[talk-ph] Admin Boundary of Davao City and Davao del Norte REMOVED

[Marloue Pidor]

I noticed that the boundary I set between Davao City and Island Garden
City of Samal was deleted. It was derived from 1:50k topographic map

May I ask the group who deleted it? 

Best Regards,

murlwe


P.S. Please revert the deletion. 


___Get
 the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com 
target=new>http://www.mail2world.com  Unlimited 
Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – 
Much More!___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary of Davao City and Davao del Norte REMOVED

[maning sambale]

Is this the changeset?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/61959357

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Marloue Pidor  wrote:
> I noticed that the boundary I set between Davao City and Island Garden City
> of Samal was deleted. It was derived from 1:50k topographic map
>
> May I ask the group who deleted it?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> murlwe
>
>
> P.S. Please revert the deletion.
>
> ___
> Get the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com
> Unlimited Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – Much More!
>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
>



-- 
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
--

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Marloue Pidor]

Is there a need to clamp the admin boundaries to the coastline? 


___Get
 the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com 
target=new>http://www.mail2world.com  Unlimited 
Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – 
Much More!___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary of Davao City and Davao del Norte REMOVED

[Marloue Pidor]

You again! Ian Haylock, I need that Admin boundary. Do you think that
was incorrectly placed? Why remove it? it says in your changeset you are
"fixing errors". 

murlwe



From: maning sambale [emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com]
>Sent: 5/19/2011 8:23:18 PM
>To: mur...@mail2engineer.com
>Cc: 
>Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary of Davao City and Davao del Norte
REMOVED
>
>Is this the changeset?
>http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/61959357
>
>On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Marloue Pidor 
>wrote:
>> I noticed that the boundary I set between Davao City and Island
Garden City
>> of Samal was deleted. It was derived from 1:50k topographic map
>>
>> May I ask the group who deleted it?
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> murlwe
>>
>>
>> P.S. Please revert the deletion.
>>
>> ___
>> Get the Free email that has everyone talking at
http://www.mail2world.com
>> Unlimited Email Storage - POP3 - Calendar - SMS - Translator - Much
More!
>>
>> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list
>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>>
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>cheers,
>maning
>--
>"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
>wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
>blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
>--
>.
> 


___Get
 the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com 
target=new>http://www.mail2world.com  Unlimited 
Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – 
Much More!___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

There's no real need. The idea is that in the future we would be able
to map out the exact municipal and provincial waters. But until then,
making the admin boundaries just tackle land for the moment is
manageable since data is much more readily available.

Please reply if you have other suggestions. :)


On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Marloue Pidor  wrote:
> Is there a need to clamp the admin boundaries to the coastline?

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Marloue Pidor]

Hi Eugene, I find it easier if the Barangay boundaries be extendend to
the City/Municipal boundary, City/Municipal boundary be extended to the
Provincial boundary, Provincial boundary to the Country boundary. This
is just a suggestion for the coastal areas as you said to map out the
exact municipal and provincial waters. If you notice here,
http://osm.org/go/4sY75GPk-- the admin boundaries are clamped to the
shoreline and creating the same to the island when we can include those
island to the municipal boundary. I'm suggesting this because on a GIS
point of view, it is easier to look for places when it is placed inside
boundaries.

murlwe


<-Original Message-> 
From: Eugene Alvin Villar [sea...@gmail.com]
>Sent: 5/19/2011 10:13:33 PM
>To: mur...@mail2engineer.com
>Cc: 
>Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline
>
>There's no real need. The idea is that in the future we would be able
>to map out the exact municipal and provincial waters. But until then,
>making the admin boundaries just tackle land for the moment is
>manageable since data is much more readily available.
>
>Please reply if you have other suggestions. :)
>
>
>On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Marloue Pidor
 
>wrote:
>> Is there a need to clamp the admin boundaries to the coastline?
>.
> 


___Get
 the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com 
target=new>http://www.mail2world.com  Unlimited 
Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – 
Much More!___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

Hi Murlwe,

I don't think that municipal/provincial waters should be clamped to
the national waters.

According to the UNCLOS, national waters are those that are within 12
nautical miles (about 22km) from the coastline. According to the
Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, municipal waters are within 15
kilometers of the coastline. In addition, there is yet no rule on how
to deal with overlapping municipal waters.

