Re: [OSM-talk-fr] était Subject=Re: SeFaireConnaitre :(, devient SeFaireConnaitre :)
Bonjour, Merci de vos explications sur cette liste quant à la prise en compte des remarques de la communauté des fourmis et ainsi VousFaire(re)Connaitre :) au sein de celle-ci. Brice Le 13/08/2015 17:35, Support Sefaireconnaitre a écrit : Bonjour, Comme convenu avec Christian, nous avons lancé des développements sur les différents points que vous avez listés, pour améliorer la qualité de nos publications, et vous éviter les différents problèmes qu'elles ont pu causer. Nous allons désormais traiter les géolocalisation en amont, pour ne pas avoir à publier un POI et le déplacer ensuite. Dans la mesure du possible, les POI seront synchronisés avec la base BAN. Les doublons seront traités, en suppression ou en fusion. Il y a du passif concernant les publications que nous avons faites jusqu'ici, nous allons traiter ces différents POI pour les corriger. Vous trouverez ci dessous le message que nous avons transmis à Christian suite à son alerte, et evidemment nous serons plus attentifs à la liste de diffusion pour mieux traiter les anomalies. Nous sommes à l'écoute de vos retours et suggestions. bonne journée L'équipe SFC Bonjour Christian, je prends connaissance de votre mail, et de la liste de discussion, avec de nouveaux messages depuis le mois de mai. Des messages et des échanges qui ne sont pas satisfaisant, ni pour la communauté, et évidemment pas pour nous, c'est un euphémisme. Très clairement notre souhait n'est pas de nous appuyer sur la communauté pour faire notre travail, nous voulons être autonomes et corriger nos erreurs lorsque nous en faisons, quand à polluer les bases, n'en parlons même pas c'est à l'opposé de notre volonté. Je prends note d'un certain nombre de points, qui sont à traiter de notre côté car ils correspondent à la réalité de nos process : - nous utilisons une référence GPS et pas une référence adresse, à ce stade, nous ne faisons pas le rapprochement strict, mais a minima, nous vérifions manuellement la cohérence des données soit avec OSM, soit avec le cadastre, et positionnons le POI sur le batiment. je note la sortie de la base BAN qui devrait permettre le faire ce rapprochement automatique sur une partie des POI. - le fait que nous créions un POI, pour le corriger immédiatement est vrai, c'est actuellement notre process, nous allons donc le revoir, et nous créer des outils pour traiter cela en amont - la vérification des doublons est intégrée dans nos process, si des doublons sont créés ce sont des erreurs, et donc je vais faire en sorte que nous soyons plus attentifs sur ce point. Nous avons fait beaucoup de modifications suite à vos précédents retours sur nos process (novembre), pour prendre en compte les éléments que vous aviez remontés. Nous avons fait des repasses sur les points que nous avions créés pour améliorer la géolocalisation lorsqu'elle était mauvaise, cette repasse est toujours en cours étant donné le volume, à date nous avons 3000 POI, nous sommes repassés sur 1500, 500 restent à traiter, et nous avons 1000 POI qui n'ont pas été publiés. Le process auparavant automatique est désormais passé en semi-automatique, pour intégrer les vérifications, permettre une géolocalisation de meilleure qualité, et ne pas créer de doublons. Nous allons continuer à travailler dans ce sens et prendre en compte vos retours dans nos process. Par rapport aux retours de la mailing list je retiens les points suivants : - Des personnes remontent que la qualité de la géolocalisation est meilleure qu'auparavant, sans éluder les autres problèmes ou les anomalies restantes, je prends cela plutôt positivement car nous avons travaillé sur ce point. - Il y a un problème de process, que nous allons revoir, pour ne pas créer un point mal geolocalisé et le relocaliser ensuite, afin de vous éviter le bruit que cela génère. - les points ne sont pas croisés avec les bases d'adresses, nous allons travailler sur ce point, notamment avec BAN, pour les adresses qui ne seraient pas accessibles ou vérifiables via ces bases nous continuerons sur la géolocalisation GPS, et si nous ne pouvons pas localiser précisément alors nous ne publierons pas. - nous avons taggué les url de certains POI sur demande d'un de notre client qui voulait intégrer le tracking dans ses outils, nous ne le ferons plus Voila à date ce que je peux vous dire en termes d'action de notre côté. Effectivement nous n'avons pas été attentifs aux messages de la mailing list, nous allons faire en sorte de la surveiller plus attentivement pour être plus réactifs en cas de probleme, et en tout cas plus constructifs. Je vais faire en sorte de lancer le dev de ces outils de notre côté, sur BANO et sur les traitements amont de géolocalisation, en l'attente de ces outils je vais suspendre les nouvelles publications. Nous continuerons à traiter les 500 points sur lesquels nous ne sommes pas encore repassés. ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 02:23:29 -0400 Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: What if I was to add the aqueduct which goes past Aqueduct Race Track on Long Island, NY? It is without question there (the name Aqueduct should be a pretty good hint), yet it cannot be seen anywhere. Why not map that? Why map the Catskill aqueducts, which also cannot be seen? That is a good example. Buried railway tracks, that are known to exist may be mapped (and marked as buried) and should not be deleted just because this feature is not visible. In another case where railway tracks that were removed, embankment demolished and somebody build there houses. In that case railway track should not be mapped in OSM because this feature is gone. See for example http://www.dawnotemuwkrakowie.pl/miniatury/95-most-podgorki-i-kladka-ojca-bernatka/ There were multiple bridges in this location. First constructed in 1335 (destroyed by fire), there was later a floating bridge, in 1801 next documented bridge (quickly destroyed by a flood) and next one in 1844, this time from stone. In 2010 footbridge/cyclebridge was constructed. There are still well visible traces of bridge from 1844, maybe there are some traces of older ones (aligned streets, maybe also some buried remains). But only a single bridge should be mapped at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/242682567#map=19/50.04659/19.94752 Traces of bridges should be mapped as traces (tourism=attraction, archeological site, navigation hazard) not things like [man_made=bridge; status=burned in XIX century]. Or a railway case: http://www.dawnotemuwkrakowie.pl/miniatury/83-kolej-obwodowa-pociagi-alejach-trzech-wieszczow/ - completely and utterly removed railway, leaving no traces (road that replaced railway follows its course, but it is likely that railway itself followed available space). This railway certainly should not appear in OSM. Location: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.0641mlon=19.9239#map=16/50.0641/19.9239 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Making progress finally ...
