date:20131205

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 05:23:12AM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
 Glenn,
 
 I just used the node that was already in OSM.  I'll move it. I've done some
 surveys there, so I know where you want it.

So what would be the difference between the place= node and this
admin_centre for admin_level 9?  You currently seem to be using
that node for it.

PS: I see 2 relations for Muizen?  3359778 (admin) and 3360497
(post).  They have exactly the same members, just some difference
in the tags.  Can't we just delete one of them?

Kurt


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

2013-12-05 Thread Glenn Plas


On 05-12-13 05:54, Marc Gemis wrote:
Another question related to this boundary. Originally I did not touch 
the boundary between Mechelen en Bonheiden. I just reused it for the 
Muizen-boundary. I now noticed that the Bonheidensteenweg 
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146650425) was partially in 
Muizen-Mechelen and Bonheiden. So I moved the boundary at that point, 
i.e. moved 1 point by merging it with the streetname change point.


But now I wonder whether the boundary should not be over the stream 
 Boeimeerbeek. That makes more sense to me. In this case the street 
name change should occur in the middle of the bridge.


I just checked AGIV, there is no (street) name on the bridge, but the 
street names are different on both sides of the stream. Also, the name 
of the stream is Vrouwvliet according to AGIV.


Can we improve the boundaries with data from AGIV ? Is there a WMS 
layer or shape files we can use ?



m


I was born and raised in Bonheiden, I always thought that was the 
border, you could actually spot the border between Mechelen(Muizen) and 
Bonheiden for years by looking at the quality difference of the road.  I 
only visit it once in a while and now it seems the road has been 
redone.   But it used to be pretty close to the bridge over the 
Boeimeerbeek you mention.


The road in Bonheiden is called the Muizensteenweg, in Muizen that road 
is called Bonheidensteenweg.  By looking at the map alone I think that 
the point on the road should not be merged with the administrative 
boundary like it is now. I noticed someone messed with that area a good 
while back and he lacked some mapping knowledge.


That bridge is the border, atleast by popular knowledge.


Glenn

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 05:23:12AM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
  Glenn,
 
  I just used the node that was already in OSM.  I'll move it. I've done
 some
  surveys there, so I know where you want it.

 So what would be the difference between the place= node and this
 admin_centre for admin_level 9?  You currently seem to be using
 that node for it.

 PS: I see 2 relations for Muizen?  3359778 (admin) and 3360497
 (post).  They have exactly the same members, just some difference
 in the tags.  Can't we just delete one of them?

 Kurt


 _



I used the place= node as admin_centre. That's also the one that I moved.
Should there be a difference between the two ?
As for the two relations: I'm still fighting nominatim. I want all the
street(segments) within the Muizen area to return 2812 as post code. In
Germany they use the dedicated boundary=postal_code. This is also what was
recommended by someone on a similar question on help.openstreetmap.org.
So I tried that.

m
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

[OSM-talk-be] Fwd: [OSM-talk] SotM-EU 2014 in Karlsruhe, Germany

2013-12-05 Thread Ben Abelshausen

FYI: SOTM-EU!

Not that far for most of us... :-)
-- Forwarded message --
From: Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org
Date: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:33 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] SotM-EU 2014 in Karlsruhe, Germany
To: Talk Openstreetmap t...@openstreetmap.org, d...@openstreetmap.org 
d...@openstreetmap.org

Hi,

   today I have the pleasure to announce that we'll be holding SotM-EU
2014 in Karlsruhe, on 13-15 June. We've set up the web page at
www.sotm-eu.org and we'll be posting news there and on @sotmeu on Twitter.

We'll be trying to emulate the success of the 2011 Vienna conference,
bringing together everyone who does anything interesting in  with
OpenStreetMap in Europe.

The call for papers will be out soon, with registration to open early
2014. We already have a good international programme committee preparing
that but if you'd like to join the programme committee or otherwise help
organising the conference (or aspects of it), don't be shy and write to
i...@sotm-eu.org. Same if you have any ideas that you'd like the
organisers to consider.

We'll be distributing this announcement to the dev and talk lists
as well as to talk-fr and talk-de. If you are on one of the other
regional European lists, we would be grateful if you could forward
the announcement.

I'm looking forward to seeing you in Karlsruhe next year!

Bye
Frederik

PS: we = the local Karlsruhe team  everyone involved

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
talk mailing list
t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

At least the shapefile is clear about the license, and you can
just open that in josm. You need the OpenData plugin for it.

See:
https://download.agiv.be/Producten/Detail?id=10title=Voorlopig_referentiebestand_gemeentegrenzen

Since the WMS is just a rending of that information, I don't think
it's a problem to use it.

Kurt

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:35:17AM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
I'll try to get the wms layer for the boundaries and adapt the boundary to
the one from AGIV (or are we not allowed to use that ?)

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be wrote:

On 05-12-13 05:54, Marc Gemis wrote:

Another question related to this boundary. Originally I did not touch the
boundary between Mechelen en Bonheiden. I just reused it for the
Muizen-boundary. I now noticed that the Bonheidensteenweg (
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146650425) was partially in
Muizen-Mechelen and Bonheiden. So I moved the boundary at that point, i.e.
moved 1 point by merging it with the streetname change point.

But now I wonder whether the boundary should not be over the stream
Boeimeerbeek. That makes more sense to me. In this case the street name
change should occur in the middle of the bridge.

I just checked AGIV, there is no (street) name on the bridge, but the
street names are different on both sides of the stream. Also, the name of
the stream is Vrouwvliet according to AGIV.

Can we improve the boundaries with data from AGIV ? Is there a WMS layer
or shape files we can use ?

I was born and raised in Bonheiden, I always thought that was the border,
you could actually spot the border between Mechelen(Muizen) and Bonheiden
for years by looking at the quality difference of the road. I only visit
it once in a while and now it seems the road has been redone. But it used
to be pretty close to the bridge over the Boeimeerbeek you mention.

The road in Bonheiden is called the Muizensteenweg, in Muizen that road is
called Bonheidensteenweg. By looking at the map alone I think that the
point on the road should not be merged with the administrative boundary
like it is now. I noticed someone messed with that area a good while back
and he lacked some mapping knowledge.

That bridge is the border, atleast by popular knowledge.

Glenn

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

2013-12-05 Thread Ben Abelshausen

When I read the licence file it's the same conditions as the CRAB dataset.
There is an obligation to mention the source, just add it to the list of
sources on the wiki and specify that it's about borders.

Met vriendelijke groeten,
Best regards,

Ben Abelshausen

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Kurt Roeckx k...@roeckx.be wrote:

At least the shapefile is clear about the license, and you can
just open that in josm. You need the OpenData plugin for it.

See:

https://download.agiv.be/Producten/Detail?id=10title=Voorlopig_referentiebestand_gemeentegrenzen

Since the WMS is just a rending of that information, I don't think
it's a problem to use it.

Kurt

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:35:17AM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
I'll try to get the wms layer for the boundaries and adapt the boundary
to
the one from AGIV (or are we not allowed to use that ?)

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be
wrote:

On 05-12-13 05:54, Marc Gemis wrote:

Another question related to this boundary. Originally I did not touch
the
boundary between Mechelen en Bonheiden. I just reused it for the
Muizen-boundary. I now noticed that the Bonheidensteenweg (
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146650425) was partially in
Muizen-Mechelen and Bonheiden. So I moved the boundary at that point,
i.e.
moved 1 point by merging it with the streetname change point.

But now I wonder whether the boundary should not be over the stream
Boeimeerbeek. That makes more sense to me. In this case the street
name
change should occur in the middle of the bridge.

I just checked AGIV, there is no (street) name on the bridge, but the
street names are different on both sides of the stream. Also, the
name of
the stream is Vrouwvliet according to AGIV.

Can we improve the boundaries with data from AGIV ? Is there a WMS
layer
or shape files we can use ?

I was born and raised in Bonheiden, I always thought that was the
border,
you could actually spot the border between Mechelen(Muizen) and
Bonheiden
for years by looking at the quality difference of the road. I only
visit
it once in a while and now it seems the road has been redone. But it
used
to be pretty close to the bridge over the Boeimeerbeek you mention.

The road in Bonheiden is called the Muizensteenweg, in Muizen that
road is
called Bonheidensteenweg. By looking at the map alone I think that the
point on the road should not be merged with the administrative boundary
like it is now. I noticed someone messed with that area a good while
back
and he lacked some mapping knowledge.

That bridge is the border, atleast by popular knowledge.

Glenn

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

2013-12-05 Thread Bart Van Lancker

 

 

I used the place= node as admin_centre. That's also the one that I moved.
Should there be a difference between the two ?

As for the two relations: I'm still fighting nominatim. I want all the
street(segments) within the Muizen area to return 2812 as post code. In
Germany they use the dedicated boundary=postal_code. This is also what was
recommended by someone on a similar question on help.openstreetmap.org. 

So I tried that.

 

 

That's what I'm trying to do in Ghent, and it doesn't work. I've defined the
deelgemeenten with their postal code (actually as a
boundary=administrative), but there seem to be some postal codes hardcoded
in Nominatim, which seem to have preference over the postal code
bounbdaries.

Examples :

 

Waterkluiskaai in Sint-Amandsberg still has postal code 9050, although in
reality it has 9040 :

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=waterkluiskaai#map=17/51.04681/3.7
5473

 

Sint-Amandsberg has 9040, which is correct :

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=sint-amandsberg#map=17/51.04681/3.
75473

 

9040 is NOT hardcoded in Nominatim :

 

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9040#map=17/51.04681/3.75473

 

9050 is :

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9050#map=17/51.04681/3.75473

 

So everything near the 9050 node will get the postal code 9050, regardless
of boundaries :

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=tarbotstraat#map=17/51.04557/3.746
83

 

while Tarbotstraat is within the 9000 boundary, but close to the 9050
virtual node

 

The only solution is to add the postal_code on street level.

 

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary


  
  
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:35:17AM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:

  
I'll try to get the wms layer for the boundaries and adapt the boundary to
the one from AGIV (or are we not allowed to use that ?)
  

On 2013-12-05 16:36, Kurt Roeckx wrote
  :


  At least the shapefile is clear about the license, and you can
just open that in josm.  You need the "OpenData" plugin for it.


I wrote several times without reaction that the law states that the
law (e.g. the Moniteur) cannot be copyrighted, that the boundaries
are part of the law (normally in the Moniteur) and hence that the
boundaries cannot be copyrighted. The same applies to road signs.

Don't you agree?

Cheers,


  

  André.

  


  


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 05:19:35PM +0100, Bart Van Lancker wrote:
 
 That's what I'm trying to do in Ghent, and it doesn't work. I've defined the
 deelgemeenten with their postal code (actually as a
 boundary=administrative), but there seem to be some postal codes hardcoded
 in Nominatim, which seem to have preference over the postal code
 bounbdaries.

As far as I know it always takes the closest place node, and I
think I've open a bug about that.  But as ussual there doesn't
seem to be much reaction to it.


Kurt


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary


  
  
On 2013-12-05 03:43, Glenn Plas wrote :


  
  Exactly what I feared, that point in
Muizen has probably never been of any importance,  in that sense
the real historic centre of Muizen is the area at the new church
(and old tower) , about 1Km to the northwest of the current
coordinate used as centre.  Thats the reason I asked,  it is so
way off anything important (ever) and the location is
insignificant even now.  Muizen (was) a village that is divided
by de Dijle and de Leuvense Steenweg.  Mechelen is currently
consuming it at an evergrowing rate.
  

Oh, I see, that's another matter.
The problem with Dolembreux is that, according to OSM, the center of
Province Liège is 3 km away from it.
That must be an error ;-)
In a village nearby, they had two centers!
Seriously, the town center is a debatable matter. Some will say the
church, others the town hall, etc.
I prefer where activity takes place, where people love to go, where
to invite tourists.
Think of "You have arrived at your destination."
But all that relates to a place center and has nothing to do with
boundaries

Cheers,


  

  André.

  


  


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

Nominatim also uses data that is not in OSM. They did some imports into
their database. That's why there was a postcode 12 in Reet last year. They
removed that one. So it is possible to have postal code nodes that are not
in OSM, and which cannot be deleted in the normal way of course.

as a side note, someone on the import mailing list proposed to import the
AGIV CRAB data in Nominatim and not in OSM. So even addresses can be in
Nominatim and not in OSM. They already did this for some US-addresses I
believe.

regards

m


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be wrote:



 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=sint-amandsberg#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 9040 is NOT hardcoded in Nominatim :


 Not sure what defines 'hardcoded in Nominatim' to you.  But since it uses
 OSM data.  I tried a little overpass search, and I sure find instances of
 that postal code.  See:

 http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Ho


 Glenn

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


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

I think the boundary=postal_code makes a difference after all

compare

http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=52527679(Waterkluiskaai)
which uses the postal code point
with
http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=64725723(Bonheidensteenweg)
which uses the postal_code boundary, which is an extra
relation in this case. It does not extract the postal code from the admin
level 9 boundary.

 I'll admit that for another part of that street (
http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=83522405) it still
uses the (wrong) postal code point from Bonheiden. Maybe something was not
updated ? Althought the dates do not reflect that

regards

m


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Bart Van Lancker b...@vlweb.net wrote:





 I used the place= node as admin_centre. That's also the one that I
 moved. Should there be a difference between the two ?

 As for the two relations: I'm still fighting nominatim. I want all the
 street(segments) within the Muizen area to return 2812 as post code. In
 Germany they use the dedicated boundary=postal_code. This is also what was
 recommended by someone on a similar question on help.openstreetmap.org.

 So I tried that.





 That’s what I’m trying to do in Ghent, and it doesn’t work. I’ve defined
 the “deelgemeenten” with their postal code (actually as a
 boundary=administrative), but there seem to be some postal codes
 “hardcoded” in Nominatim, which seem to have preference over the postal
 code bounbdaries.

 Examples :



 Waterkluiskaai in Sint-Amandsberg still has postal code 9050, although in
 reality it has 9040 :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=waterkluiskaai#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 Sint-Amandsberg has 9040, which is correct :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=sint-amandsberg#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 9040 is NOT hardcoded in Nominatim :



  http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9040#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 9050 is :



 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9050#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 So everything near the 9050 “node” will get the postal code 9050,
 regardless of boundaries :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=tarbotstraat#map=17/51.04557/3.74683



 while Tarbotstraat is within the 9000 boundary, but close to the “9050
 virtual node”



 The only solution is to add the postal_code on street level…



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


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

2013-12-05 Thread Bart Van Lancker

Of course there are references to 9040. But this what I mean :

 

http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=98380890

 

There is no such thing for 9040.

Problem is : you can't edit or remove this.

 

Van: Glenn Plas [mailto:gl...@byte-consult.be] 
Verzonden: donderdag 5 december 2013 17:41
Aan: OpenStreetMap Belgium
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

 





http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=sint-amandsberg#map=17/51.04681/3.
75473

 

9040 is NOT hardcoded in Nominatim :


Not sure what defines 'hardcoded in Nominatim' to you.  But since it uses
OSM data.  I tried a little overpass search, and I sure find instances of
that postal code.  See:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Ho


Glenn

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary


  
  
On 2013-12-05 05:54, Marc Gemis wrote :


  Another question related to this boundary.
Originally I did not touch the boundary between Mechelen en
Bonheiden. I just reused it for the Muizen-boundary. I now
noticed that the Bonheidensteenweg (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146650425)
was partially in Muizen-Mechelen and Bonheiden. So I moved the
boundary at that point, i.e. moved 1 point by merging it with
the streetname change point.

  

But now I wonder whether the boundary should not be over
  the stream  Boeimeerbeek. That makes more sense to me. 
  

Yes, from an imprecise map I have, the boundary follows Boeimeerbeek
and it's most of the time the case when it looks like following
something, but you may have some sudden excursions.
What to do then, is draw the boundary very near to the road/river,
but not to use them as the boundary. If you do so, I can assure you
that, sooner or later, someone will want to change the road/river
and destroy your boundary.
Near enough so that the map show them at the same place, but far
enough to be able to select one at OSM.org zoom level.
Destruction has begun already ;-)  Some joker attached the boundary
to one end of the bridge. I'm used to that!

  

  
In this case the street name change should occur in the
  middle of the bridge.
  
  

I just checked AGIV, there is no (street) name on the
  bridge, but the street names are different on both sides of
  the stream. Also, the name of the stream is Vrouwvliet
  according to AGIV.
  

Bridges are a long, strange, OSM story.
Bridges are pieces of concrete put under the road when there is no
ground.
Hence, OSM should draw an additional way segment under the road at
layer -1, that's all.
The road (tarmac foil) continues uninterrupted, without any routing
or naming concern.
But instead, OSM puts the bridge sort of ON TOP of the road AND
splits the road.
Then people wonder what is the name of the bridge and routing
programs wonder why the road changes.

OSM are very complicated people. A bridge normally has no name, the
street name continues as if there were no bridge.  In your case, in
the normal world, the street, and not the bridge, changes name
simply because it crosses a boundary.
But there are, of course, big bridges in big cities that stand on
their own and don't "inherit" a street name, whose road is called "Bridge
XXX" as well as bridges in smaller towns on which and beside which
the street is called "rue du Pont".

Cheers,


  

  André.

  


  


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

Bart,

I just added a postal_code boundary for 2840 Rumst. And  yes, both the
Hondstraat and Steenweg op Waarloos now get the correct postal code: 2840.
They had 2550 (from Kontich) before. So postal_code boundaries are the
solution for my nominatim problems.

regards

m


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Bart Van Lancker b...@vlweb.net wrote:





 I used the place= node as admin_centre. That's also the one that I
 moved. Should there be a difference between the two ?

 As for the two relations: I'm still fighting nominatim. I want all the
 street(segments) within the Muizen area to return 2812 as post code. In
 Germany they use the dedicated boundary=postal_code. This is also what was
 recommended by someone on a similar question on help.openstreetmap.org.

 So I tried that.





 That’s what I’m trying to do in Ghent, and it doesn’t work. I’ve defined
 the “deelgemeenten” with their postal code (actually as a
 boundary=administrative), but there seem to be some postal codes
 “hardcoded” in Nominatim, which seem to have preference over the postal
 code bounbdaries.

 Examples :



 Waterkluiskaai in Sint-Amandsberg still has postal code 9050, although in
 reality it has 9040 :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=waterkluiskaai#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 Sint-Amandsberg has 9040, which is correct :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=sint-amandsberg#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 9040 is NOT hardcoded in Nominatim :



  http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9040#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 9050 is :



 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9050#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 So everything near the 9050 “node” will get the postal code 9050,
 regardless of boundaries :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=tarbotstraat#map=17/51.04557/3.74683



 while Tarbotstraat is within the 9000 boundary, but close to the “9050
 virtual node”



 The only solution is to add the postal_code on street level…



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


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

Did the same (duplicate the admin relation, change into a postal-code
relation) for Bornem and there it works as well. Sas  Nattenhaasdonkstraat
now show the correct 2880 postal code. It took several minutes though
before all street segments were updated.

Since in Belgium the postal code areas coincide with village borders, we
have to double them. This 1-to-1 mapping might not be the case in other
countries. When we use those postal code boundaries, we do not have to put
the postal code on streets or admin relations anymore. At least not for
applications that understand those boundaries.

regards

m


On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bart,

 I just added a postal_code boundary for 2840 Rumst. And  yes, both the
 Hondstraat and Steenweg op Waarloos now get the correct postal code: 2840.
 They had 2550 (from Kontich) before. So postal_code boundaries are the
 solution for my nominatim problems.

 regards

 m


 On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Bart Van Lancker b...@vlweb.net wrote:





 I used the place= node as admin_centre. That's also the one that I
 moved. Should there be a difference between the two ?

 As for the two relations: I'm still fighting nominatim. I want all the
 street(segments) within the Muizen area to return 2812 as post code. In
 Germany they use the dedicated boundary=postal_code. This is also what was
 recommended by someone on a similar question on help.openstreetmap.org.

 So I tried that.





 That’s what I’m trying to do in Ghent, and it doesn’t work. I’ve defined
 the “deelgemeenten” with their postal code (actually as a
 boundary=administrative), but there seem to be some postal codes
 “hardcoded” in Nominatim, which seem to have preference over the postal
 code bounbdaries.

 Examples :



 Waterkluiskaai in Sint-Amandsberg still has postal code 9050, although in
 reality it has 9040 :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=waterkluiskaai#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 Sint-Amandsberg has 9040, which is correct :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=sint-amandsberg#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 9040 is NOT hardcoded in Nominatim :



  http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9040#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 9050 is :



 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=9050#map=17/51.04681/3.75473



 So everything near the 9050 “node” will get the postal code 9050,
 regardless of boundaries :




 http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=tarbotstraat#map=17/51.04557/3.74683



 while Tarbotstraat is within the 9000 boundary, but close to the “9050
 virtual node”



 The only solution is to add the postal_code on street level…



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



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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:52:31PM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
 Since in Belgium the postal code areas coincide with village borders

I've read somewhere that Brussels has some exceptions to that.


Kurt


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary


  
  
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Marc
  Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:
  
Bart,


I just added a postal_code boundary for 2840 Rumst. And
   yes, both the Hondstraat and Steenweg op Waarloos now get the
  correct postal code: 2840. They had 2550 (from Kontich)
  before. So postal_code boundaries are the solution for my
  nominatim problems.


regards



  
  On 2013-12-05 22:52, Marc Gemis wrote :


  Did the same (duplicate the admin relation, change
into a postal-code relation) for Bornem and there it works as
well. Sas  Nattenhaasdonkstraat now show the correct 2880
postal code. It took several minutes though before all street
segments were updated.

  

Since in Belgium the postal code areas coincide with
  village borders, we have to double them. This 1-to-1 mapping
  might not be the case in other countries. When we use those
  postal code boundaries, we do not have to put the postal code
  on streets or admin relations anymore. At least not for
  applications that understand those boundaries.
  


I find bizarre to have to add such additional relations to villages
to get a correct postcode and to have to do it by guessing, without
a written specification explaining how to do. I'd say the proof that
it's not necessary is Dolembreux below and that if it doesn't work
in other cases the reason should be found rather than finding a
workaround and concluding that it's what has to be done.
Village Boundary Dolembreux,
  Sprimont, Liège, French Community, Wallonia, 4140, Belgium

This said, I returned to Минск (Minsk, a big city) where I once saw
things like that.

They of course
  use boundary relations, but with no subarea and a single name
on some ways (interesting to know that the borderline or Minsk is
called Minsk), they have
  address type relations that look a bit like the German
associatedStreet but they are different,  they also have
  postal_code relations but look at what they contain,  Автобусы г.
  Минска (buses of City Minsk) that seems done differently from
elsewhere and a strange route to me, etc.

I compare with Moscow where I see no address nor postal_code
relations, but a strange
  street relation, ..

No wonder that Nominatim does not work if everybody is doing it
their own way.

I think OSM is going crazy.  Is all that really necessary?  Why
don't we first try to have it work correctly as a routing (GPS)
database?  According to my tests, it is unreliable, and Guy even
added "they laugh at us".

Cheers,


  

  André.

  



  


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

2013-12-05 Thread Glenn Plas


On 05-12-13 22:57, Kurt Roeckx wrote:

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:52:31PM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:

Since in Belgium the postal code areas coincide with village borders

I've read somewhere that Brussels has some exceptions to that.

Rest assured, things like VRT and NATO own their own postal codes. I'm 
-almost- sure noone thinks they are a village ;-)


Also Big cities in general, not only BXL but Antwerpen en Gent too, or 
Liege, the postal codes have no logic compaired to village borders in 
plenty of cases.


Glenn

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be wrote:

 On 05-12-13 22:57, Kurt Roeckx wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:52:31PM +0100, Marc Gemis wrote:

 Since in Belgium the postal code areas coincide with village borders

 I've read somewhere that Brussels has some exceptions to that.

  Rest assured, things like VRT and NATO own their own postal codes. I'm
 -almost- sure noone thinks they are a village ;-)

 Also Big cities in general, not only BXL but Antwerpen en Gent too, or
 Liege, the postal codes have no logic compaired to village borders in
 plenty of cases.


So it really makes sense to add those boundaries

m.
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

André, your example is the postal code of the centre of a village. I'm
talking about streets, especially streets at the border of the postal code
area, close to the postal code node of the next village.

The Germans have those postal code area's. it's also mentioned on the
Nominatim FAQ page [1]. So it is documented. Of course feel free to keep
adding them to all individual address nodes or street segments.

Wouldn't they laugh at us when we display the wrong postal_code at a SatNav
? :-)

regards

m




[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/FAQ#postal_codes


On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:57 AM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.comwrote:

  On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bart,

  I just added a postal_code boundary for 2840 Rumst. And  yes, both the
 Hondstraat and Steenweg op Waarloos now get the correct postal code: 2840.
 They had 2550 (from Kontich) before. So postal_code boundaries are the
 solution for my nominatim problems.

  regards

  On 2013-12-05 22:52, Marc Gemis wrote :

 Did the same (duplicate the admin relation, change into a postal-code
 relation) for Bornem and there it works as well. Sas  Nattenhaasdonkstraat
 now show the correct 2880 postal code. It took several minutes though
 before all street segments were updated.

  Since in Belgium the postal code areas coincide with village borders, we
 have to double them. This 1-to-1 mapping might not be the case in other
 countries. When we use those postal code boundaries, we do not have to put
 the postal code on streets or admin relations anymore. At least not for
 applications that understand those boundaries.


 I find bizarre to have to add such additional relations to villages to get
 a correct postcode and to have to do it by guessing, without a written
 specification explaining how to do. I'd say the proof that it's not
 necessary is Dolembreux below and that if it doesn't work in other cases
 the reason should be found rather than finding a workaround and concluding
 that it's what has to be done.
 Village Boundary Dolembreux, Sprimont, Liège, French Community, Wallonia,
 4140, Belgium http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2792257

 This said, I returned to Минск (Minsk, a big city) where I once saw things
 like that.

 They of course use boundary 
 relationshttp://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/59195,
 but with no subarea and a single name on some ways (interesting to know
 that the borderline or Minsk is called Minsk), they have address type
 relations http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/79847 that look a bit
 like the German associatedStreet but they are different,  they also have
 postal_code relations http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/79847 but
 look at what they contain,  Автобусы г. 
 Минскаhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/295203(buses of City Minsk) 
 that seems done differently from elsewhere and a
 strange route to me, etc.

 I compare with Moscow where I see no address nor postal_code relations,
 but a strange street relationhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/85473,
 ..

 No wonder that Nominatim does not work if everybody is doing it their own
 way.

 I think OSM is going crazy.  Is all that really necessary?  Why don't we
 first try to have it work correctly as a routing (GPS) database?  According
 to my tests, it is unreliable, and Guy even added they laugh at us.

 Cheers,

   André.


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


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] My first attempt at a boundary

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:15 PM, Bart Van Lancker b...@vlweb.net wrote:

 Okay, thanks. But there’s one more problem.



 Both the deelgemeenten Ledeberg and Gentbrugge have the postal code 9050.
 The same counts for Afsnee and Sint-Denijs Westrem. So, should I draw a new
 boundary over the administrative boundaries of both Ledeberg and Gentbrugge
 and make this one a postal_code type boundary,

 Or should I change both the boundaries of Ledeberg and Gentbrugge to a
 postal_code type, and assign these both the same postal code ?





I would create 1 relation postal_code boundary, using parts of the
administrative boundaries of Ledeberg and Gentbrugge. By using parts, I
mean that the boundary line is placed in both relations (the adminstrative
and postal_code). No need to draw another boundary line.

m
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk] Bitcoin Spam

2013-12-05 Thread Paul Norman

Generally they’re not offices but mailboxes in post offices that are the 
problem. They get tagged, but if you go there, all that’s there is a private 
post office.

From: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 7:39 AM
To: Ed Loach
Cc: osm
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Bitcoin Spam

2013/12/4 Ed Loach edlo...@gmail.com

If I'm following correctly the problem is that they have no physical presence 
as a shop, but are online only businesses. With no physical presence mapping 
them becomes somewhat difficult. The one I mentioned earlier is one Discogs 
user tagging their home as a shop with a link to their user page on the site. 
Would you want every eBay seller to do similar?

this is not at all comparable to an ebay-seller, because these weren't coords 
of their clients but (supposedly) of their office, hence this is like saying we 
don't want ebay's office because they are not a shop and you cannot go there to 
buy something.

I do agree, if there is _nothing_ (not the seat of the company, no office) than 
it is spam, but if there is an office it doesn't matter if this is open to the 
public or how big it is, my requirement would be that it is tagged as what it 
is. The whole world of office-tags is about places which aren't shops.

cheers,
Martin

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Bitcoin Spam

2013/12/5 Paul Norman penor...@mac.com

 Generally they’re not offices but mailboxes in post offices that are the
 problem. They get tagged, but if you go there, all that’s there is a
 private post office.



because you checked this personally? How would you know that these are
mailboxes and not offices? I agree that there are quite probably some
mailbox-only businesses in the short list Frederik has posted (i.e. they
have been inserted at their legally registered address and not form their
operating base), but discriminating them solely based on the fact that they
didn't use an explicit shop tag or office tag and that they accept bitcoin
payments doesn't look right neither.

I have checked the second example of Freds list (via Streetview) and it
looks as if there is a computer repair shop (or some related office):
https://maps.google.it/maps?q=Noosphere+Limitedhl=dell=41.417178,-81.693306spn=0.013452,0.027788cid=4977184682897610927gl=ITt=mz=16layer=ccbll=41.417948,-81.694777panoid=ONU6tFeKPE5-KyYoBq-1fgcbp=12,18.93,,1,0.76

I think this POI is incomplete, but not spam:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2523904649


Also this one: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2537387222
(webhost poland) is consistent (address and position in OSM):
http://www.webhost.pl/kontakt

cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] 'Allowed data'

2013-12-05 Thread Lester Caine

As a result of some miss communication my job today was cut short, so I'm back 
home early ... this is a summary of my thoughts while driving home.


The trip home was fun due to a lack of the right data. Had I know that the A429 
was closed I would have taken a different decision early on, but watching how 
OSMAnd on the phone and my tomtom handled the situation was interesting. The 
data relating to road types used for routing needs tidying up in a few places, 
with perhaps an element of local knowledge adding to the simple 
'highway=tertiary' blanked 'less suitable' classification in the routing 
process, but that is just another area for development.


While the project name may include the word 'map' it is now well established 
that currently it is 'data' which is the main target of the project. I've 
deliberately left out the word 'the' there which is a subtlety that needs 
explaining first. OSM is a rapidly growing archive of data of several types and 
a lot of information is available if viewed correctly. 'The Data' is what people 
allow to be viewed via the main API rather than via the history and this is 
personally where I have a problem since data that a road existed from time A to 
time B may well be contained in the changelog, but is not so easily accessible. 
Making that 'The Data' provided by OHM in many cases is simply not the right 
approach since the data is already contained in the main data repository and 
there are no plans to 'delete' the changelog?


I have a growing archive of data providing the 'start_date' for many of the 
roads in the areas I'm interested in, and once time permits I will upload them, 
but while the 'added' date is always automatically logged, there is little 
incentive to add a 'start_date' even when new developments are being added to 
the data. While adding historic data, a date may not be possible, checking back 
on some of the growing number of historic overlays does allow a 'before' date to 
be added, so I would like to request that 'start_date' is automatically 
populated with ad the very least, the current date, but with an option to update 
it based on what is being traced from?


Moving on to data that is less easily 'verified on the ground'. The one thing 
that the data is not is 'relational', but with the growing volume is it not time 
to re-address this area. The current debate is on adding addresses and other 
'spam' to the data. If this adds information like house numbers and postcodes to 
the data, then actually I can live with the random data also added. However, 
I've only added a few house numbers locally here since creating the tags for 
every one is time consuming, and I don't see any advantage in having 'Smallbrook 
Road' add some fifty time in the data! All I need is a tag referencing the road 
(or part of it where the postcode changes) and the volume of data is reduced. 
'Smallbrook Road' will reference all of the higher level links needed. As a 
simple extension to this we can also solve a problem that the routing software 
has where we can add an 'abutting' tag where a premise may have a different 
'postal' address to the best route for accessing the property. In the UK it's 
not uncommon to see 'POSTCODE for satnav' after an address ;)


Moving the other way in relation to information in addition to the house number 
or name, adding things like phone number and website has become accepted, and 
the one good thing with the 'new' front end is that they are made available. 
Perhaps not in a style that is usable as a replacement for google, but at least 
it shows the principle. Since the link is active one can follow on to the site 
which is something we did not have before. However I think I am with others when 
I say that listing all the websites for the PO boxes at a post office located on 
the map is a step too far. It *IS* however a point that if that physical 
location had a website which listed it's customers, then one could follow 
through and see that secondary data? The physical location is a post office - 
nothing more - with a physical address.


There was a suggestion relating to the bitcoin 'spam' that the additional data 
should be handled elsewhere, and certainly a database of 'bitcoin' shops could 
quite easily use a reference to OSM on it's own database. This would just be an 
alternative to a 'directory of businesses' provided by the 'post office' when 
working the other way. What I think I am getting to is the 'payment' tag! Should 
that have any place in our data? Yes it makes searching for 'bitcoin', or 'visa' 
shops easier, but if one has a link to the business, then following that will 
provide the current up to date data and we do not need to clog up the changelog 
with all of that traffic?


We need a roadmap of what a 'complete' set of data looks like, and I can see 
separate RELATIONAL databases provided by others providing at least part of that 
data? Even the 'boundaries' problem could be solved by providing a

Re: [OSM-talk] 'Allowed data'

2013-12-05 Thread Patrick Kilian

As a result of some miss communication I stopped reading the email
before the wall of text ended.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] 'Allowed data'

2013/12/5 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk

 I would like to request that 'start_date' is automatically populated with
 ad the very least, the current date, but with an option to update it based
 on what is being traced from?




if you are refering to the tag start_date than I strongly oppose this
idea. Hardly ever will the start_date of an object be the same than the
time the mappers adds it. If you are refering to changesets or version
timestamps then you are a lucky man, because this is already done. Every
single version of every single osmobject has a precise timestamp with not
only date but also hours, minutes and seconds.

cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] SotM-EU 2014 in Karlsruhe, Germany

2013-12-05 Thread Frederik Ramm

Hi,

   today I have the pleasure to announce that we'll be holding SotM-EU
2014 in Karlsruhe, on 13-15 June. We've set up the web page at
www.sotm-eu.org and we'll be posting news there and on @sotmeu on Twitter.

We'll be trying to emulate the success of the 2011 Vienna conference,
bringing together everyone who does anything interesting in  with
OpenStreetMap in Europe.

The call for papers will be out soon, with registration to open early
2014. We already have a good international programme committee preparing
that but if you'd like to join the programme committee or otherwise help
organising the conference (or aspects of it), don't be shy and write to
i...@sotm-eu.org. Same if you have any ideas that you'd like the
organisers to consider.

We'll be distributing this announcement to the dev and talk lists
as well as to talk-fr and talk-de. If you are on one of the other
regional European lists, we would be grateful if you could forward
the announcement.

I'm looking forward to seeing you in Karlsruhe next year!

Bye
Frederik

PS: we = the local Karlsruhe team  everyone involved

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] 'Allowed data'

2013-12-05 Thread Lester Caine


Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

I would like to request that 'start_date' is automatically populated with ad
the very least, the current date, but with an option to update it based on
what is being traced from?

if you are refering to the tag start_date than I strongly oppose this idea.
Hardly ever will the start_date of an object be the same than the time the
mappers adds it.


I am referring to using 'start_date' is it is currently documented
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date
At a very minimum putting a current timestamp in will give a starting point 
since we know it is valid today, although a future start date is also possible. 
It is creating the habit of populating it and encouraging the addition where it 
is known.


end_date is only required when an existing object is removed from the data.

 If you are refering to changesets or version timestamps then

you are a lucky man, because this is already done. Every single version of every
single osmobject has a precise timestamp with not only date but also hours,
minutes and seconds.


That is a completely different set of data ;)
And since elaboration seems to be required. The history of the way data is 
created is not the same as the history of how an object came into existence.


--
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 mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] 'Allowed data'

2013-12-05 Thread Andy Street

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:20:58 +
Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:

 Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
  I would like to request that 'start_date' is automatically
  populated with ad the very least, the current date, but with an
  option to update it based on what is being traced from?
 
  if you are refering to the tag start_date than I strongly oppose
  this idea. Hardly ever will the start_date of an object be the same
  than the time the mappers adds it.
 
 I am referring to using 'start_date' is it is currently documented
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date
 At a very minimum putting a current timestamp in will give a starting
 point since we know it is valid today, although a future start date
 is also possible. It is creating the habit of populating it and
 encouraging the addition where it is known.

The start_date is the date that it feature came into existence not the
date it was mapped so automatically populating it will just lead to
junk data that is indistinguishable from the real valid data. What you
really asking for is an auto-generated start_date_sometime_before tag
but that data is already logged in the changesets.

There is also the matter of *what* started. Take the following example:

building=yes
amenity=pub
name=The Mappers Rest
start_date=2013-11-15

Was the building first opened on that date? or was it when the pub began
trading? Perhaps that was when the name changed? To do this properly
you'll need to automatically add a start_date_sometime_before tag for
every tag in the database!

-- 
Regards,

Andy Street

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] 'Allowed data'

2013-12-05 Thread Lester Caine


Andy Street wrote:

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:20:58 +
Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:


Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

 I would like to request that 'start_date' is automatically
populated with ad the very least, the current date, but with an
option to update it based on what is being traced from?

if you are refering to the tag start_date than I strongly oppose
this idea. Hardly ever will the start_date of an object be the same
than the time the mappers adds it.


I am referring to using 'start_date' is it is currently documented
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date
At a very minimum putting a current timestamp in will give a starting
point since we know it is valid today, although a future start date
is also possible. It is creating the habit of populating it and
encouraging the addition where it is known.


The start_date is the date that it feature came into existence not the
date it was mapped so automatically populating it will just lead to
junk data that is indistinguishable from the real valid data. What you
really asking for is an auto-generated start_date_sometime_before tag
but that data is already logged in the changesets.

There is also the matter of *what* started. Take the following example:

building=yes
amenity=pub
name=The Mappers Rest
start_date=2013-11-15

Was the building first opened on that date? or was it when the pub began
trading? Perhaps that was when the name changed? To do this properly
you'll need to automatically add a start_date_sometime_before tag for
every tag in the database!


Changes to details on the object would be covered by the changelog entries. At 
this stage simply a date that physical building came into existence would be 
nice. That only the current view of the object is provided is what 'The Data' is 
designed to supply, and in this instance the start_date is when the building 
physically appeared ...


You are perfectly correct that there are more start_dates needed, but starting 
today, any information change such as 'The Mapper Rest'-'The Mappers Arms' 
would be fairly accurate using the changelog dates. When it is scheduled to 
change at a future date, we have no means of recording that data. 'The Data' 
does not do history even if it relates to live data? We have to make those 
changes in real time rather than relying on the API serving the time correct view!


--
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 mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] 'Allowed data'

2013/12/5 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk

 You are perfectly correct that there are more start_dates needed,



If you have one object for the pub and one for the house you don't have
this problem. A building ideally wouldn't have tags like amenity=pub, but
of course it does currently in the osm database. When you come to add a tag
like start_date or wikipedia or name it would be better to detach the
building's occupant from the building object, while for a few tags like
architect this might not be necessary.

For a POI occupying the whole building you can add a detached node inside
the building, or create a multipolygon-relation with the building outline
as outer member. I wouldn't suggest overlapping ways as they are really a
pita, and I also don't like the POI being part of the building outline
because it adds one node to the building as well which is really not
needed, and it remains unclear if the POI is outside or inside.

cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Bitcoin Spam

2013-12-05 Thread Paul Norman

Yes, I have checked a number of them. I can sometimes find the website of the 
private post office with their mailboxes, sometimes I can find sites listing 
100 businesses at the same address when location is clearly a small location 
within a strip mall.

From: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 4:24 AM
To: Paul Norman
Cc: Ed Loach; osm
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Bitcoin Spam

2013/12/5 Paul Norman penor...@mac.com

Generally they’re not offices but mailboxes in post offices that are the 
problem. They get tagged, but if you go there, all that’s there is a private 
post office.

because you checked this personally? How would you know that these are 
mailboxes and not offices? 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[talk-au] Adding residential properties?

2013-12-05 Thread Will Rouesnel

A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
buildings be tagged?

The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
tagged house.

Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to get
my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
provide navigation to specific locations.

Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my area)?

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

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

2013-12-05 Thread Paul Norman

 From: Will Rouesnel [mailto:w.roues...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:34 AM
 To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

 A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
 buildings be tagged?

 The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
 buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
 tagged house.

 Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to get
 my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
 provide navigation to specific locations.

 Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
 with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
 likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my
 area)?

My practice is

- Add the buidings from imagery, generally with building=house and 
  building=shed

- Add address info from a survey, either with field papers + pen or 
  geotagged photos

- Add other interesting features from the survey (paths, mailboxes, etc)

- Trace out the landuse, generally as larger than single blocks, but 
  using separate polygons for areas split on major roads

This generally involves an initial imagery-based mapping for buildings, 
trees, paths, and other stuff visible from imagery, a survey, then a 
final mapping using survey notes + imagery.

It helps having buildings mapped already when collecting addresses.

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

Re: [talk-au] data.qld.gov.au explicit permission request

Hi again,

There has been a response from TMR and the necessary permission has been
obtained (for their datasets
accessiblehttps://data.qld.gov.au/organizationon the
data.qld.gov.au portal).  I have an administrative query to be cleared by
TMR before I make any amendments to the Wiki.

Its a start and the gtfs data will shortly be okay to use (once the
attribution goes up).  Unfortunately, the respondent has noted, at least
from the position of TMR, that approval would need to be sourced from each
dataset owner (see link above for that list).

In an interesting and somewhat timely twist.  Andrew Mills, the SA Govt CIO
since 2007 commences as the Qld Government CIO in January 2014 so I guess
that means, Watch this space.  I'll be introducing myself to him in the
New Year.

Cheers,

Jason
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

2013-12-05 Thread Daniel O'Connor

I started out with buildings, but got a bit excited in my local area;
getting down into trees, power lines, fences, driveways etc.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-34.84928/138.52277

Not super pretty looking.


Nowdays, I tend to map the primary houses only, and perhaps significant
features like a tennis court or pool if present.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-34.8808/138.5473

I wouldn't worry about tracing the individual parcels of land - there are
better data sets which are maintained by various governments, either at
cost or as open data (vicmap cadastre, psma's cadlite, etc); but to my
knowledge no one is flying LIDAR equipped planes over AU cities and
publishing the data yet re buildings.

Anyway once you get past your street/block/etc; I'd recommend you start
tracing buildings along your way to work or a similar commute.
That lets you use a tool like Vespucci OSM Editor or Keypad Mapper 3 to
collect data, if you are a public transport user or tend to walk from A to
B.

Another piece of data that is quite interesting is building:levels.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:levels

If you work in the city as I do, it becomes fairly easy to tag the multiple
story buildings with the same tools.
http://osmbuildings.org/?lat=-34.92556lon=138.60092zoom=16




On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:

  From: Will Rouesnel [mailto:w.roues...@gmail.com]
  Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:34 AM
  To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
  Subject: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?
 
  A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
  buildings be tagged?
 
  The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
  buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
  tagged house.
 
  Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to get
  my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
  provide navigation to specific locations.
 
  Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
  with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
  likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my
  area)?

 My practice is

 - Add the buidings from imagery, generally with building=house and
   building=shed

 - Add address info from a survey, either with field papers + pen or
   geotagged photos

 - Add other interesting features from the survey (paths, mailboxes, etc)

 - Trace out the landuse, generally as larger than single blocks, but
   using separate polygons for areas split on major roads

 This generally involves an initial imagery-based mapping for buildings,
 trees, paths, and other stuff visible from imagery, a survey, then a
 final mapping using survey notes + imagery.

 It helps having buildings mapped already when collecting addresses.


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

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

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

2013-12-05 Thread Ross Scanlon


I'd suggest you read these wiki pages:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address

My personal opinion is that the address should be on a separate node at 
the entrance to the property. This is preferred for disability access 
programs.


It also takes into consideration that the address is unlikely to change 
but the building or landuse may.


Cheers
Ross


On 05/12/13 19:34, Will Rouesnel wrote:

A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
buildings be tagged?

The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
tagged house.

Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to get
my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
provide navigation to specific locations.

Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my area)?

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




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

[talk-au] JOSM and losing Bing Hi Res zoom recently

Hi folks,

I'm at a bit of a loss right now and wonder if any of you have experienced
the same issue.

For about a week on 2 different machines I have only had access to zoom
level 19.

I've pretty much run down every google result possible (remove tile cache,
remove attribution file et al)  and am still having the issue.

I've even looked up the JOSM bug tracker and sat in the JOSM dev chat room
before posting here.  The reason I'm starting here is to check if it's a
localised Bing problem or whether one of you smart people knows whether
something has changed that would cause this issue.

I note that other parts of the globe are not affected as I can view London
at a Zoom of 20 (I think).

Help! I've done a local street survey for house numbering and I'm reluctant
to do any tracing until I can resolve this.

Cheers,

Jason
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

2013-12-05 Thread Alex Sims

Hi Will,

I’ve been mapping the building outlines and tagging the feature appropriately, 
e.g. house and then adding address data to each building. I’ve also added in a 
smaller area the boundary fences or walls. There is I understand, two competing 
models for recording addresses, one where the building is labelled and another 
where a node is created at the building entrance.

Either way it maps “whats on the ground” and can be readily verified. 

Alex

On 5 Dec 2013, at 8:04 pm, Will Rouesnel w.roues...@gmail.com wrote:

 A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
 buildings be tagged?
 
 The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
 buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
 tagged house.
 
 Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to get
 my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
 provide navigation to specific locations.
 
 Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
 with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
 likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my area)?


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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM and losing Bing Hi Res zoom recently

2013-12-05 Thread Alex Sims

Hi Jason,

There seems to be two layers in Bing in South Australia. A high resolution 
three or four year old layer and a lower resolution layer only about twelve 
months old. This may be related to what you are seeing.

On 6 Dec 2013, at 9:29 am, Jason Ward jasonjwa...@gmail.com wrote:

 For about a week on 2 different machines I have only had access to zoom level 
 19.
 
 I've pretty much run down every google result possible (remove tile cache, 
 remove attribution file et al)  and am still having the issue.
 
 I've even looked up the JOSM bug tracker and sat in the JOSM dev chat room 
 before posting here.  The reason I'm starting here is to check if it's a 
 localised Bing problem or whether one of you smart people knows whether 
 something has changed that would cause this issue.
 
 I note that other parts of the globe are not affected as I can view London at 
 a Zoom of 20 (I think).
 

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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM and losing Bing Hi Res zoom recently

Hi Alex,

The age is an interesting point but not what I am experiencing I think.  As
an example, and to your point, I accept that the Higher Resolution imagery
is older than the lower resolution imagery.  My house roof solar panels
installed in June 2011 are there in the Low res images.  When I zoom closer
they are not, indicating that they are, at least in my area, at least 24
months old.

The actual problem is that I can only get the Low res images (Zoom 19 in
JOSM) to show in the application and tracing is not possible, for housing
at least, with these map tiles (because JOSM just keeps zooming the Level
19 tiles to give a pixelated effect).

I'd point out too that I have completed tracing in the not too distant past
- literally just before this problem started to occur using Bing imagery
See here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/248814095 as an example and
while I had no idea about Bing Zoom Levels before needing to run this
problem down I am confident that I would not have completed this tracing at
the current Zoom 19.

Extra / New Info.  The OSM iD (in-browser) editor is also not showing the
Bing Hi res images (so its not just me!)  Something has happened recently.
 I'd be interested to here from other BNE mappers because I am confuzzled.

Cheers,

Jason

Cheers,

Jason


On 6 December 2013 09:54, Alex Sims a...@softgrow.com wrote:

 Hi Jason,

 There seems to be two layers in Bing in South Australia. A high resolution
 three or four year old layer and a lower resolution layer only about twelve
 months old. This may be related to what you are seeing.

 On 6 Dec 2013, at 9:29 am, Jason Ward jasonjwa...@gmail.com wrote:

 For about a week on 2 different machines I have only had access to zoom
 level 19.

 I've pretty much run down every google result possible (remove tile cache,
 remove attribution file et al)  and am still having the issue.

 I've even looked up the JOSM bug tracker and sat in the JOSM dev chat room
 before posting here.  The reason I'm starting here is to check if it's a
 localised Bing problem or whether one of you smart people knows whether
 something has changed that would cause this issue.

 I note that other parts of the globe are not affected as I can view London
 at a Zoom of 20 (I think).



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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM and losing Bing Hi Res zoom recently

2013-12-05 Thread SomeoneElse


Jason Ward wrote:


Extra / New Info.  The OSM iD (in-browser) editor is also not showing 
the Bing Hi res images (so its not just me!)  Something has happened 
recently.  I'd be interested to here from other BNE mappers because I 
am confuzzled.




Not just Australia either - someone on IRC mentioned that the highest 
zoom Bing tiles in Essex, England had disappeared earlier today.


Cheers,

Andy


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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM and losing Bing Hi Res zoom recently

Ah.  Okay.  I'll jump on a few more IRC channels and keep an eye out then.
 Thanks Andy.

Cheers,

Jason


On 6 December 2013 10:50, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:

 Jason Ward wrote:


 Extra / New Info.  The OSM iD (in-browser) editor is also not showing the
 Bing Hi res images (so its not just me!)  Something has happened recently.
  I'd be interested to here from other BNE mappers because I am confuzzled.


 Not just Australia either - someone on IRC mentioned that the highest zoom
 Bing tiles in Essex, England had disappeared earlier today.

 Cheers,

 Andy


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

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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM and losing Bing Hi Res zoom recently

Its a bit of a stretch but they could be scaling back high load services
(ie.  High Res map tiles) to non Bing products to ensure their 3D Maps
release runs buttering smooth.
http://www.bing.com/blogs/site_blogs/b/search/archive/2013/12/05/maps3d.aspx
but
in this day and age that'd be an extraordinary step to take (and an
indicator of not being confident in your own ability to scale).

Anyway.  It just a guess.  If enough people notice then we should
ultimately arrive at a reason why.  Thanks again for the heads up Andy.

Cheers,

Jason
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-br] IBGE lança Mapa Político do Brasil

2013-12-05 Thread erico dias

Willie, sabe se já há um shapefile baseado nessa atualização?
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-de] Lane oder SharedLane?

2013-12-05 Thread pmsg

Hallo,

2013/12/5 Masi Master masi-mas...@gmx.de:

 [...] Der
 Schutzsteifen ist allerdings eine Radspur (nicht verpflichtend und auch
 nicht ganz exklusiv), die nur im Bedarfsfall von KFZ befahren/benutzt werden
 darf, und auch nur wenn kein Radfahrer behindert wird.

behindert - gefährdet [1]

Bei Bedarf dürfen Kraftfahrzeuge auf dem Schutzstreifen anscheinend
auch behindern und müssen auch nicht die Geschwindigkeit reduzieren.
Das ist eine wesentlich schwächere Beschränkung als gilt für Radfahrer
auf Gehwegen mit Radfahrer-frei Schild (dort müssen Radfahrer
Schritttempo fahren und dürfen nicht Fussgänger behindern [2]).

Von daher kann man schon von shared_lane in Zusammenhang mit
Schutzstreifen sprechen.

Grüße,
Nils

[1] http://dejure.org/gesetze/StVO/Anlage_3.html, Anlage 3 (zu § 42
Absatz 2) Richtzeichen, lfd nr 22
[2] http://dejure.org/gesetze/StVO/Anlage_2.html, Anlage 2 (zu § 41
Absatz 1) Richtzeichen, lfd nr 18

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

Re: [Talk-de] Voting landuse=highway

2013-12-05 Thread Florian Lohoff

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 12:05:55AM +0100, Garry wrote:
 Eine 6spurige Autobahn nebst Böschung, Entwässerungsgräben,
 Sicherheitszonen etc.
 kann man nicht mehr einfach ignorieren und den umgebenden landuse zuordnen.
 
 Allerdings würde ich für landuse=road plädieren und die eigentliche
 befestigte Fahrbahnfläche inklusive
 der Sperrflächen einem landcover=highway zuordnen.

Ich bin ja nicht dagegen das zu tun - Ich sage nur es fehlt ein
Gesamtkonzept wie in 2017 wir Straßen erfassen.

landuse + highway + highway/area ?

Und was ist in Wohngebieten ohne Fußgängerweg (e.g. Verkehrsberuhigt)
wenn A und C identisch sind?

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Voting landuse=highway

2013-12-05 Thread Peter Wendorff

Am 05.12.2013 10:15, schrieb Florian Lohoff:
 On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 12:05:55AM +0100, Garry wrote:
 Eine 6spurige Autobahn nebst Böschung, Entwässerungsgräben,
 Sicherheitszonen etc.
 kann man nicht mehr einfach ignorieren und den umgebenden landuse zuordnen.

 Allerdings würde ich für landuse=road plädieren und die eigentliche
 befestigte Fahrbahnfläche inklusive
 der Sperrflächen einem landcover=highway zuordnen.
 
 Ich bin ja nicht dagegen das zu tun - Ich sage nur es fehlt ein
 Gesamtkonzept wie in 2017 wir Straßen erfassen.
+10

Dabei hilft es auch nicht alleine, Straßen-linien über Flächen zu legen.
Wir haben auch immer noch kein umfassend brauchbares Spurenkonzept, das
für Bürgersteige, Radwege, Radspuren, Radschutzstreifen, Abbiegespuren,
Busspuren etc. sowie Abbiegespuren und unterschiedliche
Fahrbahnmarkierungen (Überfahrungserlaubnisse etc.) funktioniert.

Vielleicht ist eine Fläche rundrum ein Teil der Lösung, aber die
einfach mal so einzuführen bringt vermutlich wenig.

Ein landuse=highway für den Straßenkörper ist bestimmt nicht ganz
falsch, aber es löst nur einen kleinen Teil der Probleme, die wir mit
Straßen haben, nämlich die Ausdehnung in der Breite, die bisher kaum
abbildbar ist.

Gruß
Peter

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

Re: [Talk-de] Voting landuse=highway

2013-12-05 Thread cracklinrain

Am 05.12.2013 00:05, schrieb Garry:
 Eine 6spurige Autobahn nebst Böschung, Entwässerungsgräben,
 Sicherheitszonen etc.
 kann man nicht mehr einfach ignorieren und den umgebenden landuse zuordnen.

Bisher war die sinnvollste Regelung, dass man keinen landuse nutzt und
die Fläche ungetagt lässt.

Bei highway=residential in/auf landuse=residential würde ich komplett
von landuse=highway absehen. Bei highway=track auf landuse=farm ebenso.

 Allerdings würde ich für landuse=road plädieren und die eigentliche
 befestigte Fahrbahnfläche inklusive
 der Sperrflächen einem landcover=highway zuordnen.

-1 landcover=highway geht mir deutlich zu weit. Wenn jemand landcover
für z.B. sein 3D-rendering haben möchte, soll er es taggen, dabei aber
niemanden stören. Aber so etwas offiziell zu empfehlen, führt dazu, dass
wir nicht einmal die Straßen in unserer Nachbarschaft (ganz zu schweigen
von den Hausnummern) erfassen und mit landcover beschäftigt sein werden.
So wie bei landuse=village_green.

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

Re: [Talk-de] Voting landuse=highway

Am 4. Dezember 2013 22:36 schrieb Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de:

 Das ist aber etwas was man nicht on the ground nachvollziehen kann
 wo das Grundstück aufhört.



und das aus dem Land der Jägerzäune? Man kann sehr oft nachvollziehen, wo
das Grundstück aufhört, nur aus einer Begehung der Gegend und ohne weitere
Pläne. Weiterhin gibt es in Deutschland oft Bebauungspläne, wo es
grundsätzlich drin ist. Wenn man überhaupt keine Ahnung hat, und auch
keinen best-guess wagen will oder recherchieren, ob es einen B-Plan gibt,
dann trägt man es halt nicht ein. In der Stadt (und prinzipiell auch im
Dorf) sollte es grundsätzlich kein Problem sein (von Vorderfassade der
Häuser bzw. Vorgarten bis zur gegenüberliegenden Straßenseite).

Hast Du mal ein Beispiel wo Du denkst, man könnte überhaupt nicht erkennen,
wo die Grundstücke aufhören?

Gruß Martin
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] SotM-EU 2014 in Karlsruhe!

2013-12-05 Thread Frederik Ramm

Hallo,

   ich habe heute das besondere Vergnuegen, die SotM-EU 2014 in
Karlsruhe (13.-15.6.) anzukuendigen. Die Webseite auf www.sotm-eu.org
ist schon aktualisiert, und alle Neuigkeiten gibt es dort sowie auch
unter @sotmeu auf Twitter.

Ich hoffe, es gelingt uns, an den grossen Erfolg der ersten SotM-EU 2011
in Wien anzuknuepfen und alle, die irgendwo in Europa irgendwas
interessantes bei oder mit OpenStreetMap machen, in Karlsruhe
zusammenzubringen.

Der Call for papers kommt demnaechst raus, und anmelden kann man sich ab
Anfang 2014. Wir haben schon ein ganz gutes internationales
Programmkomitee, das sich darum kuemmern wird, aber wenn noch jemand im
Programmkomitee oder bei der sonstigen Veranstaltungsorganisation
mithelfen moechte, so moege der- oder diejenige sich doch bitte bei
i...@sotm-eu.org melden, wir haben ganz bestimmt Arbeit genug ;)

Ich wuerde mich auch freuen, wenn ihr diese Ankuendigung in Euren
OpenStreetMap-Kreisen weiter verbreiten wuerdet.

Die Konferenz-Sprache ist englisch. (Der naechste deutschsprachige Event
mit grosser OSM-Beteiligung ist ja die FOSSGIS im Maerz in Berlin!)

Ich freue mich schon auf die Konferenz - wir habe ja schon viel
OSM-Zeugs gemacht in Karlsruhe, aber eine internationale Konferenz
hatten wir noch nie ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

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

[Talk-de] Pugi zu automatischen nachladen...

2013-12-05 Thread Steffen Heinz

Ich hatte bis vor kurzem noch die Möglichkeit das beim Verschieben der 
Karte diese automatisch aktualisiert wurde, brauchte also nicht mehr per 
Hmd den OSM Server anzusprechen, auch BING wurde nachgeladen.
DIe Tage ist mal JOSM tatal abgestürzt, seitdem geht das nicht mehr. 
Kann mir bitte mal wer helfen das wieder so hinzubiegen das das 
automatisch geht?


Grüße aus der Eifel
Steffen

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

Re: [Talk-de] Stolpersteine Elternrelation gelöscht?

2013-12-05 Thread Frederik Ramm

Hi,

On 12/05/2013 08:21 AM, gmbo wrote:
 Ich habe heute morgen festgestellt dass die Elternrelation Stolpersteine 
 gelöscht wurde.
 Warum ist das gemacht worden?

Ich hab zwar nicht vor, das zu machen, aber es gaebe eine Menge Gruende
dafuer - wurde ja hier schon lang und breit diskutiert. Relationen sind
nicht dazu da, um die Datenabfrage einfacher zu machen, und nur diesen
Nutzen hat die genannte Relation.

Wer alle Stolpersteine aus OSM rausladen will, kann doch Overpass nehmen.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

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

Re: [Talk-de] Stolpersteine Elternrelation gelöscht?

2013-12-05 Thread gmbo


Am 05.12.2013 16:04, schrieb Frederik Ramm:

Hi,

On 12/05/2013 08:21 AM, gmbo wrote:

Ich habe heute morgen festgestellt dass die Elternrelation Stolpersteine
gelöscht wurde.
Warum ist das gemacht worden?

Ich hab zwar nicht vor, das zu machen, aber es gaebe eine Menge Gruende
dafuer - wurde ja hier schon lang und breit diskutiert. Relationen sind
nicht dazu da, um die Datenabfrage einfacher zu machen, und nur diesen
Nutzen hat die genannte Relation.

Wer alle Stolpersteine aus OSM rausladen will, kann doch Overpass nehmen.

Bye
Frederik

Sicher kann man Overpass nehmen, dann benötigt eine solche Abfrage aber 
eine Menge Zeit.  Außerdem dachte ich bisher bei 4 Knoten, die 
gemeinsamen Daten wie Künstler, übergeordnete Website wäre vorteilhafter 
in der Relation.


Gruß Gisbert


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

Re: [Talk-de] Stolpersteine Elternrelation gelöscht?

2013-12-05 Thread Peter Wendorff

Hallo Gisbert,

ich glaube, du missverstehst die normale API und den Vergleich zur
Overpass-API.
Beide sind prinzipiell optimiert für die Abfrage nach Geometrie, also
von zusammenhängenden Boundingboxen.
Beide können auch Objekte nach Typ+ID (Typ im Sinne von node, way,
relation) zurückliefern.
Während aber bei der API die bbox-Abfragen und Anfragen nach einzelnen
Objekten im Vordergrund stehen und der normale Fall sind, ist die
Overpass-API gezielt auf die Abfragesprache hin entwickelt und
implementiert deshalb auch für gleiche Tags wahrscheinlich einige
Strategien.
Genaueres musst Du den Entwickler fragen, aber in der API ist da in der
Hinsicht absolut gar nichts drin, da muss man vor allem auch noch
schreibzugriff zum Bearbeiten erlauben, außerdem Versionierung voll
unterstützen und so weiter.

Bist Du dir sicher, dass die Abfrage per Overpass länger dauert als per
API? Ich hätte jetzt gerne Zahlen dazu gesehen (wohlgemerkt: per API
musst Du dazu die Relation selbst UND die member runterladen, bei
overpass nur die eine Abfrage ausführen).

Gruß
Peter

Am 05.12.2013 16:31, schrieb gmbo:
 Am 05.12.2013 16:04, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
 Hi,

 On 12/05/2013 08:21 AM, gmbo wrote:
 Ich habe heute morgen festgestellt dass die Elternrelation Stolpersteine
 gelöscht wurde.
 Warum ist das gemacht worden?
 Ich hab zwar nicht vor, das zu machen, aber es gaebe eine Menge Gruende
 dafuer - wurde ja hier schon lang und breit diskutiert. Relationen sind
 nicht dazu da, um die Datenabfrage einfacher zu machen, und nur diesen
 Nutzen hat die genannte Relation.

