date:20190308

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 5:46 PM Phil! Gold  wrote:
> I started work last year on a better system that generates SVGs on the fly
> from OSM data, so it doesn't need the pregeneration step.  I got bogged
> down with other things before I quite finished, but it's mostly there.
It's really great hearing from you!  I had tried to message you a few
times through OSM and tried to find a working email for you, but never
heard anything back. I definitely had things I wanted to pick your
brain about!

> (There are just a few Canadian routes left to convert; I was having
> difficulty finding official specs for their signs.)

I think that between Minh and me, we have the signs for all ten Canadian
provinces, and a lot of Ontario counties. (The other provinces use a standard
'county highway' sign.)

I'll have a look at your code, but frankly, we've diverged an awful
lot at this point. I got kind of bogged down in the stored procedures,
because the requirement that the PostgreSQL filesystem be visible at
Mapnik's runtime was getting tangled up in the chroot jail on my
server, and the fact that a stock Mapnik now makes a read-only
connection to the database was also a stumbling block. (Even a trigger
firing from a read-only connection cannot update the database.) Rather
than running from forks, I wound up reworking things so that the SVG
generation happens when osmosis runs, rather than when the tile is
built, and that went a lot smoother.

I also pretty much totally reworked the stored procedures for better
readability, and to make them compatible with the GroupSymbolizer.
(Your shield clusters are gorgeous, but I found them to be a bridge
too far and decided to try out Mapnik's stock support.) Could I get
your opinion of
https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/blob/master/queryprocs.sql.in ?
 I think that might be a more maintainable starting point, and it also
appears to be faster - it's pretty zippy at render time.
>
> I don't think this is really documented yet, but I now support four
> different sign styles, passed as the `style` parameter to the Python
> rendering functions:
>
>  * "generic" uses a standard, generic style for every US state and county,
>disregarding their individual styles.
>  * "guide" matches the styles used on highway guide signs.  This is now
>the default, since it seems most fitting to map rendering.
>  * "sign" looks like the roadside reassurance markers.
>  * "cutout" is a modification of the "sign" style to remove dark
>background areas.  This used to be the default with my old system.

Sounds reasonable. I'm making more use of pictorial shields than I
think you were, but in some cases that's a bad idea. I'd like to have
the 'guide' style, for instance, in place of all the pictorial shields
for the NY state parkways - the NY highway shield, but white-on-green
instead of black and white, with the parkway's initials.

> Anyway, the code is here:
>
>   https://gitlab.com/asciiphil/osm-shields
>
> Hopefully at some point I'll find time to finish up my changes.  (And,
> ideally, merge in all of the extra shields you and Minh have put
> together.)

Thanks, I'll have a look!

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione Bryan Housel

Good question!
As others have said - hotels have rooms that open indoors, motels have rooms 
that open outdoors.  That’s the only difference.

I did a bit of research on this last year for 
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index 
 because we are using this 
project to capture the recommended tagging for all the brands of the world.

Check out the hotel/motel files here if you are curious!
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/tree/master/brands/tourism 

For example:
Super 8 is almost always tagged as `tourism=motel`, and Travelodge is almost 
always tagged as `tourism=hotel`, even though both brands often exist in either 
kind of building.

I think this is one of those tags where it really doesn’t matter much which one 
people use.

Bryan

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 7:47 PM, Peter Dobratz  wrote:
> 
> How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
> 
> The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story building 
> where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of your room. A 
> hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story where most guests 
> cannot park directly outside their room.
> 
> There's the curious case of the two Motel 6 facilities directly across the 
> road from each other.  I had marked these as tourism=hotel based on the 
> building architecture, but maybe all Motel 6's should be tourism=motel?
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1645570 
> 
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Thanks,
> Peter
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione OSM Volunteer stevea

As I believe the etymology of the word "motel" (circa 1920s) is a contraction 
of "motor hotel," I believe it is fair to say that a motel is a hotel which 
caters to motorists.  That is, patrons who arrive in an automobile and wish for 
it to be immediately accessible, as in parked directly outside the room in the 
case of a single story facility, or very nearby for multiple story.

Others say hotels are "closer to an airport or business district" and while 
this is a more general criterion, (think of resort hotels where you do not 
arrive in your automobile as an exception, for example), I believe that "caters 
to motorists" is the defining difference for motels.

SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione Joseph Eisenberg

This was discussed at the main Tagging mailing list a couple of months ago:

Start of thread:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-December/041597.html
Continuation in January:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-January/041720.html

The wiki page for Motel was updated at that time:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Atourism%3Dmotel

A number of people said that the name on the sign is the main way to
distinguish a hotel vs a motel, but some thought that the easy access
to no-fee motor vehicle parking from the rooms was also a useful
distinction.


On 3/9/19, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> I've slept in some pretty nice places that had exterior room access. I
> wouldn't call that out as the only demarcating property. To my mind it's a
> combination of location, amenities and layout / architecture.
>
> Interesting discussion!
>
> Martijn van Exel
>
>> On Mar 8, 2019, at 18:03, Tod Fitch  wrote:
>>
>> For me the difference is interior hallway to access room (hotel) vs
>> exterior access to each room (motel).
>>
>>
>>> On March 8, 2019 4:47:33 PM PST, Peter Dobratz  wrote:
>>> How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
>>>
>>> The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story
>>> building where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of
>>> your room. A hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story
>>> where most guests cannot park directly outside their room.
>>>
>>> There's the curious case of the two Motel 6 facilities directly across
>>> the road from each other.  I had marked these as tourism=hotel based on
>>> the building architecture, but maybe all Motel 6's should be
>>> tourism=motel?
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1645570
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

I've slept in some pretty nice places that had exterior room access. I wouldn't 
call that out as the only demarcating property. To my mind it's a combination 
of location, amenities and layout / architecture.

Interesting discussion!

Martijn van Exel

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 18:03, Tod Fitch  wrote:
> 
> For me the difference is interior hallway to access room (hotel) vs exterior 
> access to each room (motel).
> 
> 
>> On March 8, 2019 4:47:33 PM PST, Peter Dobratz  wrote:
>> How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
>> 
>> The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story building 
>> where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of your room. A 
>> hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story where most 
>> guests cannot park directly outside their room.
>> 
>> There's the curious case of the two Motel 6 facilities directly across the 
>> road from each other.  I had marked these as tourism=hotel based on the 
>> building architecture, but maybe all Motel 6's should be tourism=motel?
>> 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1645570
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Peter
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-ja] 北海道拓殖バスオープンデータのインポートについて

2019-03-08 Per discussione Hokkosha

hayashiさま

確認＆ご意見ありがとうございます。

「鹿追5号」既存データ確認しました。
地理院オルソ画像で見ても既存の位置が正確そうなので、既存ノードに拓バスデータ
のnameほか各タグを追加することにします。

インポート用のアカウントは中の人1人に対し1個作って、OSMアカウントのプロフィール
に関与した各プロジェクトのwikiリンクを追加していくつもりで考えていましたが、
どちらがいいんでしょうか？
引き続き皆様のご意見を伺いたいと思います。
なおプロジェクト毎のアカウントだとしても、本アカウントのHokkosha名を含めたものに
するつもりです。
Takubusだけだと、拓バスさんがアカウントを作成した、または拓バスさんから依頼を受けた
マッパーがインポートを行ったような誤解を招きかねないのではないかと思います。

今は地元のバスルートリレーションを作って練習中ですが、北見も十勝も鉄道の代替バスで
長距離路線が多い事情もあり、なかなか大変ですね。

--
北光社（Hokkosha）
hokko_...@yahoo.co.jp

2019年3月8日(金) 19:10 yuu hayashi :
>
> hayashiです
>
> 上り下りが分離されたいいデータですね
>
> 一箇所「鹿追５号」だけ既存データがあります。名前がないデータですが位置情報は既存データのほうが正確かもしれません。
>
> 共同運行のところは Wikiにあるように ノードをわけずに operatorにセミコロンでつないで入れるので良いです。
> 同じ場所に 会社ごとにポールが２本以上立ってる場合も１ノード（bus platform）でまとめのがいいです。
> 同じ場所にあるポールで 停留所の名前が路線毎に違う場合も セミコロンでまとめるのがいいです。
>
> 気になった点は、インポート用のアカウント名ですが、プロジェクト毎の方がいいのでは？「Takubasu_import_2019」とか
>
> リレーションは、停留所を入力したあとに手作業でやるほうが簡単だと思います
>
> 停留所のインポートが完了したら、
> １）国道２４１の２条化
> ２）バスルートリレーションを入力
> を実行日を決めて分担してやるのも面白いかも ← オンラインマッピングパーティー？
>
> ___
> Talk-ja mailing list
> Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja
___
Talk-ja mailing list
Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione Tod Fitch

For me the difference is interior hallway to access room (hotel) vs exterior 
access to each room (motel).


