Re: [Talk-GB] ITO! World Tools

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Brian,

Unfortunately due to a combination of proprietary code, and linking of the code 
with some of other systems, releasing the code isn’t possible.

Shaun

> On 6 Dec 2019, at 13:18, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> 
> Hi Shaun
> 
> Would it be possible for itoworld to let us ( the UK chapter) have the source 
> code for the road names feature - we're keen to replicate it using the new 
> source of OS road names from OS Open Roads and we're hoping that other than 
> dealing with a new datasource the comparison logic and rendering backend 
> could be re-used. It might lessen the development effort and it might be 
> easier to get some volunteers.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> 
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 10:51, Shaun McDonald  <mailto:sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 28 Nov 2019, at 10:26, SK53 > <mailto:sk53@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> The big difference of the old Locator layer from ITO is that it displayed 
>> the name. The other tool which used OS locator is Robert Scott's OSL Musical 
>> Chairs <https://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/map>. Both suffer 
>> because OS Locator was last released in 2016.
> 
> The OS Locator data having last been released in 2016, with no plans to 
> update to the OS Open Roads mentioned below, and the majority of the UK 
> having street names. Combined with no new streets ever going to come up, and 
> demolished/removed street names needing to have the not:name forever more, a 
> hardware failure, were all contributory factors for the service being 
> discontinued.
> 
>> 
>> One way to get potentially missing names is to use OS Open Roads. These are 
>> big shape files, so its probably best to cut them down using something like 
>> ogr2ogr, or QGIS. The file can be pulled in as a custom layer in iD, 
>> Potlatch and as a standard layer in JOSM. 
> 
> 
> 
>> On 28 Nov 2019, at 10:30, Jez Nicholson > <mailto:jez.nichol...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> As Jerry says, the key feature was that it compared OS road names to OSM and 
>> highlighted the differences.
>> 
>> The Microsoft Open Data Team recently analysed 
>> streets-with-no-name-but-lots-of-houses which threw up positive hits, and 
>> some potentially false positives of new housing estates which do not have 
>> road names yet and auxiliary service roads.
>> 
>> I'd like to see a new tool be builti'd also like someone to fund it 
>> being built and sustain it either through a grant or donated work.
>> 
> 
> We at Ito are also hopeful that the community would implement new more up to 
> date tools with a more modern look.
> 
> Shaun McDonald
> Ito World
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb 
> <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] ITO! World Tools

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 28 Nov 2019, at 10:26, SK53  wrote:
> 
> The big difference of the old Locator layer from ITO is that it displayed the 
> name. The other tool which used OS locator is Robert Scott's OSL Musical 
> Chairs <https://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/map>. Both suffer 
> because OS Locator was last released in 2016.

The OS Locator data having last been released in 2016, with no plans to update 
to the OS Open Roads mentioned below, and the majority of the UK having street 
names. Combined with no new streets ever going to come up, and 
demolished/removed street names needing to have the not:name forever more, a 
hardware failure, were all contributory factors for the service being 
discontinued.

> 
> One way to get potentially missing names is to use OS Open Roads. These are 
> big shape files, so its probably best to cut them down using something like 
> ogr2ogr, or QGIS. The file can be pulled in as a custom layer in iD, Potlatch 
> and as a standard layer in JOSM. 



> On 28 Nov 2019, at 10:30, Jez Nicholson  wrote:
> 
> As Jerry says, the key feature was that it compared OS road names to OSM and 
> highlighted the differences.
> 
> The Microsoft Open Data Team recently analysed 
> streets-with-no-name-but-lots-of-houses which threw up positive hits, and 
> some potentially false positives of new housing estates which do not have 
> road names yet and auxiliary service roads.
> 
> I'd like to see a new tool be builti'd also like someone to fund it being 
> built and sustain it either through a grant or donated work.
> 

We at Ito are also hopeful that the community would implement new more up to 
date tools with a more modern look.

Shaun McDonald
Ito World___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] New Ghosts Set and Survey Me Auto-Location Feature

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 7 Aug 2018, at 10:53, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
> 
> Philip Barnes wrote:
>> Recently new blue branded co-op shops have started to appear, 
>> some have changed and at least one has opened in direct 
>> competition with an existing Mid-counties.
> 
> Midcounties are also adopting the "new" cloverleaf Co-op logo in many
> places, while their Chipping Norton shop, curiously, uses the Co-operatives
> UK logo. There's so much overlap (particularly between Midcounties and the
> Co-operative Group) that they really need to be surveyed to find the
> operator, which I agree would be useful information.
> 
> Shipston-on-Stour has two Co-ops literally three doors away from each other
> - one Midcounties, one Co-operative Group (ex-Somerfield).
> 

There’s also a big overlap in places like Edinburgh due to Co-op buying the 
Somerfield stores several years ago. This means that some newer stores accept 
the loyalty cards, whilst the older ones don’t.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New Ghosts Set and Survey Me Auto-Location Feature

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 6 Aug 2018, at 12:04, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
> 
> (It looks like the East of England Co-op also operates a few pharmacies. I
> haven't investigated further.)
> 

To confirm East of England Co-op do have their own brand pharmacies.
https://www.eastofengland.coop/pharmacy

Shaun

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OS Locator November 2016

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 6 Feb 2017, at 20:35, Robert Scott  > wrote:
> 
> On Monday 06 February 2017 20:27:16 Robert Scott wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> Does anyone have a copy of OS OpenData Locator's November 2015 release still 
>> kicking around anywhere?
> 
> Ok, I acknowledge I said 2016 in the subject, but 2015 in the body. I mean of 
> course 2015.
> 


I've got some old copies of the OS open data:

http://shaunmcdonald.me.uk/os_data/os_locator/2015-11/gazlco_gb.zip 


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

Re: [Talk-GB] OS Locator November 2016

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 6 Feb 2017, at 20:35, Robert Scott  > wrote:
> 
> On Monday 06 February 2017 20:27:16 Robert Scott wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> Does anyone have a copy of OS OpenData Locator's November 2015 release still 
>> kicking around anywhere?
> 
> Ok, I acknowledge I said 2016 in the subject, but 2015 in the body. I mean of 
> course 2015.
> 


I've got some old copies of the OS open data:

http://shaunmcdonald.me.uk/os_data/os_locator/2015-11/gazlco_gb.zip 


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK website

[Shaun McDonald]

The openstreetmap.co.uk  and openstreetmap.org.uk 
 domains could be an option, currently in OSMF 
ownership, as listed on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Domain_names 


Shaun

> On 31 Dec 2016, at 12:53, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have created a very simple wordpress site for the new UK company. If anyone 
> has a suitable URL to direct at the site please let me know. (Dennis is 
> looking at pointing the osmuk.org  url but others welcome).
> 
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping dangerous - but valid - routes

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Stuart,

I'd keep it in, ensure other object information such as the number of lanes is 
included within the data. Then the routing engine can take account of the 
additional information, such as avoiding, but not exempting (thus creating 
islands that you can't walk out of) at crossing points that cross 3 lanes of 
traffic. You can also present a warning that there is an uncontrolled crossing 
and you need to cross 3 lanes of traffic if this is the only suitable route.

Shaun

> On 5 Dec 2016, at 16:12, Stuart Reynolds  
> wrote:
> 
> Greetings
> 
> At Stirling Corner, on the A1 in Barnet, there is a cycle way (hence also 
> available for pedestrians) that goes around the outside of the roundabout 
> (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/78315291 
> ). A cursory glance at satellite 
> mapping shows it to be well defined, and marked. But it will also highlight 
> that where you cross the southbound A1 to the south of the roundabout (and 
> likewise the northbound A1 to the north) it is highly dangerous. You have to 
> cross three lanes of traffic, and there is always a flow of some sort, either 
> from the A1 or from the side roads.
> 
> What is the right course of action here - leave it in, because it reflects 
> what is on the ground, or take it out on safety grounds. This isn’t an idle 
> question - a user of my website has stated that it is dangerous to use, and 
> has asked me to remove it. My conclusion was to leave it in, but as it cuts 
> to what it is that is being produced here - an accurate cartographic 
> representation of the world, regardless, or something a little different - I 
> thought I would ask for views.
> 
> Regards,
> Stuart
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Quarterly project - taginfo tracker

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 18 Oct 2016, at 08:05, Steve Doerr  wrote:
> 
> On 17/10/2016 21:47, Greg wrote:
> 
>> I think the most useful link would probably be one that loads the OSM 
>> node/way in JOSM using the remote control function in the same way that the 
>> suggested matches map links do. Obviously you’d have to put the address 
>> details into JOSM manually, but you could use the FHRS links on nearby blue 
>> dots to find these.
> 
> Thanks, Greg. I'm afraid the JOSM link would not be of use to me, as I'm a 
> Potlatch user, but I realize I can't have the tool specifically tailored to 
> me, so if JOSM is the predominant editor I guess that's where you will want 
> to focus your attention.
> 

It’s possible to have an edit link that caters for everyone’s favourite editor 
by not specifying the editor, and then the osm.org website will use your 
preferences to go to the correct editor whether that be potlatch 1, potlatch 2, 
iD (default), or remote control (JOSM or Merkaartor). e.g. 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/52.04638/1.15906 is not editor 
specific.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk down?

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Robert,

I'd seen the alert that it was down at the weekend, however wasn't in a 
position at the time to get to a computer and fix it.

I've now rebooted the machine and it's back. Thanks for the reminder to look 
into it.

Shaun

> On 3 Oct 2016, at 14:34, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
>  wrote:
> 
> Is it just me, or is http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/ currently
> not working? It's been unresponsive for me for at least the last
> couple of days. Does anyone know who runs this instance and how to get
> in touch with them?
> 
> Robert.
> 
> -- 
> Robert Whittaker
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Postcodes

[Shaun McDonald]

I'm wondering if this FAQ is still up to date, which notes that the postcodes 
were computed in October 2012 and haven't been updated since. 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/FAQ#My_postcode_is_missing.2Fwrong_but_I.27ve_fixed_it_in_the_OSM_data._What_is_wrong.3F
 There are many duplicate tickets about postcodes in Trac and Github issue 
trackers.

I'd much prefer to load the OS open data as a separate list into Nominatim, 
otherwise it'll be a nightmare trying to update the OSM data when the next 
release of the OS open data comes out. Adding postcodes to specific buildings 
in OSM is still useful to produce more accurate geocoding and reverse geocoding 
results.

Shaun

> On 26 Sep 2016, at 09:39, Chris Hill  wrote:
> 
> Please do not add postcode centroids to the map. They are not real, do not 
> exist and do not belong in the OSM DB.
> 
> On 26 September 2016 09:01:38 BST, Gervase Markham  
> wrote:
> On 25/09/16 21:47, Owen Boswarva wrote:
>  I can't see any reason why there should be a problem using Code-Point
>  Open in OSM, now that Ordnance Survey has applied the Open Government
>  Licence in place of its own licence. If you read further down, the wiki
>  page gives examples of OSM projects that use Code-Point Open.
> 
> OK, that's good news. What's the quickest route to getting Nominatim to
> understand this data set? File a Nominatim bug to get the search engine
> to import the data set directly? Or add 500,000ish points to OSM itself
> with something like type = "postcode_centre"?
> 
> Gerv
> 
> 
> 
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Cheers, Chris (chillly)
> ___
> 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] OSM UK site

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 1 Jul 2016, at 16:38, Dennis Bauszus  wrote:
> 
> I have setup a wordpress site.
> 
> http://osmuk.org/ 
> 
> Please drop me a mail if you want to become an editor and start posting or an 
> administrator and help with the general layout.

I can recommend the Divi WordPress Theme which allows extremely flexible 
layouts to be easily created all in the GUI. 
http://www.elegantthemes.com/gallery/divi/ 


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Assistance fixing wonky bits of London?

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Stuart,

Looking at the history, it looks like the name was changed 8 months ago 
incorrectly and should be changed back, similarly for the relation. 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/206072/history

It looks like the tags on the relation and linked node for the name need to be 
changed to the previous one. Nothing else in the changeset jumps out as being 
an issue, so could be some odd autocomplete issue.

Shaun

> On 13 Jan 2016, at 13:32, Stuart Reynolds  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I’ve come across some errors in London, but I’m not too sure about how to fix 
> them short of deleting them.
> 
> Node 469785651 is a bus stop (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/469785651 
> ) as indeed is its partner 
> stop, node 469785652. However, rather than having the correct bus stop name 
> it is called Epsom Station and has a relation which appears to define it as a 
> platform of Epsom station. That is clearly wrong.
> 
> However, does this mean that something that should have been in Epsom has 
> been moved? I don’t really understand relations fully yet, and I’m unwilling 
> to just dive in and break something if the fix is to do something better or 
> different.
> 
> Also, what is the relationship between name=* and naptan:CommonName=*? The 
> latter I understand, but shouldn’t the two be the same?
> 
> Thanks
> Stuart
> 
> 
> Stuart Reynolds
> for traveline south east & anglia
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] First UK/GB OpenStreetMap group meeting - 17th December at 8pm

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Brian,

Are you aware that 0800 numbers are now free from mobiles?
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/phones/2015/06/0800-numbers-now-free-to-call-from-mobiles

Shaun

> On 16 Dec 2015, at 23:06, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone
> 
> Calls from a mobile, the number is 0330 336 2206, and the passcode 33224. 
> Calls will cost the same as a call to an 01 or 02 landline. 
> 
> Calls from a landline, the number is 0800 22 90 900 (same passcode) which 
> will be free
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> 
> On 16 December 2015 at 22:10, Harry Wood  > wrote:
> Thanks for making something happen Rob!
> 
> So this conference call is TOMORROW at 8pm.
> 
> I added those details to the wiki page:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/UK 
> 
> But d'you have the dial-in details?
> 
> Harry
> 
> 
> 
> From: Rob Nickerson  >
> To: Talk-GB mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>>
> Sent: Sunday, 6 December 2015, 19:25
> Subject: [Talk-GB] First UK/GB OpenStreetMap group meeting - 17th December
> at 8pm
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> Early this year I published a survey asking about “a UK/GB OpenStreetMap
> group”. 101 people filled it in and many contacted me to say they liked the 
> idea. Encouraged by the this and my local
> Mappa Mercia group, we feel the time is right to start the group. To get us 
> going Wikimedia UK have kindly offered us their teleconference facility for
> our first meeting – 8pm on 17th December. I've used teleconferencing 
> facilities in the past for State of the Map 2013 and find that they work well 
> (no text/chat facility ensures that there is only one conversation going on - 
> the one being heard by everyone).
> 
> Survey results:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1A8rKyKUW0X01n-JEMLwEUT4ktX-7WrxNP03YTkZs6lU/edit#
>  
> 
> 
> To get
> us going we will need a few people to commit time over the next 6
> months. The roles we need are set out below and
> we will need to initially fill them and then, once we have a
> constitution in place, we will need volunteers to stand for election. These 
> roles will be needed irrespective of whether decision making lies with the 
> membership or an elected board.
> 
> * Chair – to provide leadership and ensures the group functions properly
> 
> * Treasurer – to organise the finances of the group. Initially this will 
> mean setting up our bank account.
> 
> * Secretary/Membership secretary – to keep the register of members up to 
> date (indeed to set
> on up in the first place), to ensure that voting procedures are carried
> out in accordance to our agreed policy. There is potential for this to
> be two separate roles.We will also need an initial working group to provide 
> ideas and discussion. This group can also support the
> aforementioned roles in small discrete tasks.
> 
> Please let me know
> if you can help with setting up the group and/or whether you would be
> willing to stand for election once the constitution is established. I will 
> share the telephone
> number and login PIN closer to the date.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rob
> 
> p.s. Busy on 17th December? No worries. Send me you comments and I will make 
> sure they are shared.
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] ITO World - OSM OS Locator Analysis

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Philip,

Do you have a specific example where the not:names are not working? The left 
hand column on 
http://product.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/area?name=Cambridge has a 
list of the streets where the not name has been used, so that the Ordnance 
Survey can use that information as part of the feedback loop, and to allow 
later review.