I couldn't find a law stating anything about provincial waters, but I
assume they encompass their municipalities' waters. Same with barangay
waters.

So the idea is to mark admin boundaries of barangays,
municipalities/cities and provinces as just the land portions for now.
This includes islands.

If the concern is that you want to signify that places/landmarks of an
LGU are within its boundaries in GIS terms, then the GIS app need to
support boundaries that are composed of multiple polygons. For
example, Caloocan City is composed of 2 disjoint territories
. To say that a street
or POI is within Caloocan, the GIS app needs to support multiple
polygons.

Same thing goes currently with LGUs that have islands. The admin
boundaries currently include islands as multipolygons. For example,
Romblon, whose boundaries are currently clamped to the coastlines of
all of its constituent islands:
.


Eugene

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Marloue Pidor
 wrote:
> Hi Eugene, I find it easier if the Barangay boundaries be extendend to the
> City/Municipal boundary, City/Municipal boundary be extended to the
> Provincial boundary, Provincial boundary to the Country boundary. This is
> just a suggestion for the coastal areas as you said to map out the exact
> municipal and provincial waters. If you notice here,
> http://osm.org/go/4sY75GPk-- the admin boundaries are clamped to the
> shoreline and creating the same to the island when we can include those
> island to the municipal boundary. I'm suggesting this because on a GIS point
> of view, it is easier to look for places when it is placed inside
> boundaries.
>
> murlwe
>
>
> <-Original Message->
> From: Eugene Alvin Villar [sea...@gmail.com]
>>Sent: 5/19/2011 10:13:33 PM
>>To: mur...@mail2engineer.com
>>Cc:
>>Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline
>>
>>There's no real need. The idea is that in the future we would be able
>>to map out the exact municipal and provincial waters. But until then,
>>making the admin boundaries just tackle land for the moment is
>>manageable since data is much more readily available.
>>
>>Please reply if you have other suggestions. :)
>>
>>
>>On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Marloue Pidor 
>>wrote:
>>> Is there a need to clamp the admin boundaries to the coastline?
>>.
>>
>
> ___
> Get the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com
> Unlimited Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – Much More!



-- 
http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[maning sambale]

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar  wrote:
> Hi Murlwe,
>
> I don't think that municipal/provincial waters should be clamped to
> the national waters.
>
> According to the UNCLOS, national waters are those that are within 12
> nautical miles (about 22km) from the coastline. According to the
> Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, municipal waters are within 15
> kilometers of the coastline. In addition, there is yet no rule on how
> to deal with overlapping municipal waters.

According to the Fisheries Code:
Where two (2) municipalities are so situated on opposite shores that
there is less than thirty (30) kilometers of marine waters between
them, the third line shall be equally distant from the opposite shore
of the respective municipalities.

This can be easily done with a GIS buffer operation, but I don't find
any real need for osm to do that.  You can of course download the osm
data and create your preferred boundary within a GIS app.

> I couldn't find a law stating anything about provincial waters, but I
> assume they encompass their municipalities' waters. Same with barangay
> waters.
>
> So the idea is to mark admin boundaries of barangays,
> municipalities/cities and provinces as just the land portions for now.
> This includes islands.
This is a touchy issue (politically), so for now, I agree with using
coastlines as part of the admin boundary. Plus, it is easier to
maintain the data since when we move the the coastline, the admin
boundary in relation to the coastline move as well.

Although I have different opinion with "clamping" boundary relations to rivers.


> If the concern is that you want to signify that places/landmarks of an
> LGU are within its boundaries in GIS terms, then the GIS app need to
> support boundaries that are composed of multiple polygons. For
> example, Caloocan City is composed of 2 disjoint territories
> . To say that a street
> or POI is within Caloocan, the GIS app needs to support multiple
> polygons.

I think postgis can do this.

