[talk-ph] Fwd: [OSM-talk] OSM goes (almost) in the 4ht dimension
Hi everyone, If you have the traditional 3D glasses (the one with the red and cyan filter), you might find this stereo 3D OSM-history map quite amazing. Read the forwarded email below for details. :) ~Eugene -- Forwarded message -- From: Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.fr Date: Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:34 AM Subject: [OSM-talk] OSM goes (almost) in the 4ht dimension To: OpenStreetMap t...@openstreetmap.org For the impatient having red/cyan 3D glasses, first stop is : http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/~cquest/leaflet/4d.html otherwise: https://cquest.hackpad.com/OpenStreetMap-goes-in-the-4th-dimension--ju3XWhj2qAV Have fun ! (OSM's second law) -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
On 27 August 2014 22:06, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: There is no license issue. No copyright-protected data is being added to OSM. No cordinates from Wikidata are being added to OSM. No text from Wikidata is being added to OSM. While there may not be a problem in this case, and I'm actually quite supportive of the proposed addition of the wikidata tags, I'm not convinced that this argument is completely correct. Take UK postcodes for example. Suppose that postcodes themselves are non-copyrightable identifiers, but their locations are subject to database rights. Suppose we have a copyrighted database of each address with it's location and postcode. For each address we could search OSM for objects that may represent houses/businesses in the vicinity of the location in the database. In cases where there is exactly one match within say 10m of the location, we could safely assume that the postcode belongs on that object. Suppose we automatically add the postcodes to these objects. We arguably haven't added any copyrighted data to OSM, and certainly haven't added any coordinates from the copyrighted database. But what we'd end up with in OSM is a list of postcoded objects with OSM coordinates that are pretty much the same (within 10m anyway) as those in the original database. It seems to me that the owner of the postcode database would have cause to complain that the OSM data is a derived work of their database. The use case for wikidata is slightly different, since (as I understand it) the location data is being used more as a filter than as a primary matching tool. But I think we may need to be a bit more careful. Perhaps LWG should be asked for their opinion... Robert. -- Robert Whittaker ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
There are three aspects to your question. 1) wikidata is licensed on CC0 terms, essentially that boils down to no restrictions on use at all. Looking at it from the WMFs position we can link to wikidata data as much as we want, however on the other hand the WMF does not guarantee or warrant in any form that the contents of wikidata are free of any rights of third parties. 2) My understanding of the WMFs position is that they state that there is no copyright on facts and that is it. This leaves the onus of determining if a certain item in wikidata is problematic (for example for use in OSM) clearly in the lap of the user. There was, when I was talking to the wikidata people in May, some discussion of clearly identifying the source of an wikidata statement for example in the case of OSM derived data, but I don't know if that has actually happened. 3) To get back to your example, assume that the WMF got hold of a geo-referenced list of UK post codes per building and imported it in to wikidata and we, either linked in lieu of the post code to wikidata (addr:postcode:wikidata=Q) or extracted them and applied them directly to OSM objects. I suspect (this can naturally only be speculation) that in both cases we would be in big trouble and there is legally no argument to prefer one over the other. Simon Am 30.08.2014 12:02, schrieb Robert Whittaker (OSM lists): On 27 August 2014 22:06, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: There is no license issue. No copyright-protected data is being added to OSM. No cordinates from Wikidata are being added to OSM. No text from Wikidata is being added to OSM. While there may not be a problem in this case, and I'm actually quite supportive of the proposed addition of the wikidata tags, I'm not convinced that this argument is completely correct. Take UK postcodes for example. Suppose that postcodes themselves are non-copyrightable identifiers, but their locations are subject to database rights. Suppose we have a copyrighted database of each address with it's location and postcode. For each address we could search OSM for objects that may represent houses/businesses in the vicinity of the location in the database. In cases where there is exactly one match within say 10m of the location, we could safely assume that the postcode belongs on that object. Suppose we automatically add the postcodes to these objects. We arguably haven't added any copyrighted data to OSM, and certainly haven't added any coordinates from the copyrighted database. But what we'd end up with in OSM is a list of postcoded objects with OSM coordinates that are pretty much the same (within 10m anyway) as those in the original database. It seems to me that the owner of the postcode database would have cause to complain that the OSM data is a derived work of their database. The use case for wikidata is slightly different, since (as I understand it) the location data is being used more as a filter than as a primary matching tool. But I think we may need to be a bit more careful. Perhaps LWG should be asked for their opinion... Robert. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Edward Betts edw...@4angle.com wrote: Andrew Guertin andrew.guer...@uvm.edu wrote: 1: Elsewhere in this thread it was mentioned that there are 22000 wikidata ids in OSM currently. Are there any objects which currently have a wikidata id that your code would assign a different id to? Similarly, are there any instances where your code would assign a wikidata id to something and a different object in OSM already has that wikidata id? I haven't checked for either of these conditions. These are both good points and I'll investigate. I downloaded the existing set of wikidata tags and compared it with my list. There are 281 cases where the OSM item tagged with a given wikidata ID is different from the one picked by my code. Here is the list: http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/mismatches.html -- Edward. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Edward Betts edw...@4angle.com wrote: Edward Betts edw...@4angle.com wrote: Andrew Guertin andrew.guer...@uvm.edu wrote: 1: Elsewhere in this thread it was mentioned that there are 22000 wikidata ids in OSM currently. Are there any objects which currently have a wikidata id that your code would assign a different id to? Similarly, are there any instances where your code would assign a wikidata id to something and a different object in OSM already has that wikidata id? I haven't checked for either of these conditions. These are both good points and I'll investigate. I downloaded the existing set of wikidata tags and compared it with my list. There are 281 cases where the OSM item tagged with a given wikidata ID is different from the one picked by my code. Here is the list: http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/mismatches.html I've added OSM objects that link to a different Wikdata item to the end of that page. There are 15 of them. Some were duplicates in Wikidata, the items were merged, but OSM is pointing at the deleted item. In some cases my match is more specific, for example: Tesla Factory (Q7705509) instead of Tesla Motors (Q478214). -- Edward. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Edward, just so there is no misunderstanding: you are saying of the 21'000 odd wikidata tags 281 gave different results? And if I understand the results correctly the majority of the 281 are simply due to the wikidata tag not being on the place node but on the corresponding admin boundary relation? Plus 15 real errors? Simon Am 30.08.2014 14:53, schrieb Edward Betts: Edward Betts edw...@4angle.com wrote: Andrew Guertin andrew.guer...@uvm.edu wrote: 1: Elsewhere in this thread it was mentioned that there are 22000 wikidata ids in OSM currently. Are there any objects which currently have a wikidata id that your code would assign a different id to? Similarly, are there any instances where your code would assign a wikidata id to something and a different object in OSM already has that wikidata id? I haven't checked for either of these conditions. These are both good points and I'll investigate. I downloaded the existing set of wikidata tags and compared it with my list. There are 281 cases where the OSM item tagged with a given wikidata ID is different from the one picked by my code. Here is the list: http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/mismatches.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: Edward, just so there is no misunderstanding: you are saying of the 21'000 odd wikidata tags 281 gave different results? And if I understand the results correctly the majority of the 281 are simply due to the wikidata tag not being on the place node but on the corresponding admin boundary relation? Plus 15 real errors? I compared my set of 70k suggested matches with the 21k of existing wikidata tags. There are 281 cases where a wikidata item in my list of suggested matches already appears in OSM, but is linked to an object that is different from my suggestion. Often that is because an entity appears in OSM as a node and a relation, my code is matching the node. The second list, contains 15 OSM objects that have a wikidata item that is different from my suggestion. -- Edward. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: * Personally, I'm actually fairly agnostic about the process of adding wikidata tags - I can't really see what I'd use them for myself, but am open to the possibility that someone could use them for something. However, an important part of things in OSM is surely that they are on-the-ground verifiable - wikipedia has articles for villages in the UK that don't exist, as do the OS OpenData StreetView maps, and people have added garbage data from both to OSM. How do we know that the wikidata items for which links are added are accurate? I'm going to add wikidata tags to existing OSM objects. There is no risk of adding villages that don't exist, because I'm not going to add any new entities to OSM. -- Edward. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: On 28 August 2014 09:09, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: What you do avoid by not tagging in OSM is maintenance (given that OSM objects are not necessarily a persistent reference to a single real world entity). Very few Wikidata IDs will change (far fewer than Wikipedia article names, for instance; and far fewer than IDs or other tags in OSM). Again, this is a statistically-insignificant edge-case. I wasn't expecting wikidata IDs to change at all. OSM objects will get reused, copied, split, moved, deleted etc. leading to missing or wrong wikidata tags. Naturally these could be detected by re-running Edwards code, but that kind of proves my point. I don't think 'humans will make mistakes in future' should be used as an argument against an import of machine generated data. If it becomes a big problem we could modify the editors to warn when multiple items in a changeset have the same wikidata ID. -- Edward. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: In my mind this is a good move and should be supported. Point 3 above could be resolved by running the script regularly to see if there are any new matches. There have also been some good suggestions on this list such as a KeepRight style (i.e. QA) map where problematic objects (e.g. script finds more than one match) can be manually reviewed, confirming whether the script conflicts with any existing wikidata tags in OSM, checking whether the script would add a wikidata tag to an object when there is already a different object in OSM with that wikidata tag, and a check on the 400m distance rule [2]. Are these things possible Edward? I can certainly make a list of cases where there are multiple OSM objects matching a single Wikidata item. Building the interface for viewing and fixing them might be more tricky, it is probably not something I can build right now. I've written the code to look for conflicts. You can see the results here: http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/mismatches.html I've been thinking about my choice of 400m for the matching. I'm going to change the matching criteria to include a distance field, then set a low distance (200m) for things like restaurants, and a much higher distance (50km) for bigger areas, like national parks. Thanks for the summary Rob, it is really helpful. -- Edward. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Downloading GPX data including metadata
Trying to solve a debate here, and folks would like to check this for themselves: The average speed of a given metro area. As such, areas with a lot of collected data and many US metro areas, like Dallas, either have too much data or are geographically too large for the API. What's the easiest way to get an entire region's GPX data including metadata for analysis? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Hi, On 08/29/2014 08:10 PM, Rob Nickerson wrote: Lets just step back and reflect on this for a minute. My overarching concern is that if this import is done, future imports will use the but we also have Wikidata links argument for justification. What we have here is a third-party database whose object identifiers we add to OSM as tags in order to make linking things easier. This is something that has often been requested by people but never been granted on a large scale because we always said that it would be an abuse of our database and our mapper's patience to offload everyone's and their dog's linking requirements onto us. Imagine every single stretch of road being tagged with three different proprietary (or at least competing) identifiers of traffic information providers, or similar payload tacked onto OSM. I'm not saying no to a Wikidata import but I would like the proponents to state clearly what makes this import special - why this and not, for example, Ordnance Survey TOIDs or IDs of Mapillary photos? I would like to define high hurdles for such an import. The import costs us a lot (in terms of mappers having to spend time to understand the tags and know how to handle them when they edit an object, more quality checks, etc.), and it must be proven - or at least expected - to offset that cost by making itself useful. It's ok of this particular import clears the hurdles but at least I can then use the hurdles if the next guy in line comes along and wants to import his keys too. Also, I note that Rob wrote: We have our own restrictions (verifiable on the ground, not changing to frequently) in OSM. A link to wikidata allows us to continue with these restrictions but still allow people to get at interesting non-geographic data. And Andrew said: A few more points: This isn’t a deletionists’ charter and we shouldn’t rush to unload any tagging onto Wikidata without discussing the removal very carefully. I am personally very much in favour of unloading non-geo-database tagging elsewhere. We started with marking restaurants (useful) and recording their names (also useful), classing them into fast-food or proper restaurants, then tagging what cuisine they have and how to contact them for booking a table, and meanwhile we're recording whether they have vegan food and what their opening times are and whetehr you can pay with bitcoin. We don't currently have anywhere to offload that information which is all useful for certain use cases, but once we have a working integration, I should very much hope that stuff like the menu and the opening times will be recorded either in OSM or in Wikidata but not both. Allow me one question in that matter as a Wikidata ignorant though: Are there any notability rules in Wikidata? For example, if we should one day decide that restaurant opening times should not be recorded in OSM but on Wikidata, can it then happen that someone records a restaurant's opening times on Wikidata only to have that information kicked out by someone else again for lack of relevance? Because if that were the case, then Wikidata would be relatively useless as a general offloading point for non-geodata. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: What we have here is a third-party database whose object identifiers we add to OSM as tags in order to make linking things easier. This is something that has often been requested by people but never been granted on a large scale because we always said that it would be an abuse of our database and our mapper's patience to offload everyone's and their dog's linking requirements onto us. What about all the references listed in this table? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref#Key_variations There are 79k instances of the ref:INSEE key in OpenStreetMap. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ref%3AINSEE -- Edward. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Hi Fred, The question of notability rules in Wikidata also crossed my mind. At this stage we are asking the question is it worth linking existing OSM data to existing wikidata via an automated process? The key word here is automated - we are already manually adding the tags (20k so far) to OSM. As such your question is less related to the import, but more related to the long term database/tagging strategy in OSM. The import may however speed up how quickly we need to start answering questions of where non-geographic data lives (OSM or wikidata). Like you, I see a lot of benefit of holding some data in wikidata. Picking up the restaurant example we have always said that things like reviews (including its food hygiene rating here in the UK) doesn't belong in OSM. I have no urgent desire to start adding this sort of data to wikidata (or any database) as I concentrate my time on mapping new things, but if I was to add this to wikidata the question of notability rules would then be top of my list - no point doing something if it then gets deleted as it is deemed not notable! Summary: Good question and some long term thinking required but the import will, at most, only make this thinking need to be done sooner. We'll have to cross this question even if this import doesn't occur. Regards, Rob ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Hi, On 08/30/2014 11:58 PM, Edward Betts wrote: Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: What we have here is a third-party database whose object identifiers we add to OSM as tags in order to make linking things easier. This is something that has often been requested by people but never been granted on a large scale because we always said that it would be an abuse of our database and our mapper's patience to offload everyone's and their dog's linking requirements onto us. What about all the references listed in this table? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref#Key_variations There are 79k instances of the ref:INSEE key in OpenStreetMap. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ref%3AINSEE As far as I am aware, the external ID situations we currently have are those where the external ID came in with an import (i.e. someone imported schools and they came with a certain tag or so). No practical use has been demonstrated but people like to have them nonetheless, just in case. I don't know of any instance of automated (or large-scale manual) affixing of external IDs to existing OSM objects, at least none that was discussed. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
Am 29.08.2014 20:10, schrieb Rob Nickerson: Lets just step back and reflect on this for a minute. If we end um in this discussion with a general yes for this import: why not use systems like maproulette to verify the data? This sounds better to me than a bulk import. Just my 2 cents, Michael. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Adding Wikidata tags to 70k items automatically
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: Summary: Good question and some long term thinking required but the import will, at most, only make this thinking need to be done sooner. We'll have to cross this question even if this import doesn't occur. Just to provide some background: Wikidata has a notability policy: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability/Inclusion_criteria https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability/Exclusion_criteria But this notability policy only pertains to whether there should be a Wikidata item for some object, much like we in OSM ask if things like administrative boundaries or flight paths should be included in OSM or not. Then, Wikidata also has what are called statements, with properties and values. This is roughly the counterpart of OSM's tags, keys, and values. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Properties https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:List_of_properties/all_in_one_table Just like OSM, there is a discussion and process on managing properties, but their processes are strictly enforceable unlike OSM's process for voting for the approval of tags on the OSM Wiki. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Properties_for_deletion ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-is] Tenging stíga og rútun fyrir gangandi og hjólandi
Path er ekki vinsælt heldur http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333 Ég ætla að kíkja á cycle.travel fólkið og gá hvernig gengur með að smella okkur þar inn og taka þetta áfram. Þann 29.8.2014 14:08, skrifaði Morten Lange: Hæ Hef ekki náð að taka þátt í umræðunum, en þangað til niðurstaða er fengin ætti kannski að segja frá því á Wiki.openstreetmap.org að umræður séu í gangi á talk-is ? -- Regards / Kveðja / Hilsen Morten Lange, Reykjavík *From:* Svavar Kjarrval sva...@kjarrval.is *To:* talk-is@openstreetmap.org *Sent:* Monday, 25 August 2014, 16:40 *Subject:* Re: [Talk-is] Tenging stíga og rútun fyrir gangandi og hjólandi Hæ. Skoðaði highway=footway á wiki síðu OSM og þar er ekki gefið að það skuli túlka sjálfgefið sem bicycle=no heldur gefið frjálst á hvorn veginn það er túlkað af hálfu algrímanna. Ef við tökum bicycle=yes af yrði það líklega mismunandi milli algrímanna hvort þeir beini hjólafólki eftir stígum eða götum. Einhverjar umræður hafa verið í gangi á aðalpóstlista OSM um sjálfgefin gildi á tilteknum svæðum þar sem hægt væri að setja inn sjálfgefnar stillingar í samræmi við lög og reglur sem gilda á hverju svæði, svo ekki þurfi að merkja allt innan svæðisins með einhverju sem gildir alls staðar. Veit samt ekki hvort eða hvenær slíkar sjálfgefnar skilgreiningar yrðu innleiddar. Persónulega hefði ég talið það eðlileg virkni fyrir hjólaumferð í rútunaralgrímum að beina fólki á stíga ef það er styttri og/eða öruggari leið, sérstaklega ef um er að ræða óvant hjólafólk. Fólkið sem telur sig ráða við að hjóla á götum getur auðvitað hunsað tillögu algrímanna um að nota stíga ef aðstæður leyfa, eða fólkið sem semur algrímana geri ráð fyrir þessu og lagi algrímana að þessum veruleika. Ef ég ætlaði að fara stystu leiðina fyrir hjól myndi ég eðlilega vilja fá leiðarlýsingu þar sem ég get notfært mér alla stíga sem ég má hjóla á. Ef bicycle=yes yrði tekið af í Fellahverfinu, rútunaralgrímurinn myndi túlka skortinn sem bicycle=no og ég myndi óska eftir hjólaleið frá Völvufelli 11 og til Drafnarfells 2, þá myndi hann mæla með því að ég myndi hjóla eftir götunni út Völvufellið og síðan hringinn í kringum húsin meðfram Suðurfelli og Norðurfelli áður en ég kemst á Drafnarfell. Með bicycle=yes myndi algrímurinn mæla með því að ég myndi hjóla stuttan stíg norður að Drafnarfelli 2. Með bicycle=yes: http://openrouteservice.org/index.php?start=-21.824661,64.1007793end=-21.8247791,64.1012104pref=Bicyclelang=denoMotorways=falsenoTollways=false Án bicycle=yes: http://openrouteservice.org/index.php?start=-21.824661,64.1007793end=-21.8247791,64.1012104pref=Fastestlang=denoMotorways=falsenoTollways=false Síðan eru auðvitað líklegri tilvik eins og ef einhver biður um hjólaleið milli Seljahverfisins í Reykjavík og yfir í Lindahverfið eða Salahverfið í Kópavogi (ekki endilega milli heimilisfanga sem eru rétt hjá hvort öðru). Fyrri áhyggjurnar í þessari umræðu voru einnig að OpenCycleMap birti of mikið af bláum leiðum sem eiga að vera sérstakar hjólaleiðir. En ef merkja á stíga með bicycle=yes á stígum sem eru ekki meðfram götum mun birtast hellingur af bláum blettum á því korti ef reynt er að halda í rútunina. Ef úrval slíkra stíga er of strangt mun fólk undrast af hverju tilteknir stígar á kortinu urðu ekki fyrir valinu þegar þeir eru augljóslega hentugri en sú leið sem var valin. Þetta er nokkurn veginn það sem fólk er að lenda í þegar stígar eru ekki tengdir almennilega. Tæknilega séð eigum við að merkja stíga sem eru fyrir ótilgreindar tegundir óvélknúinnar umferðar sem highway=path. Gætum íhugað að breyta highway=footway í highway=path nema á þeim stöðum þar sem skilgreint er sérstaklega að stígurinn sé fyrir ákveðna umferð eingöngu (eins og sérstaka hjólastíga). Þá getum við sleppt bicycle=yes tagginu þar sem það er sjálfgefið og liturinn fyrir það er ekki æpandi á OpenCycleMap. Varðandi úrlausn myndi ég ekki mæla með því að stígar meðfram götum yrðu teknir út enda myndi það brjóta nokkuð mikið í bága við ‚don't tag for the renderer‘ regluna (sem á einnig við um rútanir). Það ferli að velja sérstaklega hvaða leiðir eru viðeigandi og merkja þær (þar með talið koma sér saman um almenn viðmið og viðhalda merkingum) getur alveg eins verið jafn fyrirhafnarmikið og setja inn þveranir þar sem á við. Auk þess væri það nokkuð selective tagging að fara að stunda það að velja leiðir með þessum hætti og myndi vera langt frá því að leysa úr rútunarvandanum fyrir gangandi vegfarendur (jafnvel með notkun á sidewalk tagginu). Ef gögnin eru rétt og rútunaralgrímar eru að mæla með einhverju röngu, þá á að leysa vandamálið í algrímunum sjálfum en ekki með
Re: [Talk-de] dev.openstreetmap.de
Hallo Jörg, aufrufen, bis 70 Zählen, und schon siehst du eine Seite :-) Klappt wirklich. Christoph Am 29.08.2014 um 09:47 schrieb Jörg Frings-Fürst o...@jff-webhosting.net: Hallo, ist dev.openstreetmap.de offline? Ich bekomme keine Seite angezeigt :_( CU Jörg -- Jörg Frings-Fürst OSM privat D-54526 Landscheid Threema: SYR8SJXB GPG Fingerprint: 13E3 4D4A 3228 D138 8511 EA5A 08AC AF02 3C6D 750A Full GPG key: hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net CAcert Serialnr.: 0D:9A:23 SHA1-Fingerprint: CA:36:4D:44:D1:71:4A:78:C8:6C:C2:CC:94:F3:6E:42:38:BA:CE:4E http://cacert.org ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Wo Google besser ist als OSM
Hallo, ich kann meinen Google vs. OSM Kartenvergleich nun weltweit anbieten. Damit sieht man schnell wo Google glaubt dass es Hauptstraßen gibt die bei OSM nicht verzeichnet sind. Oder andersrum: Gegenden in denen wir noch Straßen von Luftbildern übernehmen sollten. Ich habe das Ganze in meinem Blog beschrieben: http://www.technologyblog.de/2014/08/wo-fehlen-bei-openstreetmap-noch-daten/ Die Kurzform: Ihr seht auf der Karte die Google Hauptstraßen und Gewässer bei denen es in OSM keine Entsprechung gibt. In perfekt gemappten Gebieten ist die Karte dann grau. Wenn ihr eine Stelle genauer ansehen oder im Editor vom Luftbild abmalen wollt könnt ihr mit den Buttons auf der linken Seite den Bereich im Editor laden. Ich bevorzuge JOSM, sollte aber auch mit iD und Potlatch gehen. http://compare.osm-tools.org/ Beim Armchair mappen könnt ihr euch nun auf die wirklich wichtigen Straßen konzentrieren. Viel Spaß, Stephan ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-it] Way or relation?
Ciao a tutti! Mi è sorto un dubbio che vorrei esporvi: di solito quando più way adiacenti o sovrapposte (siano esse building, landuse, leisure, highway, amenity o altro) condividono una porzione di poligono, sono solito usare delle relazioni. Un esempio può essere questo: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/299872855, dove sia la chiesa, che il giardino, che la piazza, che il convento, hanno dei lati in comune, inoltre il convento è un amenity=university. Con le relazioni non ho way sovrapposte e selezionando una singola linea, mi rendo conto immediatamente di quali relazioni fa parte. Viceversa se non usassi relazioni potrebbe capitare di avere anche molte way sovrapposte (tipo building + amenity + landuse) e diventa difficile capire come è costruita la grafica ma anche modificarla. Credevo inoltre che in questo modo si risparmiasse peso nel DB, dal momento che viene notevolmente ridotto il numero di way, mentre mi hanno fatto notare che con le relazioni potrebbe venire appesantito il lavoro di interpretazione della mappa. In effetti facendo un giro veloce su OpenStreetMap non sono riuscito a trovare altri casi di mappatura come il mio, perchè di solito le way vengono sempre sovrapposte. Ora non so se quest'ultima sia la linea comune da seguire o se si possa fare indifferentemente come si ritiene più opportuno. Insomma è sbagliato/non opportuno usare le relazioni come faccio io? Voi che ne pensate? Grazie. Federico ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Way or relation?
Il 30/Ago/2014 10:19 Federico Cortese cortese...@gmail.com ha scritto: Ciao a tutti! Mi è sorto un dubbio che vorrei esporvi: di solito quando più way adiacenti o sovrapposte (siano esse building, landuse, leisure, highway, amenity o altro) condividono una porzione di poligono, sono solito usare delle relazioni. Per me è la tua soluzione è quella ideale. Anzi, mi sembra l'unica utilizzabile per avere un minimo di topologia. Considerazioni sulla complessità o sul peso nel database: io non me ne preoccuperei. Innanzitutto, non si può escludere che tra qualche minuto venga adottato qualche nuovo metodo di rappresentazione che comporti un aumento esponenziale della difficoltà di interpretazione o del peso dei dati nel database (a fronte di chissà quale beneficio). Poi, sono sempre stato dell'idea che un progetto nato con l'ambizione di mappare il pianeta debba dotarsi di risorse adeguate. Ciao /niubii/ ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] Estrarre DWG da OSM
Ciao a tutti, vorrei sapere se esiste un metodo efficace per ottenere delle carte leggibili (con sia strade che edifici) in formato DWG dalla mappa OSM. Ho provato a farlo con diverse procedure ma fin'ora l'unica cosa che ho ottenuto è stato un insieme di punti sparsi oppure una carta con solo la rete stradale. Ho già estratto il file .osm delle parti che mi servono dal sito e ho provato anche da http://osm-toolserver-italia.wmflabs.org/estratti/index.html , come dovrei proseguire? Ciao di nuovo, Luca ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Estrarre DWG da OSM
2014-08-30 17:31 GMT+02:00 Luca Meloni lmelonim...@yahoo.it: Ciao a tutti, vorrei sapere se esiste un metodo efficace per ottenere delle carte leggibili (con sia strade che edifici) in formato DWG dalla mappa OSM. Ho provato a farlo con diverse procedure ma fin'ora l'unica cosa che ho ottenuto è stato un insieme di punti sparsi oppure una carta con solo la rete stradale. Ho già estratto il file .osm delle parti che mi servono dal sito e ho provato anche da http://osm-toolserver-italia.wmflabs.org/estratti/index.html , come dovrei proseguire? il formato dwg è quanto di più chiuso ci sia e con cui autodesk continua a tenere il predominio del settore. L'unico passaggio che può stare in piedi è quello per il dxf (visto che è il fratello meno cattivo del dwg). Come convertitori ce ne sono diversi. Consiglio di prendere gli estratti regionali in formato shp, aprirli in qgis e salvarli in dxf ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-it] Way or relation?
io mi comporto come te ed uso relazioni, per gli stessi motivi ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Chamberlain Clock
On 21 August 2014 15:34, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: I note that the Chamberlain Clock in Birmingham's Jewellery Quarter: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/187104810 does not render in the default map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.48701/-1.91258 It /is/ quite a landmark: In another discussion, I've seen reference to the tag: landmark= -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-es] Normalización poblaciones
¿Nadie más se anima a votar?... Es un tema serio. ¿Algún Lagunero o Teldense que opine? Saludos. El 29 de agosto de 2014, 12:35, Benjamín Valero Espinosa benjaval...@gmail.com escribió: En el caso de mi ciudad Orihuela, la diferencia es bastante exagerada. Aunque casualmente aún se quedaría en la misma categoría, la población del municipio completo supera los 90.000 habitantes, mientras que la población de la ciudad en sí ronda los 30.000, estando los otros 60.000 habitantes repartidos en pedanías rurales y en la costa, y para colmo a unos 30 km alrededor, es decir, que ni siquiera son áreas cercanas en un mapa. Hay otra ciudades como Lorca con mucho territorio rural donde les puede pasar algo parecido. Aunque me duela por quitarle importancia a mi pueblo, creo que se debería tener en cuenta la población de cada núcleo urbano, y no la de todo el municipio. El 29 de agosto de 2014, 12:55, Javier Sánchez javiers...@gmail.com escribió: Hola Revisando la normalización de los núcleos de población[1] me ha surgido la duda de si cuando dice en las ciudades grandes las 21 otras ciudades de más de 100.000 habitantes se refiere a la población de todo el municipio o sólo a la de su capital. Para asegurarme he consultado el INE[2] y me sale que con cualquiera de los dos criterios hay ciudades nuevas a añadir. Si sólo consideramos la población de la capital del municipio estarían Torrevieja y Barakaldo. Si consideramos la población de todo el municipio además estarían Marbella, Cartagena, Telde, San Cristóbal de La Laguna y Dos Hermanas. ¿Qué criterio os parece el correcto? Yo voto por considerar sólo la población de la ciudad, no la de todo el municipio, me parece más lógico. Lo mismo se aplicaría a town y a village. Los datos de los listados son de 2010, con los de 2013 surgen más cambios que estoy elaborando. Saludos, Javier. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Normalizaci%C3%B3n#N.C3.BAcleos_de_poblaci.C3.B3n [2] http://www.ine.es/nomen2/ ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] Normalización poblaciones
Yo también comparto la opinión de que mejor ceñirse al núcleo urbano, al menos mientras no se haya fusionado como una conurbación a otro núcleo. El 30/08/2014 07:48, Javier Sánchez javiers...@gmail.com escribió: ¿Nadie más se anima a votar?... Es un tema serio. ¿Algún Lagunero o Teldense que opine? Saludos. El 29 de agosto de 2014, 12:35, Benjamín Valero Espinosa benjaval...@gmail.com escribió: En el caso de mi ciudad Orihuela, la diferencia es bastante exagerada. Aunque casualmente aún se quedaría en la misma categoría, la población del municipio completo supera los 90.000 habitantes, mientras que la población de la ciudad en sí ronda los 30.000, estando los otros 60.000 habitantes repartidos en pedanías rurales y en la costa, y para colmo a unos 30 km alrededor, es decir, que ni siquiera son áreas cercanas en un mapa. Hay otra ciudades como Lorca con mucho territorio rural donde les puede pasar algo parecido. Aunque me duela por quitarle importancia a mi pueblo, creo que se debería tener en cuenta la población de cada núcleo urbano, y no la de todo el municipio. El 29 de agosto de 2014, 12:55, Javier Sánchez javiers...@gmail.com escribió: Hola Revisando la normalización de los núcleos de población[1] me ha surgido la duda de si cuando dice en las ciudades grandes las 21 otras ciudades de más de 100.000 habitantes se refiere a la población de todo el municipio o sólo a la de su capital. Para asegurarme he consultado el INE[2] y me sale que con cualquiera de los dos criterios hay ciudades nuevas a añadir. Si sólo consideramos la población de la capital del municipio estarían Torrevieja y Barakaldo. Si consideramos la población de todo el municipio además estarían Marbella, Cartagena, Telde, San Cristóbal de La Laguna y Dos Hermanas. ¿Qué criterio os parece el correcto? Yo voto por considerar sólo la población de la ciudad, no la de todo el municipio, me parece más lógico. Lo mismo se aplicaría a town y a village. Los datos de los listados son de 2010, con los de 2013 surgen más cambios que estoy elaborando. Saludos, Javier. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Normalizaci%C3%B3n#N.C3.BAcleos_de_poblaci.C3.B3n [2] http://www.ine.es/nomen2/ ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
[Talk-es] addr:country
Donde puedo encontrar documentación sobre que es una mala práctica poner addr:country? En el siguiente cambio se añade este tag a miles de nodos: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22127891 pgpxeGh1seGpn.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] addr:country
La página mostra que addr:country es opcional : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Karlsruhe_Schema#Tags Es una otra forma de is_in con los mismos argumentos : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:is_in El más importanta, mechanical edit y no respeto de : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy Francisco - Mail original - From: Simó Albert i Beltran s...@probeta.net To: Jaime Crespo jy...@jynus.com, Discusión en Español de OpenStreetMap talk-es@openstreetmap.org Date: 30/08/2014 11:59:55 Subject: [Talk-es] addr:country Donde puedo encontrar documentación sobre que es una mala práctica poner addr:country? En el siguiente cambio se añade este tag a miles de nodos: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22127891 ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] Normalización poblaciones
El 30/08/14 08:47, Javier Sánchez escribió: ¿Nadie más se anima a votar?... Es un tema serio. Creo que más que votar es una cuestión de lógica: si la etiqueta en cuestión se aplica al nodo o área que define un determinado núcleo urbano, no un término municipal, lo lógico es poner la población de ese núcleo urbano. ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] addr:country
Se puede encontrar en 2 de cada 3 respuestas de la lista de imports. Echa un vistazo a los historiales. -- Jaime Crespo http://dbahire.com El 30/08/2014 11:56, Simó Albert i Beltran s...@probeta.net escribió: Donde puedo encontrar documentación sobre que es una mala práctica poner addr:country? En el siguiente cambio se añade este tag a miles de nodos: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22127891 ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-es] Normalización poblaciones
Como el escritor original de esas líneas, lo que intenté es trasladar la regla internacional de una manera razonable para nuestra geografía. Ha pasado mucho tiempo de ello, así que mi única recomendación es leer de nuevo las recomendaciones internacionales (y/o las equivalencias en otros países cercanos) hacer una propuesta con una lista cerrada y concreta, y si después de un tiempo nadie dice nada en contra, cambiarlo directamente en la wiki. Un saludo, -- Jaime Crespo http://dbahire.com El 30/08/2014 15:36, Carlos Dávila cdavi...@orangecorreo.es escribió: El 30/08/14 08:47, Javier Sánchez escribió: ¿Nadie más se anima a votar?... Es un tema serio. Creo que más que votar es una cuestión de lógica: si la etiqueta en cuestión se aplica al nodo o área que define un determinado núcleo urbano, no un término municipal, lo lógico es poner la población de ese núcleo urbano. ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es ___ Talk-es mailing list Talk-es@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
Re: [Talk-at] Karte zur Gebäudeabdeckung in Österreich
Hallo, es gibt ein paar kleine Updates bezüglich der Gebäudeabdeckungskarte (http://thomaskonrad.at/osm/osm-austria-building-coverage/): * Die OSM-Daten werden jetzt täglich um 3 Uhr früh per Geofabrik-Dump aktualisiert und ein aktueller Layer gerendert. * Zum Vergleich kann man jetzt mit zwei Radio-Buttons zwischen dem ursprünglichen Stand (29. August) und dem aktuellen Stand hin- und herschalten. Die Fade-Animation hierfür habe ich ausgeschalten damit man die Unterschiede klarer sieht. So sieht das ca. aus: ( ) OpenStreetMap-Gebäude 2014-08-29 (o) OpenStreetMap-Gebäude aktuell * @Stefan: Es gibt jetzt einen optionalen OSM-Standard-Layer zur genaueren Orientierung. * Die Farben sind nun auch in den niedrigeren Zoomlevels ein wenig kräftiger, da sieht man jetzt ein bisschen mehr. * Man kann jetzt bis Zoomlevel 16 zoomen (statt wie bisher bis Zoomlevel 15). Soon to come: Bezirksweise Abdeckungsstatistiken mit Ranking. Ich arbeite dran :) Schöne Grüße Thomas Am 28.08.2014 um 21:42 schrieb Stefan Tauner stefan.tau...@gmx.at: On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 08:24:09 +0200 Thomas Konrad tkon...@gmx.net wrote: Hallo, ich habe vor kurzem eine Karte erstellt, die die Gebäudeabdeckung in Österreich zeigt: http://thomaskonrad.at/2014/08/analyse-der-openstreetmap-gebaudeabdeckung-in-osterreich/ Die Karte soll als Analysewerkzeug und Motivation dienen, die Situation in Österreich zu verbessern :) Ganz unten im Artikel gibt es technische Infos, wie ich die Karte erstellt habe. Ich freue mich über Feedback! Ein optionaler Mapnik layer wär noch ein Hit, ansonsten hab nicht einmal ich was zu raunzen... :) -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner ___ 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: [Talk-at] Karte zur Gebäudeabdeckung in Österreich / JOSM Areaselector
Hallo, da ich noch nicht so lang mit OSM arbeite hätte ich dazu gleich eine Frage: Wie kann ich im JOSM Mit freundlichen Grüßen Dipl.-Ing. Paul Wölfel emailpaul.woel...@gmail.com Tel. +43 664 88 533 801 Lindengasse 31/1/11 1070 Wien Austria On 29 Aug 2014, at 08:30, David Schmitt da...@black.co.at wrote: Das plugin ist mir schon vor kurzem aufgefallen und ich hab einige Gebäude in NÖ damit erfasst. Folgende SAchen sind mir aufgefallen: * Wie Stefan schon erwähnt hat, fehlen die Umrandungen. Gebäude werden daher zu klein und müssen händisch nachkorrigiert werden. * knapp darauf folgend, müssen natürlich alle Gebäude die Wand an Wand stehen auch händisch verbunden werden. * JPEG Kompressionsartefakte führen manchmal dazu dass kleine Wirbel aus 4-8 Nodes entstehen, die lästige Nachkorrektur erfordern. In seiner aktuellen Form bringt mir das Plugin noch keine wirkliche Ersparnis, gegenüber einer rein manuellen Erfassung, aber ein Ausmerzen der Problemstellen könnte die Situation rasch zum Besseren wenden! Bitte halte uns am Laufenden! MfG David On 2014-08-28 21:53, Paul Woelfel wrote: Hallo, Passend zur Grbäudeabdeckung hab ich mit Unterstützung von Tom ein Tool erstellt, welches es leichter macht Gebäude ausbasemap.at http://basemap.at Bildern zu mappen. Das Plugin für JOSM nennt sich Areaselector und is auch in den normalen Josm Plugins gelistet. Quellcode und ist unter https://github.com/JOSM/JOSM-areaselectorzu finden. Zum mappen eines Gebäudes muss man nur den Bereich des Gebäudes anklicken und es werden automatisch die Grenzen erkannt und ein Polygon gezeichnet. Ein Tagging Dialog, welcher sich die letzten Werte merkt, wird danach automatisch angezeigt. Mir is klar, dass die basemap Daten nicht immer hundertprozentig richtig ist, aber ich denke als Basis mal nicht schlecht. Ich würde mich auch über Feedback oder Codebeiträge freuen! Mit freundlichen Grüßen Dipl.-Ing. Paul Wölfel emailpaul.woel...@gmail.commailto:paul.woel...@gmail.com Tel. +43 664 88 499 513 Lindengasse 31/1/11 1070 Wien Austria Am 28.08.2014 21:37 schrieb Markus Straub markus.straub...@gmail.com mailto:markus.straub...@gmail.com: Wow, gratuliere, die Karte ist wirklich wunderschön geworden! Gibt nichts zu meckern, einfach tolle Arbeit. LG, Markus 2014-08-26 8:24 GMT+02:00 Thomas Konrad tkon...@gmx.net mailto:tkon...@gmx.net: Hallo, ich habe vor kurzem eine Karte erstellt, die die Gebäudeabdeckung in Österreich zeigt: http://thomaskonrad.at/2014/08/analyse-der-openstreetmap-gebaudeabdeckung-in-osterreich/ Die Karte soll als Analysewerkzeug und Motivation dienen, die Situation in Österreich zu verbessern :) Ganz unten im Artikel gibt es technische Infos, wie ich die Karte erstellt habe. Ich freue mich über Feedback! Liebe Grüße Tom ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.orgmailto:Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.orgmailto: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 ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [Talk-at] Karte zur Gebäudeabdeckung in Österreich
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 11:53:03 +0200 Thomas Konrad tkon...@gmx.net wrote: Hallo, es gibt ein paar kleine Updates bezüglich der Gebäudeabdeckungskarte (http://thomaskonrad.at/osm/osm-austria-building-coverage/): * Die OSM-Daten werden jetzt täglich um 3 Uhr früh per Geofabrik-Dump aktualisiert und ein aktueller Layer gerendert. * Zum Vergleich kann man jetzt mit zwei Radio-Buttons zwischen dem ursprünglichen Stand (29. August) und dem aktuellen Stand hin- und herschalten. Die Fade-Animation hierfür habe ich ausgeschalten damit man die Unterschiede klarer sieht. So sieht das ca. aus: ( ) OpenStreetMap-Gebäude 2014-08-29 (o) OpenStreetMap-Gebäude aktuell * @Stefan: Es gibt jetzt einen optionalen OSM-Standard-Layer zur genaueren Orientierung. * Die Farben sind nun auch in den niedrigeren Zoomlevels ein wenig kräftiger, da sieht man jetzt ein bisschen mehr. * Man kann jetzt bis Zoomlevel 16 zoomen (statt wie bisher bis Zoomlevel 15). Soon to come: Bezirksweise Abdeckungsstatistiken mit Ranking. Ich arbeite dran :) Großartige Arbeit, danke! Falls es automatisierbar rausfindbar ist, könnte man noch den genauen timestamp vom dump angeben. Meine Änderungen (changeset 25083663 vom plugin-test) sind nämlich von Thu, 28 Aug 2014 09:11:14 PM UTC und noch nicht drinnen (auch nicht im aktuellen layer). -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [Talk-cz] Zpráva o činnosti
Dobrý den, no vidíte, já se tady vytahuji, jak jsme to opravili a tohohle jsem si nevšiml. Já jsem to kontroloval v ISKN prostřednictvím Nahlížení do KN. V katastru nemovitostí je polygon správně, protože tam je evidována 1 budova, http://sgi.nahlizenidokn.cuzk.cz/marushka/default.aspx?themeid=3MarUid=7E65 95D2%209D2F4EA0%20A5AD9D88%208244EA23MarUidi=8244EA23MarMiddlePoint=-74296 3.9674310316%20-1038573.7739832742MarScale=1130 Ale naopak v ISÚI je to evidováno jako několik samostatných stavebních objektů, viz http://vdp.cuzk.cz/vdp/ruian/stavebniobjekty/22158057, http://vdp.cuzk.cz/vdp/ruian/stavebniobjekty/22158065, kterým se každému přiřadí stejný polygon z ISKN. Zkusím to poslat ještě na KP k prověření, zdali má být zapsána jedna budova na více parcelách a nebo několik budov na samostatných parcelách. Záleží na tom, jak to bylo zkolaudováno stavebním úřadem. Petr Souček -Original Message- From: Petr Vejsada [mailto:o...@propsychology.cz] Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 12:11 AM To: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic; Petr Souček Subject: Re: [Talk-cz] Zpráva o činnosti Dobrý den, tak jsem se chtěl pokochat, jak jste opravili tu Troju, Krynickou ulici. No, je to změněné, ale opravené tedy ne. Každé té budově jste udělali polygon, který ovšem zahrnuje geometrii všech těch budov dohromady. A ty všechny jsou zase naplácané na sobě :-) http://ruian.poloha.net/18/50.12648/14.41053 po rozsvícení vrstvy budov to opravdu hodně svítí. Normálně to má být průhledné. Dne Pá 29. srpna 2014 22:21:24, Petr Souček napsal(a): Třeba případ v Troji (zmiňovaný před nějakým časem) s chybným polygonem budovy už je opraven. ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
Re: [Talk-cz] Kontrola a doplnění ulic
:-) Tak to je chaos. Cedule s U Podjezdu se zdá novější, ale v RUIAN je U podjezdu jako na té ceduli co se zdá starší. Marek On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 09:46:59PM +0200, Petr Kadlec wrote: 2014-08-29 18:17 GMT+02:00 Marek Chlup m...@chlup.net: Původně mnou uvedená olomoucká ulice: RUIAN: Na střelnici Cedule: Na Střelnici (skoro mám podezření, že v RUIAN někdo aplikoval nějaký skript...) Tak ono kdekoli dochází ke změně pravidel pravopisu, jsou z toho zmatky. Zrovna v Olomouci by mohli vyprávět… https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Uli%C4%8Dn%C3%AD_tabule_U_Podjezdu.jpg ;-) -- Petr Kadlec / Mormegil ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz ___ Talk-cz mailing list Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
[OSM-talk-fr] Nouveau job à mi-temps
A partir de ce lundi 1er septembre, je rejoins la très dynamique équipe d'Etalab (data.gouv.fr). Bien sûr je m'y occuperai de données, en particulier des données géographiques mais pas uniquement. Il y a un gros travail à faire sur les référentiels ouverts et sur l'adoption de fonctionnements collaboratifs autour de ceux-ci. BANO est un bon exemple, l'objectif va être de passer à BANO^2. Etalab est une branche du SGMAP (Secrétariat Général à la Modernisation de l'Action Publique)... et ces sujets sont il me semble assez fondamentaux. Bref, pour faire bouger les choses, il faut être au bon endroit, trouver le bon point où mettre le levier et ça me semble le meilleur actuellement. C'est un poste a mi-temps qui donc me laissera encore du temps libre pour OSM et qui me permettra aussi d'évangéliser encore un peu plus au sujet d'OSM dans des couches moins accessibles en temps normal ! Donc nouvelle adresse email pro: christian.qu...@data.gouv.fr -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Nouveau job à mi-temps
Très bonne nouvelle ! Bonne continuation Christian :) Francois Le 30 août 2014 10:46, Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.fr a écrit : A partir de ce lundi 1er septembre, je rejoins la très dynamique équipe d'Etalab (data.gouv.fr). Bien sûr je m'y occuperai de données, en particulier des données géographiques mais pas uniquement. Il y a un gros travail à faire sur les référentiels ouverts et sur l'adoption de fonctionnements collaboratifs autour de ceux-ci. BANO est un bon exemple, l'objectif va être de passer à BANO^2. Etalab est une branche du SGMAP (Secrétariat Général à la Modernisation de l'Action Publique)... et ces sujets sont il me semble assez fondamentaux. Bref, pour faire bouger les choses, il faut être au bon endroit, trouver le bon point où mettre le levier et ça me semble le meilleur actuellement. C'est un poste a mi-temps qui donc me laissera encore du temps libre pour OSM et qui me permettra aussi d'évangéliser encore un peu plus au sujet d'OSM dans des couches moins accessibles en temps normal ! Donc nouvelle adresse email pro: christian.qu...@data.gouv.fr -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Stand OSM lors de Capitole du Libre
Salut Christophe, Christophe Merlet a écrit : Volontaire pour samedi. Cool ! Merci, si nous sommes plusieurs, je vais confirmer aux organisateurs notre intérêt pour un stand. De mon côté, j'ai derechef proposé un atelier sur JOSM le dimanche. S'il est accepté, j'aurai sans doute besoin comme l'année dernière de personnes pour venir en aide personnes qui rencontrent des difficultés particulières (la formule a fait ses preuves, je déroule l'atelier au rythme adapté au plus grand nombre et les co-animateurs aident ceux qui décrochent ou rencontrent des difficulté particulières, ce faisant la dynamique est préversée et tout le monde est satisfait). Et aussi pour dimanche si besoin, si on me trouve un petit hébergement... Hébergeant des amis pour l'occasion, je suis déjà au complet, désolé. :( Mais je ne dois pas être le seul mappeur local inscrit sur cette liste. Une âme hospitalière dans le coin ? Sébastien -- Sébastien Dinot, sebastien.di...@free.fr http://sebastien.dinot.free.fr/ Ne goûtez pas au logiciel libre, vous ne pourriez plus vous en passer ! ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
[OSM-talk-fr] Sport=climbing pour escalade sur falaises et arêtes
Bonjour, J'ai du mal à comprendre sur quels objets on peut rajouter sport=climbong. JOSM me donne une erreur sport without physical feature quand je rajoute ce tag sur une falaise ou une arête. Exemples : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300954193 (école d'escalade sur falaise) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300954192 (arête avec passages d'escalade : http://www.camptocamp.org/routes/55445/fr/l-ecoutoux-l-arete-a-jojo) Comment est-ce que vous faites ? Pierre ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Sport=climbing pour escalade sur falaises et arêtes
Bonjour, JOSM voudrait voir sport=* associé à un élément physique sur lequel ou dans lequel un sport est pratiqué. C'est ce que dit le wiki, où on trouve une liste d'objets associés: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sport Les natural=cliff, natural=arete, natural=couloir ou natural=stone n'y figurent pas. Maintenant pour répondre à ta question, en ce qui me concerne je mets sport=climbing sur ce qui va bien, et je laisse JOSM râler. Matthias Le 30 août 2014 18:06, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com a écrit : Bonjour, J'ai du mal à comprendre sur quels objets on peut rajouter sport=climbong. JOSM me donne une erreur sport without physical feature quand je rajoute ce tag sur une falaise ou une arête. Exemples : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300954193 (école d'escalade sur falaise) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300954192 (arête avec passages d'escalade : http://www.camptocamp.org/routes/55445/fr/l-ecoutoux-l-arete-a-jojo) Comment est-ce que vous faites ? Pierre ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Nouveau job à mi-temps
Bravo Christian et bon courage pour cette mission, en ligne avec le développement du libre et le service public. Merci à toi Gaël Le 30 août 2014 à 10:43, Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.fr a écrit : A partir de ce lundi 1er septembre, je rejoins la très dynamique équipe d'Etalab (data.gouv.fr). Bien sûr je m'y occuperai de données, en particulier des données géographiques mais pas uniquement. Il y a un gros travail à faire sur les référentiels ouverts et sur l'adoption de fonctionnements collaboratifs autour de ceux-ci. BANO est un bon exemple, l'objectif va être de passer à BANO^2. Etalab est une branche du SGMAP (Secrétariat Général à la Modernisation de l'Action Publique)... et ces sujets sont il me semble assez fondamentaux. Bref, pour faire bouger les choses, il faut être au bon endroit, trouver le bon point où mettre le levier et ça me semble le meilleur actuellement. C'est un poste a mi-temps qui donc me laissera encore du temps libre pour OSM et qui me permettra aussi d'évangéliser encore un peu plus au sujet d'OSM dans des couches moins accessibles en temps normal ! Donc nouvelle adresse email pro: christian.qu...@data.gouv.fr -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Stand OSM lors de Capitole du Libre
Salut, Le 30 août 2014 15:38, Sébastien Dinot sebastien.di...@free.fr a écrit : Salut Christophe, Christophe Merlet a écrit : Volontaire pour samedi. Cool ! Merci, si nous sommes plusieurs, je vais confirmer aux organisateurs notre intérêt pour un stand. De mon côté, j'ai derechef proposé un atelier sur JOSM le dimanche. S'il est accepté, j'aurai sans doute besoin comme l'année dernière de personnes pour venir en aide personnes qui rencontrent des difficultés particulières (la formule a fait ses preuves, je déroule l'atelier au rythme adapté au plus grand nombre et les co-animateurs aident ceux qui décrochent ou rencontrent des difficulté particulières, ce faisant la dynamique est préversée et tout le monde est satisfait). Et aussi pour dimanche si besoin, si on me trouve un petit hébergement... Hébergeant des amis pour l'occasion, je suis déjà au complet, désolé. :( Mais je ne dois pas être le seul mappeur local inscrit sur cette liste. Une âme hospitalière dans le coin ? Sébastien -- Sébastien Dinot, sebastien.di...@free.fr http://sebastien.dinot.free.fr/ Ne goûtez pas au logiciel libre, vous ne pourriez plus vous en passer ! ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr Dispo pour le stand le samedi après-midi et également pour assister sur l'atelier JOSM comme l'année dernière s'il est accepté. -- Christophe aka orhygine | http://orhyginal.free.fr | ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Sport=climbing pour escalade sur falaises et arêtes
on pourrait alors ajouter les lacs et étangs ? natural=water... ou les rivières et eaux vives Les sports nautiques aussi ont leur terrain. L'ennui c'est que ce terrain n'est souvent pas clairement délimité par les limites naturelles. Je penche plutôt pour la définition d'un polygone englobant car c'est souvent plus limité que l'élément naturel, même si les limites sont assez floues (particulièrement les bases nautiques qui peuvent exister aussi en mer et on ne va pas taguer non plus tout les océans, seulement les zones de départ avec certains équipements (ponton, quai, parcs et hangars à bateaux, parking d'accès...) Le 30 août 2014 18:53, Matthias Dietrich eiger@gmail.com a écrit : Bonjour, JOSM voudrait voir sport=* associé à un élément physique sur lequel ou dans lequel un sport est pratiqué. C'est ce que dit le wiki, où on trouve une liste d'objets associés: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sport Les natural=cliff, natural=arete, natural=couloir ou natural=stone n'y figurent pas. Maintenant pour répondre à ta question, en ce qui me concerne je mets sport=climbing sur ce qui va bien, et je laisse JOSM râler. Matthias Le 30 août 2014 18:06, Pierre Knobel pierr...@gmail.com a écrit : Bonjour, J'ai du mal à comprendre sur quels objets on peut rajouter sport=climbong. JOSM me donne une erreur sport without physical feature quand je rajoute ce tag sur une falaise ou une arête. Exemples : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300954193 (école d'escalade sur falaise) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/300954192 (arête avec passages d'escalade : http://www.camptocamp.org/routes/55445/fr/l-ecoutoux-l-arete-a-jojo) Comment est-ce que vous faites ? Pierre ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Sport=climbing pour escalade sur falaises et arêtes
Le samedi 30 août 2014 18:53:56 Matthias Dietrich a écrit : Bonjour, JOSM voudrait voir sport=* associé à un élément physique sur lequel ou dans lequel un sport est pratiqué. C'est ce que dit le wiki, où on trouve une liste d'objets associés: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sport Les natural=cliff, natural=arete, natural=couloir ou natural=stone n'y figurent pas. Salut, Je viens justement d'ajouter la Dent de la Rancune (Vallée de Chaudefour, Puy-de-Dôme) : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3048550276[1] natural=rock car ce n'est selon moi ni une falaise (cliff), ni un rocher (stone). Maintenant, si un grimpeur un peu plus au courant en a à redire … :-) -- Nicolas Dumoulin http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:NicolasDumoulin [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3048550276 ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
On 8/29/2014 9:41 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: And then I can point you to oddly connected roads, and a lack of buildings, or new buildings. Those things should certainly be mapped, but there are other projects to put historical data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
Russ Nelson wrote: I fear that the deletionism infection has jumped from Wikipedia to OpenStreetMap. ...is exactly what I was going to say. Seriously, OSM in the US, outside a few cities, is still way beyond broken. You can open it at any random location and the map is just fictional. (I did, just now: http://www.osm.org/edit#map=13/36.1938/-103.6446 . Half of those roads don't exist at all, and the other half are barely roads, certainly not residential ones as tagged.) Why would you (contentiously) delete railway=abandoned for an actual abandoned railway trackbed when the map has thousands, millions, of fictional or entirely mistagged roads and tracks? I know it's a long-standing OSM joke, but at this rate we _are_ going to have to import some Germans to the US, because it looks like the only way the map will ever get fixed. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Abandoned-railway-tp5815752p5815879.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
On 8/30/2014 4:33 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Seriously, OSM in the US, outside a few cities, is still way beyond broken. You can open it at any random location and the map is just fictional. (I did, just now:http://www.osm.org/edit#map=13/36.1938/-103.6446 . Landing on the high plains desert in the west does not make a good case that OSM in the US is broken. Desert imagery cues do not match those of conventional climates. Those roads likely do exist, but are barely visible in contrast to the surroundings. We city-folk would classify them as tracks, but a desert prospector or park ranger would consider them secondary. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
Il giorno 30/ago/2014, alle ore 10:33, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net ha scritto: Russ Nelson wrote: I fear that the deletionism infection has jumped from Wikipedia to OpenStreetMap. ...is exactly what I was going to say. Seriously, OSM in the US, outside a few cities, is still way beyond broken. You can open it at any random location and the map is just fictional. (I did, just now: http://www.osm.org/edit#map=13/36.1938/-103.6446 . Half of those roads don't exist at all, and the other half are barely roads, certainly not residential ones as tagged.) Why would you (contentiously) delete railway=abandoned for an actual abandoned railway trackbed when the map has thousands, millions, of fictional or entirely mistagged roads and tracks? +1, completely agree. Even if you don't care for abandoned railways and question their belonging in OSM, please respect others who actually do care. Deleting what someone has entered with great effort (and what is correctly tagged) will surely cause more harm than good to OSM as a whole (eg will frustrate and ultimately draw engaged mappers away from OSM). cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
Paul Norman writes: On 8/29/2014 9:41 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: And then I can point you to oddly connected roads, and a lack of buildings, or new buildings. Those things should certainly be mapped, but there are other projects to put historical data. Don't render them, then. Oh, wait, that's what you're already doing. I'm not understanding the problem here. If you want to start deleting things from OSM, the first thing that should be deleted is your access. -- --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-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
OK, I believe everyone has made their point here. Let’s leave it at this, or take it offline. — Martijn van Exel President, OpenStreetMap U.S. Chapter http://openstreetmap.us/ @openstreetmapus Elections for the 2014-2015 board Oct 4-12 - consider running for a board seat! From: Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com Reply: Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com Date: August 30, 2014 at 10:07:07 AM To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway Paul Norman writes: On 8/29/2014 9:41 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: And then I can point you to oddly connected roads, and a lack of buildings, or new buildings. Those things should certainly be mapped, but there are other projects to put historical data. Don't render them, then. Oh, wait, that's what you're already doing. I'm not understanding the problem here. If you want to start deleting things from OSM, the first thing that should be deleted is your access. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] 2014 Tiger Update
Good point. I’ll see about updating the JOSM layer, I am not sure the iD one uses the same imagery actually. — Martijn van Exel From: Hans De Kryger hans.dekryge...@gmail.com Reply: Hans De Kryger hans.dekryge...@gmail.com Date: August 29, 2014 at 11:45:40 PM To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-us] 2014 Tiger Update Released August 19, 2014 - https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html Anyone know if they will be added to I.D editor anytime soon? Regards, Hans http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
Mike N writes: On 8/30/2014 4:33 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Seriously, OSM in the US, outside a few cities, is still way beyond broken. You can open it at any random location and the map is just fictional. (I did, just now:http://www.osm.org/edit#map=13/36.1938/-103.6446 . Landing on the high plains desert in the west does not make a good case that OSM in the US is broken. That's a fair objection to that specific example. You are correct that it is not representative. Pick some place in Pennsylvania, if you want. Every time I cross over the border from New York into Pennsylvania, I shudder. If $X has the time to make OSM worse by deleting things, then $X surely has the time to do some armchair mapping to add things. If you're bored because your country is completely mapped, come visit the US. Pick any state's list of rivers and streams (other than NY) from Wikipedia, and start clicking. I'm happy to help anybody who wants to add to OSM. Verstehen Sie? -- --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-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
Mike N. wrote: Landing on the high plains desert in the west does not make a good case that OSM in the US is broken. Desert imagery cues do not match those of conventional climates. I really wish I could agree with you, Mike, but my experience is that ~75% of the US landmass is like that. I just randomly alighted on somewhere in Texas. It's the same story. 'highway=residential's that don't exist or are, at best, very faint farm tracks at the edge of a field. The majority of the roads I click on just aren't there. Now looking at somewhere random in Missouri. It's better - the geometries are reasonably well lined up with the imagery. I'd say that around two-thirds of the roads I'm clicking on are actually roads, and perhaps just one-third are faint tracks or just non-existent. The US community (and, dare I mention it, the late NE2) has done really well cleaning up the major road data. If you're going from somewhere biggish to somewhere biggish in a car, the routing will generally be good. I can happily get OSRM to route from town to town and it works fine. But that's not a map, that's a sparse routing graph. If I pick a random highway=residential anywhere in the US, I have no confidence that it'll be drivable in an average car or cyclable on an average bike. I certainly couldn't expect it to be a road principally for residential access, in the way that the rest of the world uses highway=residential. And that's without going into nice-to-haves like rivers and woodland and so on. I don't think people realise quite how far behind OSM is in the US (the biggest cities aside) compared to Western Europe. I can look anywhere in the Highlands of Scotland, or barely-inhabited Mid-Wales, and OSM will be right. Sure, some of the rarer footpaths might be missing and the stream geometry might be a bit skewiff, but most information will be there, and what's there will be correct. Similarly, la France profonde has come on in leaps and bounds over the last couple of years. I don't need to tell you about Germany. :) Fixing the rural US is eminently achievable, and achievable right now. A Tasking Manager instance, for a clearly defined project, would be great. I think you'd get the armchair mappers of the world rallying to the task. If you wanted to widen participation, you could probably build a MapRoulette-on-steroids that provided a fast retagging UI within the browser, with no need to fire up an editor. Or whatever. But we can't get to OSM's 20th birthday and still have the same problem. It needs to be fixed sooner or later, and my sense is that, at the current rate of progress, it will be later - probably not within the next ten years. Let's decide to make it sooner instead. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Abandoned-railway-tp5815752p5815918.html Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] 2014 Tiger Update
iD mostly uses https://github.com/osmlab/editor-imagery-index So if it is added as a layer there, it can be made available in iD very easily. So I think tiles need to be generated and the source needs to be added here: https://github.com/osmlab/editor-imagery-index/tree/gh-pages/sources/north-america Thanks, Bryan On Aug 30, 2014, at 12:12 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Good point. I’ll see about updating the JOSM layer, I am not sure the iD one uses the same imagery actually. — Martijn van Exel From: Hans De Kryger hans.dekryge...@gmail.com Reply: Hans De Kryger hans.dekryge...@gmail.com Date: August 29, 2014 at 11:45:40 PM To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-us] 2014 Tiger Update Released August 19, 2014 - https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html Anyone know if they will be added to I.D editor anytime soon? Regards, Hans http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
Hi. Let's stop this thread here, please. Thanks, Your friendly list admin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Landing on the high plains desert in the west does not make a good case that OSM in the US is broken. Desert imagery cues do not match those of conventional climates. Those roads likely do exist, but are barely visible in contrast to the surroundings. We city-folk would classify them as tracks, but a desert prospector or park ranger would consider them secondary. NO! We would *still* classify them as tracks! Because there's no good reason to classify them as more major, given consistency. We're trying to * not* break the routers, after all. Yes, I realize that the vast majority of county roads are *not* paved in my region. But to classify them as more major is a sickening choice, and would actually make OSM much worse than Yahoo Maps, given the situation that actually killed a Yahoo founder. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kim Just because it's a county road doesn't stop it from being a track. It might be a grade1 track, but that's still a track. Even on the most major tracks, even if they're capable of letting you hit the default speed limit in most counties (45 mph), I'd still consider them a track. Mostly because if it's not paved at all, there's a good chance that 1) it floods regularly, 2) it's not always the grade reported in OSM and therefore not always possible in all vehicles, and 3) completely irresponsible to represent them as something people unfamiliar are going to want to take. My comfort level in taking a Chevy Malibu over dozens of miles of county track, even if it's the shortest or fastest way, is going to be completely different from someone unfamiliar with the territory, and unfamiliar with the map's foibles in the region. At least in North America, I'm willing to go so far as to say as tagging any unpaved road as anything higher than track is Considered Harmful. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: NO! We would *still* classify them as tracks! Because there's no good reason to classify them as more major, given consistency. We're trying to * not* break the routers, after all. Yes, I realize that the vast majority of county roads are *not* paved in my region. But to classify them as more major is a sickening choice, and would actually make OSM much worse than Yahoo Maps, given the situation that actually killed a Yahoo founder. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kim Also, given that not all roads in ODOT's system are paved (yes, it's 2014, and there's substantial parts of Oregon's state highway system not paved!) and many of the unpaved roads in higher elevation areas are not open in the winter, with snow gates that are often buried completely and invisibly (probably contributing to Kim's death) thanks to a lack of snow removal, I really have a hard time justifying, at least in the north american case, that any unpaved route should ever get more than a track designation. These are routes that, with good reason, should be detoured around whenever possible. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