On March 8, 2019 4:47:33 PM PST, Peter Dobratz  wrote:
>How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel
>tags?
>
>The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story
>building where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of
>your room. A hotel would be other types of buildings such as
>multi-story
>where most guests cannot park directly outside their room.
>
>There's the curious case of the two Motel 6 facilities directly across
>the
>road from each other.  I had marked these as tourism=hotel based on the
>building architecture, but maybe all Motel 6's should be tourism=motel?
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1645570
>
>What do you think?
>
>Thanks,
>Peter

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione Ian Dees

I think your description of motels as parking directly outside rooms is
good, but I've seen plenty of motels that had multiple stories.

Wikipedia's page on motels is good and has this definition:

"a type of hotel consisting of a single building of connected rooms whose
doors faced a parking lot and in some circumstances, a common area or a
series of small cabins with common parking"

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:49 PM Peter Dobratz  wrote:

> How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
>
> The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story
> building where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of
> your room. A hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story
> where most guests cannot park directly outside their room.
>
> There's the curious case of the two Motel 6 facilities directly across the
> road from each other.  I had marked these as tourism=hotel based on the
> building architecture, but maybe all Motel 6's should be tourism=motel?
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1645570
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione Kevin Broderick

I thought the defining architectural difference was whether access to the
room was via interior hallway (hotel) or exterior walkway (motel).

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019, 19:51 Shawn K. Quinn  wrote:

> On 3/8/19 18:47, Peter Dobratz wrote:
> > How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
> >
> > The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story
> > building where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of
> > your room. A hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story
> > where most guests cannot park directly outside their room.
>
> Some motels have two- or even three-story buildings. For me, the
> defining difference would be that a hotel is closer to an airport or
> business district and either has limited parking or charges for parking,
> whereas motels as I know them never charge for parking, and are often
> farther away from the business districts and airports.
>
> --
> Shawn K. Quinn 
> http://www.rantroulette.com
> http://www.skqrecordquest.com
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione Shawn K. Quinn

On 3/8/19 18:47, Peter Dobratz wrote:
> How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
> 
> The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story
> building where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of
> your room. A hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story
> where most guests cannot park directly outside their room.

Some motels have two- or even three-story buildings. For me, the
defining difference would be that a hotel is closer to an airport or
business district and either has limited parking or charges for parking,
whereas motels as I know them never charge for parking, and are often
farther away from the business districts and airports.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

2019-03-08 Per discussione Peter Dobratz

How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?

The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story
building where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of
your room. A hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story
where most guests cannot park directly outside their room.

There's the curious case of the two Motel 6 facilities directly across the
road from each other.  I had marked these as tourism=hotel based on the
building architecture, but maybe all Motel 6's should be tourism=motel?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1645570

What do you think?

Thanks,
Peter
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

2019-03-08 Per discussione Graeme Fitzpatrick

On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 08:48, Ross Scanlon  wrote:

> What you've said is correct for off ramps but would be incorrect for on
> ramps.
>
> The on ramp speed limit may be determined from the adjoining road(s), as
> the last speed limit sign is the applicable limit until you pass another
> sign.
>
> So in the example given if the 60 sign was not on the link the applicable
> limit would be what it was for Warwick Road, which from memory is 70 near
> that underpass, and this would be the limit up to the 60 sign.
>
> So for this link it should be 70 - 60 - 100 as you go past the 60 and 100
> signs.
>
Or, stupidly enough, if for some reason you've come down off the Centenary
Highway via
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144077977#map=17/-27.66335/152.73924,
through the traffic lights, then taken the on ramp we're talking about to
go back up onto the Highway, your speed would be 60 - 60 - 100 as there's a
60 sign on that off-ramp. So you'd, quite legally, have 2 different speed
limits on that stretch of road!

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[OSM-talk-ie] New Local Electoral Areas 2018

2019-03-08 Per discussione Cormac O Murchú

These are all done now bar in Cork and possibly Dublin counties but dont
import them to maps.openstreetmap.ie quite yet.

 

Could someone update us on Dublin, we do not have an official new Cork City
boundary yet and cannot do the MD/LEA updates in and around Cork City yet. 

 

 

 



___
Talk-ie mailing list
Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie

Re: [Talk-it] MAPPATURA CONFINI AMMINISTRATIVI

ne abbiamo parlato recentemente e pare che si mappano con admin_level=7
(contradite mi se mi sbaglio).
Se tutti sono d’accordo, dovremmo scriverlo nel wiki


Ciao, Martin 

sent from a phone

> On 8. Mar 2019, at 23:05, Alberto Varalli  wrote:
> 
> Buonasera, non avendo esperienza sulla mappatura di confini amministrativi vi 
> scrivo per chiedervi come fare a mappare un’insieme di comuni costituenti una 
> UNIONE o una COMUNITA’ MONTANA ad esempio. Vi ringrazio anticipatamente per 
> la collaborazione
> 
> Saluti
> 
> Bertu90
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] US map rendering (Was: Re: Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet))

2019-03-08 Per discussione Phil! Gold

* Phil! Gold  [2019-03-08 17:44 -0500]:
>   https://gitlab.com/asciiphil/osm-shields

Oops, that's the master branch, which doesn't have the changes.  You need
to look at the svg branch:

  https://gitlab.com/asciiphil/osm-shields/traa/svg
  
-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
#if _FP_W_TYPE_SIZE < 32
#error "Here's a nickle kid.  Go buy yourself a real computer."
#endif
   -- linux/arch/sparc64/double.h
 --- --

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

2019-03-08 Per discussione Ross Scanlon

| In some situations, especially on off-ramps, there isn’t any speed
limit sign at the beginning of the link only at the end of it or in the

| middle. I observed that in these situations the speed limit of the
motorway is added on the first part of the link. Because this is the

| predominant way of adding speed limit on links, we will map in the
same way: if there isn’t a speed limit sign at the beginning of the link

| we will add the speed limit of the motorway and other speed limit that
occurs along the link. If there is a speed limit sign at the beginning |
of the link (e.g.SL60 in our example) we will add the speed limit in the
way you mentioned (60 then 100).

What you've said is correct for off ramps but would be incorrect for on
ramps.

The on ramp speed limit may be determined from the adjoining road(s), as
the last speed limit sign is the applicable limit until you pass another
sign.

So in the example given if the 60 sign was not on the link the
applicable limit would be what it was for Warwick Road, which from
memory is 70 near that underpass, and this would be the limit up to the
60 sign.

So for this link it should be 70 - 60 - 100 as you go past the 60 and
100 signs.

Cheers

Ross

On 09/03/19 02:11, Lacramioara Maghiar - (p) wrote:

Thanks for your response!

I got 80 from the trunk way from which the motorway link leaves.

In some situations, especially on off-ramps, there isn’t any speed
limit sign at the beginning of the link only at the end of it or in
the middle. I observed that in these situations the speed limit of the
motorway is added on the first part of the link. Because this is the
predominant way of adding speed limit on links, we will map in the
same way: if there isn’t a speed limit sign at the beginning of the
link we will add the speed limit of the motorway and other speed limit
that occurs along the link. If there is a speed limit sign at the
beginning of the link (e.g.SL60 in our example) we will add the speed
limit in the way you mentioned (60 then 100).

Best,

Lacri

*From:* Graeme Fitzpatrick
*Sent:* Thursday, February 28, 2019 12:19 AM
*To:* Lacramioara Maghiar - (p)
*Cc:* talk-au@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

Hi Lacri

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 21:56, Lacramioara Maghiar - (p)
> wrote:

Hi all,

I’m writing you regarding the speed limit mapping in Australia.

Specifically, how would you add the speed limit on a motorway link
where the speed limit sign appears in the field towards the end/in
the middle of the link?

In Qld at least (& I think Aust-wide) speed limits officially change
at the sign - you may start accelerating as you pass it, not before;
but you must start slowing early so you're at the lower limit as you
pass the sign.

Please take a look at the following example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/37282555. Here, there is a speed
limit sign of 100 (SL100 hereafter) in the middle of the motorway
link. You can see the sign here:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo=cTDOkTXf0M0gVBjem4mt9A=-27.664412022684786=152.7436576757009=17

In which way would you add the speed limit information in the
above-mentioned case:

1. maxspeed=80 until the SL100 sign and maxspeed=100 until the
end of the link?

I'm not sure where you got 80 from? I can only see a 60 sign at the
start of the link
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-27.663581886206885=152.73979205152136=17=0.49548370263958935=0.50767663189853=0=B-1LcWLyCAjIQqhNjTQ7AQ
,
& speed then jumps to 100 just before merging out onto the Cunningham
Highway

1. maxspeed=80 represents the speed limit of the trunk way from
which the motorway link leaves.

Welcome to Australian roads! Just because it's a trunk road, doesn't
necessarily mean it's got an appropriate speed limit :-(

2. nothing until the SL100 sign but maxspeed=100 starting with
the appearance of the sign in the field?

60, not "nothing" between the 2 signs, then 100.

Hope that helps!

Thanks

Graeme

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-us] US map rendering (Was: Re: Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet))

2019-03-08 Per discussione Phil! Gold

* Kevin Kenny  [2019-03-08 14:25 -0500]:
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:37 AM Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> >
> > I agree that a local US OSM map with a *subtly* adapted rendering would be 
> > fantastic. Phil Gold did some interesting work years ago on rendering US 
> > style highway shields taking into account (sometimes crazy) route 
> > concurrency 
> > (http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=13=39.75926=-86.02786=B
> >  - note that this is based on years-old data and probably pre-carto-switch 
> > stylesheet). Lars Ahlzen created the beautiful TopOSM which is a lot more 
> > divergent from the main map style, but another great example of initiatives 
> > around custom map rendering coming out of the US community.
> 
> I've borrowed ideas (and some limited amount of code) from both of
> them in doing my experimental rendering
[snip]
> The chief roadblocks to scaleability are that the graphics are
> generated in what amounts to a batch process, taking several minutes,
[snip]
> Then there's the issue that the graphics for individual shields are
> being stored in PNG, which is rendered in a batch process that takes
> typically several minutes (so could not cope with minutely updates).

I started work last year on a better system that generates SVGs on the fly
from OSM data, so it doesn't need the pregeneration step.  I got bogged
down with other things before I quite finished, but it's mostly there.
(There are just a few Canadian routes left to convert; I was having
difficulty finding official specs for their signs.)

I don't think this is really documented yet, but I now support four
different sign styles, passed as the `style` parameter to the Python
rendering functions:

 * "generic" uses a standard, generic style for every US state and county,
   disregarding their individual styles.
 * "guide" matches the styles used on highway guide signs.  This is now
   the default, since it seems most fitting to map rendering.
 * "sign" looks like the roadside reassurance markers.
 * "cutout" is a modification of the "sign" style to remove dark
   background areas.  This used to be the default with my old system.

Anyway, the code is here:

  https://gitlab.com/asciiphil/osm-shields

Hopefully at some point I'll find time to finish up my changes.  (And,
ideally, merge in all of the extra shields you and Minh have put
together.)

-- 
...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
--- --
What computers do Daleks use?  X-TERMINALS, X-TERMINALS!
 --- --

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-it] MAPPATURA CONFINI AMMINISTRATIVI

2019-03-08 Per discussione Alberto Varalli

Buonasera, non avendo esperienza sulla mappatura di confini amministrativi vi 
scrivo per chiedervi come fare a mappare un’insieme di comuni costituenti una 
UNIONE o una COMUNITA’ MONTANA ad esempio. Vi ringrazio anticipatamente per la 
collaborazione

Saluti

Bertu90

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Les contours de la Bretagne

2019-03-08 Per discussione David Crochet


Bonjour

Le 08/03/2019 à 22:23, Jacques Lavignotte a écrit :
Profites-en pour inclure le Mont Saint Michel... 



o ! Ho  !! HO !!! H 

Faut pas pousser mamie dans les orties non plus !!

Cordialement

--
David Crochet


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Les contours de la Bretagne

2019-03-08 Per discussione Jacques Lavignotte




Le 08/03/2019 à 22:18, osm.sanspourr...@spamgourmet.com a écrit :


Comme je suis pour le retour de la Loire-Atlantique en Bretagne,


Profites-en pour inclure le Mont Saint Michel...

J.

le vendredi c'est trolldi.

--
GnuPg : C8F5B1E3 Because privacy matters.


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Les contours de la Bretagne

2019-03-08 Per discussione osm . sanspourriel


(Summary below)

J'ai regardé quelques points, ça ne m'a pas l'air d'être complètement le 
cas.


Par exemple 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/656836115/history#map=9/47.6339/-1.1838


passe de 8/commune (faux) à 6/departement (faux, hélas ;-)).

Ça devrait être 4/region.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35792233/history

Là ça semble bien être le cas.

Discussion sur les changeset ou revert?

Comme je suis pour le retour de la Loire-Atlantique en Bretagne, je veux 
bien faire un commentaire (ou un texte expliquant le blocage de 
l'utilisateur).


Ceci dit cet utilisateur a fait exactement deux modifications, or on ne 
fait pas des milliers de modification dans ses deux premières éditions.


Donc *plutôt pour un revert et un blocage de l'utilisateur *car il 
s'agit à mon avis de mauvaise foi.


On devrait comme Wikipédia avoir deux entrées, dont une relation 
Bretagne historique / (alt_name Bretagne) définie par les 5 départements 
bretons en subarea. Et en mettant en end_date la création par Pétain de 
la Bretagne amputée (ou 1972 lors de la recréation des région par De 
Gaule/Debré).


Au fait quelqu'un sait l'utilité de la relation Bretagne sans îles ni 
capitale ?


Frederik tut mir leid für die Sprache aber falls du es weiterleiten 
willst...


Summary: this user made exactly 2 edits, modifying thousands of objects 
in those two edits. So it's a fake user, I'm for 2 actions: revert + 
user block as he/she created the user by purpose.


We should add a new relation "Brittany" using the 5 départements as 
subarea (for easier maintenance) but having an end_date.