I’ve looked at a few examples in the roads missing list, and for the road 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4076126 the comment on the last changeset 
suggests that there should be a not:name added to the street. I’ve not seen an 
example where there is a not:name which is not interpreted, and would be 
interested in any such examples.

The daily updates are from the OSM data, so within 1 or 2 days any changes that 
you make to OSM should show up in OSM Analysis. The updates to the OS data are 
done manually, which I’ve just done for the November 2015 data, and should be 
picked up in the next update. This will mean there will likely be a little jump 
in the numbers of unnamed roads. (Sorry for the delay in updating, I’ve been on 
paternity leave this past couple of weeks.)

Shaun
Developer
ITO World

> On 11 Dec 2015, at 20:36, Phillip Barnett  wrote:
> 
> I'm slightly confused - I fixed a lot /most of Cambridge with not:name a year 
> or two ago but on looking again, find the same errors still there. How do I 
> get ITO to refresh this? The site says it was refreshed today.
> 
> On 11 Dec 2015, at 17:44, Jez Nicholson  > wrote:
> 
>> Thank you. You've prompted me to renew my quest for 100% in City of Brighton 
>> and Hove as long as the roads with/without apostrophes aren't counted in 
>> the percentage.
>> 
>> - Jez
>> 
>> On Thu, 10 Dec 2015 at 23:09 Steve Doerr > > wrote:
>> I think the URL may have changed. Try 
>> http://product.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main 
>> 
>> 
>> Steve
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/12/2015 22:34, Robert Neil wrote:
>>> ITOWorld OSM / OS Locator missing street analysis has been off for a couple 
>>> of weeks with page not found.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Anyone know what is happening with it?
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Robert
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb 
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. 
>> www.avast.com 
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Coastline - my botched attempt to re-align ?

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi,

The coastline is updated at a much slower pace compared to everything else, so 
it's expected that it won't align for some time in the map rendering. It could 
be days, weeks, or months between coastline updates, and not minutely updates 
like all of the other OSM data. So don't worry about it, the coastline will 
update in due course.

Shaun

> On 23 Oct 2015, at 14:02, Bogus Zaba  wrote:
> 
> A seawall was recently re-built in west Rhyl. As a result, and following
> two GPS surveys, earlier this week (Tue 20/10) I moved three features on
> the coast in West Rhyl. These were : the coastline, the boundary of a
> beach and the route of a cycleway which follows the new seawall.
> 
> The cycle route and the beach boundary now render correctly on Mapnik
> and on the cycle map. However the coastline appears to follow the
> previous version (complete with some characteristic details which used
> to describe coastal structures on the old seawall). This has led to a
> rendering which shows a sliver of sea inland of my new coastline, beach
> and cycleway. See here:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.3173/-3.5020
> 
> If I import the current OSM data into JOSM I can see no reason why this 
> "ghost" coastline should appear in any 
> rendering. There are no ways shown in the area where Mapnik and the Cyclemap 
> show this sliver of the Irish Sea.
> 
> Anybody suggest what I have done wrong and how to right it?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> bogzab
> 
> -- 
> Dr Bogumil N Zaba
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Last quarterly project for 2015

[Shaun McDonald]

A number of different boundaries such as SSSIs, national parks, and nature 
reserves are available from 
http://www.geostore.com/environment-agency/WebStore?xml=environment-agency/xml/ogcDataDownload.xml
 


Shaun

> On 5 Oct 2015, at 09:29, SK53  wrote:
> 
> I'm well in favour of mapping nature reserves, but they usually are quite 
> difficult to find actual boundaries.
> 
> Nick Whitlegg and I walked through a couple of Woodland Trust areas on 
> Saturday and working out the extent of the area owned by the WT is difficult. 
> Similarly, over another non-OSM matter, I've been exchanging emails with NT 
> Eastern Office about Wicken Fen, but they have added so much new land over 
> the past few years that they dont have a ready to use map of the reserve. 
> Another one is the new RSPB reserve at Medmerry near Selsey, which is the 
> site of a massive managed retreat and new sea wall breach. This was brought 
> to my attention by Liz Scott (@birdmaps). Lastly, I haven't even resolved the 
> bounds of Attenborough NR: the staff now manage the area in Derbyshire 
> labelled Erewash Field  on OSM. I 
> don't know if it has been formally incoriporated into the reserve, so the 
> current mapping is a sensible compromise (and yes Nottinghamshire Wildlife 
> Trust operate a reserve in Derbyshire).
> 
> There are Natural England datasets for National NRs, Local NRs and SSSIs. I 
> think these are under OGL these days, but like PRoW or Land Registry inspire 
> data, they may incorporate OS MasterMap data, and I have always treated them 
> as not fully open. Some local authorities have open data showing boundaries 
> of LNRs. Note that NR & SSSI boundaries are often not coincident. NRs depend 
> on either landowner agreement, or willingness to sell land; SSSIs are based 
> on conservation importance. And of course, some NRs have geological SSSIs in 
> their midst which are much smaller than the NR.
> 
> The second thing which is really important for NRs is to get path networks 
> and access mapped out. Experience shows that even if one wants to start 
> mapping the things the NR is about, having the paths in is a necessary but 
> not sufficient condition for a decent map. Many NRs are very deficient from 
> this point of view (including the big ancient woodlands S of Coventry, such 
> as Wappenbury & Ryton, the last of which I visited at end of August. 
> Similarly both Wyre Forest & Werneth Low which I visited in September lack 
> many paths.
> 
> There's a lot more to say about NRs, I have already started a draft for the 
> blog to do so inspired by looking at Medmerry.
> 
> My feeling is that the most value can be added to OSM by improving details of 
> NRs local to individual mappers, and initially, at least path networks (there 
> are probably 10+ km of unmapped paths in Ryton Wood alone).
> 
> One other plea, please don't map areas of grass as meadows unless you know 
> them to be meadows: Dudley wrote something about this in the past.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jerry
> 
> On 5 October 2015 at 08:39, Brian Prangle  > wrote:
> Hi everyone
> 
> For the remainder of 2015 lets concentrate on Nature Reserves
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> 
> ___
> 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] too many universities in Cambridge

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 22 May 2015, at 12:30, David Earl  wrote:
> 
> Does the main OSM rendering understand building=university?
> 

Yes, for example this building at Heriot-Watt University: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/22881764 
 where I used the 
university=building tag over 6 years ago. With the grounds of the university 
being tagged amenity=university: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4388535 
 I apply a similar principle to 
schools.

Mapnik will render any building value, except building=no. There are some 
building values which get special treatment.
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/project.mml#L468
 

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/buildings.mss 
 

Shaun


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

[Talk-GB] ITO - OSM Analysis Updated with May 2015 OS data

[Shaun McDonald]

Hello UK mappers,

I’ve updated the ITO OSM Analysis with the new OS Locator data which has been 
released this month (May 2015).

Many areas have had significant increases in the number of missing road names. 
Leeds has had the biggest increase of 35 more missing road names. Moray for 
example is now only 94.01% complete.
> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main 
> 

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

Re: [Talk-GB] How to edit the search results ?

[Shaun McDonald]

What makes you think the results are rubbish? Can you give some example 
searches with the actual result and what you actually expected, so that the 
developers can explain why that result is given and potential give you guidance 
on how to improve the results.

Shaun

> On 31 Mar 2015, at 23:48, pmailkeey .  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Simple question - how does one edit the rubbish search results ?
> 
> -- 
> Mike.
> @millomweb  - For 
> all your info on Millom and South Copeland
> via the area's premier website - 
> 
> currently unavailable due to ongoing harassment of me, my family, property & 
> pets
> 
> T&Cs 
> ___
> 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] GB postcodes

[Shaun McDonald]

> On 26 Mar 2015, at 12:26, Pmailkeey .  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 25 March 2015 at 21:35, Colin Spiller  > wrote:
> ?
> Postcodes are GREAT for routing. It's far quicker to type the postcode as 
> destination than a long address. If it takes me to the correct street I can 
> usually find the building by myself, if I haven't entered the house number. 
> Postcodes every time.
> 
> Colin
> 
> 
> Grid ref or lat/long for me - to the gate.
> 
> Got sick of giving postcodes as asked by delivery companies only to have them 
> phone me from the street to find out where I am ! ("House with trees in 
> garden" - hmm, I'll put the trees on OSM just in case !)
> 
> Obviously not everyone has the intelligence to find the route of the last leg 
> of the journey!

Granted in rural areas postcodes are less useful due to the large area that 
they cover, however within towns and cities, they are generally accurate 
enough, which covers the majority of the journey plans required. Just because 
it isn’t useful to you doesn’t mean it isn’t useful to other people.

On the flip side how many people in the general population know how to use a 
grid ref or lat/long? I’d hazard a guess, it’s less than those who know what a 
postcode is (ignoring the technical details of postcodes).

Shaun


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

[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis Updated with latest OS Locator data

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi,

OSM Analysis has been updated to the latest OS Locator data.
> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main 
> 

There have been many places knocked off the 100% completeness, with 17 areas 
now below 95% complete. Overall completeness is currently 98.00%.

I’d also like to apologise for some of the delays in the updates appearing 
publicly recently, this has problem has now been fixed.

Happy Mapping.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Confused over access...

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Stuart,

The bus=yes and psv=yes override the access=no to say only buses/public service 
vehicles can use the road.

The access=no says ignore the normal defaults for access on the road, and 
instead use the access values included in this object instead.

I hope that clarifies things.

Shaun

> On 14 Oct 2014, at 17:02, Stuart Reynolds  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi
>  
> Very quickly, if I have a road that is for bus/psv use, and is tagged like 
> this:
>  
> Access=no
> Bus=yes
> Psv=yes
>  
> does that mean that buses are, or aren’t, allowed to use it? Currently the 
> bus lane around Preston Bus Station is coded this way, but my contractor 
> isn’t treating it as a bus lane, and before I go and  hassle the contractor I 
> thought I would check my understanding. I got the impression that access=no 
> took everything out.
>  
> Thanks.
>  
> Stuart
>  
> ---
> Stuart Reynolds
> For traveline south east & anglia
>  
> email: stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk 
> 
> mob: 07788 106165
> skype: stuartjreynolds
>  
>  
> ___
> 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] Lloyds TSB

[Shaun McDonald]

Thanks for the reminder, I’ve updated one in Ipswich based on Mapillary images 
I took recently. Still need to get a bit more coverage to get the other one 
that still needs to be done.

Shaun

On 2 Oct 2014, at 09:30, Ed Loach  wrote:

> It has been over a year now since I first mentioned
> http://www.loach.me.uk/osm/LloydsTSB/
> here, and there are still lots of branches that haven't been remapped, so I 
> thought I'd mention it again.
>  
> Ed
> ___
> 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] NaPTAN (stop) import

[Shaun McDonald]

I see it as being better to put the right hints into the OSM data and the 
routing algorithm so that they can be automatically chosen from the TNDS data, 
rather than having the data in OSM, which is hard to represent some 
complexities such as a few journeys go via a school, some are part route, etc

Shaun

On 1 Aug 2014, at 15:32, Oliver Jowett  wrote:

> Right - I was just trying to understand which was the canonical source. One 
> of the things I've been wanting to try (but never have the time) is repair 
> the OSM bus route relations based on the TNDS schedule info - which sounds 
> very much like your track-finding system. But that gets dangerous if TNDS is 
> indirectly pulling data from OSM itself..
> 
> Oliver
> 
> 
> On 1 August 2014 14:20, Stuart Reynolds  
> wrote:
> Oliver,
> 
>  
> 
> TNDS data (Traveline National Data Set, for other’s benefit - national set of 
> bus & coach timetables) does not currently have the route detail - known in 
> TransXChange as tracks. This is because up to now there have been issues of 
> IPR with OSGR coordinates derived from OS and/or Navteq data.
> 
>  
> 
> Certainly from our point of view - and by “us” I mean the traveline regions 
> of South East, London, East Anglia, South West, East Midlands and (shortly) 
> West Midlands - we are all now on a merged system using OSM data so those 
> problems have gone away. But I still won’t be exporting Tracks until TNDS 
> asks me to.
> 
>  
> 
> Even then, it still has the issues of “is this right”. Most of the time it 
> is, but we do get some routes which find a shorter path along a back street 
> rather than down the main road.
> 
>  
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Stuart
> 
>  
> 
> From: Oliver Jowett [mailto:oliver.jow...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 01 August 2014 1:51 PM
> To: Stuart Reynolds
> 
> 
> Cc: Talk GB
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN (stop) import
> 
>  
> 
> On 1 August 2014 11:17, Stuart Reynolds  
> wrote:
> 
>  
> 
> In terms of bus routes, we also compute the most likely route between stops, 
> and could use that to update the services on each link. But that is a whole 
> different ball game - we have to make sure our data is good quality, and I 
> will need to think what to do when a bus turns off halfway along a road that 
> is mapped as one line, for example, - and I’m not about to get into that for 
> now! Although I would like to, eventually!
> 
>  
> 
> Where does TNDS fit into this?
> 
>  
> 
> Oliver
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] highway=trunk Roads and Cycle Navigation

[Shaun McDonald]

On 25 Jul 2014, at 17:37, David Woolley  wrote:

> On 25/07/14 17:15, Philip Barnes wrote:
>> Are you proposing we tag for the renderer by not tagging trunk roads as
>> trunk?
> 
> No.  He wants people to tag for the router, not the renderer.
> 
> I think that is a bad idea, although not as bad when most trunk roads weren't 
> already mapped, as it is doing something for the convenience of a small 
> number or routing software developers rather than a large number of mappers.
> 
> It could be argued that the current approach is actually tagging for the 
> renderer, except that the details in question don't get rendered in the 
> standard rendering.
> 
> In practice, though, it is more likely that roads would have been mis-tagged 
> if the most common case required extra permissions to be be explicitly added.

