Re: [Talk-us] Admin Level for Neighborhoods?
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone decided on a admin_level to tag for neighborhoods in a city? I'd like to import some neighborhood boundary data that my local municipalities have given out. Assuming these neighborhoods do indeed have some kind of administrating body, I'd use admin_level=10. -- David Smith a.k.a. Vid the Kid a.k.a. Bír'd'in Does this font make me look fat? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Using prefixes for regional mail list topics
On 12/3/09 12:50 AM, Randy wrote: I'm reposting this, as it was rather stupid to post it under a San Fransico/Bay topic that was only remotely related (i.e. being regional). This may very well already be the defacto standard, but if not, might I suggest that we establish a best practice of prefixing subjects which are regionally directed with a 2-4 character region prefix followed by a colon? NY: has already been used. other states also would be by postal code abbreviation having spontaneously started using NY: (the convention may predate me, but if so i've not seen it previously), i'm of course inclined to support this. but i suggest that prefixes that aren't state postal codes but come into common use should go on a wiki page somewhere. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Using prefixes for regional mail list topics
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Richard Welty This may very well already be the defacto standard, but if not, might I suggest that we establish a best practice of prefixing subjects which are regionally directed with a 2-4 character region prefix followed by a colon? Can you point to some examples (either on the wiki or on the map) which this applies to? I understand the use of addr:state but I don't know what regionally directed means. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Using prefixes for regional mail list topics
On 12/3/09 8:18 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Richard Welty This may very well already be the defacto standard, but if not, might I suggest that we establish a best practice of prefixing subjects which are regionally directed with a 2-4 character region prefix followed by a colon? Can you point to some examples (either on the wiki or on the map) which this applies to? I understand the use of addr:state but I don't know what regionally directed means. i think you may have missed the context. this proposal is about how to qualify subject: lines of talk-us email when sending out regionally specific messages, e.g. if i send out a message about surface streets being missing in Horseheads NY (which i did a few days ago), i'd start the subject line like this: Subject: NY: random subject line about Horseheads so that the locality would be narrowed down. the same would hold for mapping parties and other like activities: Subject: NY: meeting up in Albany next Tuesday this is not something that would ever go in the OSM database, and would only go in the wiki as informational about how to use the talk-us mailing list. and when there starts to be a lot of stuff tagged NY: or CA: or whatever, then it's time to split off a locality specific list. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] NY: Rivers, streams and so on
Hello, I would like to know if there is a source to get rivers in OSM in Upstate NY. I have lived 4 years in Binghamton, where I was attending SUNY Binghamton for grad school and I am always sad to see that Binghamton has no rivers displayed. I would be interested in importing them. Does anyone know of a source that I could use? Emilie Laffray ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NY: Rivers, streams and so on
On 12/3/09 8:41 AM, Emilie Laffray wrote: Hello, I would like to know if there is a source to get rivers in OSM in Upstate NY. I have lived 4 years in Binghamton, where I was attending SUNY Binghamton for grad school and I am always sad to see that Binghamton has no rivers displayed. I would be interested in importing them. Does anyone know of a source that I could use? the NHD data sets provide this information, but are mostly not done for Upstate yet. i've volunteered for the Hudson basins, but am only just getting started. general information is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Hydrography_Dataset basin signup is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NHD/Basins_East you probably want to look at the various Susquehanna basins. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NY: Rivers, streams and so on
2009/12/3 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net the NHD data sets provide this information, but are mostly not done for Upstate yet. i've volunteered for the Hudson basins, but am only just getting started. general information is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Hydrography_Dataset basin signup is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NHD/Basins_East you probably want to look at the various Susquehanna basins. Indeed. Thanks for the information. I will add this to my list of tasks to do :) It is good to see that the information is available. I will sign up when I have the time to do it to make sure that I don't block anyone from doing it if I am not doing anything. Weird to see what nostalgia can do for you :) Emilie Laffray ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. SOTM Call for Venue Bids