> Same thing goes currently with LGUs that have islands. The admin
> boundaries currently include islands as multipolygons. For example,
> Romblon, whose boundaries are currently clamped to the coastlines of
> all of its constituent islands:
> .
>
>
> Eugene
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Marloue Pidor
>  wrote:
>> Hi Eugene, I find it easier if the Barangay boundaries be extendend to the
>> City/Municipal boundary, City/Municipal boundary be extended to the
>> Provincial boundary, Provincial boundary to the Country boundary. This is
>> just a suggestion for the coastal areas as you said to map out the exact
>> municipal and provincial waters. If you notice here,
>> http://osm.org/go/4sY75GPk-- the admin boundaries are clamped to the
>> shoreline and creating the same to the island when we can include those
>> island to the municipal boundary. I'm suggesting this because on a GIS point
>> of view, it is easier to look for places when it is placed inside
>> boundaries.
>>
>> murlwe
>>
>>
>> <-Original Message->
>> From: Eugene Alvin Villar [sea...@gmail.com]
>>>Sent: 5/19/2011 10:13:33 PM
>>>To: mur...@mail2engineer.com
>>>Cc:
>>>Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline
>>>
>>>There's no real need. The idea is that in the future we would be able
>>>to map out the exact municipal and provincial waters. But until then,
>>>making the admin boundaries just tackle land for the moment is
>>>manageable since data is much more readily available.
>>>
>>>Please reply if you have other suggestions. :)
>>>
>>>
>>>On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Marloue Pidor 
>>>wrote:
 Is there a need to clamp the admin boundaries to the coastline?
>>>.
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Get the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com
>> Unlimited Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – Much More!
>
>
>
> --
> http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com
>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>



-- 
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
--

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM, maning sambale
 wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar  
> wrote:
>> Hi Murlwe,
>>
>> I don't think that municipal/provincial waters should be clamped to
>> the national waters.
>>
>> According to the UNCLOS, national waters are those that are within 12
>> nautical miles (about 22km) from the coastline. According to the
>> Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, municipal waters are within 15
>> kilometers of the coastline. In addition, there is yet no rule on how
>> to deal with overlapping municipal waters.
>
> According to the Fisheries Code:
> Where two (2) municipalities are so situated on opposite shores that
> there is less than thirty (30) kilometers of marine waters between
> them, the third line shall be equally distant from the opposite shore
> of the respective municipalities.

Let me clarify, there's a problem with the Fisheries Code's conflict
resolution in that it disadvantages municipalities that have offshore
islands. This research paper provides a very nice detailed description
of the problem including illustrations and
examples:http://www.scribd.com/doc/4938593/Archipelagic-Principle-Towards-Charting-of-the-Municipal-Waters

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Marloue Pidor]

Maning, we have the need to do that at least in Davao because we have
this Disaster Preparedness project here and it includes monitoring of
passenger sea vessels via GPS/SMS?RF going from Davao to Samal so I need
the boundaries. We are using OSM as the base map. That is also the
reason why I am adding now the Barangay boundaries to have some idea to
where the vessel on the map.

Eugene, that information help me a lot so now I would limit the barangay
boundary to 22kms or 30kms from the shoreline.

Thanks for the info guys.

murlwe



<-Original Message-> 
From: maning sambale [emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com]
>Sent: 5/20/2011 12:15:48 PM
>To: 
>Cc: mur...@mail2engineer.com;
>Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline
>
>On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar
 