Or the road planners in Britain have failed to provide proper facilities for 
the walking and cycling population of Britain?

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM

[Shaun McDonald]

Another option to the GPS data, would be to use Mapillary to provide the latest 
images of the roads, and automatically a GPS trace is included too. This would 
mean that the images could be used for us to map alongside a feed of the 
changes that are known. This also has the advantage in that other surrounding 
things can be mapped too, and gets around any derived copyright issues in the 
maps that are created based on OS data.

Shaun

On 5 Jul 2014, at 17:47, Rob Nickerson  wrote:

> Hi John,
> 
> The negativity, or least lack of enthusiasm, is partly due to the complexity 
> of the issue. We'd love to have Highways Agency data as open data but if the 
> data is based upon Ordnance Survey data this becomes a quite tricky. Normally 
> you would have the data holder apply for a Exemption under the Public Sector 
> Mapping Agreement (PSMA). Even then there's not much consensus in the GB 
> community as to whether we can actually use the data.
> 
> As suggested, a better idea would be to have the Highways Agency provide us a 
> list of upcoming projects and dates that they are expected to complete. If 
> they have any GPS data we would be able to use that too :-)
> 
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM

[Shaun McDonald]

Maybe a simple method is to use the OSM notes system, which is what the feature 
was designed for?

Shaun

On 3 Jul 2014, at 19:10, Dan S  wrote:

> You know, rather than thinking about automatically importing any of
> their data into OSM, my intuition is that given the concerns about OS
> copyright, plus how much OSMers enjoy mapping new features, I'd
> suggest using their data to create a web feed of "Hot new roads for
> mappers to go and survey!" - I bet they'd all be mapped within a week
> ;)
> 
> Dan
> 
> 2014-07-03 18:41 GMT+01:00 John Baker :
>> 
>> Yeah I know we are pretty good at adding them. But this discussion started
>> with the HA because there were roads that were not on OSM.
>> 
>> It was this project that he was working on.
>> http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/road-projects/a23-handcross-to-warninglid/
>> 
>> So I personally added this in a rough way based on the descriptions from him
>> who was on site at the time and the plans that were there (I didn't trace
>> them just looked at them).
>> 
>> I don't (for a change) want to get into conversation about tracing imagery
>> vs. doing it by hand. The point is what can we use.
>> 
>> My thought were that if there plans were based on the OS streetview (rather
>> than the more detailed ones) then we could use them.
>> 
>> 
>>> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 18:23:34 +0100
>>> From: o...@raggedred.net
>>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>> 
>>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM
>>> 
>>> On 03/07/14 17:51, John Baker wrote:
 The first thing I am worried about is the copyright of the various
 plans. Some/many seem to be derived from OS maps.
>>> 
>>> A legitimate concern.
 
 Now I am no expert on the copyright situation here and dialogue is
 difficult they know little about OSM really. He just said we release
 the plans and they are public domain.
>>> 
>>> There is no mechanism in the UK for a body like the Highways Agency to
>>> release data as PD. That is a mechanism used in countries like the US.
>>> In the UK the info would have to be licensed using a specific licence,
>>> such as the Open Government Licence. If the plans are based on OS maps
>>> then OS would have to agree to release this, according to OS's
>>> interpretation of copyright law. OS probably will not agree to this, but
>>> it is worth asking :-).
>>> 
>>> Without a suitably agreed licence we cannot trace such plans into OSM.
>>> You could visit the site and get GPS traces & photos to add such works
>>> to OSM, which is usually what happens as soon as a new road gets opened.
>>> 
>>> I'd be interested if the Highway's Agency have opened new roads and they
>>> are not included in OSM very soon after. That seems to me to be
>>> something we are pretty good at.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Cheers, Chris
>>> user: chillly
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes

[Shaun McDonald]

Personally I’d say it’s better to place the postcode on the buildings, as they 
are delivery points, that the postcode relates to, whereas adding them to the 
street is both more complex, error prone and not tagging what the postcode 
actually relates to (i.e. the collection of delivery points).

Shaun

On 20 May 2014, at 00:33, Rob Nickerson  wrote:

> I personally put postcodes on buildings as in my two most common use cases 
> (getting something delivered to my house, and using my GPS to get somewhere) 
> I have become accustomed to being asked for a house number after supplying a 
> postcode.
> 
> I guess that tagging the street works (although you may need to split it into 
> sections and add :right and :left tag extensions), but it's not something I 
> do. You mentioned the postman walking up the street - well I guess you could 
> say that the walk also includes the driveway up to the front of each 
> house/letterbox.
> 
> Whether nominatim works or not is a search problem, not a mapping one (i.e. 
> not mapping for the nominatim).
> 
> 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

[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis updated with May 2014 OS Locator data

[Shaun McDonald]

ITO’s OSM Analysis has been updated with the latest OS Locator data. Most 
places have dropped out of the 100% completeness compared to OS Locator. 
There’s now 18 places which have less than 95% completeness.

http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main

Shaun McDonald
Developer
ITO World
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] newbie questions about building outlines

[Shaun McDonald]

On 30 Apr 2014, at 09:52, Ed Loach  wrote:

> Tom wrote:
> 
>> In many other areas of inner London, particularly residential (e.g. 
>> http://binged.it/1iByiPy), 
>> the typologies and shapes are pretty easy to understand from aerial imagery 
>> so you 
>> can accurately guess individual buildings.
> 
> Perhaps it is just me, but I don’t think residential buildings without 
> addresses are worth adding to OSM, and you can’t get addresses without a 
> survey (or spot the odd business that may be hidden amongst them).

I’d be quite happy for someone to trace buildings, and all I had to do was 
update the house numbers, as the buildings are so hard to draw when on the 
ground. I often use Vespucci for editing on the ground, thus don’t need to 
spend ages once I get home editing.

Shaun


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

[Talk-GB] Fwd: [Talk-scotland] Shetland-Orkney ferry and NCN 1

[Shaun McDonald]

Here’s some info from someone who used to live on Shetland and has visited 
recently, and is an OSM mapper who isn’t on the list.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: John Robert Peterson 
> Subject: Re: [Talk-scotland] Shetland-Orkney ferry and NCN 1
> Date: 26 March 2014 18:00:17 GMT
> To: Shaun McDonald 
> 
> I'm pretty sure there are issues with ferries around orkney too, last time I 
> checked, there are 2 ferries that link Orkney to the mainland, and one goes 
> to aberdeen.
> 
> I sugest someone with proper cycling experience does a proper audit of edits 
> done by the user in question in the area on the offchance that there is a 
> pattern.
> 
> JR
> 
> 
> On 26 March 2014 17:55, John Robert Peterson  wrote:
> unless there have been some very significant, and budgetarilly unlikely, 
> changes, there is a ferry from sumburgh to fairisle, but it goes no further.
> 
> There is however a proper big ferry that goes from Lerwick to Aberdeen with a 
> stop off every second night in Orkney. 
> 
> I've been in Orkney many times, but only ever in the middle of the night 
> while trying to sleep, a bunch of blokes trying down cargo with remarkably 
> noisy equipment. so I can't comment on the Orkney side. 
> 
> 
> On 26 March 2014 17:20, Shaun McDonald  wrote:
> Dunno if you know the answer to this?
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> > From: Richard Fairhurst 
> > Subject: [Talk-scotland] Shetland-Orkney ferry and NCN 1
> > Date: 26 March 2014 17:19:25 GMT
> > To: talk-scotl...@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > Hello Scotland,
> >
> > Someone has pointed out that OSM currently has NCN 1 going by ferry to 
> > Grutness/Sumburgh:
> >
> > http://cycle.travel/map?lat=59.8714&lon=-1.2772&zoom=13
> > http://opencyclemap.org/?zoom=11&lat=59.8689&lon=-1.27559&layers=B000
> >
> > whereas the ferries actually go to Lerwick.
> >
> > P2 tells me that the way in question was created by a German mapper last 
> > summer. I can't see any information anywhere about a Kirkwall-Grutness 
> > ferry, but then I've never been north of John O'Groats!
> >
> > Could someone with local knowledge correct/amend as applicable? Better to 
> > have this section of NCN 1 missing than send people on a non-existent 
> > ferry, I think.
> >
> > cheers
> > Richard
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-scotland mailing list
> > talk-scotl...@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-scotland
> >
> 
> 
> 

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

Re: [Talk-GB] name=Flooding

[Shaun McDonald]

Also while around York the past couple of days, I noticed various flood 
barriers being closed, thus closing some roads to access. Is there a way to tag 
a flood barrier or gate?

Shaun

On 12 Feb 2014, at 12:25, jonathan  wrote:

> I agree it isn't, however, considering the current conditions some parts of 
> the country are experiencing, the continuing weather forecasts of more to 
> come and the fact that the ground water is so high that this water won't be 
> going anywhere soon, then perhaps we should apply some tagging to areas that 
> people have kindly already mapped.  Maybe highways should be marked as 
> impassable?  The Highways Agency etc are producing such lists.
> 
> We would need to revisit these areas to remove it as they subside but this 
> information is invaluable to many people, agencies, charities, gov 
> departments etc.
> 
> There's also a historical benefit having  areas mapped as having previously 
> flooded, either as live ways tagged accordingly or as old deleted ways that 
> nevertheless are still accessible.
> 
> If the HOT team had been activated for this then we would be doing this sort 
> of thing just as has been done in many other parts of the World.
> 
> I'm beginning to think we are not stepping up to provide this unique mapping 
> requirement that no other mapping service is providing.
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> http://bigfatfrog67.me
> 
> On 10/02/2014 17:29, Steve Doerr wrote:
>> Is this an appropriate use of the name tag?
>> 
>> http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/search.php?q=Flooding%2C+Burrowbridge
>> 
>> Steve
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] POI features: node vs way?

[Shaun McDonald]

The osmconvert has the ability to turn all the areas and ways to single nodes:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Osmconvert

Shaun

On 26 Jan 2014, at 10:15, Dan S  wrote:

> Hi -
> 
> Definitely you should _not_ tag both the polygon and a node. That
> creates two objects, and many systems will then think there are two
> pubs!
> 
> This is articulated in this principle:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
> 
> If you have a need for POIs as point features, simply convert all
> relevant ways/relations into nodes while populating your database.
> It's very easy to calculate the centroid (average position) of nodes
> in a way.
> 
> Dan
> 
> 2014-01-26 Nick Whitelegg :
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Have noticed here in the UK an increasing tendency to tag polygons rather
>> than points with the "POI" tags e.g. amenity=pub, railway=station.
>> 
>> This is good for many uses, however in some use cases (e.g. my own, I have a
>> need to populate a database with POIs as point features) it can cause
>> difficulty.
>> 
>> What is the general recommendation in this case? Tag both the polygon
>> (building) and one of its nodes as amenity=pub, etc?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] Royal Mail & Parcelforce delivery offices

[Shaun McDonald]

On 12 Jan 2014, at 13:03, Borbus  wrote:

> On 12/01/14 12:30, Andy Street wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 11:52:02 +
>> John Aldridge  wrote:
>> 
>>> Is there a consensus on how to tag Royal Mail & Parcel Force delivery
>>> offices?
>>> 
>>> Are these amenity=post_office, or something else?
>> 
>> If there is a facility that allows the general public access to collect
>> or send mail then I'd consider amenity=post_office to be appropriate.
>> 
>> 
> 
> They're not Post Offices, though.  Post Office (capitalised) has a very 
> specific meaning in the UK, with more services than just posting letters.  It 
> depends what we want amenity=post_office to mean but I'd say at a minimum 
> without further tags it should mean you can actually post something.  If 
> someone goes to a Local Delivery Office with a parcel to post they will be in 
> for a surprise.
> 

I agree, we need a different tag for delivery offices compared to post offices 
which are significantly different. If a lay person searches for a post office 
they need to get what they expect to be a post office. I’ve recently come 
across someone who was essentially saying OSM is confusing due to the problems 
with the located in parts of the Nominatim search results being wrong. A 
similar thing will happen here.

Delivery Offices will pretty much only accept prearranged parcels and pickups.

The pickup of parcels from Post Offices is a fairly recent change.

Companies such as Collect Plus and myHermes operate through newsagents and 
smaller supermarkets, thus I’d say it’s a property of the shop rather than 
being an amenity itself within the shop as it’s the same counter that you buy 
stuff from where you drop off and collect the parcels.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Primary or Trunk?

[Shaun McDonald]

On 3 Nov 2013, at 20:17, Robert Norris  wrote:

>> 
>> Sorry if I've not seen the old posts on this, the wiki pages are
>> contradictory which is why I asked the question.
>> 
>> In the UK we are defining Trunk or Primary based on some arbitrary
>> definition not on anything that is of use to any user or renderer.
>> 
>> What we should be mapping is reality, so that people can use that data
>> to build on. Whether a road is signed in Green, Pink or Purple tells a
>> user nothing, it may have a legal definition but that is all. The tag
>> we give it should tell the user something about the road's capabilities,
>> importance, size and potential timings/traffic flow. A Trunk road that
>> is a dual carriageway with a maxspeed of 70 mph is very different to a
>> Trunk road that winds around fields and has a maxspeed of 50 mph or less!
> 
> Other tags such as lanes=*, width=*, surface=*, maxspeed=* etc... are for 
> more the detailed nuances of route calculations based on the physical 
> properties of the road. Or for how a renderer could choose to emphasize 
> certain roads over others.
> 
> Of course the bendyness of the road should be interfered from the geometry of 
> the node positions themselves.
> 

ITO World make a series of maps which highlight some of the above additional 
tags that can be added to OSM so that routers can decide whether each road is 
suitable based on objective data, rather than broad generalisations.

http://www.itoworld.com/map/group/2

Shaun McDonald
Developer
ITO World
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Notes feature

[Shaun McDonald]

That should use another first world object as a calendar item so that it’s 
properly supported.