On 14/08/15 09:41, Lester Caine wrote: After working through a few little nuances on SUSE linux I finally have tilemill running. It's giving me level 1 and 2 from the shape files and the loading of the style now completes without any errors. I can see it remotely although there is still an error getting it to work through nginx, but the problem on the todo list is 'could not create converter for windows-1252' which I think is being created when it tries to start building OSM based tiles. White tiles start appearing as soon as the error appears :( Where should I bee looking next? OK ... turns out I'm only getting that problem with zoom levels 3 and 4 ... switch to 5 and I have a nice view of the UK! The other question, since I can see the top level tiles ... how do I access them via port 20008 ... only seeing 'Not Found' which reassuringly nginx is also returning for the /tile/ access ... And actually this part is also working fine now I know what I'm looking at. Right click on a tile - view image - remove the :20008 - tile refreshes. What I am not sure about is just where the tiles are being cached? My disk layout is a little unconventional as the SSD disk is not big enough for everything, so /tmp is a separate disk, and /srv/maps has all of the planet and postgres directories along with the openstreetmap-carto project, but both views into that seem to be building their own tiles? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-at] Graz+Innsbruck: »Schiene und Straße wurden getrennt«
Das Problem ist, dass dann nicht erkennbar ist, ob in einer Strae Schienen liegen (wre frs Routing z.B. entscheidend, da man auf einer Strae mit Schienen im Ortsgebiet nicht links zufahren darf). Auch mit den subkeys :lanes und :placement kann man die genaue Lage der Schienen beschreiben, ohne den Zusammenhang zwischen Schienen und Strae zu verlieren. Die obigen subkeys sind der Standard fr lane tagging, und ich finde, da gehrt die Beschreibung, in welcher Fahrspur die Schienen liegen, dazu. Warum sollten die Schienen lagegenau gezeichnet werden, whrend Fahrspuren (sinnollerweise) zu einer abstrahierenden Linie zusammengefasst werden? Die von dir zitierte Wiki-Seite wurde erst vor ein paar Monaten auf den jetzigen Stand gendert, eine Diskussion darber ist mir nicht bekannt - zumindest ist sie nicht auf der Wiki-Seite dokumentiert. Andreas PS:Deine E-Mail-Adresse lsst darauf schlieen, dass dein Interesse an OSM (auch) berufliche Grnde hat. Eine nderung von Daten nur um einzelnen Firmenvorgaben zu enstprechen, wird meines Wissens nach in OSM nicht gern gesehen. Gesendet:Freitag, 14. August 2015 um 11:24 Uhr Von:Jonathan Gallagher gallag...@mentzdv.de An:talk-at@openstreetmap.org Betreff:[Talk-at] Graz+Innsbruck: Schiene und Strae wurden getrennt Hallo! Wie angekndigt, melde ich mich hier nochmal wegen dem Thema Strae von Schiene trennen. Mir erschliet sich nicht ganz, was dagegen spricht die Schienen und die Fahrbahn einzeln und lagerichtig zu mappen, wenn man die Routenrelationen bernimmt. Grundstzlich halte ich das fr die sauberere Methode. Ich spreche noch gar nicht davon zweispurige Gleise einzeln zu mappen (das wre eine kompliziertere Angelegenheit), sondern nur Schiene von Strae zu trennen. Welche stichhaltigen Argumente gibt es denn dagegen? Das mglicherweise noch bessere Argument fr das Auftrennen ist, dass es internationaler Standard ist. Nachzulesen hier:http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:railway=tram Auch das englische Original stellt explizit klar, dass verschiedene Wege mit gleichen Knoten genutzt werden sollen. Auch hier geht hervor, dass das in den allermeisten Fllen so gehandhabt wird. Nur eine kleine Minderheit (10%) kombiniert den Tag railway=tram mit highway=*. Frher oder spter wird das auch fr Graz kommen mssen. Ich hab jetzt mal damit begonnen und werde fortfahren, so es keine stichhaltigen Gegenargumente gibt. Ich bin grundstzlich sehr offen fr konstruktive Kritik und ntzliche Hinweisen und Tipps. Gre, Jonathan (Weltstaat) ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
Maarten Deen writes: On 2015-08-14 07:44, Russ Nelson wrote: Maarten Deen writes: I beg your pardon? I read this as nothing can be deleted, since you say that deleting something you don't see (which usually means it's not there) is reason for a ban. No, nobody is going to get banned for just one action. But if they consistently go around deleting things because *they* didn't see the thing, and are counselled that that is not how we do things, and persists in doing it (and advising others to do it), yeah, deleting things that can be seen is reason to ban somebody, just as is any other kind of damage to the map data. That last statement is something different than I didn't see it, so I deleted it So I'm still confused. Please confine the answer to the deletion of things that are not present. You are mixing two ideas: 1) that something is not present, and 2) that everyone who doesn't see something is competent to judge that it is not present. Examples: a blind person doesn't see anything. Why can't they delete everything? Trivial, I know, but that's the claim. Less trivial: someone with limited vision. Are we now administering eye tests before we allow people to map? What about somebody with left neglect? Should they delete something because it's on their left? They won't see it. Less trivial examples: A subway (for all of the meanings). A pipeline. Aqueduct. Buried electrical mains. We map above-ground, why not map buried? Underground fire hydrants. Rich Welty has mapped all the fire hydrants in the Albany area, for good reason. What about places where they are underground? Don't map them?? Why? Delete them if they're mapped? A very strong example: we map political boundaries. The only boundary I've ever seen is the one between the US and Canada. It's a 30' wide clearcut with concrete pillars every klik or so. We map placenames. Never seen a big pin sticking in the ground saying Potsdam, NY where we have it mapped. What if I was to add the aqueduct which goes past Aqueduct Race Track on Long Island, NY? It is without question there (the name Aqueduct should be a pretty good hint), yet it cannot be seen anywhere. Why not map that? Why map the Catskill aqueducts, which also cannot be seen? See? The simple Delete things you don't see is just plain wrong. And I didn't see it so I deleted it is not always a valid defense. If I started deleting NY political boundaries, I'd get my ass canned in a New York minute, and deservedly so. Obviously there could be a project called ISawItMap, where you only map things that an ordinary man can see. OpenStreetMap, however, is not that project. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On 2015-08-14 08:23, Russ Nelson wrote: Maarten Deen writes: On 2015-08-14 07:44, Russ Nelson wrote: Maarten Deen writes: I beg your pardon? I read this as nothing can be deleted, since you say that deleting something you don't see (which usually means it's not there) is reason for a ban. No, nobody is going to get banned for just one action. But if they consistently go around deleting things because *they* didn't see the thing, and are counselled that that is not how we do things, and persists in doing it (and advising others to do it), yeah, deleting things that can be seen is reason to ban somebody, just as is any other kind of damage to the map data. That last statement is something different than I didn't see it, so I deleted it So I'm still confused. Please confine the answer to the deletion of things that are not present. You are mixing two ideas: 1) that something is not present, and 2) that everyone who doesn't see something is competent to judge that it is not present. Examples: a blind person doesn't see anything. Why can't they delete everything? Trivial, I know, but that's the claim. Less trivial: someone with limited vision. Are we now administering eye tests before we allow people to map? What about somebody with left neglect? Should they delete something because it's on their left? They won't see it. Less trivial examples: A subway (for all of the meanings). A pipeline. Aqueduct. Buried electrical mains. We map above-ground, why not map buried? Underground fire hydrants. Rich Welty has mapped all the fire hydrants in the Albany area, for good reason. What about places where they are underground? Don't map them?? Why? Delete them if they're mapped? A very strong example: we map political boundaries. The only boundary I've ever seen is the one between the US and Canada. It's a 30' wide clearcut with concrete pillars every klik or so. We map placenames. Never seen a big pin sticking in the ground saying Potsdam, NY where we have it mapped. What if I was to add the aqueduct which goes past Aqueduct Race Track on Long Island, NY? It is without question there (the name Aqueduct should be a pretty good hint), yet it cannot be seen anywhere. Why not map that? Why map the Catskill aqueducts, which also cannot be seen? See? The simple Delete things you don't see is just plain wrong. And I didn't see it so I deleted it is not always a valid defense. If I started deleting NY political boundaries, I'd get my ass canned in a New York minute, and deservedly so. I won't go into your point about political boundaries. That's not applicable here, we're talking about physical features. But still you say that noting can be deleted, except maybe by the person who created it. IMHO a bit of a I reject reality and substitute my own attitude. _I_ see that something is there and don't you dare delete it because you don't see it. You're talking about abandoned railroads. Sure, if tracks are there, they are present. But what if only the groundworks of the railroad is present? What when we subsitute railroad with road in general? Is it also not acceptable to delete a road when only a clearing remains? Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-ja] 献血ルームについて