>wrote:
>> Hi Murlwe,
>>
>> I don't think that municipal/provincial waters should be clamped to
>> the national waters.
>>
>> According to the UNCLOS, national waters are those that are within 12
>> nautical miles (about 22km) from the coastline. According to the
>> Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, municipal waters are within 15
>> kilometers of the coastline. In addition, there is yet no rule on how
>> to deal with overlapping municipal waters.
>
>According to the Fisheries Code:
>Where two (2) municipalities are so situated on opposite shores that
>there is less than thirty (30) kilometers of marine waters between
>them, the third line shall be equally distant from the opposite shore
>of the respective municipalities.
>
>This can be easily done with a GIS buffer operation, but I don't find
>any real need for osm to do that. You can of course download the osm
>data and create your preferred boundary within a GIS app.
>
>> I couldn't find a law stating anything about provincial waters, but I
>> assume they encompass their municipalities' waters. Same with
barangay
>> waters.
>>
>> So the idea is to mark admin boundaries of barangays,
>> municipalities/cities and provinces as just the land portions for
now.
>> This includes islands.
>This is a touchy issue (politically), so for now, I agree with using
>coastlines as part of the admin boundary. Plus, it is easier to
>maintain the data since when we move the the coastline, the admin
>boundary in relation to the coastline move as well.
>
>Although I have different opinion with "clamping" boundary relations to
rivers.
>
>
>> If the concern is that you want to signify that places/landmarks of
an
>> LGU are within its boundaries in GIS terms, then the GIS app need to
>> support boundaries that are composed of multiple polygons. For
>> example, Caloocan City is composed of 2 disjoint territories
>> . To say that a street
>> or POI is within Caloocan, the GIS app needs to support multiple
>> polygons.
>
>I think postgis can do this.
>
>> Same thing goes currently with LGUs that have islands. The admin
>> boundaries currently include islands as multipolygons. For example,
>> Romblon, whose boundaries are currently clamped to the coastlines of
>> all of its constituent islands:
>> .
>>
>>
>> Eugene
>>
>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Marloue Pidor
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi Eugene, I find it easier if the Barangay boundaries be extendend
to 
>the
>>> City/Municipal boundary, City/Municipal boundary be extended to the
>>> Provincial boundary, Provincial boundary to the Country boundary.
This is
>>> just a suggestion for the coastal areas as you said to map out the
exact
>>> municipal and provincial waters. If you notice here,
>>> http://osm.org/go/4sY75GPk-- the admin boundaries are clamped to the
>>> shoreline and creating the same to the island when we can include
those
>>> island to the municipal boundary. I'm suggesting this because on a
GIS 
>point
>>> of view, it is easier to look for places when it is placed inside
>>> boundaries.
>>>
>>> murlwe
>>>
>>>
>>> <-Original Message->
>>> From: Eugene Alvin Villar [sea...@gmail.com]
Sent: 5/19/2011 10:13:33 PM
To: mur...@mail2engineer.com
Cc:
Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

There's no real need. The idea is that in the future we would be
able
to map out the exact municipal and provincial waters. But until
then,
making the admin boundaries just tackle land for the moment is
manageable since data is much more readily available.

Please reply if you have other suggestions. :)


On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Marloue Pidor 
>
wrote:
> Is there a need to clamp the admin boundaries to the coastline?
.

>>>
>>> ___
>>> Get the Free email that has everyone talking at
http://www.mail2world.com
>>> Unlimited Email Storage - POP3 - Calendar - SMS - Translator - Much
More!
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com
>>
>> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

Hi Murlwe,

If you are sure about the delineation of the boundary between Davao
City and Samal Island, then I have no problem with moving the admin
boundary from the coastline to the median line between the two cities.
As for the barangay boundaries, can you ask the barangays there what
delineates their waters? Is it 15 km (same as with municipalities and
cities) or is it closer?

Eugene


On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Marloue Pidor
 wrote:
> Maning, we have the need to do that at least in Davao because we have this
> Disaster Preparedness project here and it includes monitoring of passenger
> sea vessels via GPS/SMS?RF going from Davao to Samal so I need the
> boundaries. We are using OSM as the base map. That is also the reason why I
> am adding now the Barangay boundaries to have some idea to where the vessel
> on the map.
>
> Eugene, that information help me a lot so now I would limit the barangay
> boundary to 22kms or 30kms from the shoreline.
>
> Thanks for the info guys.
>
> murlwe

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline

[Marloue Pidor]

The distance between Samal and Davao is only 1.5kms at its nearest and
19kms at its farthest. As of now I am using the NAMRIA data but later I
will use the data from the City Planning Office.

murlwe

<-Original Message-> 
From: Eugene Alvin Villar [sea...@gmail.com]
>Sent: 5/20/2011 12:52:21 PM
>To: mur...@mail2engineer.com
>Cc: 
>Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Admin Boundary and Coastline
>
>Hi Murlwe,
>
>If you are sure about the delineation of the boundary between Davao
>City and Samal Island, then I have no problem with moving the admin
>boundary from the coastline to the median line between the two cities.
>As for the barangay boundaries, can you ask the barangays there what
>delineates their waters? Is it 15 km (same as with municipalities and
>cities) or is it closer?
>
>Eugene
>
>
>On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Marloue Pidor
> wrote:
>> Maning, we have the need to do that at least in Davao because we have
this
>> Disaster Preparedness project here and it includes monitoring of
passenger
>> sea vessels via GPS/SMS?RF going from Davao to Samal so I need the
>> boundaries. We are using OSM as the base map. That is also the reason
why I
>> am adding now the Barangay boundaries to have some idea to where the
vessel
>> on the map.
>>
>> Eugene, that information help me a lot so now I would limit the
barangay
>> boundary to 22kms or 30kms from the shoreline.
>>
>> Thanks for the info guys.
>>
>> murlwe
>.
> 