Shaun

On 28 Oct 2013, at 08:28, Bob Kerr  wrote:

> Maybe we could use it to make an note for mapping parties, social events and 
> conferences too
> 
> Bob
> 
> From: Brian Prangle 
> To: Talk GB  
> Sent: Sunday, 27 October 2013, 16:15
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Notes feature
> 
> It seems that some businesses are starting to use the notes feature to 
> identify their location, thinking it's just like Googlemaps perhaps. I think 
> we should encourage this by separating the notes function into 2 , adequately 
> labelled, one for " place your business/event here" and one for "map 
> improvement needed here"
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> 
> ___
> 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] Notes feature

[Shaun McDonald]

The place your business here may be better dealt with through clickable POIs on 
the OSM site, plus some dot or something for every shop/address available.

Shaun

On 27 Oct 2013, at 16:15, Brian Prangle  wrote:

> It seems that some businesses are starting to use the notes feature to 
> identify their location, thinking it's just like Googlemaps perhaps. I think 
> we should encourage this by separating the notes function into 2 , adequately 
> labelled, one for " place your business/event here" and one for "map 
> improvement needed here"
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> ___
> 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] Advice needed for maxweight turning restriction

[Shaun McDonald]

The oneway except cyclists bit is a well defined thing, whereby you can use the 
tag cycleway=opposite. You can be more specific by saying opposite_lane, or 
opposite_track as appropriate. (There are other way to tag the same thing which 
may be appropriate).

Shaun

On 12 Oct 2013, at 21:00, Philip Barnes  wrote:

> I came across an odd situation where a road is on way, except for cycles
> and vehicles over 13'3" high. Its a residential area of Shrewsbury which
> would be a useful rat run, hence the oneway. But to make it complicated,
> there is are industrial units, and a low bridge.
> 
> Not sure of a better way, but have added a note.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/39348226
> 
> Phil (trigpoint) 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2013-10-12 at 20:11 +0100, Ed Loach wrote:
>> ael wrote:
>> 
>>> I have a road with a maxweight (7.5t) sign at one end but none at
>> the
>>> other end. So I take it that this means that vehicles over this
>> weight
>>> may not enter from that end.
>>> 
>>> I have used relation tagged with
>>> type=restriction:maxweight
>>> maxweight = 7.5
>>> restriction = no_entry
>>> 
>>> including the relevant ways with "from" and "to" roles.
>>> 
>>> This was my best guess from what I could find on the wiki.
>>> 
>>> Is this the right way (in the UK)? Or will it be interpreted as
>> no-entry
>>> for all vehicles by routers?
>> 
>> I mapped a road which had different maxweight restrictions depending
>> on which way you entered it:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/55165330
>> I used maxweight:forward and maxweight:backward based if I remember
>> correctly on IRC discussion and this wiki page:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forward_%26_backward,_left_%26_ri
>> ght
>> 
>> No relations needed. In your case you would only need to tag either
>> forward or backward depending on the way direction.
>> 
>> Whether routers spot these tags currently or not I don't know; I
>> personally doubt it. But they may in the future if they don't
>> already.
>> 
>> I hope this helps,
>> 
>> Ed
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] State of the map Scotland 2013 - 6 days away

[Shaun McDonald]

On 5 Oct 2013, at 14:13, Robert Scott  wrote:

> On Saturday 05 October 2013, Bob Kerr wrote:
>> Counting down to State of the map Scotland 2013
>> 
>> wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_of_the_Map_Scotland_2013
>> 
>> Please send out messages to your social media of choice
>> 
> 
> Booked my megabus gold tickets last night.
> 
> What are numbers looking like so far?
> 

Check the following lists of who is planning to attend:
http://sotms.eventbrite.com
https://stateofthemapscotland2013hackday.eventbrite.com
and
http://lanyrd.com/2013/sotmscot2013/

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] iD and accidental landuse deletions

[Shaun McDonald]

On 10 Sep 2013, at 07:05, Andrew  wrote:

> Tom Chance  writes:
> 
> 
>> Here's another one, this editor really ought to be fixed or
> removed:http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17655245
>> I tried using the JOSM Revert plugin, but it just downloaded the nodes
> without the way.
>> Tom
> 
> Were the landuse areas attached to roads?

It’s rather easy in iD to click the middle of an area and select the area.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England

[Shaun McDonald]

There are some areas where you must dial the area code, so that there is enough 
numbers available in the area. I've always dialled the full number, thus don't 
see what the fuss is about area codes.

Shaun

On 22 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Nick Whitelegg  wrote:

> 
> So to dial Portsmouth from Southampton you need only do 92xx ? Not tried 
> it.
> 
> Really, to make 023 a "Solent" area code though in any meaningful sense, you 
> need Fareham, Gosport, Hedge End, Whiteley etc to all be in the 023 area.
> 
> Nick
> 
> -Andy Street  wrote: -
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> From: Andy Street 
> Date: 22/08/2013 11:10AM
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
> 
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 09:31:49 +0100
> Tom Hughes  wrote:
> 
> > On 22/08/13 09:01, Lester Caine wrote:
> > 
> > > Personally I still think of 0207 as Inner London and 0208 as Outer
> > > London, but moving the 7/8 as part of the exchange sort of makes
> > > sense these days.
> > 
> > Well you think incorrectly then, as that has not been the case for
> > some time, either in theory or in practice. On top of which 0203 is
> > now in use as well...
> 
> 
> I don't think the UK population has really cottoned on to the idea of
> three digit area codes. We have a similar situation here on the South
> Coast where some people think the area code is 02380 for Southampton and
> 02392 for Portsmouth when it is actually 023 for the whole area. I do
> sometimes wonder whether it is a simple misunderstanding or the old
> local rivalry and not wanting to get lumped in with "that lot at the
> other end of the M27"! ;)
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Andy Street
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] ITO's OSM Analysis updated with the latest OS Locator data

[Shaun McDonald]

Adding not:name is the correct method to resolve these errors and remove them 
from the list, as they are otherwise tagged correctly in OSM with the name and 
ref detailed separately.

Shaun

On 18 May 2013, at 10:51, Donald Noble  wrote:

> I notice that in Glasgow there are 9 road segments flagged up for 
> name="London Road (A74)" which is correctly in OSM as name="London Road" 
> ref=A74. 
> 
> I can add not:name to suppress these, but not sure if this is something that 
> is being flagged up elsewhere in country, and if this is something that could 
> (easily) be tweaked in the algorithm.
> 
> Cheers, Donald
> 
> -- 
> Donald Noble
> http://drnoble.co.uk - http://flickr.com/photos/drnoble
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] ITO's OSM Analysis updated with the latest OS Locator data

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi,

The ITO OSM Analysis comparison between OSM and OS Locator has been updated 
with the latest OS Locator data released this month.

http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main

There has been a small dip in the completeness with a noticeable drop in the 
number at 100%. There hasn't been any area dropping to a lower coloured band. 
We're currently at 95.91% completeness with 35,846 major differences.

Shaun McDonald
Developer
ITO World 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tidying up some shop tags

[Shaun McDonald]

On 5 May 2013, at 14:51, Malcolm Herring  wrote:

> On 05/05/2013 14:25, sk53.osm wrote:
>> I propose to tidy up some shop=* tag values.
> 
> Synonyms fine but not specific products/services to generic ones as this 
> deletes useful information.
> 
> e.g:
> Shops that do key cutting are rarely locksmiths.
> sandwich shops are a subset of fast food shops, as are fish & chip shops. 
> That is important when you are looking for a sandwich rather than a burger.
> 

In terms of the fish and chips, you use the cuisine tag to state that it's a 
fast food fish and chip shop ;-)

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Writing a howto wiki page for mapping golf courses

[Shaun McDonald]

There is also an ITO Map for Golf courses: http://www.itoworld.com/map/47

Shaun

On 30 Apr 2013, at 12:07, "sk53.osm"  wrote:

> Have you seen Richard Weait's page on this subject : http://weait.com/node/21.
> 
> And fewer of those named ways to make the hole names look nice :-)
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Bob Kerr 
>  wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have been spending a lot of time looking at Taginfo and golf courses. I 
> would like to layout the best way to map a golf course based on what I have 
> found. 
> 
> I was thinking of creating a page "HOWTO map a golf course 2013"
> 
> This is not a proposal for tags, I would link to Taginfo pages of tags that 
> are already used, this would just help with data consistency.
> 
> My reasoning comes from the idea that mappers like a challenge like a golf 
> course, much like they do a zoo. In Scotland there are between 530-630 golf 
> courses. This would be useful if the data were consistent. It would also get 
> the golfing community talking about openstreetmap and there are a 
> considerable number of golfers
> 
> Are there any precedents for HOWTO pages
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 10 fascinating facts about OSM & OSGB

[Shaun McDonald]

On 18 Apr 2013, at 13:01, "Dave F."  wrote:

> On 18/04/2013 12:52, Shaun McDonald wrote:
>> Updates are a lot harder to do as you have to deal with differences
> 
> When you say differences, do you mean within the tags? Does it need to do 
> that, could it not do a simpler find & replace?

If someone has modified the item in OSM and in NaPTAN then it needs manual 
intervention as to which is more correct - the one in OSM or the one in NaPTAN. 

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 10 fascinating facts about OSM & OSGB

[Shaun McDonald]

On 18 Apr 2013, at 12:33, "Dave F."  wrote:

> On 18/04/2013 11:59, SomeoneElse wrote:
>> Shaun McDonald wrote:
>>> Not all of NaPTAN was imported. It was only done in some regions. It still 
>>> needs the maintenance, i.e. updating from the updates from NaPTAN too, 
>>> however no tools have been built to make this happen yet.
>> 
>> In the other direction there's also a slight "double-counting" effect where 
>> data was imported in some regions but bus stops (without the NaPTAN detail) 
>> was already present.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Andy
> 
> And a couple of occasions where I accidentally deleted them & Potlatch 
> couldn't retrieve. As the imports that have occurred appeared to go fairly 
> seamlessly, is there any objection why it can't be rolled out nationally?
> Would updating code be hard to write? Half of it must have been written for 
> the initial import.
> 

Updates are a lot harder to do as you have to deal with differences, however 
the newish snapshot server tool by Andy Allan is a possible manual solution to 
that.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] 10 fascinating facts about OSM & OSGB

[Shaun McDonald]

Not all of NaPTAN was imported. It was only done in some regions. It still 
needs the maintenance, i.e. updating from the updates from NaPTAN too, however 
no tools have been built to make this happen yet.

Shaun

On 18 Apr 2013, at 11:41, "Barnett, Phillip"  wrote:

> I thought that we’d imported the NAPTAN dataset, which should mean we have 
> ALL the bus stops in the UK? So why do OSGB have more?
>  
> 
>  
> 
> PHILLIP BARNETT
> SERVER MANAGER
> 
> 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD
> LONDON
> WC1X 8XZ
> UNITED KINGDOM
> T +44 207 430 4474
> E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk
> WWW.ITN.CO.UK
> P  Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?
>  
> From: sk53.osm [mailto:sk53@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 18 April 2013 10:28
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [Talk-GB] 10 fascinating facts about OSM & OSGB
>  
> OSGB has just tweeted it's 10 fascinating facts. I thought it would be fun to 
> compare with OSM
> Pylons: 80,517 ; 58,487 (OSM)
> Post Boxes: 93.728 (OSGB); 42,742 (OSM)
> Camp sites: 8,908 (OSGB); 1 274 (camp_site) + 1 918 (caravan_site) = 3,192 
> (OSM)
> Buildings: 35,397,754 (OSGB); 1,890,835 (OSM)
> Bus Stops: 354,099 (OSGB); 215,720 (OSM)
> 2,115,006 (OSGB);
> Petrol Stations: 7,702 (OSGB); 5,197 (OSM)
> Addresses: 27,341,262 (OSGB); 532,886 (OSM)
> Electricity Poles: 183, 987 (OSGB); 94,199 (OSM)
> Road length: 407,532 km (OSGB); 522,627 (OSM)
> Of course there is no guarantee we are comparing like for like (although its 
> only power=pole which looks suspiciously high, I suspect we map low power 
> lines not included by OSGB).
> 
> All values from UK taginfo (except for road length, which I queried from a 
> snapshot schema), no data merging or need to query multiple sources, and 
> certainly no need for an IBM Netezza appliance.
> 
> I thought I'd add a few more quirky OSM values:
> 
> 5 post boxes with Edward VIII's royal cypher
> only 110 War Memorials 
> 1830 Police and 1518 Fire Stations
> 847 Fire Hydrants (see above)
> 1378 establishments purveying Real Ale, and 156 Real Cider out of 32,624 Pubs 
> and 1717 Bars (including 1 with ale_supply_limited, and ONLY 1 with 
> osm:london=approval)
> 4771 Bicycle Parking locations
> around 300http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=hide#values 
> bird/wildlife hides
> 2 knitting shops (shows gender of mappers I suspect)
> 5552 stiles
> 1774 canal locks
> Jerry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please Note:
> 
> Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
> represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically 
> stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended 
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. 
> If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk
> 
> Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of 
> our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from 
> our systems.___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

[Shaun McDonald]

On 31 Oct 2012, at 16:02, David Earl  wrote:

> On 31/10/2012 15:29, Andy Robinson wrote:
>> Shaun McDonald [mailto:sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk] wrote:
>>> Sent: 31 October 2012 15:21
>>> To: Matt Williams
>>> Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 31 Oct 2012, at 14:49, Matt Williams  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 31 October 2012 14:37, David Fisher  wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> The pedestrianised main shopping street in Croydon has a sign with
>>>>> the following wording: "Pedestrian Zone.  No vehicles except cycles
>>>>> and for loading 6pm-10am."
>>>>> How would you interpret that?  I see at least 3 possibilities:
>>>>> 
>>>>> (a) Cycles permitted at any time; loading only permitted 6pm-10am
>>>>> (this is what I guess is the correct one)
>>>>> (b) Cycles and loading only permitted 6pm-10am (this would also make
>>>>> sense; i.e. cycling only outside shopping hours)
>>>>> (c) Restrictions apply 6pm-10am (clearly ludicrous!)
>>>>> (d) Something else?
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm guessing it's meant to be (a), but just thought I'd canvas
>>>>> opinion before tagging.
>>>> 
>>>> I think I agree with (a). I would find it a little strange to disallow
>>>> cycling just during the day (why not just ban it entirely?).
>>> 
>>> The centre pedestrianised bit of Ipswich has cycling banned from 10:30am -
>>> 4:30pm. It does get pretty busy during that time.
>>> http://goo.gl/maps/ouha1
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm not sure that's correct? Is it not just banning cyclists from cycling
>> against the traffic flow during this period? The sign at the other end
>> suggests its open to cyclists at all times in the direction of normal flow.
> 
> (from your corrected link http://goo.gl/maps/SM2y9 )
> 
> The key thing here is the sign it is underneath. The reference to cyclists in 
> the text is superfluous (and presumably not authorised by the DfT) because 
> the 'low flying motorbike' sign means "no MOTOR vehicles", and a bike isn't a 
> motor vehicle. That's not just pedantry: there is a separate sign for banning 
> ALL vehicles, a simple red roundel with nothing inside it. There is no 
> restriction on bikes at any time according to that sign.
> 
> Their traffic engineer needs sending back to sign school.
> 

So some more info on this situation.