I can imagine to write the text the user would read when being blocked 
(as I'm also for a full-size Brittany)


Jean-Yvon

Le 08/03/2019 à 21:18, Frederik Ramm - frede...@remote.org a écrit :

Bonjour talk-fr,

someone has reported these two changesets

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66342909
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66285978

and said:

"Cet utilisateur a rédifini les contours de la Bretagne incluant le
département de la Loire Atlantique. Si ce sujet est bien débattu, et n'a
actuellement aucun impact sur le tracé des contours administratifs
régionaux. OpenStreetMap n'a pas à recevoir des données qui proviennent
d'un choix personnel et qui ne sont pas une réalité administrative et
politique du département de Loire-Atlantique."

Could you have a look at these changes and tell me if they need to be
reverted? (Or revert them yourselves if you want.)

Merci
Frederik

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-us] US map rendering (Was: Re: Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet))

Kevin — yes, I was talking about SOTM US. Please do stay tuned to this list and 
OSM US blog for announcements for community scholarships and other initiatives 
we will deploy to make it possible to have many more community members attend 
(and also present! on interesting topics like this one.)

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 12:25 PM, Kevin Kenny  wrote:
> 
> Finding the time and money to attend a conference that my employer
> doesn't sponsor is hard for me at the moment, particularly since I'm
> already committed once or twice a year to conferences on another "free
> time" (hah!) project. (Also, I presume you mean SOTM-US? An overseas
> conference would add a whole other level of complexity to my getting
> to go.)

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How to stop violation of OSM copyright by Mapbox?

to me it seems you did represent facts, although I am not sure I would see the 
click-to-see attribution on small screens a violation of copyright, I agree it 
is suspicious that there is space for a mapbox logo but not for an OSM 
attribution.

Cheers, Martin 


___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-talk-fr] Les contours de la Bretagne

2019-03-08 Per discussione Frederik Ramm

Bonjour talk-fr,

someone has reported these two changesets

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66342909
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66285978

and said:

"Cet utilisateur a rédifini les contours de la Bretagne incluant le
département de la Loire Atlantique. Si ce sujet est bien débattu, et n'a
actuellement aucun impact sur le tracé des contours administratifs
régionaux. OpenStreetMap n'a pas à recevoir des données qui proviennent
d'un choix personnel et qui ne sont pas une réalité administrative et
politique du département de Loire-Atlantique."

Could you have a look at these changes and tell me if they need to be
reverted? (Or revert them yourselves if you want.)

Merci
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] We need to have a conversation about attribution

Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 11:20 Uhr schrieb Frederik Ramm :

> With today's interactive options, it would indeed be possible to show
> the authors of individual features when hovering ;)




yes, ALL authors of course, not just the last one ;-)

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] Tag per Iscrizioni o Epigrafi

Am Fr., 8. März 2019 um 19:49 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi :

> Guarda, sinceramente, fate come volete. Io sono per la semplicità, ma qui
> sempre più spesso mi sembra di avere a che fare con l'UCAS di Fantozziana
> memoria (*ricordate? Ufficio Complicazione Affari Semplici*), e non mi
> riferisco solo a questo thread, ma un po' in generale, tanto che
> incominciano a sorgermi seri dubbi sulla sostenibilità del progetto...
>


certo, facciamo tutti come vogliamo. Io scrivevo nel merito degli epigrafi
perché non è la prima volta che ci manca un tag, e con "historic=yes" non
si capisce se parliamo di una scritta oppure di un'altra cosa che ha anche
una scritta.

Ho creato una bozza di proposta, anche perché cosí possiamo parlarne e ci
rimane traccia ;-)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/epigraph

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-us] US map rendering (Was: Re: Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet))

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 11:37 AM Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>
> I agree that a local US OSM map with a *subtly* adapted rendering would be 
> fantastic. Phil Gold did some interesting work years ago on rendering US 
> style highway shields taking into account (sometimes crazy) route concurrency 
> (http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=13=39.75926=-86.02786=B
>  - note that this is based on years-old data and probably pre-carto-switch 
> stylesheet). Lars Ahlzen created the beautiful TopOSM which is a lot more 
> divergent from the main map style, but another great example of initiatives 
> around custom map rendering coming out of the US community.

I've borrowed ideas (and some limited amount of code) from both of
them in doing my experimental rendering at
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html. It has North American
highway shields. I say 'North American' because it handles the
Canadian and a few Mexican ones, with concurrences, also.  It has a
lot more than Phil! incorporated thanks to a yeoman effort by Minh
Nguyen (sorry, Minh, no time to go hunting for Vietnamese diacritics
to spell your name correctly!)

It has scalability issues that are fixable, but imply ditching a fair
piece of the toolchain.
I'm tracking a project for it at
https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/projects.  I have a Kanban for
it at https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/projects/1.

The chief roadblocks to scaleability are that the graphics are
generated in what amounts to a batch process, taking several minutes,
triggered by the Osmosis update of the 'northamerica' export from
geofabrik.de. If the process is to scale to minutely updates and the
whole planet, it needs to do shield rendering incrementally in
response to specific updates affecting it.

The fact that osm2pgsql does not and will not ever support querying of
relations at rendering time is a headache, and so the first job will
have to be retooling everything to the table formats used by imposm3.
(This is entirely doable; it's quite a lot of very routine programming
that I've simply not had time to take on.)
https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/issues/13

Then there's the issue that the graphics for individual shields are
being stored in PNG, which is rendered in a batch process that takes
typically several minutes (so could not cope with minutely updates). I
have some sketches for how that could be accomplished, but again, I
keep running out of time.
https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/issues/5

Also, 'carto' does not have support for the GroupSymbolizer in Mapnik,
needed for highway shield rendering, so I'm still stuck with defining
the rendering in Mapnik XML. This isn't a problem for me, but others
might demand better support.

Finally, Mapnik itself would benefit from being able to render SVG's
with template parameters substituted from objects in the database. I
think that the pipeline could be implemented in a scalable fashion
without this last task, but there would be more custom code about.

I've sounded out the maintainers of various of the OSM software, and
get different assessments.
osm2pgsql - Actively hostile to supporting what I need, contend that
osm2pgsql is the wrong tool for the job.
imposm3 - Interested and helpful, and it appears that they wouldn't
actually have to do anything (imposm3 may have everything needed
'right out of the box').
Phil Gold!'s 'highway shields' project - Moribund, but I've extracted
from it what I think I need and put the code at
https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/
TopOSM - Again, moribund, but I have working renderings derived from
it that suit me and could serve as starting points for new
development.
Carto - Maintainers would be very interested in GroupSymbolizer support.
OSM Carto - Little interest, but that's because of the emphasis on
consistent rendering worldwide, and this is really a project specific
to North America.
Mapnik - I've not really needed to approach the Mapnik team yet - I've
been treating it as a black box.

So, it looks as if there's a path forward, but it involves a bunch
more programming than I've had time to take on. I'm very good at
programming, but my time is limited. I'm much less good at project
management, and I'm terrible at recruiting, so I've been unable so far
to form a team to tackle this. A better leader than I could probably
make significant forward progress with my technical assistance. I may
find this thrust upon me, but I hope to dodge any requests to lead
open-source development efforts while I'm still in the paid workforce.
(With luck, retirement is a couple or three years away.)

> Perhaps something for a BoF session at the next SOTM!

Finding the time and money to attend a conference that my employer
doesn't sponsor is hard for me at the moment, particularly since I'm
already committed once or twice a year to conferences on another "free
time" (hah!) project. (Also, I presume you mean SOTM-US? An overseas
conference would add a whole other level of complexity to

Re: [Talk-it] Tag per Iscrizioni o Epigrafi

2019-03-08 Per discussione Sergio Manzi

Guarda, sinceramente, fate come volete. Io sono per la semplicità, ma qui 
sempre più spesso mi sembra di avere a che fare con l'UCAS di Fantozziana 
memoria (/ricordate? Ufficio Complicazione Affari Semplici/), e non mi 
riferisco solo a questo thread, ma un po' in generale, tanto che incominciano a 
sorgermi seri dubbi sulla sostenibilità del progetto...

Ciao,

Sergio

On 2019-03-08 18:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 8. Mar 2019, at 00:11, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
>>
>> ma capisco che a volte l'oggetto in se può essere poco significativo e non 
>> degno di mappatura, mentre l'inscription sì.
>
> il fatto che ci sia l’inscription renderebbe l’oggetto degno di mappatura. 
> Potrebbe essere proprio la scritta stessa l’oggetto mappato, perciò 
> historic=inscription/epigraph 
>
> Ciao, Martin 
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [talk-it] discrepanza classifica strade su pagina wiki

sent from a phone

> On 8. Mar 2019, at 18:16, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> 
> Il mio punto è, che finora pensavo che nella gerarchia residential e 
> unclassified sono sullo stesso livello. Invece nel testo sulla pagina la 
> versione inglese combacia con quello che penso sia la prassi comune, invece 
> quello italiano dice che residential è "sotto" unclassified.

avevo capito, io invece vedevo da sempre unclassified sopra residential, cosa 
confermava in qualche modo anche il rendering (non so se ancora).
Nelle discussioni precedenti c’erano avvocati di entrambe le posizioni. In 
generale penso “residential” è una classe per penalizzare le strade 
residenziali (per evitare inutile traffico di transito e perché effettivamente 
potrebbero essere più lente da percorrere), quindi mi sembra giusto vederle 
come “inferiore”

Ciao, Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Tag per Iscrizioni o Epigrafi

sent from a phone

> On 8. Mar 2019, at 00:11, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
> 
> historic=yes, inoltre, è già ben usato, quindi non mi sembrerebbe una 
> anomalia...

si, ci sono, ma ci sono altri tag molto migliori, che specificano cosa sia. C’è 
anche highway=road o building=yes
più di 5000 landuse=yes
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=yes

Ciao, Martin ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

Perhaps they should be tagged not as peaks then but as a place node 
(place=locality probably)?

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Mike Thompson  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:29 AM Kevin Broderick  > wrote:
> 
> Would https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4992960980 
>  be an example of (or very 
> similar to) what you're talking about? 
> Yes, slightly different, but same general concept.  
> 
> 
> I've been told that one is a local reference point ("25 Short", ie. 25 feet 
> short of 10k), and at least one article 
> (https://rootsrated.com/stories/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-the-best-backcountry-skiing-in-jackson-hole
>  
> )
>  backs that up.
> I have seen back country trip reports mention such points (at least those 
> that are high points), and they have *some* value therefore, but as I 
> suggested earlier, "point n,nnn" is to me more of a description rather than a 
> name in most cases.
> 
> Mike
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-it] Tag per Iscrizioni o Epigrafi



sent from a phone

> On 8. Mar 2019, at 00:11, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
> 
> almeno che non vogliamo taggare anche le pubblicità sui muri, e spero di non 
> stare suggerendo una brutta idea a qualcuno!)


ho creato anni fa un tag per le pubblicità, ha avuto qualche successo (persone 
che mi scrivevano per spingere la proposta) 
;-)

Ciao, Martin ___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

2019-03-08 Per discussione Mike Thompson

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:29 AM Kevin Broderick 
wrote:

>
> Would https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4992960980 be an example of (or
> very similar to) what you're talking about?
>
Yes, slightly different, but same general concept.


> I've been told that one is a local reference point ("25 Short", ie. 25
> feet short of 10k), and at least one article (
> https://rootsrated.com/stories/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-the-best-backcountry-skiing-in-jackson-hole)
> backs that up.
>
I have seen back country trip reports mention such points (at least those
that are high points), and they have *some* value therefore, but as I
suggested earlier, "point n,nnn" is to me more of a description rather than
a name in most cases.

Mike
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-it] Tag per Iscrizioni o Epigrafi

sent from a phone

> On 8. Mar 2019, at 00:11, Sergio Manzi  wrote:
> 
> ma capisco che a volte l'oggetto in se può essere poco significativo e non 
> degno di mappatura, mentre l'inscription sì.

il fatto che ci sia l’inscription renderebbe l’oggetto degno di mappatura. 
Potrebbe essere proprio la scritta stessa l’oggetto mappato, perciò 
historic=inscription/epigraph 

Ciao, Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] KeepRight might do that already | Re: HTTPS all the Things (Automated Edit)

2019-03-08 Per discussione Dave F via talk

Keepright returns far too many false positives (in the UK) to be useful. 
I'm not an expert, but it seems the further (ie another country) you are 
away from the server storing the website the less likely Keepright will 
find it.


It makes me wonder if Bryce's script, running from the US, will garner a 
decent hit rate. Would running it from different world locations 
discover more?


Happy to have it clarified to me.

Cheers
DaveF

On 27/02/2019 15:19, Rory McCann wrote:
I think KeepRight checks websites, and can report things like that: 



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] [talk-it] discrepanza classifica strade su pagina wiki

2019-03-08 Per discussione Volker Schmidt

Il mio punto è, che finora pensavo che nella gerarchia residential e
unclassified sono sullo stesso livello. Invece nel testo sulla pagina la
versione inglese combacia con quello che penso sia la prassi comune, invece
quello italiano dice che residential è "sotto" unclassified.

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 18:07, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> mi sembra giusto il testo italiano. Come anche evidenziato recentemente in
> una lunga discussione su tagging, la classe unclassified viene visto come
> “quartiary” cioè viene utilizzato per indicare strada di accesso ad un
> piccolo quartiere (dove la strada non è nemmeno tertiary).
>
> Ciao, Martin
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Tag per Iscrizioni o Epigrafi

sent from a phone

> On 8. Mar 2019, at 16:46, canfe  wrote:
> 
> Concordo Sergio, e' esattamente quello che avevo proposto:
>   historical=yes
>   inscription=*
> in modo da non far proliferare i tag come raccomandato.

intendi “historic”? Quindi la classe della cosa mappata sarebbe ‘storico’ e 
basta? 
Penso per descrivere oggetti è sempre utile essere un minimo specifico. Se per 
chi fa la mappa non importa finché sia un oggetto storico, potrebbe sempre 
valutare tutti gli oggetti con tag
historic= e tag inscription.

Ciao, Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [talk-it] discrepanza classifica strade su pagina wiki

mi sembra giusto il testo italiano. Come anche evidenziato recentemente in una 
lunga discussione su tagging, la classe unclassified viene visto come 
“quartiary” cioè viene utilizzato per indicare strada di accesso ad un piccolo 
quartiere (dove la strada non è nemmeno tertiary).

Ciao, Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] More imagery

2019-03-08 Per discussione chilton steve via Talk-GB

All,

Following on from Rob's email the contact person for Getmapping is: Jake Lauder 
- jake.lau...@getmapping.com mailto:jake.lau...@getmapping.com

Web:http://www.getmapping.com Address: Virginia Villas, High Street, Hartley 
Wintney, RG27 8NW

If making contact I suggest you mention the discussion that he and Steve 
Chilton had recently at the GeoForum2019 meeting at Lancaster University.

Also stating the obvious: The request should outline what OSM plan to do 
(tracing) and where the data will be used.

Cheers

Steve Chilton (Steev8)

> On 06 March 2019 at 22:12 Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> 
> Sounds good. Although it is worth noting that OSM UK is us - i.e. the 
> OpenStreetMap community in the UK. Yes it does happen to be a registered 
> company which helps in some conversations (some companies like to speak with 
> other companies) but to get things moving fastest we welcome help from fellow 
> OSMers. If not then it will fall to the OSM UK board, of which there are 5 
> people (I am one) with limited volunteer time.
> 
> To get things started I have written to OSMF's advisory board to see if 
> any of the local groups or organisations that form part of that have 
> experience with getmapping imagery. If you can pass contact details from 
> getmapping then we can start enquiries.
> 
> P.S. If anyone reading this wants to jump in and help, please let me know.
> 
> With best regards,
> Rob
> 
> 
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 21:14, chilton steve < 
> steve.chil...@blueyonder.co.uk mailto:steve.chil...@blueyonder.co.uk > wrote:
> 
> > > 
> > Rob,
> > 
> > Thanks for the response.
> > 
> > In fact I would prefer to hand over to OSMUK or some more formal 
> > part of the project, particularly if they have experience of such 
> > discussions/negotiations.
> > 
> > I don't know what the level of content is. They market themselves 
> > as leading provider in UK so I don't think global.
> > 
> > I will email OSMUK first before going to the company, just to see 
> > how the land lies (pun intended!).
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > > > > On 06 March 2019 at 19:54 Rob Nickerson < 
> > rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com mailto:rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com > wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Steve,
> > > 
> > > >Would OSM benefit from another imagery source? Getmapping 
> > > have tentatively offered theirs. See: 
> > > https://itsahill.wordpress.com/2019/03/05/edina-geoforum-2019/ and get 
> > > back to me via any of the normal methods.
> > > >
> > > >Cheers
> > > >Steve Chilton (@steev8)
> > > 
> > > It's certainly worth exploring and I think this is something 
> > > that OSM UK company can assist with if they prefer to discuss with a 
> > > registered company rather than an individual (could still be you, just on 
> > > behalf of, and with the support of OSM UK if that helps with discussions).
> > > 
> > > What are the next steps? I guess confirming it is unique 
> > > content is a good step - rather than a copy of Digital Globe imagery 
> > > already available to us for example. Do you want to start an email 
> > > discussion with them cc'ing bo...@osmuk.org mailto:bo...@osmuk.org in and 
> > > we can arrange a call / meeting with them if that helps.
> > > 
> > > P.S. Are we speaking UK or global?
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> > > Rob
> > > 
> > > > > 
> > > 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-de] EU-Urheberrechtsrichtlinie: Banner und Aktionsseite für openstreetmap.de

2019-03-08 Per discussione Florian Lohoff


Hi Michael,

On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 12:31:36AM +0100, Michael Reichert wrote:
> Hallo,
> 
> in seiner Sitzung hat der FOSSGIS-Vorstand sich vorletzte Woche mit den
> gewohnten Veränderungen an openstreetmap.de einverstanden erklärt. Diese
> habe ich jetzt vorbereitet. Dabei handelt es sich um:
> 
> - Die Aktionsseite (die übrigens immer noch online, aber nicht mehr
>   verlinkt war) habe ich aktualisiert. Zu den Änderungen bitte ich um
>   Kommentare.
> - Für die Aktionsseite in ihrer alten Fassung habe ich eine englische
>   Übersetzung erstellt. Mithilfe bei der Aktualisierung der englischen
>   Fassung ist hier willkommen.
> - Ich habe etwas dezentere (dunkelgraue statt schwarze) Banner für die
>   Start- und Kartenseite eingebaut.
> 
> Auf https://michreichert.de/osm/openstreetmap.de/index.html könnt ihr
> sehen, wie es aussehen wird. Die Änderungen gegenüber dem Status quo
> könnt ihr im Quellcode unter
> https://github.com/fossgis/openstreetmap.de/pull/26/files
> anschauen.
> 
> Ich habe mittlerweile drei Seiten mit Listen von Demonstrationen
> gefunden. Ist der Protest v.a. in Mittel- und Osteuropa aktiv oder sind
> mir noch keine Seiten für West- und Südeuropa über den Weg gelaufen?

Als Aktionsseite kenne ich noch:

https://botbrief.eu/

und eben

https://pledge2019.eu/

Für die Linksammlung unter "Was kann ich dagegen tun?"

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
UTF-8 Test: The  ran after a , but the  ran away


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

I agree that a local US OSM map with a *subtly* adapted rendering would be 
fantastic. Phil Gold did some interesting work years ago on rendering US style 
highway shields taking into account (sometimes crazy) route concurrency 
(http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=13=39.75926=-86.02786=B

 - note that this is based on years-old data and probably pre-carto-switch 
stylesheet). Lars Ahlzen created the beautiful TopOSM which is a lot more 
divergent from the main map style, but another great example of initiatives 
around custom map rendering coming out of the US community.

Perhaps something for a BoF session at the next SOTM!

Finally, I don’t think it’s a funding or infrastructure issue. It’s just that 
someone needs to lead it.

Martijn

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 9:27 AM, Kevin Kenny  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:59 AM Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>> If it’s just a shortcut to have the main OSM map display elevation in feet, 
>> that’s not right, but it indicates a need that is currently unaddressed: 
>> displaying elevation in local units on the main map.
> 
> Even as a USAian, I'm fine with SI units on the main map. If the
> USAians need a map localised to US conventional units, let the USAians
> host it.
> 
> (and openstreetmap.us miught be a perfect place to put such a thing,
> but I know, the infrastructure and funding really isn't there.)

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:59 AM Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> If it’s just a shortcut to have the main OSM map display elevation in feet, 
> that’s not right, but it indicates a need that is currently unaddressed: 
> displaying elevation in local units on the main map.

Even as a USAian, I'm fine with SI units on the main map. If the
USAians need a map localised to US conventional units, let the USAians
host it.

(and openstreetmap.us miught be a perfect place to put such a thing,
but I know, the infrastructure and funding really isn't there.)

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

2019-03-08 Per discussione Lacramioara Maghiar - (p)

Thanks for your response!

I got 80 from the trunk way from which the motorway link leaves.
In some situations, especially on off-ramps, there isn’t any speed limit sign 
at the beginning of the link only at the end of it or in the middle. I observed 
that in these situations the speed limit of the motorway is added on the first 
part of the link. Because this is the predominant way of adding speed limit on 
links, we will map in the same way: if there isn’t a speed limit sign at the 
beginning of the link we will add the speed limit of the motorway and other 
speed limit that occurs along the link. If there is a speed limit sign at the 
beginning of the link (e.g.SL60 in our example) we will add the speed limit in 
the way you mentioned (60 then 100).

Best,
Lacri

From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 12:19 AM
To: Lacramioara Maghiar - (p) 
Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

Hi Lacri

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 21:56, Lacramioara Maghiar - (p) 
mailto:lacramioara.magh...@telenav.com>> wrote:
Hi all,

I’m writing you regarding the speed limit mapping in Australia.
Specifically, how would you add the speed limit on a motorway link where the 
speed limit sign appears in the field towards the end/in the middle of the link?

In Qld at least (& I think Aust-wide) speed limits officially change at the 
sign - you may start accelerating as you pass it, not before; but you must 
start slowing early so you're at the lower limit as you pass the sign.

Please take a look at the following example: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/37282555. Here, there is a speed limit sign 
of 100 (SL100 hereafter) in the middle of the motorway link. You can see the 
sign here: 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo=cTDOkTXf0M0gVBjem4mt9A=-27.664412022684786=152.7436576757009=17.
In which way would you add the speed limit information in the above-mentioned 
case:

  1.  maxspeed=80 until the SL100 sign and maxspeed=100 until the end of the 
link?
I'm not sure where you got 80 from? I can only see a 60 sign at the start of 
the link 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-27.663581886206885=152.73979205152136=17=0.49548370263958935=0.50767663189853=0=B-1LcWLyCAjIQqhNjTQ7AQ,
 & speed then jumps to 100 just before merging out onto the Cunningham Highway


  1.  maxspeed=80 represents the speed limit of the trunk way from which the 
motorway link leaves.
Welcome to Australian roads! Just because it's a trunk road, doesn't 
necessarily mean it's got an appropriate speed limit :-(


  1.  nothing until the SL100 sign but maxspeed=100 starting with the 
appearance of the sign in the field?
60, not "nothing" between the 2 signs, then 100.

