Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Archaeology
Obviously the location of the site can be identified, and any excavations recorded. These are current facts. But I keep watching Time Team and thinking that all of the material they gather would make a good base for an historic view of the UK. Not sure where we are with the servers for the historic map, but in a lot of places the historic view breaks through into the current data! So the idea that this material is stored in the same database is in so many cases sensible? There is considerably less data that is totally lost to redevelopment against that which is now being preserved below that development? Being able to view what is actually recorded below that development would be an excellent next step? Sent from my android tablet, so quoting gets messed up! -Original Message- From: Brian Savidge To: "talk-gb@openstreetmap.org" Sent: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 7:14 Subject: [Talk-GB] Mapping Archaeology Hi A friend of mine belongs to a local Archaeology group and they are going to do some surveying shortly using a variety of methods including ground penetrating radar. I thought it would be nice if somehow the results get put onto Open Street Map. Are buried walls and landscape features suitable for recording on Open Street Map perhaps at level -1? I have a feeling I saw something a while ago about a parallel open streetmap that was intended for archaeology and recording things that are no longer visible, but I have lost the link and can't find any references to the site. Any thoughts on the matter? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to motor vehicles, open to foot)
Sent from my android device so the quoting is crap! -Original Message- From: SomeoneElse To: "talk-gb@openstreetmap.org" Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 12:16 Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to motor vehicles, open to foot) OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: > I keep coming across cases where marking the access to a way based on > primary category will imply that the way is not suitable for use on > foot. That becomes particularly interesting with barriers, as in > those cases, the sidewalk may bypass the barrier. > In that instance isn't there effectively a short footway that runs parallel to the short piece of road that has the barrier on it? Micro mapping would add the 'sidewalks' as separate ways and ideally that is the way forward, but there are still roads where foot traffic share the blocked vehical way ... ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to motor vehicles, open to foot)
Sent from my android device so the quoting is crapp! -Original Message- From: OpenStreetmap HADW To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 13:44 Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to motor vehicles, open to foot) On 7 September 2013 12:15, SomeoneElse wrote: > > In that instance isn't there effectively a short footway that runs parallel > to the short piece of road that has the barrier on it? > Micro-mapping tends to clutter the rendered map. In any case, street maps are abstractions of the real world and do deliberately simplify. Then it is up to the rederers to make any simplificatons needed - you do not map for them !!! OK agreeing on how things simplify may need to be agreed, but that is a different problem. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to motor vehicles, open to foot)
Long time discussion but the data is not the map. If a detail is need, such as adding a way to show the pedestrian route around an object, then it should be mapped. Not mapping it leaves gaps in the data. Now replacing the obstruction with a short length of 'footpath' may be an alternative, but knowing the detail of some of the type of street being mapped, there are alternative footpaths which do not join naturally to the vechical sections, but do to additional footpaths alongside. One would take a wheelchair 'around' via another route. Sent from my android device so the quoting is crap!___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to motor vehicles, open to foot)
Sent from my android device so the quoting is crap! -Original Message- From: OpenStreetmap HADW To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 15:07 Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to motor vehicles, open to foot) On 7 September 2013 14:46, Philip Barnes wrote: > > Streetmaps do tend to be abstractions of the real world, and > openstreetmap ceased to be be a mere streetmap several years ago, and is > a far far better map than a mere streetmap can ever be. The word > streetmap implies urban, cities. OS maps are abstractions even when not dealing with streets. The other problems with micro-mapping are: - the transition between higher and lower levels of abstraction. I have considered mapping certain road areas as areas, because the line approximation loses important information, but, unless a road joins an area perpendicularly, this doesn't work well in the transition region; - with things like sidewalks, there is usually a fixed distance between the two pedestrian ways and the vehicle way, but the current data structure cannot represent that, and the current tooling doesn't support it very well, so if everyone started mapping sidewalks explicitly, there would be big maintenance problems (I've just seen a transition case where a road both has a separate footpath, with cycle access and the road itself is marked as having parallel cycle tracks); - routing software can no longer just operate on a network of edges and nodes, but needs to know that your can normally cross from one sidewalk to the other, at arbitrary places. (currently I have seen explicit footway crossings, where no physical features exists, being inserted to get round this one. Basically, the abstraction is adding value, by showing that the the sidewalks are related. Trying to incorporate all of the conditions relating to the physical structure of the road using just tags would make things almost impossible to understand. With the level of detail becoming available for buildings, adding the footpaths through developments is accepted, and those around the edge add value simply by showing their presence. YES routers need a bit more inteligence, and in cities with barriers between car and pedestrian, things are simple. A 'clever' foot router could be made to recognise that people can walk anywhere in shopping precincts, so why not the area of a footpath/road combination? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] New St station platform alignments
I can't remember ... has the track layout been changed yet? I know there were some plans to realign, but the core structure hasn't changed since first constructed? Sent from my android device so quoting is crap ... need to kill these painful email clients! -Original Message- From: Andy Robinson To: 'Brian Prangle' , 'talk-gb-westmidlands' , 'Talk GB' Sent: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 21:12 Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] New St station platform alignments I recall tweaking the tracks some years ago to better fit imagery as they were definitely rough drawn before that but I expect with different imagery now and folks messing about over that couple of years of changing its all got a bit messy. Part of the problem is that a lot of the track radius is out of view. I expect by using the NR concourse plan as a starting point you would get a better alignment using the escalator locations. From: Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com] Sent: 25 September 2015 13:57 To: talk-gb-westmidlands; Talk GB Subject: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] New St station platform alignments Does anyone know whether the alignment of the platforms under the concourse is based on anything other than pure guesswork? The alignment at either end where they can be seen in Bing doesn't look right either. I'm trying to get the concourse layout to match the platforms for lifts and escalators and they're not quite matching currently. regards Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Wickham Market, Suffolk
Sent from MailDroid -Original Message- From: Mark Goodge To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Sent: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 11:32 Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Wickham Market, Suffolk On 07/09/2018 11:25, Martin Wynne wrote: >> If it were true, then almost every village would need 30mph repeater >> signs throughout, as they wouldn't have enough lighting to count as a >> built up area. In practice, though, they don't. > > Yes they do. At least all the villages I know have 30mph repeaters. > Here's a couple at random: > > https://goo.gl/maps/zMfNHUFTSW92 > > https://goo.gl/maps/N96GbyndYRB2 None of the villages round here do. Nor do any of those I've lived in previously. (Quoting crap on mobile clients!) Broadway is still a village in my book, and had to sort speed limit signs when speeding tickets were found invalid. In some ways the facebook singular 'city' designation makes some sence. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic = rail tags
We still NEED some usable mechanism to maintain historic information. On the whole the map is just growing, so just a valid start date is all that is needed. But increasingly we have modern history where roads are remodelled, and moving the history of those changes to something other than the main database just seems pointless? - Original message - > I agree with Dave F here, where would you stop. > > I've been updating some streetnames around the SW, and noticed that > there are now railway=abandoned going through towns and villages where > there are no remains of the tracks visible. (Housing estates clearly > built over any remnants of old lines) > > Where there is physical evidence of an embankment, cutting, old track > route, then by all means record it. (I've done this myself, as it > helps to explain the topography) but this is not a historic document. > > Cheers > > Jason W (UniEagle) > > -Original Message- > From: Dave F. > Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 10:49 PM > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic = rail tags > > On 30/06/2012 15:11, SomeoneElse wrote: > > Obviously "mapping things that aren't there any more" is a bigger > > issue > Has there been discussion about this outside talk:railway? If there > hasn't I'm a bit annoyed that a niche user group didn't discuss it with > the wider world. > > You're correct it has been discussed before but I thought there was a > conclusion - that OSM is not a historic document. > > It there is physical evidence of something from days gone by then tag it > as such but if the landscape has totally obliterated it, leave it be. If > Peterito wants to create a 'railways of the past map' he should use OSM > as the _current_ background and import old ways from a separate database. > > One of the problems is where do you stop? I live in a city that's goes > back beyond Roman occupation. If OSM were to be totally inclusive & > complete in a historic sense then my patch would be a right PITA to move > around within the editors, let alone amend anything. > > Cheers > Dave F. > > > > ___ > 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] Temporary road closures
Kev js1982 wrote: I've only bothered on really long term ones , the most glaring example being in preston where it was in place for 24 months at least; our where the road will reopen on a new alignment - e.g. A46 Newark to Widmerpool The main bridge in Evesham is due to close for many months and I certainly think it's worth tagging when it happens as the alternative routes are miles! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Building Numbers
Chris Baines wrote: I have been playing around with OSM on my university's campus [1], I have most of the buildings and their names on OSM, but not the numbers. My university are quite good with data, you can see the building numbers (they are not really numbers, but alphanumeric identifiers) that I refer to here [2]. I am unsure though how to include this data in OSM, is there a tag I have missed? 1:http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.93539&lon=-1.39624&zoom=17&layers=M 2:http://data.southampton.ac.uk/places.html Are they used as part of the postal address? I had a quick scan around the website, but could not find any physical addresses listed ;) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr still irritates when I'm adding addresses for business premises ... addr:unit could fit your use ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Footway to Sidewalk?
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 PLEASE can someone revert that straight away !!! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] On Countryside paths
Nick Whitelegg wrote: Would there be sufficient interest from the community for a UK OSM site to be hosted on OSM servers and talk to the main OSM "read-only" database? Would people want contours too? If so Iwould be quite keen to do development work on it (I could re-use a lot of Freemap code)... just as long as I had free-reign to choose server- and client-side technologies. Such a thing could then act as an "official" OSM walking map of the UK - which I think would be quite nice. I'd happily contribute some time to help with something like that. The contours as a selectable lay is something I'd like to see on the main map, but for this area of the UK a local facility would be very useful. Cyclists would benefit as well as walkers. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] ITO - OSM Analysis updated with latest OS Locator data
Shaun McDonald wrote: OSM Analysis is available at: http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main Shaun I was going to ask what is the easiest way of finding which reporting area I am working in? After scouting around I've managed to find changes listed in Wychavon, but I'm not sure how far east that goes. Is there a map showing where reporting areas overlap? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] ITO - OSM Analysis updated with latest OS Locator data
Ed Loach wrote: Anyway, is the map you want the one that you get when you click "map" in the top right on the above link? OK cleaver clogs :) I can see my 'problem' sitting right on the boundary of two big areas ... which wrap one another as well. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Places and postcodes -- nodes/areas?
Andy Mabbett wrote: >People tend to place great importance on living "within" a certain postcode, >and thus we tend to think of them as defining areas, but they don't really Well, Royal Mail produce and supply, or at least used to, maps showing postcode districts, so perhaps someone should tell them that;-) There's more on the subject, at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_codes_in_the_United_Kingdom It is probably worth reminding people that the post codes are only designed to designate 'postal sorting routes' and as such, a small number do not even lie in the same county as the sorting office. The Post Office specifically excludes any changes that are not related to that function, and requests to 'change' a post code even when on opposite sides of the same road tend to be futile. The relation to an 'area' only covers the actual identified properties in the PAF. There is no 'definition' of the gaps between postcodes until perhaps a new building is added. This is one of the reasons that the National Land and Property Gazetteer uses it's on references numbers for streets and properties and postcodes - when recorded - are buried in the fine detail. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Highlighting an area ...
I'm in the middle of a web site overhaul for a town council, and I'd like to improve the site by using OSM maps for each of the wards. The problem is how to highlight the relevant area? I'm not sure that the wards are set up in the relevant area and so I'm wondering if it's time to move from Potlatch2 which does for the sort of fine tuning I am normally doing to something else - preferably Linux based :) Something that I can filter on the type of object I'm looking for? What I need to do is get up to date with what IS available now. I've got my mapserver tools all built into the web framework so I can work with raster images and add overlays, but now is the time to go beyond simply linking location maps and adding a little more interaction. A little aside, but in the same general area. My son is now doing google pano shoots which get added to streetview, but many of the shoots he is doing don't have a tidy connection to that. I have all of the relevant missing roads on OSM and would like to add links to our own copies of the images, although simply making links to the businesses would do for now. Another 'overlay' problem. Should I be off down openlayers as well? What is the current 'gold standard' here? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Highlighting an area ...
Tom Chance wrote: I'm in the middle of a web site overhaul for a town council, and I'd like to improve the site by using OSM maps for each of the wards. The problem is how to highlight the relevant area? One simple solution I have used: * get the OS open data boundary line dataset * use QGIS to clip the shapefile to just have the boundaries for wards in the town council's bounds * save that as geojson from QGIS * or as that previous step sometimes fails save as GPX, open in JOSM and save as geojson (!) * reference that in your leaflet or openlayers script, and use the attributes and styling to only show the selected ward, or show it differently, etc. In some map tools I've created for a local political party branch using leaflet-js, this results in nice polygons on a slippy map with the MapBox streets tiles. Very clean, attractive, quick and easy to use. Also for this site - www.londonrents.org.uk <http://www.londonrents.org.uk> You can also use QGIS to simplify the polygons if you're not bothered about precision. I've done this for the rents map above, which resulted in a much smaller chunk of geojson, which hugely improves loading times. That is on the line of where I am heading :) Of cause being able to click on a 'ward' and show the councillors will have to come later ... Currently the site just has a list of streets for each, so it will be nice to know if they are ALL on OSM ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] First steps with JOSM
OK Finally given in and downloaded JOSM ;) I'm liking what I am seeing ... One my dual screen setup I've got the display area filling the whole left screen, and the options boxes on the right ... with help open in the remaining area ;) Remembering to 'right click' to drag is going to take a little getting used to and 'esc' not actually removing a 'rogue node' ... but the warning before uploading is helpful. However it is also warning me about the ends of hedges and other similar detail. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.04696&lon=-1.856523&zoom=18&layers=M is the area I've been working on, adding the woodland area just north of the A44 and tidying up the hedge boundaries on that side of the road. I had to 'disconnect' a number of boundaries that were connected directly to the A44 to fit the woodland area in and I've added the 'footway' across the roundabout for pedestrians ... still need to work out any extra tags that needs! The area that is being complained about is the field just to the right side of the roundabout. There is a gated road and the 'gap' in the hedge is the gate into that field off that road. I've currently left the same gap as there is in the hedge, and on one hand that is right, but how do I add the gate. Obviously JOSM wants me to close the gap and add the gate? And then to I add a spur off the road to connect to it? The end of the hedge sticking out is also accurately mapped and does just 'end' but JOSM does not like that, so what is the 'current guideline' when we get into this level of mapping? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Boundaries ...
OK I'm buried deep into this and getting totally lost ... I'm using http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/ to check what needs doing We have 'admin?' levels 5=Regions ... so West Midlands 6=Counties ... But Manchester and some Welsh ones are missing? 7=Not used ... But I wonder if 'Unitary Authorities' might be better here? 8='Districts' ... But I'm not sure WHAT is currently set here? Should this be 'local_authority'? 9=Not Used 10=Parish ... Has some way to go, but why is CP appended to some areas and not others? The files I've checked have CP as part of the title so should we not standardise on that? The French have added a separate 'local_authority' http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dlocal_authority But we have been having a discussion on the main talk list about them doing their own thing ;) We could legitimise that by using it? I then have http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dpolitical With political_division of: parl_const county_division ward But we only seem to have a very small number of wards loaded? My immediate 'need' is to add a couple of constituencies and their wards , but I'm having trouble unravelling the 9 different data sets in the Boundary Line set. I think I need 'district_borough_unitary_ward_region' for the wards, but is it then 'westminster_const_region' for the constituency boundaries? Next step is what has already been converted and who is already adding stuff ... I've located 'county', district' and 'parish' but I assume that I need to process the ward data myself :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Boundaries ...
Chris Hill wrote: CP is appended on some parishes because that is the name from the OS OpenData Boundary Line. The name IMHO is better without the CP. I have to agree with that now I've looked closer. I'm working for 'Parish Councils' not 'Civil Parishes' :) Typically the ones I need are not present yet :( I'd not realised how long ago I last looked at this stuff. I've got the Oct2009 and May2010 files and nothing since :( Just downloaded May2012 but I could do with picking up the missing ones some time. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Boundaries ...