The intention was to allow cycling in both directions between the hours of 
4:30pm and 10:30 am. With vehicles for loading and service access in one 
direction only during those hours. However it's more recently turned out that 
it's not possible to legally sign a road like that.

Unfortunately there are a few cyclists who are spoiling it for everyone else, 
by cycling dangerously during the busy period, thus the probable plan is to not 
allow cycling all the time in terms of signage. (The police are happy to allow 
sensible cycling even if not allowed).

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user reinstating old railways in Norfolk

[Shaun McDonald]

It may be worth pointing out that you can have different view of the same data. 
For example ITO have a map highlighting the former railways:
http://www.itoworld.com/map/198#fullscreen&lat=52.58151540618443&lon=1.0302901709739063&zoom=9

Shaun
ITO World Developer

On 18 Feb 2013, at 14:24, "Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)" 
 wrote:

> New user MATTHEW NIBARI [1] has created just two changesets [2], both
> yesterday (17th February). The OSM History viewer views of these are
> as follows:
> 
> http://osmhv.openstreetmap.de/changeset.jsp?id=15065237
> http://osmhv.openstreetmap.de/changeset.jsp?id=15066769
> 
> I've been though every way listed there, and every single change in
> both of these changesets involves changing railway=abandoned or
> railway=disused to railway=rail, and removing any highway=* tags. I
> haven't checked every way, but I expect that all these railway lines
> are indeed disused or abandoned, and so the previous tagging was
> correct.
> 
> I sent Matthew a message a couple of hours ago through the OSM system
> to explain that our tagging should reflect the current reality, and
> that his changes are therefore inappropriate. His reply was that he
> was trying to track down old railway lines and make them easier to
> find in OSM. He didn't seem to see a problem with changing the
> tagging. His user page [1] includes the text "If people are having
> problems please note the edited sections must not be changed for any
> reason so if anyone inbox me or changes it back, I will revert back if
> its put back" suggesting he may revert any changes to his new tagging
> regardless of other's views. I've sent a second email half an hour ago
> to explain in more detail why current roads need to be tagged as roads
> and not railways, and suggested that he should discuss things with the
> community on talk-gb to find a suitable way to achieve his ends
> without messing up the map data for everyone else.
> 
> At that stage I'd only found a couple of road->rail changes in one
> changeset, and wasn't aware of the History Viewer, so didn't know that
> *every* change was removing highway tags and changing to railway=rail.
> I thus wasn't sure whether the whole changeset would need reverting or
> just a part of it, and so I asked Matthew what his changes had
> involved. However, I think it's now clear that the whole of both
> changesets [3,4] need to be reverted. Presumably, this should be done
> as quickly as possible to avoid the risk of subsequent edits
> complicating things. I don't have any recent experience of doing
> reverts, so is there anyone reading this who would be able to do them
> instead?
> 
> I haven't had a reply from Matthew to my second message yet, but once
> this has posted, I'll send him a web link to this thread.
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Robert.
> 
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/MATTHEW%20NIBARI
> [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/MATTHEW%20NIBARI/edits
> [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/15065237
> [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/15066769
> 
> -- 
> Robert Whittaker
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Telegraph releases Green Belt data

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Ralph,

I'll get this added to ITO Map in the next day or so.

Shaun

On 28 Nov 2012, at 15:37, "Ralph Smyth"  wrote:

> This afternoon the Daily Telegraph has released Green Belt data for
> England. Could anyone import this into OSM? If so how might it be
> rendered? 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/greenpolitics/planning/9708387/Interactive-map
> -Englands-green-belt.html
> 
> "This map is the first time it has been possible for members of the
> public to easily see which areas are green belt land, and which are not.
> 
> 
> The Department for Communities and Local Government released the data
> for the 2011 green belt to the Telegraph, and it is being made available
> here to view, explore, share and download. 
> 
> Previously the data has only been available at a cost of tens of
> thousands of pounds from a third party, despite the location of green
> belt land being identified by councils using taxpayer money. 
> 
> Expert users may also download a copy of the green belt map
>  reen%20belt%20boundaries.zip>  (29MB ZIP file) for use in geographic
> information systems (GIS)."
> 
> 
> 
> OSM already has many other forms of environmental data so it would be
> great if this could be included.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ralph Smyth
> Senior Transport Campaigner, Barrister
> Campaign to Protect Rural England
> 
> www.cpre.org.uk/what-we-do/transport
>  
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] OS Locator 201211 out, musical chairs updated

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi all,

Thanks Robert for the notification about the updated data, hopefully the OS 
will get better at sending out those notifications.

The ITO OSM Analysis has been updated and there's now only 7 areas at 100%.

http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main

Shaun

On 7 Nov 2012, at 00:47, Robert Scott  wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Normal announcement. Ordnance Survey have again managed to release a new 
> version of OS Locator whilst still listing it as the old version on their 
> site. Be assured, what you will be served with is the November 2012 OS 
> Locator.
> 
> This release looks to have 7609 new entries and 5077 removed entries. Though 
> of course a lot of those "new" entries are just slightly altered incarnations 
> of some of the deleted entries (I don't try too hard to second-guess OS's 
> shifting around of entries). My modified version that I've attached "stable" 
> ids to is also up [1].
> 
> As ever, taking a look as musical chairs [2] for the next few ways will show 
> you new entries as "recent updates" - good for seeing the changes in your 
> area.
> 
> Slightly rushed email - if you don't know what I'm on about you can refer to 
> the wiki page [3].
> 
> 
> robert.
> 
> [1] http://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/data/oslocator/
> [2] http://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/
> [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OS_Locator_Musical_Chairs
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

[Shaun McDonald]

On 31 Oct 2012, at 15:29, "Andy Robinson"  wrote:

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

That's a different road which is two way cycling all the time. The example I 
gave is for a pedestrian street, that effectively becomes a service road 
overnight and early morning when it's full of delivery vans for the shops.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

[Shaun McDonald]

On 31 Oct 2012, at 14:49, Matt Williams  wrote:

> On 31 October 2012 14:37, David Fisher  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> The pedestrianised main shopping street in Croydon has a sign with the
>> following wording: "Pedestrian Zone.  No vehicles except cycles and for
>> loading 6pm-10am."
>> How would you interpret that?  I see at least 3 possibilities:
>> 
>> (a) Cycles permitted at any time; loading only permitted 6pm-10am (this is
>> what I guess is the correct one)
>> (b) Cycles and loading only permitted 6pm-10am (this would also make sense;
>> i.e. cycling only outside shopping hours)
>> (c) Restrictions apply 6pm-10am (clearly ludicrous!)
>> (d) Something else?
>> 
>> I'm guessing it's meant to be (a), but just thought I'd canvas opinion
>> before tagging.
> 
> I think I agree with (a). I would find it a little strange to disallow
> cycling just during the day (why not just ban it entirely?).

The centre pedestrianised bit of Ipswich has cycling banned from 10:30am - 
4:30pm. It does get pretty busy during that time.
http://goo.gl/maps/ouha1

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Office of National Statistics data

[Shaun McDonald]

CycleStreets for example use a different database for the postcodes (Code Point 
Open) and if any search query looks like a post code the look it up there 
first. Similarly for station names they look them up in their own table first 
before going to nominatim.

Shaun

On 31 Oct 2012, at 12:30, "Andy Robinson"  wrote:

> Ah, but we are not in the business of adding non-physical stuff just because
> it makes a search work better. If we have something to add postcode data to
> then that's right and proper, otherwise the postcode centroid database can
> be off map and referenced from a separate database.
> 
> Cheers
> Andy
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Colin Smale [mailto:colin.sm...@xs4all.nl]
>> Sent: 31 October 2012 12:26
>> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Office of National Statistics data
>> 
>>> Colin, it's fine to add the postcode data to a node object (eg a poi),
>>> just don't create a node with just the postcode and nothing else as
>>> this is meaningless. The postcode data we have is not the information
>>> for individual buildings, its just the centroid of the address polygon
>>> which will contain any number of buildings (or post delivery points).
>>> Thus when using the data its still necessary to do some interpretation
>>> and it's not possible always to know that you are assigning the right
>>> postcode to the right building/delivery point because we don't know
>>> where the boundary of one postcode is against another for the same
>>> street etc.
>> 
>> I am guessing that just having the centroid is plenty adequate for a lot
> of
>> reverse geocoding probably including routing, i.e. "where is XX1 3AB"
>> or "take me to XX1 3AB". Obviously it won't cover questions of the form of
>> "what's the postcode for this building" which will require every
> individual
>> building/delivery point to be tagged.
>> 
>> As (legal stuff permitting) "importing" the centroids would cover a very
>> popular use case with (IMHO) a quality which is adequate for most people,
> I
>> would not be so quick to dismiss it.
>> 
>> Colin
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>> 
>> -
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2013.0.2742 / Virus Database: 2617/5864 - Release Date: 10/30/12
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

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

[Shaun McDonald]

On 9 Oct 2012, at 17:47, Andy Allan  wrote:

> On 9 October 2012 17:34, Shaun McDonald  wrote:
>> Gregory,
>> 
>> I thought that cycleway=opposite_lane was the equivalent of
>> cycleway:right=lane.
> 
> no - opposite_lane is useful in a one-way road to indicate cyclists
> can go both ways. There's nothing in cycleway:right=lane to suggest
> whether or not that cycle lane is with or against the traffic flow on
> a one-way road. Outside the Jeremy Bentham is a one-way cycle lane in
> the same direction as cars on the right hand side of a one way road,
> for example.
> 

Thanks for the clarification, maybe it would be easier to just map each lane of 
the road as areas?

Shaun


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

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

[Shaun McDonald]

Gregory,

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

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

Shaun

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

> Richard,
>  
> It looks good and useful. On the OSM side of things it looks like you’ve 
> missed handling cycleway=opposite_lane, since a place where I had that in the 
> data wasn’t being rendered. I have since changed this to be 
> cycleway:right=opposite_lane though to be more accurate.
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> Gregory
>  
> From: Richard Mann [mailto:richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 09 October 2012 16:15
> To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail)
> Subject: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes
>  
> As you may recall, DfT has made available a lot of cycle facility data. This 
> was processed and snapped to OSM geometry, and has been available for some 
> months for importing (subject to local review) using the Snapshot tool. 
> Further details 
> here:http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project
>  
> I've reconciled the data for my area, but I found it a bit hard going. 
> Progress in other areas has been variable.
>  
> I'm particularly interested in cycle lane data, so I've produced a rendering 
> that compares DfT (Red) with OSM (Blue) data. Note that the DfT data is not 
> clear which side of the road cycle lanes are on.
> http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/
>  
> Quite a lot still missing.
>  
> So I've also generated tiles of the DfT cycle lane data (down to z17), for 
> use as a background in editors. In Potlatch, you can create a new background 
> by clicking on the Background drop-down, then Edit, then Add. The URL for the 
> tiles is:
> http://www.transportparadise.co.uk/dftcyclelanes/tilesDfT/$z/$x/$y.png
>  
> If any of you care to add cycle lanes in your area, that'd be most welcome. 
> It will also be interesting to see whether providing a background proves to 
> be an effective way of getting data reviewed and into OSM. If it's 
> successful, a similar approach can be used for other parts of the data.
>  
> Feedback welcome.
>  
> Richard
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Gibraltar - Mapping Party?

[Shaun McDonald]

Assuming suitable dates, I'm in for this.

Shaun

On 2 Oct 2012, at 22:47, "Andy Robinson"  wrote:

> Roger Bamkin, prior chair of Wikimedia UK board and following a prompt from
> Andy Mabbett, has sent me an email asking if OSMer's would be interested in
> a mapping party based in Gibraltar where he has links to the Government. He
> was suggesting November but I'm thinking that's too soon and something next
> year would be more logical if there was enough interest. He indicated that
> basic accommodation in an old fort might be available free of charge so the
> main cost would be airfare. Roger's interest is in improving the link
> between Wikipedia articles and OSM mapping, they have some sort of contract
> with the Government on that.
> 
> Gibraltar itself looks fairly well mapped but across the border in Spain it
> looks like there is plenty to do and North Africa is a short journey away
> where there are more opportunities.
> 
> I've pointed out to Roger that the OSM community in the UK may not be large
> enough to draw from but if folks are interested we can widen it out to see
> if there are others who might be interested in a more international
> get-together.
> 
> Anyway, I'll come back with more once I catch up with Roger. In the
> meantime, would this idea float anyone's boat?
> 
> Cheers
> Andy
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Open Data User Group asks "what data do you want"

[Shaun McDonald]

PDF isn't necessarily the best format if you want to process the data with some 
other program. It's great for presentation, but as soon as you want to push it 
around and mix it with things, and do interesting things it's much less useful.

Shaun

On 27 Sep 2012, at 23:19, Richard Mann  
wrote:

> I've asked for Network Rail's Sectional Appendices (track layout diagrams and 
> lots of other goodies) to be available in PDF form.
>  
> Richard
> 
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Rob Nickerson  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Just a quick heads up that the Open Data User Group (supported by UK 
> Government) as asking "what data do you want". If interested there are 
> details of the initiative and a simple form to fill out:
> 
> http://www.data.gov.uk/odug/overview
> http://data.gov.uk/node/add/data-request
> 
> Cheers,
> Rob
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

[Talk-GB] Geovation: innovation in transport event

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi all,

On Monday there is an event  at the RSA in London as part of Geovation about 
innovation in transport which you may be interested in. There will be 
opportunities to talk about OSM, and discuss new transport ideas. More 
information:
http://www.geovation.org.uk/speakers-innovation-transport-event/

Free signup:
http://geovationcollaboration2012.eventbrite.co.uk/

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] ITO - OSM Analysis updated with latest OS Locator data

[Shaun McDonald]

On 30 Aug 2012, at 00:09, Robert Norris  wrote:

> 
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> A little update on OSM Analysis, ITO's OSM to OS Locator comparison service. 
>> We have just updated to the latest OS Locator data in OSM Analysis. 
>> Hopefully the next update to the OS Locator data will be updated a bit 
>> quicker. The biggest drop in completeness has been Leeds with 44 new streets 
>> missing.
>> 
>> OSM Analysis is available at:
>> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main
>> 
>> 
>> We have recently been releasing some new ITO Map layers, and improving some 
>> of the current map layers. We now have nodes for Great Britain for some of 
>> the maps. For example
>> Bicycle parking: http://www.itoworld.com/map/223
>> ATMs: http://www.itoworld.com/map/230
>> Building entrances: http://www.itoworld.com/map/221
>> 
> 
> Good stuff as always!
> 
> Some quick thoughts:
> 
> I note the bicycle parking does not include ways/areas, since I mapped one 
> near a Portsmouth University site as an area - due to having a capacity of 
> about a 100!

I have now added the rendering of the bicycle parking as areas:
http://www.itoworld.com/map/223#fullscreen&lat=50.79749258580279&lon=-1.0992181497781681&zoom=18

> 
> On the car parking front, I'm not convinced about colour highlighting whether 
> it has a capacity set or not. I don't realistically see how I can deduce the 
> capacity of many car parks without counting the individual number of bays! 
> And then car parks in the countryside are somewhat ad-hoc...
> The fact that some are mapped as an area should give a clue to the estimated 
> capacity.

What if the car park is multi-storey, then it will be difficult to get the 
capacity estimate simply from the area, though in that case you probably have 
an advertised number of spaces. I'm wondering if some approximate_capacity 
would be useful for the car parks where there are no bays marked out?

> Does this include single car park nodes yet?

I have just added nodes now. Which has added a lot of car parks that weren't 
there before.

> IMHO a more useful (end user) map would be things like whether it's free or 
> not, or any physical restrictions (normally height).

I have switched it to the fee tag just now. There are some interesting patterns 
or lines of car parks where someone has tagged the fee. I'm currently thinking 
about ways in which to represent multiple dimensions of data in a better way 
without being overwhelming or ugly. For example in this case you have 
overground, underground, multi-storey, capacity, max height and whether there's 
a fee, or if it's private. It also needs to work well for both ways and nodes.

http://www.itoworld.com/map/7

Shaun

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] ITO - OSM Analysis updated with latest OS Locator data

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Adam,

Thanks for the suggestion for a different colour for 100% completeness. We will 
look to implementing this in an upcoming release.

Shaun

On 29 Aug 2012, at 20:41, Adam Hoyle  wrote:

> Shaun,
> 
> That's really awesome. It's good to know the area I work on is 95% there, 
> gives me something to aim for to get it to 100%.
> 
> Would it be possible to tweak the 'area completeness' map so that areas that 
> are 100% have a slightly different colour to 95%+, that might seem a tad sad, 
> but gives me a bit more to aim for.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Adam
> 
> On 29 Aug 2012, at 18:22, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> A little update on OSM Analysis, ITO's OSM to OS Locator comparison service. 
>> We have just updated to the latest OS Locator data in OSM Analysis. 
>> Hopefully the next update to the OS Locator data will be updated a bit 
>> quicker. The biggest drop in completeness has been Leeds with 44 new streets 
>> missing.
>> 
>> OSM Analysis is available at:
>> http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main
>> 
>> 
>> We have recently been releasing some new ITO Map layers, and improving some 
>> of the current map layers. We now have nodes for Great Britain for some of 
>> the maps. For example 
>> Bicycle parking: http://www.itoworld.com/map/223 
>> ATMs: http://www.itoworld.com/map/230
>> Building entrances: http://www.itoworld.com/map/221
>> 
>> We are updating the nodes daily, and working on going to Europe and then 
>> Worldwide soon.
>> 
>> http://www.itoworld.com/map/
>> 
>> If you have any comments, questions or ideas for ITO Map, please let me know.
>> 
>> Shaun McDonald
>> Developer
>> ITO World
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

[Talk-GB] ITO - OSM Analysis updated with latest OS Locator data

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi,

A little update on OSM Analysis, ITO's OSM to OS Locator comparison service. We 
have just updated to the latest OS Locator data in OSM Analysis. Hopefully the 
next update to the OS Locator data will be updated a bit quicker. The biggest 
drop in completeness has been Leeds with 44 new streets missing.

OSM Analysis is available at:
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main


We have recently been releasing some new ITO Map layers, and improving some of 
the current map layers. We now have nodes for Great Britain for some of the 
maps. For example 
Bicycle parking: http://www.itoworld.com/map/223 
ATMs: http://www.itoworld.com/map/230
Building entrances: http://www.itoworld.com/map/221

We are updating the nodes daily, and working on going to Europe and then 
Worldwide soon.

http://www.itoworld.com/map/

If you have any comments, questions or ideas for ITO Map, please let me know.

Shaun McDonald
Developer
ITO World
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Postcodes - Potential data source

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Rob,

Postcodes are a bit more complicated. Postcodes are a series of points, not a 
single point, as based on CodePoint data. I would not like to see a raw import 
of the CodePoint Open data as it is just the centroids of the postcodes, 
instead the postcodes need to be attached to specific addresses, which is more 
work, though more accurate and what is needed by the geocoders.

There are websites out there such as CycleStreets that are successfully using 
the CodePoint Open data for geocoding in addition to other OSM data.

Shaun

On 27 Aug 2012, at 23:18, Rob Nickerson  wrote:

> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong, but to the best of my understanding we are 
> still struggling to find a good source of postcode data under an open 
> licence. From what I understand the CodePoint data set is currently seen as 
> not available for use in OSM.
> 
> That is where this data set available under the OGL licence may help: 
> http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/information/public-data/price-paid-data
> 
> It's not perfect as it does not provide lat/lon co-ordinates, but it does 
> include full addresses for residential properties sold within each month. 
> This means that it gives us a link between address (something we can survey) 
> and postcode (which we can't easily survey). It also states which properties 
> are new (i.e. new builds, new addresses). Any thoughts?
> 
> If this is a useful source I was thinking a simple database where we can look 
> up an address and find a postcode for adding to OSM. Going one step further 
> we could try to find automatic matches between OSM addresses and this dataset 
> and therefore generate a list of postcodes that could be suitable for import. 
> I guess for someone with experience this would be quite an do-able hack?
> 
> Regards,
> Rob
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] On Countryside paths

[Shaun McDonald]

On 22 Aug 2012, at 13:21, "Dave F."  wrote:

> On 22/08/2012 01:06, SomeoneElse wrote:
>> 
>> Well, there's this one that ITO have made:
>> 
>> http://www.itoworld.com/map/87#fullscreen
> 
> Is there description of the rules ITO is using?
> 
> It doesn't recognise highway=bridleway as a single tag which I thought was 
> valid.

I've updated the description of that map on that page.

That specific map is for people who want to tag the PROW designation 
information in addition to the simple highway=footway/path/bridleway.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Find My Nearest Cash Machine

[Shaun McDonald]

On 22 Aug 2012, at 08:10, Graham Jones  wrote:

> 
> Seem Graham beat me to publishing a map of the ATMs:
> http://www.itoworld.com/map/230
> 
> 
> But yours looks nicer, and doesn't have odd references to breweries mixed in 
> with ATMs!

Excellent, great that you like it.

> 
> When I looked at doing this I struggled with banks - how do we know if they 
> have ATMs or not?  Some have them tagged explicitly as separate nodes, but 
> not sure what to assume if there is only an 'amenity=bank'.

If there is only an amenity=bank you assume that either the ATMs have been 
tagged separately, or they don't have any. I'm also assuming that amenity=bank; 
atm=yes means that there is an ATM publicly available at all times, rather than 
just during opening hours.

Next thought, what if the bank has been mapped as a building… I'll get that 
added later.

Shaun

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Find My Nearest Cash Machine

[Shaun McDonald]

On 21 Aug 2012, at 18:44, Graham Jones  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 21 August 2012 14:40, Sam Larsen  wrote:
> I don't really see the point of this thread.
> UK cash machine data is fairly dense in OSM, i very rarely find any that 
> aren't already mapped.
> Can't we just extract OSM cash machines?  This will spur us on to map them 
> better in OSM in areas that are lacking, which will lead to a better OSM 
> dataset anyway.
> A quick go at visualising 'amenity=atm' in OSM shown here if anyone is 
> interested - http://maps3.org.uk/AtmMap.
> Note that this will not update automatically - my database is quite out of 
> date since the licence business started
> It is not really mobile friendly either - the datafile is about 500kb - 
> really needs to be split into data tiles, but that takes more than a half 
> hour train journey to sort out!

Seem Graham beat me to publishing a map of the ATMs:
http://www.itoworld.com/map/230

Here's a UK only ITO Map of the ATMs in OSM, including those part of a bank, 
and a whether the ATM charges a fee. I note that there are at least 5 ways that 
have been used to note that no fee is charged including no, None, Free, 0, and 
0.00. I've only taken into account no and 0, as the fee can state the actual 
amount of the fee, I found it reasonable to use 0.

Shaun

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Find My Nearest Cash Machine

[Shaun McDonald]

On 20 Aug 2012, at 13:15, Philip Barnes  wrote:

> On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 12:33 +0100, Brian Prangle wrote:
>> Hi Andy
>> 
>> 
>> Impressive! Shame about the data.  Just done a quick look around
>> Acocks Green - ATMs missing and some are up to 30m away from their
>> actual location. I would estimate about 95% accuracy. Anyone else had
>> a look?
>> 
> Too small an area that I am not familiar with for me to make any
> meaningful comment. A different colour for the machines which charge
> would be useful, to allow these to be ignored.

The ones that I've looked at had a faded balloon for the ATMs that are charged 
for.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footway to Sidewalk?

[Shaun McDonald]

On 20 Aug 2012, at 13:30, Philip Barnes  wrote:

> Have just spotted this changeset, which has globally changed footway
> tags to sidewalk, the area covers the UK.
> 
> Any thoughts, to me sidewalk is one of those American words that should
> not find its way into English.
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/12795153


The use of the word sidewalk has been used as it internationally will cause the 
least confusion. The word footway in a way has already been used, thus reusing 
it may cause confusion, and has different meaning in parts of the industry.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalk

The following map shows where the sidewalk data have been added to OSM: 
http://www.itoworld.com/map/126

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Party - Manchester

[Shaun McDonald]

There will be SOTM Scotland in Edinburgh later this year on 19th and 20th 
October: 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/State_Of_The_Map_Scotland_2012

Shaun

On 17 Jul 2012, at 10:55, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

> 
> I might be interested depending on the date - missing SOTM for the first time 
> this year, not because of the distance (I quite fancy seeing Japan) but 
> because it's difficult to get a lot of time of work in September. Would be 
> good to have some sort of big OSM meetup locally (as in Western Europe) this 
> year!
> 
> Nick
> 
> -Grant Slater  wrote: -
> To: Rick Ogden 
> From: Grant Slater 
> Date: 17/07/2012 12:41AM
> Cc: Talk GB 
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Party - Manchester
> 
> On 16 July 2012 15:15, Rick Ogden  wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I'm planning on organising a mapping party in Manchester at some point. The 
> > idea being to remap things that were removed during the redaction, and also 
> > increase the number of POIs around Manchester city centre. Would anyone 
> > here be interested in attending? There is not a date yet, I'm just trying 
> > to gage interest.
> >
> 
> Set a date. I am interested. Mini SoTM-EU 2012?
> ;-)
> 
> / Grant
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Supermarkets being changed

[Shaun McDonald]

Here is that link: 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

I agree that having the tags on the building object is better. If there is some 
user of the data or editor that isn't able to cope with that scenario, then it 
should be improved. It would be useful to ask for the rational behind the use 
having made that change, so that we can understand why they made the change, 
and be able to make the appropriate adjustments.

Shaun

On 3 Jul 2012, at 23:47, Ed Loach wrote:

> If anyone did that around here I'd revert it. If I were at my computer I'd 
> link to the one item one OSM object wiki page. The only reason I can imagine 
> for doing it is someone is using an old app that only handles node POIs that 
> should be upgraded or fixed instead of downgrading the data.
> 
> Sent from my HTC
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Pollinger 
> Sent: 03 July 2012 23:22
> To: OSM Talk-GB 
> Subject: [Talk-GB] Supermarkets being changed
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> When mapping large supermarkets, I'll map the building as an area and
> give it shop=supermarket, building=retail and name=Asda (for example).
> 
> Some of these have since been altered to remove the shop and name keys
> from the area, then adding a node with these tags roughly to the
> middle of the area.
> 
> E.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/11182447
> 
> Is there an accepted way of doing this? Should I do anything? Not
> wanting to start a revert war or anything, but this seems like
> duplication.
> 
> Thanks,
> LT
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic = rail tags

[Shaun McDonald]

On 2 Jul 2012, at 16:19, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

> Peter Miller wrote:
> > I started using railway:historic=xxx in place of railway=dismantled 
>> for cycletracks etc in response to a comment through OSM 
>> messaging that one editor had found it confusing to suddenly 
>> have cyclepaths being rendered as railways in Potlatch due the 
>> railway=xxx tag (although that is not a good reason to make 
>> the change in itself.)
> 
> Indeed not. That's a 30-second change to P2 to change the rendering order.
> Put a trac ticket in and someone will change the stylesheet!

https://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/4467 has been created for this.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OT: Is Bristol the UK's only cross-border city?