I see from the notes that Charlotte suggested going into an area with an established community. I would like to throw out the idea of the opposite approach. It might help to jump start activity in an area that is currently inactive by having the SOTM there. I don't know which cities would qualify, but I wanted to throw that idea out. Richard Kate Chapman wrote: Hi All, The U.S. SOTM Working Group would like to announce a call for venue bids. We will be discussing bids and deciding on the Jan 4th US SOTM call. Please link you bid to this page in the OSM wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/US_SOTM/BIDS The criteria for bids is available here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/US_SOTM/BIDS/CRITERIA Thanks, Kate Chapman ___ 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] U.S. SOTM Call for Venue Bids
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Richard Shank deve...@zestic.com wrote: I see from the notes that Charlotte suggested going into an area with an established community. I would like to throw out the idea of the opposite approach. It might help to jump start activity in an area that is currently inactive by having the SOTM there. Richard, There are two major reasons for this as an included criteria. The first reason is that by having an area with an existing OSM community, US SOTM will attract locals. An area without a mapping community may have interested parties (as you mention) but it would be difficult to spread the word effectively. The other reason is connected with the organizing team. A local community would make it easier to create/maintain an effective organizing team on the ground who is able to both plan the conference (selecting a venue, selecting accommodations, etc.) and also be able to effectively run the conference. Without locals, finding volunteers to do this would be difficult, especially as this is the first US SOTM conference. In the end, if you feel strongly about it, I'd put your reasoning into your proposal. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects
Agreed that at this point in time, having everything centralized here is the best way forward. I would like to make a request for the future though, that if a list is marked for deletion that a message is sent out on that list informing them. (maybe a week ahead of time). I was the admin for the bay area list and didn't know if was deleted until my email to it bounced. It would have been helpful to let folks know, and encourage them to enlist here if they weren't already (or to join the meetup group which is now being used at the local event list as well). At this point in the project, we can use as many mappers as possible, and don't want to lose folks who may only be involved on a localized level. Thanks, Sarah -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:03:22 -0800 From: Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects To: Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: 1259769802.24696.2521.ca...@nimitz Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 03:55 -0500, Dale Puch wrote: I think the idea was that there wasn't that much traffic that it would bother the talk-us group, and what was there the rest of us could possible benefit from. Yeah, that's what I took from it too. It will be a wonderful day when we have so much activity on this list that there's a desperate need to break it up somehow. As talk-us list dictator, I hereby declare that any local discussions about anywhere in the country are more than welcome here. :) -- Dave -- Message: 4 Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 11:18:57 -0800 From: SteveC st...@asklater.com Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects To: Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net Cc: Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com, talk-us@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: eb9f7ae1-b080-4092-86aa-a65229fdd...@asklater.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii agreed multiple empty lists are sub-optimal, and what we saw in Europe was that local events, published on a national scale encouraged people to travel long distances to them, and prodded competition to start other events where people couldn't make it. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us This may very well already be the defacto standard, but if not, might I suggest that we establish a best practice of prefixing subjects which are regionally directed with a 2-4 character region prefix followed by a colon? NY: has already been used. other states also would be by postal code abbreviation If you need a broader or narrower region, such as New England (NwEn?) or SF/Bay area (SFB?), etc. then as long as you don't step on a state, if you get there first, it's yours. This would allow those who are interested in a particular region to be pricked by the prefix, and would also make it easy to search the list for regionally specific entries. Anything without a prefix would be of general US interest. -- Randy ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. SOTM Call for Venue Bids
I'm coming to this thread late and apologize for not knowing, but has a date for SOTM-US been set yet? I think one criterion for an area might be the ability to hold the SOTM-US meeting immediately before or after a meeting of another organization that might have interest. For example, the Association of American Geographers holds their annual meeting this year in Washington, DC, in April. It normally draws a very large attendance (3000+) with many students, although with the state of the economy attendance could well be down this year. Holding SOTM-US on a weekend immediately before or after a conference such as this, and publicizing it to the other conference, would probably attract a lot of people. Last year's program did have one or two presentations on OSM, but I would say that awareness of OSM among the academic and student geography community is still pretty limited (based on a scan of OSM for college towns with large geography departments). There are other conferences that draw people who might be interested in OSM. The American Planning Association comes to mind. But if a date has been set, then this would limit this as a criterion. Edward L. Hillsman, Ph.D. Senior Research Associate Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 Fowler Ave., CUT100 Tampa, FL 33620-5375 813-974-2977 (tel) 813-974-5168 (fax) hills...@cutr.usf.edu http://www.cutr.usf.edu On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Richard Shank deve...@zestic.com wrote: I see from the notes that Charlotte suggested going into an area with an established community.? I would like to throw out the idea of the opposite approach.? It might help to jump start activity in an area that is currently inactive by having the SOTM there. Richard, There are two major reasons for this as an included criteria. The first reason is that by having an area with an existing OSM community, US SOTM will attract locals. An area without a mapping community may have interested parties (as you mention) but it would be difficult to spread the word effectively. The other reason is connected with the organizing team. A local community would make it easier to create/maintain an effective organizing team on the ground who is able to both plan the conference (selecting a venue, selecting accommodations, etc.) and also be able to effectively run the conference. Without locals, finding volunteers to do this would be difficult, especially as this is the first US SOTM conference. In the end, if you feel strongly about it, I'd put your reasoning into your proposal. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. SOTM Call for Venue Bids
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: Hi All, The U.S. SOTM Working Group would like to announce a call for venue bids. We will be discussing bids and deciding on the Jan 4th US SOTM call. Please link you bid to this page in the OSM wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/US_SOTM/BIDS The criteria for bids is available here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/US_SOTM/BIDS/CRITERIA I've added placeholders for bids from Atlanta and DC, the two groups that have already announced that they are considering bids, as well as a spot for additional bids to drop in place. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/US_SOTM/BIDS Would the bid teams please add a bid page with, at a minimum, contact information for the bid-team, so other locals interested in participating can reach you? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Vegetation/landuse import
Ian, I totally agree that the import I referenced is not perfect. I really just wanted to show a place that had already completed an import for reference. The points you bring up are very relevant and you were not belittling the effort in the least :) If nothing else we have an example to improve upon. That particular import was done some time ago and a lot has changed on the ground and the dataset is low resolution. Do you have any recommendations for how we might fix it? Best, Thea On 12/3/09 11:08 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Thea Clay t...@cloudmade.com wrote: Hi guys, I am so excited that more land use imports are in the works. They make such a huge visual difference. Check out the border between a state with the import complete and one without: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.896lon=-85.408zoom=9layers=B000FTF Although the lower-detail zooms might look marginally better (I would say they're way too cluttered right now...), the import was not done very well for two main reasons: 1. All of the areas were imported with overlapping edges. This means there is *tons* of duplicate information in the database. I learned my lesson with the counties import: overlapping edge imports like this should be broken apart and use relations for the borders. 2. The resolution of the landuse information is very low. If you zoom in and use Potlatch to see what the aerial images look like, you can see that in most cases the polygons don't come close to matching the actual landuse. in the future, we should make sure that imports are high-enough resolution to be useful in our datasets. 1:24k is the minimum and even that is not useful in some cases. I'm not trying to belittle the effort, I just want to make sure we don't repeat the same mistakes on other huge imports like this. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Vegetation/landuse import
On 3 Dec 2009, at 9:08 , Ian Dees wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Thea Clay t...@cloudmade.com wrote: Hi guys, I am so excited that more land use imports are in the works. They make such a huge visual difference. Check out the border between a state with the import complete and one without: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.896lon=-85.408zoom=9layers=B000FTF Although the lower-detail zooms might look marginally better (I would say they're way too cluttered right now...), the import was not done very well for two main reasons: 1. All of the areas were imported with overlapping edges. This means there is *tons* of duplicate information in the database. I learned my lesson with the counties import: overlapping edge imports like this should be broken apart and use relations for the borders. 2. The resolution of the landuse information is very low. If you zoom in and use Potlatch to see what the aerial images look like, you can see that in most cases the polygons don't come close to matching the actual landuse. in the future, we should make sure that imports are high-enough resolution to be useful in our datasets. 1:24k is the minimum and even that is not useful in some cases. I'm not trying to belittle the effort, I just want to make sure we don't repeat the same mistakes on other huge imports like this. These are very important points and I don't want to repeat it. It's like tiger import. It was the best approach at that time but from all we learned imports should be done better in future. a bit planning upfront can save all the time spent to cleanup. But it's also possible to overdo the high res requirement. The MassGIS import didn't remove redundant points and the data is just huge without any benefit. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Vegetation/landuse import
The land use in Georgia is nice in that it lends visual interest to the map and gives a bit more information than a blank background. I don't find the resolution a problem, much more detail would not really be much more useful. Most of my editing is in Georgia, so I see this land use coverage a lot. The main problem I have with this coverage is that the editors I have used do not let me turn it off while I am editing other things. Often land use changes at a road, so often I have trouble selecting a road and when drawing a road it keeps wanting to make intersections with land use ways. I am concerned that if addresses get imported as ways I will have more of those kinds of problems (more things I am not trying to select or intersect with getting in the way while editing.) I don't see why it should be too difficult to remove the existing import if a newer or different dataset comes along which we prefer. I am not familiar with the details, but the existing import is not the first attempt in Georgia. If memory serves, there was a lower resolution import which was removed to add the current one. I am sure a few people have moved land use boundaries around since the import, but surely not to the extent or level of importance as road editing. As one person who has edited Georgia land use boundaries manually I would be fine with replacing the whole import including my edits if a newer/better dataset or import strategy wanted to replace the old one. -- Mark Gray ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Using prefixes for regional mail list topics
Richard Welty wrote: On 12/3/09 12:50 AM, Randy wrote: I'm reposting this, as it was rather stupid to post it under a San Fransico/Bay topic that was only remotely related (i.e. being regional). This may very well already be the defacto standard, but if not, might I suggest that we establish a best practice of prefixing subjects which are regionally directed with a 2-4 character region prefix followed by a colon? NY: has already been used. other states also would be by postal code abbreviation having spontaneously started using NY: (the convention may predate me, but if so i've not seen it previously), i'm of course inclined to support this. but i suggest that prefixes that aren't state postal codes but come into common use should go on a wiki page somewhere. richard I think that's a good idea. We could have a US wiki page, which included a section on talk-us subject prefixes, or we could have a talk-us wiki page, strictly for that purpose. However, I do see a difficulty. The wiki page would need to be something that people would be aware of and refer to. I'm not sure how that would be done, unless a message was posted monthly, for example. If there's an easy way around the problem, then I'd say Go for it. If not, then possibly just common usage, and the hope that those in a particular region would be aware of any precedent set for the prefix of that region will be adequate. After all, they are the ones who really need to be aware of it. The rest of us will rarely be initiating communications for a region other than our own, and can check a message to see what region it's talking about, if we aren't sure from the prefix. At any rate, I think using a prefix scheme, whether documented elsewhere or not, would make it less likely to need a regional talk list until a very large part of the total communications over a significant time is for a particular region. The prefix would make it much easier to assess that, as well. That's why I threw out the suggestion. As with all OSM proposals, folks can choose to use it or not. I think those who do will profit from it, though. 'Nuff said. -- Randy ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Admin Level for Neighborhoods?
David ``Smith'' wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone decided on a admin_level to tag for neighborhoods in a city? I'd like to import some neighborhood boundary data that my local municipalities have given out. Assuming these neighborhoods do indeed have some kind of administrating body, I'd use admin_level=10. Ah, but what if they do not have a administrative body. Most neighborhoods have, at most, a neighborhood association, which has no legal administrative authority, but acts as a common voice to the city for its citizens, and may perform other functions (such as, in our case, negotiating a group natural gas extraction lease for the residents, or purchasing street sign toppers that have the name of the neighborhood). Still, the boundaries of the neighborhoods are recognized by, and, in fact, usually established by the city. -- Randy ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Admin Level for Neighborhoods?
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Randy rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com wrote: David ``Smith'' wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone decided on a admin_level to tag for neighborhoods in a city? I'd like to import some neighborhood boundary data that my local municipalities have given out. Assuming these neighborhoods do indeed have some kind of administrating body, I'd use admin_level=10. Ah, but what if they do not have a administrative body. Most neighborhoods have, at most, a neighborhood association, which has no legal administrative authority, but acts as a common voice to the city for its citizens, and may perform other functions (such as, in our case, negotiating a group natural gas extraction lease for the residents, or purchasing street sign toppers that have the name of the neighborhood). Still, the boundaries of the neighborhoods are recognized by, and, in fact, usually established by the city. Then tag the area (be it a single closed way, or a multipolygon relation) with landuse=residential for primarily residential neighborhoods/subdivisions, or place=locality for mixed-use neighborhoods, and name=*. The exact boundaries of the neighborhood won't be visible on the default renderers, but they'll be there in the data for any user who wants a map with those details. And there should be a nice label in the center of the neighborhood in Mapnik (if it doesn't conflict with another label) and Osmarender/t...@h. I've done this for quite a few developments south of Hilliard, OH: http://osm.org/go/z...@kdz-. Note, there are many areas I haven't drawn/tagged yet. And there are some areas I've drawn which I know have names, but I don't know them personally. It's a work in progress. -- David Smith a.k.a. Vid the Kid a.k.a. Bír'd'in Does this font make me look fat? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects
I thought I mailed all the talk-us-* lists when I asked for input? On Dec 3, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Sarah Manley wrote: Agreed that at this point in time, having everything centralized here is the best way forward. I would like to make a request for the future though, that if a list is marked for deletion that a message is sent out on that list informing them. (maybe a week ahead of time). I was the admin for the bay area list and didn't know if was deleted until my email to it bounced. It would have been helpful to let folks know, and encourage them to enlist here if they weren't already (or to join the meetup group which is now being used at the local event list as well). At this point in the project, we can use as many mappers as possible, and don't want to lose folks who may only be involved on a localized level. Thanks, Sarah -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 08:03:22 -0800 From: Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects To: Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: 1259769802.24696.2521.ca...@nimitz Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 03:55 -0500, Dale Puch wrote: I think the idea was that there wasn't that much traffic that it would bother the talk-us group, and what was there the rest of us could possible benefit from. Yeah, that's what I took from it too. It will be a wonderful day when we have so much activity on this list that there's a desperate need to break it up somehow. As talk-us list dictator, I hereby declare that any local discussions about anywhere in the country are more than welcome here. :) -- Dave -- Message: 4 Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 11:18:57 -0800 From: SteveC st...@asklater.com Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects To: Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net Cc: Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com, talk-us@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: eb9f7ae1-b080-4092-86aa-a65229fdd...@asklater.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii agreed multiple empty lists are sub-optimal, and what we saw in Europe was that local events, published on a national scale encouraged people to travel long distances to them, and prodded competition to start other events where people couldn't make it. Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us This may very well already be the defacto standard, but if not, might I suggest that we establish a best practice of prefixing subjects which are regionally directed with a 2-4 character region prefix followed by a colon? NY: has already been used. other states also would be by postal code abbreviation If you need a broader or narrower region, such as New England (NwEn?) or SF/Bay area (SFB?), etc. then as long as you don't step on a state, if you get there first, it's yours. This would allow those who are interested in a particular region to be pricked by the prefix, and would also make it easy to search the list for regionally specific entries. Anything without a prefix would be of general US interest. -- Randy ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us Yours c. Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
Hi, I'm new here and a little unsure of how best to proceed. I'm having some issues getting JOSM to run but I expect to get those sorted out soon. Then I want to start working on TIGER fixup. I'm located in central Oregon, near Bend. I see a lot of mapped roads around here, imported from TIGER, that are clearly very wrong. Most are simply incorrectly located. I can edit those from my own GPS tracks fairly easily and tag them as reviewed. Others, all unnamed, I'm less sure how to handle. Many are not roads at all. Some just simply don't exist. I'm not sure where they came from. Others seem to roughly correspond to irrigation canals. Should I simply delete these or just change their tags so they don't render as roads? If the latter, how should they be tagged? OTOH, there are new roads that aren't in the currently imported version of the TIGER data. These I can clearly GPS and map. In all of these cases I'm unsure of how my edits will coexist future imports of TIGER 2009, 2010, etc. For instance if I just delete bogus roads will they come back like zombies? Perhaps there's some guidance in the Wiki about all this but I have yet to come across it. -- Jeff Barlow WB6CSV ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 15:50 -0800, Jeff Barlow wrote: I'm new here and a little unsure of how best to proceed. I'm having some issues getting JOSM to run but I expect to get those sorted out soon. Then I want to start working on TIGER fixup. I'm located in central Oregon, near Bend. I see a lot of mapped roads around here, imported from TIGER, that are clearly very wrong. Cool, more Oregon mappers! :) Should I simply delete these or just change their tags so they don't render as roads? If the latter, how should they be tagged? If you've been there and can confirm that there's nothing there, or they're bad enough that you can't figure out what they correspond to, delete them. But, I personally don't want people deleting everything that doesn't appear on aerial imagery. OTOH, there are new roads that aren't in the currently imported version of the TIGER data. These I can clearly GPS and map. Excellent. TIGER was from 2005 at best. In all of these cases I'm unsure of how my edits will coexist future imports of TIGER 2009, 2010, etc. For instance if I just delete bogus roads will they come back like zombies? Perhaps there's some guidance in the Wiki about all this but I have yet to come across it. I'm not sure we'll ever import a full TIGER set again. We'll certainly do everything we can to not overwrite any work that people are doing now, especially with roads that people deleted in their entirety. -- Dave ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] U.S. SOTM Call for Venue Bids
Serge Wroclawski wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Richard Shank deve...@zestic.com wrote: I see from the notes that Charlotte suggested going into an area with an established community. I would like to throw out the idea of the opposite approach. It might help to jump start activity in an area that is currently inactive by having the SOTM there. Richard, There are two major reasons for this as an included criteria. The first reason is that by having an area with an existing OSM community, US SOTM will attract locals. An area without a mapping community may have interested parties (as you mention) but it would be difficult to spread the word effectively. The other reason is connected with the organizing team. A local community would make it easier to create/maintain an effective organizing team on the ground who is able to both plan the conference (selecting a venue, selecting accommodations, etc.) and also be able to effectively run the conference. Without locals, finding volunteers to do this would be difficult, especially as this is the first US SOTM conference. In the end, if you feel strongly about it, I'd put your reasoning into your proposal. Serge, I don't have a strong feeling about it, it was more of just tossing an idea out there. I completely understand what you are saying and I would say that having a SOTM at a city without support should probably wait until we get the first one under our belts. Richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
Dave Hansen wrote: On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 15:50 -0800, Jeff Barlow wrote: I'm new here and a little unsure of how best to proceed. I'm having some issues getting JOSM to run but I expect to get those sorted out soon. Then I want to start working on TIGER fixup. I'm located in central Oregon, near Bend. I see a lot of mapped roads around here, imported from TIGER, that are clearly very wrong. Cool, more Oregon mappers! :) Hear, hear! Welcome! Should I simply delete these or just change their tags so they don't render as roads? If the latter, how should they be tagged? If you've been there and can confirm that there's nothing there, or they're bad enough that you can't figure out what they correspond to, delete them. But, I personally don't want people deleting everything that doesn't appear on aerial imagery. I think part of the question here was also about irrigation canals. If you are certain that the way is for a canal, it can be changed to waterway=canal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dcanal I would second what Dave said here, deleting can be a problem, especially since the aerials aren't always up to date or even clear. I do find the aerials are very helpful in adjusting the locations and ending points for the TIGER data. I would also suggest using OpenStreetBugs when you see something in the TIGER data that looks odd but you can't get to the location to check it for yourself. Here is the link http://openstreetbugs.schokokeks.org/?lon=-120.12704lat=43.89472zoom=8layers=B00T Richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
Dave Hansen d...@sr71.net wrote: Cool, more Oregon mappers! :) Well, I'll try anyway. If you've been there and can confirm that there's nothing there, or they're bad enough that you can't figure out what they correspond to, delete them. But, I personally don't want people deleting everything that doesn't appear on aerial imagery. Understood. I would only ever edit / delete/ add features based on personal observation and GPS waypoints and tracks. I'm not sure we'll ever import a full TIGER set again. We'll certainly do everything we can to not overwrite any work that people are doing now, especially with roads that people deleted in their entirety. