Re: [Talk-us] Nominatim in CDP
Hi, So from my point of view as a nominatim developer the issue is that there are (at least?) 2 types of city in the USA. There are administrative cities and there are postal cities. There are also census areas, which may or may not be their own category of thing. At the moment all of these are tagged in exactly the same way: boundary=administrative type=boundary plus an admin_level There is nothing that lets us tell them apart so we are left to pick the 'best' city. Adding individual 'city' tags to houses doesn't help much. Do you mean admin city or postal city? Same issue. In most cases we actually want to find and link to both. So - my suggestion would be to introduce tagging that makes the distinction. Ideally to create boundary=postal or something like that rather than tagging every road or house with duplicate information. Thoughts? -- Brian On 24 June 2014 01:24, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: I reported this as a bug in trac. See https://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/5190 Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ 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-GB] Cycle routing over uncycleable BOATs
On 20 December 2012 23:36, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: (like the Unfit for Motors question, but for bicycles) I recently noticed that someone's changed the track between Stanage Pole and Redmires west of Sheffield to bicycle=no. It's been a few months since I was there (and the last time I was it was snowing horizontally) so I can't be sure but I suspect that this isn't correct - I think that it's a continuation of the BOAT that runs up Long Causeway. http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/92398784 Not sure it is the exact bit you are talking but I've cycled down this bit and I'd never do it again. 'Gravel' it isn't, rather it is boulders and sharp loose rocks with up to 2 foot drops. I made it to the bottom still on the bike but I think it is the closest I've ever come to dying on my bike. Up would probably be impossible, down is just stupid unless you are way better than I am. Is the best way to indicate you're legally allowed to cycle here but would be an idiot to try* to add an mtb:scale tag of 0, or is there some other accepted (by mappers and routers) way of doing this? I've previously added surface tags to the bits I've mapped around here but I wouldn't expect a router to understand random values in that. Hard to judge from the photos and I don't have the experience but I'd say a minimum of s3 maybe s4 due to the loose rocks on the bit I've linked. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-us] First vs 1st
On 28 November 2012 14:28, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 11/28/12 9:23 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: I think the key word here is abbreviated. In the OSM name, the un-abbreviated form should be used: name=Fourth Street To record the abbreviated form, you could use the following: short_name=4th St As with all abbreviations, sometimes they will appear on signs and sometimes the full word will be written out (often depending on size contstraints of the sign itself). which is ok, but is it documented and do any of the search entities (such as Nominatum) actually pay attention to it? and if this convention hasn't been followed, is it ok if search engines fail to find the streets because the wrong form is used? what i'm getting at is that naive users are likely to enter it in either form, so we should endeavor to have both forms work reliably. If you mapped is as above it would work in nominatim since both name and short_name are supported. Translation of 'Street' = 'St' is supported anyway but 'First' = '1st' isn't because that would require a large multilingual number database to resolve this in the general case. -- Brian ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] First vs 1st
On 29 November 2012 19:06, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 11/29/12 12:30 PM, Brian Quinion wrote: If you mapped is as above it would work in nominatim since both name and short_name are supported. Translation of 'Street' = 'St' is supported anyway but 'First' = '1st' isn't because that would require a large multilingual number database to resolve this in the general case. fixing it in the OSM database by adding both would require mappers everywhere to detect the issue and do the right thing. what are the odds on this happening? fixing it in the search engines would be a bunch of work, but has the potential to fix it consistently everywhere. I'm very happy for it to be fixed as you suggest, adding code to the geocoders is definitely preferable, I just don't have the bandwidth to get it done myself at the second. Also just wanted to make clear that any solution like this needs to handle multiple languages - I'm reluctant to get an english only solution. -- Brian ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-GB] FW: Office of National Statistics data
On 31 October 2012 12:25, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: Tom Hughes wrote: On 31/10/12 11:58, Steve Doerr wrote: On 31/10/2012 11:54, Tom Hughes wrote: On 31/10/12 11:51, Steve Doerr wrote: On 31/10/2012 11:44, Tom Hughes wrote: On 31/10/12 11:39, Steve Doerr wrote: Can we get this data into Nominatim? Why? What would it give us over the CodePoint Open data? Is that in there? I believe it is in Nominatim 2 yes. Is that different to what's used on www.openstreetmap.org for the Search box? That's where I want to see accurate postcode searching. The search box on www.osm.org uses nominatim.osm.org which as far as I know is running Nominatim 2 and includes Codepoint Open as a data source. Tom I've just tried searching osm.org for S42 7DT and the first answer is a street that is actually S42 7DY according to Chris's site. Is it perhaps just using the first S42 7## part? It does a search using the royal mail postcode but then returns only data found in OSM. It seems we might have lost the 'order by distance to the postcode' when I added the wikipedia importance code so it is now returning the 10 nearest roads in an arbitrary order. I'll try and get that fixed. I've always been concerned about merging the postcode data into the OSM output and lower lever indexing because of the uncertainty around the '© Royal Mail' part of the license. If this data is now being imported into OSM I assume I should now stop worrying about this? Or would people prefer that nominatim continues to only output true OSM data rather than a hybrid? -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] FW: Office of National Statistics data
On 31 October 2012 16:59, Kevin Peat k...@k3v.eu wrote: On 31 October 2012 14:50, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote: I think this is quite a confusing approach. Post code searches often end up returning the wrong street that is also near the centroid, houses that don't belong to that post code that happen to be nearby, and also weird objects like trees and car club parking bays. +1 on that. When I search for my own postcode, as well as the buildings actually tagged with it the pub car park next door is also returned and a nearby unclassified road neither of which have a postcode set. I think in a postcode search it would be better not to return things that could never have a postcode. Making this sort of distinction (what can have a postcode) is incredibly difficult - for instance NCP carparks do have a postcode. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Boundaries ...
On 23 September 2012 15:21, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: CP is part of the name in the OS Boundary-Line data. There doesn't seem to be any consensus or guidelines about what to put in the name tag. Should it be Dartford or Dartford Borough or Borough of Dartford or Dartford Council or something else? Is it naming the area, or the administrative entity governing it? As there are very many cases of areas at many levels named identically, from counties down to parishes, there needs to be some way of distinguishing between them. We have to watch out that we continue to distinguish distinct, unrelated hierarchies. In particular parish and ward mean different things according to the context. There are civil parishes, which are (by definition) a subarea of a higher-level local authority (normally district/borough or unitary authority) and ecclesiastical parishes: each religion/denomination has its own hierarchy of areas. The NHS has a geographic hierarchy as has Fire and Rescue. But they have only a certain correlation to governmental areas, with cases of one fire service serving multiple counties, and a counties being covered by multiple fire services (although I don't have an example of this to hand). An area at admin level 10 might be a civil parish, it might be an ecclesiastical parish, it might be an electoral ward etc etc. To me, boundary=administrative means the boundary belongs to government, which means it starts at level 2 with countries (leaving room for supra-national levels such as the EU) and includes regions, counties, unitary authorities, districts and civil parishes. Wards in this hierarchy should really be at admin level 11 (i.e. inferior to parishes). There are some special cases which don't fit the 100%: the Scilly Isles and City of London spring to mind. There is a hierarchy of parliamentary-electoral areas as well; the lowest quantum is the ward but these are not the same as the wards for local council purposes. Personally, and as the maintainer of nominatim I would be very happy to see admin_level dropped in favour of a set of specific tags (i.e. place=* or something similar). Admin_level is applied inconsistently and in ways that cause overlapping hierarchies. They also correlate badly between the place nodes and boundary relations - using a consistent set of tags across both would help no end in parsing the data! The current version of nominatim starts the process of linking admin boundaries to nodes - the next version will probably depreciate admin_level in favour of the place=* value from the label node where it is available. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[OSM-talk] Nominatim data and code updates
tl;dr: nominatim is updated (data and code), add wikipedia tags and label/admin_centre relation member to improve search quality. As some of you may have noticed Sarah (lonvia) has been busy updating the openstreetmap nominatim instance. It should now be fully up to date and back running live updates, so, if anyone is still finding data that they have added is not included please let us know by email on the geocoding mailing list, via trac (select nominatim component) or on either the #osm or #osm-nominatim irc channels. In the process of updating the data we also took the opportunity to release some code changes. Probably the most visible changes in this update are modification in how address hierarchy is calculated, a new technique for calculating the importance using wikipedia articles and a new system for deduplicating place and admin areas. As a result of these changes nominatim now supports a few extra tags that were previously ignored: 'wikipedia' tag [1] and its variants. Adding this allows nominatim to have a far better value for how important a place is which helps with the ordering, for instance a search for statue of liberty now consistently returns the correct one [2] first rather than the on on a traffic island in the UK [3]. If you find a place where the ordering of results is still bad consider adding suitable wikipedia links to the osm elements to help improve scoring. The new version of nominatim also supports both 'label' and 'admin_centre' relation members for boundary relations [4] which allows it to reduce the amount of duplicated data returned and produce a more consistent result set. The 'label' member will be merged (name and tags), relation tags win if there is a conflict. 'admin_centre' member will be merged only if the names and 'rank' (effectively admin_level / place=*) match, but other than that same rules. In both cases the node will also be added as the centre point of the polygon - i.e. the location that the map will centre on and this is returned in preference to the geometric centre of the polygon. If no 'admin_centre' and 'label' members are present the code will try to guess by looking for a node at the right admin level, name and approximate location - obviously explicit tagging is far better and more accurate. Thanks to all those who help with this update, in particular Sarah Hoffmann who did by far the majority of the work! -- Brian [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/32965412 [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/355219404 [4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary#Relation_members ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] administrative boundaries and Nominatim
On 1 August 2012 14:48, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for jumping on this discussion. Does the population tag have any significance to Nominatim? We import it as an extra tag but it has no current effect on importance / ranking. Using wikipedia turns out to simplify the ordering problem a lot - it lets us compare not just places but things like the statue of liberty or, for instance, is 'Paris' the beauty salon in london more important the Paris, Texas - we can do complete apples to oranges comparisons and get quite reasonable results. But this does assume we are able to link them to the correct wikipedia article and explicit tags definitely help there! -- Brian ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] administrative boundaries and Nominatim
Is it sensible to have a polygon for the boundary and also a node that locates precisely the cultural/logical center? Does Nominatim ignore the node when there is a same-named boundary? Or is there some way to have a relation for a town that has both a polygon and a center? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary Apparently you can add a node to the relation with role admin_centre. New version of nominatim supports both admin_centre and label relation members although it will also have a go at automatically merging them even if they are not explicitly tagged. The 'label' member will be merged (name and tags), relation tags win if there is a conflict. 'admin_centre' member will be merged only if the names and 'rank' (effectively admin_level / place=*) match, but other than that same rules. In both cases the node will also be added as the centre point of the polygon - i.e. the location that the map will centre on. This is a new property in the xml and json format and will be release with the new version. While doing this people may also wish to ensure that there is a wikipedia tag [1] which is now used as a basis to calculate relative importance of admin features. Adding this makes the ordering of results far better. -- Brian [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikipedia ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-GB] Millennium Greens Doorstep Greens
Searching OSM for name=Millennium Green shows that these are currently mapped as: * parks * village greens * nature reserves * recreation grounds * common land To me it looks like leisure=park is best (with the others used only when the exact same land area is also designated as one of the other types, all of which seem to have some official meaning). However this does not cover the Millennium Green status - perhaps designation=millennium_green? Alternatively we tag an area as leisure=millennium_green or designation=millennium_green just round the designated area and leave the park/common/whatever tag on a separate way (e.g. Millennium Greens may comprise part of a larger open space). Millennium Greens cover a wide range of on the ground usages. Same are clearly gardens, some parks, some nature reserves. Please do not retag these features to some perceived standard. I would also avoid overloading the designation key - better to have an explicit key than to reuse and existing key. About the only thing these area have in common is that they were all funded as part of the same project, if you want capture this information I would suggest something like: millennium_green=yes or how about: funding_source=Millennium Green -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Millennium Greens, Doorstep Greens CROW Open Area land
are clearly gardens, some parks, some nature reserves. Please do not retag these features to some perceived standard. I would also avoid overloading the designation key - better to have an explicit key than to reuse and existing key. About the only thing these area have in common is that they were all funded as part of the same project, if you want capture this information I would suggest something like: millennium_green=yes or how about: funding_source=Millennium Green -- Brian Yeah you're entirely right that the land cover can be different. They have to include significant natural area. The one closest to me is a mix of grassy areas and woodland. Oddly it misses one part of grassy area. There is a local nature reserve that includes all the grassed area but not the wood!! It would make sense to me to tag the whole area as leisure=park and then to tag the Millennium Green and Local Nature Reserve as 2 separate closed ways. The whole area isn't a park so don't tag it as such. It is an area covered by a funding program / financial trust. Perhaps the landuse tag can be used. The main issue here is that the area is Please do not reuse existing tags (designation, landuse, whatever) to mean something new. Create a new tag that is explicit. Reusing an existing tag causes huge problems for data users. It isn't a type of landuse - which describes the physical usage of the land. On second thoughts, there is a boundary proposal that could work well: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Reserve#Examples Looks like the boundary tag is already used: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dnational_park http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area Looking at the page on boundary=protected_area, perhaps class 7 is the right one for Millennium Greens? As Ed has said this probably isn't appropriate although it would seem closer. How about boundary=millennium_green ? Please - use a new tag. Don't try to twist an existing tag. Adding a new tag is not a bad thing - create it and document what you have done to the wiki. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Icons
On 28 June 2012 11:40, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: john whelan wrote: Could someone or a group come up with a more standard set of icons please? http://sjjb.co.uk/mapicons/ It is also now on github (https://github.com/twain47/Open-SVG-Map-Icons) so there is now an easy route to extend or assist in this project. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Nominatim and language tags
Hi, We are doing some work to improve the linking of name and name:xx tags in nominatim (basically adding better language fall backs) but in order to do that we need to have a list of which OFFICIAL languages are used in which countries. Since we've been unable to find such a resource I've started building one. You can find my first pass on the wiki here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Country_Codes but as you will see it is missing codes for a lot of the countries. So, rather than me spending the next few days of my life researching, and probably getting a lot of them wrong, could anyone who knows the official languages for a missing country go and fill them in? It would be much appreciated and will help to improve the presentation of nominatim search results! Official languages only (i.e. ones that are used on signs in that country), not languages that are simply spoken in that country. Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim and language tags
On 17 February 2012 14:24, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote: On 17/02/2012 14:08, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: What is the official language? This is not always unambigous for every part of the national territory. Even in Germany with few minorities there are exceptions (e.g. [1] de: Mittlerweile lautet der § 184 des Gerichtsverfassungsgesetzes: „Die Gerichtssprache ist deutsch. Das Recht der Sorben, in den Heimatkreisen der sorbischen Bevölkerung vor Gericht sorbisch zu sprechen, ist gewährleistet.“ - In areas with a majority of Sorbs [2] they have the right to speak Sorbian at court). cheers, Martin [1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorben#Rechtliche_Grundlagen [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbs ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk What they're actually looking for is the language which mappers usually use for the unqualified name tag: 'Please do not list all languages used in a country only the official language that would be used by the name tag.' (as is says on the wiki page). Yup, this. Which means it isn't always quite the same as the standard list of official languages. But probably something could be done with wikipedia to pre-populate most of it. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
On 27 July 2011 23:10, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Kay Drangmeister k...@drangmeister.net wrote: That, to me, is a convincing argument to tag the unabbreviated form and let software (easily) do the abbreviation, instead of tagging the abbreviation and have software do the (next to impossible) task to un-abbreviate. name is what is on (the majority of) the signs Anything else belongs in a different tag (long_name, full_name, pedants_name, whatever) Speaking as someone who has to use this data can I make a plea for unabbreviated names to always be used. As has been repeatedly mentioned it is relatively easy to go from a full names to abbreviations, going the other way is virtually impossible without errors. To give you an idea of the size of the problem have a look at the nominatim abbreviation list [1] - once you add them for every country it is difficult enough to cope with just going from full to abbreviation let alone the reverse. Now that said I don't really care which tag is used for the 'full' name. I'd personally prefer the name tag was used for this because it has always been the policy of OSM that the name tag includes the full unabbreviated name. Really - this has been one of the few points of (until recent conversation) agreement. My preference would be to add a common_name (or the existing short_name) and to render that in preference to name on the map. -- Brian [1] http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/nominatim/module/tokenstringreplacements.inc ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] shortened names
I think the main issue now is whether St at the beginning of English place names is an abbreviation for Saint, or actually part of the place name as St, and whether the same rule applies to street names. And not just at the beginning, thinking about it. I don't think I'd ever write Bury Saint Edmunds (mapped as Bury St. Edmunds in OSM). Ask any English speaker in the UK what the 'st' in Bury St Edmunds means and they will tell you it is an abbreviation for Saint. St. is an abbreviation. It's just a very common one and an unusual case that we don't want to render the full 'Saint' on the map because it would look odd. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Nominatim updates paused
Hi, The live install of nominatim has run out of integers on it's primary key and the database is being updated to use bigint. Sorry for the lack of notice - this rather caught me by surprise! Until this is completed there will be no updates. Because of the size of the database and the software changes needed to support this it will probably take most of next week to complete - as such the ETA for completing this work is 13th of June. Apart from updates the service should operate as normal. Anyone using the MapQuest NPI (pre-indexed files) will need to run an update script to update the fields in their local database - I'll post this as soon as I've finished testing it locally. Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Skip geographical (redundant) address tags
The lookup may be efficient, it is frequently wrong and again dependent of correct and complete admin_levels. Currently it places every street where I live (in the Netherlands) in Belgium and does not specify a town with it. Looking for Jacob van Marisring returns Jacob van Marisring, België 51.32,51.32 14558705 (Residential). Searching for Jacob van Marisring, Helden even returns an error. I was unaware I still had the country wrong for some places, I thought I'd found and fixed all these. Recalculating the street now produces the right result (as you can see if you re-do your search) so I'll do another forced update and try and get the last of these problems fixed. Also note that in the FAQ page of nominatim, the suggestion is done to fix errors by adding addr: or is_in: tags. I feel you are rather miss-quoting the FAQ: If a street or higher level feature (city, town, county, etc.) has the wrong address you can either add a is_in tag to provide an explicit address or, *preferably, draw a polygon or create an admin boundary relation for the feature that should contain it*. note the second half of the sentence! -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim updates
Hi, http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/search?q=fuelnearlat=43.5nearlon=7format=xml Is there any plan to bring this kind of (very useful !) search back ? I've fixed this - a column had changed name - thanks for the bug report. BTW - you may find that using the new bounded=1 option provides more control: http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/search?q=[fuel]viewbox=-1.54%2C53.41%2C-1.43%2C53.36bounded=1 bounded=1 limits the search to only items in the viewbox the [] around fuel force it to be interpreted as a tag search (so it won't find places called 'fuel') Hope this helps. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim updates
On 28 January 2011 14:47, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote: For me, reverse lookups are completely wrong right now. (I haven't tried forward lookups). And the status indication on nominatim.openstreetmap.org is blank. So I figure he's doing a DB rebuild or something. http://osm.org/?lat=-25.797306lon=28.289618zoom=18 Thanks for reporting this - this should also now be fixed. It was finding the nearest road with houses on rather than just the nearest road - a bit of an edge case this one because the road you wanted doesn't have houses but all the ones nearby do. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Most complete cities and administrative divisions database
I was asking about its administrative boundary. So, after reading http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place, what I understand is that : - Cities are marked as nodes - Sometimes, there are additional ways (boundary=administrative) to delimit the administrative boundary - As a bonus, there can be relations that link the city node to its boundary. Yes So now, let's go with other administrative divisions : Now, let's say I want to add an entry for Orange County. How should I do it ? Should it just appear as a boundary=administrative, or should there be some kind of node node and a relation ? Well, stage 1 should be to check if it exists or not - which it does I think: http://open.mapquestapi.com/nominatim/v1/search.php?q=Orange+Countypolygon=1 But, ignoring that if you have the data creating it as a relation is normally best. The nodes are mostly a legacy where an area initially didn't have a boundary=administrative relation and it was added afterwards. For some reason people seem reluctant to delete the node - probably because the node allows more accurate label placement (tagging for renderer - naughty!) -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Nominatim updates
Hi, On Monday morning I'm intending to switching the existing nominatim service over to an updated code base designed to allow better scaling and additional data sources (tiger, external postcode sets, etc) as well as being the first stage of various other improvements. With any luck the only externally visible difference should be in improvement in US search quality, however it is possible that there will be some other minor differences. If you spot any problems please email me or contact me on IRC (twain47). In particular please let me know if you spot something that used to work and now doesn't. The new service is currently a couple of weeks behind on data but catching up rapidly - I'm expecting it to be fully up to date by the end of the week and once it gets there is should be able to handle updates more quickly and reliably. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-de] Post offices near Lünen
mit post office near Lünen kriege ich ein Ergebnis; post offices geht offensichtlich tatsächlich nicht. Ticket erstellt. http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/3451 In der Wortliste (die jeder ergänzen darf!) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Special_Phrases/EN ist die Pluralform eigentlich drin, also wohl ein Nominatim Bug. Wortliste DE: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Special_Phrases/DE Sorry for the English. The new word lists have not yet gone live. This problem was one of the reasons for creating the new wiki pages because previously we were missing plurals and variations. The version using the new wiki word lists will go live next week. In the mean time I have manually added 'post offices' to resolve this. Google translate for what it is worth: Die neue Wort-Listen sind noch nicht aktiv. Dieses problem wurde auch einer der gründe für die schaffung der neuen wiki-seiten, weil wir vorher fehlende pluralformen und variationen. Die version mit dem neuen wiki-wort-listen werden live gehen nächste Woche. In der zwischenzeit habe ich manuell hinzugefügt post offices, um dieses problem zu. -- Brian ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Post offices near Lünen
When searching Bank nah Lüdinghausen I get (money)banks and benches (Sitzbanken / amenity=bench) in the result list, because in german bank has this two meanings. About an hour ago I deleted the 'bank' = 'amenity=bench' mapping to remove some general problems it was causing. I agree this needs resolving but I will come back to it at some point in the future. -- Brian ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] address parsing by nominatim
2) We so many times have blocks or sectors (tagged as locality or hamlet) OK - this sounds like a combination of bad tagging and software problems with nominatim and the mapnik style sheet. Can I suggest that locality and hamlet are probably not the correct tags and that you need to come up with a consistent way to tag these types of features. Once there is a valid tagging scheme support can be added to nominatim. The suggestion of place=block or place=sector and addr:block, addr:sector sound like a good direction to go. So 1) they need to be documented on the wiki 2) discussed to look for any problems - for instance do they work in other countries with similar problems? 3) a sample area needs to be tagged 4) software tools need to be extended to support the new tags. This can potentially be done quite quickly - and using tags which do not overlap with existing tags makes this a LOT simpler! -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] address parsing by nominatim
2011/1/10 ヴィカス ヤダヴァ (vikas yadav) mevi...@gmail.com: I used hamlet for my block as pop limit of 1000 is given = satisfied I used suburb for it is neither a village or a town but holds 2 ~ 10 blocks = suggest We do have villages within cities and they have been tagged properly, villages never have sub areas or blocks. Therefore, sectors are not villages. You seem to be determined to force the existing tagging scheme onto a situation for which is was not designed. It as far better to use new and appropriate tags that reflect the actual situation - software support should follow fairly rapidly if you come up with a suitable tagging scheme. Using hamlets, villages and incorrectly named roads to try to hack the various software will not work and is very unlikely to be supported by any of the software. Pierre-Alain Dorange's suggestion to use admin_level and some type of boundary is another reasonable way to approach the problem - although I would suggest that your probably want to create something like admin_level=11 or maybe even 12. 6 Is definitely too low. You may also be able to find inspiration in the tagging of Japan - my understanding is that they have a similar approach and may already have created a suitable scheme. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim US places
it's not really leading anywhere, in part due to the fact that noone from Nominatim has spoken up. i did just review the Hi. Yes, I've been off doing new year type things. I'm playing catchup on my email now - and I've still got a hangover so please accept my apologies if anything is incoherent. First of all I'm already working on a lot of this - I'm aware of the US address problems and working on improving the code and adding extra data (i.e. tiger) to improve the quality so it may just be sensible to ignore the whole problem for a couple of weeks and see what happens. Nominatim stuff i found in the wiki. they want postal code polygons in the database; in the US this is the extremely iffy zip code boundary stuff that probably shouldn't go in. i think there are some architectural issues to be resolved, but this is If postcode polygons don't work use 'addr:postcode' on roads or buildings/properties. There are also special tiger:zip tags from the initial import which I've recently added support for which should go live shortly. but i did find a workaround. i added is_in=Averill Park, NY, US The post towns idea in the US isn't one that nominatim currently supports and it would probably be better to work out a correct way of tagging this rather than missusing the existing tags. I'm vaguely aware of the issue - but it would probably be better for tagging suggestions to come from the US community who understand the situation on the ground. A couple of possible suggestions: additional boundaries tagged 'boundary=posttown' or tagging streets with addr:city but both of these would need code added to nominatim for them to work properly and should ideally be done in such a way as not to disrupt other data users. what i still don't get is how it figures out the correct zip code of 12018 for the displayed result string, i guess there's some research to be done yet. I've back ported some code from the new version a couple of weeks back which tries to improve postcode handling for addresses but this is just the first stage. Really I think the zip code stuff is pretty much a solved problem (or will be shortly) the post town issues are probably more significant. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim US places
I agree. Don't forget it is the holiday and people take more time to reply. What would be nice from Nominatim point of view is the creation of a page where you would enter your test cases and what you expect. That would allow the developer of nominatim to include those in his test suite. It would make sense as not everyone understands the subtlety of a different adressing system. Such a page would be perfect for people to add knowledge.about their country. Geocoding is not something trivial. This sounds helpful and it sort of already exists (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/TestCases) although at the moment it is more about test cases for search strings rather than how the addresses should be presented or formatted. On a related topic it would probably also makes sense to start trying to put together a more formalised version of the pages on address formats - both in terms to the different ways that people enter search strings and the format which should be used for outputting addresses for different types of featured. The following are both good starts but are not very easy to convert into rules for software: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Name_finder/Address_format http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Geocoding -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Nominatim Special Phrases and improving search
Hi, I'm changing how Nominatim handles the special phrases which are used to search for particular key=value pairs. Up until now these phrases have been imported from the translatewiki but this is now turning out to be to limited - in particular regarding the ability to capture the differences between phrases that should search for things 'near' somewhere, or 'in' somewhere or 'named' something. There are also problems with capturing the different plural version of words and the different language forms. As a result of all this I've now moved the these phrases into the wiki as a set of tables - one table/page per language. The base page (which links to all the currently languages) and contains a full explanation can be found here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Special_Phrases In a lot of cases these pages have been machine generated with very little understanding of the particular languages and will contain numerous errors and omissions so at this point I'm now looking for volunteers to go through these pages and fix them up, or indeed to add completely new languages. I'm afraid its a fairly boring and repetitive task - I should know I've been correcting the English language version myself - but it is something which can result in a a significant improvement of the search system. Please feel free to copy or translate this message onto any of the other mailing lists. Many thanks for any assistance! -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language
On 6 December 2010 11:41, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Erik, On 12/06/10 11:19, Erik Johansson wrote: :-) Well does anyone have code to add name as local language in postgis, what are the options? Lets not complicate your remark by enumerating all multilingual areas in the world, where names means power The question was about Nominatim originally. As far as I am aware, Nominatim already makes an effort to find out in which country something lies (so it can give the country in the result list) - so it should be trivial to employ a country-language code mapping and always assume that the given name is in the country's default language, no? This is the approach I've already taken - the next version of Nominatim has a field country_default_language_code as part of the country details (http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/nominatim/data/country_name.sql). This list is entirely of my own construction and probably misses quite a few countries default languages. I welcome any improvements! This approach really only works for countries with a single primary language, for instance it won't work well in Switzerland, but in general people in countries with multiple primary languages are more careful about how they tag languages so actually ti resolves most of the problems. Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Explicit tagging of name language
On 6 December 2010 13:18, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Brian Quinion openstreetmap at brian.quinion.co.uk writes: This list is entirely of my own construction and probably misses quite a few countries default languages. I welcome any improvements! Shouldn't it be tagged as part of the map, rather than a separate file? Feel free to move the data into the map - if this happens I will probably write something to import it into the table. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Voluntary re-licensing begins
I really want to be able to click 'Agree' and 'make it PD' but section 1 worries me as it states that I agree to only add Contents for which [I am] the copyright holder. This seems to preclude me being able to add any data I've imported from an outside source (like tracing from OS Street View) since, while the license is compatible (given OS attribution), I am not the copyright holder. Am I just misunderstanding the legal talk in the CTs or is this sort of importing currently unacceptable under the CTs? Never mind. It appears that I somehow managed to miss the bit that said If You are not the copyright holder of the Contents, You represent and warrant that You have explicit permission from the rights holder to submit the Contents and grant the license below. Could you point to the document from OS that gives explicit permission? I would love to find such a document. As far as I'm concerned at the moment: I am not the copyright holder. I do not have explicit permission (implicit permission is not the same) So I can't sign up - and I don't think legally you were able to either :( There is some possibility that traces are deriving data from OS StreetView do not contain any copyrightable elements, again I'm waiting for a written document confirming this from either OSMF (which would accept any future liability if it turned out to be wrong) or from the OS. No-one is going to violate any licenses (if that's what the supplies of the imported data are worried about) since legally we _can't_. That clause is simply there so that we have flexibility in the future to re-license without so much of a hoo-ha as this time :) There is no restriction in the CT (that I can see) in terms of them not being able to switch to a PD license. And my reading is that as a result of signing up to the terms you have effectually indemnified OSMF against any consequences and agreed that you are liable if they do. I would be VERY happy to be wrong about any of this. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Voluntary re-licensing begins
On 12 August 2010 14:37, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 12/08/10 12:51, Brian Quinion wrote: Could you point to the document from OS that gives explicit permission? I would love to find such a document. It's here: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/licence/docs/licence.pdf Unfortunately it does not, as far as I can see, allow anybody who has used, or plans to use, OS OpenData to sign the CTs as things stand because it requires: You must: * acknowledge the copyright and the source of the Data by including any attribution statement specified by the Data Provider. If no specific statement is provided please use the following: Contains [insert name of Data Provider] data Š Crown copyright and database right * include the same acknowledgment requirement in any sub-licences of the Data that you grant, and a requirement that any further sub-licences do the same; Which is clearly in conflict with the CTs which require you to grant OSMF a license to sublicense any data you upload under a license of their choosing subject only to a constraint that the license they choose is open and free which clearly does not restrict their choice to licenses that would pass on the attribution requirement. Yes this was exactly the issue I was referring to, the compatibility between the OS OpenData License and the Contributor Terms. Thanks for clarify this rather better than I did! Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Change - moving forward
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Mike Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: If you support the share-alike concept, I urge you to accept the new Contributor Terms which provides for a coherent Attribution, Share-Alike license written especially for databases. If you are a Public Domain license supporter, we are divided as a community on which is best and I do urge you to give this one a good try. The Contributor Terms is expressly written to allow us to come back in future years and see what is best without all this fuss about procedure. And if you'd just really like all this hoo-haa to go away and get back to mapping, well, please say yes. One question: Given that you can't (legitimately) sign up to the CT if you have used data which you are not the copyright owner how will we deal with the situation where someone who HAS imported external data signs up to the Contributor Terms? In some ways it is their own problem, they have warranted that they are the legal owner and accepted responsibility for any resulting copyright infringement but this seems a trifle unfair since they may not have understood the implications and it also still leaves OSMF to resolve the future copyright disputes. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Change - moving forward
Given that you can't (legitimately) sign up to the CT if you have used data which you are not the copyright owner how will we deal with the situation where someone who HAS imported external data signs up to the Contributor Terms? In some ways it is their own problem, they have warranted that they are the legal owner and accepted responsibility for any resulting copyright infringement but this seems a trifle unfair since they may not have understood the implications and it also still leaves OSMF to resolve the future copyright disputes. If you have derived data from a source that allows deriving to OSM then I'd say you are fine. This would cover tracing from aerial imagery. If we were dealing with the world of copyright and creative works this would be similar to taking a photograph of a bonsai plant after being granted permission to take the photograph. If you've imported data from a source that allows importation to OSM, again I'd say that you are okay. If you've imported data from a source based only on license compatibility in the last three years you'd have to have been uninformed or thoughtless to do it without giving the license upgrade some consideration as stated in the import guidelines since January 2008. My point was that people can easily get themselves into a situation where they are legally liable by clicking the accept link and there is insufficient warning. IMO it should say in big letters 'If you have imported data for which you are NOT the copyright owner you CAN NOT accept the Contributor Terms' otherwise we are encouraging, even recommending that people breach copyright. There also needs to be a process for people who have signed the contributor terms in error to un-sign or some way for them to be assisted in removing their 'tainted' data so they are no longer in breach. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Problems with names with postfixes / types
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:57 AM, woll w...@2-islands.com wrote: Better to keep this thread restricted to the subject of is it valid to tag names with postfixes, and have any technical discussions separately in the trac report! Yes - it was probably a mistake to reference the ticket in this message, I was really just supplying some background. The basic question is the one you have stated - Is it valid to tag names with postfixes? And spiting it down: Are there circumstances where it is / is not valid? Should different versions of the name be split into seperate tags? e.g. name:ja = 福岡福岡市 base_name:ja = 福岡 Is including the 市 tagging for render or is this the 'real' name? How do we define the 'real' name for consistency? Basically it would make my life a lot easier as a data user if there was some hard and fast rules in this :) -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Problems with names with postfixes / types
Hi, I've been handed a search bug regarding being unable to search for 福岡 (Fukuoka) [1]. This has been caused by all cities in Japan being entered in the form 福岡市 (Fukuoka City). I would normally regard this as a tagging error because the fact that it is a city is defined by the place=city tag - but in this case it is country wide [2] There has also been a recent increase in this happening in other places. For example places in the UK like Leverton CP [3] where CP standard for Civil Parish, and a few relations in Germany now tagged 'xxx Stadt'. There are probably other examples I haven't noticed. Up till now it has been my opinion that all items entered with the the type in the name were in error and I have been marking all such items 'will not fix' and telling people to fix the data instead - but maybe this is just my opinion rather than the correct decision. Anyway I'd like to promote a discussion on the topic and hopefully reach some sort of consensus. Options? -- Brian [1] http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/3149 [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Japan_tagging [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/660893 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: Total time 6 minutes Hundreds of hours, yeah right. What you have given is an absolute minimum time for someone who already understands to actually edit the files. You've skipped research, testing and deployment. The program I've been talking about uses osm2pgsql and mapnik so I'm well aware of them. If your smart you could probably add the emergency data without having to totally rerun osm2pgsql. Smart takes time to think about / time to code. You don't seem to have included any time for it in your 6 minutes. Also as you say you are well aware of osm2pgsql and mapnik, you might even say expert. So your 6 minutes is the time for an expert to make the changes - most people are not experts. Let me give you an alternate time-line at the other end of the scale: Receive and read bug report that map symbol for police no longer appears (2 min) Research why it no longer appears (20 minutes of reading wiki and mailing lists) Research on how to add emergency to the database (20 more minutes of reading the wiki) Deicide on process to fix bug (10 minute meeting between developer and server admin) Produce patch to fix issue (we'll go with your 6 min) Re-import database - this person doesn't understand osm well enough to do something 'clever' (20 min monitoring over a few days) Test (2 min) Work out why it doesn't appear (5 min - your patch is actually very slightly wrong btw, can you spot your mistake?) Test (2 min) Deploy to live server (another 20 min monitoring) Retest (2 min) Close bug (2 min) Total time: as near to 2 hours as makes no difference. Let's say the average is an hour - I think it's fair some people will do it in 10 minutes, some will will spend 2 hours trying to work out what to change and another hour on IRC asking for help! Let's say there are 100 people using mapnik / osm in the world - I'm sure it's more than that :) 1 * 100 = 100 hours just on mapnik. However the above is just for fun - lets replace my original statement with 'a lot of time' and move on... -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote: Better yet - just don't change it. This sort of change just isn't worth the pain and hundreds of developer hours that could be better spent on moving the project forward. Yes - this sort of change might make the tag heirachy prettier - but not enough to justify the work. Garbage. It's not hundred of hours of developer work to change this. If the renderer programming is up to scratch then it should be able to automatically accept changes like this. One of the programs I have done some development on has this built in. Well done. Pretty much none of the others do. I look forward to your patches :) Mapnik for instance has manual rules - they will need to be changed. Worse than that osm2pgsql (the import tool) only imports certain keys so implementing emergency=* requires a complete reimport of the database - about 30 hours even on very good hardware. Then the changes need to be tested and deployed. I can get to 3 or 4 hours of actual developed work without even trying. Now times that by the number of applications. For applications that are deployed to the desktop or mobiles the situation is even worse - it might not be possible to release a new version of the time being, the change might have to wait for the next update cycle and then all the users have to actually get round to updating. Or maybe they have to code in some sort of hack to change the new tag back to the old tag for compatibility. And what about multi-lingual support? A lot of apps are in multiple languages, they might well need to go back to their translators and check that the new tagging doesn't result in a subtle change in meaning. But all this is the tip of the iceberg - you are missing the time it takes to monitor the tagging list (most developers will not even be on it), to find out which changes are important and to work out if things are exactly equivalent or if there is a change of meaning. I think hundreds was a fairly reasonable number. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
Discussing this for a day on the Tagging list is not enough for you to make this change. How much time should it take? I didn't really set a dead line but was trying to get comments on the idea... A change that breaks every editor / renderer / search data user ? 6 months minimum before you change any data IMO. And that is a minimum if lots of people seem to think it is a good idea. Better yet - just don't change it. This sort of change just isn't worth the pain and hundreds of developer hours that could be better spent on moving the project forward. Yes - this sort of change might make the tag heirachy prettier - but not enough to justify the work. If you choose to use this new tag no-one will stop you - it won't work, render or do anything but no-one will stop you. The moment you start destroying other peoples work though you are a vandal. BTW - commenting on a message you just sent. amenity=ambulance_station will work for search automatically, emergency=ambulance_station won't because it isn't supported - lets hope that isn't important to any of the users who's data you just broke. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Brian Quinion openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk wrote: Discussing this for a day on the Tagging list is not enough for you to make this change. How much time should it take? I didn't really set a dead line but was trying to get comments on the idea... A change that breaks every editor / renderer / search data user ? I don't understand this argument. Doesn't every tag change anywhere break every editor/renderer/search/data user whether or not you think it is correct? John has just as much right to go change all the amenity= tags to something more specific as you do to keep them the same. Data consumers of all kinds need to accept both kinds of changes. No. Adding a new type tag just doesn't work yet. Replacing an existing tag takes something that worked and stops is working (hence breaks). Changing tags in a sensible way is hard - which is why it happens so rarely. There is no way that OSM can be taken seriously as a data source if we just randomly switch tags without giving data users adequate time to respond. As to John's edits being equally valid. Also no - that like saying that my deleting every park or retagging every park 'fish=yes' is equally valid. Some edits make the data better - some make it worse. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM-to-PostGIS issues
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Juan Lucas Domínguez Rubio juan_lucas...@yahoo.com wrote: Yes, sorry, here is the command and error message: http://www.prodevelop.es/files/fm/public/downloads/wxp_console.png Slim uses 800MB of ram as a cache by default (change with -C) Postgresql is configured to use 256MB of shared ram plus 256MB of working memory. That gives you a peak usage of at least 1312MB on a 1536MB machine during index creation (it will actually be a little higher) leaving about 200MB for the entire rest of windows. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Compatible licenses
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:01 AM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: * Currently you can import any data with a compatible licence (e.g. CC-BY-SA, CC-BY), you can't if we change without the copyright holder's permission This is a tremendous improvement in my opinion. I'd like to see every data publisher as informed and enthusiastic about having contributed to OpenStreetMap as the everyday mapper. Have the Ordnance Survey given permission to OSMF for data to be imported under the terms of the contributor agreement? My reading of the contributor terms is that I have to be the copyright owner of all data I add. But some of the data I've added recently was based on OSSV tracing and as such I don't own the copyright - I'm licensed to use it SS-BY by Ordnance Survey. As such as of the second I added something based on licensed data I am unable to sign up to the contributor terms. Please correct me if you spot a mistake here - I'd love to know what I've missed. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] maori/english search oddities for nz towns
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Robin Paulson robin.paul...@gmail.com wrote: well, here's an odd thing: if i search for pahia from firefox 3.6, it returns 'Pahia, New Zealand' if i search from IE7, it returns 'Pahia, Aotearoa' . Aotearoa is the Maori name for New Zealand. or rather, new Zealand is the English name for Aotearoa any suggestions why? can someone else try this, and see what happens 2 Part answer: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/556706 Aotearoa is used because it is the default name if it can't find a language match. Firefox sends a language sequence of EN-AU, EN, ... IE apparently only sends EN-AU (no pure EN) This would seem to be a bug in IE - it should be sending a complete list of languages in order not just the country specific version. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Strange Search Result in Devon or should that be Kelland Cross?
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@... writes: Well, the bit _I'm_ wondering about is 'Devon County'!! Should now be fixed: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5148177 I expect it'll take some time for Nominatim to pick up the new data. On a related topic can I point out the large number of items being added named CP, Civil Parish or Parish at the moment. A few examples: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/947839 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/920051 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/910918 These will all suffer from a similar problem. Could I suggest possibly adding place=civil parish (or something similar) and not including this in the name. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Strange Search Result in Devon or should that be Kelland Cross?
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 06/07/10 14:00, Brian Quinion wrote: On a related topic can I point out the large number of items being added named CP, Civil Parish or Parish at the moment. A few examples: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/947839 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/920051 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/910918 These will all suffer from a similar problem. Could I suggest possibly adding place=civil parish (or something similar) and not including this in the name. Sure, and what's with all the _SHOUTY_TAGS_WITH_UNDERSCORES_ shit? In this case ask SK53. I'd assume he is using some sort of automated import tool. Each of these relations was imported by a different user and there are others loading them from the OS data as well - hence the general post rather than messaging the individual user. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OS Locator - using in JOSM
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:19 PM, Robert Scott li...@humanleg.org.uk wrote: On Wednesday 21 April 2010, David Dixon wrote: I've been playing with the OS OpenData Locator dataset, which contains the XY coordinates for the ends midpoint of many of the UK's roads. This gazetteer appears to complement the StreetView data - some (short) streets whose names are absent from StreetView are included in OS Locator. Conversely, some streets named in StreetView are absent from OS Locator. This has been on my todo list since the data came out. I'm hoping to get to it next weekend during the hack weekend but if anyone else gets to it first I'll do something else! -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Post code areas
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: we're thinking about importing post code areas in Germany. Are post code areas being mapped in other countries already, and if so, using what tagging schema? I was thinking of creating multipolygon boundary relations with boundary=post_code_area or so. I don't think there is much consistency on anything postcode related (beyond addr:postcode postal_code nodes) so my feeling would be that implementing a nice solid spec would help everyone. Can I ask you to take into account that postcodes/zipcodes apply at different levels of details in different countries, and in some cases there are multiple levels of details even within the same country. As such perhaps something like either: boundary=street_postal_code | district_postal_code | city_postal_code street_postal_code = 425253 or boundary = postal_code postal_code = 425253 postal_code_level = street | town | city | county or even boundary = postal_code street_postal_code = B35 1RT Otherwise data users have to guess the level of detail based on the content of the postcode and the country. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Post code areas
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:06 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 April 2010 01:51, Brian Quinion openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk wrote: boundary=street_postal_code | district_postal_code | city_postal_code street_postal_code = 425253 or boundary = postal_code postal_code = 425253 postal_code_level = street | town | city | county That doesn't make sense for Australian postcodes, check out the links I posted... From the wiki link you posted Australian postcodes are approx. suburb level / admin_level 8 The data you are importing already includes an admin_level = 8 tag which is exactly the same concept as the above. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Post code areas
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:16 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 April 2010 02:13, Brian Quinion openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk wrote: On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:06 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 April 2010 01:51, Brian Quinion openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk wrote: boundary=street_postal_code | district_postal_code | city_postal_code street_postal_code = 425253 or boundary = postal_code postal_code = 425253 postal_code_level = street | town | city | county That doesn't make sense for Australian postcodes, check out the links I posted... From the wiki link you posted Australian postcodes are approx. suburb level / admin_level 8 The data you are importing already includes an admin_level = 8 tag which is exactly the same concept as the above. I meant about street/town/city/county... since some postcodes are half a state in size... but never smaller than a suburb... Well, yes. But full UK postcodes can cover either all, or part of a street, or a single building - I'd still naturally call them a street level postcode (as opposed to a building or suburb level). I'd assume that the preferred usage would be defined per country in the same way that admin_level and road to highway types are. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Post code areas
Brian Quinion wrote: boundary=street_postal_code | district_postal_code | city_postal_code street_postal_code = 425253 I'm having difficulties in grasping this concept. In Germany we have 5-digit post codes, and the associated regions vary in size depending on how densely populated an area is. So a five-digit code might sometimes encompass a whole region, sometimes a town, sometimes just a quarter. That doesn't technically make them different kinds of post codes, and any labeling like street/district/city would be purely the mapper's guess. I've not explained well. My point is that different countries have postcodes that work at different scales. Some countries have multiple sets of postcodes for different levels of detail. When trying to process data on a world wide basis it would make life easier for data processors if boundary=post_code did not to refer to a completely different level of detail depending on the country. Effectively at the moment the postal_code tag can mean something very different in two different countries despite being the same tag. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] London Underground roundel
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 2:01 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: As long as there is a consistent tag to base it on (e.g. operator) it should be very straightforward (he says, never having looked at the code!)- but in implementation it must be very similar to amnenity=place_of_worship subdividing by religion=christian church icons and religion=islamic mosque icons. I think it's the bureaucracy that is the harder issue. It's the amount of admin required and finding someone that has the time to spend creating, maintaining the logos (and presumably getting permission to use them) and to create the rules. Also, the icons need to be of a certain quality (for mapnik certainly). As a one off it is trivial but... The other question is where do we stop? It's certainly a whole can of worms and once the first one is on the map it will be hard to stop it snowballing. My feeling is that someone keen should investigate this on this own map server before attempting anything like this on the official mapnik layer. But starting the process of collecting logos and permissions is definitely a good thing. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Haiti street names
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 5:38 PM, David Fawcett david.fawc...@gmail.com wrote: How often is Nominatim being updated? I am watching for an update to show up before I mark it as a 'yes' in the PaP street names table. http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/haiti/ should be updated approx. once an hour. Any problems or missing data let me know and I'll investigate asap. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] problems with nominatim
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Stan Berka stan.be...@gmail.com wrote: I have problems with Nominatim search. If I search for saint clare church, Portland, Oregon, United States of America, I get no results. If I change the search to ... Portland, Washington ..., I get the correct result. And as you can guess the result suggests that Portland is in Washington. Whom do I contact to correct this? Relation for Washington is broken: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/165479 http://betaplace.emaitie.de/webapps.relation-analyzer/analyze.jsp?relationId=165479 Relation for Oregon, which is reported as working but for some reason osm2pgsql isn't able to find a closed polygon - it ends up as a line string: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/165476 http://betaplace.emaitie.de/webapps.relation-analyzer/analyze.jsp?relationId=165476 Without a polygon all Nominatim can do is guess... -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What Streets are in what Places
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote: Looking at this the new Nominatim service seams to do 85% of what I need, and might do more at a pinch. (Only found the service when I logged into IRC tonight) My hope is that in the fullness of time Nominatim can be extended to provide some sort of directory or supplementary address information export for osm. but at the moment I'm concentrating on the search functionality. If anyone else would like to join it to work on this aspect it would always be appreciated - I'm busy documenting what I've done at the moment, although there is a long way still to go. One thing to say is that the address generation is fairly simplistic. The addresses are mostly at the moment intended to provide context to the search results and I'm fully aware that in a lot of cases they are incorrect. Some of the techniques discusses in the thread above are far more advanced! You can read a quick summary of how it currently works here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nominatim/Development_overview -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation
Thank you Brian for your tips, I edited address with suggestions you made. Can I ask you just to check if I made it ok now, because I will start adding street numbers so I would like to be sure I'm doing ti correctly: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.544703lon=18.718653zoom=18layers=B000FTF So what I have done how is wrong and I should put back as it was with tags on nodes? So I should remove: addr:city = Osijek addr:country = Croatia addr:postcode = 31000 addr:street = Starigradska from way and put it back on nodes? According to the wiki as now written (I hate wikis for documentation!) what you have done, and I suggested, is wrong. However there are plenty of cases where people have used it as I suggested because it makes sense and any one implementing reading OSM data for addresses will have to deal with both so in my opinion it makes not one jot of difference. Doing it as I suggested is cleaner (IMO) and avoids duplication but is different to the method originally suggested - but this is OSM so tag it anyway you wish :-) -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation
Imo, yes, you should put all those details onto the objects that carry addr:housenumber (either nodes or building outlines). That's the method intended by the documentation and I don't see a good reason for not sticking to it in this case. inconsistent duplication. I can't image having to convince anyone that this was bad: http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/The-Utlimate-State-Selector.aspx Why is this a special case where duplication is a good thing? It may be that no-one can think of a better way of doing it - but that doesn't make it good. Brian Quinion wrote: However there are plenty of cases where people have used it as I suggested because it makes sense It does not make much sense to add information to a temporary construct (interpolation way) that will be replaced with individual tags on each building outline in the long term anyway. I think in many places this data will not be very temporary. Due to the rapid rate of mapping Germany may well be the exception. and any one implementing reading OSM data for addresses will have to deal with both I think an evaluator can ignore addr:street on interpolation ways - with documentation and tools (such as JOSM presets) supporting consistent tagging you will be able to extract most data this way. Unless, of course, enough people prevent consistent tagging by denying its possibility. Well speaking as an evaluator I can say that simply coping with the possibility of addr:street being on the way rather than the node is very trivial compared with all the other difficulties, in fact it falls out of the code required to cope with the relations anyway. Discarding all data that doesn't perfectly conform to the specification would remove quite a large percentage - this case alone accounts for around 3% of the data. In a way I don't actually care about which is the 'correct' answer, I've written my code to cope with this and a lot of the other edge cases because in practical terms with the current data that is the only choice. It is more that I'm confused by the the apparent assumption that this is the one specification in OSM that will never change - everything else in OSM evolves. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/489432179 I'd suggest moving all the following tags addr:city = Osijek addr:country = 385 addr:postcode = 31000 addr:street = Starigradska No! Please don't do that. That makes it harder to use. Then there are two possible ways, where data can be. Please use only addr:interpolation on the way and everything else on the nodes. (Of course those tags *can* Have the above details on the nodes makes the data potentially inconsistent because given 2 nodes: node1: addr:street = Starigradska node2: addr:street = SomethingElse way: addr:interpolation = all There is no way to know what street address the interpolated points have. And enough other people are already doing this that assuming that you can ignore tags on the way just doesn't work. Your advise also contradicts the definition on wiki. Putting the tags on the way prevents inconsistency and duplication. In general creating a polygon / relation for anything above street level is probably more useful than adding it to individual nodes (or even ways) - so just draw a rough polygon for the city of Osijek and tag that instead. No. Creating polygons and relations willy nilly makes this harder to use. Again, it means there are several places where the software has to look for the data and several places where people have to look for the data. I disagree with your statement but you have also miss-interpreted what I said. I mean use a polygon / relation to create a polygon for the place (in this case Osijek). The street/house is then known to be within the town because it is inside the town polygon. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation
that you can ignore tags on the way just doesn't work. Your advise Do you have numbers for that? There are, as of last Wednesday: 46899 uses with addr:street in this way I described 209340 uses with addr:street used to link a building outline to a street 2947067 uses with addr:street used to link a node to a street Because of the duplication the 46899 way uses actually relate to 83579 equivalent nodes (for comparison) and while this is definitely a far smaller number than the original usage - it is still large in OSM terms. also contradicts the definition on wiki. Somebody must have changed the Wiki. It used to be different. I have changed it back. I would argue that you have just removed the documentation for how people are using the tag. Putting the tags on the way prevents inconsistency and duplication. Duplication is good. It helps with finding errors. No, duplication is almost always bad (caching may be an exception). Inconsistent data is the enemy of all good database management because you can't tell what it means and if data changes it is easy to miss changing it in multiple places. But this may be a religious war there is no point in having, although I am, of course, right :) I mean use a polygon / relation to create a polygon for the place (in this case Osijek). The street/house is then known to be within the town because it is inside the town polygon. Ok, thats a different issue. If you already have, say, an area with landuse=residential for the town, you could also tag it with this data. But its totally undefined what this is supposed to mean. If people just put those tags anywhere its hard to make sure the right meaning is understood. Depending on whether a way is closed and on other tags this way has, different things could be meant. Say the motorway around London is tagged with addr:postcode, does this mean that everything inside it, has this postcode? Probably not. But what if it is also tagged with a boundary tag? The consensus use of the boundary=administrative relation seems to me to be clearly and (unusually!) consistent. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:boundary The meaning of a place polygon is also clearly described: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Address interpolation
Hi, On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Valent Turkovicvalent.turko...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm using address interpolation for the first time so I would like to ask if somebody can check if I did it ok or if there are some errors: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=45.544703lon=18.718653zoom=18layers=B000FTF They seem OK - and my processing code can interpret them (yeh!) but I'd suggest a couple of changes For http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/489432179 I'd suggest moving all the following tags addr:city = Osijek addr:country = 385 addr:postcode = 31000 addr:street = Starigradska to the way (rather than the individual nodes). And I'd suggest that addr:country = 385 is unlikely to be understood. In general creating a polygon / relation for anything above street level is probably more useful than adding it to individual nodes (or even ways) - so just draw a rough polygon for the city of Osijek and tag that instead. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] State of the NameFinder
Preliminary results of the British Museum Test: http://povesham.wordpress.com/2007/11/23/the-british-museum-test-for-public-mapping-websites/ Thanks for all this - very interesting results. I'll work my way through them and track down the reasons for the various errors. The duplication is to be expected - at the moment there is no code to prevent it - but I'll got some written given how significant a problem it seems to be, it was less obvious with road searches. Another hint for priorities would be if something is in the current map, it should possibly score a bit higher than something further away (although anything in the current map area should score the same - you don't want to put a positive bias on The Midlands when searching while viewing the whole UK). This would have solved the Natural History Museum, Hemel Hempsted problem. This is partially working, but currently turned off because it made debuging harder and I forgot to turn it back on before posting to the list. Ho, hum. Postcode searching is weird. If I search for NW1 3AN, it seems to give me the result for NW1 3AR, which isn't the same place. If it doesn't know the correct postcode, it should fall back to the area - NW1 3, for which is a better result because it's clear that it's not accurate and it's pointing to the whole area. The system performs a weighted sum over all nearby postcodes which seems to generate a fairly actuate result. In this case it is about 80 meters out, far better than a simple sector code search. However it then uses its standard address generation code to present the result which is just confusing and odd. I'll improve the output to try and present the error range better. Many thanks, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] State of the NameFinder
running again. First one is just performance improvement for old one (done by David Earl) and second one is completely new effort (by Twain). The one I've been working on (suggestions for a name for the project gratefully received off list BTW) is mostly functional. I was expecting to open it for testing on the geocoding list some time next week when it has finished indexing the most recent planet import however given the timing of this I've started an import of just a uk extract (which will take 3 to 4 hours to run assuming it all works first time) so people can have a quick preview. I'll post a URL to the list when it is complete. The main problem with the project, and reason it has been so slow, is the sheer size of the data. A complete test cycle for the whole planet data takes around a week assuming that nothing goes wrong and working on less than a country sized area is pointless because you don't get a true indication of performance. There is still considerable work to be done - the system doesn't just support diff updates, the code is very messy and in need of considerable cleaning up and there are a few known bugs with long strings running out of memory. I also want to move a lot more of the core search code into the database to make it less dependant on php. If people are keen it is possible that some of this work could be shared with other people. Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] State of the NameFinder
The one I've been working on (suggestions for a name for the project gratefully received off list BTW) is mostly functional. I was expecting to open it for testing on the geocoding list some time next week when it has finished indexing the most recent planet import however given the timing of this I've started an import of just a uk extract (which will take 3 to 4 hours to run assuming it all works first time) so people can have a quick preview. I'll post a URL to the list when it is complete. As promised, you can try a uk test system here: http://katie.openstreetmap.org/~twain/ And a couple of sample queries: http://katie.openstreetmap.org/~twain/?q=london http://katie.openstreetmap.org/~twain/?q=91+upper+ground%2C+london http://katie.openstreetmap.org/~twain/?q=pub+near+upper+ground%2C+london If you want to know how the address was created click the 'details' link at the end of the search result. Some of the values are my debug info but it will also provide links to the osm node/way/relation. Please be aware that this extract is about 4 weeks old and there have been quite a bit of improvements to the UK county data since then. Please email me bug reports off list, but be aware that I'm going to be away from my email for a lot of the weekend and that there are still known issues - so don't be that surprised if you break it. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-GB] Rotherham mapping party this weekend (15th and 16th)
Hi, This is a notification / reminding that the Rotherham mapping party is happening this weekend. Due to recent mapping the focus of the party has shifted from central Rotherham to the West and surrounding areas - but there is still plenty to map! Details for the party are here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rotherham_Mapping_Party And the cake for the party is now up, although it may get tweaked on the day. While emailing, we have a minor issue that unfortunately we've not arranged to borrow any GPSs from the foundation. If anyone is in a position to bring a spare GPS that would be most appreciated. Add your name to the wiki or email me if you are intending to come. Cheers, -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Introductions, and Icons?:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Richard Fairhurstrich...@systemed.net wrote: Austin Martin wrote: Also, does OSM need a collective icon set, because by looking at this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features. It seems like just a random mishmash of icons, but maybe I'm wrong on this. There are various icon sets. I'd suggest you have a further look at what is available, if only for inspiration: http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/share/map-icons/ http://www.sjjb.co.uk/mapicons/SJJBMapIconsv0.03/recoloured/ http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Icon There is also an icons set used by Potlatch and cloudmade which I believe has an svg base (although I've only ever seen png renderings - does anyone have a link to a source?) If you want to create a nice consistent set of icons I'm sure it would be welcome but as Richard said it is up to each developer to decide what they want to use for their application. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] UK Boundaries - update
1) Complete the conversion from boundary=administrative - boundary=ceremonial for the ceremonial-only counties. I will do this and also change the name of these to 'Blar (ceremonial)' to make a clear distinction from the administrative boundary. Changing them to boundary=ceremonial is great, but can I request that you don't add '(ceremonial)' to the end? This is implicit in the tagging and it is generally easier to automatically add a postfix than to remove it. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Karlsruhe schema with address ranges
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema#Sub-proposal:_ranges_of_numbers_for_individual_nodes I've done a lot of addr:housenumber=10-23 Sometimes I've added a node for each entrance. I've even done some funky stuff with writing (even)/(odd) in there, but that's probably not such a good idea. I was just following the principal of recording the information to figure out what works later. I think that parsing this sort of tag set is very tricky because it might overlap with other valid tags, for instance some building addresses are 'The Water Works, 1-4 Testing Avenue' and I'm not sure that interpolating the building numbers in this case would be correct. If you use the proposed: addr:interpolation=odd/even/all tag suggested in the subproposal it at least gives the parser some hint that the building number should be handled in this special way. Personally from the point of view of parsing simplicity I'd prefer two nodes within the building polygon using the standard Karlsruhe Schema - parsing it is difficult enough with out adding huge numbers of exceptions! -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] rendering some large maps, e.g. whole world
One caveat, though: As the icons are included as pixel graphics, and I do not know of any possiblity to scale them using style file syntax, they are not modified. Thus they will appear much too small on a printed map. If you have better icons, you might be able to adapt the script such that it exchanges yours for the standard ones ... Most of the icons in the standard mapnik style are rendered from the twotone svg set and can be rendered at any required size by modifying the script (i.e. http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/share/map-icons/svg-twotone/generatemapniksymbols.sh) Although i've still not got round to modifying this script since the icons where put in to the new hierarchy - you might need to check out an old version of the twotone folder to get it to work. Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Database rights and who has them
Hi, I came across the following while looking for something else. It regards the interpretation of database rights in a case between William Hill and Fixtures Marketing. Article here: http://www.out-law.com/page-5698 My impression is that it might have implications for whether database rights apply to OSM data and who owns that protection since it suggests: 1) Investment in actually creating data which forms part of a database will not automatically result in a database right. Organisations creating data must make separate investment in the organisation and arrangement of the database itself in order to gain protection. Are individuals compiling data or creating it? Traces / drawing roads are probably creating data. Collecting road names might be compiling data, but I'm far from certain. 2) Database rights only arise where the maker of the database has invested substantially in obtaining or verifying data from independent sources. Has OSM Foundation (the other alternative for the database rights owner?) invested enough effort in obtaining and verifying the data from database rights to apply? Contributors are unpaid volunteers, independent from OSMF so maybe their time doesn't count in which case the only applicable effort is the server hosting. Is that enough? There is very little (if any) verification going on from OSMF itself. I'm sure this has been investigated and considered by the relevant lawyers but it seemed worth mentioning. The final suggestion in the article that: 'Remember that a database can attract copyright as well as database rights. The reduction in the scope of protection under database rights may mean that the makers of databases seek to rely more on copyright in order to protect their investment.' Has a certain comedy element to it given the current license change! Cheers, -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik: strange prioritisation/appearance of place names
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:34 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: On 23/03/2009 12:13, Adam Schreiber wrote: On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Elena of Valhalla elena.valha...@gmail.com wrote: finding a working algorithm that uses only objective data and is always able to select the proper item to print would be excellent, but also probably not feasible in real life. Population? People can vote importance with their feet. Population's not enough. Some places punch above their weight - the example I like to use is Hay-on-Wye in Powys. It's under 2,000 people but is most clearly an important market town for the surrounding area. In population it would be a modest village, but it is more important than that. I've been finding that the number of hotels (within the city area as defined by builtup_area file) is a surprisingly effective method of calculating the importance of a place, with the added advantage that it is data already present in OSM. It does suffer from the problem that not every mapper considers hotels to be worth mapping, and that areas not mapped get an artificially low importance - but in most cases it seems to work and will hopefully improve with time. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Address, post code data base
Hi, I ran a little script against the data base of planning applications of Islington Council and ended up with around 16,500 address. Around 6,500 of them are relatively old and only have the first part of the post code. After tidying the data little and removing dupes, this still leaves 10,000 Islington addresses with a fully qualified post code, available in a plain text file for your perusal. So I was wondering if others have done the same for their area, and how to best share this data. Has anybody experimented with address data bases yet? Is there a preferred file format? Is there a drop-off point anywhere? I've got a set of scripts that parse and try and match/import the data to a seperate postcode database. The plan was to make it available as a combination geo-coding service and bulk data upload. The command line scripts are mostly working and produce quite usable results most of the time but I had a large project turn up at work before I could quite finish it or get the public interface written. That's just coming to an end now so I was expecting to get back to it. Relevant thread here: http://www.mail-archive.com/talk-gb@openstreetmap.org/msg01291.html My feeling was that this data was best kept in a seperate database because it might not be that accurate (multiple streets with same name) and in case of any copyright problems - I was going to make it available as a seperate download like NPE / Postboxes / etc. I'd love a copy of your data to try feeding into the code I've got - could you email it / let me have a copy? Might encourage me to get it finished :-) Cheers, -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping the unloved and unwashed
Has anyone made any plans for mapping parties for any of the unloved north yet? After cycling up and down the hilly climbs of Sheffield I quite fancy mapping somewhere flat like Lincolnshire :-) I've checked the wiki but didn't notice anything - so are their any unannounced plans in progress? -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping the unloved and unwashed
There is nothing prohibiting yourself organising mapping parties. I think the events are few and far between due to the not so great weather at this time of year. Why did I just know that was going to be the response :-) I'll probably be up for trying to organise something for Rotherham or Barnsley or somewhere at some point but realistically I probably don't have the energy to organise anything at the moment - turning up is probably about my limit! As for the weather - yes, it's a bit cold at the moment but now is presumably a good time to organise things for March and April. - Brian Has anyone made any plans for mapping parties for any of the unloved north yet? After cycling up and down the hilly climbs of Sheffield I quite fancy mapping somewhere flat like Lincolnshire :-) I've checked the wiki but didn't notice anything - so are their any unannounced plans in progress? -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping the unloved and unwashed
Should we investigate buying aerial photography for some of these un-loved places which would allow us the capture the base road structure and land-usage prior to any actual visit and speed things up a lot? The photography that Mikel and eye have been sorting out for Gaza Strip is costing $11 (£7.50) per sq km for 2 meter accuracy, 1 month old colour images (with the associated rights to derived mapping from them). http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Palestine_Gaza Please, please NO! Mapping an area after it has been traced is: a) almost as much work as without the tracing (you still have to go down each road to look for missed features) b) very unsatisfying because it doesn't look like you have achieved anything I hate doing area that have been traced, I even hate doing areas that *I* have traced. It is however nice to fill in extra details that can only easily be done from aerial images like building outlines and other large features - I'd love to buy some aerial imagery for Sheffield for instance - but only once the basic mapping is *finished* please! Thinking ahead, should be set up an Aerial photography team who sort out the purchasing and hosting of commercial photography as and when required? I can see the point, but do this with great care please or I'm sure you will loose some dedicated mappers. -- Brian ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Indiscrimate layering
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 8:15 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: On 19/12/2008 20:04, Nic Roets wrote: invalid assumption that all bridges without layer tags should have layer=1. In all the cases I've seen it has been largely harmless but unnecessary and has changed the intent (though I can imagine an obscure case of a set of tiered bridges where it could actually make it wrong if someone has relied on the default being layer=0, though that would have been unwise). I've now tracked through the 22 edits this bot made in the area I monitor. Of those I think 4 will result in corruption (e.g. putting things on the same layer which are not actually reachable from each other), none of the others will make any difference. Maybe I'm lazy but I've always assumed that layer=0 was the default and I've mapped as such and while I could go back over my edits and fix everything that leaves the rest of the planet to fix... Given the high error rate and virtually zero benefit if anyone is able to 'undo' this indiscriminate update (by source IP address, hidden user name, whatever) it would seem a good idea. If it isn't possible to undo the changes (because it is anon.) then I'd +1 the ban on anon. edits for the simple reason that we need to be able to undo things! BTW - it hasn't only changed bridges, also tunnels to -1, and a rather random looking change to a highway tag from highway=unclassified;tertiary to highway=unclassified. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Possible Data Source For Bradford
Hi, It looks like the data is provided under licence from the Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright and so can't be used. -- Brian On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Kærast [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Bradford Council provide public gis information on rights of way, and other stuff at http://gis.bradford.gov.uk. Unfortunately it needs a Windows computer and special software installing to be used, and so I've been unable to look at exactly what is provided and whether it would be useful to us. Does somebody want to have a look and take on contacting them if it seems useful? Even if they're not willing to open source the data, it might still be useful to compare what we've got to see how complete we are. -- K__rast ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Recent changes to slippymap Mapnik rendering
-The road refs aren't centred properly in their boxes. This looks really poor. Also, they aren't as clear as the used to be. Actually a technical issue, so this time not a judgement call :-) This is the only thing which isn't really an opinion! I'm currently trying to add options to mapnik to allow this to be resolved, see also: https://trac.mapnik.org/ticket/104 ETA for a patch is this weekend but then it will have to be accepted, tested, rolled out, etc... -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Recent changes to slippymap Mapnik rendering
resolved, see also: https://trac.mapnik.org/ticket/104 That ticket has nothing to do with the problem we're discussing here ;-) The ticket is about how a shield is positioned relative to a POI, but we're talking about the positioning of text relative to the shield symbol that surrounds it. Um - no the ticket is regarding position shield and text relative to each other. Offsetting relative to the POI is already pressent in mapnik. While the ticket creator wanted it for a different purpose (placing text under a symbol) it can also be used to apply an small vertical offset in this cases as well to correct the text placement. Of course this assumes Steve/Other doesn't find an alternative fix from the xml before that. We don't use shields for POIs anyway, only for linear objects like roads, so the issue in the ticket won't affect us at all as far as I can see. Probably the case. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] PD vs SA: The eternal battle
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:27 AM, bvh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually no, your bus company is just going to take PD-OSM data and is going to bring out a map with its bus routes. And its competitor is going to do the same. And no one will have the ability to take both maps and bring out one comprehensive 'public transport' map for your town containing routes from all bus companies. The consumer loses. Just to point out that under the new license (and probably the current one) they can do this anyway - and so can the fast food chains and most anyone else. They just create it as a seperate layer or as pins on the map and as a result don't have to contribute their data back. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contact Info For Tom Hughes Regarding Public Domain Mailing List
Tom Hughes wrote: We all want to improve OSM data quantity and quality. We just haven't agreed on weather a viral license will help or hinder. Just like we haven't agreed on JOSM vs. Potlatch. No, but some of us are trying to work to achieve the best consensus possible within the existing project while others appear to be trying to fragment the project. I don't really see how it is possible to know what the 'consensus' of the project is. It is entirely possible that the consensus is PD and people are going along with the existing license because they don't see an alternative. Plus most of the discussion so far seems to be 'how do we create OSM/PD without splitting the project'. Personally I'd be very happy to see the discussion of PD continue on the talk list but a mailing list seems a very minor resource compared to the time and effort that have gone into the creating the new license. BTW - I'm not sure if I'd want to make my edits PD or not, it will all depend on the final result of the new license process. However I'd certainly hope, given the level of interest, that when the time comes to offer the new license to the OSM community it would be a 3 way choice between No, New Licence and PD. As such this feels a discussion that is very relevant to OSM. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] More vandalism
Hi Frederik, I am approached every now and then by people who would like something reverted. It is quite a dilemma for me, in most cases I don't even know the place or the people involved - so who am I to decide who is right and who is wrong? I'd have said that making the request to have someone edits reverted on a public list and not having anyone disagree was a good sign. That said keeping a log of what you revert (so it can be un-reverted - is that possible?) would seem sensible, as would sending the relevant user a short message. If you are willing to do it then really all your doing is providing a manual version or the standard wiki 'undo'. To me it would seem like a good first step for testing out how an undo it works in practice on this project. Presumably this sort of functionality will be available to everyone once 0.6 is released - that was as I understood it part of the point of the 0.6 changes! -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] SVG / PNG map icons
could you please add a license file to the root directory of your icon files Doh! Now done. A lot of them are based on existing map icons, US Park icons or other PD sources (we are not interested in reinventing the wheel) many others are brand new. Some we are happy with, others still need more work. very nice artwork. keep up the good work! i'd propose to use sans-serif fonts (i think it looks better compared to the overall style of your icons and is better readable when the icons are rendered small). Cheers. I'll give the font change a try. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC Attribution Share Alike License with OSMF exception
OK, so either not OSMF (but a group setup for the purpose) or OSMF with better protections for who can be a board member. How about a group made up of interested parties with a minimum amount of data submitted to OSM... :-) Or is the basic idea flawed as well? -- Brian On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 12:23 PM, 80n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Brian Quinion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Been reading all the discussions for a while with growing frustration. I find my self mostly agreeing with the CC-By-SA license but I do wish there was a way to easily provide exceptions to those organisations wishing to make good use of the data but having problems with the license. So my questions is this: would it be possible for the contributors to OSM (in addition to releasing the data as CC-By-SA) to also grant a license to the OSMF to use the data for ANY purpose? and to be able to in turn also license the data on other projects / organisations by unanimous vote? I'd be willing to trust the OSMF to only release the data under license for suitable purposes. For instance they could license it to npe with an explicit agreement that using it to geocode postcodes did not constitute a derivative work.Or they could give definitive interpretations of what was covered by CC-By-SA and back it up with their own license agreement if there was ever a dispute. Is this just stupid, or is this an easy way out of the bind the project now seems to find itself in? I guess it really comes down to if people would be willing to trust OSMF... At the recent election for the OSMF board there were 26 members who voted. It costs £15 to become a member. So it would cost about £500 to elect your own board. I wouldn't trust OSMF with my data. Etienne (OSMF Treasurer) -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] CC Attribution Share Alike License with OSMF exception
Hi, Been reading all the discussions for a while with growing frustration. I find my self mostly agreeing with the CC-By-SA license but I do wish there was a way to easily provide exceptions to those organisations wishing to make good use of the data but having problems with the license. So my questions is this: would it be possible for the contributors to OSM (in addition to releasing the data as CC-By-SA) to also grant a license to the OSMF to use the data for ANY purpose? and to be able to in turn also license the data on other projects / organisations by unanimous vote? I'd be willing to trust the OSMF to only release the data under license for suitable purposes. For instance they could license it to npe with an explicit agreement that using it to geocode postcodes did not constitute a derivative work.Or they could give definitive interpretations of what was covered by CC-By-SA and back it up with their own license agreement if there was ever a dispute. Is this just stupid, or is this an easy way out of the bind the project now seems to find itself in? I guess it really comes down to if people would be willing to trust OSMF... -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Mass import of TeleAtlas data
As an aside, I was unable to find any information / suggestions / procedure documented on the wiki as what to do if you suspect someone is copying data from a copyright source which means it is left pretty much up to each person to decide what to do. So far the procedure seems to be: 1) Contact the user via their talk page with the evidence. Be polite - you might be wrong or they might have permission. 2) If there is no response (after 5 days) or you are deeply unconvinced by the response post your evidence to the legal-talk mailing list (or your country specific mailing list if you think this would be more appropriate). 3) The OSM community as a whole will take it from there. I realise that this sounds rather bureaucratic but I think some guidelines would be helpful. If the above is pretty much correct I'll add it to the FAQ on the wiki. -- Brian On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, The right place would obviously be user Pranas' inbox. Have you at least made an attempt talking to him before demanding, in public, that all his contributions should be deleted? I have to admit that the very detailed examples that Albertas brought up in his mail, do look convincing Sure they do. But even *if* that user was importing proprietary data wholesale it could be a misunderstanding, and one could at least make an attempt to clarify this with him and only go public if that doesn't get one anywhere. (For all you know, that guy could even have a written ok from TeleAtlas for what he's doing, or more likely from those people from whom TeleAtlas get their data, or whatever.) I'm just saying that we should not publicly talk about what someone does without at least making an attempt to contact him - FIRST. If he says go away it's none of your business then you can still go public. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Actually using OpenStreetMap and the usability of the current maps
One would think that getting all of the capitals tagged would be easy, however going and grabbing it from sites linked to google I'm assuming would almost certainly be a no no. Can we use information from wikipedia? For example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_capitals If I can use that, then I can find all the capitals, and just tag them. How about geonames database - is that usable? A quick scan shows 142,000 locations with population data (accuracy unknown!). There are also feature codes to define which locations are major cities, etc. country_code | ansiname | latitude | longitude | population | feature_code --+-+--+--++-- GB | Abbotts Ann | 51.18300 | -1.51700 | 2112 | PPL GB | Aberaeron | 52.25000 | -4.25000 | 1537 | PPLA GB | Abercanaid | 51.723611100 | -3.36600 | 5061 | PPL GB | Abercarn| 51.64700 | -3.136944400 | 10118 | PPL GB | Aberchirder | 57.55000 | -2.61700 | 1159 | PPL GB | Aberdare| 51.71500 | -3.454166700 | 32756 | PPL GB | Aberdeen| 57.13300 | -2.1 | 183790 | PPLA GB | Aberdour| 56.05000 | -3.3 | 1742 | PPL GB | Aberfeldy | 56.61700 | -3.85000 | 1937 | PPL GB | Aberfoyle | 56.18300 | -4.38300 |577 | PPL -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Actually using OpenStreetMap and the usability of the current maps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_capitals If I can use that, then I can find all the capitals, and just tag them. How about geonames database - is that usable? We cannot use data from geonames as the data is derived from Google Maps. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-May/014038.html http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Geonames Sorry - let me me more precise. I was referring to the original us goverment database of the same name: http://geonames.nga.mil/ggmagaz/geonames4.asp http://geonames.nga.mil/ggmagaz/detaillinksearch.asp?G_NAME=%2732FA881891803774E0440003BA962ED3%27Diacritics=DC My understanding as that all US data of this type is in the public domain. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?
I like this - but would suggest a small change: highway=crossing crossing=zebra|toucan|pelican|... No, get rid of the UK specific classifications of crossing completely - they require too much background knowledge to interpret and are pointless if you have already split out the various properties into separate tags. OK - but this means that even for the simple cases you have to enter 4 times as many tags. People are lazy (well I certainly am!) and tend to use the easier method - which means people stick with the existing solution and ignore the new method. I'm not a big fan of having many alternative ways of defining exactly the same feature. A better way to implement shortcuts is to have presets in the editors which automatically set the appropriate tags. Implementing presets for this in the editor is a viable alternative. But they need to be implemented in all editors - which could be tricky? Presets could also be implemented centrally server side as part of the 0.6 api change - i.e. an uploaded tag of crossing=zebra|toucan|pelican|... could be 'fixed' on the server and returned back to the client for display (I'm sure almost everyone will absolutely hate this idea!) My feeling is this leaves lots of room for future expansion without breaking backwards compatibility with most of the existing data. What do people think? IMO It just adds lots of redundent data, which massively complicates anything interpretting it (e.g. the renderers). A clean change over to a totally new system would require no more complexity, but would make it possible for the complexity to eventually be reduced since the old tags could gradually be replaced with new ones (or there could be a bulk search/replace, but I know some people are opposed to this). As far as I can see the choice is either to make the renderers or the editors work hard :-) Unfortunately the only centralised location in the current system is the database and I suspect most people will not be happy with the DB changing the data any more than mass search and replace. -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Too many nodes?
Hi, IIRC, Mapnik supports bezier hinting for quite a while now, just no-one has gone and updated the stylesheet to use it. I was looking for these options the other day for a map I was doing but came to the conclusion that they had not yet been exposed at the stylesheet level. Do you have a short example of how to enable this? Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Too many nodes?
Interesting, Artem sent a mail in January that he was working on it and I foolishly assumed that meant he was working on it in SVN. However looking through the source it seems you are right, there's nothing there. I'll bug him to release a patch at least so we can play with it. Many thanks! This bezier stuff is nice for the renderers, but it shouldn't be a substitute for having enough nodes to define the curve. Don't forget there are other data consumers/renderers that may not have the ability to do bezier curves. Extra nodes can always be reduced by using a simplification algorithm if the number of nodes is a problem for a particular application. While I agree with you what is 'enough'? I'm doing hi resolution maps for print - effectively zoom level 20 maybe 21 - and it would be unreasonable to expect people to put in enough nodes to make that look smooth! Like everything else bezier smoothing is another tool... Cheers, -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Too many nodes?
This bezier stuff is nice for the renderers, but it shouldn't be a substitute for having enough nodes to define the curve. Don't forget are other data consumers/renderers that may not have the ability to do bezier curves. Extra nodes can always be reduced by using a algorithm if the number of nodes is a problem for a particular While I agree with you what is 'enough'? I'm doing hi resolution maps for print - effectively zoom level 20 maybe 21 - and it would be unreasonable to expect people to put in enough nodes to make that look smooth! Of course, enough is subjective. I'm specifically thinking of maps on GPS devices. A certain amount of jaggedness is expected, but it should be a reasonable approximation of the curve. Sorry - I think my previous email came across badly... anyway: You make a good point - I was thinking of the number of points in terms of the quality of the output I want but it probably makes more sense to think in terms of the reliability of the input data. A guideline of 'the limit of the quality of your GPS / data source' sounds like very good advice. It comes down to that fundamental conflict of the whole OSM project - what we capture is data but what most of us want out of the end is good quality maps! -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] List of tags in use/database
Hi, Is there anywhere I can get a list of the tags / values that are actually in use in the system (i.e. an empirical list as opposed to the wiki) without downloading the whole planet file and searching it? Something like the output produced by Jon Burgess in the recent discussion would be very helpful for seeing what other people are currently using: gis= select amenity,count(amenity) as number from planet_osm_point where amenity like 'bus%' group by amenity order by number desc; amenity | number -+ bus_station | 1051 bus_stop|216 bus stop| 5 bus_depot | 3 bus_terminal| 2 busstop | 2 bus_parking | 2 bus station | 1 business_park | 1 business centre | 1 bus_stop? | 1 (11 rows) gis= select highway,count(highway) as number from planet_osm_point where highway like 'bus%' group by highway order by number desc; highway | number --+ bus_stop | 13532 bus_halt |230 bus_station | 69 bus stop | 4 busstop | 4 bus_stop | 2 bus_sluice | 1 bus_stop:forward | 1 (8 rows) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Fwd: List of tags in use/database
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Matt Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there anywhere I can get a list of the tags / values that are actually in use in the system (i.e. an empirical list as opposed to the wiki) without downloading the whole planet file and searching it? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tagwatch Between that and the pages at http://etricceline.de/osm/index.htm it is exactly what I was after (and more!). I wish I'd known about this when I was first starting - it would have been great starting point and the examples of how things are rendered is wonderfully bonus. Why would I want to do it myself when someone else has already done it better :-) Many thanks! -- Brian ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cycle lanes
Excuse me while I but in... I'd agree that Left/right doesn't feel like the right solution - I've got a different idea for a solution which doesn't seem to have been suggested. For me the whole problem comes down to the fact that in the current representation there is no concept of a WIDTH of a way - or at least not one that is respected by any of the software. This means that positioning items at the 'edge' or 'inside' of a way becomes a complete mess. If instead we give the way a width then the problem becomes a lot simpler. The bus stop, cycle track or lane gets created in its actual physical location (as near as possible) and gets marked with a 'child of' relationship to the parent way. Width is either a standard default based on the 'highway' or an actual measurement. Because of the 'relationship' software that wants to render the way at a different size can either scale the way (and contents) or drop back to the standard way representation. Seems pretty clean to me - so what am I missing!? -- Brian On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Karl Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Bjørn Bürger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Karl Newman wrote: I don't know why everyone's opposed to left/right. It's unambiguous, and properly structured it would not be difficult for editors to accommodate it. Hmm, IMO neither north/south, nor left/right are a good solution for this problem. The only clean solution would be a relation, saying something like feature=abc from node=x to node=y. Bjørn You still haven't solved the left/right problem. For example, house numbers are commonly even on one side and odd on the other. How do you indicate odd/even with the from...to structure you mention without using left/right (or some equivalent)? Or what about bus stops which are only on one side of the road (arguably a more difficult problem)? Karl ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
