Re: [talk-au] Admin levels for LGAs / suburbs etc changed (Was "Suburbs & admin boundaries stopping streets being found?)

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 19:29, Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

>
> Yes - at least if no conflicting edits were
> done later.
>
> Otherwise it may be necessary to copy
> earlier text.
>

Wasn't able to simply revert the changes due to "other conflicting edits",
so re-pasted previous data.

Could somebody please have a look at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#Table_1:_Countries_using_admin_level_3.E2.80.9310
& see if Oz now looks the same as it used to ‽

Thanks

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] rues en landuse residential

[Philippe Verdy]

Si ci, il y a bien des exemples où les landuse=residential ont été nommés
explicitement après ce découpage en blocs ou lotissements. Mais à chaque
fois en n'y incluant pas les rues bordées (seulement les voies privées).
Je pense même que c'est un découpage qui veut différencier le parcellaire
privé et le domaine public, plus ou moins issu du découpage cadastral (non
importable avec toutes ses irrégularités et son historique car il ne tient
pas compte du regroupement parcellaire  ou des extensions grignotées soit
par le privé sur le domaine public, soit l'inverse par vente ou par échange
de parcelles, soit entre propriétés, pour agrndir ou réduire des
bâtiments ou élargir une route, aménager un rond-point, faire une zone
d'arrêt pour les bus, ou tout travaux nécessitant de l'emprise ou une marge
de sécurité autour de certains ouvrages, ou tenir compte de l"évolution des
dangers ou de la nécessité de changer des accès barrés par un autre ouvrage.
Mais le pire c'est que ce parcellaire n'est pas toujours très précis dans
les petites communes: même vectorisé, le plan cadastral a gardé des
décennies voire des siècles d'un ancien découpage, et s'est tracé avec
d'anciens outils de mesure quand on n'avait pas autant besoin de précision
et que les tolérances étaient plus grandes sur des parcelles plus grandes.
de plus cela n'a pas toujours tenu compte des évolutions naturelles
(glissement du lit de fleuves et rivières, mouvements liés à
l'exploitation minière ou simplement les déformations naturelles avec un
écoulement des sols alluvionnaires dans les vallées ou encore les effets de
l'érosion et du changement de régime des eaux: le terrain n'est pas
statique même si on ne s'en aperçoit pas. C'est bien pour ça qu'il y avait
autant de balisage au sol mais une fois posé et repéré sur le cadastre ,
les mesures de triangulation deviennent de moins en moins précises à cause
des déformations non linéaires.
Mais le pire se trouve souvent dans les centre-villes anciens: les
bâtiments sont vraiment disposés dans tous les sens et les mesures et
proportions ne sont pas respectées, il y a des découpages artificiels qui
n'ont même jamais existé, juste estimés mais avec des erreurs liées à la
difficulté d'observation et l'usage d'anciens outils et de nombreux oublis.


Le sam. 12 sept. 2020 à 22:29,  a écrit :

>
> Le 12/09/2020 à 22:22, Marc Mongenet - marc.monge...@gmail.com a écrit :
>
> Si comme le pense Philippe c'est pour nommer
> les landuse, alors ce n'était pas nécessaire, ni même désirable,
> d'exclure les rues.
>
> Marc Mongenet
>
> j'avoue ne comprends pas car ça n'a pas été nommé non plus !
>
> Comme Jérôme est sur la liste il pourra expliquer ce qu'il a voulu faire.
>
> Cette partie-ci ce n'est sûrement à taguer comme ça, éventuellement en
> highway:area
> 
> =residential.
>
> Jean-Yvon
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Tom Hughes via Talk-GB]

If you think Bristol or Aberdeen are mad then try Norwich:

  https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/172506

Again presumably due to Norwich's history as a port and therefore
having control of the river.

Tom

On 12/09/2020 22:53, Russ Garrett wrote:

Yeah, I assume what happened is that the City of Bristol ended up, at
some point, as a statutory port authority (which I think they were
until 1991), and somehow the boundary from that has remained as their
local authority boundary. But it's still a fairly unique situation as
there are many other harbours with statutory port authorities where
this anomaly doesn't exist.

I'm fairly sure that Bristol boundary does not coincide with the
current limits of the Port of Bristol. Aberdeen has a small seaward
extension which also doesn't appear to coincide with their current
port authority limits either. So it's not clear what these seaward
extensions currently achieve.

I'd love to find the actual legislation which created this...

Russ

On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 22:24, Mark Goodge  wrote:




On 12/09/2020 21:23, Russ Garrett wrote:

I've foolishly now decided to try to get to the bottom of it - the
beating of the bounds still doesn't explain why exactly it covers that
area (although I'm impressed that the Lord Mayor managed to commandeer
a warship to do so!)


AIUI, it's because it's the historic maritime navigation route into
Bristol and Avonmouth. The simplified constituency boundary map is,
possibly a little bizarrely, one of the best visualisations of that:

https://members.parliament.uk/constituency/3368/location

See also this Admiralty chart for the Bristol Channel - you can see that
the "Bristol Deep" channel passes between the two islands and leads into
the harbour:

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0278/1529/products/OCB-1179.jpg

Mark

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







--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-09-12 23:53, Russ Garrett wrote:

> Yeah, I assume what happened is that the City of Bristol ended up, at
> some point, as a statutory port authority (which I think they were
> until 1991), and somehow the boundary from that has remained as their
> local authority boundary. But it's still a fairly unique situation as
> there are many other harbours with statutory port authorities where
> this anomaly doesn't exist.
> 
> I'm fairly sure that Bristol boundary does not coincide with the
> current limits of the Port of Bristol. Aberdeen has a small seaward
> extension which also doesn't appear to coincide with their current
> port authority limits either. So it's not clear what these seaward
> extensions currently achieve.
> 
> I'd love to find the actual legislation which created this...

There are seaward extensions not linked to a port as well. I wonder what
the background is to Torbay (Devon) for example.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Russ Garrett]

Yeah, I assume what happened is that the City of Bristol ended up, at
some point, as a statutory port authority (which I think they were
until 1991), and somehow the boundary from that has remained as their
local authority boundary. But it's still a fairly unique situation as
there are many other harbours with statutory port authorities where
this anomaly doesn't exist.

I'm fairly sure that Bristol boundary does not coincide with the
current limits of the Port of Bristol. Aberdeen has a small seaward
extension which also doesn't appear to coincide with their current
port authority limits either. So it's not clear what these seaward
extensions currently achieve.

I'd love to find the actual legislation which created this...

Russ

On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 22:24, Mark Goodge  wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/09/2020 21:23, Russ Garrett wrote:
> > I've foolishly now decided to try to get to the bottom of it - the
> > beating of the bounds still doesn't explain why exactly it covers that
> > area (although I'm impressed that the Lord Mayor managed to commandeer
> > a warship to do so!)
>
> AIUI, it's because it's the historic maritime navigation route into
> Bristol and Avonmouth. The simplified constituency boundary map is,
> possibly a little bizarrely, one of the best visualisations of that:
>
> https://members.parliament.uk/constituency/3368/location
>
> See also this Admiralty chart for the Bristol Channel - you can see that
> the "Bristol Deep" channel passes between the two islands and leads into
> the harbour:
>
> https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0278/1529/products/OCB-1179.jpg
>
> Mark
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



-- 
Russ Garrett
r...@garrett.co.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Mark Goodge]

On 12/09/2020 21:23, Russ Garrett wrote:

I've foolishly now decided to try to get to the bottom of it - the
beating of the bounds still doesn't explain why exactly it covers that
area (although I'm impressed that the Lord Mayor managed to commandeer
a warship to do so!)


AIUI, it's because it's the historic maritime navigation route into 
Bristol and Avonmouth. The simplified constituency boundary map is, 
possibly a little bizarrely, one of the best visualisations of that:


https://members.parliament.uk/constituency/3368/location

See also this Admiralty chart for the Bristol Channel - you can see that 
the "Bristol Deep" channel passes between the two islands and leads into 
the harbour:


https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0278/1529/products/OCB-1179.jpg

Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-09-12 22:23, Russ Garrett wrote:

> Incidentally, the OSM wiki page for Wales claims that the sea boundary
> between Wales and England is not well-defined:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wales#Boundary

Then the wiki is wrong. The "Welsh Zone" was most recently defined by
the: 

THE WELSH ZONE (BOUNDARIES AND TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS) ORDER 2010

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/760/schedule/made___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Mark Goodge]

On 12/09/2020 21:11, Rob Nickerson wrote:
"extremely stupid reasons" in this case relates to an very old tradition 
where the Lord Mayor of Bristol 'beats the bounds' of the city by 
rowing/sailing out to the islands.


As a consequence a small wedge of the city of Bristol bounds lies within 
Welsh water.


See also this rather oddly shaped map of the Bristol North West 
constituency:


https://members.parliament.uk/constituency/3368/location

Mark

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

Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Tagging of LEAs that changed in 2019

[Colm Donoghue]

The map of Holmpatrick LE district is different on
https://www.townlands.ie/holmpatrick/ than the map on
http://www.boundarycommittee.ie/Maps/Fingal%20LEA%20Report%20Map%202018.pdf

The skerries arent included on the boundary commission map, but are on
townlands/osm

Which is correct?
Colm


Ar Sath 12 MFómh 2020 ag 12:16, scríobh Colm Moore :

> Hi,
>
> I think Brian's approach is reasonable. I would make sure they are tagged
> with dates, even so far as adding the date to the name.
>
> Colm
>
>
> ---
> Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can
> change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. Margaret Mead
>
> ___
> Talk-ie mailing list
> Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
>
___
Talk-ie mailing list
Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] rues en landuse residential

[osm . sanspourriel]

Le 12/09/2020 à 22:22, Marc Mongenet - marc.monge...@gmail.com a écrit :

Si comme le pense Philippe c'est pour nommer
les landuse, alors ce n'était pas nécessaire, ni même désirable,
d'exclure les rues.

Marc Mongenet


j'avoue ne comprends pas car ça n'a pas été nommé non plus !

Comme Jérôme est sur la liste il pourra expliquer ce qu'il a voulu faire.

Cette partie-ci ce n'est sûrement à taguer comme ça, éventuellement en
highway:area
=residential.

Jean-Yvon

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Russ Garrett]

I've foolishly now decided to try to get to the bottom of it - the
beating of the bounds still doesn't explain why exactly it covers that
area (although I'm impressed that the Lord Mayor managed to commandeer
a warship to do so!)

Incidentally, the OSM wiki page for Wales claims that the sea boundary
between Wales and England is not well-defined:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wales#Boundary

Cheers,

Russ

On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 21:12, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
>
> "extremely stupid reasons" in this case relates to an very old tradition 
> where the Lord Mayor of Bristol 'beats the bounds' of the city by 
> rowing/sailing out to the islands.
>
> As a consequence a small wedge of the city of Bristol bounds lies within 
> Welsh water.
>
> You get a similar situation with Denny Island which lies within English 
> waters but is part of Monmouthshire.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7019663.stm
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20071012220607/http://www.bristol.gov.uk/ccm/content/press-releases/2007/sep/beating-bristols-water-boundary.en
>
> Best regards
> Rob
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



-- 
Russ Garrett
r...@garrett.co.uk

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] rues en landuse residential

[Marc Mongenet]

Bonjour

Le sam. 12 sept. 2020 à 14:40, Georges Dutreix via Talk-fr
 a écrit :
>
> Je viens de tomber sur ça à La Ciotat : 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/433148353/history#map=18/43.17743/5.60195
> une emprise de rue en landuse=residential
>
> Tout le quartier est comme ça, je trouve ça assez lourd, et ça me semble même 
> être un contresens puisque la zone "résidentielle" serait justement toute la 
> zone en dehors de l'emprise des rues et trottoirs.
>
> Qu'en pensez-vous ?
> Doit-on laisser tel quel ? le signaler à l'auteur puis corriger ?

Je fais beaucoup de landuse, mais je n'ai jamais fait, et jamais vu,
ça. Je ne suis pas pour. Si comme le pense Philippe c'est pour nommer
les landuse, alors ce n'était pas nécessaire, ni même désirable,
d'exclure les rues.

Marc Mongenet

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

[Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Rob Nickerson]

"extremely stupid reasons" in this case relates to an very old tradition
where the Lord Mayor of Bristol 'beats the bounds' of the city by
rowing/sailing out to the islands.

As a consequence a small wedge of the city of Bristol bounds lies within
Welsh water.

You get a similar situation with Denny Island which lies within English
waters but is part of Monmouthshire.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7019663.stm

https://web.archive.org/web/20071012220607/http://www.bristol.gov.uk/ccm/content/press-releases/2007/sep/beating-bristols-water-boundary.en

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Colin Smale]

This anomaly gives rise to the situation that there is a triangle (more
or less) of water near Flat Holm which is simultaneously within the
jurisdiction of  Wales and the City of Bristol. It probably only matters
for things like fishing, as that was basically the reason to define
clearly the maritime boundary between England and Wales, fishing and the
marine environment (up to 12nm) being Devolved Powers. The City of
Bristol is probably the only cross-border local authority in the UK 

On 2020-09-12 19:53, Russ Garrett wrote:

> Oh wait, I remember now. This is correct for extremely stupid reasons
> relating to the boundaries of the county of Bristol including a large
> chunk of the Bristol Channel.
> 
> I can confirm the boundary in OSM matches the one in OS Boundary Line.
> That relation could probably do with a note tag on it, though.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Russ
> 
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:48, Russ Garrett  wrote: 
> I'm pretty sure Flat Holm is part of Cardiff - Steep Holm is in
> England but it also isn't in Bristol as far as I know. There's
> definitely something weird going on with the boundaries there but it
> also looks like nothing has changed around there in a while. Curious.
> 
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:39, Brian Prangle  wrote: 
> This island, in the bristol Channel between Weston super Mare and Barry seems 
> to be in two countries  at once. It's on the Welsh side of the national 
> boundary but also in South West England City of Bristol. This is either a map 
> error with the Welsh boundary or a legal anomaly I don't know which.  If it's 
> one of those legal quirks then wouldn't it be better as an exclave of England 
> in Wales?
> 
> Apologies if this has come up before.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb 
> 
> --
> Russ Garrett
> r...@garrett.co.uk___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples of good paid mapping?

[Mateusz Konieczny via talk]

12 Sep 2020, 15:42 by frede...@remote.org:

> Hi,
>
> On 9/11/20 23:57, Bryce Cogswell via talk wrote:
>
>> Exactly. When companies do it right nobody knows they’re doing it. 
>>
>
> Except that - because they do it right - they will of course have
> documented their work on the wiki.
>
Or it was done before introducing this
requirement.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Fondation OSM / nouveau membre, dernier jour aujourd'hui pour pouvoir votre en décembre

[Denis Helfer]

Le 12/09/2020 à 19:01, Vincent Bergeot a écrit :


Bonjour,

l'assemblée générale de la Fondation OpenStreetMap se déroulera le 12 
décembre 2020.


Et pour devenir un *nouveau* membre habité à voter pour les candidats 
au conseil d'administration de la fondation, il faut adhérer 
aujourd'hui, jusqu'à minuit. Cette mesure avait été prise suite à des 
adhésions massives dans les derniers jours avant l'AG 2018.


Plus d'infos ici : 
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Annual_General_Meetings/2020 et 
ici : 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM20/Election_to_Board


Vous *pouvez devenir membre automatiquement si vous avez 42 jours de 
cartographie volontaires non rémunérées* ou d'autres types d'activités 
de promotion d'OpenStreetMap (plus d'infos ici 
https://join.osmfoundation.org/active-contributor-membership/).


à vous,


J'appuie le message de Vincent : c'est un opportunité inédite de montrer 
que la communauté peut faire contrepoids. Changer la gravité de la 
Fondation par la masse des contributeurs bénévoles, attachés à la 
création d'un commun inaliénable avant que le Fondation ne soit attiré 
vers d'autres destinées.


42 est la réponse

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Russ Garrett]

Oh wait, I remember now. This is correct for extremely stupid reasons
relating to the boundaries of the county of Bristol including a large
chunk of the Bristol Channel.

I can confirm the boundary in OSM matches the one in OS Boundary Line.
That relation could probably do with a note tag on it, though.

Cheers,

Russ

On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:48, Russ Garrett  wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure Flat Holm is part of Cardiff - Steep Holm is in
> England but it also isn't in Bristol as far as I know. There's
> definitely something weird going on with the boundaries there but it
> also looks like nothing has changed around there in a while. Curious.
>
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:39, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> >
> > This island, in the bristol Channel between Weston super Mare and Barry 
> > seems to be in two countries  at once. It's on the Welsh side of the 
> > national boundary but also in South West England City of Bristol. This is 
> > either a map error with the Welsh boundary or a legal anomaly I don't know 
> > which.  If it's one of those legal quirks then wouldn't it be better as an 
> > exclave of England in Wales?
> >
> > Apologies if this has come up before.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Brian
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
>
> --
> Russ Garrett
> r...@garrett.co.uk



-- 
Russ Garrett
r...@garrett.co.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Russ Garrett]

I'm pretty sure Flat Holm is part of Cardiff - Steep Holm is in
England but it also isn't in Bristol as far as I know. There's
definitely something weird going on with the boundaries there but it
also looks like nothing has changed around there in a while. Curious.

On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 18:39, Brian Prangle  wrote:
>
> This island, in the bristol Channel between Weston super Mare and Barry seems 
> to be in two countries  at once. It's on the Welsh side of the national 
> boundary but also in South West England City of Bristol. This is either a map 
> error with the Welsh boundary or a legal anomaly I don't know which.  If it's 
> one of those legal quirks then wouldn't it be better as an exclave of England 
> in Wales?
>
> Apologies if this has come up before.
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



-- 
Russ Garrett
r...@garrett.co.uk

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

[Talk-GB] Flatholm Island Boundary Problem

[Brian Prangle]

This island, in the bristol Channel between Weston super Mare and Barry
seems to be in two countries  at once. It's on the Welsh side of the
national boundary but also in South West England City of Bristol. This is
either a map error with the Welsh boundary or a legal anomaly I don't know
which.  If it's one of those legal quirks then wouldn't it be better as an
exclave of England in Wales?

Apologies if this has come up before.

Regards

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

[OSM-talk-fr] Fondation OSM / nouveau membre, dernier jour aujourd'hui pour pouvoir votre en décembre

[Vincent Bergeot]

Bonjour,

l'assemblée générale de la Fondation OpenStreetMap se déroulera le 12 
décembre 2020.


Et pour devenir un *nouveau* membre habité à voter pour les candidats au 
conseil d'administration de la fondation, il faut adhérer aujourd'hui, 
jusqu'à minuit. Cette mesure avait été prise suite à des adhésions 
massives dans les derniers jours avant l'AG 2018.


Plus d'infos ici : 
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Annual_General_Meetings/2020 et ici 
: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/AGM20/Election_to_Board


Vous *pouvez devenir membre automatiquement si vous avez 42 jours de 
cartographie volontaires non rémunérées* ou d'autres types d'activités 
de promotion d'OpenStreetMap (plus d'infos ici 
https://join.osmfoundation.org/active-contributor-membership/).


à vous,

--
Vincent Bergeot

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] La proposition shadok : les pompes

[François Lacombe]

Merci Gad pour tes encouragements

N'hésitez pas à compléter la section des exemples ou proposer des
illustrations pour les valeurs qui n'en ont pas encore.
Par exemple les pompes à vis, à aubes, injecteurs et autres éjecteurs à air
comprimé.

Bon weekend

François

Le mer. 9 sept. 2020 à 05:48, Gad Jo  a écrit :

> Ton dossier pour la proposition est très bien construit et très clair.
>
> Félicitations
>
> Le September 8, 2020 10:12:40 PM UTC, "François Lacombe" <
> fl.infosrese...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>> Salut à tous
>>
>> Voici une proposition de nouveaux tags pour décrire les pompes, beaucoup
>> de modèles différents, dont je vient d'achever la traduction
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Proposed_features/Pumping_proposal
>>
>> Elle m'a occupé une partie du confinement de ce printemps et a déjà reçu
>> de nombreux commentaires sur la version anglaise, ce qui permet aujourd'hui
>> d'avoir un modèle assez mature.
>>
>> L'idée est de réutiliser ce qui a été mis en place pour décrire les puits
>> à eau ou de pétrole pour l'étendre à d'autres univers comme l'industrie ou
>> le médical.
>> En tout cas il est proposé de considérer les pompes comme des appareils à
>> part entière, quel que soit leur usage en situation.
>>
>> Je cherche encore des exemples ou des photos. Certains modèles sont quasi
>> introuvables dans la nature et ca ne pousse pas sur les arbres.
>>
>> Le modèle attributaire proposé sera également présenté au groupe de
>> travail de l'ASTEE qui débute la semaine prochaine pour l'élaboration d'un
>> nouveau géostandard pour l'adduction d'eau potable et la gestion des eaux
>> usées. J'essaierai d'y apporter un peu de culture OSM
>> (le précédent GT
>> https://www.astee.org/groupe-de-travail-sig-participez-a-la-consultation-externe/
>> )
>>
>> Preneur de vos retours, à bientôt
>>
>> François
>>
>
> --
> Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] rues en landuse residential

[Philippe Verdy]

Je pense que l'auteur a voulu découper les zones résidentielles selon les
des blocs lotis (afgin ensuite de pouvoir en nommer certains) et qu'il a
ensuite rempli les trous laissés vides le long des rues qui les divisent.
Cependant c'est une subdivision arbitraire: les landuse=residential ne sont
pas fait pour nommer des blocs, des résidences ou des lotissements.

Et même si on le fait il n'y a aucune raison de ne pas inclure au moins la
moité des rues qui les borde; créer alors un espace intermédiaire juste
pour la voie publique est un non-sens.

Le sam. 12 sept. 2020 à 14:40, Georges Dutreix via Talk-fr <
talk-fr@openstreetmap.org> a écrit :

> Bonjour,
>
> Je viens de tomber sur ça à La Ciotat :
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/433148353/history#map=18/43.17743/5.60195
> une emprise de rue en landuse=residential
>
> Tout le quartier est comme ça, je trouve ça assez lourd, et ça me semble
> même être un contresens puisque la zone "résidentielle" serait justement
> toute la zone en dehors de l'emprise des rues et trottoirs.
>
> Qu'en pensez-vous ?
> Doit-on laisser tel quel ? le signaler à l'auteur puis corriger ?
>
> Merci.
> Georges
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] Examples of good paid mapping?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 9/11/20 23:57, Bryce Cogswell via talk wrote:
> Exactly. When companies do it right nobody knows they’re doing it. 

Except that - because they do it right - they will of course have
documented their work on the wiki.

Bye
Frederik

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

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

[OSM-talk-fr] rues en landuse residential

[Georges Dutreix via Talk-fr]

Bonjour,

Je viens de tomber sur ça à La Ciotat : 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/433148353/history#map=18/43.17743/5.60195

une emprise de rue en landuse=residential

Tout le quartier est comme ça, je trouve ça assez lourd, et ça me semble 
même être un contresens puisque la zone "résidentielle" serait justement 
toute la zone en dehors de l'emprise des rues et trottoirs.


Qu'en pensez-vous ?
Doit-on laisser tel quel ? le signaler à l'auteur puis corriger ?

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

[OSM-talk-ie] Irish Pub preset

[Colm Moore]

Hi,

It's good that it is disabled for Ireland. My inner tidiness freak wouldn't 
like relabelling 10,000 pubs. :)

Colm

---
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the 
world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. Margaret Mead

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

Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Tagging of LEAs that changed in 2019

[Colm Moore]

Hi,

I think Brian's approach is reasonable. I would make sure they are tagged with 
dates, even so far as adding the date to the name.

Colm

---
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the 
world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. Margaret Mead

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM data without attribution

[Andy Townsend]

On 11/09/2020 15:17, Mike Thompson wrote:


I will thank Ron for the change and try to start a dialog with our DWG 
about AllTrails asking their users to contact the DWG directly with 
map errors.



Yes - that'd be great.

The wider issues in addition to their support process are that (1) lots 
of trails in the USA don't have access mapped (and are missing other 
detail as well)*, and (2) even when these details are mapped AllTrails' 
maps and apps simply don't do a very good job of showing what there is 
in the area (see my previous comment in the thread about that).


We (the DWG) have fed these issues back to AllTrails' support on a 
number of occasions but we have yet to see meaningful change. Obviously 
the support people within an organisation can only work within the 
parameters that are set for them - if they see "complaints about 
cartography" then it's up to the people responsible for that to fix it, 
not the support staff, and AllTrails' maps suggest they outsource that 
to MapBox.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)

* to pick an entirely random example, see 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/547170922 for the sort of thing I'm 
talking about.  To be fair, that's a trail 60km from the nearest town so 
I suspect it isn't going to get that much attention in OSM.



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

Re: [Talk-it] R: R: R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

[Fabio Bettani]

Concordo con quanto espresso da Martin: un'informazione incompleta è
infinitamente meglio di un'informazione errata.
L'informazione incompleta ti dice già "ehi, sono incompleta", mentre quella
errata è indistinguibile da una vera. E un nome di via errato su una mappa
mi sembra davvero grave.
Un tasso di un errore ogni 20, poi, è completamente inaccettabile.

--
Fabio


Il giorno sab 12 set 2020 alle ore 10:32 canfe  ha
scritto:

> 20 imprecisioni su 20 oggetti invece sì??
>
> canfe
>
> -Messaggio originale-
> Da: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com]
> Inviato: sabato 12 settembre 2020 10:25
> A: openstreetmap list - italiano
> Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] R: R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 12. Sep 2020, at 10:21, canfe  wrote:
> >
> > Ritengo che se ne peggiorano 5 ma se ne migliorano 95 la cosa � a
> vantaggio di chi usa la mappa.
>
>
> direi decisamente di no. Un errore ogni 20 oggetti sarebbe gravissimo,
> renderebbe completamente inutilizzabile la mappa.
>
> 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
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [talk-au] Admin levels for LGAs / suburbs etc changed (Was "Suburbs & admin boundaries stopping streets being found?)

[Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au]

12 Sep 2020, 03:41 by graemefi...@gmail.com:

>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020 at 20:01, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au <> 
> talk-au@openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sep 2, 2020, 06:06 by >> thesw...@gmail.com>> :
>>
>>> On 2/09/2020 10:38 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>>

 Did a bit of searching & it appears it was only changed on 15/7/20, but 
 no, I certainly don't remember any discussion?

 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Admin_level_10=prev=2012028

 Makes reference to "Australian Tagging Review (2012 / 2016)", but that 
 doesn't help me much either?

>>>
>>> Sigh.
>>>
>>> He is a serial offender:
>>>
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-October/013009.html
>>>
>>> There was no discussion. I'd suggest that the changes to the wiki page 
>>> should be reverted.
>>>
>> I posted on their talk page on Wiki with request to explain what is the 
>> source of change +
>> mailing list links.
>>
>> See >> 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Aaronsta=2028532=1185639
>>
>> BTW, if he is serial offender why noone ever commented on their talk page?
>> Maybe it would help and they have some good point?
>>
>
> So are we in agreement that this change should be reverted?
>
> & if so, how is it done? Is it just a matter of clicking the "undo" button on 
> that edit, leaving a comment & that's it?
>
Yes - at least if no conflicting edits were
done later.

Otherwise it may be necessary to copy
earlier text.

(Exactly like with OSM reverts of OSM
map data)___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[Talk-it] R: R: R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

[canfe]

20 imprecisioni su 20 oggetti invece sì??

canfe

-Messaggio originale-
Da: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com] 
Inviato: sabato 12 settembre 2020 10:25
A: openstreetmap list - italiano
Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] R: R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade



sent from a phone

> On 12. Sep 2020, at 10:21, canfe  wrote:
> 
> Ritengo che se ne peggiorano 5 ma se ne migliorano 95 la cosa � a vantaggio 
> di chi usa la mappa.


direi decisamente di no. Un errore ogni 20 oggetti sarebbe gravissimo, 
renderebbe completamente inutilizzabile la mappa.

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] R: R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Sep 2020, at 10:21, canfe  wrote:
> 
> Ritengo che se ne peggiorano 5 ma se ne migliorano 95 la cosa è a vantaggio 
> di chi usa la mappa.


direi decisamente di no. Un errore ogni 20 oggetti sarebbe gravissimo, 
renderebbe completamente inutilizzabile la mappa.

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

[Talk-it] R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

[canfe]

Sicuramente per fare un lavoro ben fatto bisognerebbe controllarsi tutte le vie.
Ma comunque non verrebbe fatto, come non vengono risolte le note che stanno lì 
da anni, gli errori, moltissimi invero, segnalato da OSMOSE e altri…
Insomma a scapito di un 5% si perde il 95% di lavoro.

Il discorso però è a carattere generale, non specifico sui nomi.
Se si applicasse una linea di “duri e puri” allora anche i torrenti con 
immagini precedenti all’ultima piena (basta una piena per ridisegnare il corso) 
andrebbero rivisti
Oppure i boschi da immagini con più di 5 anni. Un frassineto si espande a 
velocità impressionante…

 

Ferruccio Cantone (canfe)

 

Da: Andrea Albani [mailto:aob...@gmail.com] 
Inviato: lunedì 7 settembre 2020 19:58
A: openstreetmap list - italiano
Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

 

Ciao Ferruccio,

 

Un paio di considerazioni:

- per trovare il 5% di errori il "circolo degli anziani" deve smazzarsi anche 
quel 95% restante proprio per determinare cosa è buono e cosa no (tralasciamo 
un attimo il problema della conoscenza dei luoghi) 

- con queste regole un po' lasche diventa accettabile se 100 osmers italiani, 
ognuno affezionato al proprio personaggio storico, si mettono a cambiare tutte 
le istanze dei nomi dei loro beniamini. Infatti quale regola esiste per dire 
che uno, particolarmente affezionato ad Anita in Garibaldi, possa o meno fare 
un change di questa natura? Senza estremizzare... quanti cognomi noti hanno un 
doppione che non conosciamo? 

 

Personalmente vorrei mappare e non inseguire i problemi introdotti da chi ti 
risponde che puoi sempre correggere dopo. 

 

Il lun 7 set 2020, 19:10 canfe  ha scritto:

Io quello che cambierei è la mentalità.


In pratica c’è scritto: “non toccare nulla che potresti sbagliare e se sbagli 
anche solo qualcosina tutto il lavoro è da rifare”.
Vorrei che i mass editing, se fatti a fin di bene, non possano essere revertati 
se contengono meno del 5% di errori.

Anzi, vorrei che i più anziani e capaci, si adoperassero per correggere quel 5% 
di errori introdotti a fronte di un 95% di correzioni.

 

Insomma si “butta il bambino assieme con l’acqua sporca”.

 

Ferruccio Cantone (canfe)

 

Da: mbranco2 [mailto:mbran...@gmail.com] 
Inviato: mercoledì 2 settembre 2020 10:14
A: openstreetmap list - italiano
Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

 

Se proponi di cambiarla, indica quali frasi modificheresti o sostituiresti in 
[1]; io personalmente non toccherei neanche una virgola.

Per i pigri che non hanno voglia di leggere tutta la pagina, riporto parti 
significative per quanto si sta discutendo:



AMBITO



-  uso di funzioni trova-e-sostituisci negli editor standard come JOSM oppure 
ricerche usando servizi come Overpass API e modifiche conseguenti fatte senza 
il controllo sui singoli elementi; 

-   cambiare i tag manualmente su larga scala senza un'adeguata revisione

 Anche se stai per modificare i tag di un grande numero di oggetti 
sistematicamente e non pensi che sia una modifica automatica che ricade sotto 
questo codice di condotta, è comunque una buona idea discutere prima le tue 
modifiche. 

Uso problematico

Usare uno strumento per affermare uno standard, o la tua personale 
interpretazione di uno standard, quando potrebbero esserci giustificati motivi 
per altre interpretazioni o dove lo standard non rispecchia la pratica comune. 
In particolare è un problema quando una persona, o un piccolo gruppo di 
persone, stabiliscono uno standard di codifica e poi usano processi automatici 
per applicarlo nel database senza una consultazione appropriata. Tieni a mente 
che la Wiki non deve essere usata come la definizione dell'unico modo corretto 
di assegnare i tag, e che non è accettabile usare la wiki come giustificazione 
per modifiche massive ai dati senza una adeguata consultazione.

.
Documenta e discuti i tuoi piani

Se hai in mente di fare una modifica automatica, prima discutine e documentala. 
La documentazione deve essere inserita nella wiki e la proposta discussa nelle 
opportune mailing list
...
Di solito si documentano le modifiche che si vogliono fare in una pagina wiki 
in inglese con nome "Automated edits/username" (dove username è il nome utente 
OSM dell'account con cui saranno eseguite le modifiche (pensa adesso al nome, 
così non dovrai rinominare la pagina dopo), e aggiungila a Category:Automated 
edits log  .

La documentazione deve riportare: 


  

[1]   
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

 


 

 

Mail priva di virus.  

 www.avast.com 

 

Il giorno mer 2 set 2020 alle ore 

[Talk-it] R: R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

[canfe]

Ritengo che se ne peggiorano 5 ma se ne migliorano 95 la cosa è a vantaggio di 
chi usa la mappa.

 

Cantone Ferruccio (canfe)

 

Da: Simone Saviolo [mailto:simone.savi...@gmail.com] 
Inviato: martedì 8 settembre 2020 08:51
A: openstreetmap list - italiano
Oggetto: Re: [Talk-it] R: R: R: R: Edit automatici su nome strade

 

Il giorno mar 8 set 2020 alle ore 08:47 Simone Saviolo 
 ha scritto:

[...] non stiamo dando un'informazione sbagliata, il che è meglio di 
un'informazione "corretta ma non enciclopedicamente corretta". 

 

Nota per il futuro: rileggi prima di inviare, non dopo. Intendevo dire che 
l'informazione può essere corretta, corretta ma incompleta oppure sbagliata. 
L'importante è che l'informazione non sia sbagliata; correggere un'informazione 
corretta ma incompleta *senza essere sicuri al 100% (ragionevolmente) di non 
peggiorarla* è da evitare. 

 

Ciao,

 

Simone

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