[Talk-us] National Atlas
Hi, I see the National Atlas has a shapefile download for Federal lands. I'm interested in getting the National forests in Arizona into OSM, but the data sets I've found so far are crude. This one has good detail IIRC. I can't find licensing information for this government site. Is all US Government data OK to use or do I need to find something explicit? Any ideas on this particular data? http://nationalatlas.gov/atlasftp.html#fedlanp Andy -- Andy PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Atlas
Most US Government-sourced data is essentially "public domain" (actually a slight variant sometimes called "government domain"). All boundary data you find on National Atlas and The National Map (as well as seamless.usgs.gov) are completely free for just about any use except terrorism. ;) All the Census TIGER data falls under the same license as does all Landsat (a fairly recent return from a commercial license), NAIP, and more recent flyovers like the 133 Most Populated Places 1-foot color imagery. The only caveat is that National Atlas, The National Map, and Seamless put a cap on daily download size. This cap isn't a big deal for vector data - like your boundaries. But it's a real burden when trying to pull raster imagery, like Landsat or DRGs (scanned topo sheets). With the 1-foot Most Populated Places imagery, you'll hit your limit in about a quarter square mile of coverage. Maybe I can track down the right folks to write an official statement for the OSM wiki. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. Wolf 720-209-6818 USGS Geographer Center of Excellence in GIScience PhD Student CU-Boulder - Geography On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Andrew Ayre wrote: > Hi, > > I see the National Atlas has a shapefile download for Federal lands. I'm > interested in getting the National forests in Arizona into OSM, but the > data sets I've found so far are crude. This one has good detail IIRC. > > I can't find licensing information for this government site. Is all US > Government data OK to use or do I need to find something explicit? Any > ideas on this particular data? > > http://nationalatlas.gov/atlasftp.html#fedlanp > > Andy > > -- > Andy > PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864 > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Strange synthentic GPS tracks spelling out words
We had a super-cool mapping party in Portland, OR this weekend. But I noticed some really werid GPS traces. Somebody has spelled out things like "ATM" and "SUSHILAND" in the GPS tracks, and they weren't walking around spelling things. ;) Take a look around 45.524613, -122.694281. I'm just curious who uploaded these. They seem pretty harmless and kinda funny, but I wonder why someone would go to this trouble. Or did someone's GPS automatically translate waypoints into these things? Any ideas? -- Dave atm.gpx Description: XML document ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Atlas
I know that for the National Park boundaries the national atlas data is much worse than park specific data. I would suspect that to be the case for national forest boundaries as well on the National Atlas. As Eric said, most government data is alright to use. I found the Forest service site for region 3 [1] and I tossed the admin boundaries and and the wilderness boundaries into Arc and compared that data with the national atlas forest boundaries data. I can confirm the national atlas data has much less detail than the FS data. The forest service data is also unambiguous in terms of copyright and is usable on OSM. But what you gain in resolution you also lose in terms of import speed. Also, check out the National Forest Service data on the wiki and add your project to it [2]. [1] http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/gis/datasets.shtml [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_Forest_Service_Data Happy mapping! -Tyler ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Strange synthentic GPS tracks spelling out words
not my tracks. I guess they are done with OSMTracker. It has lots of onscreen buttons and you can assign any name to them. Or you enter any custom text. supports voice tracking too. very convenient to enter lots of wp or when you need to concentrate on driving. On 21 Jun 2009, at 19:32 , Dave Hansen wrote: > We had a super-cool mapping party in Portland, OR this weekend. But I > noticed some really werid GPS traces. Somebody has spelled out things > like "ATM" and "SUSHILAND" in the GPS tracks, and they weren't walking > around spelling things. ;) > > Take a look around 45.524613, -122.694281. > > I'm just curious who uploaded these. They seem pretty harmless and > kinda funny, but I wonder why someone would go to this trouble. Or > did > someone's GPS automatically translate waypoints into these things? > Any > ideas? > > -- Dave > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Atlas