いいだです。 なるほど情報ありがとうございます。 タグの定義については、海外での利用状況との調和もありますので、 一概に「HLA検査できる場所」＝「骨髄バンクドナー登録できる場所」と してしまうことで齟齬があると困るかもしれない、と思ったので、タグをみてみました。 なお、保健所 (healthcare=centre かな?) のオブジェクトに対して、 blood:stemcells=yes タグをつけるのは、僕はさほど違和感はありません。 また、このタグのもとになったDonationのProposed featureページをみてみると、 ドナー登録できることまでがスキーマに含まれており、 海外でも、HLA型の診断と骨髄バンクへの登録が密接に紐付いている、という、日本と類似の状況であることが推察されます。 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Donation と、いうわけで、訳文としては、こんなかんじかなぁ、と考えています。 「血液標本を採血して、幹細胞（stem cell）のHLA型 (tissue type) を 調べることができるかどうか。事前予約や申し込みが必要な場合がある。（日本では、骨髄バンクのドナー登録が可能な施設であることが多い）」 原文: Whether you can have blood samples taken to determine the tissue type of your stem cells. An appointment might be required. 申し込まないと調査はしないハズです。 これは、予約が必要な場合がある、という文言があるので、 「事前予約や申し込みが必要な場合がある」というWikiの文言とも合致しており、特に齟齬は発生しないかな、と思います。 2015年8月11日 19:48 tomoya muramoto muramototom...@gmail.com: muramotoです。 日本では、「HLA検査できる場所」＝「骨髄バンクドナー登録できる場所」だと思います。 ですので、利用者側(マッパー含む)の立場からは、「骨髄バンクドナー登録できる場所」という定義にしたほうが分かりやすいと思います。 一部の保健所等では骨髄バンクドナー登録ができるようなので、そのような場所にタグ付けするのも有用ではないかと思います。 #なお、HLA検査は、輸血(献血)目的の場合と、骨髄バンク目的の場合のものがあります(検査内容は一緒だと思いますが)。 #病気が重い場合など(?)、白血球のタイプ(HLA)が同じ血液の輸血が必要なことがあります。こちらは日本赤十字社がやるHLA検査です。予約は不要です。もう忘れてしまいましたが、署名する程度です。 ##私は献血を100回ほどやりましたが、HLA適合の献血依頼はまだ1回だけです。 #骨髄バンク目的の場合は、おそらくドナー登録のリスク説明などのために、予約が必要なのだと思います。たしか、日本骨髄バンクと日本赤十字が事業協力か何かで、献血ルームが窓口になっているんだったと思います。 2015年8月11日 18:24 SHIBATA Akira h...@eva.gr.jp: 柴田(あ)と申します。 骨髄移植ドナーを二回やったことがあります。 その縁で DLI というのもやったことがあります。 osm と関係ない話題で申し訳ありませんが… On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:39:11 +0900 ribbon o...@ns.ribbon.or.jp wrote: HLA ですか。多分どこの献血センターでも申し込めばHLAの調査は していると思います。 骨髄移植関連事業をしている骨髄バンクと 血液関連の事業をしている日本赤十字社は別法人なので、 直接的には関係なく、たぶん申し込まないと調査は しないハズです。 わたくしは、スレッドにもでてきた所沢の献血ルームで 骨髄バンクの勧誘員？な女性に「登録しないか？」と 聞かれて、断る理由もなかったし、試験管一本分血液採取が 増えるだけだということだったので、登録を容認しました。 なお、骨髄移植ドナーになっても HLA の型は教えてもらえません。 ML の趣旨とは違うので、もっとお知りになりたい方は直接 メールをくだされば、可能な範囲で回答いたします。 一応当方の二回の体験に関しては当方のメアドと骨髄移植という キーワードで検索すると見つかると思います。 ___ Talk-ja mailing list Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja ___ Talk-ja mailing list Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja -- Satoshi IIDA mail: nyamp...@gmail.com twitter: @nyampire ___ Talk-ja mailing list Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja
Re: [OSM-ja] リンクが更新されない
いいだです。 ページ上部から日本語へのリンクもありますし、ページも見えています :) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:shop%3Dantiques 2015年8月14日 14:21 ribbon o...@ns.ribbon.or.jp: wiki.openstreetmap.org で Tag:shop=antiques の日本語訳を行いました(一部のみ)。 ただ、英語から日本語へのリンクが更新されません。他の言語(ロシア語、ウクライナ語) からはリンクが見えるのですが。 皆様の所では見えていますでしょうか。 ribbon ___ Talk-ja mailing list Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja -- Satoshi IIDA mail: nyamp...@gmail.com twitter: @nyampire ___ Talk-ja mailing list Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 09:33:11 +1000 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: On 13/08/2015 11:24 PM, Ruben Maes wrote: On Thursday 13 August 2015 15:10:14 Mateusz Konieczny wrote: On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 21:54:39 +1000 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: For example a demolished building .. may have a new building built on the same spot .. with the same outline. Leave the node data in OSM, change the tag building=yes to building=demolished (may not be rendered nor official OSM tagging) add a note as to who/why .. and then if rebuilt change the tag back to building=yes... with a source tag please. If the site has a different shaped building then the nodes will have to be changed, or the site gets used for something else .. then change it. But untill then leave the old data there. This is a bad idea. Maybe [note=this building is demolished] to protect against mapping from outdated aerial images may be OK. But expecting data consumers displaying buildings to filter out building=demolished, building=razed, building=proposed etc etc is a really bad idea. Or you use demolished:building=yes as I said an hour ago. This is clearer than a note IMO, allows to retain all tags of the demolished building for reference and caters for potential data consumers interested in demolished buildings. I like it Ruben. demolished: it is. Not just for use on buildings, but bridges, poles .. any structure that could be rebuilt to the same dimensions, especially any with foundations that could be reused. Note that features that are completely gone should not be mapped. This is OK for features that are no longer a building or a bridge but something is still left. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-lt] Dzyvų dzyvai...
Aš pritarčiau tokiam atskyrimui. Nors jis nėra tobulas – kai kur ir prie unclassified kelių plotų prijungimas jau nenatūraliai atrodo. Na žemiau tertiary kol kas paliekam nesutartą variantą. T.y. kas kaip nori. Aš tarkim niekada nejungiu kelių prie landus kraštų, nes realiai landuse niekada nesikeičia kelio viduryje. Kelias arba miške, arba pievoj. Plius tai skirtingų galaktikų objektai, tai patogiau juos atskirai ir laikyti. informacija padalinama į stipriai didesnį atskirų vektoriukų skaičių, dėl to pasidaro stipriai sunkiau redaguoti kelių info. Čia jau greičiau įrankių problema. O eksportuojant duomenis į kitas specializuotas sistemas galima būtų tuos atskirus vektoriukus sujungti. Teoriškai taip, bet praktiškai įrankių, kurie kažkaip automatiškai tokius padalintus kelius sujungtų nėra (ir negirdėjau, kad kažkas ruoštųsi kurti). Eksportavimo įrankiai irgi nejungia tokių padalintų kelių į vieną, taigi išorinėse sistemose bus daug kelio atkarpų, turinčių identiškas žymas. Nuo motorway iki tertiary (imtinai) kelius įsivaizduoti kaip pažymėtus plotais ir atitinkamai žymėti greta esančius miškus, pievas, dirbamas žemes. Pritariu, bet kaip tada pažymėti tą plotą, kuriame yra pats kelias? Kol kas tik „įsivaizduojam“, kad kelio plotas pažymėtas :-) kaip suprantu, dar nėra galutinio susitarimo, kaip žymėti kelio plotą. Artimiausias rastas žymėjimo pasiūlymas - „area:highway=...“: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/area:highway -- Tomas ___ Talk-lt mailing list Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
Serge Wroclawski writes: On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: It's really just a small handful of people who think it's okay not just to delete things, but to counsel other people to delete things. I didn't see it, so I deleted it is a reason for a ban, not an excuse against being banned. Russ, I doubt that you mean it this way, but if you set the bar too high, then you're essentially asking people to disprove a negative. I think you mean prove a negative. It's easy to disprove a negative. If somebody wants to delete something that I added because they don't see it, but instead, they ASK ME what did you see? I can show them what I saw, just as I showed you pictures of what I saw on one side and the other side of a building, giving me reason and cause to conclude that there is an abandoned railroad there. That disproves their claim that nothing was there. We allow original research and expert testimony, but we also don't require it. Adding things, fine, no expertise required. Deleting things that somebody else added (because we allow original research and expert testimony) because we don't require expertise to delete things means that in fact we don't allow original research and expertise. Can you see how your sentence doesn't make any sense when it comes to deletion? We have generally not required specialized knowledge or equipment for observations in the past and I don't think that we should change that going forward. To add things, no. To destroy things, uh yeah, people should understand that somebody put something into the map for a good reason which may have required special knowledge or equipment. For example, I could go to some place where OSM says there is a pipeline, look around, not see a pipeline, and say urp, somebody screwed up and added a pipeline here! I'll fix it by deleting it! Again ... the problem is deleting. The problem is people who say Delete things you don't see and people who believe them. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[talk-latam] Semanario Nr. 259-260-261-262
Hola, el semanario Nr. 259-260-261-262, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en español http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/ ¡Disfruta! ___ talk-latam mailing list talk-latam@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-latam
