Re: [OSM-talk] How to get an overview of multiple gpx on OSM map?
Hi all, Thanks for all the great advice. I’ve looked into uMap and it does the job perfectly. With all the gpx of over a year of hiking imported it still runs smoothly. I would like to prevent running into performance issues later though. Does anybody know if it is wise to add ‘simplified’ versions of the gpx to uMap instead of the original recordings with 1 s resolution? Since the published data is public, I just have to take into account not to import gpx which start from my home since I value my ‘sort of anonymity’. @Oleksiy To answer Oleksiy’s question, I record with OSMand on a Moto G4 smartphone, that works like a charm. Off course there is fluctuation due to accuracy errors, I guess 10-15 m is achievable most of the time, but close to near vertical mountains it becomes much worse. It however does never happen that I miss long stretches of data (except for tunnels ). I did have that problem in the past, when <15% battery charge and Android automatically started the battery saving mode. That just turned of the gps antenna whenever the screen was off. So now I have set battery saving mode to off. Also OSMand does not drain the battery much. Usually I do take a lot of notes which OSMand attaches to the gpx and loads perfectly into JOSM. Recently I also used the voice recorder of OSMand, which really speeds up the note taking while on the go in comparison to typing. These also load into JOSM via the gpx, but some fiddling with the location of the audio is required. Taking notes on the phone does have an effect on the battery life off course. A 20 km hike in the mountains easily takes 6-8h, which my phone reaches most of the time on one charge in flight mode. I do have a power-bank as back-up, and for multi-day hikes though. Altitude measurements have always been a bit tricky with OSMand. I guess the raw elevation data from gps fluctuates quite a lot, and the data processing did not do a good job filtering errors from actual elevation change. After a hike with 1000m elevation gain according to the map, OSMand often showed I did 5000m... The graph of the track you can generate in OSMand also showed a lot of spikes with instant ascents of >200m. Recently that seems to have changed and the measurements seem to better represent the actual situation. Hope this helps you with you work OSM workflow! Cheers, dikkeknodel Van: Oleksiy Muzalyev<mailto:oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch> Verzonden: zaterdag 3 november 2018 18:51 Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] How to get an overview of multiple gpx on OSM map? Hi _dikkeknodel, I have a question - how do you record a GPX trace during 20 km walk? It should be about 4 hours. I also record GPS traces but usually for 15-20 minutes. I use a phone with the OSMTracker app for Android with mixed results. Sometimes it records a path well, sometimes it turns the second part of the walk into a long direct line. Such a trace I usually discard. Besides it empties the phone battery rather quickly. I usually take a power-bank with me, but still it is not a good solution to get a phone battery empty in mountains. I am thinking of getting a dedicated device which can record the GPX files, on the OSM map, and also measure and altitude more or less correctly. The question is - what device, what model. Best regards, Oleksiy On 03.11.18 16:09, _ dikkeknodel wrote: Hi all, Ever since I moved to Switzerland over a year ago I’ve been both hiking in the mountains and updating OSM details a lot. Since I hike at least 20 km every weekend, it must have totaled to about 1200 km by now all across the country. I would love to get an overview of where I have been so far. Since I’ve got a GPX file of almost every hike, the data is there. I am now looking for a nice graphical way to plot all of these files at once on a nice OSM map, OpenTopoMap as a base layer would be great. I’ve been searching for a while how to arrange this (without much programming knowledge), but I am kind of lost at the moment. Does anybody have a hint? Cheers, dikkeknodel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] How to get an overview of multiple gpx on OSM map?
Hi all, Ever since I moved to Switzerland over a year ago I’ve been both hiking in the mountains and updating OSM details a lot. Since I hike at least 20 km every weekend, it must have totaled to about 1200 km by now all across the country. I would love to get an overview of where I have been so far. Since I’ve got a GPX file of almost every hike, the data is there. I am now looking for a nice graphical way to plot all of these files at once on a nice OSM map, OpenTopoMap as a base layer would be great. I’ve been searching for a while how to arrange this (without much programming knowledge), but I am kind of lost at the moment. Does anybody have a hint? Cheers, dikkeknodel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea
Hi all, I fully support the position summarized by statement “As you have stated in 2014, this should not be the long term way to deal with the situation, and short term is probably coming to an end.” If the DWG does not share this position, they should provide an argument for it. Cheers, dikkeknodel Van: Martin Koppenhoefer Verzonden: Sunday, October 21, 2018 3:12:03 PM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: [OSM-talk] Fwd: DWG policy on Crimea Dear all, we all know how sensible the topic of disputed boundaries can be (they are not necessarily a big problem, many boundary disputes like between Italy and France about the summit of Mont Blanc / Monte Bianco, have little bearing on the actual life of people). Therefore we can all be satisfied there is clear guidance from the board how to deal with this: the local situation determines how we map, and the OSMF is explicit here: “National borders are particularly sensitive. Currently, we record one set that, in OpenStreetMap contributor opinion, is most widely internationally recognised and best meets realities on the ground, generally meaning physical control.” https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.<https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf>pdf When I recently looked at Crimea I noticed it is still part of the Ucraine in OSM: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/60199 As many might know, the current boundary situation for Crimea was frozen 4 years ago “for a short time” by the DWG and so I asked them about their current position 2 months ago, and after I got no reply, tried to remind them 5 weeks ago, but have not yet gotten any reply, so I am now opening this thread here. IMHO, for consistency and credibility, we should either recognize that Russia is actually controlling Crimea, or we should update the disputed borders information. As I believe the general concept of ground truth for admin boundaries was a good idea, I would tend to the former. I also believe the actual situation has already been ignored for too long. When the thing is still dynamic or/and we’re in the middle of a conflict it can be wise to step back and see for some time how things are evolving, but 4 years are a lot of time, something like one year would seem more reasonable. What do you think? Cheers, Martin sent from a phone Begin forwarded message: From: Martin Koppenhoefer mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> Date: 20. August 2018 at 10:42:33 CEST To: d...@osmfoundation.org<mailto:d...@osmfoundation.org> Subject: DWG policy on Crimea Dear members of the DWG, as of this question in the help forum: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/65436/what-is-the-current-position-of-the-dataworkinggroup-on-crimea I kindly invite you to reconsider and eventually update your position on the situation in Crimea. As you have stated in 2014, this should not be the long term way to deal with the situation, and short term is probably coming to an end. There is clear guidance by the OSMF board how to deal with disputed boundaries (as the situation seems to be more stable than some would have liked). My motivation is not promoting the Russian point of view, but to act predictably and consistent wrt sensible topics. Thank you, cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas
Hi Tomasz, Could you elaborate on what would be the use-case for this approach and why that is relevant? At the moment I do not see the relevance for mappnig them as an area. Cheers, dikkenodel Van: Yves Verzonden: Thursday, August 16, 2018 8:20:59 AM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Barrier=block areas Being a closed way with area=yes does not mean they aren't connected to the underlying ways: I don't think router be bothered by this. Yves Le 16 août 2018 02:14:49 GMT+02:00, David Fox a écrit : Barriers, by definition, provide some level of restriction. Without attaching them in some form it becomes hard for routers to account for them. Hedges and walls are linear in nature, not an area. On 15 August 2018, at 19:51, Tomasz Wójcik wrote: Currently, barrier=block is not allowed to be mapped as an area. As blocks can be big enough to map them as areas, I think it should be allowed, the same as in barrier=wall or barrier=hedge. Anyway, currently we have 3,9k of barrier=block areas in database. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dblock Block examples: http://www.concrete-barriers-blocks.co.uk/up/concrete-barrier-type-m-block-photo.gif http://cdn1.codziennypoznan.pl/201606241325/pub/img/full/71/1c58d-a9.jpg Barriers with mapping as area allowed https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier=wall https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abarrier%3Dhedge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Addressing systems (Was: Paper/Article about stagnation in OSM)
To me this is just another way of colonisation, forcing (technical) systems upon other people who have no say in them. They are communicated as a means to help people, but are mainly to make a buck in the end. Instead we at OSM should leave it up to the people themselves to choose how to describe their location in a way they feel like, and provide a means to do so based on that. Technology should be designed to support people in their preferred way of life, not to force them to a way of life because that’s what most easily is implemented in technology. Cheers, dikkeknodel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*
Ed wrote: > though perhaps notes make more sense than hiding things in tags and instead > of changing case the proposal should be to extract the FIXME's to notes to > increase their visibility. For me notes are often much less informative than fixme tags. Because the fixme tag is on the entity requiring fix, there is no discussion required about what entity is meant. Also, when the entity requiring fix is re-aligned by some mapper without handling the note, the descrepancy between the entity and the note make become bigger. For me notes and fixmes are different things. fixme is used between fellow mappers to indicate missing or incorrect data, like the endnode of a highway with fixme=continue is very clear that it requires a survey on where the highway goes notes can be used by anybody on openstreetmap.org, and typically require more info. Cheers, dikkeknodel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] finding drinking water with an Android app
In Switzerland there are so many natural sources around, that you barely have to bring a bottle and can just take a sip of every source you pass. Typically these natural sources are guided via piping so you can easily use the water, http://sehenswertes.ch/Sehenswertes/schweiz/Doerfer/Schornen/Brunnen/Bildergalerie/SDC14131.JPG. If you take a radius of 10 km around Zürich city center, there are 1044 drinking water points available . http://ausleuchtung.ch/travel_pack/?lat=47.372454125432945=8.542385101318361=14=10=amenity=drinking_water=0 My prefered method of finding them ‘in the field’ on Android is OSMand, which I typically have running whenever I hike or cycle anyway. With the POI search ‘drinking’ you can display the drinking water POIs on the map to see which one is nearest or most convenient for your direction of travel. When I plan routes in advance I use https://www.komoot.com, which lets you display the drinking water POIs and use them as routing points easily. The amount of drinking water PIO on the map of your area off course depends on several factors like (1) availability of natural sources, (2) local culture making them readily accessible and (3) OSM contributors focus for putting them in the OSM database. Here in Switzerland all of these factors are strong, although I find a water point every now and then which is not on the map yet. Cheers, dikkeknodel Van: Warin<mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com> Verzonden: maandag 4 juni 2018 11:43 Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] finding drinking water with an Android app On 04/06/18 18:51, Maarten Deen wrote: > Less than a second to something usable? Sure, it displays the O logo > within a second, but on my phone (quad core 1.3 GHz ARM Cortex A7) it > takes about 10 seconds to get to anything usable. +1 .. probably 30 seconds on my old phone with a map of some 200M. > > And about the OSM quality... There is one drinking water POI mapped > near to me, but I hardly think that's an official public tap. I rather > suspect that's someone's home garden tap. > Well, it would do the job I guess ;) That is not quality but a lack of information. Around me public bubblers are found in most public playgrounds, some parks (50%?), some public squares (40%?). Very much depends on the local climate .. if you can open your mouth and get a drink there is not much point in providing another water source :) > > Maarten > > On 2018-06-04 10:29, Philip Barnes wrote: >> OSMand starts for me in less than a second, however the nearest >> drinking water is 150 miles away. Not many mapped and actually >> struggling to think where I would find one. >> >> Phil (trigpoint) >> >> On 3 June 2018 19:29:24 BST, Maarten Deen wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Mateusz Konieczny >>> wrote: >>> >>> 3. Jun 2018 18:05 by ba...@ursamundi.org: >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Mateusz Konieczny >>> wrote: >>> >>> I am looking for an application for Android displaying >>> amenity=drinking_water >>> >>> locations with available offline map - I am frequently using it to >>> avoid buying plastic bottles >>> >>> just to almost immediately throw it out. >>> >>> Any simple open source map displaying locations of some objects >>> >>> would also be great - it should be fairly simple to adapt. >>> >>> Osmand displays and can find drinking water. >>> >>> In my experience OSMand starts for a long time, like maps.me [1]. Is >>> at least search >>> not taking any noticeable time? >> >> Startup of OSMand takes quite some time yes, it annoys me too. >> Searching >> in the datafile of the Netherlands, some 850 MB, also takes a few >> seconds. It is certainly not instant and if your impatient it can be a >> >> bother. >> But it does not take minutes. >> >> Maarten >> >> - >> >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> -- >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] QA bots commenting on changesets - your thoughts?
Hi Michał, I can see value in making sure that mistakes are not accidentally introduced. However, I am not sure whether a bot like you describe is a wanted solution. * I have concerns about false positives, when the bot considers an action as braking a connection and gives comment while the change is actually valid. This relates to what Martin brings in, false positives raise the noise level and the comments will therefore be ignored in the future. I don’t know what an acceptable level for false positives is, but there must be literature on it from psychology/computer sciences. * Feedback by a bot as comment to a changeset is too late for maintaining data integrity, the mistake is already submitted to the database. The feedback should be given when trying to submit a changeset. I can imagine an implementation similar to what JOSM does for validation before submitting a dataset. This validation should then occur on the OSM server instead, or access to the changeset API should only be allowed for applications that have decent validation implemented. The second option is maybe preferable from a money perspective, since the calculations will be done locally and no server capacity is required. It will however put more requirements on hardware and software used to input data. Cheers, dikkeknodel Van: Martin Koppenhoefer<mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com> Verzonden: woensdag 4 april 2018 11:17 Aan: Michał Brzozowski<mailto:www.ha...@gmail.com> CC: osm<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] QA bots commenting on changesets - your thoughts? 2018-04-04 10:44 GMT+02:00 Michał Brzozowski <www.ha...@gmail.com<mailto:www.ha...@gmail.com>>: There's a bot in Poland that comments on changesets which break addresses (e.g. combining addr:place with addr:street), along with an explanation and links to forum topic. What do you think about it? Are such bots useful or not? while the example situation merits some kind of response, I am not sure if automated changeset comments are a good answer, because this will raise the noise level and very soon we will not find the needles in the comments haystack any more. Maybe the time has come for tags in changeset comments (bot=yes) ;-) Cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