 Wer alle Stolpersteine aus OSM rausladen will, kann doch Overpass nehmen.

 Bye
 Frederik

 Sicher kann man Overpass nehmen, dann benötigt eine solche Abfrage aber
 eine Menge Zeit.  Außerdem dachte ich bisher bei 4 Knoten, die
 gemeinsamen Daten wie Künstler, übergeordnete Website wäre vorteilhafter
 in der Relation.
 
 Gruß Gisbert
 
 
 ___
 Talk-de mailing list
 Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
 


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

Re: [Talk-de] Stolpersteine Elternrelation gelöscht?

2013-12-05 Thread Dietmar

Hallo,

Am 05.12.2013 16:31, schrieb gmbo:
 Am 05.12.2013 16:04, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
 Hi,

 On 12/05/2013 08:21 AM, gmbo wrote:
 Ich habe heute morgen festgestellt dass die Elternrelation
 Stolpersteine
 gelöscht wurde.
 Warum ist das gemacht worden?
 Ich hab zwar nicht vor, das zu machen, aber es gaebe eine Menge Gruende
 dafuer - wurde ja hier schon lang und breit diskutiert. Relationen sind
 nicht dazu da, um die Datenabfrage einfacher zu machen, und nur diesen
 Nutzen hat die genannte Relation.

 Wer alle Stolpersteine aus OSM rausladen will, kann doch Overpass
 nehmen.

Alle Stolpersteine sind aktuelle NUR per Overpass herauszuholen. Die
Elternrelation für die Stolpersteine bringt nur etwa die Hälfte aller
Steine, wenn sie rekursiv in Josm geladen wird. Und nur dort kann die
Relation aus meiner Sicht sinnvoll geholt werden.
Ich verwende eine osmpgsql und da werden die meisten Relationstypen
nicht unterstützt.

Ich habe nur am Anfang einige Stadt-Relationen erzeugt, aber die sind
überflüssig wie ein Kropf und nerven mich total, weil die am meisten
Overhead beim aktuell halten einer OSM-DB bringen. Die meisten Steine
haben ein addr:city, so sind Kommunenorientiert Steine zu holen und nur
mit der Overpass-Api können auch Websites den aktuellen Bestand der
Steine auf einfache Weise in einer Openlayer-Anwendung integrieren.

Die meisten der von mir erfassten Steine ( 1000) sind in keiner
Relation enthalten.

Viele Grüße

Dietmar


 Bye
 Frederik

 Sicher kann man Overpass nehmen, dann benötigt eine solche Abfrage
 aber eine Menge Zeit.  Außerdem dachte ich bisher bei 4 Knoten,
 die gemeinsamen Daten wie Künstler, übergeordnete Website wäre
 vorteilhafter in der Relation.

 Gruß Gisbert


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



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

Re: [Talk-de] Stolpersteine Elternrelation gelöscht?

Am 5. Dezember 2013 18:23 schrieb Peter Wendorff wendo...@uni-paderborn.de
:

 (wohlgemerkt: per API
 musst Du dazu die Relation selbst UND die member runterladen, bei
 overpass nur die eine Abfrage ausführen).



ja, eines der Hauptprobleme der Relation (neben der Tatsache, dass sie dem
Gesamtsystem viel schwerer auf dem Magen liegt als tags, und sich auch
leichter Konflikte durch paralleles Editing bilden) ist ja, dass sie
permanent von Hand aktualisiert werden muss, während man per API Abfrage
alle Objekte mit dem tag bekommen kann. Gegen Vandalismus ist
zugegebenermaßen die Relation resistenter, weil man da sozusagen ein Backup
im System hat (man findet die gelöschten Nodes über die Relation einfach,
genauso wie es nichts ausmacht, wenn die relevanten tags gelöscht werden
aber das Objekt noch bleibt).

Gruß Martin
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Stolpersteine Elternrelation gelöscht?

2013-12-05 Thread Roland Olbricht

Hallo zusammen,

persönlich würde ich zum Editieren in JOSM empfehlen, eine Hintergrundkarte, 
z.B. die OSM-Karte einzuschalten und dann mit dem mirrored_download-Plugin 
unter dem Menüpunkt Datei  Mittels Overpass-API laden im Dialogfenster

[timeout:180];node[memorial:type=stolperstein];out meta;

eingeben und den Bereich der Wahl im Auswahlfenster wählen. Für eine Bounding-
Box in der Größe von Köln dauert der Download etwa 7 Sekunden, und JOSM 
reagiert dank kleiner Objektzahl sehr flott.

Außerdem kann ich sehr die Dorstener Lösung empfehlen:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dorsten#.C3.9Cbersichtskarten

Dort wird ohne Gebrauch irgendwelcher Relationen aus einem Wiki-Template eine 
Übersichtskarte generiert.

Kurz noch ein paar Zahlen zu dem Thema:

http://api.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/relation/407359/full

braucht 3-5 Sekunden (je nach Cache-Zustand), findet aber neben mehreren 
Relationen auch nur 3 Stolpersteine.

Das exakte Äquivalent dazu ist:

http://overpass-api.de/api/interpreter?data=(rel(407359);rel(r)-
.a;node(r););out meta;

braucht etwa 3-7 Sekunden (je nach Cache-Zustand)

Mit der Abfrage, die auch alle indirekten Referenzen verfolgt:

http://overpass-api.de/api/interpreter?data=(rel(407359);;);out meta;

findet man 7572 Stolpersteine in 60-80 Sekunden.

Mit der Abfrage, die alle Stolpersteine sucht:

http://overpass-
api.de/api/interpreter?data=node[memorial:type=stolperstein];out meta;

findet man 10753 Stolpersteine in 60-90 Sekunden.

Relationen über mehrere Relationen-Level aufzulösen ist meines Erachtens mit 
der Main API nicht möglich.

Viele Grüße,

Roland


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

Re: [Talk-de] Stolpersteine Elternrelation gelöscht?

2013-12-05 Thread Roland Olbricht

Hallo,

 Außerdem dachte ich bisher bei 4 Knoten, die
 gemeinsamen Daten wie Künstler, übergeordnete Website wäre vorteilhafter
 in der Relation.

Nein. Mindestens die Main API, komprimiertes XML, PBF und auch die OVerpass 
API ersetzen Strings intern durch Referenzen auf Strings, d.h. sie speichern 
jeden String nur einmal. Das deckt aber auch schon so ziemlich alles ab.

Zum groben Vergleich: schreibt man 1000 Nodes mit dem gleichen Tag in eine 
.osm.gz-Datei, so braucht das nur etwa halb so viel Platz (unter 3 KB) wie 
1000 Nodes ohne Tag und mit dem Tag einmalig an der Relation (knapp über 6 
KB).

Viele Grüße,

Roland


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

Re: [Talk-de] Lane oder SharedLane?

2013-12-05 Thread Masi Master


Am 05.12.2013, 09:34 Uhr, schrieb pmsg pmsg2...@yahoo.com:


Hallo,

2013/12/5 Masi Master masi-mas...@gmx.de:


[...] Der
Schutzsteifen ist allerdings eine Radspur (nicht verpflichtend und auch
nicht ganz exklusiv), die nur im Bedarfsfall von KFZ befahren/benutzt  
werden

darf, und auch nur wenn kein Radfahrer behindert wird.


behindert - gefährdet [1]

Bei Bedarf dürfen Kraftfahrzeuge auf dem Schutzstreifen anscheinend
auch behindern und müssen auch nicht die Geschwindigkeit reduzieren.
Das ist eine wesentlich schwächere Beschränkung als gilt für Radfahrer
auf Gehwegen mit Radfahrer-frei Schild (dort müssen Radfahrer
Schritttempo fahren und dürfen nicht Fussgänger behindern [2]).

Von daher kann man schon von shared_lane in Zusammenhang mit
Schutzstreifen sprechen.


Danke für die Richtigstellung! Hatte das nur aus dem Kopf wiedergegeben.
Etwas schwerer wiegt die Tatsache, dass Fahrzeuge die Linie des
Schutzstreifens nur bei Bedarf überfahren dürfen. In dem Zusammenhang
von gemeinsam Nutzung zu sprechen finde ich ein wenig fraglich.

Ohne jetzt in der StVO nach feinen Details zu suchen (die in anderen
Ländern eh unterschiedlich sind), finde ich es viel wichtiger die
Schutzstreifen von wirklichen gemeinsam benutzten Spuren zu unterscheiden,
den Sharrows (gibts auch ohne die Pfeile).

Radfahrstreifen und Schutzstreifen finde ich auf den ersten Blick
ähnlicher als eine komplette Spur die von verschiedenen Verkehren
verwendet wird. Wirkt sonst irgendwie wie eine komplette Fahrspur.


[1] http://dejure.org/gesetze/StVO/Anlage_3.html, Anlage 3 (zu § 42
Absatz 2) Richtzeichen, lfd nr 22
[2] http://dejure.org/gesetze/StVO/Anlage_2.html, Anlage 2 (zu § 41
Absatz 1) Richtzeichen, lfd nr 18






--

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

Re: [Talk-in] OSM workshop in Mumbai tomorrow morning

2013-12-05 Thread Mikel Maron

Sounds fun, wish I could be there

Mikel

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

Re: [Talk-in] OSM workshop in Mumbai tomorrow morning

2013-12-05 Thread Aditya Nag

Too bad I wouldn't be able to attend it. Mumbai is too far away from home
and this was announced in too short a notice.

I've always wanted to attend one of these workshops since I started
contributing to OSM. Maybe next time.

Regards,
Aditya Nag.
On 05-Dec-2013 7:55 PM, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:

 Since I'm in the city, I'm taking hand on session on contributing to OSM
 to those interested at the Homi Bhaba Centre for Science Education,
 Anushakti Nagar. Its open for public, but please RSVP to Amit.

 What I expect to cover:
 * Paper mapping using field papers
 * Geo referencing and digitizing map scans
 * OSM editing using iD
 * Loading OSM data in Quantum GIS
 * Creating basic visualization with QGIS

 --

 As a part of NUSSD Digital Literacy Trainers' Training Programme,
 Gnowledge Lab is organising a one day hands-on workshop on Contributing to
 Open Street Map (OSM) on 06-12-2013

 OSM is community driven and an open data effort to build maps with data
 about roads, trails, cafés, railway stations, and much more, all over the
 world. The project uses diverse methods for contribution from the people
 and also emphasises on local knowledge.

 Local area mapping and contributing to OSM is one of the projects for the
 NUSSD Digital Literacy course. The workshop will cover the basics of
 mapping, and some advanced topics.

 For more information about the project please visit:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org

 The workshop will be guided by Arun Ganesh. Arun is an expert in mapping
 and has been contributing to the OSM project for a long time.

 Time: 10 am to 3 pm
 Date: 06-12-2013
 Venue:
 Room No 217,
 Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education
 Tata Institute of Fundamental Research
 V. N. Purav Marg, Mankhurd
 Mumbai, 400088 INDIA

 Please bring your laptops for the workshop.
 Please forward this mail to people who might be interested.
 Those who miss this workshop will be trained by those who attend this
 workshop.

 RSVP: Amit Dhakulkar | dam...@gnowledge.org | 9819350953



 --
  Arun Ganesh
 (planemad) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Planemad
  http://j.mp/ArunGanesh

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


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

Re: [Talk-it] Strade non connesse da correggere

2013-12-05 Thread Luca Delucchi

2013/11/18 Simone F. grop...@gmail.com:
 Ciao.


Ciao Simone


 Aggiorno le pagine solo di tanto in tanto (per es. adesso...), sarei
 contento se qualcuno volesse farlo regolarmente.


se volete il server è sempre a disposizione

 Il link al codice è sulla pagina, dentro Info, se serve posso metterlo in
 GitHub.

metticelo velocemente :-P

 Lo script è cresciuto per aggiunte successive e non è il massimo della
 pulizia ma se avete domande rispondo volentieri.


 Ciao,
 Simone F.



-- 
ciao
Luca

http://gis.cri.fmach.it/delucchi/
www.lucadelu.org

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

Re: [Talk-it] R: Strade con doppio nome in base al lato

2013-12-05 Thread alessandro zardo

Cioè dici di mettere un name= Via Lato dx - Via Lato sx a me non sembra il 
massimo e non trovo indicazioni sul wiki, forse va corretto?