Hope that helps!

Thanks

Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

If it’s locally known as such, to my mind, it’s totally fine tagging it that 
way, even if it’s only by backcountry skiers. I would say this is common in 
OSM, I see (and appreciate) a lot of named trails that are not always 
signposted as such but locally known by those names (like 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/624949038 
). Local knowledge trumps most 
everything in OSM.

If it’s just a shortcut to have the main OSM map display elevation in feet, 
that’s not right, but it indicates a need that is currently unaddressed: 
displaying elevation in local units on the main map. I don’t see a ticket 
currently on the osm-carto repo that addresses this. I think it would be hard 
to get ’regional’ rendering preferences accepted however. A better / other way 
to improve on this is to change the convention for the ele tag to be more like 
maxspeed: default to meters but allow other units to be entered as ‘8801 ft’ 
for a value. Then osm-carto could pick that up more easily.

Martijn

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 6:27 AM, Kevin Broderick  wrote:
> 
> To elaborate on my previous response, now that I'm back at a computer:
> 
> Would https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4992960980 
>  be an example of (or very 
> similar to) what you're talking about?
> 
> I've been told that one is a local reference point ("25 Short", ie. 25 feet 
> short of 10k), and at least one article 
> (https://rootsrated.com/stories/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-the-best-backcountry-skiing-in-jackson-hole
>  
> )
>  backs that up. The old USGS quad does have a point elevation of 9975' on 
> that knob, but it looks to more properly be a shoulder of a larger mountain, 
> not a proper mountain on its own.
> 
> I'm not suggesting that the current tagging is correct, but in this case (and 
> I believe in some others, although I don't even have anecdotes to back that 
> up), point elevation marks on USGS maps have become the "names" for local 
> topographical features. They're a little wonky on the 
> on-the-ground-verifiability (you can easily verify that a height-of-land 
> exists there, but I don't know that there's a sign or survey marker 
> indicating "this is 9975" or "this is 25 Short"), but [some] locals who 
> travel in the vicinity will use the reference. So it seems like something 
> that may be very reasonable to map, but I don't know what the best tagging 
> scheme is. I do think that normalizing to meters loses the meaning in the 
> current tag-for-the-renderer scheme, because a '3040m' label isn't going to 
> translate well to '25 Short' or '9975' unless you happen to particularly good 
> at math.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 4:53 AM Dave Swarthout  > wrote:
> This is simply a way to get an otherwise unnamed peak to render and also, I 
> suspect, to sidestep the inconvenience of converting the elevation to meters. 
>  AFAIK, there are no peaks with the generic name "Point" on any USGS Topos. 
> In addition, placing the elevation into the name is another trick that should 
> be discouraged.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 2:38 PM Mateusz Konieczny  > wrote:
> If it is a peak then ele=XXX and noname=yes would be OK.
> 
> If it is not a peak it should not be present at all - otherwise it opens way 
> to importing
> LIDAR data into OSM (and there are datasets with resolution of 5 cm, dumping 
> it
> into OSM would be case of unverifiable data making it impossible to edit).
> 
> I opened https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1703462 
>  to reduce chance that it will be 
> discussed 
> and forgotten.
> 
> If this is really used name - then it would be OK but my bet is that this is 
> not an actually used name.
> 
> Mar 7, 2019, 7:04 PM by miketh...@gmail.com :
> It seems that there are a couple of mappers in Colorado US (at least, perhaps 
> mapping in other areas as well) who are adding spot elevations (presumably 
> from USGS Topo maps) to OSM tagging them as 
> natural=peak
> name=Point (elevation in feet)
> 
> For example:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4601119717 
> 
> 
> What does the community think about this?
> 
> natural=peak might be ok if said spot elevation is really a local high point 
> (some are not).  The name I am less sure of. If this belongs on the map at 
> all, it should probably have an ele tag, with value in meters.
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Swarthout
> Homer, Alaska
> Chiang Mai, Thailand
> Travel Blog at

Re: [Talk-it] Tag per Iscrizioni o Epigrafi

2019-03-08 Per discussione canfe

+1
Concordo Sergio, e' esattamente quello che avevo proposto:
   historical=yes
   inscription=*
in modo da non far proliferare i tag come raccomandato.

Ferruccio

 



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-br] Geometria de lagos com margens muito variáveis

2019-03-08 Per discussione Fernando Trebien

Olá a todos,

Tenho atualizado a geometria da Lagoa dos Patos no RS, uma lagoa rasa,
com margens quase planas em diversos locais. O nível da água depende
das marés próximo do oceano, e dos ventos em terra [1], e com isso às
vezes invade áreas com centenas de metros e às vezes mais de um
quilômetro. A minha dúvida é se estou representando corretamente no
OSM:

1. A área dentro da variação do nível da água
- Praias de areia: natural=beach + surface=sand + tidal=yes/no ("no"
na parte seca, "yes" na parte às vezes submersa)
- Outras áreas periodicamente submersas: natural=wetland + wetland=tidalflat

2. Os limites da lagoa com a terra seca: no OSM as coastlines devem
aproximar a média astronômica da maré alta [2], ou "mean high water
spring" (MHWS) [3]. Como não temos essa informação, tenho comparado as
imagens do Bing e do ESRI e escolhido a que tem a maré mais alta para
atualizar essa geometria, e a de maré mais baixa para definir a área
periodicamente alagada (item anterior).

3. Os limites administrativos definidos em termos dos limites da
lagoa: tenho colocado junto à maré baixa, que é mais próxima da
geometria do IBGE e me parece mais próxima também do que seriam a
Linha do Preamar Média (LPM) e da Linha Média de Enchentes Ordinárias
(LMEO) definidas em 1831, quando o nível da água era mais baixo que o
atual. A LPM e a LMEO de 1831 estão sendo levantadas pelo governo
federal já faz uns anos. [5]
http://www.planejamento.gov.br/assuntos/gestao/patrimonio-da-uniao/plano-nacional-de-caracterizacao

Escolhi uma área [4] mais complicada para avaliar a aplicação dessas
definições e gostaria de ouvir opiniões sobre se parece correto ou se
algo deveria ser diferente.

A aplicação dessas definições parece ter sido um tanto inconsistente
no exterior. [6]

[1]  https://acervo.popa.com.br/diversos/ventos_lpatos.htm
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Coastline
[3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tide_terms.png
[4] 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=-31.8076=-51.8015#map=13/-31.8076/-51.8015
[5] 
http://www.planejamento.gov.br/assuntos/gestao/patrimonio-da-uniao/plano-nacional-de-caracterizacao
[6] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-April/035654.html

-- 
Fernando Trebien

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map new housing?

2019-03-08 Per discussione Lester Caine


On 08/03/2019 15:15, Brian Prangle wrote:
Whilst being immensely useful, Planning Applications are usually heavily 
annotated as Copyright,  both Crown Copyright and Developer Copyright- 
so even if the developer gives you permission you're still lumbered with 
OS encumbrance


The site plans may use OS material, but the developers drawings don't 
and in most cases even OS don't have the new roads and other details so 
permission to use is all that IS needed.


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - https://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map new housing?

2019-03-08 Per discussione Brian Prangle

Whilst being immensely useful, Planning Applications are usually heavily
annotated as Copyright,  both Crown Copyright and Developer Copyright- so
even if the developer gives you permission you're still lumbered with OS
encumbrance

Regards

Brian

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 11:24, Lester Caine  wrote:

> On 08/03/2019 10:35, Dave Abbott wrote:
> > I'm quite new to OSM, and am wondering how I might go about mapping new
> > housing plots in my area.
> >
> > In general, there is nothing on the imagery - I know I can walk the new
> > streets and map them with GPS - but how to go about mapping the new
> > buildings?
> >
> > Is there a guide I can look at?
>
> One source of information that I use is the planning application.
> Although it may also be necessary to ask the builders if you can use it
> directly. It's a useful background on josm ... when combined with a GPS
> walk around.
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -
> Contact - https://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - https://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.co.uk
> Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] HTTPS all the Things (Automated Edit)

2019-03-08 Per discussione Bryce Jasmer

Thanks for pointing that out. I have fixed it by redirecting between the
two pages.

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 4:28 AM Michael Reichert 
wrote:

> Hi Bryce,
>
> Am 22/02/2019 um 08.02 schrieb Bryce Jasmer:
> > The wiki page is
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/b-jazz
>
> I have seen that you started uploading. Could you please add a link to
> that wiki page to the profile page of b-jazz-bot or create
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/b-jazz-bot
> as a redirect page to
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/b-jazz
> in order to comply with the Automated Edits Code of Conduct.
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael
>
> --
> Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
> ausgenommen)
> I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Fw: Road name contradictions in the UK

2019-03-08 Per discussione Dave F via Talk-GB


On 08/03/2019 10:15, Andy Townsend wrote:
OS Locator is/was a good source of those missing names, as shown in 
"Musical Chairs" here: 


There's also:
http://product.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/

Although don't be deceived by the 'Last Updated' date - It's not being 
updated. When I contacted ITO to check if they'd had a change of heart & 
were using OS Open Data, I received a reply "no plans to spend any time 
developing OSM Analysis or Ito Map any further"


Would it take much effort to upgrade Musical Chairs to use OS Open Roads?

Cheers
DaveF


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map new housing?

2019-03-08 Per discussione Philip Barnes

Field boundaries are often retained (development usually takes a field
at a time), look out for these. They are a useful guide to aligning
stuff with old aerial imagery.
Phil (trigpoint)

On Fri, 2019-03-08 at 14:38 +, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Welcome to OSM.
> 
> 
> 
> Mapping new developments is trickier without aerial imagery, but
> there's quite a bit you can do to make it more accurate than
> guesswork.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   if you're mapping the roads use the GPS to walk down their
> centre, if it's safe to do so, of course)
>   Takes *lots* of photos. Videos are even better
>   If there is something already mapped in OSM Field Papers may
> help: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Field_Papers
>   I found that many new estates have a certain amount of
> conformity. Try offsetting a copy of the road centre lines to
> use as guidelines ensuring buildings equidistant from the
> road
> & the same width
> 
> To map larger buildings you can walk walk around it taking
>   waypoints with a GPS whenever you're in line with the plane of
> a
>   building's side. These points can then have a way drawn with
> their
>   opposite number to create the buildings outline. Make sure
> you're
>   far enough away from it to avoid GPS interference.  
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> DaveF   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 08/03/2019 10:35, Dave Abbott wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >   Hi,
> > I'm quite new to OSM, and am wondering how I might go about mapping
> > newhousing plots in my area.
> > In general, there is nothing on the imagery - I know I can walk the
> > newstreets and map them with GPS - but how to go about mapping the
> > newbuildings?
> > Is there a guide I can look at?
> > TIA,
> > Dave Abbott
> > 
> >   
> > 
> >   
> >   
> > 
> >   ___Talk-GB
> > mailing listtalk...@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> ___Talk-GB mailing 
> listtalk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map new housing?

2019-03-08 Per discussione Dave F via Talk-GB


Hi
Welcome to OSM.

Mapping new developments is trickier without aerial imagery, but there's 
quite a bit you can do to make it more accurate than guesswork.


 * if you're mapping the roads use the GPS to walk down their centre,
   if it's safe to do so, of course)
 * Takes *lots* of photos. Videos are even better
 * If there is something already mapped in OSM Field Papers may help:
   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Field_Papers
 * I found that many new estates have a certain amount of conformity.
   Try offsetting a copy of the road centre lines to use as guidelines
   ensuring buildings equidistant from the road & the same width

To map larger buildings you can walk walk around it taking waypoints 
with a GPS whenever you're in line with the plane of a building's side. 
These points can then have a way drawn with their opposite number to 
create the buildings outline. Make sure you're far enough away from it 
to avoid GPS interference.


Cheers
DaveF



On 08/03/2019 10:35, Dave Abbott wrote:

Hi,

I'm quite new to OSM, and am wondering how I might go about mapping new
housing plots in my area.

In general, there is nothing on the imagery - I know I can walk the new
streets and map them with GPS - but how to go about mapping the new
buildings?

Is there a guide I can look at?

TIA,

Dave Abbott



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it] evento su mappatura accessibilità a Milano

2019-03-08 Per discussione Andrea Canevazzi

grazie mille Alessandro per la visibilità sul nostro incontro in AMAT.
Spero che alcuni dei mappatori di Milano riescano a passare perchè, oltre
ad essere l'occasione per spiegare con maggiore dettaglio le nostre
prospettive, sarà anche l'occasione per un uno scambio di opinioni sui
prossmi passi e su eventuali correzioni di rotta. al'incontro dovrebbero
esserci anche rappresentanti delle istituzioni e delle associaioni.

Se riuscite a iscrivervi su Eventibrite ci faresste un pacere perché ci
mettete nelle condizioni di capire come organizzarci.
https://www.eventbrite.it/e/registrazione-gestione-dati-ambientali-e-della-mobilita-milano-digital-week-2019-57608162565

Grazie,
Andrea

*Arch. Andrea Canevazzi, Ph.D.*
 +39 3482453713
 andrea.caneva...@gmail.com 

*Via Novara, 160 | 20153 Milano | Italia*

*L’invio di documenti anche contabili  tramite posta elettronica è un mezzo
consentito, ai sensi dell’art.21 DPR 633/72 e a seguito della CM n. 45/E
del 19/10/2005; il documento informatico dovrà essere materializzato da chi
lo riceve tramite stampa su supporto cartaceo e quindi conservato come ogni
altro documento su carta.  *

Mail
priva di virus. www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Il giorno ven 8 mar 2019 alle ore 11:00 Alessandro Sarretta <
alessandro.sarre...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Non riesco ad essere presente fisicamente, ma seguo con interesse gli
> sviluppi, se possibile.
>
> E complimenti ancora ad AMAT Milano per le iniziative e l'approccio!
>
> Ale
> On 08/03/19 09:47, Alessandro Palmas wrote:
>
> Gli amici di AMAT Milano, già presenti su questa lista e attivi anche
> sulla wiki (santi subito :-) ), organizzano un incontro su *Cartografia e
> analisi delle barriere architettoniche a Milano* venerdì 15 marzo dalle
> 15,30.
>
> AMAT sta avviando la mappatura della rete pedonale di Milano e della sua
> accessibilità, direttamente sulla piattaforma OpenStreetMap e su Mapillary.
> Durante l’incontro racconteranno metodo e finalità di tale progetto e
> risponderanno alle domande degli interessati al tema.
>
> Per organizzare al meglio gli spazi e l'accoglienza chiedono la
> registrazione al link:
>
> https://www.eventbrite.it/e/registrazione-gestione-dati-ambientali-e-della-mobilita-milano-digital-week-2019-57608162565
>
> Sperando che questa opportunità venga colta da molti di voi inoltro con
> piacere il loro invito.
>
> Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing 
> listTalk-it@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
> --
> --
>
> Alessandro Sarretta
>
> skype/twitter: alesarrett
> Web: ilsarrett.wordpress.com
>
> Research information:
>
>- Google scholar profile
>
>- ORCID 
>- Research Gate
>
>- Impactstory 
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)