Re: [Talk-transit] East Lothian Bus Stops lack any details on the ground
2009/9/23 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk Yesterday I was out checking a few bus stops in East Lothian (cycling from Musselburgh out along the coast to North Berwick). Pretty much all of them had no information other than a flag which said that buses stop here and that you are in East Lothian. There was one that had a timetable where there were 4 buses per day to the regional hospital in Edinburgh. Most of the bus stops did have a space for a timetable but there was nothing in there about it. Is this normal for more rural stops? I'm not sure about rural stops, but most of the bus stops in Manchester are exactly like this - it's appalling. London seems to be one of the few places where there has been a real effort made to make buses easier to use - I miss the spider maps... Frankie -- Frankie Roberto Experience Designer, Rattle 0114 2706977 http://www.rattlecentral.com ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] East Lothian Bus Stops lack any details on the ground
On 23 Sep 2009, at 23:50, Peter Miller wrote: On 23 Sep 2009, at 19:32, Shaun McDonald wrote: Hi, Yesterday I was out checking a few bus stops in East Lothian (cycling from Musselburgh out along the coast to North Berwick). Pretty much all of them had no information other than a flag which said that buses stop here and that you are in East Lothian. There was one that had a timetable where there were 4 buses per day to the regional hospital in Edinburgh. Most of the bus stops did have a space for a timetable but there was nothing in there about it. Is this normal for more rural stops? Is it any wonder hardly any one uses the bus in the area when they have no idea of where they go? (Well that's probably diverging from the point). Yes, the level of information provision is very variable across the county - the nearest stop to my house has information dated August 2005! Possibly we should use FixMyStreet to report these to the authorities? The fact there is no timetable information is going to be a real pain, as every stop in East Lothian is missing it. Where it is out of date then I think it would be a good idea. Or maybe we need to crowd source it. I'm sure we could get ahold of the keys to open the cases and ITOWorld to enable access to people who want to print out the timetables and maps using their transport tools, and bingo we have decent bus stop information. I have been adding 'tabletable_case=yes' to indicate that there is somewhere to put timetable information, but I have not been indicating whether there is any information in it. timetable_case=empty | no | information | out_of_date sound like a good way of recording the information. Shaun smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[Talk-transit] NaPTAN in Nottingham Notts: early use of the data
I've now had a few days to contemplate the Nottingham Notts NaPTAN data, so I thought I'd write quick summary of what I've been doing. Feedback and suggestions all most welcome. * Use the data to name noname roads. I managed to resolve quite a number of unnamed road issues thanks to the detail in the data. Using ITO's OSM Mapper I've saved an image of the changes made based on this information: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Nottingham_NaPTAN_derived_road_names.jpg * Add major missing roads. Alignment of bus-stops have also allowed a much smaller number of roads to be added. Being able to add these roads, which of course will all need surveying, makes planning future surveys using only OSM sourced data much easier. I use main roads for survey area boundaries, but they are also very useful for estimating survey complexity (which even OSGB 1:25000 aren't much use). * I've merged very few bus stops as yet, just a few which I've happened to pass. Overall impression is that the stops in the city of Nottingham are accurately located. Some of the differences may be between boarding point and the flag location (I always try and take this). All stops which I encounter which are not already on OSM, where my GPS reading is close will just be tagged as verified, and source=naptan_import;survey. * Details like indicator shelter will not always be available immediately a bus stop is verified. Today I passed a whole slew which I waypointed, but I'd run out of convenient bits of paper and space on the dictaphone. I'd rather revisit these than try and guess which had shelters/indicators. * Quite a few stops don't have indicators, but the infrastructure is being installed. I propose to tag these electronic_indicator=installation. * One stop does not appear to exist on the ground: Charlbury Road ( http://osm.org/go/eu8ZC@@J9-- ). A bus does seem to run along this road, but I suspect it is a hail-and-ride sector. * Trams. I have been re-tagging tram stops to railway=tram_stop and changing name to reflect signage at the stop (usually this means removing Tram Stop) from the name. As there is a stop for each direction, incorporating the NaPTAN stuff for the NET-1 (Nottingham Tram) will take quite a lot of work. Most of this needs to be done: the single node on the track did not allow adequate representation of pedestrian access, particularly to island platforms. I am proceeding to rework tram stops in Basford which are not on a road. I am just creating two ways adjacent to the tram stop. One tram stop, Cinderhill, has two stop points, but it has a single platform for up and down direction trams, and a single track. This seems wrong, but I am open to correction: particularly if the data model enforces such a difference. * Stop Points. Many stops belong to multiple stop points (presumably part of a hierarchical arrangement), but some of these seem to have little utility. For instance, stops BA82 and BA05 located at the junction of Vernon and Nottingham Roads, belong to stop areas 339GBA09, 339GBA10 and 339GBA24. The latter seems far too far away and is probably an error, but there seem to be large numbers of overlapping stop areas, which to me as a passenger do not seem logical. I'll look into this more once OPNV has rendered the data.Thanks to all who made this possible. Jerry Clough ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] NaPTAN in Nottingham Notts: early use of the data
2009/9/24 Jerry Clough - OSM sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk: I've now had a few days to contemplate the Nottingham Notts NaPTAN data, so I thought I'd write quick summary of what I've been doing. Feedback and suggestions all most welcome. Use the data to name noname roads. I managed to resolve quite a number of unnamed road issues thanks to the detail in the data. Using ITO's OSM Mapper I've saved an image of the changes made based on this information: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Nottingham_NaPTAN_derived_road_names.jpg Add major missing roads. Alignment of bus-stops have also allowed a much smaller number of roads to be added. Being able to add these roads, which of course will all need surveying, makes planning future surveys using only OSM sourced data much easier. I use main roads for survey area boundaries, but they are also very useful for estimating survey complexity (which even OSGB 1:25000 aren't much use). Nice work here. I've merged very few bus stops as yet, just a few which I've happened to pass. Overall impression is that the stops in the city of Nottingham are accurately located. Some of the differences may be between boarding point and the flag location (I always try and take this). All stops which I encounter which are not already on OSM, where my GPS reading is close will just be tagged as verified, and source=naptan_import;survey. Details like indicator shelter will not always be available immediately a bus stop is verified. Today I passed a whole slew which I waypointed, but I'd run out of convenient bits of paper and space on the dictaphone. I'd rather revisit these than try and guess which had shelters/indicators. Quite a few stops don't have indicators, but the infrastructure is being installed. I propose to tag these electronic_indicator=installation. One stop does not appear to exist on the ground: Charlbury Road ( http://osm.org/go/eu8ZC@@J9-- ). A bus does seem to run along this road, but I suspect it is a hail-and-ride sector. Trams. I have been re-tagging tram stops to railway=tram_stop and changing name to reflect signage at the stop (usually this means removing Tram Stop) from the name. As there is a stop for each direction, incorporating the NaPTAN stuff for the NET-1 (Nottingham Tram) will take quite a lot of work. Most of this needs to be done: the single node on the track did not allow adequate representation of pedestrian access, particularly to island platforms. I am proceeding to rework tram stops in Basford which are not on a road. I am just creating two ways adjacent to the tram stop. One tram stop, Cinderhill, has two stop points, but it has a single platform for up and down direction trams, and a single track. This seems wrong, but I am open to correction: particularly if the data model enforces such a difference. This interests me, there should have been no tram stops included in this import. They were scheduled to be imported at a later date, with a lot of manual massaging from me beforehand. Stop Points. Many stops belong to multiple stop points (presumably part of a hierarchical arrangement), but some of these seem to have little utility. For instance, stops BA82 and BA05 located at the junction of Vernon and Nottingham Roads, belong to stop areas 339GBA09, 339GBA10 and 339GBA24. The latter seems far too far away and is probably an error, but there seem to be large numbers of overlapping stop areas, which to me as a passenger do not seem logical. I'll look into this more once OPNV has rendered the data. Thanks to all who made this possible. Jerry Clough ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[Talk-transit] Railway. Source= GPS
Hi I've seen a few railway ways where it says the source is GPS. I've tried a couple of times but got absolutely no signal. I guess the roof of the carriages are shielded. Short of sticking an aerial on the roof or walking the tracks, what tips could you give me to get a recording of my journey? Cheers Dave F. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-us-bayarea] [Talk-us] U.S. Local Chapters
Agreed. Steve-- can you set up a conference call? Also, would be good if more folks sign up on committees. I think going forward calls may work best on a committee level, with notes sent out here. I am now volunteering at the wikimedia foundation, so I can probably ask for a help from one of their contacts (per Kate's suggestion). On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 5:36 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: On 16 Sep 2009, at 13:56, Sarah Manley wrote: As listed by Kate in her second email (and being built out on the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States) A local chapter will do more advocacy within their own nation. OK That's a lot more filled out, added my name. Suggest moving to a weekly phone call to get it moving. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-us-bayarea mailing list Talk-us-bayarea@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us-bayarea
Re: [Talk-hr] Novi renderer - http://www.mapsurfer.net/
2009/9/24 Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com: On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:08:38 +0200, Darko Boto wrote: Jedino sto jos nisam probao mapnikov BuildingSymbolizer koji isto renda pseudo 3d objekte pa ne mogu reci koji to bolje radi. Znam da mapnik u BuildingSymbolizer ima fill-opacity parametar tako da ne vidim prednost Mapsurfera. Uz to ne vidim da pise da je slobodan software i ne znam sto bih s njim. Nisam znao da Mapnik ima isto tu funkciju, zgodno. Da li pratis da li ce mozda na OSM stranici nuditi i pogled s 3D zgradama? Koliko vidim (http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/rendering/mapnik/osm.xml) da to nisu ukljucili... sjecam se da je bila neka rasprava i da su dogovorili da uz building=yes treba staviti i tag height= ali nemogu tu raspravu pronaci. Random pogledom na Berlin nisam našao niti jednu 3D zgradu :( Da li je netko vidio koju 3D zgradu? Imate permalink? Sviđa mi se što su stavili na kartu topografsku podlogu, što isto ne bi falilo da OSM ekipa doda odmah na glavoj stranici. Cycle map ima topografsku podlogu ali nema hillshade relief sto je slazem se zgodno... -- pratite me na twitteru - www.twitter.com/valentt http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/ linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr
[Talk-hr] Dopisi firmama za slobodno koristenje njihovih podataka
OK, jel netko pisao kakav dopis u tom smislu? Treba mi mala pomoc oko toga jer kolege rade u nekim firmama i spremni su pomoci oko toga ali treba nam nesto na pismeno. ___ Talk-hr mailing list Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr
Re: [talk-ph] MAJOR PROBLEM in San Fernando, Pampanga portion
Something that strikes me as odd here is that it seems impossible to go north on MacArthur through this intersection. I am pretty sure I've gone north there myself on several occasions, but it's a while ago aand I'm back in London now so I can't verify. Can someone local verify this? Also, I'm pretty sure you can turn left as well (under the viaduct), right? Ronny. maning sambale wrote: junsamboy and others, I edited the San Fernando area for a lot of obvious errors: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2593646 Mostly these area: - untagged ways - unconnected highways - duplicate nodes - overlapping highways I think it requires several more passes because I may have missed other errors. Don't worry jun and ingguana, these errors are natural for new areas. We can improve on it as we learn the ropes. So I appeal to other osm-ph members, maybe we can help the san fernando contributors improve the data. Please have a brief look and correct the obvious errors. The most common are unconnected intersections. This is very important for routing. A critical road intersection is the olongapo-gapan-macarthur intersection: http://osm.org/go/4zO2B2C9f-- On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:03 AM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: OK On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Jun Martin jun.mar...@gmail.com wrote: maning sambale wrote: OK, so we can override his edits then. I'll try fix a few in the coming days. Thanks. I would be good if he can cite his source using the source tag. Oh please invite ingguana to the talk-ph list. I've relayed this to ingguana. I hope he responds favorably. -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] MAJOR PROBLEM in San Fernando, Pampanga portion
Yeah, it's messy. I didn't touch because I don't know what's actually on the ground. Only local mappers can edit that intersection On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Ronny Ager-Wick - Develo Ltd. r...@develo.ltd.uk wrote: Something that strikes me as odd here is that it seems impossible to go north on MacArthur through this intersection. I am pretty sure I've gone north there myself on several occasions, but it's a while ago aand I'm back in London now so I can't verify. Can someone local verify this? Also, I'm pretty sure you can turn left as well (under the viaduct), right? Ronny. maning sambale wrote: junsamboy and others, I edited the San Fernando area for a lot of obvious errors: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2593646 Mostly these area: - untagged ways - unconnected highways - duplicate nodes - overlapping highways I think it requires several more passes because I may have missed other errors. Don't worry jun and ingguana, these errors are natural for new areas. We can improve on it as we learn the ropes. So I appeal to other osm-ph members, maybe we can help the san fernando contributors improve the data. Please have a brief look and correct the obvious errors. The most common are unconnected intersections. This is very important for routing. A critical road intersection is the olongapo-gapan-macarthur intersection: http://osm.org/go/4zO2B2C9f-- On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:03 AM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: OK On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Jun Martin jun.mar...@gmail.com wrote: maning sambale wrote: OK, so we can override his edits then. I'll try fix a few in the coming days. Thanks. I would be good if he can cite his source using the source tag. Oh please invite ingguana to the talk-ph list. I've relayed this to ingguana. I hope he responds favorably. -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] MAJOR PROBLEM in San Fernando, Pampanga portion
Can ingguana be specific with his misalignment with the maps? What map is mentioned here? On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Jun Martin jun.mar...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Maning and others, ingguana wrote back: Jun, Looks like I had a misalignment with the maps I used. I will try to do a restore of the previous file. I am using JOSM for my edits. Yes I am MGDanting. Marc Looks like a restore would be best in this situation. maning sambale wrote: junsamboy and others, I edited the San Fernando area for a lot of obvious errors: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2593646 Mostly these area: - untagged ways - unconnected highways - duplicate nodes - overlapping highways I think it requires several more passes because I may have missed other errors. Don't worry jun and ingguana, these errors are natural for new areas. We can improve on it as we learn the ropes. So I appeal to other osm-ph members, maybe we can help the san fernando contributors improve the data. Please have a brief look and correct the obvious errors. The most common are unconnected intersections. This is very important for routing. A critical road intersection is the olongapo-gapan-macarthur intersection: http://osm.org/go/4zO2B2C9f-- On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:03 AM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: OK On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Jun Martin jun.mar...@gmail.com wrote: maning sambale wrote: OK, so we can override his edits then. I'll try fix a few in the coming days. Thanks. I would be good if he can cite his source using the source tag. Oh please invite ingguana to the talk-ph list. I've relayed this to ingguana. I hope he responds favorably. -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [OSM-talk-be] zoominopuwdak
Die huisnummers per perceel zitten in de CRAB databank: http://www.agiv.be/gis/projecten/?artid=94 Van de overheid dus. 2009/9/24 Luc Van den Troost luc.a...@gmail.com: Voor zover ik kon zien zijn de 'foto's' een samenvoeging van 5 verschillende data. 1. een 'traditionele' luchtfoto. Deze LIJKT me op het eerste zicht dezelfde te zijn als degene die ook op google maps wordt gebruikt, vermits de inkijkhoeken gelijk zijn - zo is bv. onze voorgevel hierop gelijkaardig te zien - 2. een luchtfoto met warmtecamera, waarop de inkijkhoeken in ieder geval anders zijn. Daarop ligt immers 'ons dak' wat verschoven in een andere richting, doch beter op z'n plaats 3. de kadasterkaarten 4. de adresgegevens gekoppeld aan de kadaster-percelen 5. het stratenplan 1, 3 en 5 haalt de stad zowiezo bij externe partijen - eurosense, ministerie van financien, en tele-atlas of zo - dus daar zullen zowiezo wel copyright issues aan zijn. 2 is op z'n eentje weinig bruikbaar en zal ook wel copyright issues hebben. Intressanter is mogelijk de adresgegevens, of men bv. een databank heeft met huisnummers per wegsegment, of huisnummers met coordinaten, die zou kunnen worden gebruikt. Voor zover ik weet zijn die niet beschikbaar in de data van het kadaster zelf, ook niet in de kaartbasis die de stad van tele-atlas of zo overneemt, dus die moet men er zelf ook nog op een of andere manier aan hebben toegevoegd. On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 21:41 +0200, wannes wrote: In 2009 maakte de stad en omringende gemeenten luchtfotos en termografische fotos. De fotos zijn eer gedetailleerd en de huisnummers staan er mee op. Hoe geraken we aan de foto's? :-) http://zoominopuwdak.antwerpen.be/ -- wannes ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways?
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/22 Anthony o...@inbox.org: It is possible to represent different surfaces and different maxspeeds without using more than one way. maxspeed:lane=130;110; surface:lane=asphalt;concrete. That's not necessarily the best solution, indeed, it won't be understood by none of the apps that are using our data and it doesn't say, which lane has which value... There would obviously need to be a standard, formed through a proposal, first. :) Left to right when the way is pointing up? Different turn-restrictions is already possible. If you have a three lane way with two lanes going straight and one turning right, you join three ways at one node: one with three lanes, one with two lanes, one with one lane. If you have a three lane road with two lanes going straight and one lane going straight or turning right, ditto, except the way going straight has three lanes instead of two. Which lane is which is determined by the geometry of the ways as they come out of the node. but that's exactly what I propose (map lanes explicitly) and it's against the separate-ways-only-when-physically-divided-paradigm (because an ambulance could change from one way to another)... If you're going to go with the separate-ways-only-when-physically-divided-paradigm, aren't you better off using boundary relations rather than ways? I meant the lanes for acceleration and breaking (when going on or from a highway). Usually there will be ~100mtres for this where you can change at any time, but in OSM you have to decide on one merging point. True... Perhaps it's a mistake to try to combine the physical and the logical into one in the first place. How about using ways to represent the suggested paths of travel, and boundary relations to represent the physical road structure? If you want to represent the physical road structure, mapping all the lanes doesn't even cut it. When two lanes merge or diverge, they don't leave nice little lanes of paved roadway in between them, they leave sections of roadways that would be better described with polygons or boundary relations rather than lanes. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
As best as we can tell the wiki only covers source=survey which is on the map features page so why does potlatch use source=GPS? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
I'd say the one it's going to. Though I have no special arguments to why. Konrad torsdagen den 24 september 2009 02.28.00 skrev talk- requ...@openstreetmap.org: Hi I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] The OpenStreetMap website is now translatable at Translatewiki
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com wrote: To add Potlatch some internal changes need to be done in Potlatch itself. I've filed a bug detailing what these are: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2304 I've now fixed Potlatch up so that it can be Translated on Translatewiki. Now it just needs to be imported into Translatewiki. To use this translation tool you have to: 1. create an account. http://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special:CreateAccountreturnto=Project%3ATranslator 2. add a request to be able to translate http://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Project:Translatoraction=editsection=newnosummary=1preload=Project:Translator/preload 3. perhaps edit you user page? 4. wait for the bot(?) to ack your account. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John wrote: As best as we can tell the wiki only covers source=survey which is on the map features page so why does potlatch use source=GPS? We? Anyway, you all seem to have missed source=User Defined on map features and the whole of the Key:source page. While GPS isn't specifically mentioned anywhere that I can see, source=GPS is clearly a more detailed use than source=survey which could be or other physical survey (Map Features). I personally don't bother with source=GPS as I upload the tracks and make them public, so it is fairly obvious in JOSM what the source is (less so in Potlatch when only most recent traces show I believe, so not all tracks are always visible when you press g). As you all can see from Tagwatch there are many variations on a theme: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk: We? The talk-au list Anyway, you all seem to have missed source=User Defined on map It also says on the map features page: You can use any tags you like as long as the values are verifiable. However, there is a benefit in agreeing to a recommended set of features and corresponding tags in order to create, interpret and display a common basemap. source=survey is one such tag in the recommended set of features, source=GPS isn't documented on the map features page nor on the Key:source page. features and the whole of the Key:source page. While GPS isn't specifically mentioned anywhere that I can see, source=GPS is clearly a more detailed use than source=survey which could be or other physical survey (Map Features). I personally don't bother Then use: source=survey survey=gps gps=model/device. Simply stating GPS is no better than stating survey because you don't know what type of GPS was used. As you all can see from Tagwatch there are many variations on a theme: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html Doesn't mean things shouldn't be made consistent where possible. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Field boundaries
Hi Mike, OS one-inch (or 1:50k) mapping does not show field boundaries. But is anyone working on out-of-copyright 1:25k (or larger scale) mapping? Mike Harris I believe Andy R is. Field boundaries would also be a great help in the 3D navigation stuff I'm working on. I think most people who map the countryside do map gates and stiles btw. Nick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On 24 Sep 2009, at 09:04, John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk: We? The talk-au list Anyway, you all seem to have missed source=User Defined on map It also says on the map features page: You can use any tags you like as long as the values are verifiable. However, there is a benefit in agreeing to a recommended set of features and corresponding tags in order to create, interpret and display a common basemap. source=survey is one such tag in the recommended set of features, source=GPS isn't documented on the map features page nor on the Key:source page. It does not matter if it is documented. When you read source=GPS you can be pretty sure that you understand what it means. features and the whole of the Key:source page. While GPS isn't specifically mentioned anywhere that I can see, source=GPS is clearly a more detailed use than source=survey which could be or other physical survey (Map Features). I personally don't bother Then use: source=survey survey=gps gps=model/device. Simply stating GPS is no better than stating survey because you don't know what type of GPS was used. It doesn't tell you about anything that would affect the GPS signal on that particular day, thus is a waste of time. Also the source tag is a bit useless once several people have been along a street and verified it, which is why I think that it should be put on to the changeset instead. As you all can see from Tagwatch there are many variations on a theme: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html Doesn't mean things shouldn't be made consistent where possible. Things that are important will become consistent through usage. The source tag is not an important tag, it is a freeform tag. The items on the map features page just give some ideas of the values that you can use. Shaun P.S. I'm a bit of a perfectionist, however there aren't enough hours in the day to be able to make tags that are absolutely perfect and get everyone using them all consistently. You just need people to start using them. Then when things break you can fix the tagging of the individual items. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk: It does not matter if it is documented. When you read source=GPS you can be pretty sure that you understand what it means. In this case survey and gps are synomonous, also I can't verify a GPS was in fact used if people move the way due to aerial imagery etc so it may not be a verifiable tag. Also the source tag is a bit useless once several people have been along a street and verified it, which is why I think that it should be put on to the changeset instead. So why not use survey, since that would most likely be the most accurate. Things that are important will become consistent through usage. The source tag is not an important tag, it is a freeform tag. The items on the map features page just give some ideas of the values that you can use. If consistency is let lapse in one area it will go into other areas, I could use the same logic for slightly more important tags and state it's a free form tag and so on up the chain till I start doing my own custom set of highway tags. P.S. I'm a bit of a perfectionist, however there aren't enough hours in the day to be able to make tags that are absolutely perfect and get everyone using them all consistently. You just need people to start using them. Then when things break you can fix the tagging of the individual items. Unless you want to go to significant effort thaere is no point stating gps over survey. In fact stating GPS could be slightly misleading, you have no idea what type of gps was used, any additional techniques to improve from the talk-au list: gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/ gps_model= hdop= pdop= (precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to see them on each single node) Unless all the above is present you don't have precision, or going a step further without surveyor type equipment you aren't going to get accuracy anyway. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John Smith wrote: Unless you want to go to significant effort thaere is no point stating gps over survey. In fact stating GPS could be slightly misleading, you have no idea what type of gps was used, any additional techniques to improve from the talk-au list: gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/ gps_model= hdop= pdop= (precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to see them on each single node) Unless all the above is present you don't have precision, or going a step further without surveyor type equipment you aren't going to get accuracy anyway. I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk: The source tag has been in use for the past 3+ years and no one has made such a fuss over it as you. You missed all the fun and excitment on the talk-au list today. The hdop and pdop will vary widely across the track, thus it would be useless adding it. Also what happens when you have many different traces. I for example have a few hundred traces from some of the streets that I commute to work on. What happens if I load a large portion of them for averaging a trace? Exactly my point, you stated you wanted precision and yet you can't define how to achieve it in real terms rather than saying gps is better than survey. You are trying to to store more information than is useful, thus wasting space and processing time for people using the data. No I'm trying to point out the futility of stating GPS is more accuracte than survey, since most survey's are done with gps this is a moot point. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. source=GPS is a more precise description of the source than source=survey. What you chose to do with that information is up to you, but I don't see why making the distinction is harmful? -- Jonas Häggqvist rasher(at)rasher(dot)dk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On 24 Sep 2009, at 12:54, John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. A survey could mean a walking papers style survey without a gps. Shaun smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Field boundaries
I believe Andy R is. Field boundaries would also be a great help in the 3D navigation stuff I'm working on. I think most people who map the countryside do map gates and stiles btw. Nick We do, but sometimes that's not quite enough. I had a path that ran parallel to a hedge but there was no clear indication which side it was on either on the ground or the OS 1:25k. I went down the wrong side had to double back. In these cases where footpaths cross boundaries/barriers I try to map as much as I can see, even if it's just looks like short stubs on the map. A full set of field layouts would be ideal, but just an indication of where they are when met by a way can be just as useful. Good use of the word lacuna, Mike H. Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk: A survey could mean a walking papers style survey without a gps. Wouldn't that be an observation, a survey is physically surveying something... ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Jonas Häggqvist ras...@rasher.dk: John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Someoneelse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: I think that it's easy to get too prescriptive... I'm not suggesting anyone do any of that, I'm pointing out how silly it is to say gps is more precise than saying survey. source=GPS is a more precise description of the source than source=survey. What you chose to do with that information is up to you, but I don't see why making the distinction is harmful? Because of consistency, if things this simple can't be consistent then more complex things will diverge. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
John Smith wrote: Wouldn't that be an observation, a survey is physically surveying something... ? What is a survey but observing your surroundings? (And recording them, which is what a walking paper entails). Even with high-tec recoding equipment, most surveyors (in UK) still have those orange booklets to record levels, directions sketches. Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Jonas Häggqvist wrote: source=GPS is a more precise description of the source than source=survey. it isn't precise at all gps is a subset of survey but it leaves a lot to be desired in terms of precision if you think that precision will help you will need far more information about the gps, the arrangement of the satellites that time/ day how much multipath the gps chipset the algorithms used which set of satellites (in the future) and the estimates of pdop will help the most usual method of survey on OSM is handheld GPS and it is accepted that survey with no further notes is survey done by handheld gps. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: What is a survey but observing your surroundings? (And recording them, which is what a walking paper entails). Lets face it, most surveyed paths are made by consumer grade GPS receivers, and street names surveyed are by observation, so source=survey covers the majority of situations without needing multiple sets of tags do we really want to do this: source=gps source:name=observation whereas source=survey surfices just fine... ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Field boundaries
Nick Sounds great and as if I should be very grateful to Andy R! As a sort-of 'countryside mapper' I do try to include stiles, kissing gates (would be nice to have them rendered some time), gates, footbridges, steps, tracktype - and where relevant to a special path difficulty short sections of fence/hedge boundary to explain an obstruction or similar - as well as 'designation' (legal status) and 'ref' (path number) where known. I also add key farmhouses where the name is visible and they are useful for orientation. Mike Harris -Original Message- From: Nick Whitelegg [mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk] Sent: 24 September 2009 10:30 To: Mike Harris Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Field boundaries Hi Mike, OS one-inch (or 1:50k) mapping does not show field boundaries. But is anyone working on out-of-copyright 1:25k (or larger scale) mapping? Mike Harris I believe Andy R is. Field boundaries would also be a great help in the 3D navigation stuff I'm working on. I think most people who map the countryside do map gates and stiles btw. Nick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Satellite for OSM
I wonder what one of these retail for: http://www.snotr.com/video/619 Apparently can autonomously hover at 20,000ft for 3 weeks with a 1 ton payload of surveliance equipment http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/09/24/0521225/250-Foot-Hybrid-Airship-To-Spy-Over-Afghanistan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetView
Richard Bullock wrote: Also, I've mistakenly uploaded an image without geolocation in the exif (I haven't pushed it towards moderation yet). Any chance we could have the option to remove an image? My suggestion: be able to delete the picture if it is you own or if 2 or three have marked it as unsafe. malenki ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
you might be shocked. I rarely add this info. many edits are a mix of gps, yahoo tracing, best guess, averaging and interpolation with other existing data, topo maps if free version available, free shape files. why would I add all this info? just a lot of work with no benefit. we are not in a constant lawsuit where we have to document each single node. let's spend more time on the map instead of defining the rules if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open On 24 Sep 2009, at 5:37 , John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com: What is a survey but observing your surroundings? (And recording them, which is what a walking paper entails). Lets face it, most surveyed paths are made by consumer grade GPS receivers, and street names surveyed are by observation, so source=survey covers the majority of situations without needing multiple sets of tags do we really want to do this: source=gps source:name=observation whereas source=survey surfices just fine... ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/25 Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com: you might be shocked. I rarely add this info. many edits are a mix of gps, yahoo tracing, best guess, averaging and interpolation with other existing data, topo maps if free version available, free shape files. why would I add all this info? just a lot of work with no benefit. we are There is a lot of benefit in knowing the source beyond the reason of lawsuits, firstly if you use a lower grade set of data to map from and I have a higher quality I would know that mine is more likely to be accurate without guessing. not in a constant lawsuit where we have to document each single node. let's spend more time on the map instead of defining the rules Without such rules people would tag everything anyway they saw fit and it would be completely useless. if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Satellite for OSM
The OpenGeo Foundation in the Netherlands are also doing tests with quadcopters and fixed wing (3m) rc planes for aerial photography Best regards Rob, OpenGeo.nl 2009/9/24 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com: I wonder what one of these retail for: http://www.snotr.com/video/619 Apparently can autonomously hover at 20,000ft for 3 weeks with a 1 ton payload of surveliance equipment http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/09/24/0521225/250-Foot-Hybrid-Airship-To-Spy-Over-Afghanistan ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Field boundaries
Dave makes a good point - the most important thing for walkers in farmed rural areas is often to know on which side of the hedge / fence they ought to be. OS 1:25k is fairly useless for this as the difference between one side of the hedge and the other is usually less than the registration error between the OS overlays for public rights of way and the base map! Larger scale OS does not afaik show public rights of way as such - just 'paths' and 'tracks'. So OSM can offer something here. I will try to record fence / hedge stubs more often - especially when I note that they do not agree with OS mapping! Mike Harris -Original Message- From: Dave F. [mailto:dave...@madasafish.com] Sent: 24 September 2009 13:18 To: Nick Whitelegg Cc: Mike Harris; talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Field boundaries I believe Andy R is. Field boundaries would also be a great help in the 3D navigation stuff I'm working on. I think most people who map the countryside do map gates and stiles btw. Nick We do, but sometimes that's not quite enough. I had a path that ran parallel to a hedge but there was no clear indication which side it was on either on the ground or the OS 1:25k. I went down the wrong side had to double back. In these cases where footpaths cross boundaries/barriers I try to map as much as I can see, even if it's just looks like short stubs on the map. A full set of field layouts would be ideal, but just an indication of where they are when met by a way can be just as useful. Good use of the word lacuna, Mike H. Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/24 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? I don't think that sticking to the name will get us anywhere. OSM has reached a stage where we are not just mapping streets any more. I mean we have administrative boundaries, zoos, golf courses, etc... Everyone is finding what they want in Open Street Maps. It is in the nature of the project to evolve that way. Also, there is something else to keep in mind. There are a number of us that believe that while we need some basic rules to keep things consistent, everything should be free to evolve on their own. There are a few proeminent contributors with the anarchy tag on their wiki pages. Trying to enforce rules will get you nowhere especially considering how Open Street Maps has evolved over time. While we strive to achieve a very high accuracy, we cannot guarantee that everything will be perfect. When you look at some other map makers, they all make that kind of statements too. OSM works partly because rules are not that strongly binding in the end. Would I want to work on a project where everything is defined in advance, and where I get stuck in bureaucracy because I need to follow some very strict rules? No, absolutely not. I can understand the mindset for needing rules, but as far as I am concerned, rules are made to be bended. Emilie Laffray ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetView - documentation?
Jeremy Adams wrote: You'll find most of the documentation on the wiki at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org. This mailing list you've posted to is the primary source of discussion. There are other lists as well for more specific topics (newbies, legal, etc) as well as for specific countries. The OP wrote about OS_V_. For the moment http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap/41813 should help regards malenki ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Field boundaries
Mike Harris wrote: Dave makes a good point - the most important thing for walkers in farmed rural areas is often to know on which side of the hedge / fence they ought to be. OS 1:25k is fairly useless for this as the difference between one side of the hedge and the other is usually less than the registration error between the OS overlays for public rights of way and the base map! Larger scale OS does not afaik show public rights of way as such - just 'paths' and 'tracks'. So OSM can offer something here. I will try to record fence / hedge stubs more often - especially when I note that they do not agree with OS mapping! Mike Harris I've always been disappointed with the quality of the OD 1:25k. These are now all digitally stored yet the printed versions look like they've been drawn with swan quills. I've never understood why they used thicker linestyles to represent paths than the 1:50k's . It just blocks out detail underneath it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetView
John McKerrell wrote: On 22 Sep 2009, at 17:44, malenki wrote: It would be nice to have p...@openstreetmap.org on gmane. I'm not actually sure what you mean by this, is it something I need to set up for the pho...@openstreetmap.org mailing list? This is the place where you can subscribe the ML to gmane: http://gmane.org/subscribe.php Regards malenki ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetView
On 24 Sep 2009, at 15:51, malenki wrote: Richard Bullock wrote: Also, I've mistakenly uploaded an image without geolocation in the exif (I haven't pushed it towards moderation yet). Any chance we could have the option to remove an image? My suggestion: be able to delete the picture if it is you own or if 2 or three have marked it as unsafe. Yeah, definitely being able to delete your own pictures would be useful. I'll probably go with what you say for unsafe, or something like if ( Nsafe - Nunsafe ) -3 then mark as deleted. John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetView - documentation?
On 24 Sep 2009, at 18:25, malenki wrote: Jeremy Adams wrote: You'll find most of the documentation on the wiki at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org. This mailing list you've posted to is the primary source of discussion. There are other lists as well for more specific topics (newbies, legal, etc) as well as for specific countries. The OP wrote about OS_V_. For the moment http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap/41813 should help Indeed, that email is currently the only documentation really, and the discussions we've had here and on pho...@openstreetmap.org. I'd recommend using that list for bigger discussions too. I'll add a page to the wiki for OpenStreetView and start putting some documentation there too. John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Train station names: Place Station ou just Place ?
On the subject of railway stations. I think it would be good if tagged them with their reference codes (no idea what the correct term is), all the stations in the UK have codes and if you know them it's quicker to use them while searching. I'm not such a geek I know all of them but the ones I use regularly I tend to know (in the UK they're also useful for the traintimes.org.uk site, e.g. http://traintimes.org.uk/sav/eus gets the next trains from Stratford-upon-Avon to London Euston). Just spotted the wiki mentions uic_ref so would this go under ref, or nr_ref (national rail) or something else? John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
Emilie Laffray wrote: 2009/9/24 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? I don't think that sticking to the name will get us anywhere. OSM has reached a stage where we are not just mapping streets any more. I mean we have administrative boundaries, zoos, golf courses, etc... Everyone is finding what they want in Open Street Maps. It is in the nature of the project to evolve that way. Also, there is something else to keep in mind. There are a number of us that believe that while we need some basic rules to keep things consistent, everything should be free to evolve on their own. There are a few proeminent contributors with the anarchy tag on their wiki pages. ...And yet cry like girls when their internet connection goes down :-) I believe that the rules are a bit too lax needs tightening up. If you look at the Tagwatch-Source link from earlier: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html How many of those have just one Count against them? I mean GPS (drove down there by mistake) http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/osmxapi/*%5Bsource=GPS%20%28drove%20down%20there%20by%20mistake%29%5D. Oh for crying out loud!! The problem with this is for the renderers. OK I know what your going to say, DMFTR, but I think that's wrong. (I've even been told the data is the only important thing in OSM!) Say somebody is out for a country walk, or wants to know the quickest way to get out of Vegas they're never going to say 'Ooh what nice XML file you've got there, so well formatted'. They want to see a clear, accurate map or an accurate route list of every turning to take. See it from the renderers/routers point of view. Their product is going to be judged on quality of the output. They're not going to spend their time getting their map to render properly /all /the tags with just one count. This will leave gaps in the map. As they have no control over the data I think most renderers will either give up or not even bother to start with. To help with the problem the editors need to have a more complete predefined options list to steer people in the right direction cut down on spelling mistakes I realise Source tag is not relevant to mapping but you know get the point. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Distance to opacity (OT)
Was Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways? Well, let's take this intersection: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=qie=UTF8layer=ccbll=-26.124795,152.574151panoid=H08s6qv1gLXcd8hGtNhvwgcbp=12,333.55,,0,2.6ll=-26.124704,152.574123spn=0,359.996175z=18 OT... ... but I couldn't help admiring the beauty of how the cursor changes from horizontal to vertical in this image. I'd seen it before, and assumed it was based on where the horizon was - neat but not that tricky. But no, this location, with a rocky wall close on one side and open space on the other, demonstrates that the cursor knows about distance to opacity! I can only assume Google grabs some info from the stitching process, building 3D info to feed into the Street View UI. - L ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Distance to opacity (OT)
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Laurence Penney l...@lorp.org wrote: Was Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways? Well, let's take this intersection: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=qie=UTF8layer=ccbll=-26.124795,152.574151panoid=H08s6qv1gLXcd8hGtNhvwgcbp=12,333.55,,0,2.6ll=-26.124704,152.574123spn=0,359.996175z=18 OT... ... but I couldn't help admiring the beauty of how the cursor changes from horizontal to vertical in this image. I'd seen it before, and assumed it was based on where the horizon was - neat but not that tricky. But no, this location, with a rocky wall close on one side and open space on the other, demonstrates that the cursor knows about distance to opacity! I can only assume Google grabs some info from the stitching process, building 3D info to feed into the Street View UI. Their streetview cars also use LIDAR to get a depthmap as they drive. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
Dave F. wrote: Emilie Laffray wrote: 2009/9/24 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com if someone likes to add it so let them do it. osm means open What does street map mean? I don't think that sticking to the name will get us anywhere. OSM has reached a stage where we are not just mapping streets any more. I mean we have administrative boundaries, zoos, golf courses, etc... Everyone is finding what they want in Open Street Maps. It is in the nature of the project to evolve that way. Also, there is something else to keep in mind. There are a number of us that believe that while we need some basic rules to keep things consistent, everything should be free to evolve on their own. There are a few proeminent contributors with the anarchy tag on their wiki pages. ...And yet cry like girls when their internet connection goes down :-) I believe that the rules are a bit too lax needs tightening up. If you look at the Tagwatch-Source link from earlier: http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Great_britain/En/ignored_source.html How many of those have just one Count against them? I mean GPS (drove down there by mistake) http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/osmxapi/*%5Bsource=GPS%20%28drove%20down%20there%20by%20mistake%29%5D. Oh for crying out loud!! The problem with this is for the renderers. OK I know what your going to say, DMFTR, but I think that's wrong. (I've even been told the data is the only important thing in OSM!) Say somebody is out for a country walk, or wants to know the quickest way to get out of Vegas they're never going to say 'Ooh what nice XML file you've got there, so well formatted'. They want to see a clear, accurate map or an accurate route list of every turning to take. See it from the renderers/routers point of view. Their product is going to be judged on quality of the output. They're not going to spend their time getting their map to render properly /all /the tags with just one count. This will leave gaps in the map. As they have no control over the data I think most renderers will either give up or not even bother to start with. To help with the problem the editors need to have a more complete predefined options list to steer people in the right direction cut down on spelling mistakes I realise Source tag is not relevant to mapping but you know get the point. Without completely replying to your argument, I can definitely see it from the point of view of renderers/routers/other things, since I am paid by my company to deliver a product out of OpenStreetMap. Yes, it would be nice to have everything well defined without boundaries, and that would leave out the most creative things out of OSM. The example you are giving is in my view wrong. I don't think anyway will actually argue with you on this one. You are talking about oners that nobody cares about. I don't think you will get much blank out of those tags. You could choose many other tags it would boil down to the same: you start caring about tags that are starting to get used. It is a bit like the Evolution: survival of the fittest. In the product, I am working on I don't care about one tag, I care about some specific tags, and I do use tag watch to pick up some tags that are starting to get used. And no I am not doing yet another renderer or router. I care more about OSM as a database (which it is in my view) because it enables way more things than just being a map (look at the monopoly application). I am sorry but people will make spelling mistakes all the time. The only way I can see them disappear is to use editors that won't allow user input and I don't see that happening any time soon. If your argument was true, you would have no one making new renderers or routers. I keep seeing new projects so clearly those people must find the data reliable enough to produce maps. As far as I am concerned, not every tags are even rendered in current renderers, because they don't necessarily have a particular focus. If you want a touristic map renderer, then you will start using some specific tags and you will start looking at things coming from tagwatch to see how you can improve your maps according to your needs. Emilie Laffray signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: you might be shocked. I rarely add this info. many edits are a mix of gps, yahoo tracing, best guess, averaging and interpolation with other existing data, topo maps if free version available, free shape files. why would I add all this info? It is really important for us aussie mappers to know whether a road has been genuiinely surveyed - that is someone went there as opposed to traced from Landsat images. Because we plan routes depending on what hasn't been mapped, or what needs checking for accuracy. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetView
On 23 Sep 2009, at 20:16, malenki wrote: John McKerrell wrote: On 22 Sep 2009, at 17:44, malenki wrote: | There was an error saving your changes Odd, I'll take a look, can you paste the URL to the thumbnail to help me identify it? Impossible at the moment, OSV looks like this both in opera and firefox: http://omploader.org/vMmVxeA I *think* that's how your own user homepage looks when you haven't uploaded any images, just click on the OpenStreetView on the top left to hit the real homepage (yes, this should be renamed). For moderating photos: 1) It would be handy to be able to see the pictures in full resolution since its a difference if a car with licence plate is photographed with a 320x240 cam of a mobile phone or with a 12MP SLR. The thumbnails aren't much helpful there. Currently you see the image at max 1024 width/height, Yes, when I click Mask, even if I don't know/am not sure if there has to be something masked. Maybe it is an option to display one file after another at 1024x? or to show thumbnails bigger as they are now. rasher on IRC suggested this too so I'll probably go with it when I get time to do it, here's the mock-up he suggested, feel free to add your own suggestions: http://osm.jonash.dk/temp/osv-mock.png that said, we will need to allow photos of GPSes to be uploaded when we do server-side geotagging (i.e. uploading traces). Why is that? (maybe just because of my sometimes insufficient english..?) Often it's a good idea to take a photo of your GPS so that you can accurately geotag your photos. It means that even if your camera time and your GPS time are out by a few seconds you can fix this by typing in the time shown in the photo. Actually this would probably be useful whether we're doing server-side geotagging or not. John___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenStreetView
On 23 Sep 2009, at 21:27, Richard Bullock wrote: [still not enough :)] For moderating: right now I moderated several photos until I cam onto a visible license plate. This I masked and added the tag licenceplate, left the masking area, clicked mark as safe and save - and then an error showed up: | There was an error saving your changes Now moderating is stuck at this one photo, I can't go on. Marking as unsafe and saving the change gives no reaction of any kind. I've got the same issue. I'm stuck on an image that I wanted to add a mask to, and it said the same thing There was an error saving your changes. I can't load any more images to moderate whilst I've still got this one - and I can't seem to be able to do anything at all with this image. Some way of being able to download more images to moderate (say, so that you have around 10) even if you've got one left would be good here. Yeah, I had something similar yesterday when I had images assigned to me for moderation but enough other people had marked them as safe so they had progressed and I couldn't update the status, I'm sure I pushed a fix for that so I'll try to have a look at your problem tomorrow or at the weekend, if you can post an issue on github that would be brilliant: http://github.com/johnmckerrell/OpenStreetView/issues A couple more bugs; It took half an hour for my authentication e-mail to arrive. Someone else on IRC said the same. Some others report it being instant. This seems to be when people have greylisting on their servers, I should be able to make my server retry sooner though. Also, I've mistakenly uploaded an image without geolocation in the exif (I haven't pushed it towards moderation yet). Any chance we could have the option to remove an image? Answered elsewhere but yes, would be a good idea. On Internet Explorer - the map fails to display on the main page. Also, when trying to mask-sections of a photo on IE, it appears that you are selecting something - but the mask is not blacked out - and no area is actually selected. Pah, IE, but ok I'll take a look ;-) On Firefox, I can see the map with thumbnail images in some places. I can't see any way of seeing larger images. Is that functionality to be added, or is it a bug? Yeah I don't think there's a way at the moment, you can pull out the KML feed though. If you feel like doing it, git is that way -- Just kidding, but really the github integration should make it really easy for people to get involved, no need to ask for an account, just clone the repository, make some changes then submit a push request. John ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Distance to opacity (OT)
Ian Dees wrote: Sent: 24 September 2009 9:35 PM To: Laurence Penney Cc: Talk OSM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Distance to opacity (OT) On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Laurence Penney l...@lorp.org wrote: Was Re: [OSM-talk] Should Bridges be independent of their ways? Well, let's take this intersection: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=qie=UTF8layer=ccbll=- 26.124795,152.574151panoid=H08s6qv1gLXcd8hGtNhvwgcbp=12,333.55,,0,2.6ll= -26.124704,152.574123spn=0,359.996175z=18 OT... ... but I couldn't help admiring the beauty of how the cursor changes from horizontal to vertical in this image. I'd seen it before, and assumed it was based on where the horizon was - neat but not that tricky. But no, this location, with a rocky wall close on one side and open space on the other, demonstrates that the cursor knows about distance to opacity! I can only assume Google grabs some info from the stitching process, building 3D info to feed into the Street View UI. Their streetview cars also use LIDAR to get a depthmap as they drive. And all way more interesting than the original thread ;-) Cheers Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: It is really important for us aussie mappers to know whether a road has been genuiinely surveyed - that is someone went there as opposed to traced from Landsat images. Then ask people to use highway=road if they don't survey from the ground. Tag source is not important, comments in changeset are not important, complex tagging schema or requests to measure road width every ten meters are not important. Important is the fun to map. Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Evolution of a map
Eddy Petrișor a scris: Habib Habib a scris: Hi guys, Is there a tool which shows the evolution of a region in time (i.e. show how the number of ways, points changed and increased in a period of time), as an animated slide, or as a series of map tiles each taken at a different point in time? Has it been written yet? Thank you I've done something primitive based on some shell scripting and the mapnik render; the code isn't published yet, but I can publish it, if you want. OK, I've just pushed the code on repo.or.cz: http://repo.or.cz/w/osm-map-evolution.git but be warned there are many hardcoded things (though can be configured or easily modified). The main ideas: - the planet files are stored in a git repo (in another branch than master - the scripts warn about this and give advice) - the generation of the maps is currently tailored to focus on Caracal, my home town where I was the author of he huge majority of changes; it would be nice if this was configurable by an external file, but I expect patches - you can commit anonymously in the mob branch :-) - the generation can go back from the most recent version of the planet file in the planet repo down to a date or down a certain number of commits - mapnik is used for generation and the database configuration stuff surely needs checking - the main script is gen_dated_maps which in turn calls gen_map - gen_map is the rename of gen_map_Caracal and should be the generic version of the map generator - the images are created in a ne directory _maps, and can be added an optional time stamp I haven't managed to make a script to generate an animated movie of the evolution, but I did managed to make manually a movie/clip from the resulted images. I also welcome suggestions for this (and I'll come with more info on this). Any suggestions and patches are welcome! -- Regards, EddyP = Imagination is more important than knowledge A.Einstein signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Potlatch doing source=GPS in error?
2009/9/25 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: It is really important for us aussie mappers to know whether a road has been genuiinely surveyed - that is someone went there as opposed to traced from Landsat images. Then ask people to use highway=road if they don't survey from the ground. How would that help? If the road exists and we know what it is it should appear on OSM as such, that doesn't tell us the quality of the data. Tag source is not important I think that's how we got to this point in the first place, some people do place considerable weight on information stored in source tags. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Distance to opacity (OT)
On 24 Sep 2009, at 22:35, Ian Dees wrote: Their streetview cars also use LIDAR to get a depthmap as they drive. They're surely not transmitting LIDAR 3D data to the Street View Flash viewer. I wonder what the minimum would be for this effect. I doubt that steps (a return to a horizontal patch once it's switched to vertical) are handled, so perhaps just a small set of horizon angular offsets for each Street View viewpoint is sufficient, each one given a heading and an elevation, the latter being where to start verticality, the elevation to use for any Street View heading being interpolated in the viewer. - L ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
On Thursday 24 September 2009 00:16:14 Dave F. wrote: I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? The others responded to the second question. But I think the first question is a lot more important. We (should) map what is there. So the real question is: Do sliproads between trunk roads actually have a ref in the real world? If I'm not mistaken, then they don't have one around here (the Netherlands). -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] hier.nl mobiel
Berichtje van Nulaz binnen: Naamsvermelding wordt aangepast. Gr, Henk Op 23 september 2009 13:50 heeft Henk Hoff toffeh...@gmail.com het volgende geschreven: Ik kom er net achter dat de mobiele toepassing een samenwerking is van Ilse Media met Nulaz. Henk Op 23 september 2009 13:05 heeft Henk Hoff toffeh...@gmail.com het volgende geschreven: Bedankt voor de tip. Ik neem even contact met nu op. Gr, Henk Hoff Op 23 september 2009 12:09 heeft Frank Fesevur f...@users.sourceforge.net het volgende geschreven: Als je in het rechtermenu onder het filmpje op Klik hier om meer te lezen klikt kom je op http://www.hier.nl/about/mobile Gegroet, Frank Op 23 september 2009 12:06 heeft Floris Looijesteijn o...@floris.nu het volgende geschreven: Waar zitten de OSM tiles dan??? Mooie url trouwens :) Groet, Floris PS: OpenStreetMap BE discussion list talk-nl@openstreetmap.org BE Martijn van Exel wrote: He OSMers, De mobiele app van hier.nl (ilse media) gebruikt OSM-tiles, maar ik kan nergens attributie vinden. Heeft iemand hier al eens naar gekeken? Grt Martijn martijn van exel http://schaaltreinen.nl/ twitter / skype: mvexel flickr: rhodes ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] OSM op Garmin vragen
Fijn dat je de Garmin kaart weet te waarderen! :-) 1. STRM (of ASTER) zou ik graag willen gebruiken maar ik heb simpelweg niet de ruimte om dat te verwerken (Als ik het doe is het meteen wereldwijd). Als er toch een moment komt waarop ik denk dat het kan zal het waarschijnlijk een transparante layer zijn die je over de OSM kaart kan laden in je GPS. 2. Er zijn nog wel wat meer problemen met de installer. O.a. werkt deze niet goed voor Windows 64bit en dus ook de plek waar de installer komt te staan (zowel op de hdd als het start menu). 3. Dat was mij onbekend. De dagelijkse updates gaan via een geplanned scriptje en dat loopt (tm). Misschien dat de NL polygoon veranderd is waardoor er voor die tiles geen data meer is (en dus geen update). 4. Het xml bestand is ooit bedoeld geweest voor een te ontwikkelen programma waarmee alleen gewijzigde tiles op de pc geupdate konden worden zonder reinstalls enzo. Dat project is nooit wat geworden. 5. Voor het renderen van de kaarten wordt de standaard stylesheet van Mkgmap gebruikt. Die laat kennelijk de gemeente grenzen zien en er zijn meer mensen die er 'last' van hebben. Het is al eens gemeld op de Mkgmap mailinglist maar niemand heeft het kennelijk opgepikt. Het werkt met veel opensource projecten zo dat het vaak beter is om patches in te sturen i.p.v. een probleem te mailen. Kortom: Bedankt voor het signaleren en melden van deze punt. Er is nog veel te doen maar tijd is een probleem zoals altijd. Met wat geduld zie je deze dingen wellicht opgelost worden. Frank Fesevur wrote: Hallo, Ik gebruik sinds enige tijd OSM van Lambertus op mijn Venture HC. Ik gebruik de MapSource installer van NL normal en af en toe van de routeable kaarten als ik naar het buitenland ga. Het werkt prima en ik heb er veel plezier van, met name tijdens het geocachen. Daarnaast gebruik ik ze ook om te zien wat er nog niet gemapt is (om dat dan dus ook proberen te mappen). Toch heb ik wat opmerkingen en kleine problemen omdat het, IMHO, nog beter kan. 1: Hoogtelijnen Zijn er plannen om hoogtelijnen op te nemen in de (routeable) bestanden? Ik zie in de wiki dat diverse programma's de mogelijk hebben om de SRTM data te gebruiken. Ik weet dat hoogtelijnen in grote delen van Nederland niet bijster interessant zijn, maar we gebruikten deze zomer de kaarten in Zwitserland en daar kunnen ze zeer prettig zijn om te hebben. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relief_maps http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/SRTM 2: Uninstaller Als je zowel een normal als de routable kaartenset installeert dan blijkt de uninstaller alleen voor de laatst geïnstalleerde set te werken. Misschien is het zinvol om de uninstall-naam van deze installers aan te passen. Ik neem aan dat hetzelfde geldt voor de normal en bijv de cyclemaps, maar dat heb ik niet uitgeprobeerd. 3: niet alle imgs worden bijgewerkt Niet alle img bestanden op de server lijken te worden bijgewerkt. De tiles 1143 1145 1146 1147 hebben een datum van 18 juli. http://dev.openstreetmap.nl/~lambertus/garmin/nl/normal/ 4: tiles.xml Geen idee waar het bestand voor gebruikt wordt, tiles.xml is geen valid xml. De tile-elements worden niet afgesloten. 5: Gemeentegrenzen Ik vraag me af hoe zinvol het is om de gemeentegrenzen op te nemen in de Garmin-kaarten. Gegroet, Frank ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] OSM op Garmin vragen
Lambertus schreef: 5. Voor het renderen van de kaarten wordt de standaard stylesheet van Mkgmap gebruikt. Die laat kennelijk de gemeente grenzen zien en er zijn meer mensen die er 'last' van hebben. Ik ben er aan gewend geraakt op mijn Garmin ;) Maar zoals is geschreven heeft het voor de doorsnee Garmin'er geen functie om die grenzen te zien op de map. Ik stoor mij er overigens niet aan, ik gebruik het primair om te tracken en heel soms om te zien waar mijn bestemming is. Voor de fun gebruik ik dan soms de routing functie. Groet en succes, Martijn ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
[OSM-talk-nl] huisnummers controle
beste mede huisnummer invoerders, deze tool is recent op het forum gepost, erg handig: http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresseslon=4.88371lat=52.37944zoom=17 (ja er zit inderdaad incomplete data in :) groet, floris ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [OSM-talk-nl] huisnummers controle
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:02:24PM +0200, Rejo Zenger wrote: - Ligt het aan mij of is het vastleggen van de interpolatie op een een way met op de ene node een 2 en op de andere node een 4 als huisnummer inderdaad gewoon handig? Bovenstaande tool zegt dat interpolatie overbodig is. Lijkt me niet onredelijk. Ik vind van niet, omdat je op die manier kunt zien dat er geen 3 is. Je zou kunnen zeggen dat je dan die way niet nodig hebt, maar ook dan zou er nog in theorie een missende node met huisnummer 3 tussen kunnen zitten. Dit is alleen relevant als zowel de even als de oneven nummers aan dezelfde kant van de straat zitten. Bij addr:interpolation=even zit er dus zowiezo geen 3 tussen. Hoe gaat die tool om met addr:interpolation=all versus addr:interpolation=even? - Iemand op IRC zei me dat een huisnummer aan een building=yes hangt, niet aan een amenity=building_entrance. In de praktijk werkt dat niet voor mij. Ik vind het in principe prima als een huisnummer aan een gebouw hangt, maar ook in de werkelijkheid zit het huisnummerplaatje niet voor niets naast de voordeur op de gevel. Groeten, -- Sybren Stüvel http://stuvel.eu/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/sybrenstuvel signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-nl mailing list Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
Hi all I'm still a relative newcomer to OSM (and am still in wonder at the complexity and enormity of the task!) and have found this discussion quite interesting. I only use Potlatch as I was advised it was simple, and for beginners, and it loaded by default in the edit screen. I use an Oregon300 GPS. I started only using the tag source=survey until Potltach added the GPS tag. I thought that the Wiki had simply not been updated but that some official (so to speak) decision had been made to encourage the use of the tag source=GPS. I then went back to my traces and changed the source to GPS to keep up with the default application. From what I've read I now will go back to source=survey and add the tag survey=gps. I will consider further the advantages of further definition to GPS type (I think that could well end up in a Commodore/Falcon and Landcruiser/Patrol debate). I do want to say though that I do appreciate the attention you guys give to such matters. When I am confident enough to comment beyond a newbie I hope to add constuctively to some of the serious stuff. Dan From: Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Thursday, 24 September, 2009 2:07:49 PM Subject: Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag If source=GPS (or source=gps) is unallowable, then why is it a preset in Potlatch? No idea, whoever wrote the presets for potlatch probably thinks it's a good idea but did not read the wiki. I'd prefer to stick to the guidelines, rather than making up tags - as long as I know what the guidelines actually are! Then RTFW, it's on the map features page and source=survey is a core recommended feature set and corresponding tag and states: source | survey | gpx track or other physical survey If you feel that it needs to be amplified that the survey is from gps then add survey=gps or note=survey by gps, this is the intent of the add your own tags. But most would understand that it's from a gps survey rather than using theodolite/compass and chain/etc -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au __ Get more done like never before with Yahoo!7 Mail. Learn more: http://au.overview.mail.yahoo.com/___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] The source tag [Was] More on the survey tag
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 15:35:56 +1000 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/24 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: so who's aerial_photography is it? Those may need an attributation=* tag, should be easy enough to work out where they came from. A quick look shows http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/MatthewC tagged ways that way, I'm guessing yahoo sat imagery + he surveyed for the names. Exactly the point. These should then be source=Yahoo and source:name=survey if that's where they came from. Then if there is any issue with copyright the source can be readily identified. Also the DB has south eastern asia + New Zealand + pacific islands, not just Australia and it's external territories. Understood, I was only looking at the ones in Australia. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
2009/9/24 Dan O#39;Hara detect...@yahoo.com.au: GPS. I started only using the tag source=survey until Potltach added the GPS tag. I thought that the Wiki had simply not been updated but that some I've mailed the main talk list over this, no doubt it'll end up in a pointless debate, either the wiki will be updated to reflect this or more likely potlatch devs will be prompted to do the right thing. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
I'm still a relative newcomer to OSM (and am still in wonder at the complexity and enormity of the task!) and have found this discussion quite interesting. I only use Potlatch as I was advised it was simple, and for beginners, and it loaded by default in the edit screen. I use an Oregon300 GPS. I started only using the tag source=survey until Potltach added the GPS tag. I thought that the Wiki had simply not been updated but that some official (so to speak) decision had been made to encourage the use of the tag source=GPS. I then went back to my traces and changed the source to GPS to keep up with the default application. Potlatch is good for simple edits, josm is much better in the long run. Have a look at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_editors as you can see there a few to chose from. From what I've read I now will go back to source=survey and add the tag survey=gps. I will consider further the advantages of further definition to GPS type (I think that could well end up in a Commodore/Falcon and Landcruiser/Patrol debate). Good idea of John's wasn't it. Yes gps type could easily end up like that and I don't see any great advantage, unless you have dgps or the like. Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
2009/9/24 Dan O#39;Hara detect...@yahoo.com.au: From what I've read I now will go back to source=survey and add the tag survey=gps. I will consider further the advantages of further definition to GPS type (I think that could well end up in a Commodore/Falcon and Landcruiser/Patrol debate). Not really, cars have had over 120 years to get to this point in time, electronics is much less mature and there is significant differences between the GPS chipset in iPhones which does poorly compared to some other phones, then you have various dedicated GPS devices some of which would be more accurate than others, and you have current technology verses older technology all of which can decrease acuracy compared to other devices. I've played with 3 different phones with GPS some were better than others, and if they had 3G coverage/capability they were more accurate again. I've also played with a couple of GPS loggers, one of which is more accurate than the phones, the other is much worst. Then you get into DGPS like Ross suggested, you also have devices that can mostly lock onto the secondary GPS frequency which gives the device more certainty by being able to work out the atmospheric conditions better. You also have the farming GPS stuff which is good down to the 4cm or sub-cm accuracy levels. It's all about how much money you have to burn but there is significant differences between technologies for various reasons. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, John Smith wrote: You're blowing smoke, it's obvious source=gps is the same thing as source=survey, however source=survey is a core set of features and already in wide spread and common usage. If you think in the Venn diagram source=survey is a big box source=gps is a subset of that box and then some other subsets of gps would be needed just for fun I've printed out a walking-papers page and am going to see if it is any use for tagging shops in a suburban strip shopping strip and then how will I define the survey= ?? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
2009/9/24 Liz ed...@billiau.net: If you think in the Venn diagram source=survey is a big box source=gps is a subset of that box and then some other subsets of gps would be needed GPS on it's own isn't more meaningful either, not without knowing the hardware used, since most surveys will be using consumer grade GPS anyway. and then how will I define the survey= source=survey survey=observation ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] http://maposmatic.org/
http://maposmatic.org/ John ! I want! It says it needs translation from French and some organisation of admin boundaries... OK Please John, how can we have this for Australia? How can we help make this happen for us? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] TidyMyStreet
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, cam_...@fastmail.fm wrote: Another thing I'd like to do is to generate a street map (with a grid reference of all the roads) of a council boundary, there's a few utilities that can do that already, but they're not terribly well supported / user friendly just yet, but in time they will be better :D -- see maposmatic.org (just being repetitive) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On 24/09/2009, at 2:07 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: I'd prefer to stick to the guidelines, rather than making up tags - as long as I know what the guidelines actually are! Then RTFW There's no need to be rude. The obvious place to look at the wiki is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source - however on this page even source=survey is missing. Yes, is it on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features but it's not exactly the most obvious place to look. Anyway, I originally made the post because someone had made the change from gps to source at around the time that we were discussing which tag to use on this list. I wasn't expecting the talk to degenerate. As long as a consensus is reached I am happy to go with it. Mark P. --- They offered to transport me back to any point in history that I would care to go, and so I had them send me back to last Thursday night, so I could pay my phone bill on time. (Weird Al Yankovic, Everything You Know Is Wrong) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] What's the best way to edit on holidays?
In the past when I have gone on holidays, I have uploaded the GPS tracks at the end, then (usually over a couple of weeks) added the roads via Potlatch using audio annotations made during the trip. I have been thinking about whether there is a better way. I might be going to Flinders Island later this year (currently no roads on the map), and will definitely be going to South America and Antarctica next year (I should be able to complete the Antarctica highway system on the trip :-P ). Here's what I have been thinking: 1. Before the trip, download the data in JOSM and save it. 2. During the trip, make changes / additions as I go. 3. On my return, upload the changes (as I generally don't have internet access on the trip). There is one major snag that I can see - prior to uploading I will need to download any changes made since I initially downloaded the data. (For the overseas trip this would be several weeks worth of changes, although I'm sure not much would change on the Antarctic peninsula!) What happens to ways that someone else has changed? I assume that the way on the server would have priority, but how does that affect junctions added to the way when I've added a new way? Will I need to re-do these junctions before uploading. Hopefully someone else on the list will have already dealt with this problem. Mark P. --- They offered to transport me back to any point in history that I would care to go, and so I had them send me back to last Thursday night, so I could pay my phone bill on time. (Weird Al Yankovic, Everything You Know Is Wrong) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Great Western Highway relation question
I recently added a relation for the Great Western Highway (Bathurst to Lapstone), and extended the existing NR32 relation to Lapstone (stopping where NR32/Great Western Highway becomes M4/Western Motorway). The Great Western Highway does continue further, although there is a break between the end at the Motorway and the bottom of Mitchell's Pass. I was wondering whether the Great Western Highway relation should continue from Mitchell's pass to Sydney, or whether it should be a separate relation? My thought is that it should be a separate relation (or just left as it is), as there is no way to drive between the two ends of the break at Lapstone. Anyone have any thoughts on this? The relations are: NR32: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/207581 Great Western Highway: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/254498 Mark P. --- They offered to transport me back to any point in history that I would care to go, and so I had them send me back to last Thursday night, so I could pay my phone bill on time. (Weird Al Yankovic, Everything You Know Is Wrong) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
2009/9/24 Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au: on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features but it's not exactly the most obvious place to look. That should be the first place to look, not the last. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What's the best way to edit on holidays?
2009/9/24 Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au: There is one major snag that I can see - prior to uploading I will need to download any changes made since I initially downloaded the data. (For the overseas trip this would be several weeks worth of changes, although I'm sure not much would change on the Antarctic peninsula!) What happens to ways that someone else has changed? I assume that the way on the server would have priority, but how does that affect junctions added to the way when I've added a new way? Will I need to re-do these junctions before uploading. Hopefully someone else on the list will have already dealt with this problem. JOSM has conflict resolution, but it's really poor and I usually ditch changes and start over 7 or 8 times out of 10. There is also a limit on the age OSM will accept changes. You might be best using 2 layers, 1 layer for the downloaded data, the 2nd layer for your changes, that way everything you do will be new, the only thing then would be to download a fresh downloaded layer when you get back to make sure you aren't duplicating. In any case I wish you the best of luck it's not something I'd want to try :) Maybe you could try the main talk list, maybe they can suggest things people have done in africa with limited/no net connectivity. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Great Western Highway relation question
2009/9/24 Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au: I recently added a relation for the Great Western Highway (Bathurst to Lapstone), and extended the existing NR32 relation to Lapstone (stopping where NR32/Great Western Highway becomes M4/Western Motorway). The Great Western Highway does continue further, although there is a break between the end at the Motorway and the bottom of Mitchell's Pass. I was wondering whether the Great Western Highway relation should continue from Mitchell's pass to Sydney, or whether it should be a separate relation? My thought is that it should be a separate relation (or just left as it is), as there is no way to drive between the two ends of the break at Lapstone. Anyone have any thoughts on this? NR's are usually end to end they don't usually have gaps, although they can share sections of ways with other routes. I've been on that road but it's been a while and I can't remember it :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:11:30 +1000 Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote: On 24/09/2009, at 2:07 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: I'd prefer to stick to the guidelines, rather than making up tags - as long as I know what the guidelines actually are! Then RTFW There's no need to be rude. Read the full wiki. The obvious place to look at the wiki is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source - however on this page even source=survey is missing. Yes, is it on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features but it's not exactly the most obvious place to look. The Map_Features is the first place you should be looking not the last. All other pages are just additional to that. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] source=lansat
I noticed in tagwatch that there are some source tags that have values lansat. Is this an incorrect entry for landsat? It seems to be about 3 or 4 users that have entered these. Google references the nasa landsat page or a definition of a type of berry. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] source=lansat
2009/9/24 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: I noticed in tagwatch that there are some source tags that have values lansat. Is this an incorrect entry for landsat? I'm guessing so, and it's easy with JOSM at least to replicate these errors with it's auto complete based on what tags are already loaded. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] source=lansat
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 23:25:52 +1000 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/24 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: I noticed in tagwatch that there are some source tags that have values lansat. Is this an incorrect entry for landsat? I'm guessing so, and it's easy with JOSM at least to replicate these errors with it's auto complete based on what tags are already loaded. My thoughts exactly so I'll fix it shortly. -- Cheers Ross ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Great Western Highway relation question
I recently added a relation for the Great Western Highway (Bathurst to Lapstone), and extended the existing NR32 relation to Lapstone (stopping where NR32/Great Western Highway becomes M4/Western Motorway). The Great Western Highway does continue further, although there is a break between the end at the Motorway and the bottom of Mitchell's Pass. I was wondering whether the Great Western Highway relation should continue from Mitchell's pass to Sydney, or whether it should be a separate relation? My thought is that it should be a separate relation (or just left as it is), as there is no way to drive between the two ends of the break at Lapstone. Anyone have any thoughts on this? The relations are: NR32: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/207581 Great Western Highway: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/254498 Mark P. --- They offered to transport me back to any point in history that I would care to go, and so I had them send me back to last Thursday night, so I could pay my phone bill on time. (Weird Al Yankovic, Everything You Know Is Wrong) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] http://maposmatic.org/
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, John Smith wrote: 2009/9/24 Liz ed...@billiau.net: http://maposmatic.org/ John ! I want! It says it needs translation from French and some organisation of admin boundaries... OK Please John, how can we have this for Australia? How can we help make this happen for us? The short answer no idea... The longer answer is no idea :) They didn't seem to have a link to download it and even if they did I only know a limited number of computer languages, I don't know perl or ruby or python which are common languages for stuff done for OSM It's Python using Django and PostGIS (a PostgreSQL addon). http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/maposmatic/ocitysmap.git/tree/ http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/maposmatic.git/tree/ as linked off http://maposmatic.org/about/ James Andrewartha ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote: The obvious place to look at the wiki is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source - however on this page even source=survey is missing. I'm with Mark - this should be cleaned up, preferably by someone who has a clearer understanding of the consensus than I. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What's the best way to edit on holidays?
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Mark Pulley wrote: (I should be able to complete the Antarctica highway system on the trip :-P ) Now to be able to say that I have completed the entire highway for a continent singlehanded surely is better than North Star for completing a town http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Awards ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: ideas for subsets gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/ gps_model= hdop= pdop= (precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to see them on each single node) May I suggest adding source:*=* to the front of these (and other) keys to make it absolutely clear they refer to the source and not to the tagged element? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Roy Wallace wrote: On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: ideas for subsets gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/ gps_model= hdop= pdop= (precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to see them on each single node) May I suggest adding source:*=* to the front of these (and other) keys to make it absolutely clear they refer to the source and not to the tagged element? Roy i'm not really suggesting tag forms but a logical set of the tags so if we made up a wiki page on how to be obsessional with tagging the source of data we would need to set the tags out in a reasonable way as you noted -- BOFH excuse #404: Sysadmin accidentally destroyed pager with a large hammer. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bugs - TidyMyStreet
Awesome, bugs.bigtincan.com (TidyMyStreet) is working again, thanks :). I'll continue popping up council errors, most notably street sign problems there. So far the reception by the two councils I've rung up to submit the problems with the street signs has been very well received. Thanks again for both doing TidyMyStreet and fixing the errors :). On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 11:05 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/9/24 Lindley Bowers lindleybow...@gmail.com: I've just been submitting streetname sign errors to bugs.bigtincan.com. This seems like an excellent idea to introduce OSM to councils and help street signs to be more accurate. However now all the errors I've submitted have disappeared just as I was about to ring up the next local council to introduce them to the site? Also I can't seem to add any more errors? What is happening? The text from users wasn't properly handled when sent to the browser so it was causing a javascript error to occur, I've fixed it so the locations should show again now. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:02 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: just for fun I've printed out a walking-papers page and am going to see if it is any use for tagging shops in a suburban strip shopping strip and then how will I define the survey= source=survey survey=observation I don't think survey=observation means anything. source=survey always implies survey=observation - that is, if you visit someplace and don't make any *observations*, you aren't doing mapping. The source of an element, I think, comes from two places: source of lat/long (e.g. the location of the road) - how about source:location=* - and source of tag values (e.g. the name of the road) - already defined as source:key=*. It may be useful to tag these separately. For the walking-papers example, for each new shop node where shop=* and name=* is entered, presumably you would have source:location=walking-papers; source:name=survey; source:shop=survey. This implies that you used the walking-papers only to decide where to locate the new shop nodes. If you used a GPS and added a waymark on the ground, or used photo- or audio-mapping synchronised to a gpx track, you would instead use source:location=survey; survey=gps, etc. If you named the shop from memory, rather than on-the-ground survey, you'd use source:name=knowledge. If you added a shop node *in a particular location* from memory (e.g. you remember it's on this particular corner), you'd use source:location=knowledge. Another example: If going out with a GPS and filling in noname roads, where the locations are already traced from, say yahoo, I think you would only need to add source:name=survey. In this instance I don't think your GPS has anything to do with adding name=* to pre-mapped noname roads. And so on and so forth. That was a bit long winded. In short, to be thorough, use source:location=* and source:key=*. As long as location is never used as a key name (I can't see why it would be), it'll work :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] comments on being argumentative
there have been a few comments made on John Smith being persistent in argument. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/8032 Comment: should have fixed the date of birth ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Roy Wallace wrote: On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: Roy i'm not really suggesting tag forms but a logical set of the tags so if we made up a wiki page on how to be obsessional with tagging the source of data we would need to set the tags out in a reasonable way as you noted Liz, I know - I wasn't trying to be critical, just adding my thoughts :) we might make up a wiki page on the variations of survey, deliberately never put it to vote, because that is a useless process and then we could say that survey with no further definition *is* gps and keep pointing people in that direction -- BOFH excuse #353: Second-system effect. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:58 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:02 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: just for fun I've printed out a walking-papers page and am going to see if it is any use for tagging shops in a suburban strip shopping strip and then how will I define the survey= source=survey survey=observation I don't think survey=observation means anything. source=survey always implies survey=observation - that is, if you visit someplace and don't make any *observations*, you aren't doing mapping. The source of an element, I think, comes from two places: source of lat/long (e.g. the location of the road) - how about source:location=* - and source of tag values (e.g. the name of the road) - already defined as source:key=*. It may be useful to tag these separately. For the walking-papers example, for each new shop node where shop=* and name=* is entered, presumably you would have source:location=walking-papers; source:name=survey; source:shop=survey. This implies that you used the walking-papers only to decide where to locate the new shop nodes. If you used a GPS and added a waymark on the ground, or used photo- or audio-mapping synchronised to a gpx track, you would instead use source:location=survey; survey=gps, etc. If you named the shop from memory, rather than on-the-ground survey, you'd use source:name=knowledge. If you added a shop node *in a particular location* from memory (e.g. you remember it's on this particular corner), you'd use source:location=knowledge. Another example: If going out with a GPS and filling in noname roads, where the locations are already traced from, say yahoo, I think you would only need to add source:name=survey. In this instance I don't think your GPS has anything to do with adding name=* to pre-mapped noname roads. And so on and so forth. That was a bit long winded. In short, to be thorough, use source:location=* and source:key=*. As long as location is never used as a key name (I can't see why it would be), it'll work :) Sorry for additional email - Alternatively, use source=* ONLY with regards to lat/long, and source:key=*. Unfortunately, in that case some would probably persist with source=survey when adding name=* to noname roads... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] http://maposmatic.org/
2009/9/25 James Andrewartha tr...@tartarus.uwa.edu.au: It's Python using Django and PostGIS (a PostgreSQL addon). http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/maposmatic/ocitysmap.git/tree/ http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/maposmatic.git/tree/ as linked off http://maposmatic.org/about/ PostGIS is just some libs and tables in Postgres which I'm running for the tile server anyway. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] comments on being argumentative
2009/9/25 Liz ed...@billiau.net: there have been a few comments made on John Smith being persistent in argument. http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/8032 Comment: should have fixed the date of birth You mean I beat out Roy for the prize, I feel so honoured! ;) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
Something else worth noting, as I've been doing postcode boundaries I've noticed some people have wiped some of the ABS tags so they could do their roads or what not. I've added them back in as it's only fair to attribute the ABS for their data but has anyone else noticed this at all, or even removed the tags, accidental or otherwise? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[Talk-br] Estação de metrô mapeada ao extrem o
Durante uma aula chata na faculdade... http://osm.org/go/OVcx2IIU3-- ;) -- Arlindo Saraiva Pereira Jr. Bacharelando em Sistemas de Informação - UNIRIO - uniriotec.br Consultor de Software Livre da Uniriotec Consultoria - uniriotec.com Acadêmico: arlindo.pere...@uniriotec.br Profissional: arlindo.pere...@uniriotec.com Geral: cont...@arlindopereira.com Tel.: +5521 92504072 Jabber/Google Talk: nig...@nighto.net Skype: nighto_sumomo Chave pública: BD065DEC ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-de] Server
Hallo, Matthias Versen wrote: Der macht derzeit so grob 1 Million Edits am Tag, und das wird noch bis schaetzungsweise Ende November so weitergehen. Allerdings stehen diesem Datenbank-Stress dann auch handfeste Vorteile bei der Verarbeitung von Planetfiles gegenueber, ich zitiere aus einem alten Posting aus dev: Sorry, ich wollte Dich nicht als Übeltäter hinstellen Kam auch nicht so an - ich habe bloss die Gelegenheit ergriffen, auch hier (und nicht nur auf talk-us) kurz zu erklaeren, was der Bot macht und wozu das gut ist. Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Fwd: Mapper bei Ludwigshafen gesucht
Hallo, Carsten Niehaus wrote: Ich wurde von Contargo GmbH Co. KG in Ludwigshafen angesprochen. Frau Petermann (siehe CC) sucht Personen, die auf dem Gelände der Contargo GmbH alles kartieren. Im Idealfall wäre das zum Beispiel eine Schule mit einem engagierten Informatik- oder Geographielehrer. Konkret geht es um das Gelände nördlich der Insel- bzw. Shellstraße: Ich fliege da morgen vorbei und koennte ein paar gescheite Luftbilder machen, aber ich habe keine Zeit, mich dann um die Weiterverarbeitung (georeferenzieren, orthorektifizieren) zu kuemmern. Haette jemand daran Interesse? Wobei ich ehrlich gesagt nicht weiss, ob Schulklassen kartografieren im Auftrag der Industrie kostenlos Industriegebiete jetzt unbedingt so das Kernziel von OSM ist - ich bin sicher, es gibt in MA/LU ein paar engagierte OSMer, die sich gern mal am Wochenende ein paar Euro mit einer Mappingaktion im Auftrag dazuverdienen wuerden, oder nicht? Bye Frederik ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