___Get
 the Free email that has everyone talking at http://www.mail2world.com 
target=new>http://www.mail2world.com  Unlimited 
Email Storage – POP3 – Calendar – SMS – Translator – 
Much More!___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[talk-ph] re typ of osm

[samuel cruz]

hi,

after installing osm map into my garmin unit,im having a hard time viewing the 
street especially if it is a residential or tertiary road.  i tried installing 
typ file but it wont work osm map.

sam___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

[talk-ph] Notes on using GADM or PhilGIS boundary data

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

Hello guys,

Some of you may already know that there is a globally available data
for administrative boundaries from country level down to the
sub-municipality level (depending on country). This is the Global
Administrative Areas (GADM) dataset . They have data
for the Philippines down to the barangay level. If you need a freely
available data like that then you can use GADM.

The GADM data for the Philippines is in one big chunk. If you need
smaller sets (e.g., just for Metro Manila or just for a single
province), you can check out PhilGIS  which
has taken the GADM data, added PSGC metadata, and provided downloads
on a per-province level. (BTW, PhilGIS contains other freely-available
datasets aside from boundaries.)

However take note of the restrictions and limitations:

1. License. The GADM data "is freely available for academic and other
non-commercial use. Redistribution, or commercial use, is not allowed
without prior permission." Same with PhilGIS: "For academic,
non-profit, and non-commercial use only." This means that we *cannot*
add GADM data into OSM, which allows redistribution and commercial use
even without prior permission.

2. The data has quality issues.

2.1. Inaccurate positioning: Despite saying that the data is in WGS84
datum (which GPS devices use), they don't actually match what's on the
ground. For example, here are two comparisons between the GADM data
and the data in OSM:

a. central Quezon City:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:GADM_vs_OSM_-_Central_Quezon_City.png

b. Northern Caloocan:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:GADM_vs_OSM_-_Northern_Caloocan.png

2.2. Outdated data: The dataset is missing new barangays,
municipalities, and cities. And the embedded data sometimes contain
old names.

If these restrictions and limitations are not a problem for you, then
you should use them in your mapping applications, especially if the
current OSM data is incomplete or inadequate for your needs.

Eugene

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] re typ of osm

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

Hi sam,

I'm not an expert on Garmin typ files but if I remember correctly, typ
files are tied to specific maps. So, you cannot use a RoadGuide typ
file on OSM Garmin maps and vice versa.

Rally is the (sorta) expert here on Garmin typ files. He's the one
that developed the default style for the OSM Garmin map and he should
be able to answer your questions.

Thanks,
Eugene


On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM, samuel cruz  wrote:
> hi,
> after installing osm map into my garmin unit,im having a hard time viewing
> the street especially if it is a residential or tertiary road.  i tried
> installing typ file but it wont work osm map.
> sam

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [talk-ph] re typ of osm

[maning sambale]

docsam,

The difference between residential and tertiary should be very distinct:

residential - thin grey lines
tertiary - thicker yellow lines

Note that this style was optimized for older units with very limited
screen size.

Using a different typ file (i.e. rg's typ) won't work because they
have a separate family ID when installed in mapsource and in your
device.

Rally is our main man for the typ styling.  He is currently developing
new styles as I write so if you have suggestions on what style should
be adopted let us know.

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar  wrote:
> Hi sam,
>
> I'm not an expert on Garmin typ files but if I remember correctly, typ
> files are tied to specific maps. So, you cannot use a RoadGuide typ
> file on OSM Garmin maps and vice versa.
>
> Rally is the (sorta) expert here on Garmin typ files. He's the one
> that developed the default style for the OSM Garmin map and he should
> be able to answer your questions.
>
> Thanks,
> Eugene
>
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM, samuel cruz  wrote:
>> hi,
>> after installing osm map into my garmin unit,im having a hard time viewing
>> the street especially if it is a residential or tertiary road.  i tried
>> installing typ file but it wont work osm map.
>> sam
>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>



-- 
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
--

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph