Re: [Talk-GB] Jewson - is it shop=doityourself or shop=trade?
Mateusz Konieczny wrote: I encountered https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/issues/4140 and it is hard to me how it should be decided. Do you have some clear preference? As a shopper, the important question for me is whether a shop will actually sell to me, i.e. whether they are trade ONLY or not, so that I don't have a wasted journey. Does our tagging scheme (and default rendering) address this? Based on limited experience, I think that Jewson and Travis Perkins will sell to anyone but their non-account (i.e. DIY) prices are so uncompetitive that few people would ever do so. On the other hand, places like Screwfix have significant trade custom but I think offer the same prices to everyone. Even B now has trade counters. I have a feeling that the distinction between "retail" and "trade" may matter for planning permission purposes, i.e. some chains may describe themselves in a way that allows them to get permission to operate on cheaper industrial estates rather than more expensive retail parks. I don't think that's very useful information for map users. The important things are what they sell, and whether they will sell to me. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Farmfoods clean up
Cj Malone wrote: This also means shop=frozen_food, currently they are mainly shop=supermarket My local one was doing a roaring trade in 36-packs of loo roll a few weeks ago. I believe they are also one of the cheapest places to get cans of coke. So frozen_food sounds a bit too limited. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] London venues
I certainly like the idea of a London meeting, it is relatively easy to get to from most places and looking at rail prices my concern about 8th was probably unfounded. Phil (trigpoint) On Monday, 18 March 2019, Gregory Marler wrote: > I (somewhat in the capacity as an OSM UK director) have been invited to > visit Geovation, and I don't think there is much of a hatchet left to bury. > I could ask our contacts if an event at Geovation would be suitable and > possible. > > For the Queen's birthday I don't think there would be a lot of added issue, > apart from certain parts of London (like Victoria, Green Park, etc). The > 8th was partially to avoid following the bank holiday weekend, as that > might more of you and cheap train tickets unavailable. > We also thought London might be good for it's central location in the South > of the UK. Last year we spent a lot of time voting and considering the best > city. > > From up North, > Gregory. > > > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 13:10, wrote: > > > It could make reasonably priced trains hard to come by. > > > > Phil (trigpoint) > > > > On Thursday, 14 March 2019, Tony Shield wrote: > > > FYI > > > > > > Saturday 8 June is the Queens Birthday - Trooping the Colour occurs. > > > Don't know London well enough to know if this could be disruptive. > > > > > > TonyS > > > > > > On 13/03/2019 23:14, Rob Nickerson wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > For the next OSM UK annual general meeting we thought we would try > > > > London as a possible location. Does anyone know of good (and cheap) > > > > venues that we can use? We have 100 members but would expect the > > > > number to actually attend would be in the region of 20-30 unless > > > > paired with a significant other event. > > > > > > > > Dates: We are thinking Saturday 8 June as a starting point but can > > > > move to other Saturdays if venue availability is better. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > *Rob* > > > > > > > > P.S. Plans for a Bristol event are still in the works. This has taken > > > > longer than we had hoped as it is a joint event. Hopefully some news > > > > on it shortly. > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > Talk-GB mailing list > > > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > > > > > -- > > Sent from my Sailfish device > > ___ > > Talk-GB mailing list > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > > > -- > Gregory Marler > No More Grapes > 07939 689 691 > i...@nomoregrapes.com > http://www.nomoregrapes.com > -- Sent from my Sailfish device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] London venues
It could make reasonably priced trains hard to come by. Phil (trigpoint) On Thursday, 14 March 2019, Tony Shield wrote: > FYI > > Saturday 8 June is the Queens Birthday - Trooping the Colour occurs. > Don't know London well enough to know if this could be disruptive. > > TonyS > > On 13/03/2019 23:14, Rob Nickerson wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > For the next OSM UK annual general meeting we thought we would try > > London as a possible location. Does anyone know of good (and cheap) > > venues that we can use? We have 100 members but would expect the > > number to actually attend would be in the region of 20-30 unless > > paired with a significant other event. > > > > Dates: We are thinking Saturday 8 June as a starting point but can > > move to other Saturdays if venue availability is better. > > > > Best regards, > > *Rob* > > > > P.S. Plans for a Bristol event are still in the works. This has taken > > longer than we had hoped as it is a joint event. Hopefully some news > > on it shortly. > > > > ___ > > Talk-GB mailing list > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > -- Sent from my Sailfish device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway or track?
On Monday, 11 March 2019, Warin wrote: > On 11/03/19 10:45, Martin Wynne wrote: > >> There's clearly no evidence of 4 wheeled vehicles, so it should be > >> marked as a bridleway, but It's advisable to check the whole length > >> as sections can be used by vehicles such as agricultural ones to get > >> between adjacent fields. > > > > It's a public bridleway, with the usual "evidence", so no argument > > about that. > > > > But is it highway=bridleway or highway=track? > > > > There is evidence of recent wheeled use, which I think was a tractor > > gaining access across the adjacent fields for the purpose of > > hedge-trimming alongside it. It clearly was once a vehicular track. > > > > What I think I'm getting at is this -- is the highway= tag intended to > > represent the physical appearance, or the intended use? > > Arr .. > I'd tag the present use. > > highway=track > motor_vehicle=private? > horse=yes > surface=unpaved > > Where the 'wheeled use' is not evident then I'd tag highway=bridleway etc > Access tags for a bridleway in the UK or in my experience England and Wales should be horse=designated, foot=designated and bicycle=designated. As Andy mentioned the important tag is designation=public_bridleway. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Sailfish device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] How to map new housing?
Hi Dave In general new housing is a bit of a best guess and a bit of creative use of gps traces. I use techniques such as walk the roads and cross over, or put a wiggle in, when I am level with the ends of the building. I tend to use those traces locally in josm as they will be a bit odd to someone else. HTH Phil (trigpoint) On Friday, 8 March 2019, Dave Abbott wrote: > Hi, > > I'm quite new to OSM, and am wondering how I might go about mapping new > housing plots in my area. > > In general, there is nothing on the imagery - I know I can walk the new > streets and map them with GPS - but how to go about mapping the new > buildings? > > Is there a guide I can look at? > > TIA, > > Dave Abbott > > -- Sent from my Sailfish device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Road name contradictions in the UK
I have downloaded the spreadsheet and split the lat/lon column into two numeric columns so that I can apply bounding boxes to see what there is within the areas I have knowledge of. Ran out of time but should get to have a look later. Phil (trigpoint) On Friday, 8 March 2019, Andy Robinson wrote: > Candidate for project of the month? > > > > Cheers > > Andy > > > > From: Oisin Herriott (Insight Global Inc) via Talk-GB > [mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org] > Sent: 22 February 2019 20:47 > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-GB] Road name contradictions in the UK > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > Our Open Maps team (https://github.com/microsoft/open-maps > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com > %2Fmicrosoft%2Fopen-maps=02%7C01%7Cv-oiher%40microsoft.com%7C5f43e39d0d > 63417ee38408d68d2e9a4b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63685162 > 8660533805=fQkRtSQ0jQaJ7s7fWg23NervMF7yX3SGJxEwANMTOIM%3D=0> > ) has been continuing to work on analyzing OSM in the UK. Some of you may > have seen my session in Milan where we talked about Microsoft's ongoing OSM > work in Australia. > > > > We've created a list of the top 1500 streets in the UK that appear to be > missing names along with the name that we suspect should be there. We are > not 100% certain if our suspicious are correct and, not being local to these > areas we are not remotely trying to fill these in. If there are folks that > know these areas we could use your help closing these gaps. > > > > The complete list is available here: > > https://1drv.ms/x/s!As04HHdPPfhgg4lYigS4IiWjp2JJiw > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F1drv.ms%2F > x%2Fs!As04HHdPPfhgg4lYigS4IiWjp2JJiw=02%7C01%7Cv-oiher%40microsoft.com% > 7C5f43e39d0d63417ee38408d68d2e9a4b%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C > 0%7C636851628660543799=mHI1fOL4xJFNZTL%2BRcpoVlsg5hFQHJSJUEwCaXjHmtY%3 > D=0> > > > > These are not major roads but they are associated with a large number of > residential addresses so end up having a big impact. We may also create a > Maproulette challenge for these as well if that is preferable? > > > > Thanks, > > Oisin > > <https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/herriotto> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/herriotto > > > > > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows > 10 > > > > -- Sent from my Sailfish device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Marking closed businesses
On Thursday, 7 March 2019, Jez Nicholson wrote: > Fuanctioning restaurants and food-related shops are listed in the FHRS > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System > > As an aside, it can be useful to retain the old name of a > restaurant/pub/takeaway so that other mappers don't re-add it...can someone > remind me what tag they'd use for an ex-name please? Absolutely, a closed shop is also a useful landmark. Somebody using it is not necessarily looking to buy something. For example the local Toys r us is still displaying the logos. Obviously it is tagged as disused:shop. Phil (trigpoint) > > On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 10:24 David Woolley, wrote: > > > On 07/03/2019 09:47, Jon Spriggs wrote: > > > > > > Near where I am are some mapped businesses properties which have closed, > > > primarily shops, but also a couple of restaurants. > > > > > > > There is more than one common way of doing this. > > > > Is the building exclusively used by the business? If not, I would map > > the business as a point, or as a polygon covering the plan view area > > occupied by the business, and not tag the building with business details. > > > > > > > > a) A building holds a functioning business (that isn't a shop or > > restaurant > > The appropriate tagging for the functioning business, e.g. office=* > > > > > b) A building holds a functioning shop > > > > shop=yes > > > > > c) A building holds a functioning restaurant > > > > amenity=restaurant > > > > > d) A building is a former business property (ceased > > > trading/closed/moved) with no new business taking it's spot > > > > shop=vacant > > > > or > > > > disused:shop= > > disused:amenity=restaurant > > > > > > > > As a side note, I've been using Street Complete on Android. Is it worth > > > asking the Street Complete developers to add information about > > > businesses to their collection data, if they aren't already? > > > > I've never heard of that, so I've no idea what the developer's > > objectives were. I'm not aware of any Android tool that I would > > recommend to someone who was not experienced with one of the big three > > PC editors. > > > > ___ > > Talk-GB mailing list > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > -- Sent from my Sailfish device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] More imagery
Shropshire Council use GetMapping on their PROW map. It is very clear and recent. I would find it very useful as a mapping source. Phil (trigpoint) On Thursday, 7 March 2019, Marc Gemis wrote: > Even before the Belgian local chapter was formed, some community > member(s) wrote to AIV (Flemish agency for information) [1] whether we > could use their aerial imagery for tracing. We got that permission. > Similar requests were made to the other regions in Belgium. It does > not really matter whether there is a registered company or not. The > request should outline what you plan to do (tracing) and where the > data will be used. > I was not involved in the request, but some of our current board > members were (if I recall it correctly) > > regards > > m. > > [1] https://overheid.vlaanderen.be/informatie-vlaanderen > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 11:13 PM Rob Nickerson > wrote: > > > > Sounds good. Although it is worth noting that OSM UK is us - i.e. the > > OpenStreetMap community in the UK. Yes it does happen to be a registered > > company which helps in some conversations (some companies like to speak > > with other companies) but to get things moving fastest we welcome help from > > fellow OSMers. If not then it will fall to the OSM UK board, of which there > > are 5 people (I am one) with limited volunteer time. > > > > To get things started I have written to OSMF's advisory board to see if any > > of the local groups or organisations that form part of that have experience > > with getmapping imagery. If you can pass contact details from getmapping > > then we can start enquiries. > > > > P.S. If anyone reading this wants to jump in and help, please let me know. > > > > With best regards, > > Rob > > > > > > On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 21:14, chilton steve > > wrote: > >> > >> Rob, > >> > >> Thanks for the response. > >> > >> In fact I would prefer to hand over to OSMUK or some more formal part of > >> the project, particularly if they have experience of such > >> discussions/negotiations. > >> > >> I don't know what the level of content is. They market themselves as > >> leading provider in UK so I don't think global. > >> > >> I will email OSMUK first before going to the company, just to see how the > >> land lies (pun intended!). > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> Steve > >> > >> On 06 March 2019 at 19:54 Rob Nickerson wrote: > >> > >> Hi Steve, > >> > >> >Would OSM benefit from another imagery source? Getmapping have > >> >tentatively offered theirs. See: > >> >https://itsahill.wordpress.com/2019/03/05/edina-geoforum-2019/ and get > >> >back to me via any of the normal methods. > >> > > >> >Cheers > >> >Steve Chilton (@steev8) > >> > >> It's certainly worth exploring and I think this is something that OSM UK > >> company can assist with if they prefer to discuss with a registered > >> company rather than an individual (could still be you, just on behalf of, > >> and with the support of OSM UK if that helps with discussions). > >> > >> What are the next steps? I guess confirming it is unique content is a good > >> step - rather than a copy of Digital Globe imagery already available to us > >> for example. Do you want to start an email discussion with them cc'ing > >> bo...@osmuk.org in and we can arrange a call / meeting with them if that > >> helps. > >> > >> P.S. Are we speaking UK or global? > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Rob > > > > ___ > > Talk-GB mailing list > > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > ___ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > -- Sent from my Sailfish device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM augmented reality project - affordable hosting recommendations or Overpass?
Nick Whitelegg wrote: I wondered if anyone had any affordable hosting recommendations? Would be looking for hosting of not much more than approximately £20/EUR 20 per month, perhaps £30/EUR 30 as a maximum. My current server has 1GB of memory and can just about cope with the areas above, so I suspect for the whole of Europe more memory would be required. Storage requirements for Britain, Ireland and Greece is perhaps (as an estimate) 10GB or a little less. Amazon Lightsail (in London): $20/month, 4 GB RAM, 2 CPU cores, 80 GB SSD storage, 4 TB/month bandwidth. You can add extra storage for $0.10/GB/month. There are also modest additional charges for snapshots (for backups). I have found Lightsail to be very reliable and good value. The only thing to watch out for is the bandwidth pricing if you exceed the monthly allowance. If that's going to be a concern, consider DigitalOcean. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Newark on Trent mappers
SK53 wrote: Quick look (Nottingham, of course): - Polygons look OK - Many features missing (e.g., University of Nottingham Main Campus, both sites of Dunkirk Primary School - Old features present (e.g., Elms Primary School, closed prior to 2011) - Reasonably well attributed. At the very least it could be used to hunt for missing schools (which I've done a bit of in N Scotland using Food Hygiene data). Having looked at OpenMap Local for Edinburgh a while ago, my impression is that they have used some rather primitive rules to identify "important buildings". It picks up anything with "school" in the name, but fails to mark most of the city landmarks - things that are shown in their older "Street View" data. So yes, it might work for schools - but not much else. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Environment Agency LIDAR datasets OGL licensed now available
Chris Hill wrote: I've had a go at extracting the height of buildings from the Environment Agency LIDAR, and it seems possible. I loaded the EA data into a database and found all the height points within the polygon of an existing building outline. The highest value is the height of the building. Well it's the altitude above sea level of the roof of the building. Presumably what OSM wants to record is the height above natural ground level or adjacent road level or similar. I can think of various ways of doing that, e.g. looking for the lowest point near but outside the building outline. I can also imagine looking at the distribution of heights within the building outline and working out if it is a flat or a pitched roof. And maybe working out which direction the ridge runs in i.e. which wall it is parallel to. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Environment Agency LIDAR datasets OGL licensed now available
Chris Hill write: On 24/09/15 18:41, Phil Endecott wrote: Chris Hill wrote: Suitably processed this could provide a source of building outlines. Yes, I think it could be very useful for that. I've had a play and rather than doing shaded relief I've just converted the height directly into a grey shade. I've then applied ImageMagick's edge detection filter. Here are a couple of fragments near Manchester taken from the 25cm resolution data; in each case the first image is the direct height-to-grey and the second is edge-detected: http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar1.png http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar1_ed.png This is at SJ 8099, or maybe search for Chaseley Road to find it on a map. You could easily trace building outlines from this and determine roof shapes and could measure building heights by subtracting roof from ground, with some suitable tool. You could also trace trees and some walls. http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar2.png http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar2_ed.png This is SE of the last one at SJ 8198. The gasometers (presumably!) are at the junction of West Egerton Street and Liverpool Street. I find it interesting that you can count the number of ridges in the large warehouse roofs. You can also easily identify carparks! How would people find this for tracing compared to photo imagery? Looks interesting. Have you reprojected the images from the OS projection they come as to WGS84 that OSM uses? No, I've just processed the raw values in their OSGB form. I don't really have the skills to do reprojection and tiling and serving the tiles as a map layer; if people actually want to use this, someone else will need to do that. Some of the data was gathered in 2009, so Bing aerial images can be more up-to-date, but for most buildings this isn't a problem. The data does at least indicate its age. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Environment Agency LIDAR datasets OGL licensed now available
Chris Hill wrote: Suitably processed this could provide a source of building outlines. Yes, I think it could be very useful for that. I've had a play and rather than doing shaded relief I've just converted the height directly into a grey shade. I've then applied ImageMagick's edge detection filter. Here are a couple of fragments near Manchester taken from the 25cm resolution data; in each case the first image is the direct height-to-grey and the second is edge-detected: http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar1.png http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar1_ed.png This is at SJ 8099, or maybe search for Chaseley Road to find it on a map. You could easily trace building outlines from this and determine roof shapes and could measure building heights by subtracting roof from ground, with some suitable tool. You could also trace trees and some walls. http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar2.png http://chezphil.org/tmp/lidar2_ed.png This is SE of the last one at SJ 8198. The gasometers (presumably!) are at the junction of West Egerton Street and Liverpool Street. I find it interesting that you can count the number of ridges in the large warehouse roofs. You can also easily identify carparks! How would people find this for tracing compared to photo imagery? Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Environment Agency LIDAR datasets OGL licensed now available
Has anyone reviewed how useful this LIDAR data would be for 3D city mapping? Chris Hill wrote: The slippy map with relief tiles made from the data and optionally contours also made from the data is here: http://relief.raggedred.net. Thanks Chris. I've just been looking at Hull city centre. It doesn't look great; is this the difference between the "terrain model" and the "surface model" that they mention? Which are you using? Have you looked at the other one? Of course I know that the rationale for the data is for flood risk evaluation so recording building profiles was not the objective - but you never know how something could be re-purposed! Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Environment Agency LIDAR datasets OGL licensed now available
Chris Hill wrote: DSM does include building outlines. I've processed a small part of the data to see them. Here's an example of a TIFF of DSM data with the building outlines: http://raggedred.net/shared/ta0230.tif Thanks Chris, that's quite impressive. My interest is in using this as a better alternative to the OS open terrain data as a base over which maps and/or imagery can be draped, a la Google Earth. Whether it is better to extract building outlines, and semantics such as the complex OSM descriptions for roof shapes, or to just drape a 2D map over a 3D terrain for display, is I think an open question. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Little spate of vandalism/mistakes in SE London
On Fri Jul 17 09:37:49 2015 GMT+0100, Tom Chance wrote: Could someone contact / chase up these new users and remove their edits? Could be vandalism, or just people not realising what they're doing. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/panchal%20chetana/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Solanki%20yuvraj/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Dinesh%20rabari/history http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/anilparamar/history They look connected, probably a school. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ramblers app
On Wed Jul 15 09:37:19 2015 GMT+0100, Rob Nickerson wrote: Looks interesting. Anyone know more information about this? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33532041 The big pathwatch runs until October, is open to both the general public and ramblers members alike. The aim is to survey paths with a 1km grid square and upload the results either through the app, or on the website. Any square can be chosen, however there are key squares that must be completed based on a sample of 200 per highway authority. I'm not convinced by this as rural areas have sparse coverage, and urban areas have complete coverage. Telford, semi rural has the same number of squares as Shropshire and Leicestershire, and the lax planning rules caused by the new towns act will, I am sure, bring up some interesting results. I have downloaded the app, not too sure yet, can only highlight a bad stile, not a good one. More here http://www.ramblers.org.uk/get-involved/join-the-big-pathwatch.aspx Key squares here, only visible if not logged in https://bigpathwatch.ramblers.org.uk/map-of-sample-squares Please do sign up, and complete some squares and add to OSM at the same time. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Thrapston viaduct
On Mon Jul 13 19:07:35 2015 GMT+0100, Dave F. wrote: Curious: Why don't you think blue for motorways is acceptable? Blue is the correct colour for motorways, I was referring to the coming carto change where they will become orange. Phil (trigpoint ) On 13/07/2015 13:13, Philip Barnes wrote: On Mon, 2015-07-13 at 10:25 +0100, SK53 wrote: Bridges and other significant remaining infrastructure of railways tagged as railway=abandoned ceased to be rendered on the Standard rendering some time ago. There was a degree of dissension with this decision: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542. Certainly I recall a few grumps to that effect on the osm-gb IRC channel: not least because of the potential value of such routes for walkers cyclists. I was certainly one of those, disused railways are important and very visible features in rural parts of the UK. I suspect other countries didn't suffer the stupidity of a Dr Beeching in the way we did. At the time I recall most of the arguments being about railways appearing through housing estates and the solution seemed to be to hide them rather than leave them and allow local mappers to correct the tagging. If its gone and not visible then it should be tagged historic, rather than abandoned. I think this, and blue motorways, is a good argument for why we need a UK render of the map. Phil (trigpoint) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] July Meeting
On Thu Jul 2 09:50:12 2015 GMT+0100, Andy Robinson wrote: I’ll probably do some in Oakengates in the afternoon. I’ll know where Brian has been by then so as not to conflict. One thing to remember is Oakengates carnival, we will be ok in the morning but the afternoon could be busy. Phil (trigpoint) Cheers Andy From: Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com] Sent: 02 July 2015 09:22 To: Rob Nickerson Cc: Andy Robinson; talk-gb-westmidlands Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] July Meeting Probably no need for a cake. I'll concentrate on Market Street and surrounds in Oakengates. See you in the pub about 1230 -1 depending on weather and stamina On 1 July 2015 at 21:55, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: What are the mapping priorities? i seem to recall someone said there was a lot left to map here? Do you think a cake is needed? Rob On 1 July 2015 at 21:27, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a family commitment pm so I'll be mapping am -getting some listed bdg pics in Codsall first then mapping Oakengates. I need to be away about 130 On 1 July 2015 at 19:02, Andy Robinson ajrli...@gmail.com wrote: Excellent. What time do folks want to stop for lunch? Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Philip Barnes [mailto:p...@trigpoint.me.uk] Sent: 01 July 2015 18:04 To: talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] July Meeting On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 09:09 +0100, Brian Prangle wrote: Hi everyone This month's meeting will be on Saturday 4th July, so we can do some serious mapping in Telford. Current suggested venue for lunch is The Cock at Wellington. Oakengates was our original area for mapping but 4th July is their Annual Carnival so getting a pub where we can chat might be a bit difficult! You can still map Oakengates as it needs some attention and then move the couple of kilometres to Wellington. Both Oakengates and Wellington have train stations. It might be an idea to know who's coming and what areas you intend to survey. Phil's our man on the ground and can be reached on the day at 07983 459583 I have the dining room at The Cock Inn, Wellington booked. Its a nice room, I call it the Hogwarts Common Room, which we use for our Shropshire Linux User Group meetings. Phil (trigpoint) ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] July Meeting
A slight correction, my number is 07983 459 531. I will pm the Shropshire regulars who may not be on the mailing list and invite them to join us. Phil (trigpoint ) On Tue Jun 23 09:09:44 2015 GMT+0100, Brian Prangle wrote: Hi everyone This month's meeting will be on Saturday 4th July, so we can do some serious mapping in Telford. Current suggested venue for lunch is The Cock http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/52.6968/-2.5089 at Wellington. Oakengates was our original area for mapping but 4th July is their Annual Carnival so getting a pub where we can chat might be a bit difficult! You can still map Oakengates as it needs some attention and then move the couple of kilometres to Wellington. Both Oakengates and Wellington have train stations. It might be an idea to know who's coming and what areas you intend to survey. Phil's our man on the ground and can be reached on the day at 07983 459583 Regards Brian -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-GB] Apple streetview
On Wed Jun 10 20:11:31 2015 GMT+0100, Rob Nickerson wrote: Apple collecting images for a street view competitor? Details: http://maps.apple.com/vehicles/ I did see a tomtom streetview car in Edinburgh last August. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Quick tagging question
On Fri Jun 5 14:15:09 2015 GMT+0100, Wittle, Paul wrote: Hi, Is it ok to add a tag 'addr:county' when drawing properties, it doesn't seem to be an officially recognised tag but I can find some references to it online? Also, would you put sub-districts of a town (i.e. Wyke Regis in Weymouth) under 'addr:place'? I would say yes, people navigate by county so it is helpful. Official is just royal mails means of delivering the mail. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS Open Names
Hi Chris, Chris Hill wrote: I've been looking at OS Open Names I've also had a look at Open Names, but looking at everything except roads and postcodes. My conclusion was that it is not a useful replacement for the old 1:50k gazetteer because it doesn't contain names for any natural features. On the other hand, the new Open Map Local does include names for those features. So I think one could create a more useful gazetteer by extracting just the names from that map. And of potential interest here, road names extracted from the map can include multiple segments and non-straight-line geometry (which I don't think Open Names has). In other respects I find Open Map Local inferior to the old Street View map, e.g. its important buildings are very oddly chosen. I think the best thing in this latest release is the simplified license. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] ooops.... I destroyed a building...
We can fix it, if someone hasn't beaten me to it I will fix it when I'm home. Only have a phone right now. Phil (trigpoint) On Wed May 27 21:29:53 2015 GMT+0100, thomas van der veen wrote: Hi, I just did a quick update to a path in Newbury and goes through a tunnel in a building... but my edit seems to have destroyed the building and I am not sure how to get it back. http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.40251/-1.32458 is the location. The Santander bank is gone. Does anyone know how to make the building appear again? TIA!!! Thomas -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ref names on Residential roads
On Tue May 12 17:35:30 2015 GMT+0100, SomeoneElse wrote: On 12/05/2015 17:28, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Why not ref:highway_authority To keep the tags just a little bit organized? https://xkcd.com/927/ (sorry) pedant PROW refs are also allocated by the highway authority. /pedant Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ref names on Residential roads
The quoted source of these refs is no longer available, so no easy way to check validity. Phil (trigpoint ) On Tue May 12 10:11:46 2015 GMT+0100, SomeoneElse wrote: On 12/05/2015 09:52, Bob Kerr wrote: On residential roads where there has been a ref= added is being rendered on Mapnik. Is this something new since I have not been checking recently. This is all over the highlands https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/57.5695/-4.4282 I don't think that it's a rendering change but just that someone has decided to apply internal unsigned council-generated refs to these roads. If they're not signed I'd have thought that official_ref was more appropriate here - if someone wants to render the data they can, but it's no use to general map users. It's been mentioned before: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22official_ref%22+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Flists.openstreetmap.org%2Fpipermail%2Ftalk-gbbtnG=Searchtbs=li%3A1 http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22admin_ref%22+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Flists.openstreetmap.org%2Fpipermail%2Ftalk-gbbtnG=Searchtbs=li%3A1 http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22c+roads%22+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Flists.openstreetmap.org%2Fpipermail%2Ftalk-gbbtnG=Searchtbs=li%3A1 The roads you link to have been like that for nearly a year: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22762295 Where C road refs (that aren't signed, and aren't available from a suitably-licensed source) have appeared locally to me I've removed them though I'm aware (see the recent C-roads discussion on this list) that they sometimes are signed - I've seen them myself. With these U refs I'd suggest that local mappers discuss with the person adding them whether it's the best way to store the data. It may be that they really are signed usable references - not just something made up in a council office and never used outside of there. Cheers, Andy PS: UK taginfo showing use of various ref tags: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=ref -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project - postboxes
On Mon Apr 13 23:59:14 2015 GMT+0100, Pierre Riteau wrote: I have followed this proposal too. Example for a Franked mail only post box: mail:meter = yes mail:stamped = no I do not understand where the word meter comes from in this concept. Surely mail:franked=yes mail:stamped=no Boxes are labeled franked mail only, can you put print postage at home stuff in a franked only box? Phil (trigpoint ) On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, at 03:19 PM, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: On 13 April 2015 at 12:22, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote: Came across 2 postboxes today, side-by-side, one with 1st Class and one with 2nd class. Two wall-mounted box refs so not 2 apertures on the same pillar. I couldn't see anything in the wiki on how to treat these so I tagged them postbox:restriction= 1st class mail only and 2nd class mail only. Is there something somewhere already established or do we need a consensus on how to tag these? I don't recall any recent specific discussion about this, and hence don't think there's a definite consensus. But if you look at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postboxes/osm-tag-keys.html it would seem that the most popular method would be to add mail:meter=yes/no, mail:first_class=yes/no, etc. This would be consistent with the suggestions in the abandoned proposal at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extend_post_box . But there are also a few instances of mailtypes=* as well, and even fewer of class=* in use. Robert. -- Robert Whittaker ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Search but cannot find
On Wed Mar 18 15:38:13 2015 GMT, Pmailkeey . wrote: U-numbers are used publicly - most often on temporary planning development notices attached to street lights etc. If they are not signed, then they do not belong in the ref tag. The consensus is that such information belongs in an admin_ref tag, a sat nav instruction to 'turn left into the U666' is very unhelpful. Phil (trigpoint ) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Proposed import of approximately 6 bicycle repair tool stands in the UK
On Thu Mar 5 10:03:18 2015 GMT, Jonathan Bennett wrote: On 04/03/2015 22:59, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Ok, last call for comments. I don't see a huge amount of support for automatically importing these from the GB community. If there's such a small number, why not just list them on this mailing list and local mappers can check the accuracy before mapping them in the normal way. Please note this is an ongoing import, so new nodes will show up from time to time under the same conditions. I'm not aware of any previous cases where the community has said it's OK for an open-ended, ongoing import to happen. They've been done as one-offs or in batches (e.g. Naptan) but there's always been a limited set of data. GB is well-enough served by local mappers for listing potential sites on the wiki (for example) for later mapping to work. Directly adding possibly erroneous locations to the map is just going to harm OSM's reputation for being the most accurate map available. +1 And/or add 6 notes to the map, providing notes have meaningful content they tend to be picked up local mappers.. There is really no need to import this type of data in the UK where the mapping culture is to walk/cycle and just go and have a looksee. Well that applies to UK culture in general, choosing to walk is not viewed with suspicion. Imho notes offer an easy to see/navigate to and are visible in osmand. Phil (trigpoint ) -- -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] addr:place
On Sun Oct 26 2014 19:34:14 GMT+ (GMT), Brad Rogers wrote: On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:27:11 + Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote: Hello Chris, Like you, I live in a different parish than the one RM route my post through. spurious and wholly wrong concept of Royal Fail's postal town. Postal I agree it's a shame that so many people attribute so much value to RM's postal address. After all it was, and remains, designed for *their* purposes only. That is, the purpose of routing mail deliveries. Nothing more. Absolutely, would be so good to put the postcode genie back in the bottle. Postal addresses are the reason Donington Park is referred to as The Derbyshire Circuit by geographicakk ignorant motor racing commentators, its in Leicestershire. Ramblers are assigned to wrong county as a result of postcodes, it took some work to convince London office staff that that Castle Donnngton, Kegworth, Measham, Moira are in Leicestershire. Its a shame grid references are not taught in schools, they are as simple to use and remember. They give geographic meaning, I can see instantly that SK53 lives in an area 100km east and 10km north of me. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] River Severn Dried up in places
Brian, see this thread, think it is a broken coastline. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-August/070493.html Phil (trigpoint ) On Mon Aug 18 2014 19:33:04 GMT+0100 (BST), Brian Savidge wrote: Looking around a bit more, it looks like Stroud is also suffering problems where its submerged when the zoom level is at 500m (all other zoom levels seem fine for that area). I've tried zooming around other parts of the UK and this problem doesn't seem to exist, so I can only guess its a local problem around the river Severn. Further up the Severn valley, Tewkesbury seems to be flooded at 1km zoom range and below, with different tiles being marked as flooded depending on the zoom. From: a_sn...@hotmail.com To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 18:18:33 + Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] River Severn Dried up in places I should have said, you see different things at different zoom levels From: a_sn...@hotmail.com To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 18:15:42 + Subject: [Talk-GB] River Severn Dried up in places What has gone wrong with the River Severn around Sharpness, near Berkeley, Gloucestershire? It looks like someone has been adding in the sand banks at the same level as the waterway=riverbank. My guess is OpenStreetMap doesn't know which one takes priority and the sandbanks have won. I am also assuming OpenStreetMaps doesn't draw the maps according to the tide. There seem to be other tidal features along the Severn such as tidal reservoir which don't seem to be causing problems. Should the tidal features have a specific level so that they can be seen, presumably level 2 would be the best or is there a better way to resolve this issue? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation
On Wed Aug 06 2014 14:18:24 GMT+0100 (BST), Marc Gemis wrote: On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Pavlo Dudka pavlo.du...@gmail.com wrote: name/name:en can't be the key for place names, since different cities with the same names in english may have different names in another language. (I can't find an example, but I am sure there are some) Paris (France) is Parijs in Dutch Paris (Texas) is Paris (as far as I know) regards m Newport, South Wales is Casnewydd in Welsh. Newport, Pembrokeshire is Trefdraeth. Phil (trigpoint) -- Sent from my Jolla ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Food Hygiene Rating System
Neil Pilgrim wrote: I've used fhrs to add some data and wondered about this, though in Scotland they didn't seem to have a rating. My understanding is that in Scotland is it Pass / Fail, rather than stars. Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] bing image alignment
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote: A couple of days ago, I walked a footpath, which turned out, along with the preceding private road, to be a PROW on foot. As I wanted to detail map it to show steps, I first calibrated Bing against OS StreetView When using any OS data it's important to be certain of the method used for the datum conversion. If it's not using the OSTN02 table-driven conversion you should expect to see offsets. The OS documentation says that the less-accurate method is OK for up to +/- 5m, but my experience is that the offset can be greater than that, e.g. up to about 20m. If you ever see offsets of this magnitude in anything that has touched OS grid references or OSGB36 datum, be suspicious! (As an example, http://hills-database.co.uk/ *deliberately* uses the less-accurate conversion because they claim that GPS devices will typically use the less-accurate conversion back to WGS84 when you enter a grid reference. As a consequence, if you display their summit positions on a not-reprojected OS map, they will be in the wrong places.) Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Finding Unmapped public rights of way
Robert Whittaker wrote: I assume that these digitised PRoW Maps from local councils are released under the OS OpenData License. That being the case, please note that Ordnance Survey have recently stated that their OS OpenData licence is not forward compatible with the ODC-By and ODbL [1]. Hence these datasets cannot currently be used as direct sources for contributing to OSM. I absolutely agree that the paths from these maps cannot be imported into OSM with the current licensing. This is clear. However, it would be great if we could use them just to add the designation=public_footpath tags to paths that have already been surveyed. Do people think it would be acceptable to, for example, view a paper definitive map at the local council office, and then update the designation tags manually? If that's allowed, surely it is possible to construct an argument that an automated equivalent process using the digital versions of the maps is allowed. Is it possible to claim that while the geometry of the path is derived from the OS, the fact of it being a public footpath is something added by the local authority; if OSM substitutes its own path geometry, the OS intellectual property is removed. Ideally, the local authority would then disclaim any rights (or adopt the plain OGL) over the remaining data: after all, they are only using the OS licence because of the OS- derived elements. Hmmm, that's not too convincing. Maybe someone else can come up with a better argument. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Finding Unmapped public rights of way
Dudley Ibbett wrote: I'm trying to make use of the row files on rowmaps for derbyshire and staffordshire and and merging these with and osm map file to then produce maps that can highlight which paths are and aren't mapped. Thanks for doing this. One suggestion - it would be great if the disgnation=public_footpath/bridleway tags on existing paths could be tidied up at the same time. Last time I looked, too few had these tags to be able to use them exclusively to identify footpaths, and the other tag combinations tend to have many false positives. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Searching UK addresses on the osm.org website
I believe that the royal mail postcode database is copyright and so importing such data would probably be a no no. Until recently I was a Ramblers Membership srcretary, and the problems caused by postcode allocation of new members, in particular around the county boundary led me to believe that postcodes are a very goog way of delivering the mail and are totally useless for any other purpose. If we need a shortcode for entering an address how about a good old fashioned grid-reference? Phil On 12/03/2012 10:50 Dan Avis wrote: Hi, Without wishing to descend into a license debate... (I've seen previous posts suggesting that *importing* the postcode database is at least contentious) Is it possible to get the osm.org search box to return results of the full postcode database? The data's been geocoded already, and it wouldn't have to be imported in order for that to work. I typically use only the postcode to find addresses, so it'd be handy. cheers ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Revert my changeset please
Pawel Stankiewicz wrote: Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Pawel Stankiewicz wrote: If you don't know how to revert an import, chances are you shouldn't be doing the import in the first place. Chances are something very different from a ban. No. You're misunderstanding English idiom. No. It's not ,,a group of words in a fixed order that have a particular meaning that is different from the meanings of each word understood on its own: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/idiom?q=idiom ,,chances are you shouldn't means ,,probably you shouldn't' but you still may it (are allowed). Deleting ,,chances you made it only more categorical but it still far far away from a rule in meaning used by you (do only). Pawel, There are at least two layers of subtle meaning in that statement. What you are perhaps missing is the element of sarcastic understatement. For example, if I noticed that someone were about to put salt in their tea instead of sugar, I might say err... are you sure you want to do that?. What that means is of course you idiot, stop!. Of course it would be better to avoid language like this, but it is hard for someone who has developed a complex style to revert to a lowest common denominator. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] (OT) Depressions, and projections
Dear All, Two slight off-topic questions for UK map enthusiasts: (1) Can you think of any depressions in Britain? I.e. places where the contour lines on the map would wind the wrong way? I ask because I recently noticed that the OS OpenData contour data is wrong around Princes Street Gardens in Edinburgh. It looks as if the contour lines are in the right places but their heights have been mis-labelled, as if the height labels had been added automatically by an algorithm that didn't expect depressions. The gridded data is consistent with the incorrect labelling, probably confirming that the gridded data is derived from the contours, rather than vice-versa. The only other depressions that I can think of are the sunken areas in the Fens. Any other suggestions? (2) Have a look at today's XKCD ( http://xkcd.com/977/ ) and tell us what your favourite map projection is :-) Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] (OT) Depressions, and projections
Donald Allwright wrote: (1) Can you think of any depressions in Britain? I.e. places where the contour lines on the map would wind the wrong way? I ask because I recently noticed that the OS OpenData contour data is wrong around Princes Street Gardens in Edinburgh. It looks as if the contour lines are in the right places but their heights have been mis-labelled, as if the height labels had been added automatically by an algorithm that didn't expect depressions. The gridded data is consistent with the incorrect labelling, probably confirming that the gridded data is derived from the contours, rather than vice-versa. The only other depressions that I can think of are the sunken areas in the Fens. Any other suggestions? There are many depressions on a small scale in carboniferous limestone areas, where rivers/streams have disappeared underground or where caves have collapsed. I can think of a number but whether there are any that are large enough to show up in OS data is another question. Yes; I am an occasional caver, as it happens. There are a few places where my 1:25,000 OS maps show a depression contour around a cave entrance, including Gaping Ghyll, Stream Passage Pot and Hunt Pot in Yorkshire, and Porth Yr Ogof in Wales. But none of those show up on 1:50,000 OS maps or in the OpenData contours. One interesting spot is where Manchester Airport runway was extended over the Bollin Valley. The river now flows under the runway in a culvert, making the upstream valley a depression as far as Styal. Unfortunately, the runway was built after the OS OpenData contours were frozen. But maybe there are some other places like this? Any other examples? Thanks, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] [Semi-OT] affordable hosting for own tileserver?
Nick Whitelegg wrote: Am wanting to develop Freemap (coubtryside-orientated OSM site) and its mobile client, OpenTrail, further but the thing that's always holding me back, and forcing me to restrict it to certain areas of the UK only, are the limitations of the server. So is anyone aware of any hosting provider which costs no more than say GBP25-30 a month (am willing to pay that much, but no more as this is a not-for-profit project) and would allow me to maintain Freemap and update the database weekly without encountering memory issues? Rendering is not such a problem (IMX) as caching can be done - it's the actual database import that's the problem. Use Amazon AWS, or some other cloud provider, where you can change the size of the server (or the number of machines in the cluster) dynamically. See http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/instance-types/ and http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/ . A micro server has about 600 MB of RAM and burstable (i.e. shared) CPU, and costs $0.02 / hour = about £10/month. When you want to do something intensive like a database import, shut it down, reconfigure it as a quadruple extra large high memory machine, bring it up again, and for $2/hour (or less on the spot market) you have 68 GB of RAM and 4 dedicated Xeons. You also need to pay for storage and bandwidth. As a new user you would get a free allowance that, I think, would cover one permanently-running micro instance. I would avoid anything saying unlimited. What they means is we're not telling you what the limit is. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] To delete or not to delete, that is the question...
Nick Whitelegg wrote: Around Easter 2010, IIRC, I surveyed what appeared to be a footpath in good faith: I was then given a hard time by the landowner about trespassing etc. The landowner has told you that it is not a footpath. Please delete it. (Or re-tag as private.) Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Webhost recommendations for OSM data processing
Attila Sz?sz wrote: Sorry for the slightly out of topic subject, but I'd appreciate hearing about your recommendations in regards with a hosting provider that allows to run a reasonable amount of processes on their servers primarily for OSM data processing. Keep your existing service for the always on server, and use Amazon EC2 instances for the data processing tasks. You have a choice of several different machine types (from 1 to 8 cores and 1GB to 64GB RAM) and pay by the hour. 256M of memory for about 1-2 hrs/day A small standard instance (1.7 GB RAM, 1 CPU, 32-bit Linux OS) in Ireland would cost about $6 per month for 2 hours per day. See http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/ Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
Hi Craig, Craig Loftus wrote: If anyone knows about using cloud-hosting as a mirror, particularly if you think it is a terrible idea, please speak up now. I use S3 extensively. It does exactly what it says on the tin. Be sure to create your buckets in the right geographic zone (i.e. EU, which means Dublin). Fixing that later is a bit painful. I'm a command-line sort of person and I use something called s3cmd to upload. There are lots of other tools including a FireFox extension. To get bulk data in, I generally use an EC2 instance. For example, I can slurp date from wherever into the EC2 instance, process it a bit, and then slurp it into the S3 bucket all via very fast links. EC2 has a steeper learning-curve than S3, but for those of us for whom the alternative is the upstream bandwidth of our domestic broadband, it's the only sane way to use it. Feel free to ask on or off-list if you have any questions. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS grid positions
Tom Hughes wrote: http://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/2056/using-the-ordnance-survey-national-grid-with-openstreetmap Making search work is a whole different issue and I would certainly consider reasonable patches to do that - there are complicated issues of OS intellectual property (which I'm not sure Richard's answer on that thread accurately addresses) which would need to be considered depending on what algorithm was used. Good grief. Are people seriously suggesting that the Ordnance Survey owns the grid reference system to the extent that others cannot convert between grid refs and other formats, or draw a grid over their own maps? That sounds like legal paranoia to me (and normally, I think I'm more cautious than most about such issues). Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Roadside cycle-lanes vs. off-road cycle-paths
Dear Experts, Can anyone propose a test that I can use to distinguish between roadside cycle-lanes and off-road cycle paths? This is part of my effort to superimpose OSM path info onto OS District Map. I would like to show off-road cycle paths that would typically be shown on a paper OS map, perhaps as a bridleway, and not roadside paths that would not be shown separately from the road itself. One option is to look only for the footpath/bridleway tags, but that does seem to miss some things. Any suggestions? Thanks, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Roadside cycle-lanes vs. off-road cycle-paths
David Earl wrote: On 15/04/2011 19:50, David Earl wrote: there's various lane indications such as cycleway=lane ... PS if you want examples, Cambridge and the surrounding area is particularly dense with all the variations of these all over the place. Indeed, I live in Cambridge... A good example is Trumpington Road, where OSM has Trumpington Cycleway as a separate way parallel to the road. It is tagged just highway=cycleway, name=Trumpington Cycleway. There is something similar on Grange Road. Barton Cycleway has a more comlex set of tags, but I don't see any obvious filter criteria to distinguish these from cross country cycle paths. Thanks, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS VectorMap District with LandForm Panorama contours overlay
Luke Smith wrote: Hi Phil, What did you use for the 3D render? That's a screenshot from my 3D Lake District iPhone app. The maps I've put together aren't using the VectorMap raster, so I have the roads rendered above the paths - otherwise I'm sure things would be all over the place. Right, being able to render them under the OS data is certainly helping you. Ben Nevis etc is indeed coming from Strategi's selection of major mountains and mountain ranges (got a few problems with accents there I see). It's not great, but VectorMap District hopelessly misses out the major hills altogether. The 50K gazetteer has them in, but far too many points aren't categorised. Hopefully fixed in the next version. Text for water features is a complete disaster in VectorMap, with the locations being massively out and the text sizes being inconsistent, with many rivers set to the same style as the North Sea etc. I had a meeting with OS on Thursday, where they seemed to think the 1st April would see the next release of VectorMap District. I'm going to render the whole country in the mean time (will take a few days) and work out what all the problems are, then see what's fixed in April. Good; I'd rather wait and hope that they've fixed things, rather than trying to work-around it somehow. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS, OSM and field boundaries
Mike Harris wrote: What is needed in OSM for walkers - but how to do it? (thanks to Nick and others for great work) is (a) contours and (b) field boundaries. Contours (nominally at 1:50,000) are included in OS OpenData. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] 10000 scale withdrawn
andynbe...@gmail.com wrote: I wonder what will happen to OS streetview when the 1 scale mapping is withdrawn in 2 years time. The 1 is being replaced by VectorMap local under the Public Sector Mapping Agreement. Streetview is described as one of the styles of VectorMap Local: https://www.ordnancesurveyvectormap.com/meetingYourRequirements/ Styles Black and White, Streetview, 1:10 000 Scale Raster, Standard Style 1, Standard Style 2, Standard Style 3 What that means in terms of open availability I don't know. Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Loch Lomond National Park sorry for 'Giro Bay' map
Ed Avis wrote: These maps will probably become collector's items: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-12684156 What struck me was this quote: She also confirmed that some previously unnamed parts of the loch had been named after cartographers and rangers who had worked together on the mapping project. The spokeswoman explained names given after people was a common map-making tradition Err... it is? OK, maybe in the 19th century if you were Robert Fitzroy in Patagonia, but I don't imagine any cartographer today is just making up names! (Hopefully not any OSM contributors or anyone at the O.S., anyway...) Phil ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Viability of huge shapefile of LandForm Panorama contours in Mapnik?
Hi Nick, Nick Whitelegg wrote: Sometime, perhaps over Easter, I'd like to do something I've been meaning to do for a while, and that is create pseudo-Landranger maps by combining OS Vector Map District, contours from OS Landform Panorama, and OSM footpaths. I will naturally be interested to see what you come up with! The amount of data involved is large. I did mine on about 20 medium Amazon EC2 instances, and it took a couple of days IIRC. This was with my own code to parse the OS data and a renderer based on AGG. One issue that I would like to look at at some point is how to heal the contours. The lines in the OS download are truncated on steep ground where they would be too close together on a printed map. (I think that the 50m contours are always continuous.) I'd like to thread these broken contours between their neighbours. I have some vague ideas about how to do this; maybe something like: - Make a Delaunay triangulation of all the points in all the contours. - For each edge in the triangulation, if the ends have a height difference of more than 10m, insert additional points equally spaced along the edge. - Re-triangulate including the new points. - Discard all edges whose ends have different heights. - The remaining edges are the new contours. Has anyone here ever tried to do anything like this? Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS OpenData contours
Hi Nick, Nick Whitelegg wrote: Am interested in using the OS OpenData contour set for an augmented reality app for walkers (extension of the OpenTrailView idea). What I have in mind is to load them into a database and implement a lookup facility where the elevation at a particular lat/lon can be obtained by querying the dataset. I believe the OS contours are rather higher precision than SRTM, hence my interest in them, but to potentially save effort, has anyone done something like this already? I believe you've asked me about this before, and I have code to parse the gridded version of this data and to create binary files from it, similar to the .hgt files that SRTM is distributed in. The total size is about 60 MB in about 13,000 gzipped files, one per 5km square, with a 50m horizontal resolution. Trivial interpolation within the grid seems to work pretty well compared to OS spot heights e.g. within 5m on summits, which is much better than I get using SRTM. I also have a version that is downsampled to a 200m grid which is of course much smaller. Lookups are quite straightforward once you have converted your lat/lon to eastings and northings. You are welcome to take a copy of this data, if you would like it. Regards, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Project of the week - trace a village off of OSSV?, (Kai Krueger)
At risk of being a fly in the ointment, judging by the largely favourable responses to this idea, I for one would like to register myself as -1. Rant Please don't map an area if you are not familiar with it. I have done some armchair mapping, but only where I am familiar with the area, and feel I can add value to the data I am entering. If you are that desperate for a 'complete' map, go out and do more surveying, or just use OS or other commercially available products. I just feel that blatant, blind copying of OS data is prostituting what I thought Open Street Map was meant to be about./Rant OK, I've got my tin hat on: standing by for incoming... ;-) Phil. talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: -- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 12:07:33 +0100 From: Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com Subject: [Talk-GB] UK Project of the week - trace a village off of OSSV? To: 'talk-gb' talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: 4c0b8175.30...@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Hello everyone, I would like to suggest as a sort of Project of the week for the UK for people to pick a random town or village somewhere in the UK that so far has poor coverage and trace it's roads from OS OpenData StreetView. Despite the various claims over the years that the UK road will be road complete by the end of the year, the UK is still a far distance off of that target. I have heard the numbers that so far we have on the order of 50% of named roads (people who are working on OS - OSM comparisons please correct me if I am wrong). Which is by no means a small feat of achieving, but also not as high as one would like it to be. So let us try and accelerate this a bit by everyone picking a small random town or village somewhere in the UK and trace the roads from StreetView. It probably only takes about 10 - 20 minutes for a small village and even a small town isn't too bad to do (if the weather is bad and you can't go out). So with the help of OS data, we can get a big step closer to where we would like to be and use it as a basis to continue to improve beyond the quality of OS data or any other commercial map provider. (If you are convinced already, then no need to read the rest of the email) I know that many people are opposed to armchair mapping or imports (and btw I am not proposing a full scale import here, but manual tracing instead) and so I'd like to counter some of the arguments most likely going to be brought up against this sort of non local tracing: 1) OS data might have mistakes, be outdated and generally not as good as what OSM aims for: Yes, no doubt OS has errors and can be outdated in many places by a couple of years ( I have found more than enough of those myself). Furthermore, all of the OS products released lack many of the properties we are interested in like one way roads, turn and other restrictions, POIs, foot and cycle ways and all the other things that make OSM data such a rich and valuable dataset. So yes, the OS data will clearly not replace any of the traditional OSM surveying techniques or be the end of things. But it can be a great basis to build upon. As a comparison, have a look (assuming you have a timecapsal ;-)) at what the data of e.g. central London looked like in 2007. It already had surprisingly many roads, but hardly any POIs or other properties that we aim for now. Most of that came later in many iterations of improvement. A single pass of OSM surveying is not any better than the OS data per se. Also given that the errors introduced by tracing OS data are exactly the same type of errors introduced by manual OSM surveying, i.e. misspellings in roads, missing roads, outdated roads, ... We need to have the tools to deal with this kind of maintenance anyway. It is the iterations that make OSM data what it is, not the first pass ground survey. Creating a blanket base layer from OS data allows us to much better focus on the aspects that do distinguish us from every other map data provider with having to waste as little as possible resources on the stuff everyone else has too. 2) large scale imports and tracing hinders community growth: This perhaps is the more important of the two arguments, as indeed what distinguishes us from everyone else is the community and without the community and its constant iterations and improvements, OSM data will bit rot just as much as all other data. However I don't think there is any clear evidence either way of what non local mapping does to communities and it remains hotly debated. The negative effects claimed are usually of the form a) The area looks complete, there is nothing more to do, so why bother. Or, it isn't as much fun to add a POI than a whole new village on a blank canvas. b) I put in all this effort into mapping an area
[Talk-GB] Footpath tagging and OS OpenData
Dear Experts,
I have been experimenting with superimposing OSM footpaths onto the OS
StreetView and District maps; I'm trying to get something that looks a
bit like a fake Explorer map. The results are generally
satisfactory; see e.g. http://chezphil.org/tmp/mamtor.jpeg ; as you can
see, I've also superimposed the contour lines from the Landform
Panorama data.
A challenge that I hope you can help me with is finding the right rules
to convert from OSM tag combinations to OS-lookalike path rendering
styles, i.e. footpath, bridleway, byway, permissive path, permissive
bridleway, long-distance path, path, track. There are also some ways
that would appear as multiple superimposed symbols on an OS map i.e. a
footpath along a track. It's easy to come up with something that works
most of the time, but there are lots of corner cases. For example, I
haven't really worked out what the grey tracks with no lines at the
sides really mean in the StreetView data.
Is this something that someone has done before? Here is the
pseudo-code that I'm currently using:
for each tag {
if horse==yes
or highway==bridleway return bridleway
else if horse==permissive return permissive_bridleway
else if foot==permissivereturn permissive_footpath
else if highway==track return track
else if highway==path return path
else if foot==noreturn path
}
return footpath
I apply that to all ways with highway = footway, bridleway, path or track.
What can I do to improve on that?
Many thanks, Phil.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath tagging and OS OpenData
Ed Loach wrote: What can I do to improve on that? designation= (public_footpath, public_bridleway, etc - see for example http://tagstat.hypercube.telascience.org/tagdetails.php?tag=designat ion ) is quite widely used, and is particularly useful where a footpath/bridleway runs along something which is also highway=service/unclassified/other types you aren't currently checking. Thanks Ed. Yes, I had found that tag but forgot to mention it in my message. This leads to questions like priority between e.g. foot=no and designation=public_footpath. Perhaps that one's unlikely to conflict in practice, but I bet someone else has already found the right way to parse these things... Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey talk tomorrow
Can't quite make that one .. but it sounds great. Any chance of a YouTube'd version appearing? Phil On 11 May 2010 09:51, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote: Hello everyone, In case of interest here: There is a British Computer Society talk given by a couple of guys from the Ordnance Survey on OpenSpace and the release of free data at my work place tomorrow. It's at Room HC029, Southampton Solent University, 6pm for 6.30pm. Nick ___ 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] Driving Test routes
I would go the route of contacting them, and saying : Hey, have you heard of OSM? Why don't you stick up proper streetmapping on your website showing the routes, for free? If you donate your route data it will get added to the map and ... ect. I've learned that a reciprocal relationship like this is one of the best ways of getting something from someone. Otherwise, *no* - unless something is clearly marked as copyleft / Creative Commons then it is in copyright, there is no need to display copyright for it to apply. On 13 April 2010 18:50, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote: Ed Loach wrote: I know there are people out there with time on their hands, just itching to find more uses for OSM. We've bus route maps, cycling route maps, and even in the West Midlands a gritting routes map. Today I stumbled across the fact that driving test routes are on the DSA website in a text format without any worry about them being derived from OS data that hasn't been released. http://www.dsa.gov.uk/AtoZservices_Bannered.asp?Cat=-1TestType=carTypeID=17 Then pick a centre and there should be download links on the right with PDFs describing the routes in text. Of course, the first debate is about whether we can use these. The website displays a Crown Copyright message, but the PDFs don't seem to display any terms/licence/copyright information on them. The terms of use include: not re-use the information for promotion or advertising purposes. Since we don't have such restrictions on the use of OSM data I don't think it is compatible. You could build a separate layer I suppose. Cheers, Chris ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS StreetView accuracy: caution!
I'd echo that sentiment, and say this: Streetview is a product designed to show *streets. *Anything else is just detail to show these in context. It would be a huge mistake for anyone to trace topo details from StreetView into OSM, for these reasons and more! I do think though, that it is an excellent source of street and road information in areas that have not yet been traced ... as long as users don't get over zealous with it. On 8 April 2010 09:14, Brian Prangle bpran...@googlemail.com wrote: I've just completed a 25 mile stretch of the Centenary Way in Warwickshire and I'm editing now with the aid of OSSV. Generally it's accurate but I've found a track on the wrong side of river and the course of a stream crossing my GPX tracks from the footpath where the footpath clearly stays on one side of the stream. And often there are gaps in waterways where there are none on the ground. I'm sure I'll find more as I continue editing. Also I've had a look at major building outlines in Birmingham - some of which have been demolished. So be careful with the data - it still needs a survey! Regards Brian ___ 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] tracing lakes with Potlatch
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 13:37:58 +0100 From: Henry Gomersall h...@cantab.net Subject: [Talk-GB] tracing lakes with Potlatch To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: 1270557478.9949.39.ca...@whg21-laptop Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear All, I've been keen for a while to improve the lake and tarns outlines in the lake district. It seems the current data is a little coarse and could be improved. The (fairly poor) aerial imagery seems plenty good enough to get a decent outline, but Potlatch won't allow zooming beyond a certain level in this region, which makes it difficult. Is this something the Potlach 2 will allow? Also, is it worth bothering, as it seems some of the new OS datasets will have decent lakes and rivers. Cheers, Henry I've been tracing from the OS 1:25k first series which Andy Robinson is uploading as a potlatch layer. (see http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.5384502410889lon=-2.8754997253418zoom=13and http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=54.3379497528076lon=-2.28412628173828zoom=13 ). You can trace at zoom level 17, and the rectification of the maps is pretty good (compare roads on the maplayer with gps traces). The yahoo imagery for rural areas is worse than useless, IMHO, and the NPE is not well rectified - a comment on the standard of the original mapping, not those who rectified the data for OSM use, I hasten to add. There are very few of the maps available in the Lakes at the moment, but I'm hopeful Andy will continue to upload once the furore over OSOpenData has settled a little. As for the comment from another contributor suggesting don't bother tracing - I say go for it, so long as you have local knowledge of the areas concerned - look further afield (Dales, N York moors etc if you know the areas) and get some detail on, but use the best source for tracing available; which at the moment is OS1:25k First Edition. Cheers, Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets / names , etc. We can surely get this as a backdrop layer, like the Yahoo imagery? A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect) Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire place (apologies to the person I may have double replied this to!) On 31 March 2010 23:31, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: On 31 March 2010 15:16, Tristan Thomas tristan.tho...@wikinewsie.orgwrote: As a rare contributor, sorry if my questions seem a bit obvious. What does this actually mean? ie. will OSM now have every single street in it (once imported obviously) and so contributors won't be able to contribute by adding roads (other than new ones)? I don't know exactly what is going to make it from OS to OSM yet, but... It is still good (very important in my opinion) for the map to be checked. For one reason, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright_Easter_Eggs You can check roads while adding valuable other data, bicycle racks, recycling bins, restaurants, shops, and stuff that might not be on the OS maps (or not on what they have released). In some places it may even be tricky to do an automatic bulk import of OS data, because of duplicating extensive data already added to OSM. -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey
Hi Tom, Not sure I agree that Streetview is 'horrible' - as a free base map it will rival or beat any of the others I have seen. This is even more true for rural areas. I am aware most of the raster stuff got left out, but streetview *is* raster - it says as much in the PDF. What we would want to do, I think, is encourage people to rapidly trace this to form a base map, then set upon the task of checking it for accuracy. Secondly, adding to it all the great features that we know from OSM - with the time burden or walking all the streets gone, that second part should progress more rapidly. Phil On 1 April 2010 00:47, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 01/04/10 00:06, Phil Monger wrote: The streetview announcement is FANTASTIC news for OSM in the UK - as the database is pretty much exactly what is being built - roads / streets / names , etc. StreetView is horrible - the vector data will be far more useful. We can surely get this as a backdrop layer, like the Yahoo imagery? I suspect that will be the best approach, yes. We'll probably want to wait for the Vector Map District release in May though as that will be a better data set than Meridian 2. Of course Boundary Line will also be useful for tracing and that should be available tomorrow. All this assume the license is OK of course, which we won't know until we see it. A bulk import wouldn't be possible, as this is raster data. (Though the rest of the datasets seem to have a vector element, borders ect) It's not raster data. Almost all the raster data got left out. Exciting times ... I'll finally have some backing for my small Lincolnshire village without needing to go out and GPS trace the entire place If it's only a small village then surveying it wouldn't take long anyway ;-) Plus you'll get all sorts of detail that the OS mapping won't have. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Virgin Train Traces (Richard Mann)
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote: A quick look at oepnvkarte indicates we have all of Virgin's operating routes already. Maybe some of the traces aren't great, but I think some tracing off NPE ought to fix that, surely? While positional info is probably in the trains (though I don't remember it ever being discussed in the context of Pendolino or Voyager), the effort required to extract it is probably several times greater than simply carting your own GPS around. Richard-- NPE tracing is not that accurate, certainly in Lancs/Yorks - the Morecambe - Skipton line is fairly approximate in several areas. The Yahoo imagery is so small as to be next to useless, especially now so many other ways are mapped. I interpreted John McKerrels email to be an attempt to save someone the time (and expense?) of actually getting GPS traces themselves. I wonder if other operators would be as helpful? Phil. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Map of Trace data, was: Re: Stitching Aerial Photographs (John Robert Peterson)
Thanks for that, but bearing in mind I am not a programmer, how does it help me? :-\ I don't know the ID for any tracks there may or may not be in the area i (may) want to map, and I can't find a way in OSM to reveal any GPS trace ID other than a GPS Trace filename, (not even with my own traces). if there is a way to reveal the ID, please let me know. Thanks, Phil James OJ W wrote: On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Phil James peerja...@googlemail.com wrote: John Robert Peterson wrote: Do we have anything that will draw map tiles of the trace data? (I'd like this for another project anyway: checking whether traces exist for an area when out with a mobile device) if it's a public gpx, then look for it at http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~ojw/gpx ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Map of Trace data, was: Re: Stitching Aerial Photographs (John Robert Peterson)
John Robert Peterson wrote: Do we have anything that will draw map tiles of the trace data? (I'd like this for another project anyway: checking whether traces exist for an area when out with a mobile device) +1 for that; it's a real pain when people don't include source data, especially for rural areas, and whilst it is possible to view the traces (if any) in potlatch, it's a long winded way of finding out what still needs surveying. Phil James ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Talk-GB Digest, Vol 33, Issue 24
talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to talk-gb@openstreetmap.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org You can reach the person managing the list at talk-gb-ow...@openstreetmap.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels (Peter Childs) -- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:41:59 +0100 From: Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Authorities, boundaries and admin-levels Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: a2de01dd0906131041l5dda4bc9h88fef7556e086...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 2009/6/13 Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com: On 13 Jun 2009, at 09:30, Peter Childs wrote: 2009/6/11 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk: And here is the current OSM guidance:- http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin_level#admin_level In order to tie in with NUTS and with guidance for other countries within OSM we might want to do the following for England (Scotland and Wales would be similar but would skip some levels):- UK (admin_level=2) England/Wales/Scotland (admin_level=4) English regions (North East, East of England etc) (also admin_level=4 as per NUTS) Ceremonial counties - where they exist (admin_level= 5) County Councils/Unitary Authorities (admin-level=6) Districts ?(admin-level=8) ?districts / London boroughs / metropolitan boroughs. Whats the simplest way of adding a boundary? I notice that Medway does not have one, I know ruthley where it should be, but have no idea of how to go about adding the relevant relation/way. I'm fine adding Roads and smaller stuff but the boundary stuff just throws me. It is better to use a relation for the boundary rather than way tags which used to be the only way to do it. Add the appropriate existing ways (rivers/roads etc) to a new relation. You may need to split roads/rivers where the boundary diverges. For some sections of the boundary you will need to add new ways (where it goes across fields). I just add a 'note=administrative boundary' tag to those ways. The only source of data we can legally use for the boundary to by knowledge is the NPE maps base which shows boundaries as a dotted line if you are lucky and if they have not moved in the past 50 years. I also check wikipedia as a cross check Given that Medway is less than 50 years old that could be a problem. Not necessarily - if you know from local knowledge which areas are included in Medway, you could use the boundaries marked on NPE to guide you as to where the 'new' boundary is - I've used this principle to map some of the 'new' (!974, FGS!) North Yorks/ Cumbria boundary, using the old district boundaries - might not be perfect, but if someone knows different... Phil James ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