[Shaun McDonald]

On Wed, June 13, 2012 3:40 pm, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 13/06/2012 14:38, Philip Barnes wrote:
>>
>> The built up area of Chester straddles the England-Wales border and
>> the football ground is right on the border. The pitch being in Wales
>> and some of the car park and offices in England.
>>
>>
> I think this is a little curious, but it doesn't seem to imply any
> administrative ambiguity as there is in the Severn Estuary. May be a bit
> hard to swallow for Chester FC that their home ground is in Wales though.
>
> There are probably loads of buildings in the UK which straddle a border.
> I wonder how that is handled for council tax, planning etc. In
> Baarle-Hertog (BE)/Baarle-Nassau (NL) (see [1]) this happens a lot; for
> administrative expedience the "nationality" of a house is determined in
> practice by the country in which the front door is located. But there
> are also cases where the border goes through the front door. When the
> borders were re-surveyed a few years ago one house had suddenly switched
> countries. The problem was resolved by moving the front door by a couple
> of metres.

I heard of someone who lived on the boundary between Bromley and
Southwark, a third of the council tax went to one council and 2 thirds to
the other one. Eventually they moved the boundary such that they were
completely in one council area.

Shaun



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycling, the law and traffic signs

[Shaun McDonald]

On 16 May 2012, at 01:05, Jason Cunningham wrote:

> On 15 May 2012 23:32,  wrote: 
> 
> As I am not a regular cyclist I must admit that I don't pay much attention to 
> these signs. So my question is do Local Authorities use the cycle and foot 
> signs (segregated or otherwise) and reserve the cycle sign for cases where 
> traffic regulation prevents foot access (in which case foot=no would be 
> correct), or is use mixed?
> 
> Cheers,
> Rob
> 
> Unless it's been recently changed. the Cycle Only sign could never 
> prohibit 'pedestrian access' because use of the sign is defined by the 
> Department for Transports "Traffic Signs Manual (chapter 3) [1]. 
> 
> The DFT guidance confirms the signs can be used for routes where cycles can 
> travel and all other vehicular traffic is prohibited. Therefore this sign 
> must not be used to prohibit pedestrian access. The Manual also points out 
> usefulness of a convenient footway or footpath to lure pedestrians away from 
> this intended 'cycle only' way.

I find the cycle only sign is used in cases where there is also a separate 
pavement, thus the pedestrians can use that. They can in some cases be used 
where there is no pavement and it's not recommended for pedestrians to go that 
route. If cyclists are allowed and pedestrians are prohibited then a separate 
no pedestrians sign will be used.

Shaun

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Doodle: OpenStreetMap Brighton mapping party

[Shaun McDonald]

On 31 Oct 2011, at 19:25, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> 
>> Anyone else got opinions on the date? We could go for a two day mapping
>> party?
> 
> might be interested depending on the type of mapping. Not so interested
> in addressing etc, but if it's road surveying/naming I'd be tempted.
> ATM can do any weekend except 12/13th.
> 

You're welcome to meet up and then head further afield to do some walking or 
roads. 
As Brighton was mapped fairly well a few years back, but before we mass mapped 
POIs and buildings, it is likely to be mostly adding POIs, buildings, 
addressing and checking the current data is up to date within the town centre.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Doodle: OpenStreetMap Brighton mapping party

[Shaun McDonald]

Anyone else got opinions on the date? We could go for a two day mapping
party?

On Mon, October 31, 2011 1:45 pm, Dan Karran wrote:
> Good point, that works better.
>
>
> On 31 October 2011 13:05, Shaun McDonald 
> wrote:
>> On Mon, October 31, 2011 11:52 am, Dan Karran wrote:
>>> On 29 October 2011 10:52, Shaun McDonald 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is anyone interested in heading down to Brighton for a mapping party
>>>> before the end of the year?
>>>>
>>>> Place your name down here so that we can choose the best dates.
>>>>
>>>> http://doodle.com/xcyq94nknb2nsnw9
>>>
>>> It looks like 19th or 20th November would suit best then. Shall we
>>> settle for the Sunday?
>>>
>>
>> I'd prefer the Saturday so that I can use the Sunday to enter the data.
>>
>> Shaun
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dan Karran
>>> d...@karran.net
>>> www.dankarran.com
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dan Karran
> d...@karran.net
> www.dankarran.com
>



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

[Talk-GB] Doodle: OpenStreetMap Brighton mapping party

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi,

Is anyone interested in heading down to Brighton for a mapping party before the 
end of the year?

Place your name down here so that we can choose the best dates.

http://doodle.com/xcyq94nknb2nsnw9

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] SABRE Maps

[Shaun McDonald]

On 12 Apr 2011, at 14:14, Lester Caine wrote:

> Bob Kerr wrote:
>> I just heard about this, I don't know anything about the group but I
>> thought I'd pass it on since it's using openstreetmap
>> 
>> http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/
> 
> They have links to a number of growing historic maps as well as OSM ... the 
> National Library of Scotland archive is very nice.
> 

One of the people from Sabre who has been involved in the setup of the maps has 
been along to a few of the recent London osm meetups.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN station codes

[Shaun McDonald]

On 24 Oct 2010, at 21:41, Andy Mabbett wrote:

> On 24 October 2010 21:12, Ed Avis  wrote:
>>   writes:
>> 
>>> We're importing the location of bus stops from NaPTAN, can we also load the
>>> NaPTAN codes for railway stations?
> 
>> National Rail seems to use a three-letter code for stations - does that have 
>> any
>> relationship to this NaPTAN code?
> 
> Nailsea and Backwell's is NLS, which does not appear in the Naptan
> code, "9100NAILSEA" listed above.
> 
> Wikipedia has all these codes, in article infoboxes. I would urge that
> they be added to OSM.

I have been adding the three letter short code as the ref tag when I have been 
editing around stations. e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/9779990

I have also been adding that tag tfl_travelzone, in the hope that at some point 
there will be a map showing the travel map zone in a geographic layout.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Bike Shop dataset obtained: please merge in locations in your area

[Shaun McDonald]

On 25 Sep 2010, at 15:32, Andrew wrote:

> Martin Lucas-Smith - CycleStreets  writes:
> 
>> Andy Allan and Shaun McDonald have created a webapp for the specific 
>> purpose of merging (manually) this data into OSM.
>> 
>> http://shaunmcdonald.dev.openstreetmap.org/bike-shop-locator/
> 
> Could you add a name search? Moving the map is clumsy.

It's on the todo list. At the moment you can search for cycle shop names using 
the full list, and the text search in your browser.

> 
> If we add a tag like network=Association of Cycle Traders to the shops, it 
> would be possible to highlight shops that disappear from future revisions of 
> this list that may have closed.

I don't know if we are going to be getting updates. It may be possible to get a 
separate list of shops that have been removed from the list, however I would 
recommend doing a ground survey to verify that the shop has closed, as it may 
just be that they are no longer a member of the Association of Cycle Traders. 
At this stage the tool will need to be made more advanced.

> 
> Is anyone pointing out to Halfords that other bicycle shops are going into 
> OSM 
> and would they like to follow?

I'm not aware of anyone who has spoken to Halfords, however it wouldn't 
surprise me if they would charge for this information for use by various POI 
aggregation companies.

Shaun

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Datastore musical allotments

[Shaun McDonald]

On 15 Sep 2010, at 23:21, Robert Scott wrote:

> On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Will Abson wrote:
>> Great tool! I've checked out my local area (Ealing) and there's a few
>> disagreements marked for several allotments which are listed as
>> 'Private Site' in the GLA data. Effectively there is no name present
>> in the data for those sites, so perhaps this scenario could be catered
>> for in the algorithm, e.g. do not flag the site based on name?
>> 
>> It also raises the question of the owner/operator of allotment sites
>> in the data. The wiki suggests operator=* for allotments, which would
>> seem to be equivalent to the 'Organisation' field in the data,
>> although this is not consistently recorded and is missing for the
>> thirteen private allotments in Ealing.
>> 
>> I'd second creating a wiki page to record additions/corrections to the
>> data, assuming it is not straightforward to add a feedback function to
>> the app.
> 
> Well, the feedback functionality itself is not hugely non-straightforward (?) 
> - the difficult bit is it means I have to get in to the sticky world of 
> authentication. I don't want to create a free-for-all. I'd really like to be 
> able to tie comments to osm accounts and that requires quite a bit of oauth 
> work along with tying it into django's session/auth system. It's something 
> I've wanted to do for a while with musical chairs but I've never really 
> convinced myself it's worth investing the time.
> 

Dare I say the bike shop locator doesn't have any auth, but does have the 
ability to place comments:
http://shaunmcdonald.dev.openstreetmap.org/bike-shop-locator/

It does function more of a check list and doesn't do any fuzzy matching, so no 
auto matching.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Bike Shop dataset obtained: please merge in locations in your area

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi,

On Wed, September 15, 2010 11:27 am, Graham Stewart wrote:
>
> The documentation at
> http://www.cyclestreets.net/blog/2010/04/05/add-point-of-interest/
> suggests that bike shops should always be added as nodes. Is that the
> case?
>
> For example I'd previously added the Evans Cycles at the Metrocentre
> (near Newcastle) as a building (closed way).
> Tags: building=yes, name=Evans Cycles, shop=bicycle
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.9563944617016&lon=-1.67584697130855&zoom=16&layers=C
>
> I note that this doesn't seem to show on the Cycle Map renderer.

A node or a closed way should both work. If a closed way does not work,
then that bit of software ideally needs to be updated.


>
> Also, any objections if I post this up the link on a popular cycling
> site (SingletrackWorld) we might get a bit of help from them and recruit
> some new members at the same time.

Feel free to do so. It has already got a mention on the BikeBiz news site:
http://www.bikebiz.com/news/32850/Bike-shops-urged-to-check-they-exist

Any suggestions for improvement are also welcome.

Shaun

>
> GrahamS
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:56 +0100, "Martin Lucas-Smith - CycleStreets"
>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> We've brokered a dataset of all 2,500-ish bike shops in the UK from the
>> Association of Cycle Traders (many thanks to them!), for the purposes of
>> merging this dataset into the OpenStreetMap database. It has
>> postcode-level
>> accuracy only but that's a massive head-start.
>>
>> Read more at:
>> http://www.cyclestreets.net/blog/2010/09/10/get-all-uk-bike-shops-in-osm/
>>
>> Andy Allan and Shaun McDonald have created a webapp for the specific
>> purpose of merging (manually) this data into OSM.
>>
>> http://shaunmcdonald.dev.openstreetmap.org/bike-shop-locator/
>>
>> Effectively it has a map of locations not yet reconciled, i.e. a
>> checklist.
>> Click on each location, and you'll then have a direct link to the
>> relevant
>> bit of OSM where the shop can be added/updated/removed using personal
>> knowledge. Once that's done, it can be ticked off back in the webapp.
>>
>>
>> Martin, **  CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By Cyclists
>> Developer, CycleStreets **  http://www.cyclestreets.net/
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>



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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Bike Shop dataset obtained: please merge in locations in your area

[Shaun McDonald]

On 14 Sep 2010, at 18:28, Martin CycleStreets wrote:

> 
> 
> Dave F. wrote:
>> How old is the database
> 
> It was a snapshot from their database about 4-6 weeks ago, so should be 
> pretty fresh, though it does contain errors (as would be expected given the 
> way bikeshops come and go).
> 
> 
>> & are all bike shops members of this association?
> 
> Good point - I've no idea. But I imagine quite a lot will be, judging from 
> the Cambridge part of the data.
> 

Most bike shops are members, but not all. This will mean that we get the 
majority of bike shops into osm.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Derbyshire area unconnected

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi,

I have come across a few mappers in the past who have put in a huge amount of 
effort to map their town, but were not aware of the connectivity or the 
importance of. When I have explained it to them and shown them some routing 
service that they hadn't come across before, they are generally happy to learn 
from their mistake, especially if you give some help with the editor and be 
very specific about how to make the adjustments. Maybe there is a specific 
tutorial or video that can now be linked to.

I think your link is to the wrong location.

Shaun

On 20 Aug 2010, at 23:57, Ian Spencer wrote:

> I was checking why a bike route from near Derby to Alton Towers was really 
> badly out and discovered that whoever has been mapping an area around 
> Derbyshire has been cunningly disguising their ability to connect ways 
> together. I've not come across such a consistently bad area before (naive I 
> know).
> 
> http://keepright.ipax.at/report_map.php?zoom=14&lat=48.20808&lon=16.37221
> 
> Might give you an idea of the scale of the issue. While normally a local 
> survey would be suggested, there are no sources quoted on the ways typically, 
> and a very high number of ways simply do not join although keepright spots 
> that they are very close. 
> 
> Anyone fancy checking through the area using an appropriate resource (he 
> says, reluctant to suggest Open Street View for those who are OSV 
> sensitive!). I've made a start.
> 
> Spenny
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] A newbie question - 'What are you doing ?'

[Shaun McDonald]

The explanation I've found best to use since most people understand it the 
fastest is to ask if they know what the Wikipedia is, and then compare OSM to 
Wikipedia by "instead of an encyclopaedia that anyone can edit, it's a map that 
anyone can edit".

Shaun

On 16 Jul 2010, at 20:31, Iain Simpson wrote:

> I've just started with OSM in Stafford (52.81, -2.13) and am starting by 
> surveying my local suburb - nearly blank on the map.
> 
> Yesterday I was walking down a nearby lane with my GPS - by a private 
> residential caravan park -  when the owner(?) came out and asked, quite 
> politely, what was I was doing ?
> 
> I tried to explan about OSM but I'm not sure I convinced him.
> 
> It occurred to me that it would be nice if I could have given him a 
> card/leaflet with a brief explanation of OSM with all the links etc. This 
> could also be given to other interested parties.
> 
> This seems such an obviously idea - it must have been done before.
> 
> Any Links
> 
> Iain
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Building alignment

[Shaun McDonald]

In JOSM select the building and press q.

Potlatch currently doesn't have that feature, but it is in the upcoming 
Potlatch 2.

Don't know about Merkaartor.

Shaun

On 2 May 2010, at 16:00, Roy Jamison wrote:

> Hey guys,
> 
> Is there any way in Potlatch or Merkaartor (I can't understand JOSM)
> to make buildings look better, i.e. making right angled corners
> instead of manually clicking and dragging nodes so that the buildings
> look better?
> 
> Thanks :)
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Help Needed

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Roy,

Do you have a link to the map area so that someone can look at the data to see 
what the problem is?