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com writes: sent from a phone Am 14.08.2015 um 10:48 schrieb Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com: These discussions are nuanced. Are there going to be things one person can identify that another can't- yes. But at the same time, I still think that as a project, we've collectively made a decision here that we don't require any special external knowledge or equipment to modify data. We have underlined repeatedly in the past that OSM should be a home for special interest groups as well as for occasional generic mappers. I believe we as a project do require from our contributors some respect towards the previous contributions aka the map data the find when they start contributing. For example we do not tolerate to delete a way and then redraw it, even if it's done better, but rather we ask people to improve what is there by iterating over the existing data. This respect towards the others that we expect from all contributors leads to a situation where people without special knowledge and or equipment go one step back and refrain voluntarily from editing/deleting stuff they find and recognize as special interest data. This is an excellent expression of a thought I have had during this discussion but haven't felt coherent enough to post. For deleting something that I think isn't there - that some other mapper added, I make sure that: I've actually been there on the ground, on foot. I have some idea what the thing is that was mapped, and thus how to tell if it's there. Being careless about this is rude, and deleting things without in-person looking with due care veers into vandalism. That's especially true when the deletion is associated with an X shouldn't be in the db. Note that I'm not arguing that someone on the ground who knows what old railroads look like and makes a good-faith effort to see if there are ground features of railway=razed, and doesn't find them, is being rude. Basically, if USGS would have put old railway grade on their map, we should definitely have railway=razed. For deletions, if I'm not local, and I'm not sure, I add a note or send a message instead. So I think the basic issue is that there is more-than-occasional inadequate care towards the work of people who care about railways, to the point where it's a project-wide issue cluster, rather than the occasional spot mistake. pgp2NxxRuY3bc.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On 14/08/15 14:16, Ian Sergeant wrote: Wow. Every time I edit, I'm splitting ways to add relations, speed limit changes, lane counts, etc. If the original way happens to still existing when I've finished it's more good luck than good management. And it's just as likely to be the stub of the via way in a no U-turn as it is the freeway it once was. This is in essence the whole problem ... In the past it HAS been a practice to wipe something and replace it with a new version. Certainly imports tend to be easier when processed that way, but it looses the very history that in the future will be prime information. If a railway viaduct has become a foot path, one can see that from the history of changes. The problem is that large elements of that history may well be deleted simply to create a combination of new objects describing the new view of the structure. The underlying change control should be able to keep track of those changes and provide a complete history back in time even if some of that is created incorrectly. In my book, OHM is simply looking 5, 10 or more years back into that history, and as we go forward that record remains. As I have said before 'Delete' is something that should never happen on what has at some time been correct information. 'Archive' is the correct term and making that data available as required ... Delete is only appropriate when the material is proven invalid. -- 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
[Talk-de] Wochennotiz Nr. 264 4.8.–10.8.2015
Hallo, die Wochennotiz Nr. 264 mit allen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der OpenStreetMap Welt ist da: http://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2015/08/wochennotiz-nr-264/ Viel Spaß beim Lesen! ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
Russ, Instead of replying to every individual point, I'm going to address your email as a whole, which is around the idea that deletion is different from addition. These discussions are nuanced. Are there going to be things one person can identify that another can't- yes. But at the same time, I still think that as a project, we've collectively made a decision here that we don't require any special external knowledge or equipment to modify data. Let me give you an example that's not about roads, but about power lines. We have mappers that map a ton of detail about not only the locations but the details of the power lines. But they also explain their process online. They show how to read the signs, what each symbol means, etc. If I came across a power line, I should be able to use the knowledge from the wiki page to build an understanding of the ground truth and compare that to OSM. Then I can correct OSM as necessary. If it's possible to document these abandoned railways in the same way, then we can discuss an on the ground feature and compare what we see on the ground with what's on the map. But what we can't (or at least shouldn't) do is have only certain community members be the source for certain features. I shouldn't have to email Alice or Bob just because I want to edit a feature that Alice entered, or that Bob modified. The minute we do that, we are telling certain people that there's no way to update or improve upon their updates, and at that point, why have the data in OSM at all? Improving the map can and sometimes does include the idea of removing a feature that's no longer present, and I'm not comfortable with the idea that we have certain special features or special members where the data can't be modified. And Russ, I don't think that's what you want either, ultimately. So why not just update the wiki page to be more complete and focus on educating people on what to look for? - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-GB] Making progress finally ...
After working through a few little nuances on SUSE linux I finally have tilemill running. It's giving me level 1 and 2 from the shape files and the loading of the style now completes without any errors. I can see it remotely although there is still an error getting it to work through nginx, but the problem on the todo list is 'could not create converter for windows-1252' which I think is being created when it tries to start building OSM based tiles. White tiles start appearing as soon as the error appears :( Where should I bee looking next? The other question, since I can see the top level tiles ... how do I access them via port 20008 ... only seeing 'Not Found' which reassuringly nginx is also returning for the /tile/ access ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-uy] Fwd: Definición de localidades
hay otro actor importante a la hora de generar localidades . Cada vez que se inaugura un Mevir (Movimiento para erradicar la vivienda insalubre rural) nace un centro poblado. Muchas veces, están en el medio de la nada y quedan por fuera de las localidades de SGM y Catastro. El 14 de agosto de 2015, 11:03, mural...@montevideo.com.uy escribió: A los efectos de las localidades, el modelo define al SGM como fuente y a Catastro como responsable. ¿Te parece que eso necesite revision? Si no hay opiniones en contra, ¿definimos el mismo criterio general y pasamos a resolver algunas situaciones que puedan generarse? Creo que precisamos, en particular, colaboradores con conocimiento local de la complejidad del conglomerado de Maldonado para chequear la solucion que definamos refleje la realidad. Saludos, M. - Original Message - From: Gustavo Miraballes agusgo...@gmail.com To: Guillermo Moncecchi gmo...@gmail.com, amlago aml...@adinet.com.uy Cc: talk-uy Talk-uy@openstreetmap.org Sent: Jueves, 13 de Agosto 2015 22:28:18 Subject: Re: [Talk-uy] Fwd: Definición de localidades a esta altura el modelo de direcciones necesita una revisión. Al implementarlo hemos aprendido un motón. Hay muchas cosas que quedaron afuera. El Jue 13/08/2015, 10:10PM, Guillermo Moncecchi gmo...@gmail.com escribió: My two cents http://www.agesic.gub.uy/innovaportal/file/2311/1/modelo_de_direcciones_geograficas_del_uruguay_ed01_00.pdf saludos 2015-08-13 17:53 GMT-03:00 Ing Angel Lago aml...@adinet.com.uy : BQ_BEGIN Según la época fue el gobierno nacional y mas aca los gobiernos departamentales , con aprobación de Junta Dptal de por medio en algunos casos. Cuando se aprueban fraccionamientos nuevos, amanzanamientos nuevos, lleva aprobación municipal. En algunos casos, estos fraccionamientos son totalmente independientes y lleva a la designación por el gobierno municipal de nueva localidad. A continuación se registra en Catastro el correpondiente plano de fraccionamiento y queda pronto para su posterior venta. Te copio lo de otro mensaje:Todo lo relacionado con localidades realmente oficiales, o sea creadas por decretos o leyes, se asienta mediante planos de mensura registrados en Catastro, que es en definitiva el encargado del mantenimiento de la información. En definitiva, desde muchos años atrás, (1946) las nuevas localidades las definen y aprueban las Intendencias Municipales, Catastro no crea las localidades, pero tiene la tarea de juntar la información que llegan con los planos de mensura y lleva adelante el mantenimiento de la base de datos.Es la base de información que comparte con los demas organismos. Basado en eso es que a mi parecer es la información oficial la de Catastro, que no quiere decir que la de otros organismos no sirva tambien y como respuesta legal a la pregunta de que leyes dan respaldo a todo esto paso el link . http://www.parlamento.gub.uy/leyes/AccesoTextoLey.asp?Ley=10723Anchor= o Ley de creación de Centros Poblados. Art 1 http://www.parlamento.gub.uy/leyes/AccesoTextoLey.asp?Ley=18308Anchor= Ley de Ordenamiento Territorial Cap 3 Art 14 Saludos PD: no hay realmente apuro, pero corregir algo que no existe me parece lo mejor. El 13 de agosto de 2015, 15:21, mural...@montevideo.com.uy escribió: BQ_BEGIN Sin duda que el animo es mejorar, si hay que cambiar criterios se cambian, lo que no me parece adecuado es apresurarse en cambiar el mapa antes de lograr un nuevo criterio general y no solo tratar el tema puntual de Treinta y Tres, pero si de todas formas lo queres cambiar, hacelo, porque hacia corregir esas falencias es donde hay apuntar con un nuevo criterio. Al final, ¿que autoridad determina las localidades?, ¿Catastro o SGM? ¿Que ley u otra reglamentacion le da dicha autoridad? Saludos, M. From: amlago aml...@adinet.com.uy To: talk-uy Talk-uy@openstreetmap.org Sent: Jueves, 13 de Agosto 2015 15:01:15 Subject: [Talk-uy] Fwd: Definición de localidades -- Mensaje reenviado -- De: Ing Angel Lago aml...@adinet.com.uy Fecha: 13 de agosto de 2015, 13:07 Asunto: Re: [Talk-uy] Definición de localidades Para: Gustavo Miraballes agusgo...@gmail.com Entendido. Seguimos.en contacto, Saludos El 13/08/2015 12:58, Gustavo Miraballes agusgo...@gmail.com escribió: BQ_BEGIN Estoy de acuerdo. El 13 de agosto de 2015, 12:35, Ing Angel Lago aml...@adinet.com.uy escribió: BQ_BEGIN Justamente fue donde empeze este tema. Porque Ejido de Treinta y Tres no existe.Nadie conoce ese nombre. Ni siquiera es un barrio,.simplemente esa zona es.ciudad de t y Tres. Despues me entere que pasaba en otros lados. En concreto entonces, les parece bien si fusiono ciudad de.T.y.Tres con esa zona designada Ejido de T y Tres, que en realidad es parte de la ciudad? Saludos El 13/08/2015 11:49, Gustavo Miraballes agusgo...@gmail.com escribió: BQ_BEGIN Sin duda que el intercambio de
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] était Subject=Re: SeFaireConnaitre :(, devient SeFaireConnaitre :|
Je prends acte du mea culpa (merci). Pour la prise en compte, j'attends encore de voir. À ce jour encore 101 liens pistants Ubiflow. Mon critère : node[website~ubiflow][website!~source=ubiflow]; Quand ce compteur sera à zéro, les fourmis pourront à nouveau tracer les pistes et le travail des fourmis ne servira plus à ce que d'autres soient pistés à leur insu. Le faire passer à zéro est un gage de bonne foi, gage facile à réaliser. Jean-Yvon Le 14/08/2015 13:01, Brice MALLET - brice...@free.fr a écrit : Bonjour, Merci de vos explications sur cette liste quant à la prise en compte des remarques de la communauté des fourmis et ainsi VousFaire(re)Connaitre :) au sein de celle-ci. Brice ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-at] Graz+Innsbruck: »Schiene und Straße wurden getrennt«
Hello All,Dann mische ich mich auch mal ein, wo wir schon bei Standards sind... Wie schauen eigentlich die Buslinien und Haltestellen in Graz aus? Haben die scchon nach dem neuen p_t Schema Haltestellen und Haltepunkte? Oder sind da nur Highway Busstop? Kann grad keine Abfragen machen, der Server scheint was zu haben (Error 500). Wenn es noch ein Chaos ist, wie es in Wien war sollte sich dann wohl auch wer den Linien annehmen... Ich kenne da die Grazer BusLinien leider zu wenig... Zum Schienenthema, die Schienen und Straßen einzeln zu mappen ist eine gute Idee, (ich wäre ja für MicroMapping oder wie man das genaueste nennen könnte, aber dann wären wir in 100 Generationen noch nicht mal halb fertig) nur sollte sich halt nicht die Linie der Straße und der Schiene zu 100% überdecken, das ist bei einem eigenen Gleiskörper wohl einfach, aber an stellen wo die Straßenbahn mit den Autos auf einer Fahrspur fährt ist es dann doch etwas schwierig. Wo mappt man dann Straße und wo Schiene? Kenne mich bei solchen Fragen aber wohl auch noch etwas zuwenig aus... LGRobinD (emergency99 aus Wien) ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [Talk-uy] Fwd: Definición de localidades
La sección judicial es una zonificación propia del Poder Judicial así como los son las zonas censales son una zonificación del INE y los Códigos Postales del correo. Efectivamente el que codifican localidades es el SGM (solo las oficiales). Si el SGM tiene localidades, es porque fueron oficializadas de alguna manera (es lo que tengo entendido). El 14 de agosto de 2015, 15:05, Ing Angel Lago aml...@adinet.com.uy escribió: Buena la idea del modelo de direcciones. Consulta: pasó de la etapa de proyecto y fue aceptado por todas las instituciones y aplicado? Hay cosas que me llaman la atención por ejemplo: a la hora de identificar un inmueble hace tiempo que no escuchaba de sección judicial , sino que escuchaba de sección catastral. la definición de sección judicial sigue vigente o concide con la de secc catastral hoy dia? solo por curiosidad. Lo otro de que la fuente de codificación es SGM y reponsable Catastro, supongo que es pues Catastro no proporciona la codificación interna que tiene al público, por lo que estaría correcta la idea. La tomo de quien me la de y chau. Debemos recordar igual que SGM tiene localidades que no son tales, y fueron definidas a los solos efectos de censos. De Maldonado se poco, puedo intentar interesar algún conocido por esos lares. Resumiendo: me sirve como criterio general y resolveremos las situaciones particulares que se den. saludos El 13 de agosto de 2015, 22:09, Guillermo Moncecchi gmo...@gmail.com escribió: My two cents http://www.agesic.gub.uy/innovaportal/file/2311/1/modelo_de_direcciones_geograficas_del_uruguay_ed01_00.pdf saludos 2015-08-13 17:53 GMT-03:00 Ing Angel Lago aml...@adinet.com.uy: Según la época fue el gobierno nacional y mas aca los gobiernos departamentales , con aprobación de Junta Dptal de por medio en algunos casos. Cuando se aprueban fraccionamientos nuevos, amanzanamientos nuevos, lleva aprobación municipal. En algunos casos, estos fraccionamientos son totalmente independientes y lleva a la designación por el gobierno municipal de nueva localidad. A continuación se registra en Catastro el correpondiente plano de fraccionamiento y queda pronto para su posterior venta. Te copio lo de otro mensaje:Todo lo relacionado con localidades realmente oficiales, o sea creadas por decretos o leyes, se asienta mediante planos de mensura registrados en Catastro, que es en definitiva el encargado del mantenimiento de la información. En definitiva, desde muchos años atrás, (1946) las nuevas localidades las definen y aprueban las Intendencias Municipales, Catastro no crea las localidades, pero tiene la tarea de juntar la información que llegan con los planos de mensura y lleva adelante el mantenimiento de la base de datos.Es la base de información que comparte con los demas organismos. Basado en eso es que a mi parecer es la información oficial la de Catastro, que no quiere decir que la de otros organismos no sirva tambien y como respuesta legal a la pregunta de que leyes dan respaldo a todo esto paso el link . http://www.parlamento.gub.uy/leyes/AccesoTextoLey.asp?Ley=10723Anchor= o Ley de creación de Centros Poblados. Art 1 http://www.parlamento.gub.uy/leyes/AccesoTextoLey.asp?Ley=18308Anchor= Ley de Ordenamiento Territorial Cap 3 Art 14 Saludos PD: no hay realmente apuro, pero corregir algo que no existe me parece lo mejor. El 13 de agosto de 2015, 15:21, mural...@montevideo.com.uy escribió: Sin duda que el animo es mejorar, si hay que cambiar criterios se cambian, lo que no me parece adecuado es apresurarse en cambiar el mapa antes de lograr un nuevo criterio general y no solo tratar el tema puntual de Treinta y Tres, pero si de todas formas lo queres cambiar, hacelo, porque hacia corregir esas falencias es donde hay apuntar con un nuevo criterio. Al final, ¿que autoridad determina las localidades?, ¿Catastro o SGM? ¿Que ley u otra reglamentacion le da dicha autoridad? Saludos, M. -- *From: *amlago aml...@adinet.com.uy *To: *talk-uy Talk-uy@openstreetmap.org *Sent: *Jueves, 13 de Agosto 2015 15:01:15 *Subject: *[Talk-uy] Fwd: Definición de localidades -- Mensaje reenviado -- De: Ing Angel Lago aml...@adinet.com.uy Fecha: 13 de agosto de 2015, 13:07 Asunto: Re: [Talk-uy] Definición de localidades Para: Gustavo Miraballes agusgo...@gmail.com Entendido. Seguimos.en contacto, Saludos El 13/08/2015 12:58, Gustavo Miraballes agusgo...@gmail.com escribió: Estoy de acuerdo. El 13 de agosto de 2015, 12:35, Ing Angel Lago aml...@adinet.com.uy escribió: Justamente fue donde empeze este tema. Porque Ejido de Treinta y Tres no existe.Nadie conoce ese nombre. Ni siquiera es un barrio,.simplemente esa zona es.ciudad de t y Tres. Despues me entere que pasaba en otros lados. En concreto entonces, les parece bien si fusiono ciudad de.T.y.Tres con esa zona designada Ejido de T y Tres, que en realidad es parte de la
