflation plans
If these edits are going ahead then I think the wiki page should list the usernames which are performing these edits. The OSM user page should also have a description linking back to that page. Russ On Sat, 25 Jun 2022 at 23:50, Robert Skedgell wrote: > > Is @AyushS183 one of yours? Apologies if not. > > I'm less than delighted with an import of TfLCID data where in at least > one location no attempt was made to check the imported data against > available imagery or infrastructure mapped in OSM. > > Chobham Road (w10818748) no longer has cycle lanes on both sides, which > I have fixed. How many other errors have been blindly imported in recent > changesets by this user? > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/12263258 > > On 14/06/2022 17:13, Whittaker, Ed via Talk-gb-london wrote: > > Hello, > > > > To keep you updated, a few cosmetic changes have been made to: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TfL_Cycling_Infrastructure_Database > > > > I'd particularly like to draw your attention to the very careful and > > limited plan to use the openstreetmap API. As noted: > > - This approach only applies to adjusting tags where they are determined as > > incomplete or incorrect. No geometry changes involved. > > - Changes will be manually validated > > - The script has been tested in the dev server > > > > We're really keen to get thoughts and feedback to the approach. We will be > > presenting the plan at the geomob session tomorrow (a bit late notice - but > > it would be wonderful if you're able to make it to discuss) > > https://thegeomob.com/post/june-15th-2022-geomoblon-details > > Thanks, > > > > Ed Whittaker > > Senior Transport Planner > > Sweco UK Limited | Solihull > > Telephone 0121 711 6600 > > ed.whitta...@sweco.co.uk > > www.sweco.co.uk > > > > LinkedIn | Instagram > > Reg. No.: 2888385 | Reg. Office: Leeds (Registered in England and Wales) > > Reg. Office Address: Sweco UK Limited, Grove House, Mansion Gate Drive, > > Leeds, LS7 4DN > > For more information on how Sweco processes your personal data, please read > > here. > > > > > > ___ > > Talk-gb-london mailing list > > Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london > > > ___ > Talk-gb-london mailing list > Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-gb-london mailing list Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london
Re: [Talk-gb-london] Anyone up for the task of mapping the new Lambeth electoral ward boundaries?
My controversial opinion is that these shouldn't be in OSM. The definitive boundaries are freely available as open data in OS Boundary Line (although they won't usually appear there until after the boundaries take effect). The current UK-wide coverage of ward boundaries in OSM is pretty minimal, although it looks like most of the old Lambeth wards are in OSM: http://overpass-turbo.eu/?q=W291dDpqc29uXVt0aW1lxIHEgzI1XTsKKAogIG53clsiYsSBbmRhcnkiPSJwb2xpxItjYWwixInEqMSqxKxpxK5sX2RpdmlzacSHxKYid8SjZMSxKHt7YsSfeH19KcSUxY8KxI8gxJ9kecSUPsSUxZNza2VsIHF0Ow=BJp6-ioHTL As someone who uses this boundary data relatively frequently, there's no reason why I should use OSM when the data is incomplete, and boundaries in OSM may have been altered (accidentally or otherwise). They're not surveyable, the data is freely available elsewhere - I don't see why it's worth spending our time making sure it's replicated in OSM. Cheers, Russ On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 at 11:27, David Davis via Talk-gb-london wrote: > > Hello, > a complete revamp of the electoral wards in Lambeth borough comes into effect > in May 2022, with 25 new wards. > (See > https://love.lambeth.gov.uk/a-new-political-map-for-the-2022-lambeth-borough-council-elections/ > for info). > > I'm guessing the boundaries are available as open data, > and some bright spark on this list will know how to import it into OSM in a > hugely more efficient way that me trying to manually draw and tag the new > boundaries...? > (Amusingly, on the map on Lambeth Council's page about it, someone literally > has just drawn the boundaries by hand on top of a screengrab from OSM!) > > Anyone interested this task? > > (A few of the existing Lambeth wards were tagged on OSM already, but the > majority actually weren't. But every existing ward boundary is changing in > any case...) > ___ > Talk-gb-london mailing list > Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-gb-london mailing list Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london
Re: [Talk-GB] Newbie damage alert in West Midlands
Ah I ran into his work this afternoon by pure chance and reverted one of these changesets (95506246) and left a comment - no reply as yet. It looked like vandalism to me. Russ On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 19:51, Colin Smale wrote: > > A new user, TL5100, is causing a bit of damage in the Midlands, deleting > loads of things for no obvious reason. A couple of their changesets have > comments to this effect already. Could someone have a word? > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TL5100/history#map=11/52.0822/-2.4818 > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] High quality NLS imagery of buildings and HOUSENUMBERS (!) available in London (and Scotland). Create a tasking manger to add this?
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 10:53, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: > Looking at https://maps.nls.uk/copyright.html#exceptions am I right in > thinking that the non-commercial contract restriction also applies to > some other NLS layers (e.g. OS 1:25k and 7th series scans) which have > been available (and being used) in popular OSM editors for some time > now? Do we have some specific permission to use those layers, and if > so does that permission apply to the new house number layer as well? The wiki appears to imply that specific permission has been granted in some cases, although the wording is a bit vague and could probably do with being clarified: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Library_of_Scotland -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] High quality NLS imagery of buildings and HOUSENUMBERS (!) available in London (and Scotland). Create a tasking manger to add this?
On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 at 18:38, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB wrote: > What are its licensing terms? > > "available freely" does not mean "compatible with OSM license" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Library_of_Scotland NLS maps (except for the ones where the copyright of the scans lies with other parties, which does not seem to be the case in this instance) are acceptable for use in OSM. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] High quality NLS imagery of buildings and HOUSENUMBERS (!) available in London (and Scotland). Create a tasking manger to add this?
On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 at 15:49, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote: > Link to this on NLS? I think it's the "OS 1:1,250/1:2500 1944-1969" layer: https://maps.nls.uk/os/national-grid/ -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Solar tagging app
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 at 16:42, Lester Caine wrote: > I've just spent a couple of days working on Vale Park, Evesham and many > of the units have panels on the roofs, so I think that is next on my > list to do ... problem is I've not mapped these before, so what is my > best starting point re adding them. All the info you need is (hopefully) here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_United_Kingdom/Rooftop_Solar_PV Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Solar tagging app
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 at 15:41, Russ Garrett wrote: > 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. We now have around 1500 nodes with agreed module counts. I've started submitting these to OSM and an example changeset on 20 nodes is here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92055795 (The "imagery_used: Bing" and "bot: yes" changeset tags will also be added to future changesets.) I will pause for a few hours in case anyone spots any issues with this, but it should be fairly straightforward. I have also added the appropriate wiki page to document these automated edits: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/solartagger Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Solar tagging app
Thanks! We've got about 1000 agreed module counts now, which I'm now working on batching up and submitting as an edit. On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 at 17:13, Gregory Williams wrote: > - 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? I was originally planning to add multiple "skip" options but I decided to keep it simple. I have the data on which generators are being consistently skipped though, so we can potentially go through those later to try and find nonexistent/mistagged things. > - Click twice to measure the orientation (although perhaps more suited > to using on a computer, rather than a mobile / tablet?) Orientation is next on my list when I get a moment (probably not imminently). It'll likely be a separate task from the module-counting one. Location is also another task which I could potentially add. Russ -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Solar tagging app
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, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem
Yeah, I assume what happened is that the City of Bristol ended up, at some point, as a statutory port authority (which I think they were until 1991), and somehow the boundary from that has remained as their local authority boundary. But it's still a fairly unique situation as there are many other harbours with statutory port authorities where this anomaly doesn't exist. I'm fairly sure that Bristol boundary does not coincide with the current limits of the Port of Bristol. Aberdeen has a small seaward extension which also doesn't appear to coincide with their current port authority limits either. So it's not clear what these seaward extensions currently achieve. I'd love to find the actual legislation which created this... Russ On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 22:24, Mark Goodge wrote: > > > > On 12/09/2020 21:23, Russ Garrett wrote: > > I've foolishly now decided to try to get to the bottom of it - the > > beating of the bounds still doesn't explain why exactly it covers that > > area (although I'm impressed that the Lord Mayor managed to commandeer > > a warship to do so!) > > AIUI, it's because it's the historic maritime navigation route into > Bristol and Avonmouth. The simplified constituency boundary map is, > possibly a little bizarrely, one of the best visualisations of that: > > https://members.parliament.uk/constituency/3368/location > > See also this Admiralty chart for the Bristol Channel - you can see that > the "Bristol Deep" channel passes between the two islands and leads into > the harbour: > > https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0278/1529/products/OCB-1179.jpg > > Mark > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem
I've foolishly now decided to try to get to the bottom of it - the beating of the bounds still doesn't explain why exactly it covers that area (although I'm impressed that the Lord Mayor managed to commandeer a warship to do so!) Incidentally, the OSM wiki page for Wales claims that the sea boundary between Wales and England is not well-defined: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wales#Boundary Cheers, Russ On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 21:12, Rob Nickerson wrote: > > "extremely stupid reasons" in this case relates to an very old tradition > where the Lord Mayor of Bristol 'beats the bounds' of the city by > rowing/sailing out to the islands. > > As a consequence a small wedge of the city of Bristol bounds lies within > Welsh water. > > You get a similar situation with Denny Island which lies within English > waters but is part of Monmouthshire. > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7019663.stm > > https://web.archive.org/web/20071012220607/http://www.bristol.gov.uk/ccm/content/press-releases/2007/sep/beating-bristols-water-boundary.en > > Best regards > Rob > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem
Oh wait, I remember now. This is correct for extremely stupid reasons relating to the boundaries of the county of Bristol including a large chunk of the Bristol Channel. I can confirm the boundary in OSM matches the one in OS Boundary Line. That relation could probably do with a note tag on it, though. Cheers, Russ On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:48, Russ Garrett wrote: > > I'm pretty sure Flat Holm is part of Cardiff - Steep Holm is in > England but it also isn't in Bristol as far as I know. There's > definitely something weird going on with the boundaries there but it > also looks like nothing has changed around there in a while. Curious. > > On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:39, Brian Prangle wrote: > > > > This island, in the bristol Channel between Weston super Mare and Barry > > seems to be in two countries at once. It's on the Welsh side of the > > national boundary but also in South West England City of Bristol. This is > > either a map error with the Welsh boundary or a legal anomaly I don't know > > which. If it's one of those legal quirks then wouldn't it be better as an > > exclave of England in Wales? > > > > Apologies if this has come up before. > > > > Regards > > > > Brian > > ___ > > Talk-GB mailing list > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > > -- > Russ Garrett > r...@garrett.co.uk -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem
I'm pretty sure Flat Holm is part of Cardiff - Steep Holm is in England but it also isn't in Bristol as far as I know. There's definitely something weird going on with the boundaries there but it also looks like nothing has changed around there in a while. Curious. On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:39, Brian Prangle wrote: > > This island, in the bristol Channel between Weston super Mare and Barry seems > to be in two countries at once. It's on the Welsh side of the national > boundary but also in South West England City of Bristol. This is either a map > error with the Welsh boundary or a legal anomaly I don't know which. If it's > one of those legal quirks then wouldn't it be better as an exclave of England > in Wales? > > Apologies if this has come up before. > > Regards > > Brian > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New Bing Imagery
On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 16:00, Colin Smale wrote: > At least it sounds soluble. Given the right transform and corrections a > "definitive" OS point in Easting/Northing format can be translated accurately > to WGS84 lat/long. However you look at it, I would expect a purely > mathematical transformation should have less error than a transformation > involving "tracing" from imagery whose rectification has probably also > involved some of these transformations each with their own error terms. But I > suppose that it at least partly depends on your definition of "perfection." Well, that assumes that OS's locations are perfect, and that their data isn't subject to orthorectification errors and the like. It's still likely to be better than any other source, but I'd be surprised if there weren't similar errors in some of the OS data, especially in more rural & hilly areas. In my experience, once you start trying to go below 5m accuracy you swiftly learn not to trust anyone. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New Bing Imagery
For what it's worth, I feel like Bing has less offset overall. A lot of south London has been aligned to the previous Bing imagery which is almost certainly worse than the current Bing imagery. My impression is that Bing is "more correct" than most other imagery sources. Unfortunately the levels of error we're looking at are approaching the margin of error of most GPS receivers, so GPS tracks, while sometimes helpful, are not the solution to this either. As Alan says, OS StreetView is probably the best reference in most cases. The new Bing imagery seems to have less offset from StreetView in most cases, but it does still have offset (and often in the opposite direction from the old Bing imagery...). Cheers, Russ On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 10:20, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB wrote: > > Have you checked whatever > there is an open issue proposing to > support imagery offset database in iD? > > > 19 Aug 2020, 11:11 by scolebou...@joda.org: > > So, I followed the links below and added an offset. But this simply > isn't a viable solution to the problem because it only works for JOSM > and not iD. > > I managed to convince one mapper to type in the offset manually in iD > every time, but that is a horrible thing to ask new mappers to do, > very offputting. And now I can see Amazon mappers using an iD variant > that doesn't have the offset and moving all the roads as a result: > https://osmcha.org/changesets/89549551?aoi=758c7f2b-faca-44e5-acd2-0cb8c33034bd > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89549551 > This is going to keep happening so long as OSM has multiple image > sources and multiple editors. Frankly I'm amazed that this isn't a > solved problem. > > Having done some mapping across the country recently, it seems like > Bing is offset to the previous best imagery across the country, but by > varying amounts. Is there really no solution that can be applied to > the source Bing layer? Or should we all just accept Bing as golden? > > Having added thousands of buildings and fixed roads to align to the > previous best imagery, I don't have a good solution to the problem, > and it is demotivating to think that others are going to come along > and move individual roads/buildings to align without considering the > bigger picture. > > The only solution I can think of is to move all nodes in the area I've > worked on to match the new Bing (ie a mass edit). Any other > suggestions? > > Stephen > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 at 23:36, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB > wrote: > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Imagery_Offset_Database/Quick_Start > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Imagery_Offset_Database > (I think that nowadays it is built in - is plugin installation still > necessary?) > > > No idea about iD support - > https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/search?q=imagery+offset > > Jul 13, 2020, 00:21 by scolebou...@joda.org: > > Wow, the imagery is really good. But in my area the imagery is about > 3-4m east west and 3-4m north south out of alignment with Esri World > Imagery (Clarity) Beta, which is what I've been using up until now > (for thousands of buildings). > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.39886/-0.24940 > > Is there any way to unify the alignments? > > Stephen > > > On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 06:41, Gareth L wrote: > > > I’ve noticed patches of vastly improved bing imagery since December, but it > is really patchy. > Gareth > > > On 6 Jul 2020, at 23:21, Cj Malone > > wrote: > > > > I was splitting houses in Portsmouth/Southsea this morning. The imagery > > is great, I don't know if it was part of this update, or if it's been > > like this for a while. > > > > > > ___ > > 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 > > > ___ > 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 -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UPRN Locations Map
On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 10:20, Andy Mabbett wrote: > Do you have a plausible hypothesis to explain the removal of UPRNs > from the flood warning pages, that also gives us a reason to trust the > organisation that enacted that change? It's almost certainly because some lawyer or other spotted that it's a violation of the PSGA (formerly PSMA) license under which the AddressBase data is made available to the Environment Agency. https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/documents/licensing/psga-member-licence.pdf There's no conspiracy here beyond OS zealously protecting its data, as it always has done. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UPRN Locations Map
On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 11:24, Tony OSM wrote: > There was a reference to £1000 worth of data being made free each month > to individual users - can't find out how this works yet. This may allow > us as individuals to populate OSM and OSM essentially aggregates the > data - rather like postcode data. I am researching the site to find out > how this works. I'm fairly sure that's "free as in beer" and not "free as in speech", and the data will still be subject to a restrictive license which is incompatible with OSM. > OS have also made maps downloadable as images 'OS OpenMap Local' - I did > OS square SD, this provides a map picture, I checked out a new housing > estate and it has the street names - not currently in OSM (haven't put > them in yet). So the OS data is useful. For that SD square they provide > hundreds of files based on their method of 10km map references with 4 > sections per 10 km - NW,NE,SW,SE. Not easy to use, an overlay of > sections is required. This is updated regularly so can replace OS Open > Data Streetview which I believe to be no longer updated. OpenMap Local is already available on https://os.openstreetmap.org/ and presumably it will percolate down into editors in due course. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UPRN Locations Map
On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 10:26, Nick wrote: > I was wondering about that - I checked on https://osg.scot/portal/ to > check licensing and could not see anything relevant when searching for > individual UPRNs. Even if you ignore the bit about OS copyright, it says "You may retrieve and display Content from the Site on a computer screen, print individual pages on paper and store such pages in electronic form on disk (but not on any server or other storage device connected to a network) for your personal, non-commercial use provided that you acknowledge the copyright owner." This is (definitely) not compatible with OSM. I'm a bit surprised that they claim the link between UPRN and address is not covered by OS copyright. But at any rate, it doesn't matter as their own license is pretty much equally restrictive. > This introduces an interesting debate regarding addresses. As far as I > know the PostCode is under license from Royal Mail - if so does that > mean we should not put that on buildings plotted in OSM? From personal > experience, I know that Local Authorities do make mistakes and UPRNs > with associated data (address etc.) can be incorrect, including UPRNs in > the wrong location. The tool I developed was to enable me to verify > address data - I do that by also checking the Roayl Mail address finder. Post codes themselves are not protected. If you get the post code from a company's website, or you ask someone their post code, that's *usually* fair game. The *collection* of post codes in the Royal Mail PAF (or OS AddressBase) is considered a database, and will be subject to the database right. This is what prevents you from copying them from those sources into OSM. There's a bit more info here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright_information_for_UK_mappers -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UPRN Locations Map
Just to emphasise that the output from your script is not suitable for use in OSM - the osg.scot license forbids it. Russ On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 23:17, Nick wrote: > > Hi Peter > > re: "I am still not clear how best to use the data available" - I have > written a simple bit of VBA that enables address data to be retrieved for a > given UPRN (I attach the VBA used in a form for Excel) - this only works for > Scotland but may be available elsewhere. Using the concept you can use Python > (a friend has done some preliminary work) or similar. This is not elegant but > is perhaps a first step in enabling a whole lot of development? > > Cheers > > Nick > > > On 02/07/2020 18:38, Peter Neale via Talk-GB wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > Many thanks for producing that map. > > I was able to look at my street and see a blue pin in each of the building > outlines that I had mapped from aerial imagery, so that gave me a warm, smug > feeling :) > > I too noticed some not-yet-there properties in a nearby development that had > UPRNs assigned - Not a problem really (IMHO). There is also one allocated to > a pond near me; I didn't know that was "addressable"! > > However, I am still not clear how best to use the data available, if you > can't use it to look up the address of the property. Similarly, I am not > sure how a data consumer could use the data, if we laboriously edited every > property in OSM to include a "ref:GB:UPRN=" tag (or similar; other tags are > available.). > > Sorry not to be able to contribute something more useful... :( > > Regards, > Peter > > > > On Thursday, 2 July 2020, 17:40:51 BST, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) > wrote: > > > I'm not completely sure if/how we can best make use of the new OS > OpenData (UPRNs, USRNs and related links) in OpenStreetMap, but as a > first step I've set up a quick slippy map with the UPRN locations > shown: > > https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/uprn/ (zoom in to level 16 to show the data) > > The UPRN dataset literally just contains the UPRN number and its > coordinates (both OS National Grid and WGS lat/lon). There are some > additional linking datasets that link these ids to other ids (e.g. > USRNs, TOIDs). But no address information is available directly. (You > may be able to get street names by matching to OS Open Roads via TOIDs > though. Coupled with Code-Point Open, you might be able to assign > quite a few postcodes in cases where there's only one unit for a whole > street.) > > The UPRN data has already helped me find a mapping error I made > locally though -- it looks like I'd accidentally missed drawing a > house outline from aerial imagery, and also classified a large garage > a few doors down as a house. The two errors cancelled out when the > houses were numbered sequentially, so I didn't notice until now. Today > though I spotted a UPRN marker over some blank space on the map, and > no marker over the mapped house that's probably a garage. > > Now a few initial thoughts on the data that I've explored so far: > > I believe that the UPRNs are assigned by local authorities, so > conventions may vary from place to place. I don't know who actually > assigns the coordinates (authority or OS). Looking at those for rows > of houses around me, they don't seem to have been automatically given > coordinates from the house footprint, it looks more like someone > manually clicking on a map. > > The UPRN dataset should include all addressable properties. It is also > ahead of reality in some places, as it includes locations for houses > on a new development near me that have yet to be built yet. For blocks > of apartments/flats, the UPRN nodes may all have the same coordinates > or may be displaced from each other, possibly in an artificial manner. > > Other objects also appear to have UPRNs. Likely things I've noticed so > far include: car parks, post boxes, telephone boxes (even after > they've been removed), electricity sub-stations, roads and recorded > footpaths (the UPRN locations seem to be at one end of the street, so > usually lie at a junction), recreation grounds / play areas, > floodlight poles (around sports pitches), and allotments. There's no > information about the object type in the UPRN data unfortunately. > > Anyway, I hope some of this is useful / interesting. I hope to be on > the OSMUK call on Saturday to discuss things further. Best wishes, > > Robert. > > -- > Robert Whittaker > https://osm.mathmos.net/ > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-g