You should be able to have landuse and buildings without a problem.

Have you looked at the tags that are used for the buildings in central london, 
for a comparison?

Shaun

On 2 May 2010, at 09:56, Roy Jamison wrote:

> Just a quick couple of questions really.
> 
> I have created buildings and residential areas, i.e. marked out where
> the houses are along a street according to OS data and memory, but it
> doesn't appear in Mapnik or Osmarender. Could this be because there
> has been an entire residential area added from Landsat? Also, if this
> is the case is it safe to remove the landsat area and mark the
> buildings out more accurately. What will this do to the state of the
> map in that particular area, i.e. will it still look "Ok"?
> 
> Sorry again for so many questions at once thought I'd better ask them
> in one message :)
> 
> Thanks guys!
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Beginnings

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Roy,

As someone who has cycled out and mapped parts of Sheerness and Minster, it's 
great to see someone local starting to map recently.

I'd recommend taking a looking at central London or Canterbury for inspiration 
of the amount of detail that you can enter into OpenStreetMap.

Shaun

On 1 May 2010, at 18:08, Roy Jamison wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I live in Sheerness on the Isle of Sheppey and have done quite a lot
> of work on mapping the island. I am constantly adding bits here and
> there; buildings, POIs, adjusting roads that need minor changes and
> have recently been fiddling around with the local railway lines.
> How accurate is the OS map, and is there any difference between the
> tiles from it if they are used in Potlatch, Merkaartor, etc.? I have
> been using the OS maps quite a bit as I haven't had a lot of time to
> go into town myself.
> Also, I'd appreciate if a few people wouldn't mind taking a little
> look, especially near the Sheerness town area and make any suggestions
> or notes for improvement (I realise it is far from complete I just
> need a good idea on where to go).
> 
> Much appreciated!
> 
> Roy (Teej), Sheerness, Kent :)
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] OS Boundaries

[Shaun McDonald]

On 25 Apr 2010, at 07:57, Lester Caine wrote:

> 
>> If a footpath gets moved do you think I should still show a way & mark
>> it as 'this is where it used to go'?
> 'closed=2007' makes perfect sense to me. People then coming back to an area 
> that 
> they walked 30 years ago would then see why they can't follow the same route 
> today?

Please don't use modifiers to state that a path/pub/whatever is no longer 
there. You can use a modifier for permissions, i.e. some people can use it, but 
not all. If a footway has closed use highway=old_footway or 
highway=disused_footway. For a pub or any amenity that is not longer open or 
there, use old_amenity=pub. That way no one will still think it is still open 
and it is backwards compatible with all software that currently uses the osm 
data.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] London Mapping Marathons

[Shaun McDonald]

Hi Nick,

You'll find that the day of the week varies between Tuesdays, Wednesdays and 
Thursdays so that people like yourself who have a commitment on a particular 
day of the week can get along to some of them. They are currently running 
roughly once every two weeks.

Shaun

On 12 Apr 2010, at 20:31, Nick Black wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> 
> What are the chances we could do the London Mapping Marathons on
> Tuesday or Thursdays?  There's a SOTM conference call every Wednesday
> from 8pm BST that makes it difficult to make it to the mapping
> parties.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> -- 
> Nick Black
> twitter.com/nick_b
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey

[Shaun McDonald]

On 1 Apr 2010, at 01:16, Phil Monger wrote:

> Hi Tom,
> 
> Not sure I agree that Streetview is 'horrible' - as a free base map it will 
> rival or beat any of the others I have seen. This is even more true for rural 
> areas.
> 
> I am aware most of the raster stuff got left out, but streetview *is* raster 
> - it says as much in the PDF.
> 
> What we would want to do, I think, is encourage people to rapidly trace this 
> to form a base map, then set upon the task of checking it for accuracy. 
> Secondly, adding to it all the great features that we know from OSM - with 
> the time burden or walking all the streets gone, that second part should 
> progress more rapidly.
> 

But I want to go out on my bike and map, I spend enough time at the computer as 
it is, without sitting there tracing, missing out on various details that are 
not or are wrong on the OS maps.

Shaun

> Phil
> 
> On 1 April 2010 00:47, Tom Hughes  wrote:
> On 01/04/10 00:06, Phil Monger wrote:
> 
> The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the
> database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets /
> names , etc.
> 
> StreetView is horrible - the vector data will be far more useful.
> 
> 
> We can surely get this as a "backdrop" layer, like the Yahoo imagery?
> 
> I suspect that will be the best approach, yes. We'll probably want to wait 
> for the Vector Map District release in May though as that will be a better 
> data set than Meridian 2. Of course Boundary Line will also be useful for 
> tracing and that should be available tomorrow.
> 
> All this assume the license is OK of course, which we won't know until we see 
> it.
> 
> 
> A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the
> rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect)
> 
> It's not raster data. Almost all the raster data got left out.
> 
> 
> Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small
> Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire
> place
> 
> If it's only a small village then surveying it wouldn't take long anyway ;-) 
> Plus you'll get all sorts of detail that the OS mapping won't have.
> 
> Tom
> 
> -- 
> Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
> http://compton.nu/
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] XAPI lagging behind by days?

[Shaun McDonald]

The route ref is an interim data level until the relations are added. Think of 
it as house numbers being initially added as points, and then full building 
outlines being added at a later stage at which point the building number gets 
transferred to the building outline.

Shaun

On 24 Mar 2010, at 07:58, Tom Chance wrote:

> That all sounds good, though if we add stops to route relations do they 
> really need route_ref?
> 
> Tom
> 
>> On Mar 23, 2010 10:26 PM, "Christoph Böhme"  wrote:
>> 
>> Tom Chance  schrieb:
>> > On 23 March 2010 13:20, Christoph Boehme  wrote: > > > 
>> > Well, I just updated t...
>> 
>> Yes, exactly. My current plan is to have four types of stops in the
>> basic scheme:
>> 
>> 1. Non-NaPTAN stops: Stops without naptan:*-tags. Basically plain
>>   old OSM bus stops.
>> 2. Unverified NaPTAN stops: Stops from the NaPTAN import which
>>   have a naptan:verified=no tag or which are missing the
>>   highway=bus_stop tag.
>> 3. Verified NaPTAN stops: Stops tagged as hightway=bus_stop and with
>>   either no naptan:verified tag or a naptan:verified=yes tag.
>> 4. CUS-stops: Stops with naptan:BusStopType=CUS because they are not
>>   marked on the ground and cannot be verified.
>> 
>> Extended schemes would be:
>> 
>> 1. Stops with notes: Highlight stops with a note or naptan:error tag
>> 2. Route information: Highlight stops which are missing the route_ref
>>   tag.
>> 3. Shelter and asset refs: Highlight bus stops which have shelter=yes
>>   and no asset_ref or which have no shelter tag at all (this might be
>>   quite Birmingham specific).
>> 4. Anything else?
>> 
>> I suggest to keep the old schemes but rename them to the name of the
>> public transport network they apply to (e.g. "Transport West Midlands"
>> for Birmingham), since they are based on the amount of information that
>> is available on the signs used by a particular network.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Christoph
>> > Best, > Tom > > -- > http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance
>> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest?

[Shaun McDonald]

Currently openbusmap.org is a quick hack using an iframe to the original site. 
This means that if you click permalink the permalink will open in that frame. 
If you open in a new tab/window from that link, you'll get a permalink.

Shaun

On 16 Mar 2010, at 22:05, Richard Mann wrote:

> I tried to supply a lat & lon and failed dismally. I find German rail
> services fascinating, but I suspect I may be in a minority for
> openbusmap.org users. Is that easy to fix (being able to supply a
> lat/lon, maybe even generating an openbusmap.org permalink)?
> 
> Cyclists may also like to ponder whether a good bus service actually
> does them quite a few favours, even if they don't use it themselves.
> Certainly has here in Oxford.
> 
> Richard
> 
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Andy Allan  wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Tom Chance  wrote:
>> 
>>> The cycle map and regular chatter have seen coverage blossom. Obviously bus
>>> stops aren't as interesting to fellow OSM nutters as cycle routes; and the
>>> cycle map was an "early mover" and got onto the front page of the main web
>>> site. But can't we make a bit more of an effort to push this across the GB
>>> community?
>> 
>> :-) I sallied forth on this issue at WhereCampEU - topics of how to
>> improve the public transit data in OSM came up a surprising number of
>> times on Saturday.
>> 
>> Step One: Register a better domain name for people who can't remember
>> how to type the double-dots in http://www.öpnvkarte.de/ . Et voila,
>> now we have http://openbusmap.org thanks to Shaun.
>> Step Two: Have a (UK?) public transport hack-weekend. Peter Miller
>> offered to sponsor this at said WhereCampEU, so that just needs
>> organising.
>> Step Three: Good editor support. Potlatch2 already supports things
>> like NAPTAN cardinal compass directions. There's more to do on that
>> front...
>> 
>> That's a start, and IMHO doing what the cyclemap did (i.e. provide a
>> compelling end-use) does as much as YAOSMIT (that's Yet Another OSM
>> Inspection Tool). The tools have their place, but only for the most
>> hard-core contributors. I see contributors as progressing through the
>> following stages, where only a small proportion ever make it to the
>> next stage:
>> 
>> 1) Not interested or aware of the subject in question
>> 2) Liking an end-use of the subject (e.g. opencyclemap.org, openbusmap.org)
>> 3) Fiddling with the data in places that's important to them
>> 4) Getting interested in wider QA of the data using inspection tools
>> 
>> I think we need to support 2 and 3 to get a much larger number of
>> people involved in buses etc in the UK.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Andy
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-transit] NaPTAN - Time for the rest? (Thomas Wood

[Shaun McDonald]

TrackMyJourney uses the NAPTAN codes to get departures from the bus stops. 
Similarly for the train stations from National Rail.

Shaun

On 14 Mar 2010, at 22:52, Nick Allen wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Not only is the NaPTAN data useful for planning journeys, but I've also
> found it useful when mapping - if an area of the map contains bus stops
> but no roads then you know it's worth going there for a bike ride!
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Nick
> (Tallguy)
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Yet another trunk road query - A495

[Shaun McDonald]

Do the signs on the road have a green or white background?

If they are green, then it is a trunk road, otherwise it is primary.

Shaun

On 31 Dec 2009, at 03:11, brenda cameron wrote:

> The A495 runs from Oswestry to a junction with the A525 a mile or so west of 
> Whitchurch and is tagged as 'trunk'.
> Can anyone confirm that this is correct?
> 
> I'm afraid that this trunk road/primary road business is very confusing for a 
> Canuck who visits Britain only on occasion.
> 
> 
> Angus C.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] last london pub meetup of the year

[Shaun McDonald]

We'll today is Tuesday, since the wiki page hasn't been updated yet, I'll 
assume that the meetup has not been postponed.

Shaun

On 18 Dec 2009, at 22:03, Matt Amos wrote:

> the wiki currently has the meetup set for the john snow on tuesday[1].
> how do people feel about moving that to wednesday?
> 
> cheers,
> 
> matt
> 
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/London/Winter_2009-2010_Pub_Meetup
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Underground Pipelines

[Shaun McDonald]

On 9 Nov 2009, at 11:37, Thomas Wood wrote:

> Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> (and
>> once people start correctly tagging tram tracks with oneway tags  
>> things
>> will get *very* confusing).
>>
> Like has been done for the tramtracks around Croydon?
> http://osm.org/go/euupqUAQ5-

Note that some of the roads that the tram runs on is two way, even so  
the tram only goes in one direction. Even more complex is a section  
where the tram, bus, and cyclists share in one direction, with all  
traffic except the tram going in the other.

Shaun


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Postboxes & Payphones

[Shaun McDonald]

On 7 Nov 2009, at 01:36, Craig Wallace wrote:

> On 06/11/2009 17:48, Mike wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> I've been looking at the Dracos postbox list
>> http://www.dracos.co.uk/play/locating-postboxes/ and the UK  
>> payphone DB:
>> http://payphonedb.bobsbasement.co.uk/.  Both tie into the OSM  
>> (postboxes
>> keyed with a ref: tag and phone boxes with telephone:  Looking  
>> through
>> the OSM data, there's a lot of postboxes and payphoens but very few  
>> have
>> the appropriate tags to tie them into the other databases.  Would  
>> OSMers
>> mind tagging any postboxes/phones that they come across to tie them  
>> in
>> with these side projects?  Perhaps we could even have a virtual (ie  
>> UK
>> wide) mapping party to update the map with these?
>>
>> What do people think?
>>
> I agree with you on this, its useful to add refs to postboxes. I've  
> been
> working through them in my area, and ticking them off on the Dracos  
> list.

Every so often the Dracos site will import the OSM data, so you don't  
need to manually enter it there, it will automatically be picked up  
after a few weeks.

I know some mappers do go and specifically collect the refs of post  
boxes.

>
> I've not seen that payphone DB before, how does it work? Does it
> automatically get payphones from OSM?
> I've tried searching in my area, but it doesn't find any. Do they need
> particular tags to appear on that site? I have tagged a few with their
> phone number, but can't find them if searching for that. And it  
> doesn't
> find anything at all if searching in my county.

I don't think this site is integrated with OSM.

Shaun

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Funny with Mapnik?

[Shaun McDonald]

It is probably due to a fresh planet import.

http://matt.sandbox.cloudmade.com is currently up to date.

Shaun

On 23 Oct 2009, at 15:21, Ian Caldwell wrote:

> I put a few roads in last night and when I checked them this morning
> they were missing from the level 14,15,16 in Maplink. I then added a
> turning circle I had missed. About 1/2 hour ago they were missing from
> levels 14-18.
>
> They are all there in Osmarender.
>
> location is 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.11225&lon=-2.29763&zoom=17&layers=0B00FTF
> Streets Moatway Moat Cresent and Five Oaks Close.
>
> As I check for this mail parts of them have appeared in level 18. but
> when I do a status on the showing bit I get
> http://tile.openstreetmap.org/18/129396/86455.png/status "Tile is
> clean. Last rendered at Thu Oct 22 22:38:30 2009"
>
> but were it is missing status shows
> http://tile.openstreetmap.org/18/129396/86456.png/status "Tile is
> clean. Last rendered at Fri Oct 23 14:16:29 2009"
>
> So the later tile has the streets missing
>
> Have I done anything wrong or is it Mapnik?
>
> Ian Caldwell
> ian1caldw...@googlemail.com
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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