Colin Smale wrote: I and some other users have started to use "designation" to further qualify the tagging. Adding designation=civil_parish makes it unambiguous; admin_level=10 also gets used for "towns" which are not CPs (official Town Councils are actually CPs by another name). You might think of doing something similar with Westminster electoral wards - they are not "by definition" the same as council wards. In any case they should IMHO not be boundary=administrative but boundary=political. I already have a problem and I'm only looking at one 'Town Council' which is 'Evesham CP' and has 5 wards in the OS data, but I'm looking for SIX for which town councillors are elected :) I'm getting into QGIS and can see there have been no changes since 2010 but my next step is to get data I can view from JOSM and check against the 'list of streets' that are currently displayed on the Town Council website. AH ... as I suspected 'Evesham North' in the data consists of two wards on the ground, and it looks like a few other wards have the same problem ... The ONS data set matches OS data, so I'll check with my contacts tomorrow on how we identify the smaller areas. I've got a complete database of the ONS dataset as part of my NLPG handling package, and I'd prefer to stick with the names from that over the ones in the OS data! But obviously there are a few extra 'tags' I can add from the OS data. Looking at the 'raw vectors' I have in my mind something that I considered three years ago but never got around to because I did not have the tools. The bulk of the boundaries are the same 'layer to layer', so would it not make sense to extract a single clean set of ways from the data and then create relations that simply pick up the relevant ways and add the right tags. Combining the ONS data with the OS Boundary Line stuff? OK some of this stuff has been added, but only the county boundaries cover the whole of England, and Scotland and Wales would benefit from finishing that? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Geo-referencing
OK things are going well and I actually have a shape file for the wards that I need to get started ( except one need cutting down the middle ) and with the .prj fix it even overlays the map perfectly, so I presume that everybody is using the same alignment fix with the borderline shape files? If I just replace all the .prj files with the 'new' one all the layers will line up? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] First steps with JOSM
Gregory wrote: The area that is being complained about is the field just to the right side of the roundabout. There is a gated road and the 'gap' in the hedge is the gate into that field off that road. I've currently left the same gap as there is in the hedge, and on one hand that is right, but how do I add the gate. Obviously JOSM wants me to close the gap and add the gate? No gap, make it a continuous way with a node at the location of the node. Tag that node with barrier=gate or barrier=entrance if it is a gap and not a gate that opens and closes. I had made a proposal to tag the usual state of a gate (open/closed/locked) but I don't think it got much support/use. I'm curious about the gate that's a node on the road. Is that another gate? See the wiki page for helpful information. In this particular case there are three gates. It is a gated road, and then the are gates in the hedge on either side of the road into fields. Hence the question about adding roadway up to the other gates ... And of cause what is missing on the wiki page is 'width'. That is probably more important than height especially when moving combines and the like around :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Acceptability of data sources for road names
Donald Noble wrote: I would appreciate some opinions on acceptable data sources for road names when out surveying, particularly thinking about new housing developments here, but could apply elsewhere too. Of the six data sources below, the first and last are pretty black and white OK and not OK respectively, but what about the shades of grey in between? 1. Road sign saying "Main Street" 2. Sign on house door "6 Main Street" 3. Information board with map labelling road as "Main Street" 4. Housing development sales board with map labelling road as "Main Street" 5. Map on housing development sales website labelling road as "Main Street" 6. Commercial map of new housing development labelling road as "Main Street" And one other that doesn't fit on this continuum is asking a local resident what the name of the new road is. I suppose this also applies to other information too, although perhaps with additional caveats, especially if it is rarely available on signs on the ground. Sorry if this has been covered before, but I've not come across it. World Wide this is a continual debate, where different translations and 'changes of ethnicity' result in roads being CALLED something different ;) The rule is 'map what is on the ground', so road signs rule, but there may well be alternative versions, such as two languages - welsh creates some fun. If a house door has details on then that should be tagged against the house. It may actually be different to the street sign :) OFFICIAL new street names are created by the local council and logged with their LLPG officer who will update the NLPG at regular intervals. Streets form their own register at http://www.thensg.org.uk ... NOW we just need free access to it and a bot that can cross check that all of the entries exist in OSM :) THAT is a request I've put through on the open data questionair, but if we all ask? In the meantime, the local council have to make the data available under open access, so the information is freely available locally. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Stiles (and gates) on roads
Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote: Instead, the two paths on the same side should meet at a separate node a small distance from the style, with a short linking segment between that node and the stile. With a short segment joining the stile to any other highway ... Ideally the barriers would be placed the right physical distance from any road that they link to with the correct link to the main way. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Offset problem
I've been playing with osrm, but while http://map.project-osrm.org/?hl=en&loc=52.019300,-1.982110&z=14¢er=52.019233,-1.991326 allows me to create routes correctly, hte road details are several miles adrift from the actual location. Anybody else seeing this? AH - it's just getting 'town' wrong ... so is that something that needs fixing in the tags? Where are the 'town' details picked up from? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Offset problem
Philip Barnes wrote: OSRM uses the place node from OSM. The node needs to be close enough to a road it can navigate to, otherwise it will fail. I moved Shrewsbury for this reason as it was in the middle of a pedestrianised area. I've added addr:place tags along with the postcode to all the roads in the area, THEN I found that 'Dumbleton' place tag was flagged as is_in Gloucestershire which does not help :) Interesting ... I know Dumbleton as in Worcestershire, but the Gloucestershire border IS north of the vilage. Searches give both Worcs and Gloucs county references and the POSTAL address IS Dumbleton, EVESHAM and it's a WR postcode, but Google says Worcs and Bing say Glocs :) I just seem to have picked a 'difficult one' -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Offset problem
Lester Caine wrote: Philip Barnes wrote: OSRM uses the place node from OSM. The node needs to be close enough to a road it can navigate to, otherwise it will fail. I moved Shrewsbury for this reason as it was in the middle of a pedestrianised area. I've added addr:place tags along with the postcode to all the roads in the area, THEN I found that 'Dumbleton' place tag was flagged as is_in Gloucestershire which does not help :) Interesting ... I know Dumbleton as in Worcestershire, but the Gloucestershire border IS north of the vilage. Searches give both Worcs and Gloucs county references and the POSTAL address IS Dumbleton, EVESHAM and it's a WR postcode, but Google says Worcs and Bing say Glocs :) I just seem to have picked a 'difficult one' Seems the 'posh' side of Dumbleton prefer to be 'Worcs' while the official location is 'Glocs' :) Have put the place back, but this is an area that needs handling a little better. Postal details do not necessarily match reality on the ground as we know, but it would at least be helpful if the local 'place' featured in any search results. I've added addr:place=Dumbleton and addr:city=Evesham which is the correct postal address so I can see what changes. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Offset problem
Philip Barnes wrote: According to wikipedia Dumbleton is in Gloucestershire, and the location of the border in OSM confirms this. The postal address/postcode means nothing, its just where the post comes from. Always annoys me when I hear Donington Park described as The Derbyshire circuit. Totally agree ... but when the 'on the ground' situation is X, Near Y as the normal 'location', then getting fed something else in OSRM gets very confusing. I live in Broadway which is a tongue of Worcs sticking into Gloucs and sometimes we get referred to as Gloucs as people drive across :) OSRM is calling us 'Wychavon' though which is even more confusing :( No mention of 'Broadway' at all -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Offset problem
Ed Loach wrote: Dumbleton seems to think it is in Gloucestershire based on the links from http://www.dumbletonvillage.co.uk/ It may be one of these strange places though that because their sorting office is in WR gets a postal county of Worcestershire but an admin county of Gloucestershire. I think I read recently that Royal Mail have dropped counties from their addresses though. Wikipedia suggests something similar to what I remember: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_counties_of_the_United_Kingdom At the risk of repeating myself ;) The problem I'm seeing now I investigate further is not so much the 'county', but rather the missing 'city' and/or 'place' references. Dumbleton, Evesham is correct ... it's 9km Dumbleton, Tewkesbury is wrong ... it's 15km And Smallbrook Road, Wychavon just does not make any sense at all :( Yet move over the boarder a few hundred meters and I get Field Lane, Willersey which IS correct. All I'm trying to do here is get Nominatim and OSRM reporting the correct details ... but I've not found any 'rules' yet to get these reported correctly? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Working nicely
http://zverik.osm.rambler.ru is doing it's job nicely. All my updates and those from other people in the area are dropping into the in box and I can see if I have cocked up :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Finally today ...
I'm going to strip all the 'xx_CP' back to simply 'xx' for the 'parish stuff', but I think that Nomination is 'incorrectly' using 'political' areas when building a location rather than 'economic' ones. Hence we get Smallbrook Road Broadway CP Wychavon Worcestershire West Midlands England WR12 7EP United Kingdom Stripping the Wychavon, West Midlands, England layers would make the results on 'Results from OpenStreetMap Nominatim' a lot more readable Smallbrook Road Broadway Worcestershire WR12 7EP United Kingdom I know this is an international thing, but overseas locations always seem to have an even shorted 'address' that this anyway? Need to get a lot of content moved over now ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Offset problem
Tom Chance wrote: On 23 October 2012 12:31, Lester Caine http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2012-September/013791.html Unfortunately the :- My question is: are there any guidelines on how such areas/relations should be defined? Political/admin boundaries don't really help. Is it a case of just using my instinct & local knowledge? Are there any good examples elsewhere? Question did not get answered :( It went off onto postcodes ... For straight forward Nominatim bugs you can enter something in http://trac.openstreetmap.org Let me in this time ... must have miss-typed ... But it's not really a 'bug' - although asking for documentation may be appropriate? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FW: Office of National Statistics data
Tom Hughes wrote: Is that different to what's used on www.openstreetmap.org for the Search box? That's where I want to see accurate postcode searching. The search box on www.osm.org uses nominatim.osm.org which as far as I know is running Nominatim 2 and includes Codepoint Open as a data source. What gets a little confusing is that the results will only contain the full postcode if it's been added to an address, otherwise you may get results from several postcodes in highly populated areas. Once the data is transferred to addresses, only those addresses appear. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FW: Office of National Statistics data
Kevin Peat wrote: Making this sort of distinction (what can have a postcode) is incredibly >difficult - for instance NCP carparks do have a postcode. > Shame about that, but if someone does a full postcode search and there are OSM objects tagged with that exact postcode then wouldn't it be better just to return those objects or at least have them at the top of the list? In my case there are 3 buildings tagged with the full postcode but when I search for it they appear below an entry for the suburb of the town which I think if shown at all should be further down the list. That is a sensible suggestion ... There ARE objects that could be left out of the search, but actually car parks are not one of them if one uses that to direct clients where to park via sat nav. I'd make a case for leaving out post boxes IF there is a result with a full post code, and perhaps this is the problem? Until there are actual targets, anything in the general area can be useful. SO listing 'exact match' then any possible secondary hits is a good starting point? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Office of National Statistics data
Rob Nickerson wrote: On a related note, we now have the support of the Open Data User Group (ODUG), who have issued a paper calling for the release of address data as open data. As you may or may not recall, ODUG reports in to the Cabinet Office and is responsible for identify public sector datasets that should be made openly available. I haven't had a reply to my own request re the NSG and NLPG stuff, but presumably there were a substantial number of requests for the same data! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Problem with missing links on road
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.04697&lon=-1.857193&zoom=18&layers=C has a gap between the Leamington Road and the roundabout. These exist on the other views and I can't see anything wrong. Any thoughts on why they are missing on the cycle and transport map views? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Problem with missing links on road
Philip Barnes wrote: Am not sure why they are tertiary_link, they are just a short section of one-way around a roundabout splitter island. In this case I think they should be changed to tertiary. I must admit I have never understood the highway=..._link. Didn't think of that one. The 'link' stuff does make sense at times but probably not here where the one-way bit is probably enough. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Added road schemes announced in the Autumn Statement in OSM
Kevin Peat wrote: > No. We should be mapping physical objects... There are plenty of non-physical objects mapped in OSM but I don't see the point of adding road schemes to the db before contracts are awarded. The South Devon Link Road near me was in the planning stage for more than 25 years before work started and having proposed routes in OSM for such long periods wouldn't benefit anyone. The problem is the lack of any current overlay facilities. We are looking at an overlay for historic information, and perhaps a similar 'projected' overlay is now about due? Where more than one proposed route is being discussed, it WOULD be nice to be able to see that information in parallel with OSM, but certainly not in the main database. ( Removing past history from the database is still not cut and dry in my book, but if a safe haven is created for that ... ) Personally I think the right time for any 'new' development to appear is when the diggers move in and start work. At that point it becomes useful to see what is going on from existing routes? Anything else is just 'speculation'. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Added road schemes announced in the Autumn Statement in OSM
David Earl wrote: http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/road-projects/a11-fiveways-to-thetford-improvement/ Yes indeed, it's true, they have been clearing the trees through the forest alongside the existing road and levelling the ground. It's been closed overnight in sections to do this so I had to go a long way round when I went that way a few weeks ago. It's a pity that the roundabouts are not being bypassed :( Getting traffic up to the Thetford Bypass quicker is just going to increase the queues there? I seem to remember queueing that end every time I want over but it's been a couple of years since I last went. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Added road schemes announced in the Autumn Statement in OSM
Jason Cunningham wrote: (just noticed my work on the South Devon Link Road and surrounding area has been deleted, then the same info re-added by someone else! I've been cleansed from the history.) This is the more 'irritating' bit here. People spending a substantial amount of time doing work that someone else simply removes! I'll bang on again about secondary databases where the likes of these 'proposals' can be staged prior to their physical appearance, but the more annoying aspect of this moving forward is the simple scrapping of the current on the ground situation which IS perfectly valid information. Taking the A11 developments as an example, all of the current routing is nicely mapped, so displaying '2012' version of the map requires no 'extra' mapping. It would be nice to be able to roll back show the roads development over time, and there are people around who would contribute that material if a mechanism was available to fill in the gaps. It's the current lack of a mechanism to use/display current historic data that needs addressing? A slightly different example of this is looking at historic data in change sets. I'm probably spoilt with some of the comparison tools when looking at differences between versions of a file or changeset. But it would be nice to see a graphical 'diff' between version of object history in OSM ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone famiiar with Hay-on-Wye?
SomeoneElse wrote: I recently deleted a doodle in Hay-on-Wye, but after doing so noticed that to there northwest there seem to be a cycle path and a footpath _very_ close together: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.073537&lon=-3.130221&zoom=18&layers=M I guess that this could be correct, but presumably it's also possible that they're really the same thing. If it is incorrect, is anyone able to patch it up with local knowledge? I can't remember the exact details around there (been many years since I last walked it), but the main cycleway is the old railway track, and there there several footpaths which used to run originally alongside the railway. So probably just a case that your deletion needs rolling back. One of the problems which makes understanding some of the close proximities is the random nature of 'layers' added just to some elements. The steps between the old track bed and the footway passing under it start and end on the same layer? There is nothing to distinguish the vertical relation between the two tracks going north although guesswork would suggest that the footpath may be further down the slope towards the river? There is quite a steep drop from the town to the river. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone famiiar with Hay-on-Wye?
SomeoneElse wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/199683324/history If you look at it in P1 it's an obvious untagged doodle. Not having P1 running, cross checking other peoples changes can be a little difficult :( View of history is an area I'd still like to see some facilities for. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Highways Leading to Farms and single residential properties in rural areas
Kevin Peat wrote: On 11 Mar 2013 21:27, "Dudley Ibbett" mailto:dudleyibb...@hotmail.com>> wrote: > > Is there a correct answer for this or is it a matter of mapping style? I am leaning towards using Highway=Service for these and keeping Highway=Track for "tracks" that link from fields to farms or roads to fields (i.e. not from roads to farmyards or residential properties... > Modern farms are more like industrial estates with access designed for 40t trucks and massive farm machinery so in those cases I favour highway=service for the main farm access road even if it has a central divide like a track might have. Highway=track is better for typical bridleways, green lanes, etc that only a tractor or 4x4 could use. I tend to follow the same rule. As soon as there is a diversity of premises on the way then it tends to get 'service'. A single residence would not normally have it's drive shown, but where it may have public access to walk down, 'track' seems less formal? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Aerial Photographs
Andy Robinson wrote: I'm less worried about scanning and managing the files now as I have sufficient scanning equipment to cover most bases and disk space attached to an OSM sever doesn't appear to be an issue. We would need to come up with tools and methods of turning them into a seamless mosaic but I'm sure given the task there's a workable solution for that too. All thoughts, suggestions and offers welcome. I've still got space in dry storage and I need to run up to Sheffield with the van to drop some kit into my remote hosting site in the next few weeks so can provide a short term storage solution while things are discussed further. But ideally this needs to be stored in a 'library' location? Or do the photographs need to be stored once scanned and indexed? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Taginfo Golf Tags
Dave F. wrote: BTW, are there any renderings that show golf course details like tees, bunkers, greens etc? It's a shame mapnik doesn't. I'm just looking to add a couple of golf course details myself. Can anybody point me to a good example showing details in the UK. The examples shown on the wiki page are not particularly easy to work with, and I like to be able to 'edit' the demo area to see the things that are not displayed. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Taginfo Golf Tags
sk53.osm wrote: I've added the Ladies (Pans) Course at Machrihanish <http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?q=machrihanish&zoom=16&lat=55.42622&lon=-5.72159&layers=B0F> and the 1st & 18th of the Championship course. I can't remember where all the tees are, and as for many links courses, fairways are often shared between holes. I've put two out-of-bounds ways on too, but these need refinement (left of 18 on the main course, i.e., the fairway on 9 of the 9-hole course is out-of-bounds, but not vice versa). Other things to note, the beach is in play on the 1st, I've not added other water hazards. I don't put single lines in for holes as these entirely depend on the ability of the golfer. Parkland courses usually have the edges of the holes more obviously distinguished, but then the rough is usually less intimidating. I long ago started but never finished Chilwell Manor <http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?q=machrihanish&zoom=17&lat=52.91646&lon=-1.21937&layers=B0F>. Bob Kerr provided some examples off list http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=56.00343&lon=-2.5352&zoom=16 is typical and has a lot more detail than is rendered - no bunkers for example. But I don't think we need an outline to each hole as in your example ( both links are the same ) ... I'd prefer to see one of the tee to hole tracks which is a little easier to view, that is if it's rendered ;) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Taginfo Golf Tags
sk53.osm wrote: I noted above why I dont like tee to hole tracks & the 1st at Macrihanish is a great example. If you are a scratch golfer you drive over the beach directly at the hole. Good club golfers will drive more the right avoiding the horrors of being down on the beach. Hackers will try and just lay-up anywhere on the fairway towards the 18th green. Which one is right? The other problem is that the line may be very different from championship tees compared with standard tees, and again different for ladies tees. A more pertinent point from an OSM point of view is that it is not an on-the-ground feature or suitable for verification. It does look nice on rendering and those golf maps they show in the newspapers. Totally understand that, which is probably why arbitrary outlines are wrong as well ;) My point about a line from tee area through to hole is that it does give a clean overview of the course at lower res? Some of the examples Bob supplied we difficult to link tee and hole, but both tee and hole are surv3yable points. Once a better means of adding secondary data is available, then showing the PAR calculations for each colour of tee makes sense but is OTT for the base map. I'm not a golfer - but I can see the advantage of hints when new to a course. I've copied to list as I think this is part of the general discussion to get an approved tagging page. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mass edits of landuse /natural tags
John Baker wrote: The wiki is a consensus of opinion over the years about how to tag things. The lack of respect for this I find staggering. It would be nice if there WAS a consensus. There are a number of 'contradictions' and the area of landuse vs natural has been debated many times and I don't think any of the current 'selections' accurately describe the situation so there is still room for improvement. The general consensus seems to be that 'landuse' is used where an area is managed or has been artificially created and natural where there is no discernible management. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dgrassland highlights some of the subtle differences, and there is a valid argument for natural=meadow co existing with landuse=meadow since there are still some remaining natural meadowlands, or should that be natural=grassland/grassland=meadow ? I don't see the need for the 'grasslands' here at all - just use meadow,veld,pampas or what ever with natural. 'wood' is another area where there are managed and unmanaged woodland which is not forest. landcover was I think proposed at one time to remove the distinction between managed and unmanaged but in reality the distinction IS important even if it's use is not being applied properly. So what checks are you making that there is not such a distinction between the areas that you arbitrarily changing? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mass edits of landuse /natural tags
John Baker wrote: If the original editor applied the tags on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dmeadow <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%253Dmeadow> there is no issue. There it defines the state of the managed or unmanaged. And that is the pain the the backside since all these EXTRA tags are unnecessary if the base standard is followed properly. I should not have to look at secondary tags to find that an area is not actually 'landuse', but rather 'natural'. You should be able to identify managed and unmanaged areas from the main tag! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic=rail
Richard Fairhurst wrote: Taginfo/Taginfo GB suggest that railway:historic=rail is not used much elsewhere in the world, and that railway=abandoned, =disused and =dismantled remain the popular choices. No client software appears to take any notice of railway:historic=rail. Would there be any opposition to gradually reverting uses of this tag to railway=dismantled/abandoned, depending on what's on the ground? The only documentation I could find (on a wiki discussion page, of all the obscure places): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Railways#railway:historic.3Dxxx_or_former:railway.3Dxxx_in_place_of_railway.3Dabandoned.2Fdismantled.3F There is a special case, but I'm not sure that is what you are actually seeing. While the track bed may have been lifted, a number of 'historic' lines still have statutory orders in place designating them as 'protected'. For instance the line up from Broadway extending the GWR track from Toddington has to be treated as if it is active and the Broadway Bypass had to have a bridge built to allow for an electrified line to be run through. BR is unlikely ever to do that and the information is not visible on the ground, but it is available information. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic=rail
Barnett, Phillip wrote: BR is unlikely ever to do that and the information is not > visible on the ground, but it is available information. > > -- > Lester Caine - G8HFL They certainly are unlikely ever to do that. Unless this lot succeed .. http://www.bringbackbritishrail.org/ :-) In the case of my local line BR may not open it, but GWR preservation has an option to continue the line north and given the land slip problems going south it may be a cheaper option for them :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic=rail
sk53.osm wrote: I don't think Richard's original post was an invitation to discuss arcane quirks of Britain's historical railway system. I have raised the issue of wholesale tag changing several times recently, and as this tagging is clearly not with the consensus of mappers either in the UK or elsewhere, I would suggest it be reverted. Casual changing of tags can create a lot of work for people. That is one of the reasons why it needs to be discussed. In this case the different tag could have been added rather than obliterate a widely used tag convention. I would support a reversion of these edits, and ask the contributor to consult with this list first. Screwing the ordering of the thread up totally ... My point to Richard was that there MAY be a valid use for a different tag. Richard was asking if he could change it, but part of the reason for local tagging differences IS because of arcane quirks ... That is not to say that this tags is right ... there is room to clean up a number of the railway related tags ... just that it may be flagging a difference that 'abandoned' looses. Given the amount of work now being done on additional railway information on the map, proper expansion of the fine detail is important. On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Richard Fairhurst mailto:rich...@systemed.net>> wrote: I've just been bitten by the minority, largely undocumented usage of railway:historic=rail on a bunch of dismantled/abandoned railways in Britain. Having exported some OSM data and done a few days' manual processing on it, I belatedly find that various lines are missing due to not taking account of this tag and I'm going to have to do a whole bunch more work. :( Taginfo/Taginfo GB suggest that railway:historic=rail is not used much elsewhere in the world, and that railway=abandoned, =disused and =dismantled remain the popular choices. No client software appears to take any notice of railway:historic=rail. Would there be any opposition to gradually reverting uses of this tag to railway=dismantled/abandoned, depending on what's on the ground? The only documentation I could find (on a wiki discussion page, of all the obscure places): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/__wiki/Talk:Railways#railway:__historic.3Dxxx_or_former:__railway.3Dxxx_in_place_of___railway.3Dabandoned.__2Fdismantled.3F <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Railways#railway:historic.3Dxxx_or_former:railway.3Dxxx_in_place_of_railway.3Dabandoned.2Fdismantled.3F> -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] OSM volunteer to participate in panel discussion
Hello, I have had a request from Ian Holt of Ordnance Survey to see if anyone involved with OSM would like to sit on this panel: "We have a Mobile Monday London event themed around location on the 24th June. Would you or someone you could suggest from OSM be able/willing to attend to sit on a panel? Topics will include crowd sourcing." http://www.mobilemonday.org.uk/ I don't feel remotely qualified to attend as my actual involvement in data capture is very limited. Can anyone suggest someone? Cheers, Stu ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Testing off-line
Sorry for 'noise' - just checking that I can send emails direct again. Once one finds the answer to a problem things are easy, but it seems that since BT forced all their business customers over to 'Office365' - something I will never use - the reply address on my account has been messed up. Don't you just love progress :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ongoing routing developments
Andrew M. Bishop wrote: lsces writes: >"Disclaimer: I wrote Routino, so I might be slightly biased." > >Andrew >Added that to my list, but I find it a little cumbersome with respect to the >other options. Having now got osrm working on my own server, the way that >you can drag the route around is very nice. That said, my main 'problem' >with the current routing engines is their novel way of identifying one's >motion at a change of route such as at a roundabout. What prompted me to dig >deeper was being in the wrong lane on the M25 because of these 'mistakes':( >Oh and making this work well on a tablet/smartphone. Your website is a bit >heavy for that target. Your feedback is useful, even if slightly negative. When you say cumbersome I guess that you a referring to the web interface rather than the command line version? I have always considered the web interface as a secondary part of Routino. It is however a necessary feature for allowing the primary feature - the routing software - to be displayed. Unfortunately when I wrote the web interface the only choice was OpenLayers but it seems that most maps these days are using Leaflet. If you have any more feedback, particularly about the quality of the routing instructions, I would be interested to hear it (off-list if you prefer). My problem Andrew is 'testing' routing instructions. Locus on the Android machines has four options, and using them out on the road I'm starting to build up a 'wish list' to get something that works SAFELY. If Routino was an option then I could test that as well, but I'm limited to off-line testing via the web interface. The main problem I am finding even with OSRM is the fact that none of these are usable when traveling down motorways and main trunk roads. I had thought OSRM was doing a better job, but I've had a run through a route that I've never used before, and 'straight' at every stage of moving from the M6 onto the M42 South is a real problem when you should be using the inside and then outside lanes through the intersection. FORTUNATELY I'm still running the tomtom which correctly reports the lane to be using. Next step on my part is to see if I can get Locus to select a private OSRM server in place of the default one. I have my local server working and I can get at some of the elements, but need to be able to use it live. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] BBC article on volunteers mapping hillforts
Adam Hoyle wrote: This would be awesome information to have in OSM, but as it is historic information, sometimes with no obvious above ground visualisation, is it definitely appropriate for the project? (Personally I hope it is, but wanted to see what the consensus is). OHM has been set up exactly to support this type of data ;) But it looks a little empty at presnet :( http://www.openhistoricalmap.org/ -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] BBC article on volunteers mapping hillforts
Adam Hoyle wrote: On 8 Jul 2013, at 11:31, Lester Caine wrote: >Adam Hoyle wrote: >>This would be awesome information to have in OSM, but as it is historic >>information, sometimes with no obvious above ground visualisation, is it >>definitely appropriate for the project? (Personally I hope it is, but wanted to >>see what the consensus is). > >OHM has been set up exactly to support this type of data;) >But it looks a little empty at presnet:( >http://www.openhistoricalmap.org/ Wow, I didn't realise such a thing existed - looks potentially rather awesome, although I agree it is slightly empty right now. What's the background / roadmap / plan with it? Is it 'owned' by OSM, or an offshoot? http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic is the discussion list, and it's a work in progress ... needs a bit more support to get the rules laid down and one of the things still to be resolved is how to link between current data which may have 'start_date' relevant to a search, and data which has expired from the current map ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] First pass at cross reference to UK tile sources.
The list of available historic maps UK we can use directly as backgrounds to OSM data is growing nicely. I've tabulated ones I've had a play with on http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/index.php?page=Tile+Server+Sources and a number of them can be selected as backgrounds on http://myhomecloud.co.uk:8080/osrm/ The myhomecloud site will be tidied up and much of this will be hosted there, but currently the index of data is at http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/index.php?page=Mapping+Index Now that there are a number of alternative UK sources I'll switch the mapserver page back to it's original map set covering the Isle of Man on it's own. The old maps need a little tweek to align them better with OSM, and then these views can be added to the timeline. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Help with postgres
I've been working through all the disjointed installation guides in order to set up mapnik to run my own server, but while I'm fairly happy that everything is now in place, generate_tiles.py is giving me an authentication error. I had some fun at various points, and I'm installing onto an SUSE12.3 server which is running text only, so I'm using ssh access to give me the command line, which may be part of my problem since I'm logged in as 'root'. I seem to have a 'gis' database fully populated, and I can access it via the user 'root', but not via the user 'gisuser' which is what I thought should be used, and which has worked in all the previous steps running osm2pgsql. Can anybody kick me in the right direction to fix this? I've got osrm routing running on the machine so something has set up properly. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with postgres
Keith Sharp wrote: When I did this, many years ago, I used something like: createuser -S -D -R apache echo "GRANT ALL ON SCHEMA PUBLIC TO apache;" | psql gis echo "grant all on geometry_columns to apache;" | psql gis echo "grant all on spatial_ref_sys to apache;" | psql gis I'm using apache as the user ID here as that's what Mapnik was running as. This is taken from: http://www.passback.org.uk/maps/fedora.shtml. Not helping :( I used http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/PostGIS/Installation#openSUSE_11.2 to set up, and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik#Authentication_failure kicked in, but 'psql gis' gets me in and I can play with the data, just generate_tiles.py is giving the FATAL: Ident authentication failed for user "root" error On 10 Jul 2013, at 08:43, Lester Caine wrote: I've been working through all the disjointed installation guides in order to set up mapnik to run my own server, but while I'm fairly happy that everything is now in place, generate_tiles.py is giving me an authentication error. I had some fun at various points, and I'm installing onto an SUSE12.3 server which is running text only, so I'm using ssh access to give me the command line, which may be part of my problem since I'm logged in as 'root'. I seem to have a 'gis' database fully populated, and I can access it via the user 'root', but not via the user 'gisuser' which is what I thought should be used, and which has worked in all the previous steps running osm2pgsql. Can anybody kick me in the right direction to fix this? I've got osrm routing running on the machine so something has set up properly. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with postgres
Lester Caine wrote: Not helping :( Panic over! Just needed to re-read the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik#Authentication_failure note ... I'd missed that the xml file was generated without a -user setting ;) Up to level 9 already ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with postgres
Tom Hughes wrote: On 10/07/13 09:24, Lester Caine wrote: Not helping :( I used http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/PostGIS/Installation#openSUSE_11.2 to set up, and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik#Authentication_failure kicked in, but 'psql gis' gets me in and I can play with the data, just generate_tiles.py is giving the FATAL: Ident authentication failed for user "root" error Well why are you running renderd as root! You really, really don't want to be doing that... Habit ... I'm remote onto the machine via ssh as root because I was configuring the server and that is the way I've done things for many years ... May not be politically correct these days, but I can set up the various accounts quickly and I've not got used to having to 'sudo' every command :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] bbox coordinates
Anybody got an 'optimal' bbox setting for the UK and Ireland including the Scottish Isles. I'm running (-14.5, 49, 3, 61) but I'm sure that the -14.5 is overkill? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] bbox coordinates
Lester Caine wrote: Anybody got an 'optimal' bbox setting for the UK and Ireland including the Scottish Isles. I'm running (-14.5, 49, 3, 61) but I'm sure that the -14.5 is overkill? OK trimmed that to (-12.2, 49, 3, 61) which picks up the sea details off Ireland. May nudge the 61 up to 62.5 to include the Faroe Islands later. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] bbox coordinates
Philip Stubbs wrote: You have chopped off Rockall! That is at -13.688. Not sure if there is anything else west of that. THAT was what I'd missed ;) Could not see that on the low res images. Actually I think I'll segment this up and do bbox elements for the scottish isles, faroe's and rockall. creating tiles for the sea area is taking too much time. On 10 July 2013 10:40, Lester Caine mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk>> wrote: Lester Caine wrote: Anybody got an 'optimal' bbox setting for the UK and Ireland including the Scottish Isles. I'm running (-14.5, 49, 3, 61) but I'm sure that the -14.5 is overkill? OK trimmed that to (-12.2, 49, 3, 61) which picks up the sea details off Ireland. May nudge the 61 up to 62.5 to include the Faroe Islands later. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=__contact <http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.__uk <http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk> _ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org> http://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-gb <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb> -- Philip Stubbs -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historic Maps - Can you help?
Steven Horner wrote: I've used the NLS maps a lot and wish there were more maps from England available. Obviously this isn't a priority for them but would happily help in anyway I can. I have looked at their online georeferencer but almost all are done. It's a shame the English equivelant aren't as open. What is available covering England is not too bad. A number of the sets I have are already available as backgrounds and a few just as scanned sheets. The reason for creating the list was to work out just what does still need scanning. I'd like to be able to run through all issues of the bartholomew half inch series but even the ones already available are a start. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Historic Maps - Can you help?
Rob Nickerson wrote: I'd like to be able to run through all issues of the Bartholomew half inch series but even the ones already available are a start. Lester, Are you aware that Bartholomew half inch maps for Scotland, England and Wales are available online at http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/ ? If yes, then can you please explain to me (in simple terms :-) ) exactly what you would like. Is it that you would like to see the issues from other years so that you can see how things have evolved on the ground? NLS has a couple of editions, but there are several editions and yes I'm looking to the evolution of areas over time. http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/index.php?page=Bartholomew+Cloth Thanks, Rob p.s. We should be able to get this view added to JOSM and other editors with ease if it is not already there. Yes I've been using a number of historic layers already. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Banquetting Halls (neither hotels, not community centres)
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: >Banqueting hall seems rather specific. >These types of places may be used for a wide variety of events, so may be >known by different names. eg might be used for conferences, exhibition, live >music etc. > >I think a more generic tag for an "event hall" would be useful. That's probably better than banqueting hall. On the other hand, it needs to be distinguished from the concept "exposition centre" which is listed as something that a conference centre is not. Conference centre was suggested off list, but I think that is different: much more strongly B2B, large groups talking together, rather than lots of small conversations, little connotation of food and even less of music and dance. This is where there needs perhaps to be a better concept of two level tags? The building has a hall or halls. And that encompasses village halls through to the likes of the NEC. What the halls are used for is almost secondary, and perhaps a check list of functions? If a hall is licensed to carry out weddings then that is an additional flag rather than trying to find a single name for these type of building? But this is where the secondary data should perhaps also be a separate database? With everybody trying to get in on the specialist market band wagon, 'Banqueting hall' is another use that could be applied anywhere, but I can see that being a specialist type of restaurant rather than a 'hall' since essentially it's a place to eat with some form of themed entertainment? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: Incidentally, one common usage I do agree with, and which Ofcom seem to use, is the space after the director exchange, as 79460676 is a bit long to remember as one group, and there is a historical, and some geographic, significance, in this split. http://www.area-codes.org.uk/formatting.php 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. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: In particular, in London, you can dial this number as 00442079460676, 02079460676 or 79460676. On the other hand, dialing it as 9460676 will fail. I'd forgotten that particular reason for grouping the extra 7/8 differently! Been 25 years since I moved out from London :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Banquetting Halls (neither hotels, not community centres)
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: >specialist market band wagon, 'Banqueting hall' is another use that could be >applied anywhere, but I can see that being a specialist type of restaurant >rather than a 'hall' since essentially it's a place to eat with some form of >themed entertainment? Whilst "banqueting hall" is used in the PR material for the place in question, what is actually on sale is the use of the building and some very basic services. The patrons are expected to source food and entertainment from third party contractors. This is where the current tag setup is something of a mess. There are gaps in the 'building' tag which get building=yes and some other tag ( 7000+ building=no is interesting ;) ) but with some 4600 different tags for 'building' simply adding banqueting_hall is probably perfectly valid as well. Probably the right way to tag these type of operations is ... landuse=commercial building=commercial amenity=hall - which is not listed under amenity, but is used website=xxx - which will give the details (if we could access them from the map) But it's all so inconsistent with other buildings? There is amenity=banquet_hall used but personally I'd expect that to be something more like a tourist attraction 'medieval banquet' venue running mainly themed events? Something like http://www.lumleycastle.com/elizabethan-banquets/ but that is not detailed currently ;) http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=146749#map=17/54.85361/-1.55454 - actually that need s alot of tidying up to add missing detail. The bottom line is "do we add the fine detail?" ... places like Lumley are a hotel, restaurant, banqueting hall, and so on, so should there be tags for each? If a hotel does not accept non-residents in it's restaurant then it's not tagged ... it's function room may be tagged as 'licensed for weddings' or just receptions ... where do you stop :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
Tom Hughes 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... As I said - been 25 years - I can remember the changeover but not what I did last week :) That said I see little benefit in a mass edit, especially in cases which just amount to inserting or moving whitespace. Then again I see little benefit in adding phone numbers to OSM in the first place. In the absence of a mechanism to reliably link external data to objects in OSM, then there is a small reason for including the phone number with an address, along with a web url. But I'm probably with you that IN the main database is not the right location. A secondary searchable database makes a lot more sense but I've been pushing that for years :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Banquetting Halls (neither hotels, not community centres)
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: website=xxx - which will give the details (if we could access them from the >map) If you access it fromhttp://www.openlinkmap.org/ you can access them from the map (and also phone numbers). How long have I been using OSM and I've not found out about this ... But I tried to drop in to edit a few urls that had gone missing, and P2 is not currently loading for me. It was fine yesterday and id is working if I select it but it just does not work for me when trying to tidy data by adding and moving ways. On the satellite imagery I can't see the cursor much of the time that an element is selected to move! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: Whilst most London people don't realise that they can abbreviated numbers, I believe it is still common to miss the area code, once you get outside a director area (although that might just be a generational thing, with older users less likely to be using mobile phones). Well it is still perfectly acceptable to say 'Evesham 842908' and locals know just to ring the number. This was one of the reasons the inner/outer split of London was so unpopular initially. But you need to be able to look up the exchange code and I can remember being given a phone number after having an accident on the M4. I don't remember the exact name, but something like 'Forest Hill 1234' and 4 digit numbers were acceptable back then, except 'Forest Hill' was a local sub exchange that was not listed and even directory enquiries did not recognise it! 'Reading 123456' obviously did not have as posh a ring, but I of cause though it has a duff number and the Police became involved. SO lets stick to numbers ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Building in space
I have a multi-story car park which I need to add a 'shopmobility' hire store on the top level and correctly link to the footpaths and roads so that routing works for disabled users. The only road access is on the base level, and disabled bays are on the top level next to the shop. Footpaths all come of the top level and the road access slopes steeply away from the car park. Just to add to the fun, there is a car valeting business 3 stories below, as well which is also not mapped currently. I'm not seeing anything in the wiki as a guide to handle this. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] iD and accidental landuse deletions
Tom Chance wrote: I've seen two new users accidentally delete residential landuse areas near me in the past fortnight: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17695130 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17505646 Could this be a problem with the iD editor? Has anyone else noticed it? A known bug it iD is that it selects the relation if nothing else is found, so you can easily highlight something without actually seeing it. They would have to delete as well, but if they had something selected and hovered over the delete it is all to easy to remove something without knowing! This was a reason we objected to iD being made default - it's not ready yet :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] bing image alignment
I'm currently playing in an area where the highest resolution imagery is still an older view, while as I zoom out we step to newer imagery which is some distance off from the map tracks. I'm fairly happy with the map as I have had some older gps tracks which it follows, and I'll run over in the morning and gather a new track as a cross reference, but are people in general finding that these new images are out of alignment with what is currently mapped? Can I assume that they need realigning before using them? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] bing image alignment
I started answering this a couple of hours ago, but as I was documenting things I was also testing what I'd written. I'm a lot more comfortable with the FACT that new new bing imagery around here can't be used without several different offsets. Previously there was not much difference between zoom levels and 'height' above sea level. In-line comments are 'chronological' :) OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: On 9 September 2013 20:05, Lester Caine wrote: I'm currently playing in an area where the highest resolution imagery is still an older view, while as I zoom out we step to newer imagery which is some distance off from the map tracks. I'm fairly happy with the map as I have had some older gps tracks which it follows, and I'll run over in the morning and gather a new track as a cross reference, but are people in general finding that these new images are out of alignment with what is currently mapped? Can I assume that they need realigning before using them? I find that current BIng is usually mis-allgned by two or three metres relative to OS StreetView, which I believe is good to better than 1 metre. I think I'm seeing considerably more than that this morning. Both z18 and z19 layers have now updated to new imagery, but z20 is still the older view. Anybody know how to get the size of the change from iD's realignment tool? Not that iD is usable as the new imagery is so dark you can't distinguish features. I really need the potlatch2 'dim' feature to make these images usable! OK - JOSM is saying 5.5 meters + depending on height ... SSW AH - So that is how you do it in Potlatch2 ( shift + slide ) I should probably get used to josm's different hotkeys - I've currently got three offsets set up in that. One reason for this is parallax error, because the images aren't taken square on to the ground (that may be because the camera is taking in quite a large area. You can see this with building, you can end up with a metre or more difference depending on whether you use the top or bottom of the building. It also presumably means that alignment changes with the height of the land. Obviously this pass is well over from the last one, which was pretty well aligned. There is quite a steep slope on the area I was working on last night and I can align things to the bottom or the top of the slope ... -1.68; -5.13 at the top -6.92; -8.13 down the slop :) On the the other hand, individual GPS points usually have larger error than this. With commercial grade GPS, you probably need several hours averaging to get down to a metre accuracy. The S4 GPS is poor on accuracy, unless snap to road is on you end up driving through the fields, but I have a new USB module for the tablet which is a lot more accurate. Obviously a dedicated receiver has a better aerial and I'll take a run up on top when I pop out to the bank later. Work in progress -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] iD and accidental landuse deletions
Shaun McDonald wrote: >Were the landuse areas attached to roads? It’s rather easy in iD to click the middle of an area and select the area. It's the way it works ... if you click and there is nothing close, then it picks up an area which may well be outside the area you are looking at ... It would be MUCH safer if you had to pick the boundary to select it! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] iD and accidental landuse deletions
Ed Loach wrote: It would be MUCH safer if you had to pick the boundary to select it! But much harder to use for areas that share the boundary ways with an adjacent area. You'd have to resort to the / stuff that Potlatch uses or middle-click for JOSM (or whatever). I think all I am asking for is that it only selects an area if the boundary is actually visible. But I'm used to 3D drawing packages which provide a select list when there are several entities within range. This warns when the wrong one is selected and allows selection of the right one. The problem is where several areas overlap, and you don't know that they are. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Search for location
I'm buried in other code at the moment so don't have time to dig for an answer, so can someone point me in the right direction to get a 'search result' via the API for looking up a location. I know I can go via the website, but I need to be able to search for http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/515065315 but using the 'McMurdo Station' name. I am expecting that I'll get several results at times, so the node/way number will be used eventually, but initial search to give a list to select from would be helpful. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hand-drawn OS maps on Wikimedia Commons
Rob Nickerson wrote: p.s. Is there a Linux equivalent of MAPC2MAPC? qgis2 ? I still need to actually get it to create an alignment, but it displays the material I do have nicely, so is anybody using this for doing the referencing? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] NPE data
Barnett, Phillip wrote: NPE maps were the first backgrounds for the editors other than some quite low res Yahoo imagery of the UK, so people used them for mapping streams/rivers/woods etc back in the day. As you have noticed, they don’t necessarily relate to modern streams – they may have dried up or been culverted/piped long since. They are all over 50 years old, (for copyright reasons) after all. Yes, if the facts on the ground have changed, then the stream needs to be moved, or removed. No process needed, just use an editor. Note – only remove NPE tagged items if you know they have changed – don’t just do a mass-remove! (That’s in the unlikely event you were planning to write a bot to remove them all!) Of cause it would be nice if people could actually tag when a feature ceased to exist using the end_date tag. This is all important material for the OHM view of history. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Editor backbground layers in iD
Paul Norman wrote: Paul Norman wrote: > >It's worth pointing out that iD doesn't actually have an imagery list. > >It inherits its from the editor-imagery-index project at > >http://osmlab.github.io/editor-imagery-index/, which is for > >OpenStreetMap editing, not historical mapping or a general list of all > >possible imagery. > >Thanks Paul - that's something that I hadn't realised. From the >comments above, presumably the "open historical map" people are using >the same list rather than one tailored to historical mapping though? They shouldn't be. The editor-imagery-index project is targeted at the needs of OpenStreetMap, not of other projects. With how the index is setup with each layer being its own file it is trivial to automatically copy in additional files before running make. In fact, there are layers in editor-imagery-index which can't be used outside of OSM. Well since OHM is simply a part of OSM created to placate the complaints of a few, it IS part of OSM ... but making background layers locally selectable is a facility that many of us would benefit from. More and more material is becoming available which while not relevent to a 'current' map is essential in completing the historic development of the maps. In 50 years time the current view of the map will be 'historic' and we need to design for that fact today rather than simply hiding the data in the change logs :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Moderation (WAS: Primary or Trunk? PITA?)
Tom Hughes wrote: Lessons: * We should be able to explain the reasoning behind our tagging if asked. Absolutely, and I believe I did so. Tom - reading Rob's post I don't think he was directing anything at you, however like him, I was concerned about other posts in the thread! But what is more irritating is the continual cross posting as I can't see the other posts that are being refered to, and I suspect you have not seen some either? PLEASE post to one list only should be what moderation is asking ... I don't bother with the tagging list so can't post back to that ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Oliver Jowett wrote: The point is that "just using the map" is not our target audience. As has been said many times, we are not trying to be an end user mapping site that offers a Google Maps alternative for the masses. Our target audience is people that want to signup and contribute. I contribute when I see problems with the map in areas I am familiar with. To see the problems, I have to be using the map in the first place. To use the map I'd prefer not to have that signup box floating around all the time (I am only logged in when I am about to edit). I'd second that ( although this should probably be on the main talk list ) I CONTRIBUTE to mapping to provide correct information to my client base and I encourage them to use OSM instead of Google because we do provide the correct details, and in many cases the only detail in an area. We need a clean user interface which has easy access to edit functions, although I'm tending towards off-line editing as certainly I would NOT recommend iD even to new users, so josm currently seems the only option anyway going forward! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Jonathan wrote: Personally speaking I don't feel it would be a terrible idea to ditch the OpenStreetMap.org map and just have this page as the homepage: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_OpenStreetMap I don't believe OSM is about rendering maps, isn't it about creating a cartographic database? There is basically no reason that we can't simply have http://wiki.openstreetmap.org giving direct access to the documentation and http://map.openstreetmap.org giving clean access to the same map layers that the editor provides as a background. Then leave http://openstreetmap.org to proide what ever people want from that view ... Yes other versions of the map exist and can be used, but this is the definative map, and changes made here are reflected promptly while some other maps can be weeks behind ... I can post changes and see them rendered fairly promptly. But as yet there is no tidy method of reflecting those changes into my own rendering ... which is another problem here. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ashamed to be a part of the OSM GB community
Richard Fairhurst wrote: Thirdly; there is no "they", only "we". OSM, all of it, map and code equally, is made by its contributors. So when Brian says "Surely we can do better than this?": Yes. We can. But only if you're prepared to be part of the "we". The main problem with that statement is that not all of us time time to learn yet another environment and method of working. I'm on github, mirroring to HG locally for compatibility with other projects, but I simply don't have time to dig into Ruby. Python and Java is bad enough to fix problems with my development tools which to some extent I'm driven to use to provide a good PHP development platform. I wasted many days playing with bits which were working at one time, but changes in other areas has broken them again. Unfortunately the playing field is not flat, so we have to live with what others 'provide' with little acceptance of other usages of the data. I'll repeat what I've said on the main talk list ... the new front end is TOO targeted at pushing visitors to become mappers. I don't actually have a problem with that ... however the follow up pages lack a LOT of sensible information for NEW mappers and that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. The 'About' page is simply NOT 'Learn More' but is exactly 'About OSM', so some other path needs to be provided to help even for the tools ON the new front end. I'm trying to work out what 'Export' is intended to do, and some help on how things like the 'Share' now works would be nice ( my notes still relate to the OLD tools! ). HELP should be available on actually using the map as it is configured now ... But what I'm looking to providing is a decent 'Large View' which has promotional material and other links on the ONE page. If you come to the site from an embeded map it IS a case of 'what the f**k' ... I've had a second call about this already this weekend and I'm expecting many more tomorrow when users get back to work although it will probably over the next weeks as people come accross it :( THAT is why a proper announcement ON THE SITE ITSELF that it was going to change would have been helpful ... just like when the style change was dropped on us with little notification! Does no one learn? If I've got to create my own independent site to do this then OK. I did have OSRM running, but keeping our own mirrors up to date is simply NOT supported well currently !!! No way can I support a whole world map, I need something that mirrors the UK area in something less than the 2 or 3 week cycle of some mirrors :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Matthijs Melissen wrote: The website changes have been announced on the talk mailing list before it went live: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2013-November/068555.html 'Nearly ready to roll' is not 'will go live on'! Had I had a little more notice I would have grabbed an html dump of the old site ... Can you provide a link to the ANNOUNCEMENT that the new version was going live? (And yes, before it went live, many people suggested to remove the Welcome box as well.) And the response was 'we will not change it!' so why ask for comments when the changes were already a done deal? MOST other projects maintain the older style of site in parallel with such a major overhaul. At least then we could access the older version if there WAS a problem and there is no real overhead to adding a link to the older code. If the change was made without maintaining a version of the old site in parallel then we need to change the management process! Some projects/services have even rolled back changes where they prove unpopular, or simply failed, so NOT providing a legacy link seems dictatorial? At least we can still access potlatch in place of Id so the principle has already been adopted here. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Richard Fairhurst wrote: not you, Lester, I don't think the blog COULD withstand the RANDOM capitals EVERYWHERE I make no apologies for the style of messaging. I've been doing it for over 15 years and I'm just happy with emphasis where it is shouting out in my head. It's a bit like those people who insist in top posting on lists were the written rule is not to :) If I was not wasting so much time fixing sites broken by other peoples actions then I would have probably managed to get my own services running by now, but every time I go back to that code I'm having to start again as something has changed :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Ed Loach wrote: When I first edited with Potlatch 2 after the change it took me a moment to spot that I had to click the work OpenStreetMap rather than View to get back to the map view. Just hit that one myself ... and it dropped straight to the map, but I'm sure that I used to get a warning that I was leaving the potlatch screen? OK - It has done it this time, must not have touched anything last time so not had 'save' active. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Nick Whitelegg wrote: >I make no apologies for the style of messaging. I've been doing it for over 15 >years and I'm just happy with emphasis where it is shouting out in my head. It's >a bit like those people who insist in top posting on lists were the written rule >is not to :) As an aside it doesn't help that many mail clients, particularly proprietary ones, insist on assuming that top posting is the way to go. If you're in a rush it can be a PITA to manually do standard Unix-style quote-posting, or to fiddle around in the options trying to see if you can set them up to do it. If mail clients followed the standards less people would top post! ;-) Very true ... My old N900 phone worked nicely email wise, the android replacement and the tablet has an apology as the sig :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website
Andy Robinson wrote: But how do I get the box back now that I’ve closed it ;-) I know you are asking for a button ;) But wiping the cookies for the site resets everything and should be an available option to comply with the cookie directive anyway? Since the servers are UK based, shouldn't that directive by observed with the correct warning? *From:*Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 02 December 2013 15:26 *To:* Talk GB *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website Thank you to whoever it was who listened to this thread and implemented a close function. It's much appreciated -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Hobbyist OSM Data Server?
Nick Whitelegg wrote: >What sort of spec machine are we taking about for a GB extract? The main problem is less the osm2pgsql extraction (which can be run in slim mode to conserve memory) and more the speed of accessing the postgis database to grab the data. Very much 'work in progress' ... a new initial extract is running as we speak :) http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/OSM+Data+Mirror+on+SUSE13.1 I have OSRM running on that machine http://osrm.rdm2.co.uk/main.html and am planning to drop another machine over to Sheffield to do the rendering for my own tile set, but I've had this all running nicely on a local machine, only restricted by 'BT Broadband' so once it's all on a nice fast pipe everything should be a bit more accessible. While the crib sheets are freely accessible, they are mainly intended as my own guide to keeping everything running, and rebuilding machines if required. Any corrections or improvements are MOST welcome! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Question regarding OS Opendata
John Aldridge wrote: I have a question regarding the OS Opendata. How accurately aligned is it? I've noticed that in some places the bing orphophotos match up almost perfectly to the buildings below, and it other areas there can be some difference (sometimes up to a meter of). I don't know how accurate OS Opendata is, but I do know that Bing is sometimes several metres off (and sometimes differently off depending on how far you are zoomed in). I've had carefully surveyed data buggered up a few times by people 'correcting' it to match the Bing photography! It's often interesting when imagery is updated. Zooming in and seeing old and new versions at different zoom levels. Often these simply don't line up well with one another. I've even resorted now to popping out and taking GPS readings in the hope of establishing a better reference, which with an external aerial should be accurate to 1mt. The result is that with the large vertical variations around here one can see the effect of a satellite not being directly over head quite clearly and different passes give different offsets to landmarks. One can see the different side walls much of the time. I don't find the OS Opendata any more accurate. If anything it tends to be a little 'artistic' ignoring a lot of fine detail so I have no problem moving objects where originally sourced from Opendata. That is once the new data is proven to be more accurate. Altitude *IS* an important element of determining accuracy and is something we need to take more seriously ... the flat earth society has been proven wrong long ago :) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail & Parcelforce delivery offices
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? Presumably Parcelforce offices are distinguished by being tagged operator=Parcelforce? Apologies if I've missed something in the documentation or help -- I did look! http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228404442 Search on 'parcelforce' lists a few depots but these all need tidying in some way. amenity=post_office should be added if they actually take parcels in, but I'm not sure that is correct for all carrier depots? I use City Link but they are not really a post office? http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/471456976 is another example of confusion, since the building above was not listed in the search results, but http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41363497 has amenity=post_depot ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail & Parcelforce delivery offices
Borbus 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. Added to that, there are a growing network of parcel services based on convenience stores. I've been making more use of that service for parcels which Royal Mail has now priced too high ;) Even in the local 'post office', some activities are cheaper at the shop counter rather than at the post counter. Post Office is perhaps now just part of the name like 'Parcelforce Depot' or 'Sorting Office'? To also bring in is these 'collection point' services for parcels. amenity=parcel_drop and parcel_collect perhaps along with operator= and perhaps url to the related service? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Warwickshire County Council releases aerial imagery
Richard Symonds wrote: Hi Brian! This looks fantastic and will be really useful for Wikipedia too (Aerial views of significant buildings etc). However, the link you've provided obviously only works for mapping. Is there a regular HTML-based 'homepage' the describes the aerial imagery collection etc, that you know of? http://maps.warwickshire.gov.uk/historical/ -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Warwickshire County Council releases aerial imagery
Jason Woollacott wrote: All Copyright info seems to be recorded on this page http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/historicalmapsterms And the only reference to Aerial Photography is copyrighted to © Get Mapping 2000 / © GeoPerspectives 2006. I've found a reference to OGL under http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/disclaimer Which releases non restricted info under this license Interestingly there is no mention of OSM in the terms despite the fact that it is one of the base layers used. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