Re: [Talk-GB] Documenting tagging practice for place nodes in London
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 13:20, Andy Townsend wrote: > Quite a lot of stuff of the placename info on OS StreetView probably > _shouldn't_ be in OSM. Leaving aside farm and house names, the where I > used to live in Derbyshire is according to OS StreetView composed of 5 > different "villages". It's actually either 1 or 2, depending on who you > ask. It's probably less of an issue in London (less space for > extraneous names), though. I have noticed a few cases, especially in areas of London I know very well, where OS shows an archaic name which isn't really in general use. This gets a bit tricky because there's not really a way of signalling to other mappers that a place name isn't in use based on local knowledge. Obviously local knowledge is best here but we probably don't have mappers with good local knowledge of all the various corners of London, and I'm pretty sure that there are areas of London where the area names have never been adequately mapped (which is why I started this thread). So I'm not sure how best to solve that conundrum. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Documenting tagging practice for place nodes in London
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 12:51, Michael Booth wrote: > It seems like a number of those hamlets could be changed to something else. > > Also worth having a look at place=locality nodes, to see if they can be > tagged as another place type (if it's a populated place - e.g. > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4678882808) or the name added to a > feature. Yeah, I excluded locality from that search for the moment as I was more concerned with the higher-level place names, but I should take a look at those at some point too. I reckon that "village" and "hamlet" probably shouldn't be present in London, except in the few legitimately rural areas of outer London. (A lot of those hamlets are definitely wrong and I plan to go through them at some point.) Russ -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Documenting tagging practice for place nodes in London
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 at 09:19, Jez Nicholson wrote: > I take it that these names are used by Nominatim to assist with search. I > know it's another form of tagging-for-the-renderer, but do you know > how/whether changes affect it? I'm not especially familiar with the internals of Nominatim but I think for most purposes it actually prefers the page rank on Wikipedia (discovered via the wikidata tag if provided) for ranking place nodes, rather than the actual value of the place tag (which makes sense as the usage tends to be inconsistent anyway). https://nominatim.org/release-docs/develop/develop/Ranking -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Documenting tagging practice for place nodes in London
Hi folks, By way of lockdown procrastination, I started looking at place nodes in London. The main things which were annoying me are: * The presence of a few archaic place names which were presumably derived from NPE or other historic maps but are generally out of use now. * A surprisingly large number of place names present in OS StreetView are unmapped on OSM. * Most places in London are tagged as place=suburb, regardless of their size/importance. This issue especially is annoying me quite a lot now I've started noticing it. I started demoting some place=suburbs to place=quarter, and promoting one or two of them to place=town (as this seems to be almost universally used as the next level up from suburb in London), when it was pointed out that it's probably worth discussing this. These place tags are quite subjective, especially because they frequently get used for reasons which don't really tie in with their name, and wiki is pretty vague about their definition, so I don't think we can avoid some level of tagging for the renderer here. I think it would be useful to document which of these tags we want to use in London, and ideally some kind of heuristic for where to use them. I've generated a list of all place nodes within Greater London and the City, by type: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ru/London_Place_Nodes Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Rockall
I'm still a bit confused about this, because the circle rendered around Rockall on OpenStreetMap is the 12nm limit of territorial waters, not the 200nm EEZ. We don't render the EEZ on OpenStreetMap, but as you point out, it is not in dispute that Rockall does not extend the UK's EEZ. So I'm a bit confused why we're talking about the EEZ at all here. If you want to see a map of EEZ claims, I believe this is the best one: https://www.marineregions.org/eezmapper.php Russ On Mon, 15 Jun 2020 at 22:14, barry b wrote: > > Hi Folks, I made the below changes to rockall. > > The changes i've made are > 1) Changed Rockall from Island to Rock > 2) Removed the Administration boundary > > 1) Rockall is not a island. You could debate its a rock or islet but it cant > sustain human life. > References: > 1) Wikipedia calls it a islet > 2 https://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2011-03-24.365.0 Irish Government > call it a rock > 3)https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/97923/response/262438/attach/html/3/0109%2012.pdf.html > - Uk Government call it a islet > 4) The hint is in its name > > > 2) The reason for removing the administration boundary is i wanted to remove > the EEZ around rockall.( The big circle) > From a visual point of view this looks off. it implies there is an island or > county there. But more importantly it is incorrect > > Firstly even according the the UK. The EEZ wouldn't be 200nm, it would be 12 > - > https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/97923/response/262438/attach/html/3/0109%2012.pdf.html > > Secondly. No country accepts the EEZ and is considered international waters. > Several countries claim it Iceland, Denmark , UK and Ireland. > > In the coming months this rock in the middle of nowhere could potentially > turn into a larger issue with the UK exit from the EU as Iceland, Ireland and > other EU country all fish here > Last summer there was a standoff with the UK Navy and fishing boats. The > Irish Navy have also regularly patrol the area in protection of fishery > > I can give a list of references to show the EEZ recognized, but i don't think > that helpful > > I don't know the exact procedure here. I feel i didn't do it right. > > Happy to discuss further. > Cheers > Barry > > > From: Colin Smale > Sent: Monday 15 June 2020 21:39 > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Rockall > > > I just pointed the user concerned to the signup page to this mailing list, so > he should be here soon! Further to my earlier message I will not make any > changes to Rockall until we have had the discussion. > > Colin > > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Town Greens
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 14:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: > What I would do with these is to separate the legal status from the > physical and usage characteristics. First I would tag the legal > status, using the designation=* tag (which was set up for such > purposes) i.e. designation=town_green. Once that's done you can add > whatever other tags you think best describe the actual land and the > way it is used. That might be leisure=park, landuse=recreation_ground, > or whatever, depending on the nature of the Town Green in question. By > using two (or more tags) you can correctly capture the UK legal > status, while also ensuring the area renders in an appropriate way > based on it's on-the-ground characteristics. I was just about to suggest this. The legal status should be tagged separately from the landuse. We created designation=common for common land. However it looks like town greens and village greens are legally identical under the Commons Act. Maybe designation=green might be best, although it looks a little weird. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:designation=common -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Still too many universities in Cambridge
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 at 21:37, Alan Mackie wrote: > On a completely unrelated note. Does any software actually support site > relations? openinframap.org does, for power plants (wind farms etc). I suspect it may be the only one. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Map with AI comes to the UK
Given the obvious flaws in the data, I'm actually quite surprised how good it is at spotting unmapped service roads in London - including those which pass beneath buildings. Most of them probably deserve a survey though. Russ On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 15:04, Rob Nickerson wrote: > > Thanks Jerry. > > I'd also subsequently discovered the data dump but had not yet got around to > looking at it. What are you using here to view and work with the data? Is > QGIS and 6GB RAM sufficient? > > I would be interested in Warwickshire if you can extract that. > > And yes, we probably are not expecting much for the UK given how well we > already have most roads mapped. It's a shame it only shows missing roads as I > suspect it has better geometry of some rural roads in poorly mapped areas > than us - I still find jagged roads with source=npe. > > Nevertheless, the AI stuff is an interesting one to keep an eye on. If > improvements can be made and additional datasets incorporated, it could > become a significant aid in the future. For example I wonder if it could be > good at building detections when combined with other data such as LiDAR > height data. There is also the prospect of using AI to help find solar panels. > > Best regards, > Rob > > > On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 14:07, SK53 wrote: >> >> Perhaps more useful is that one can download the UK data as a geopackage >> from >> https://github.com/facebookmicrosites/Open-Mapping-At-Facebook/wiki/Available-Countries. >> It's 147Mb zipped in a tar which unpacked is around 400Mb. >> >> I've had a very quick look and notice quite a few concentrations of features >> which are obviously tractor lines in farmland. See this area around Colston >> Bassett >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Colston_basset_fb_rapid.png. >> Apparently such false positives can be marked as such in the editor which >> ought to improve detections next time round. My suspicion is that things >> which are actually roads are mainly driveways to outlying houses & farms or >> farm tracks. Using OS OpenRoads is more likely to help find significant >> missing adopted roads. >> >> Jerry >> >> I can potentially provide extracts for individual LAs if people want them, >> send me an email. I personally found it easier to look at the data as a >> whole rather than scanning around in the editor. >> >> >> On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 at 22:09, Rob Nickerson wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I just spotted that Facebook have pushed an update to their map with AI >>> project: >>> >>> "For our final release of 2019, we have released 84 new countries for our >>> AI road data with new coverage in the remainder of Europe, Asia, and >>> Oceania! AI roads are now available nearly globally." >>> Source: >>> https://github.com/facebookmicrosites/Open-Mapping-At-Facebook/blob/master/WHATSNEW.md >>> >>> For those who don't know what MapWithAI is check out https://mapwith.ai >>> >>> And to try it out in their RapID version of the iD editor: >>> https://mapwith.ai/rapid#background=Bing_features=boundaries=18.60/53.40625/-2.13801 >>> >>> Just roads at the moment and not that easy to find a suggestion that is >>> worth adding (at least near me where roads are well mapped) but this does >>> demonstrate what is possible. Let us know if you have a good or bad >>> experience with this. >>> >>> Would be great to see this extended to buildings but we may have to wait >>> for Microsoft for that. >>> >>> P.S. A happy new year to all! >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Rob >>> ___ >>> 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 -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] accurate GPS
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 12:57, Simon Ritchie wrote: > However, that still leaves the fundamental problem: I can (and will) > publish the kit of parts for making your own base station. You could use > something similar to build a rover or you could buy one off the shelf. > According to the ads this will give you an accuracy of 2 cm, but how will you > check that you really are getting that accuracy? At its heart, that's quite a complex question of metrology, geodesy, and maths. But really I'm not sure you need to worry about it too much with GPS. GPS receivers don't really exhibit constant errors (as I mentioned before, the antenna may introduce some but I suspect they'll be in the order of centimetres at worst), and the variable errors they exhibit are well-characterised. Any GPS fix you get will have error values provided with it, and you should be able to broadly trust those numbers. I'm sure there are commercial services which will give you a calibration result against a known receiver, but they will likely be expensive. Centimetre-level precision is close to the state of the art in GNSS/GIS and so services will be priced accordingly. The real question, really, is why you're aiming for that level of precision. Relative accuracy (i.e. consistency of measured points within a reasonably sized area) is much easier to achieve than absolute accuracy (which is not even an especially well-defined concept in this case). If you're just making these measurements to put into OSM, you have to realise that it's pointless to aim for accuracy better than 1m or so in OSM, as it will degrade over time due to the use of the WGS84 coordinate system which doesn't take plate tectonics into account. (Of course precision for precision's sake is a completely valid endeavour in my opinion. But, as I mentioned before, that rabbit hole can go extremely deep and is probably off topic here. I hope I've given you a flavour of that though!) Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] accurate GPS
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 12:31, Simon Ritchie wrote: > > You're not going to find a (publically-accessible) physical location which > > has better location error than 1m or so. > That was the kind of conclusion that I was coming to. There's the meridian > line at Greenwich, but that only gives one coordinate. It's a pity that they > don't have a crosshair with a published position. Sadly I have to be the bearer of bad news there as well: the marked meridian line at Greenwich no longer corresponds to a fixed coordinate in any modern coordinate system! The WGS84 zero degree meridian is approximately 100m to the east but that too will move due to continental drift and other esoteric gravitational factors. > I think that the only way forward may be to get hold of another accurate GPS > device and compare results. Unfortunately, the others tend to be quite > expensive. Trimble have a cheap deice called the Catalyst, but you still > have to buy their correction service at £300 per month. Getting to 2cm accuracy will be tricky by any mechanism, but there are cheaper solutions if you're willing to do some work. Broadly: You'll need a GPS receiver with the capability of outputting carrier phase data (u-blox receivers will do this) and ideally a well-characterised external antenna (these are quite expensive). You can then fix this antenna somewhere and record several days worth of data. This data can be post-processed with RTKLIB (http://www.rtklib.com/) using the RINEX atmospheric correction data from OS (https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/gps/os-net-rinex-data/) - this data is free for historical use, it's the realtime atmospheric corrections which cost the money. The combination of averaging, phase measurement, and atmospheric correction should at least get you sub-20cm. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] accurate GPS
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 11:47, Gareth L wrote: > Are you including the continental drift? That will make etrs89 gps coords be > about 60-70cm off by now That's the total net error since ETRS was established, but the ETRS reference frame moves with the Eurasian plate and corrections are issued, so presumably the GPS receiver has some of those incorporated. I think for the highest accuracy it's probably worth taking the position as WGS84 rather than doing the coordinate system transformation on-device, but I'm not 100% sure on this. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] accurate GPS
You are entering an extremely deep rabbit hole here and there are hundreds of extremely nerdy aspects you have to consider when aiming for sub-metre precision. As you correctly point out, the position of trig points is no longer accurate nor canonical. Errors of half a metre sound absolutely plausible, as the OS coordinate system has undergone significant revision since trig points were phased out. You're not going to find a (publically-accessible) physical location which has better location error than 1m or so. I suspect (I may be wrong) that the "conversion errors" you're see are likely artefacts of the geoid difference between the ETRS and OSGB coordinate systems. ETRS covers a wider area than OSGB so the OSGB numbers are likely to be more accurate (even if you've converted them from ETRS numbers output by your GPS). Different coordinate systems serve different purposes so this is absolutely normal. Once you start trying to map things to sub-50cm precision over 10+km baselines you enter a world where OSGB is not accurate enough either. You then need to expend a tremendous amount of effort establishing a custom coordinate system - this is what Crossrail had to do across the entire London area to provide enough precision for tunnelling operations. tl;dr: All maps are wrong. Russ On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 11:06, Simon Ritchie wrote: > > I've been working with some GPS equipment that claims to be accurate to 2cm. > To test it, I've been visiting local OS trig points, taking position > measurements and checking if they are correct. > > Unfortunately I've discovered that the data I'm getting from the OS is not > nearly as accurate as my equipment claims to be, which is wrecking my testing. > > We tend to assume (well, I do anyway) that OS trig points are very accurate > position markers, but compared with modern equipment, that's no longer so. I > thought people might be interested in knowing how accurate they are. > > A related issue is this: GPS devices don't work in terms of OS map > references. If your tracker device gives you a position in that form, it's > done a conversion. How accurate is that? > > The GPS device in a typical tracker is accurate to maybe three metres, so the > position you see on the screen will always be a bit wrong. If you get it to > display your position in OS map reference form, it will need to do a > conversion, which introduces an extra error, so the result will be even more > wrong. Not good if you are trying to produce an accurate map. > > The OS published a spreadsheet giving the positions of their trig points in > OS map references. This is available from them as a spreadsheet and Ian > Harris has used that data to create the web site:http://trigpointing.uk > > The OS also offer a web page that can convert this to other forms including > Cartesian, which is one of the forms that my GPS device gives me: > https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/gps/transformation/ > > To test my equipment, I take the OS map ref of a trig point, convert it to > Cartesian form, visit the trig point, get the position in Cartesian form > from my device and compare the two. > > The results are typically out by at least half a metre. Is my equipment > faulty, or is the OS data wrong. How accurate is the published position of > the trig point and, when I use the OS web page to convert that to Cartesian > form, how accurate is thatt? > > This OS document was very enlightening: > https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/legacy/docs/gps/updated-transformations-uk-ireland-geoid-model.pdf > It explains how the Cartesian coordinates work, which is useful. It reminds > me that OS maps pretend that the Earth is flat, which introduces an error, > but that's tiny, and for my purposes itcan be ignored. It explains how > accurate you can expect the published measurements of trig point positions to > be - they can be out by as much as 60 cm! In general, the document stresses > that there is no sure-fire way to convert a position from one system to > another. The result will always be inaccurate. > > So now I know that the published positions of the trig points are a bit > wrong, but how accurate is the conversion from OS map ref to Cartesian form? > > OS map references plus height above sea level and Cartesian coordinates both > specify a position using a 3D coordinate system. The origin and the > direction of the axes are different in each system so you can't compare thm > directly. However, the distances between two points should be the same > regardless of which system you use. If you have two points in the same > coordinate system (a1,b1,c1) and (a2,b2,c2) and the difference along each > axis is a,b and c then the distance between them is > > the square root of (a squa
Re: [Talk-GB] accurate GPS
On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 11:40, Andy Robinson wrote: > Are you using trig points that are also OS Net station locations? > https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/legacy/docs/gps/OSNet_GPSWebSite_Coordinates_File.txt Pretty sure that all those OS Net locations are actually fixed GPS receivers rather than trig points, and so not something you can go and plonk your GPS receiver on. The file definitely seems to list the model of receiver at each one. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 13:59, David Woolley wrote: > Although I don't have a primary source for this, my understanding is > that the median is snapped to the nearest actual delivery point within > the postcode. I was also under the impression that they were mathematical centroids of the postcode area but the user guide [1] indeed says: "The point is given the coordinates of the nearest delivery point to the calculated mean position of the delivery points within the postcode unit." (Although this may not be true for all entries - the PQI will provide that info.) So I guess it would technically be possible to use Code-Point Open to add at least one address location to OSM for most postcodes. I'm still uneasy about doing this automatically though. Cheers, [1] https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/documents/product-support/user-guide/code-point-open-user-guide.pdf -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?
I didn't even know there was an OsmAnd forum ;) I'll go look for it, thanks. Russ Get BlueMail for Android On 2 Oct 2019, 16:47, at 16:47, Nick Allen wrote: >Hi Russ, > >Somewhere in tbe Osmand forum you should find a link for a postcode >player >you can download & use. I think it was Harry, one of the main people >answering queries who produced it. > >Regards > >Nick >my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes! > >On Wed, 2 Oct 2019, 17:12 Russ Phillips via Talk-GB, < >talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > >> OsmAnd is what made me think of it. I'm using that for directions a >lot >> now, and it's common these days to give a postcode to plug into a sat >nav, >> but they frequently don't work in OsmAnd. >> >> I was somewhat surprised that it hadn't already been done, and I >accept >> all the reasons for not doing it. >> >> I'll look into alternatives. >> >> Russ >> >> >> On 02/10/2019 15:52, SK53 wrote: >> >> I really see no point. The data are already present in Nominatim >(albeit >> perhaps not up-to-date) and search is the ONLY thing that so-called >> postcode centroids can help with. DE24 (Sinfin) was imported long >ago, see >> this overpass query <http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MNZ>. >> >> What can be done is attempt to assign postcodes to streets, and >various >> incomplete efforts have been made over the years. Open Data provides >full >> addresses for around 70% of UK postcodes (principally Companies >House, Food >> Hygiene & National Register of Social Housing). >> >> What would be useful is a maintained set of postcode information >based on >> codepoint open/ONS postcode data/OS Local. The sorts of things which >it >> would be useful to know are: >> >>- Is the postcode centroid co-located with others (e.g., delivery >>offices, some businesses, blocks of flats) >>- Can the postcode be unambiguously assigned to a street & post >town? >>- Is the post code in use or not (ONS is now obviously 8 years >old, >>but still potentially useful). Greg's FHRS tracker does appear to >indicate >>a degree of churn with inner-city postcodes (although some of this >will be >>inadvertent use of more general rather than specific postcodes by >people >>filling in the FHRS forms) >>- Is a postcode the sole postcode for that street? >> >> Somewhere I have an old CPO table with some of this data populated. I >> think Geolytix had summary info associated with their post code >sector >> shape files as well. >> >> Adding addr:postcode to streets which have a single postcode is in my >book >> fine: numerous LAs put this on street signs (Rushcliffe & Gedling for >> sure); it's an intermediate step to adding the addresses to houses >Once >> the postcodes which obviously belong to a single street are >eliminated it's >> often easier to work out where the others belong. >> >> Note that other than for FHRS we have no good source for Northern >Ireland >> postcodes at all. Equally assignment of rural postcodes is quite a >bit >> harder than urban ones. In re-reading bits of Chris's blog last night >I >> came across a post of his >> <https://chris-osm.blogspot.com/2017/03/have-you-moved.html> showing >that >> some postcodes move huge distances between releases. >> >> Jerry >> >> PS. The Sinfin postcodes possibly should be removed as they were >added >> IIRC before Mike Collinson's discussions with OSGB about OS Open >Data. >> >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 13:44, Russ Phillips via Talk-GB < >> talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm wondering if it would be feasible and advisable to import the UK >>> postcode data from OS OpenData Codepoint >>> ><https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_OpenData#Code-Point_Open> >>> . >>> >>> The licence is OSM compatible. My thinking was that we could create >a >>> node for each data point and set the addr:postcode tag. This would >be >>> useful for routing software like OsmAnd, since it would allow a user >to >>> enter a postcode as a destination. >>> >>> I'm happy to do the work, but the import guidelines >>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines> say that >imports >>> should be discussed on the imports@ list and the appropriate local >>> communities, hence this email. >>> >>> Russ Phillips >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> 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] Import UK postcode data?
OsmAnd is what made me think of it. I'm using that for directions a lot now, and it's common these days to give a postcode to plug into a sat nav, but they frequently don't work in OsmAnd. I was somewhat surprised that it hadn't already been done, and I accept all the reasons for not doing it. I'll look into alternatives. Russ On 02/10/2019 15:52, SK53 wrote: I really see no point. The data are already present in Nominatim (albeit perhaps not up-to-date) and search is the ONLY thing that so-called postcode centroids can help with. DE24 (Sinfin) was imported long ago, see this overpass query <http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MNZ>. What can be done is attempt to assign postcodes to streets, and various incomplete efforts have been made over the years. Open Data provides full addresses for around 70% of UK postcodes (principally Companies House, Food Hygiene & National Register of Social Housing). What would be useful is a maintained set of postcode information based on codepoint open/ONS postcode data/OS Local. The sorts of things which it would be useful to know are: * Is the postcode centroid co-located with others (e.g., delivery offices, some businesses, blocks of flats) * Can the postcode be unambiguously assigned to a street & post town? * Is the post code in use or not (ONS is now obviously 8 years old, but still potentially useful). Greg's FHRS tracker does appear to indicate a degree of churn with inner-city postcodes (although some of this will be inadvertent use of more general rather than specific postcodes by people filling in the FHRS forms) * Is a postcode the sole postcode for that street? Somewhere I have an old CPO table with some of this data populated. I think Geolytix had summary info associated with their post code sector shape files as well. Adding addr:postcode to streets which have a single postcode is in my book fine: numerous LAs put this on street signs (Rushcliffe & Gedling for sure); it's an intermediate step to adding the addresses to houses Once the postcodes which obviously belong to a single street are eliminated it's often easier to work out where the others belong. Note that other than for FHRS we have no good source for Northern Ireland postcodes at all. Equally assignment of rural postcodes is quite a bit harder than urban ones. In re-reading bits of Chris's blog last night I came across a post of his <https://chris-osm.blogspot.com/2017/03/have-you-moved.html> showing that some postcodes move huge distances between releases. Jerry PS. The Sinfin postcodes possibly should be removed as they were added IIRC before Mike Collinson's discussions with OSGB about OS Open Data. On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 13:44, Russ Phillips via Talk-GB mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote: Hi, I'm wondering if it would be feasible and advisable to import the UK postcode data from OS OpenData Codepoint <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_OpenData#Code-Point_Open>. The licence is OSM compatible. My thinking was that we could create a node for each data point and set the addr:postcode tag. This would be useful for routing software like OsmAnd, since it would allow a user to enter a postcode as a destination. I'm happy to do the work, but the import guidelines <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines> say that imports should be discussed on the imports@ list and the appropriate local communities, hence this email. Russ Phillips ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org <mailto: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] Import UK postcode data?
Hi, I'm wondering if it would be feasible and advisable to import the UK postcode data from OS OpenData Codepoint <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_OpenData#Code-Point_Open>. The licence is OSM compatible. My thinking was that we could create a node for each data point and set the addr:postcode tag. This would be useful for routing software like OsmAnd, since it would allow a user to enter a postcode as a destination. I'm happy to do the work, but the import guidelines <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines> say that imports should be discussed on the imports@ list and the appropriate local communities, hence this email. Russ Phillips ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Removing "WikiProject" prefix
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 at 12:32, dcapillae wrote: > WikiProject Power networks/Great Britain (redirect) > --> United Kingdom/Power networks FWIW, I'm responsible for this page and it has "Great Britain" rather than "United Kingdom" in the title for a valid (pedantic) reason: the power network in Northern Ireland is different and explicitly not covered by that page. I think I'd be happier renaming the whole "WikiProject Power Networks" namespace to "Power Networks" and keeping the structure within that. I can check if this is acceptable with the infrastructure mappers I know (I suspect it will be). Russ -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tools to support solar panel mapping?
On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 11:22, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > To fit StreetComplete it must be > > - refining existing objects, not adding new ones > - be solvable by any normal human by answering a simple question One option for this is turning generator=solar nodes into areas. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] What is a residential area?
On Tue, 7 May 2019 at 13:39, Martin Wynne wrote: > Thanks Russ. That's what I was getting at when I started this topic. How > many houses make a residential area? Does it make sense to apply it to a > single isolated house? I reckon it does, although it depends on your level of patience. The ideal is that everywhere is covered by a landuse/natural tag. Stuff like gardens, buildings, etc, are a higher level of detail which live inside the broad landuse areas. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] What is a residential area?
On Tue, 7 May 2019 at 12:40, Martin Wynne wrote: > I don't know anyone who would say "I see a residential area". Or "I see > a plot of land with planning class C3 or C4". From a zoomed-out perspective, landuse= (and natural=) is the main thing you see on the map (especially if buildings aren't mapped), so I think it's pretty useful from a cartographic point of view. It's not just about what you see on the ground, but how you can turn that into a useful map when you're looking at a large area. There are still chunks of the UK which look empty at medium zoom levels (e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/50.4437/-4.8581) due to lack of landuse mapping. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK
On Wed, 1 May 2019 at 11:36, Jez Nicholson wrote: > BTW...shouldn't the points on the map reduce when I filter? They should but I'm still working on that feature. -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK
I've made the REPD dataset browsable on a map here, which should make it easier to correlate with OSM: https://repd.ru.dev/repd/repd Russ On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 11:00, SK53 wrote: > > I'll quickly add my responses on the thread: > > REPD issues. All of Rob's points taken, but we mustn't forget that OSM data > have always been acquired and refined iteratively. Of course data from REPD > has to be taken with a pinch of salt, but at least for now it's very useful > for hunting for missing installations. In practice I've found most REPD > installations relatively easy to resolve (but see below for an exception). > Russ does compute a power output for those sites which don't have the output > explicitly tagged, so there is the potential to compare the REPD output and a > computed value based on area. > ML & Solar Farms. Tyler Busby has been working to identify rooftop solar > using machine learning. He has a MapRoulette challenge running for Austn > Texas at the moment. I imagine it might be possible to reuse some of his > techniques to identify individual rows of panels within solar farms, which > could improve power estimation from OSM data. > Sections in Installations. Exceptions, such as single installations with > multiple sites certainly exist too. I recently mapped panels on the site of > the former Asfordby super pit. There are two groups of panels which a > Geograph photographer calls, on the basis of photos of ancillary electrical > plant, Asfordby A and Asfordby B. There are also photos of Asfordby C. As > usual more can be learned from on-the-ground visits, but as above this is for > future refinement. > Rooftop angles. I had a futile attempt to try & calculate roof angles from > Lidar data. The 1 m resolution doesn't seem to be adequate. Maximum roof > height is more reliable (available for instance via the dataset). Estimating > the height of eaves can be done from Lidar, but it's fairly fuzzy. I think > using rules of thumb for different periods of construction may be just as > fruitful (perhaps 9 foot ceilings for pre-WWII, 8 foot for interwar housing, > and 7 foot 6 thereafter, with 1-1.5 feet between floors). Counting courses of > bricks would give a more precise measure and only needs to be done for basic > ranges of housing. Most local archives are likely to have architects drawings > for houses built as council housing which is perhaps a third of the total > stock. However a basic estimation of eave level from 5-6 m will not be hugely > out. See next bullet for a suitable tag. > Other tags. After much faffing about, and on Russ' advice, I have now moved > to using location=roof instead of generator:place or generator:location. This > doesn't work if the generator tags are placed on the building as is the case > for some places in the West Midlands, but as these result in gross > over-estimation of likely output I'd regard this as an interim stage of > mapping. I'm still using generator:orientation, but this may also be more > unwieldy than required, and obviously relates to solar installations only. > Modules are tagged generator:solar:modules which at least unambiguously shows > that it relates to the panels, so despite the unwieldiness something similar > for angle would be clear. (As an aside I don't think we have any UK solar > farms with panels mounted on heliostats, but they certainly exist in Spain, > for instance at Almaraz). > Power tagging. One thing which has become clear is in mapping groups of > panels within a solar farm and retagging the outline as power=plant isthat > the use of generator: and plant: tags is unfortunate. Most of them would work > just fine as they were originally with power. > Solar arrays vs solar panels. The current tagging largely seems to fail to > distinguish between a large array of solar panels and single panels > consisting of a few modules. I really don't think we want to end up having to > map each group of panels individually so it would be nice to have a better > way of distinguishing them other than location=roof and overall area. Perhaps > less than half the area of an array of panels will be the actual footprint of > panels. Also I'd be unsurprised if some don't map solar-powered rubbish bins, > parking meters, road signs with power=generator too. > > Lastly big thanks to Jez, Dan, and especially Russ for his updates to > OpenInfraMap which really help with the mapping. > > Jerry > > On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 23:01, Dan S wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Thanks for the comments on solar panel mapping. (Plenty of mapping >> happening already: thousands of UK solar panels added to the database >> in the past month.) A few small responses: >> >
Re: [Talk-GB] Solar data
Hey Rob, On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 22:30, Rob Nickerson wrote: > As the image (linked to below) from a WPD public webinar shows it is not easy > to map separate solar sites based in a single location. No way to tell which > panels belong to which site from aerial imagery alone. Hah! That's a particularly pathological case, and I think it's a situation where an extension project has been given a different name from the original farm. A quick glance at the REPD indicates that Copley Wood doesn't appear as an installation - I suspect it might be down as "Higher Hill" and "Higher Hill (extension)" which would make more sense. If that's the case I'd be inclined to map the entire area as "Higher Hill" with the combined output of both. What we don't have at the moment is any accepted way of dealing with extensions and other sub-divisions of power plants. This is especially problematic with some solar farms (especially older ones), which started out as a very small installation but were significantly extended later. I think they should be represented as a single entity - at least at the top level - as the distinction between various phases/extensions is really only of academic interest. > The Renewable Energy Planning Database is one source of info. The government > have outsourced the task of tracking the growth of renewables to the company > listed on the file. They look at planning applications and speak with > developers. The capacity data is not always right as a developer may change > their plans. Also there are cases where some Wind sites are split into 2 as > the cross an admin boundary. In reality it is one Wind Farm site. I'm trying to massage the REPD data into a more easily browsable format (with clear licensing) at the moment - I'll see if I can get some of those other datasets in there as well. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK
On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 16:18, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Why not? If area is covered by solar panels then it is used for power > generation. > And power generation seems clear case of industrial use I guess it is. I just think "industrial" carries a number of connotations which solar power doesn't have. Also, in some cases the land under/around solar farms is used for grazing, or at any rate it's still mostly grass. I'm not too bothered either way, though. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK
Hi Dave, On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 14:11, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote: > This would be a great project, however I think there's some confusion in > the tagging which requires agreeing/clarifying. Solar farms should have a power=plant covering the whole perimeter as an area or multipolygon. I agree with you that relations shouldn't be used because they're unnecessary. The output of the farm should be the "plant:output:power=" tag on that object. The use of power=plant for this was enshrined in the approved Power Generation Refinement tagging proposal back in 2013 [1]. It also makes sense by analogy to wind farms (where we do use power=plant on relations). I would argue landuse=industrial is not appropriate in this case, notwithstanding what the wiki says, and perhaps landuse=grass is appropriate here. As a rule of thumb, 1 MW is probably a good initial threshold to use when deciding whether to use the power=plant tag for solar, if only to focus our tagging energy on larger plants to start with. The power=generator tag should represent the arrays of panels as closely as you can be bothered. I generally tag contiguous blocks of panels as one power=generator, rather than every individual row. With OpenInfraMap I'm now starting to estimate the output of solar generators by their area, so I have a preference towards seeing them tagged as closely as possible. However, I have little patience for micro-mapping so I feel like each block of panels is a good compromise. Cheers, [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Power_generation_refinement -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Replacement of leisure=common
On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 13:29, Edward Catmur wrote: > I note that you've linked > https://data.gov.uk/dataset/05c61ecc-efa9-4b7f-8fe6-9911afb44e1a/database-of-registered-common-land-in-england > - as this is OGL, I assume it's suitable for incorporation into OSM? Could > we pick that up as a small OSM UK project? Yes, to my knowledge (as neither a lawyer nor a LWG member) it's kosher to use in OSM. I've added an acknowledgement to the contributors page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Database_of_registered_common_land_in_England I've been doing some exploratory retagging of leisure=common and, at least in London, the majority are small areas which would be better tagged as landuse=grass. In urban areas any remaining larger areas of leisure=common are usually best tagged as leisure=park or landuse=recreation_ground, but I also found a few nature reserves. In rural areas, tagging of grassland is a much-debated subject which is outside the scope of this thread, but I will not judge. I suspect there are far more leisure=common areas which are not legally commons than which are, but it definitely looks like a good cleanup project in general. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Replacement of leisure=common
Hi folks, (Inexplicably I haven't joined this list until today. Hi. I've been around for a while, ask me about power infrastructure sometime.) We've been chatting about the leisure=common issue in IRC, and I saw there was some discussion about this here. (Sorry I can't reply to that thread - I've just joined the list.) I think common land is one of those legal intricacies we love so much in the UK, which generally live in the designation= tag, so I've gone ahead and documented designation=common which already had some use: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:designation%3Dcommon I'm going to email the tagging list about marking leisure=common as deprecated, seeing as it's not a great tag anyway, and it's been removed from the map. Cheers, -- Russ Garrett r...@garrett.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Bottle Kilns
> > From: Mark Goodge <m...@good-stuff.co.uk> > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 20:48:18 +0100 > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Bottle Kilns > > > On 06/04/2018 18:58, Brian Prangle wrote: > >> Hi Russ >> >> If any are listed buildings it would be good to tag them >> >> heritage=2 >> heritage_operator=Historic England >> listed_status = Grade I Grade II* or Grade II as appropriate >> > > All surviving bottle kilns in Stoke-on-Trent are listed. But sometimes > they are listed as part of the factory to which they are attached, rather > than individually. If you're trying to search for them, on the British > Listed Buildings site or elsewhere, it's worth noting that, in the > Potteries, they're generally referred to as bottle ovens in the listings > rather than kilns. > Thanks both. I'll use the listed buildings tags. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Bottle Kilns
Forgot to add: Elsewhere, someone suggested using kiln=bottle_kiln and building=industrial instead of building=bottle_kiln. Any thoughts? Russ On 6 April 2018 at 07:38, Russ Phillips <russ.phillips.nos...@gmail.com> wrote: > Right, I'm now thinking I'll tag as: > > building=bottle_kiln > kiln=pottery > disused:man_made=kiln > former_product=pottery > historic=kiln > > and add tourism=museum where appropriate. > > Ideally > I'd have the building as a way. > Then the kiln as a node with the product. > This allows the building to remain 'intact' while the kiln could go > disused to abandoned depending on how bad it is. > I note that the kiln requires more than the building, for example heat > proofing, venting. > > Most of the bottle kilns in Stoke-on-Trent are stand-alone brick > structures, and the whole building is the kiln. They were filled with > pottery, the doorway was bricked up, and fires were lit at the bottom. > > However, this brings up a related point. Some bottle kilns are inside > another building (eg the one at Moorcroft: https://www.flickr. > com/photos/83551695@N00/4794476050/) How would I map those? I'm guessing > I'd have two ways - one for the outer building, and one for the bottle > kiln, with a relation to tie them together. If so, what type of relation > should I use? > > Thanks for all the help and advice. > > Russ > > > ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Bottle Kilns
Right, I'm now thinking I'll tag as: building=bottle_kiln kiln=pottery disused:man_made=kiln former_product=pottery historic=kiln and add tourism=museum where appropriate. Ideally I'd have the building as a way. Then the kiln as a node with the product. This allows the building to remain 'intact' while the kiln could go disused to abandoned depending on how bad it is. I note that the kiln requires more than the building, for example heat proofing, venting. Most of the bottle kilns in Stoke-on-Trent are stand-alone brick structures, and the whole building is the kiln. They were filled with pottery, the doorway was bricked up, and fires were lit at the bottom. However, this brings up a related point. Some bottle kilns are inside another building (eg the one at Moorcroft: https://www.flickr.com/photos/83551695@N00/4794476050/) How would I map those? I'm guessing I'd have two ways - one for the outer building, and one for the bottle kiln, with a relation to tie them together. If so, what type of relation should I use? Thanks for all the help and advice. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Bottle Kilns
Hi, I'm intending to map the bottle kilns in Stoke on Trent. For those that don't know, they're an important part of the area's industrial heritage (there were several thousand of them at the height of the pottery industry). There are 47 now, and just under half are currently mapped. Based on feedback from a few people, I'm planning to use the following tags, although I'm still open to suggestions. * building=industrial * kiln=bottle_kiln * man_made=kiln * product=pottery * disused=yes * historic=building I'm planning to update the tags of any already-mapped kilns, and add any that aren't already mapped. Is it worth adding something to the wiki about this? There doesn't appear to be a Key:kiln page, so would it be better to create one, or to add the information to the Proposed_features/kiln <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/kiln> page? Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] A newbie question - 'What are you doing ?'
On 16 July 2010 20:47, Ciarán Mooney general.moo...@googlemail.com wrote: It has, the wiki has a flyer that can be printed and folded into a nice, here you go size. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Flyer I'm pretty sure I have some printed out leaflets. Remind me before the next LUG meeting I'll bring them along. Also, I made an OSM business card. There are .odt and .pdf downloads here: http://www.mappage.org/ Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Can I post about an iPhone OSM app
On 30 June 2010 20:38, Chris S lostst...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings, I am working on an offline OSM browser for the iPhone/iPad. Do people think it would it be acceptable to post details to this list if/when it is on the App Store? I thought I should ask before posting... I don't have any great objection, but I'd have thought the Announce list would be better suited: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/announce Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Fwd: UK Mapping Priorities
On 24 June 2010 12:41, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: I just had a look at the UK Mapping Priorities page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Mapping_Priorities and I noticed that Darlington has gone from unmapped to awesome over the last few months. Who wants to step up and take credit for such immense progress on what was the UK's highest mapping priority? In addition, I've recalculated some more and now we have no area with a score of more than 100, which is good news. Anyone fancy updating some more of the figures so we can see if anywhere else can be graduated off of the list? I've updated the following: Burnley/Nelson 87.2 - 52.9 Carlisle 34.2 - 34.2 Doncaster 31.2 - 28.4 Dudley 75 - 72.2 Poole 90.5 - 90.5 Rotherham 34.5 - 33.5 Stafford 35.4 - 35.4 Stoke-on-Trent 31.6 - 29.8 Tameside 89.3 - 79.4 Telford 86.4 - 23.8 Burnley/Nelson and Telford (the two really dramatic improvements) were both last updated in February, whereas some of the others were updated in May or earlier this month. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] skobbler OSM bug backchannel
On 14 May 2010 13:53, Marcus Thielking marcus.thielk...@skobbler.com wrote: It would be much appreciated if some of you could have a look at www.skobbler.co.uk/osmbugs and tell us what should be changed in order to make it more accessible for you. I'd like to be able to subscribe to an area and get an e-mail whenever a bug is reported in that area, or have an RSS feed that can be limited to a particular area. Either would work for me. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS OpenData StreetView
Damn. Intended to send this to the list earlier. On 5 May 2010 12:29, Russ Phillips r...@phillipsuk.org wrote: On 5 May 2010 12:06, Tim Francois sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Oh, really? I've just changed a few from Saint to St. based on road signs. Personally, I'm not bothered either way (though it does mean that my neat OS Locator comparison table will never reduce to zero!!) as most people know the difference, but is there a general consensus on this? I always use the full word, so I'd enter St as Saint. I think I saw something once on the wiki or a mailing list suggesting that this was best practice. Probably this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Street_Names Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Matching OS Locator with OSM data
On 27 April 2010 22:21, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Anyway, let me know if you find this useful, or if someone has a more advanced script and I'm just wasting time here! I haven't had a chance to really investigate these scripts yet, but they're on my to-do list. I suspect they'll be very useful for me in Stoke-on-Trent. I'd also be interested in a script that highlighted roads whose position in OSM was a long way off their position in OS, but I don't know how easy or difficult that would be. Have you thought about adding your scripts to the OS OpenData wiki pagehttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata, to make it easier for people to find them? Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Workington Bridges
After the November floods, the map of Workington [1] in Cumbria was updated very quickly to show the state of the bridges, and the location of the temporary road bridge that was to be built. I've just read on the BBC news site [2] that the temporary bridge is to open today, at 10:30. Can a local please update the map? I'm wary of changing it remotely. I'm giving a presentation/demonstration on OSM to my local LUG soon, and I'd really like to use this as an example of how OSM can be better than commercial maps, especially since TomTom's VP of ecommerce told PC Pro There are services like OpenStreetMap, and it's good, but sometimes there's not a bridge when it told you there would be. [3], and their map of Workington still routes people over the damaged bridges :) Russ [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.64893lon=-3.54955zoom=16 [2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/8627276.stm [3] http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/356008/tomtom-shrugs-off-free-apps-threat-with-new-iphone-app ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Error now detects source=OS_OpenData
On 8 April 2010 09:01, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Great site! I have bug report though. I've done a bit of tracing from the OS SteetView in conjunction with some GPX traces I have. Using the site, I download a GPX file of the area but a load of the waypoint tags have empty lat/lon attributes. i.e. wpt lat='' lon=''. Download link: http://www.mappage.org/error/error.php?lon_upper_left=-1.1029lat_bottom_right=52.2599lon_bottom_right=-0.9364lat_upper_left=52.3998ref=0road=0name=0hours=0source=1fixme=0naptan=0pbref=0; Thanks. It's not had a massive amount of testing. I'll look into that when I get time, and e-mail you privately when it's fixed (don't want to spam the list) Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Error now detects source=OS_OpenData
On 8 April 2010 09:30, Dan Karran d...@karran.net wrote: Hi Russ, Nice idea for the site. Just wondering, do you also check for description tags that have fixme in them? I often add that in when I'm mapping with the Mapzen POI editor as it doesn't allow custom tag keys like fixme to be used. I don't at the moment, but I'll add that when I get time. I don't use Mapzen, and hadn't realised that. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] OSM Error now detects source=OS_OpenData
During all the discussion about OS OpenData, it was suggested that anything derived from OS data should be surveyed on the ground at a later date, since on-the-ground surveying is the preferred method of gathering data. With that in mind, I've added OS OpenData source tags to OSM Error [1]. For those who don't know about it, OSM Error is a simple web app that creates a .gpx waypoint file that you can install onto your GPS, so that when you are out mapping, your GPS can direct you to those locations that need additional data. I originally wrote it to make it easier for me to find bus stops that had been imported from NAPTAN but hadn't been verified, then expanded it to look for various other issues. Russ [1] http://www.mappage.org/error/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] building shapes from OS Street View
On 6 April 2010 12:46, TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote: Hi again, Thanks for the feedback on building traces. The consensus seems to be for a JOSM plugin while others saying all surveying should be done on the ground. Personally, I'd be happy to see a JOSM plugin similar to the Lakewalker plugin: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lakewalker For those not familiar with it, you activate it, then click on a lake or similar. The plugin creates a way around the lake, which can then be manually checked/corrected before the edits are uploaded to OSM. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
On 1 April 2010 09:39, Richard Bullock rb...@cantab.net wrote: As Andy says, I say we start with getting boundary data fixed up from Boundary Line and then look at Vector Map District in a month's time and decide what the next step is I agree with this; especially as boundary data is hard to come by any other way I also agree with using OS's boundary data to fix up our boundary data. In the meantime, however, I think the Street View rasters have some use, if only for adding street names for roads that don't already have them. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
And again, I sent this to Richard instead of Talk-GB On 1 April 2010 09:44, Russ Phillips r...@phillipsuk.org wrote: On 1 April 2010 09:25, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Gregory wrote: Without restrictions? Does that mean no attribution, it sounds like PD. Or does it mean they haven't told us the exact license yet but it will be nice? The latter, I think. http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendata/ is either still password-protected or Slashdotted as I write (well, more likely Guardian-ed)... a prize to the first person who can get through and find out. ;) My reading of it is that it's roughly equivalent to CC-BY. There's a paragraph at the end that says: These terms have been aligned to be interoperable with any Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence. This means that you may mix the information with Creative Commons licensed content to create a derivative work that can be distributed under any Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence. A more sensible approach: Let's use OS data as one of the many sources that helps us map. Quite often I'll add something to the map based on a combination of survey, previous experience, out-of-copyright sources (e.g. NPE), maybe an openly licensed photo (e.g. Geograph), other map information (e.g. street names on NAPTaN nodes), and so on; I'm sure most OSMers are similarly catholic. OS data is one more source. I'd be happy using OS data to help complete Banbury and Worcester, for example, because these are places I know well; I can bring something extra to the map. But I don't think it would do OSM, or any users, any favours if I were to import OS data for Bradford, where I've never been. If you want the raw OS map of Bradford, you might as well use the OS map. The guy who knows Bradford should be the one to add those streets into OSM. I'm inclined to agree. I'm originally from Maltby, a mining village near Rotherham in South Yorkshire. I've been slowly mapping it with my GPS when I've gone to visit people, and I've added some roads from NPE. I know it well enough to be sure that the roads I add from NPE are still there. In the same way, I could use OS data to add roads, then use on-the-ground surveying to add more detail as when I get the chance. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] City centre buildings
On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 13:45 -0800, Peter Millar wrote: I think Delete it and replace it with the building shape would be the right answer. Please, though, copy any appropriate tags from the POI to the new shape before deleting the POI; I've had perfectly good information go missing this way. Agreed on both points, but I'd also point out this from the OSM for the blind wiki page: If you add POIs, it is better to add buildings and put an exact entrance node at the entrance. Try not to add POIs as the estimated middle of a building. Personally, I'd move the existing node to the location of the entrance, and use that as the start point for creating the building way. Then I'd copy relevant tags from the node to the way. Russ [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_for_the_blind ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
[Talk-GB] Garmin maps no larger than 24MB
My father-in-law has a Garmin eTrex Legend C, and we'd like to put some OSM maps on it for use when walking up hills in Scotland and the Lake District. As he's a hillwalker, contours are important, but it only has 24MB of storage. All the UK maps with contours are far too big to fit. Does anyone know of anywhere that I can get maps of regions, that would be small enough to fit? Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Garmin maps no larger than 24MB
On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 14:44 +, Glenn Proctor wrote: On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Brad Rogers b...@fineby.me.uk wrote: All the UK maps with contours are far too big to fit. Does anyone know of anywhere that I can get maps of regions, that would be small enough to fit? What's the problem with using a memory card? Something suitable can be bought for less than a fiver, these days. I don't think the Etrex Legend C has a memory card slot. It doesn't, which is exactly the problem with using a memory card, and why I'm looking for files that are small enough to fit in internal memory. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Garmin maps no larger than 24MB
On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 14:42 +, Glenn Proctor wrote: Hi Russ I have a little Perl script that will create GPSMAPSUPP.IMG files (suitable for a Garmin GPS) from arbitrary combinations of OSM tiles and contours. Hi Glenn, That sounds perfect. I'll talk to my father-in-law about exactly which areas he needs, and then I'll e-mail you off-list. Many thanks for your help. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] latest garmin cyclemap img
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 11:36 AM, andrew n...@sylva.icuklive.co.uk wrote: 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? I don't know if they're the most up to date or not, but are the maps here any use? http://openmtbmap.org/ Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Error (was Re: NaPTAN import status - update and question)
Dave F. wrote: Could you put this list on the web page? Good idea. Done. Why are the source errors not acceptable to you? I believe NPE extrapolation are valid. I've never like historical as a tag or key. It's an adjective is therefore subjective. I've never used historical, but it's listed on Map Features, where source=historical is from out-of-copyright mapping or other historical document I've included that and NPE/extrapolation source tags because they indicate features that might benefit from an on the ground survey. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] OSM Error (was Re: NaPTAN import status - update and question)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: Thinking about it, one could get OSM to produce a list of things to check for any particular trip - First one would produce a GPX for the trip and then a 'job-creator' would identify streets without names, villages without letter boxes, ways with 'FIXME' tags and also of course unchecked bus stops and produce an itinerary and map to things to do on the way. I've done something similar to this: http://www.mappage.org/error/ Enter a set of co-ordinates and it will produce a GPX file containing waypoints of all the issues it finds. At the time of writing, it flags up: Motorways, trunk, primary and secondary roads without a ref tag Various things without names Shops etc without opening hours Anything with source set to extrapolation, NPE or historical Anything with a FIXME tag Any node with naptan:verified=no Any way with highway=road Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] NAPTAN import errors
Hi, I've just noticed that some of the bus stops imported from the NAPTAN import don't have the highway=bus_stop tag. Example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.237985lon=-3.17579zoom=18layers=B000FTF This shows two bus stops, one with the tag, one without. Is this a local problem in South Cumbria or more general? Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Locating Postboxes article Guardian
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:49 PM, John Robert Peterson jrp@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty sure I heard from somewhere that the post code associated with the post box is actually a post code assosiated with the collection office, and that a house next to it can have a totally different post code. That seems highly unlikely. In the early 1990's, I was a postie, and the sorting office that I was based in delivered mail to the S66 7xx S66 8xx postcode areas. This page: http://www.dracos.co.uk/play/locating-postboxes/nearest/?s=S66+8 Shows many postboxes that have been located in the area, all with a different postcode. But all those postboxes listed with a postcode starting S66 7 or S66 8 are collected from a single sorting office. Or at least, they were in 1994, and the sorting office that I worked at is still in operation. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Healthware OSM-Atlas
Hi, I've been working on a couple of OSM-Related things, on-and-off, for a while, and I'm happy to announce that I've just released version 1.0 of both. Healthware [1] is a web site that uses the API XAPI to find pharmacies (and, later, will also find hospitals). It's designed to run on any size screen, from the tiny little screen of my phone, to a full-sized monitor. Where the opening_hours tag [2] has been added, it can work out whether a pharmacy is currently open or not. Source code is released under an MIT licence [3]. Secondly, OSM-Atlas [4] is a PHP command-line script that uses a .osm file to create an atlas. It creates a PDF file, with front back covers, overview map, detailed map pages, and index pages. This is also released under an MIT Licence [5]. Russ [1] http://www.mappage.org/hw/ [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours [3] http://www.mappage.org/hw/healthware.tar.gz [4] http://www.mappage.org/atlas/ [5] http://www.mappage.org/atlas/osm-atlas.tar.gz ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Old data in XAPI
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:36 PM, 80n80n...@gmail.com wrote: Try [amenity=pharmacy] instead of [*=pharmacy] The index for the second form is no longer being maintained. There were relatively few queries of this form and the overhead was substantial. Ah, that worked. Excellent, thanks :-) The software shouldn't give you a seemingly ok response, that needs fixing. And I should document this as well. If I get time, I'll update the wiki page. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Liam123 again
Frederik Ramm wrote: Oh yeah, and let's also get their addresses and hang them! I am amazed at how much hostility this Liam123 is able to provoke. I'm not. I think it's similar to the way people react to virus writers after their computer is infected. I've heard plenty of people suggest that they should get all sorts of severe punishments, up to and including hanging. I'd guess it's frustration at the sheer mindlessness of the attacks. We must improve our means to detect and deal with vandalism, not circle the wagons and make participation more difficult for the 99% of well-meaning users just because there's 1% of killjoys. That would be the worst thing we could do. I agree. I'd like to see a situation where someone can see something is wrong (their road name is spelled wrong, say) and they can fix it, easily. I haven't made major changes in Wikipedia, but I've made plenty of small changes, fixing typos and things, and I did it because it was drop-dead simple. I've got an account, but I didn't even bother logging in to make most of those changes, because it wasn't worth the hassle. A few fixed typos can make an article significantly more readable. In our case, if a town has been mapped using Yahoo, we may not have road names, but if locals can log in and each fill in a few names, the map becomes much better. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Old data in XAPI
80n wrote: Try [amenity=pharmacy] instead of [*=pharmacy] The index for the second form is no longer being maintained. There were relatively few queries of this form and the overhead was substantial. The software shouldn't give you a seemingly ok response, that needs fixing. And I should document this as well. I'm hoping to have time to edit the wiki page tomorrow. Before I do, I'd just like to clarify a couple of things: 1. Is [amenity=*] still supported? I'm guessing not, but I'd like to be sure. 2. Is the union operator still supported, i.e. are the following valid?: [highway=motorway|motorway_link|trunk|primary] [amenity|leisure=golf_course] Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Postal Area/District maps
2009/7/3 Mike osm-talk...@norgie.net: Folks, Does anyone know of any maps marking UK postal areas/districts? I seem to recall picutre of the day on OSM having a map of postal areas but I can't seem to find it. Any ideas where I can see the postal boundies? You're probably thinking of: http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/postcodes/ Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hello All
2009/6/24 Jack Stringer jack.ix...@googlemail.com: I would also like to get involved in adding address data for already added amenities to in turn improve the postcode database. If you're interested in improving free postcode information, then these two web sites will probably also be of interest to you: http://www.dracos.co.uk/play/locating-postboxes/ http://www.npemap.org.uk/ Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Sat Navs to stop working?
Yesterday, on Radio 2's drive time show, someone mentioned that sat navs would stop working next year. My wife heard it as she was driving home, but there were no details. We can't work out what they were talking about. The Listen Again page is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00kg9fr I can't listen to it because I'm at work, but I can't find any mention of it on the BBC news pages. Does anyone know what they were talking about? Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] MK mapping party
2009/5/18 Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com: Stoke needs work but a party will probably happen there in July, watch the wiki for that. I live in Stoke-on-Trent, but don't have a great deal of time to spend mapping, so I'd love to see a mapping party there. I don't know whether or not I'll be able to make it to a party, but even if I can't get to it, it'd be good to get some more data. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] How to add roundabouts?
2009/1/28 Chris Andrew cjhand...@gmail.com: Hi, all. New to the list. Just wondering, some roads near me have big roundabouts that aren't mapped, they are just seen as converging roads. I see that a tag exists to mark roundabouts (OSM Wiki), but I can't see how to apply it using the standard editing tool. This wiki page should help: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout It's not too long, and should tell you everything you need to know. Ask here if it's still not clear. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Yet another rail network map
2008/12/18 Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com: But where a footpath or other feature makes use of the original feature then I would definitely add a tag that explains the features former use, that's useful data. I hadn't thought of it before, but that sounds like a good idea. There are a lot of cycleways near me that used to be railways. Currently they're just tagged with highway=cycleway, what would you suggest I add? I note that Map Features says that railway=abandoned (which would have been my first choice) is not to be used if the feature has been turned into another use, eg cycleway. Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Automatically make street atlas?
Quoting David Groom [EMAIL PROTECTED]: As a starting point you might look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/PDF_atlas Thanks, I'll take a proper look later. I'm not sure if it'll do quite what I want. If I knew Perl I might be able to adapt it, but I've never managed to get my head around Perl. Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Automatically make street atlas?
Hi people, I'd like to make some street atlases using OSM data. Has anyone created a script/program to do this automatically? If not, I might have a go at writing something myself, but I thought I'd see if anyone else has done it first. Basically, I'd like to feed it a .osm file, and have it spit out a load of printable files (don't really care what format). Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Nottingham progress?
Quoting Andy Allan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Russ Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could anyone here give me an idea of progress in Nottingham? I had a quick look recently and it appeared that all the roads are in place, but some (many?) don't have names. Hi Russ, I don't know Nottingham myself, but you can see which roads are in the db and need naming using the red highlighting at http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/no-names/?zoom=13lat=6973936.32734lon=-131415.14164layers=0B000 Thanks for that - that's really quite nifty. Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Nottingham progress?
Could anyone here give me an idea of progress in Nottingham? I had a quick look recently and it appeared that all the roads are in place, but some (many?) don't have names. I have some friends in Nottingham, so it'd be good to be able to tell them that OSM has mapped their home town. I might be able to persuade some of them to help out with adding street names if that is still to be done. Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans
Quoting Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED]: So, my belief is that in realty recruiting sustrans people to our cause is unlikely to be very fruitful. Look instead for people with time on their hands, those still in education, bored professionals like me ;-) and the retired. Ah well, fair enough. They seemed to be ideal candidates for mapping parties if nothing else, but I'll bow to your superior knowledge ;-) At least I know now that we haven't been ignoring a large potential source of recruitment. Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans
Quoting Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED]: A simple card with the web address and the OSM logo would be perfect, I'm always needing the same but haven't got around to doing any. I'd add my name and an email address too so that the person can make contact again. Has anyone posted any similar proofs to the wiki/svn? if not would be good if someone can do one. I knocked something up this afternoon. It's not great, but I haven't found anything else, and hopefully it's better than nothing: http://www.phillipsuk.org/tmp/OSM-business-cards.pdf http://www.phillipsuk.org/tmp/OSM-business-cards.odt There are two pages, with slightly different wording, because I couldn't decide which one I preferred ;-) Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Sustrans
Hi list, On Saturday, the wife I went to have a look at a local (Stoke on Trent) fun day, and got talking to the guy at the Sustrans stand, largely because I started looking at his maps. I'm not a cyclist, so I don't know a great deal about Sustrans, but I get the impression that there are quite a few cyclists in OSM's ranks. It seems to me that Sustrans could benefit greatly from OSM (I know someone has already produced a cycle map), but the man we spoke to had never heard of OSM, and I got the distinct impression that he thought we were a bit mad! He did understand the value of mapping data, as opposed to maps, but he seemed to be pinning all his hopes on persuading the OS to make their data available (so much so that I started to wonder if that's something Sustrans is actively working on). So, I just thought I'd ask - do we have any contacts at Sustrans? If not, would it be worth trying to get some? The person we spoke to doesn't have a GPS, but the Foundation has some for loan. I know they were bought with the intention of loaning them at mapping parties, but would it be worth also loaning them to Sustrans people? Could we use Sustrans to advertise mapping parties, and get more people that way? Any thoughts? Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans
From: Andy Robinson \(blackadder-lists\) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Sustrans A quiet revolution, with OSM showing how we might be better than what they have now seems to be the best approach and Andy's version of our data is one of the ways to prove that. And as Andy says, those of us who are Rangers also have a say from the grass roots end of Sustrans and by showing the local sustrans officers how our data can be used we may be able to spread the word within. Well, at least now I know that people within OSM are *trying* to convince Sustrans. Is there any potential mileage in getting Sustrans people to mapping parties? Russ This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Freemap down
Apologies to the rest of the list, but I can't find any other way to contact Nick Whitelegg to let him know that free-map.org.uk appears to be down - I get a Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at www.free-map.org.uk. error when trying to view the main page, and my RSS reader can't get the RSS feed. Russ ___ 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
On Thu, January 10, 2008 2:19 pm, Gregory Williams wrote: http://maps.yahoo.com/broadband/#mvt=slat=52.949414lon=-1.178971mag=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 Excellent, thank you. I'd forgotten about that wiki page :-/ Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Talk-GB Digest, Vol 14, Issue 2
From: Richard Fairhurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Talk-GB] A roads - a new project for the winter months The principle's simple: add any missing roads you know of to the wiki page. Then either go out and map them, or (more environmentally friendly option (: ) print out the wiki page and take a detour next time you're passing. You can, of course, use NPE and all the usual tools to help. Just want to clarify something - if a road is partially mapped, should it be listed, with a note of which part is not mapped? Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Contour data
Hi, Can someone tell me how to either get data from free-map.org.uk, with contour lines, or add contour lines to OSM data? I'd like to use OSM data to print some maps suitable for walkers. I want to prove to my father-in-law that OSM is useful to him as a walker ;-) Russ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-gb