Thanks Tyler and Eric! Andy Tyler wrote: > I know that for the National Park boundaries the > national atlas data is much worse than park specific data. I would > suspect that to be the case for national forest boundaries as well on > the National Atlas. As Eric said, most government data is alright to use. > > I found the Forest service site for region 3 [1] and I tossed the admin > boundaries and and the wilderness boundaries into Arc and compared that > data with the national atlas forest boundaries data. I can confirm the > national atlas data has much less detail than the FS data. The forest > service data is also unambiguous in terms of copyright and is usable on OSM. > > But what you gain in resolution you also lose in terms of import speed. > Also, check out the National Forest Service data on the wiki and add > your project to it [2]. > > [1] http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/gis/datasets.shtml > [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_Forest_Service_Data > > Happy mapping! > > -Tyler > > > > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Andy PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Atlas
OK, I have the data in JOSM in the WGS84 projection as a GPX file. I converted the GPX layer to a data layer. I then zoomed in to one small distinct piece and selected all the nodes. Next I went to the menu and choose Forest and entered a name for this piece (Coronado National Forest). However the area wasn't shaded. Is this the right way to do it? Andy Tyler wrote: > I know that for the National Park boundaries the > national atlas data is much worse than park specific data. I would > suspect that to be the case for national forest boundaries as well on > the National Atlas. As Eric said, most government data is alright to use. > > I found the Forest service site for region 3 [1] and I tossed the admin > boundaries and and the wilderness boundaries into Arc and compared that > data with the national atlas forest boundaries data. I can confirm the > national atlas data has much less detail than the FS data. The forest > service data is also unambiguous in terms of copyright and is usable on OSM. > > But what you gain in resolution you also lose in terms of import speed. > Also, check out the National Forest Service data on the wiki and add > your project to it [2]. > > [1] http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/gis/datasets.shtml > [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_Forest_Service_Data > > Happy mapping! > > -Tyler > > > > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Andy PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Atlas
Hey Andy, The OSM API will only allow 50,000 nodes at a time and ways of length <1000 you'll want to make sure your shp to osm or gpx converter will spit out osm/gpx files meeting those criteria (the 50,000 node limit has only been an issue for me with trails and streams). If not you can do it by hand in JOSM by deleting excess nodes. If your GPX provides you with a way or ways you'll need it/them and tag them appropriately. All my nodes contain is attribution and import UUID information for my NPS boundary. Here's what I did with the National Park boundary [1] I recently imported: 1. imported <50,000 node boundary into JOSM ( 2. broke park boundary into 5 seperate ways of ~1200 nodes (select node split way, make sure the ways form an unbroken polygon if you're doing it in JOSM) 3. labeled each way with boundary=national_park leisure=nature_reserve (you would probably use landuse=forest and leisure=nature_reserve?--see wiki page for NFS) name="Name of Thing Boundary" 4. created a relation with each way of type=multipolygon with each way with a role=outer (you can also use type=boundary, but as a boundary is just a type of multipolygon I went with the latter) 5. labeled multipolygon with boundary=national_park, landuse=nature_reserve (for National Forests landuse=forest, leisure=nature_reserve) name="Name of Thing" Things to note: I'm not saying this is the right way, this is just what I did, and it renders correctly on mapnik and t...@h The advanced multipolygon wiki page [2] and it's talk page may come in handy I also included a UUID with my upload (generated with python's uuid module to both be able to attribute the data better and remove it easier if something goes horribly wrong) and and attributed US-NFS (they provided the National Park boundary data) You may wish to use leisure=nature_reserve on only the wilderness areas (even though they really aren't, you could also use landuse=wood) just to get them to render properly and not give them a boundary since they're an area inside of the National Forest. However you do it, posting on the wiki for the National Forests would be personally appreciated (see previous e-mai) as I will be encountering similar issues shortly--Olympic National Park is skirted by National Forest and accompanying wilderness areas. [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=47.872&lon=-123.829&zoom=9&layers=B000FTF [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:multipolygon#Advanced_multipolygons Good Luck! -Tyler ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