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On 15 August 2015 at 00:12, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: As I have said before 'Delete' is something that should never happen on what has at some time been correct information. 'Archive' is the correct term and making that data available as required ... Delete is only appropriate when the material is proven invalid. Your 'never delete' argument, is of a very different form to the 'never delete abandoned railroads' argument. I suspect the railway=abandoned people wouldn't care less had the nodes been intelligently replaced by more accurate ones. They are interested in the line of the railway, not the OSM markers that make it up. Your argument is to preserve some kind of history. And OSM sort-of does that because nothing is ever deleted - it is all in the full database. But you want everything to be in the active database instead. But OSM doesn't support that - because today's lake way is tomorrow's multi-poly, and the next year (hopefully!) we'll have a better way to represent it at OSM level. Today's one-way freeway is 17 ways after yesterday's survey edits get done. I'd suggest you first work on an OSM model that actually supports continuity of objects, and then we'll do the Wikipedia linking, and then we'll talk about never deleting. Of course people should show respect to previous mappers. Not tearing down other's work is the essence of a community project. But also is the knowledge that your work isn't sacrosanct. And OSM isn't open history map, and isn't a record of everything that ever was. Ian. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On 14/08/15 22:03, Ian Sergeant wrote: On 15 August 2015 at 00:12, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: As I have said before 'Delete' is something that should never happen on what has at some time been correct information. 'Archive' is the correct term and making that data available as required ... Delete is only appropriate when the material is proven invalid. Your 'never delete' argument, is of a very different form to the 'never delete abandoned railroads' argument. I suspect the railway=abandoned people wouldn't care less had the nodes been intelligently replaced by more accurate ones. They are interested in the line of the railway, not the OSM markers that make it up. Your argument is to preserve some kind of history. And OSM sort-of does that because nothing is ever deleted - it is all in the full database. But you want everything to be in the active database instead. But OSM doesn't support that - because today's lake way is tomorrow's multi-poly, and the next year (hopefully!) we'll have a better way to represent it at OSM level. Today's one-way freeway is 17 ways after yesterday's survey edits get done. I'd suggest you first work on an OSM model that actually supports continuity of objects, and then we'll do the Wikipedia linking, and then we'll talk about never deleting. Of course people should show respect to previous mappers. Not tearing down other's work is the essence of a community project. But also is the knowledge that your work isn't sacrosanct. And OSM isn't open history map, and isn't a record of everything that ever was. It is a simple fact that the current model is not suitable for many of the functions that have already evolved. That a way varies from a single linear element to a complex of multi-polygons depending on the resolution is not something that the current model can handle. But the one thing that the current model has got the capability of handling is start and stop dates for any facet of an object from the name of a shop to the evolution of the road and rail system over time. That the 'main' database only displays elements which have not yet acquired a stop date is how the model currently works, while the OHM version simply maintains multiple time stamped versions of the same data. Rather than having to recover the data from the change log ... Objects that have evolved but still retain an element of their former use may have a stop date that indicates when that change occurred, and some data consumers have the option to ignore them, but the current 'use' may be enhanced by such additional notes as on old track bed or similar. -- 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: [Talk-GB] Making progress finally ...
On 14/08/15 12:06, Lester Caine wrote: Where should I bee looking next? Why is everything so difficult. I've HAD OSRM working on SUSE12.3 and 13.1, but all the lua stuff is broken again on 13.2! I managed to use lua5.1 on the 13.1 build, but only by killing lua5.2 ... If I do that on 13.2 it's going to wipe out the organiser on the development machine, so now I need to move everything to another machine :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On 14/08/15 23:14, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:51:13 +0100 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: But the one thing that the current model has got the capability of handling is start and stop dates for any facet of an object from the name of a shop to the evolution of the road and rail system over time. That the 'main' database only displays elements which have not yet acquired a stop date is how the model currently works, while the OHM version simply maintains multiple time stamped versions of the same data. This is not true. Current model - from mappers, through programs used to edit to data consumers is unsuitable for handling several intersecting objects, verifiable only for specialists. ? That is basically what I said ... but the problem of combining macro and micro mapping has been discussed without much progress. Adding a stop_date is the only element that works ... and is the correct action rather than 'delete'. Rather than having to recover the data from the change log ... Date of deletion is at best loosely correlated with date of destruction of represented object. In particular most edits either are mapping the same objects in greater detail - despite lack of change on the ground, adding new objects present in reality since decades or in some cases thousands of years (in case of natural forms it may be even higher). Start and stop dates are verifiable facts that can be recorded ... WHEN that information is added is only of academic interest. Potentially the movement of the techtonic plates could be mapped , and certainly recent shifts due to earthquakes have a date when the variation occurred, even if it then takes many months to actually map the movement. Many of deleted objects never represented reality. No argument on that. What I am talking about is exactly where the historic material has been mapped in detail, but new road works result in a change the is subsequently also mapped. Or new roads are added with start_date tags which allows the evolution to be recorded. Reality changes over time? Mapping all buildings that ever existed may seem simple for some cases. But many cities were destroyed (partially or fully) and later rebuild. I would delete any encountered OSM elements that are marking objects that are fully and completely gone (obviously, I would do it only for places where I can verify this and after asking original mapper for clarification whatever there are some mappable traces - maybe just tagging was wrong). One exception would be for elements representing recently destroyed objects that were mapped to protect from recreation based on outdated aerial images (in that case I would convert it to ways marked with note=* asking to avoid recreation without survey). Tag when the object ceased to exist in that format with a stop_date. The action date is of little use for the historic record. Visibility of the object is a different problem. -- 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] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:51:13 +0100 Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: But the one thing that the current model has got the capability of handling is start and stop dates for any facet of an object from the name of a shop to the evolution of the road and rail system over time. That the 'main' database only displays elements which have not yet acquired a stop date is how the model currently works, while the OHM version simply maintains multiple time stamped versions of the same data. This is not true. Current model - from mappers, through programs used to edit to data consumers is unsuitable for handling several intersecting objects, verifiable only for specialists. Rather than having to recover the data from the change log ... Date of deletion is at best loosely correlated with date of destruction of represented object. In particular most edits either are mapping the same objects in greater detail - despite lack of change on the ground, adding new objects present in reality since decades or in some cases thousands of years (in case of natural forms it may be even higher). Many of deleted objects never represented reality. Mapping all buildings that ever existed may seem simple for some cases. But many cities were destroyed (partially or fully) and later rebuild. I would delete any encountered OSM elements that are marking objects that are fully and completely gone (obviously, I would do it only for places where I can verify this and after asking original mapper for clarification whatever there are some mappable traces - maybe just tagging was wrong). One exception would be for elements representing recently destroyed objects that were mapped to protect from recreation based on outdated aerial images (in that case I would convert it to ways marked with note=* asking to avoid recreation without survey). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