 Da: beppebo...@libero.it beppebo...@libero.it
A: talk-it@openstreetmap.org 
Inviato: Mercoledì 4 Dicembre 2013 18:06
Oggetto: [Talk-it] R:  Strade con doppio nome in base al lato
 

OK nome più lato strada per il nome magari mettilo con trattino tra le due vie 
e poi lo specifichi con name left and right più sotto ...molte volte cm solo le 
case sono su altro comune come dici tu se confine non è a mezza via in quel 
caso io inserisco il nome via nelle service di accesso alle case

Messaggio originale
Da: bredy...@yahoo.it
Data: 04/12/2013 11.07
A: talk-it@openstreetmap.org
Ogg: [Talk-it] Strade con doppio nome in base al lato

Ci sono alcune strade in corrispondenza dei confini comunali che hanno un
nome diverso per i due lati della strada. Per indicarli uso name:left= e
name:right= però mi domandavo, se il confine non coincide esattamente con la
mezzeria della strada poi facendo la ricerca della via si ha un errore di
attribuzione del comune.

Inoltre volevo segnalare che usando il sito  http://qa.poole.ch/
http://qa.poole.ch/?zoom=12lat=45.90233lon=12.83749layers=TFFFB0  
queste strade così taggate risultano senza nome, forse perchè non riconosce
il tag name:alto della strada.



--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Strade-con-
doppio-nome-in-base-al-lato-tp5788398.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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




___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] restrizioni di svolta

Beh, se li ha copiati da Gmap dio ci aiuti, in quanto spesso sono errati,
almeno nella mia zona è così. Non so adesso ma una volta per correggerli
passava anche un anno. Mi è capitato per la mia via, che infatti i corrieri
non trovavano mai.

Ecco perchè ho deciso di collaborare ad OSM, e ancor di più perchè per
ciclisti nelle altre mappe non c'è praticamente niente. Peccato che ci sia
ancora solo GARMIN a supportare le OSM.



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/restrizioni-di-svolta-tp5788176p5788602.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] voting bicycle=use_cycleway

Non basta mettere bicycle=no? Anche se poi voglio vedere dove sia
applicabile. 



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/voting-bicycle-use-cycleway-tp5788528p5788604.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] Semaforo in caso particolare

bredy wrote
 Nel caso come questo 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1703373539
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1703373539  
  come dovrei mappare l'incrocio semaforico? Naturalmente c'è un solo
 semaforo ma se metto i due rami o li faccio incontrare sullo stesso punto,
 ma graficamente non è proprio corretto, oppure metto una sola linea invece
 dei due rami a senso unico, e il tratto con l'aiuola lo indico come
 traffic_calming=island?

Nessuno mi può dare qualche indicazione?



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Semaforo-in-caso-particolare-tp5788295p5788605.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] Semaforo in caso particolare

Ci ho guardato, ma non ho risposta buona.

Io in questi casi ho inserito gli incroci con geometria corretta e con un
semaforo su ogni incrocio (nel tua esempio ce ne sarebbero 2). Ma non è
soddisfacente.

Ci dovrebbe essere un metodo migliore (relazione) per raggruppare tutti gli
elementi che fanno parte di un singolo incrocio controllato con semafori,
incluse, per esempio, le strisce con semafori.

Volker


2013/12/5 bredy bredy...@yahoo.it

 bredy wrote
  Nel caso come questo
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1703373539
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1703373539
   come dovrei mappare l'incrocio semaforico? Naturalmente c'è un solo
  semaforo ma se metto i due rami o li faccio incontrare sullo stesso
 punto,
  ma graficamente non è proprio corretto, oppure metto una sola linea
 invece
  dei due rami a senso unico, e il tratto con l'aiuola lo indico come
  traffic_calming=island?

 Nessuno mi può dare qualche indicazione?



 --
 View this message in context:
 http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Semaforo-in-caso-particolare-tp5788295p5788605.html
 Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

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

[Talk-it] Noexit

Stavo leggendo nella lista tagging la discussione sul tag in oggetto e mi son
reso conto che forse sto sbagliando ad inserirlo, nel senso che io lo metto
sulle way senza uscita, ad esempio dove trovo il cartello. Ma da quel che ho
capito non serve a questo, ma dove c'è una strada vicina per far capire che
non sono collegate e quindi andrebbe messo nel nodo finale.

Voi come vi comportate? Se dovessi correggerlo nelle vie che ho mappato come
faccio? Adesso ricordarmi dove l'ho messo è difficile come faccio una
ricerca?



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Noexit-tp5788614.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] voting bicycle=use_cycleway

Qualcuno sa come è la situazione legale in Italia? Suppongo anche qua
esiste un obbligo di utilizzare una pista/corsia ciclabile quando c'è.

Volker


2013/12/4 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com

 C'è una votazione in giro che potrebbe interessare i ciclisti:
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle_use_cycleway

 Sarebbe un tag da agguingere ad una strada per dire che a fianco esiste
 una pista ciclabile (quindi in legislazioni con obbligo di usare le piste
 ciclabili è nella maggior parte dei casi pratticamente un divieto di usare
 la strada).

 ciao,
 Martin

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


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

Re: [Talk-it] Semaforo in caso particolare

2013-12-05 Thread dvdzero

Io per incroci complessi ho adottato la convenzione descritta qui
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traffic_light#Tag_all_incoming_ways

ad esempio:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.44352/10.97014
e
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.44088/10.96643

poi ... non so se i motori di routing gestiscano bene (?)

Ciao
Davide



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Semaforo-in-caso-particolare-tp5788295p5788624.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

[Talk-it] Poligoni col buco: come mappare aiuole e fontane in una piazza

2013-12-05 Thread Francesco Frassinelli

Buongiorno,
per mappare delle zone di verde (landuse=grass) in una piazza
(highway=pedestrian, area=yes), ho creato un poligono contenente un altro
al suo interno. Non so come fare la differenza tra quello di area maggiore
(rappresentante la piazza) e quello di area minore (la zona di verde). Come
posso fare?

Questa è la piazza in questione:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?#map=19/45.49500/9.37430

Grazie,
Frafra

p.s. E' normale che non ci sia differenza tra il rendering di highway=steps
con e senza tunnel=yes? Vedasi http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/250093843
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] voting bicycle=use_cycleway

PS Non sono stato preciso colla domanda:

http://www.mit.gov.it/mit/site.php?p=normativao=vdid=1id_dett=185

L'articolo 182 (9) fa riferimento a un regolamento che non ho trovato da
nessuna parte. Allora ci sono  o non ci sono esenzioni all'obbligo di uso?


2013/12/5 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com

 Qualcuno sa come è la situazione legale in Italia? Suppongo anche qua
 esiste un obbligo di utilizzare una pista/corsia ciclabile quando c'è.

 Volker


 2013/12/4 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com

 C'è una votazione in giro che potrebbe interessare i ciclisti:
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle_use_cycleway

 Sarebbe un tag da agguingere ad una strada per dire che a fianco esiste
 una pista ciclabile (quindi in legislazioni con obbligo di usare le piste
 ciclabili è nella maggior parte dei casi pratticamente un divieto di usare
 la strada).

 ciao,
 Martin

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



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

Re: [Talk-it] Poligoni col buco: come mappare aiuole e fontane in una piazza

2013-12-05 Thread sabas88

Il giorno 05 dicembre 2013 11:45, Francesco Frassinelli
frap...@gmail.comha scritto:

 Buongiorno,
 per mappare delle zone di verde (landuse=grass) in una piazza
 (highway=pedestrian, area=yes), ho creato un poligono contenente un altro
 al suo interno. Non so come fare la differenza tra quello di area maggiore
 (rappresentante la piazza) e quello di area minore (la zona di verde). Come
 posso fare?

 Questa è la piazza in questione:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?#map=19/45.49500/9.37430


Devi creare una relazione multipoligono (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon), per far prima (forse c'è
bisogno del plugin utilsplugin2) seleziona la piazza e le aiuole e premi
ctrl-alt-a (vedo che usi josm, quindi perchè non saltare parte del lavoro
:) )


 Grazie,
 Frafra


p.s. E' normale che non ci sia differenza tra il rendering di highway=steps
 con e senza tunnel=yes? Vedasi http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/250093843

  Bisognerebbe segnalarlo, oltretutto non renderizzano neanche le scale
come area...
Ciao,
Stefano

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


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

Re: [Talk-it] voting bicycle=use_cycleway

2013/12/5 bredy bredy...@yahoo.it

 Non basta mettere bicycle=no? Anche se poi voglio vedere dove sia
 applicabile.



no, perché è sbagliato (non è un generale bicycle=no, ma risulta come
bicycle=no in certi condizioni).

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Poligoni col buco: come mappare aiuole e fontane in una piazza

2013/12/5 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com

 per far prima (forse c'è bisogno del plugin utilsplugin2) seleziona la
 piazza e le aiuole e premi ctrl-alt-a (vedo che usi josm, quindi perchè non
 saltare parte del lavoro :) )



si,

dopo l'operazione il way outer (piazza) non dovrebbe più contenere tags
(volendo potrebbe contenere name e area=yes perché in qualche modo anche le
aiuole fanno parte della piazza con nome), mentre la relazione deve avere
i tags che prima aveva la piazza. Le aiuole devono essere membri della
relazione (ruolo inner) e mantengono i loro tags.

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet

Come va mappato questo posto?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2024626650

E' un comprensorio di 4 palazzoni vicino a delle piste da sci, in
montagna, usati per lo più d'inverno.

Attualmente  è mappato come village, ma non è chiaramente un vero paese
e, poi, è molto piccolo. Paradossalmente, Montoso, che è il vero paese
sottostante, è stato mappato come hamlet:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/651350955

Ok, sembra che abbia una popolazione residente di soli 37 abitanti, ma
almeno nella stagione turistica ha più abitanti di Rucas. E poi è
sicuramente più imporante. Su una mappa dovrebbe prima apparire Montoso,
poi Rucas. Invece attualmente avviene l'opposto: prima appare Rucas, poi
solo zoommando appare anche Montoso:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/44.7585/7.2324

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

Re: [Talk-it] Noexit

2013/12/5 bredy bredy...@yahoo.it

 Stavo leggendo nella lista tagging la discussione sul tag in oggetto e mi
 son
 reso conto che forse sto sbagliando ad inserirlo, nel senso che io lo metto
 sulle way senza uscita, ad esempio dove trovo il cartello. Ma da quel che
 ho
 capito non serve a questo, ma dove c'è una strada vicina per far capire che
 non sono collegate e quindi andrebbe messo nel nodo finale.



il cartello (stradale) non centra molto, perché lo mettono anche quando a
piedi o in bici si passa. Io metterei quel tag sul ultimo nodo (non
connesso) in casi dove non si passa ne anche a piedi (come da wiki).

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Poligoni col buco: come mappare aiuole e fontane in una piazza

2013-12-05 Thread Francesco Frassinelli

Il giorno 05 dicembre 2013 12:01, sabas88 saba...@gmail.com ha scritto:




 Il giorno 05 dicembre 2013 11:45, Francesco Frassinelli frap...@gmail.com
  ha scritto:

 Buongiorno,
 per mappare delle zone di verde (landuse=grass) in una piazza
 (highway=pedestrian, area=yes), ho creato un poligono contenente un altro
 al suo interno. Non so come fare la differenza tra quello di area maggiore
 (rappresentante la piazza) e quello di area minore (la zona di verde). Come
 posso fare?

 Questa è la piazza in questione:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?#map=19/45.49500/9.37430


 Devi creare una relazione multipoligono (
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon), per far prima (forse
 c'è bisogno del plugin utilsplugin2) seleziona la piazza e le aiuole e
 premi ctrl-alt-a (vedo che usi josm, quindi perchè non saltare parte del
 lavoro :) )


Grazie Stefano e grazie Martin :)
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet

2013-12-05 Thread sabas88

Il giorno 05 dicembre 2013 12:10, solitone solit...@mail.com ha scritto:

 Come va mappato questo posto?

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2024626650

 E' un comprensorio di 4 palazzoni vicino a delle piste da sci, in
 montagna, usati per lo più d'inverno.

 Attualmente  è mappato come village, ma non è chiaramente un vero paese
 e, poi, è molto piccolo. Paradossalmente, Montoso, che è il vero paese
 sottostante, è stato mappato come hamlet:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/651350955

 Ok, sembra che abbia una popolazione residente di soli 37 abitanti, ma
 almeno nella stagione turistica ha più abitanti di Rucas. E poi è
 sicuramente più imporante. Su una mappa dovrebbe prima apparire Montoso,
 poi Rucas. Invece attualmente avviene l'opposto: prima appare Rucas, poi
 solo zoommando appare anche Montoso:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/44.7585/7.2324


Metterei place=locality (meno di 100 abitanti fissi)...
Ciao,
Stefano

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

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

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet

2013-12-05 Thread Gianluca Boero

E' una località a circa 15 km da casa mia, mezz'oretta di auto. Ho 
effettuato una sola mappatura in questa zona quest'estate, ho tracciato 
un sentiero di montagna e risistemato alcuni monti.

Non mi sono occupato delle attribuzioni geografiche del luogo.

La località fa parte del comune di Bagnolo Piemonte. Neppure Montoso 
comunque è un paese ma una frazione o località del comune di Bagnolo 
Piemonte, provincia di CN. A mio avviso andrebbero mappate entrambe allo 
stesso modo, essendo località abitate. Diciamo che Rucas nei periodi 
morti non ha praticamente abitanti. Residenti oserei dire nessuno. Al 
più seconde case, molte delle quali in vendita. Le enormi case che si 
vedono sulla mappa sono praticamente dei residence. In ogni caso Montoso 
è più popolata, mentre Rucas è di appoggio durante la stagione sciistica.


Se vi servono indicazioni o se devo fare modifiche fatemi sapere.
Di sicuro una cosa che andrebbe eseguita è la mappatura degli impianti 
di risalita, solo che tranne due, degli altri non mi ricordo i nomi :-)

Ebbene si...anche gli impianti di risalita dovrebbero avere un tag name.


Il 05/12/2013 12:34, sabas88 ha scritto:




Il giorno 05 dicembre 2013 12:10, solitone solit...@mail.com 
mailto:solit...@mail.com ha scritto:


Come va mappato questo posto?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2024626650

E' un comprensorio di 4 palazzoni vicino a delle piste da sci, in
montagna, usati per lo più d'inverno.

Attualmente  è mappato come village, ma non è chiaramente un vero
paese
e, poi, è molto piccolo. Paradossalmente, Montoso, che è il vero paese
sottostante, è stato mappato come hamlet:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/651350955

Ok, sembra che abbia una popolazione residente di soli 37 abitanti, ma
almeno nella stagione turistica ha più abitanti di Rucas. E poi è
sicuramente più imporante. Su una mappa dovrebbe prima apparire
Montoso,
poi Rucas. Invece attualmente avviene l'opposto: prima appare
Rucas, poi
solo zoommando appare anche Montoso:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/44.7585/7.2324


Metterei place=locality (meno di 100 abitanti fissi)...
Ciao,
Stefano

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it




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



--
Gianluca Boero

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

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet

2013/12/5 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com

 Metterei place=locality (meno di 100 abitanti fissi)...



-1, se hanno abitanti fissi non può essere un locality, metterei hamlet.

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Noexit

2013-12-05 Thread Giuliano Zamboni

Se ti consola non sei l'unico perché anch'io l'ho sempre usato a intuito senza 
controllare il wiki.
Nei prossimi giorni avrò un pó di correzioni da fare...

Ciao

-- Inviato da Android con K-9 Mail.

bredy bredy...@yahoo.it ha scritto:
Stavo leggendo nella lista tagging la discussione sul tag in oggetto e
mi son
reso conto che forse sto sbagliando ad inserirlo, nel senso che io lo
metto
sulle way senza uscita, ad esempio dove trovo il cartello. Ma da quel
che ho
capito non serve a questo, ma dove c'è una strada vicina per far capire
che
non sono collegate e quindi andrebbe messo nel nodo finale.

Voi come vi comportate? Se dovessi correggerlo nelle vie che ho mappato
come
faccio? Adesso ricordarmi dove l'ho messo è difficile come faccio una
ricerca?



--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Noexit-tp5788614.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet


  
  
Gianluca Boero ha scritto:


  
  [Rucas] fa parte del comune di
Bagnolo Piemonte. Neppure Montoso comunque  un paese ma una
frazione o localit del comune di Bagnolo Piemonte, provincia di
CN. A mio avviso andrebbero mappate entrambe allo stesso modo,
essendo localit abitate. Diciamo che Rucas nei periodi morti
non ha praticamente abitanti. Residenti oserei dire nessuno. Al
pi seconde case, molte delle quali in vendita. Le enormi case
che si vedono sulla mappa sono praticamente dei residence. In
ogni caso Montoso  pi popolata, mentre Rucas  di "appoggio"
durante la stagione sciistica.
  


Direi, quindi, che sia Rucas sia Montoso vadano mappati come hamlet.
Mi sembra di vedere che tutte le frazioni di Bagnolo Piemonte sono
degli hamlet, a parte Rucas che  un village, come Bagnolo! 

Su locality la penso come Martin: non andrebbe usato per Rucas, dato
che, almeno durante la stagione sciistica,  abitata. Il valore
locality  indicato, invece, per luoghi disabitati che hanno un
nome.


  


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

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet


  
  
Martin Koppenhoefer ha scritto:


  
2013/12/5 sabas88 saba...@gmail.com
  


  

  Metterei place=locality (meno di 100 abitanti fissi)...
  
  
  -1, se hanno abitanti fissi non pu essere un "locality",
  metterei "hamlet".

  


Cosa intendi per "fissi"? Residenti?

Abitanti residenti probabilmente non ne ha, mentre ne ha diversi
durante la stagione turistica.

La wiki dice che locality si usa "for an unpopulated named place".
Questo mi fa pensare che il luogo deve essere sempre disabitato.
Quando non ci sono abitanti che risiedono tutto l'anno, ma solo per
un periodo dell'anno, sembrerebbe comunque che il valore corretto
sia hamlet.
  


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

[Talk-it] Fwd: [OSM-talk] SotM-EU 2014 in Karlsruhe, Germany

2013-12-05 Thread Simone Cortesi

è con grande piacere che vi annuncio State of the Map Europe.

che avrà luogo nella splendida Karlsruhe dal 13 al 15 giugno 2014.

a breve uscirà la call for papers

-Simone.


-- Forwarded message --
From: Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org
Date: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:33 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] SotM-EU 2014 in Karlsruhe, Germany
To: Talk Openstreetmap t...@openstreetmap.org,
d...@openstreetmap.org d...@openstreetmap.org


Hi,

   today I have the pleasure to announce that we'll be holding SotM-EU
2014 in Karlsruhe, on 13-15 June. We've set up the web page at
www.sotm-eu.org and we'll be posting news there and on @sotmeu on Twitter.

We'll be trying to emulate the success of the 2011 Vienna conference,
bringing together everyone who does anything interesting in  with
OpenStreetMap in Europe.

The call for papers will be out soon, with registration to open early
2014. We already have a good international programme committee preparing
that but if you'd like to join the programme committee or otherwise help
organising the conference (or aspects of it), don't be shy and write to
i...@sotm-eu.org. Same if you have any ideas that you'd like the
organisers to consider.

We'll be distributing this announcement to the dev and talk lists
as well as to talk-fr and talk-de. If you are on one of the other
regional European lists, we would be grateful if you could forward
the announcement.

I'm looking forward to seeing you in Karlsruhe next year!

Bye
Frederik

PS: we = the local Karlsruhe team  everyone involved

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
talk mailing list
t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


-- 
-S

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

Re: [Talk-it] R: voting landuse=highway

si, per la seconda volta in questa proposta ;-)

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] R: voting bicycle=use_cycleway

2013-12-05 Thread Giuseppe Amici

Italia: e c’è pista ciclabile il ciclista è tenuto a utilizzarla. 

Mi risulta che siano esclusi i ciclisti – agonisti in allenamento.

Ciao Beppe




Da: Volker Schmidt [mailto:vosc...@gmail.com] 
Inviato: giovedì 5 dicembre 2013 11:44
A: openstreetmap list - italiano
Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] voting bicycle=use_cycleway

 

Qualcuno sa come è la situazione legale in Italia? Suppongo anche qua esiste un 
obbligo di utilizzare una pista/corsia ciclabile quando c'è. 

Volker

 

2013/12/4 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com

C'è una votazione in giro che potrebbe interessare i ciclisti: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle_use_cycleway

Sarebbe un tag da agguingere ad una strada per dire che a fianco esiste una 
pista ciclabile (quindi in legislazioni con obbligo di usare le piste ciclabili 
è nella maggior parte dei casi pratticamente un divieto di usare la strada).

 

ciao,
Martin


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

 

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

Re: [Talk-it] R: voting bicycle=use_cycleway

 Italia: e c’è pista ciclabile il ciclista è tenuto a utilizzarla.


ASi, ma manca (o non trovo in internet) il regolamento citato nel paragrafo



 Mi risulta che siano esclusi i ciclisti – agonisti in allenamento.


Non ho trovato traccia di questo neanche.

Se qualcuno possiede informazioni più recise, si faccia avanti.

:-)

Volker
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] restrizioni di svolta



 Am 05/dic/2013 um 10:38 schrieb bredy bredy...@yahoo.it:
 
 Peccato che ci sia
 ancora solo GARMIN a supportare le OSM.


non è così, non ci supportano per niente, siamo noi (o meglio il progetto 
mkgmap) a supportare il formato proprietario della Garmin.
;-)

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] R: R: voting bicycle=use_cycleway

2013-12-05 Thread Giuseppe Amici

Qui le sanzioni per il mancato uso della ciclabile:

http://www.codicedellastrada.net/index.html?obbligo_di_uso_della_pista_cic.htm



--

Qui l’articolo di legge (art 182 comma9) che cita: 

Art. 182 comma 9.

 

I velocipedi devono transitare sulle piste loro riservate quando esistono, 
salvo il divieto per particolari categorie di essi, con le modalita' stabilite 
nel regolamento*

 

* Al momento il citato 'Regolamento' non esiste quindi tutti i Ciclisti devono 
fare uso delle piste: dai bambini ai professionisiti che si allenano su strada.

Ma una volta che il regolamento sarà applicato:

E' una prescrizione inapplicabile a Professionisti, Dilettanti, Cicloamantori 
insomma per tutti coloro che pedalano forte che qui, per brevità, verrano 
denominati CICLISTI ESPERTI

http://ciclista.barattare.net/problemi_obbligo_tutti_ciclisti_usare_piste_ciclabili_art_182_codice_strada.html


Ciao Beppe

 

Da: Volker Schmidt [mailto:vosc...@gmail.com] 
Inviato: giovedì 5 dicembre 2013 15:53
A: openstreetmap list - italiano
Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] R: voting bicycle=use_cycleway

 

 

Italia: e c’è pista ciclabile il ciclista è tenuto a utilizzarla. 

 

ASi, ma manca (o non trovo in internet) il regolamento citato nel paragrafo 


 

Mi risulta che siano esclusi i ciclisti – agonisti in allenamento.

 

Non ho trovato traccia di questo neanche. 

Se qualcuno possiede informazioni più recise, si faccia avanti.

:-)

Volker

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

Re: [Talk-it] Semaforo in caso particolare

2013-12-05 Thread Alberto Nogaro

-Original Message-
From: dvdzero [mailto:dvdz...@gmail.com]
Sent: giovedì 5 dicembre 2013 11:46
To: talk-it@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] Semaforo in caso particolare

Io per incroci complessi ho adottato la convenzione descritta qui
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Traffic_light#Tag_all_incoming_ways

Il tag traffic_signals:direction applicato ad un nodo  è a rischio di non
venire aggiornato correttamente in caso di inversione della way. Ho provato
ad esempio con Josm, e in caso di inversione della way non viene fatto alcun
controllo sui nodi (mentre vengono aggiornati correttamente i tag
direzionali della way stessa).

Ciao,
Alberto

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

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet

2013-12-05 Thread Gianluca Boero


Il 05/12/2013 14:48, solitone ha scritto:

Direi, quindi, che sia Rucas sia Montoso vadano mappati come hamlet. 
Mi sembra di vedere che tutte le frazioni di Bagnolo Piemonte sono 
degli hamlet, a parte Rucas che è un village, come Bagnolo!


Su locality la penso come Martin: non andrebbe usato per Rucas, dato 
che, almeno durante la stagione sciistica, è abitata. Il valore 
locality è indicato, invece, per luoghi disabitati che hanno un nome.




Ho visto la tua modifica. Per me è ok hamlet anche per Rucas.
Se le altre frazioni o località di Bagnolo sono tutte segnate come 
hamlet è tutto corretto. Tutte sono sicuramente abitate.

Come mai questo tuo interesse per Rucas? :-)
Se trovi altri errori nella zona chiedi pure.

--
Gianluca Boero


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

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet

2013/12/5 solitone solit...@mail.com


 -1, se hanno abitanti fissi non può essere un locality, metterei
 hamlet.


 Cosa intendi per fissi? Residenti?

 Abitanti residenti probabilmente non ne ha, mentre ne ha diversi durante
 la stagione turistica.



si, in qualche modo residenti, un turista che ci rimane 2 settimane poi se
ne va ed arriva il prossimo turista non conta, penso.

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Rucas: place village vs. hamlet