On 14/08/2015 10:10 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 14.08.2015 um 05:09 schrieb Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com: We allow original research and expert testimony. So, is OSM to contain only the obvious that everyone can see? Or should it contain everything that can be seen? well spoken, I see this like you and would appreciate if we could change our recommendations from: in doubt delete to in doubt keep it. Where there is doubt, do nothing! Doubt should be removed before acting, asking the originator may remove doubt. And: ask the originator before deleting/changing stuff you don't understand or are unsure about, especially if it is concerning a special interest topic. Where understanding may require specialist knowledge it is even more imperative not to delete. cheers Martin PS: I also agree that shut the hell up is not acceptable language in a community, while it is somehow suitable to underline the anger ;-) ___ Denying someone their input is contrary to the Open part of OSM! Rather a need to communicate untill the issue is resolved would be better. Speak up! rather than Shut up. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Carto v2.33.0 release
This email is also in user diary form at osm.org/user/pnorman/diary/35589 where issue numbers are linked. OpenStreetMap Carto 2.33.0 has been released. This release focuses on cartographic style improvements, but the release notes also include 2.32.0. The biggest changes are - A randomized symbology for forests for natural=wood and landuse=forest #1728 #1242 A long time in the works, this improvement has finally landed. The two tags were merged - they are indistinguishable to the data consumer.[1] A randomized symbology was first suggested by SK53[2] at SOTM-EU 2014, and this feature would not have happened without his extensive research, or imagico's tools for creating an irregular but uniformly distributed and periodic dot pattern[3] - Rendering minor roads and service rail later for mid-zoom clarity #1682 #1692 #1676 #1647 As all residential, unclassified, and service roads in a city became mapped the rendered view became over-crowded, bloblike, and difficult to read. - Unification of footway/path and rendering surface of them The mess that is highway=path is well-known[4], and it is necessary to do some kind of processing as a data consumer. A distinction is now made between paved and unpaved footways. - Rendering of Antartic ice sheets from shapefiles #1540 Ice sheets in Antartica are a bit of a special case, and pre-generated shapefiles are now used - Mapnik 3 preperations #1579 The style is not yet fullly tested with Mapnik 3 and we don't claim to support it, but several bugs were fixed. Most of the work was done on the Mapnik side - No longer rendering proposed roads #1663 #1654 - Power area colour adjusted #1680 - Better place label order #1689 - meadow/grassland and orchard/vineyard color unification #1655 - Render educational area borders later #1662 - New POI icons A full list of changes can be found on Github at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/compare/v2.31.0...v2.33.0) [1]: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/647#issuecomment-52816195 [2]: http://sk53-osm.blogspot.ca/2014/09/woodland-cartography.html [3]: http://www.imagico.de/map/jsdotpattern.php [4]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
Mateusz Konieczny writes: In another case where railway tracks that were removed, embankment demolished and somebody build there houses. In that case railway track should not be mapped in OSM because this feature is gone. Railway=dismantled. Doesn't get rendered except where it should be, on openrailwaymap.org. Why is this so hard? I'm not asking you to do it. I'm asking you to stop preventing me from doing it. I'm not trying to make extra work for anybody. I'm asking you to find a different way to make the map better than by deleting things, valid things, real things, that other people entered. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Carto v2.33.0 release
On 8/14/2015 7:27 PM, Paul Norman wrote: This email is also in user diary form at osm.org/user/pnorman/diary/35589 where issue numbers are linked. I forgot to mention in the earlier message, please file any bug reports at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-in] ‘GNSS User Meet – 2015’
https://gnssusermeet2015.isac.gov.in/index.php/gnss/gnss2015 Respected Sir/Madam, The GNSS (GAGAN-IRNSS) user meet 2015 information has been hosted on *www. isro.gov.in http://isro.gov.in* website. The webpage contains general user meet information, registration process, paper submission process, etc. Kindly note that the GNSS User Meet (GAGAN-IRNSS) has been rescheduled to 8th Oct, 2015 and the registitation is free for all. This is for you kind information. With best wishes and warm regards, Organising Committee, GNSS (GAGAN-IRNSS) User Meet 2015 Quoting gnssusermeet2...@isac.gov.in: Respected Sir/Madam, The GNSS User Meet (GAGAN-IRNSS) has been rescheduled to 8th Oct, 2015. The website will be hosted shortly. With warm regards, Organising Committee GNSS USer Meet 2015 Quoting gnssusermeet2...@isac.gov.in: *Respected Sir/Madam,* Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), Govt. of India, is executing two satellite based navigation systems for application in key utility sectors of the nation. Indian SBAS system, GAGAN, has been jointly implemented by ISRO and Airports Authority of India (AAI) for civil aviation over Indian air space and has been certified for civil aviation services (APV 1.0). Non-aviation users also can benefit from its services. IRNSS, an indigenous regional satellite based positioning system developed by ISRO, is established to provide independent position solution for critical national applications. IRNSS, with four satellites already in orbit, can be utilized for stand-alone position solutions. IRNSS, in its full configuration, is expected to be operational by 2016. GNSS User meet was organized at ISRO Satellite Centre (ISAC) Bengaluru during February 2012, with a view to provide thrust to the development of user receivers and GNSS based applications. *It is planned to organise a GNSS User Meet this year at ISRO Satellite Centre, Bangalore on 10th September 2015. The theme of the meet is “Towards self-reliance in satellite navigation” with emphasis on the vision of “Make In India” and to broad base reach to wider user community. * A one-day event has been planned which will include plenary sessions, technical sessions, panel discussion and exhibition of navigation-related equipments with participation from industry, GNSS application developers, hardware manufacturers and solution providers, facility users, government organizations and academia. The event is jointly hosted by ISRO and Airports Authority of India. The market for navigation receivers in India, be it handheld, tabletop or smart phone-based, has huge potential and is bound to grow exponentially with increasing demand for a wide variety of navigation applications. The organisers of the meet solicit a wider participation of the industry, users, professionals, academia, application developers, etc, in anticipation of a bigger role in offering/utilizing position and timing services of IRNSS and GAGAN in India. ISRO/AAI takes pleasure in extending you the invitation to participate in the event. Being in the business of navigation it would be in your professional/business interest to be part of this meet. *The registration and program details of the event will be made available on ISRO website: www.isro.gov.in http://www.isro.gov.in in the first week of August 2015.* The website will also host the details of sponsorship of the events, technical sessions, exhibition stalls, etc. Looking forward to your participation and nomination from your organisation in the GNSS user meet 2015. For any clarification, kindly send email to *gnssusermeet2...@isac.gov.in gnssusermeet2...@isac.gov.in* or contact: *080-2508 4260 080-2508%204260/ 4263/ 4279/ 4336.* With warm regards, *Organising Committee GNSS USER MEET - 2015* ___ Talk-in mailing list Talk-in@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
Re: [Talk-it] Strada provinciale chiusa per frana
Ok, fatto con path e una nota. Grazie! On 13/08/15 17:34, Dario Crespi wrote: E' che la strada lì è proprio franata, non c'è più, ce solo uno stretto passaggio per pedoni e bici. Ah, ok. pensavo fosse solo ostruita. Allora anche per me va bene la tua proposta. Il giorno 13 agosto 2015 16:04, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com ha scritto: sent from a phone Am 13.08.2015 um 15:42 schrieb solitone solit...@mail.com: On 13/08/15 11:53, Dario Crespi wrote: Credo che vada lasciata la way, indicando che l'accesso è consentito solo a pedoni e biciclette nel tratto in questione, mettendo access=no agli altri veicoli. E' che la strada lì è proprio franata, non c'è più, ce solo uno stretto passaggio per pedoni e bici. per me la tua proposta di spezzare la strada dov'è franata e cambiare il valore highway li in path avrebbe senso. Aggiungerei anche un tag note per spiegare cos'è successo 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 ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-at] Graz+Innsbruck: »Schiene und Straße wurden getrennt«
Hallo, Erklär das bitte im Detail. Wieso sollte es programmatisch nicht feststellbar sein, dass Schienen auf der Straße liegen, wenn sie die gleiche explizite oder implizite Layer-Angabe besitzen und die gleichen Nodes haben? Ich denke, dass das sehr wohl möglich ist. Sogar der JOSM-Validator erkennt bereits jetzt übereinanderliegende Ways und deren Nodes, wenn sie zum Beispiel keine Tags besitzen. Sogar Wege die den gleichen Layer haben und sich ohne Node kreuzen erkennt er. Somit denke ich, dass dein Hauptargument bereits widerlegt ist. flaimo 2015-08-14 13:10 GMT+02:00 Andreas Uller a.ul...@gmx.at: Das Problem ist, dass dann nicht erkennbar ist, ob in einer Straße Schienen liegen (wäre fürs Routing z.B. entscheidend, da man auf einer Straße mit Schienen im Ortsgebiet nicht links zufahren darf). Auch mit den subkeys :lanes und :placement kann man die genaue Lage der Schienen beschreiben, ohne den Zusammenhang zwischen Schienen und Straße zu verlieren. Die obigen subkeys sind der Standard für lane tagging, und ich finde, da gehört die Beschreibung, in welcher Fahrspur die Schienen liegen, dazu. Warum sollten die Schienen lagegenau gezeichnet werden, während Fahrspuren (sinnollerweise) zu einer abstrahierenden Linie zusammengefasst werden? Die von dir zitierte Wiki-Seite wurde erst vor ein paar Monaten auf den jetzigen Stand geändert, eine Diskussion darüber ist mir nicht bekannt - zumindest ist sie nicht auf der Wiki-Seite dokumentiert. Andreas PS: Deine E-Mail-Adresse lässt darauf schließen, dass dein Interesse an OSM (auch) berufliche Gründe hat. Eine Änderung von Daten nur um einzelnen Firmenvorgaben zu enstprechen, wird meines Wissens nach in OSM nicht gern gesehen. *Gesendet:* Freitag, 14. August 2015 um 11:24 Uhr *Von:* Jonathan Gallagher gallag...@mentzdv.de *An:* talk-at@openstreetmap.org *Betreff:* [Talk-at] Graz+Innsbruck: »Schiene und Straße wurden getrennt« Hallo! Wie angekündigt, melde ich mich hier nochmal wegen dem Thema Straße von Schiene trennen. Mir erschließt sich nicht ganz, was dagegen spricht die Schienen und die Fahrbahn einzeln und lagerichtig zu mappen, wenn man die Routenrelationen übernimmt. Grundsätzlich halte ich das für die sauberere Methode. Ich spreche noch gar nicht davon zweispurige Gleise einzeln zu mappen (das wäre eine kompliziertere Angelegenheit), sondern nur Schiene von Straße zu trennen. Welche stichhaltigen Argumente gibt es denn dagegen? Das möglicherweise noch bessere Argument für das Auftrennen ist, dass es internationaler Standard ist. Nachzulesen hier: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:railway=tram Auch das englische Original stellt explizit klar, dass verschiedene Wege mit gleichen Knoten genutzt werden sollen. Auch hier geht hervor, dass das in den allermeisten Fällen so gehandhabt wird. Nur eine kleine Minderheit (10%) kombiniert den Tag railway=tram mit highway=*. Früher oder später wird das auch für Graz kommen müssen. Ich hab jetzt mal damit begonnen und werde fortfahren, so es keine stichhaltigen Gegenargumente gibt. Ich bin grundsätzlich sehr offen für konstruktive Kritik und nützliche Hinweisen und Tipps. Grüße, Jonathan (Weltstaat) ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
sent from a phone Am 14.08.2015 um 05:09 schrieb Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com: We allow original research and expert testimony. So, is OSM to contain only the obvious that everyone can see? Or should it contain everything that can be seen? well spoken, I see this like you and would appreciate if we could change our recommendations from: in doubt delete to in doubt keep it. And: ask the originator before deleting/changing stuff you don't understand or are unsure about, especially if it is concerning a special interest topic. cheers Martin PS: I also agree that shut the hell up is not acceptable language in a community, while it is somehow suitable to underline the anger ;-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-at] Graz+Innsbruck: »Schiene und Straße wurden getrennt«
Hallo, On 08/14/2015 11:24 AM, Jonathan Gallagher wrote: Wie angekündigt, melde ich mich hier nochmal wegen dem Thema Straße von Schiene trennen. Mir erschließt sich nicht ganz, was dagegen spricht die Schienen und die Fahrbahn einzeln und lagerichtig zu mappen, wenn man die Routenrelationen übernimmt. Welches Problem soll denn damit gelöst werden? Ich finde, so halte ich das für sauberer und so ist es internationaler Standard sind zwar ausreichend, um zu begründen, wie man selber mappt, aber nicht ausreichend, um zu begründen, wie man das Mapping einer Stadt umkrempelt. Früher oder später wird das auch für Graz kommen müssen. Ich hab jetzt mal damit begonnen und werde fortfahren, so es keine stichhaltigen Gegenargumente gibt. Na, da kann man nur hoffen, dass jemand anders nicht ebenso verfährt und Deine Änderungen revertiert, so es keine stichhaltigen Gegenargumente gibt ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
[Talk-es] Semanario Nr. 259-260-261-262
Hola, el semanario Nr. 259-260-261-262, el sumario de todo lo que está ocurriendo en el mundo de openstreetmap está en línea en español http://www.weeklyosm.eu/es/ ¡Disfruta! ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [OSM-talk] stop deleting abandoned railroads
sent from a phone Am 14.08.2015 um 10:48 schrieb Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com: These discussions are nuanced. Are there going to be things one person can identify that another can't- yes. But at the same time, I still think that as a project, we've collectively made a decision here that we don't require any special external knowledge or equipment to modify data. We have underlined repeatedly in the past that OSM should be a home for special interest groups as well as for occasional generic mappers. I believe we as a project do require from our contributors some respect towards the previous contributions aka the map data the find when they start contributing. For example we do not tolerate to delete a way and then redraw it, even if it's done better, but rather we ask people to improve what is there by iterating over the existing data. This respect towards the others that we expect from all contributors leads to a situation where people without special knowledge and or equipment go one step back and refrain voluntarily from editing/deleting stuff they find and recognize as special interest data. cheers Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-at] Graz+Innsbruck: »Schiene und Straße wurden getrennt«
Hallo! Wie angekündigt, melde ich mich hier nochmal wegen dem Thema Straße von Schiene trennen. Mir erschließt sich nicht ganz, was dagegen spricht die Schienen und die Fahrbahn einzeln und lagerichtig zu mappen, wenn man die Routenrelationen übernimmt. Grundsätzlich halte ich das für die sauberere Methode. Ich spreche noch gar nicht davon zweispurige Gleise einzeln zu mappen (das wäre eine kompliziertere Angelegenheit), sondern nur Schiene von Straße zu trennen. Welche stichhaltigen Argumente gibt es denn dagegen? Das möglicherweise noch bessere Argument für das Auftrennen ist, dass es internationaler Standard ist. Nachzulesen hier: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:railway=tram Auch das englische Original stellt explizit klar, dass verschiedene Wege mit gleichen Knoten genutzt werden sollen. Auch hier geht hervor, dass das in den allermeisten Fällen so gehandhabt wird. Nur eine kleine Minderheit (10%) kombiniert den Tag railway=tram mit highway=*. Früher oder später wird das auch für Graz kommen müssen. Ich hab jetzt mal damit begonnen und werde fortfahren, so es keine stichhaltigen Gegenargumente gibt. Ich bin grundsätzlich sehr offen für konstruktive Kritik und nützliche Hinweisen und Tipps. Grüße, Jonathan (Weltstaat) ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [Talk-cz] Čištění turistických tras v OSM
Co si tak vybavuji, dělal jsem to přes pravé kliknutí na relaci co chci zrušit, dal jsem Stáhnout všechny členy, následně Vybrat členy, ty jsem pak přidal do relace co zůstane a relaci co chci zrušit jsem smazal. Tak tak. Jen nezapomente, ze JOSM timto zpusobem prijde o roli uzlu/cest v relacich a tudiz je potreba tam ty role zpet doplnit. Da se to udelat pro vice clenu najednou. U turistickych tras je stejne dobre setridit cesty tak, aby clovek videl spojitost trasy a tim se odsunou body, kterych se typicky role tykaji (role guidepost), na konec, a pak se daji snadno vsechny body vybrat a priradit jim tu roli najednou. Petr ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
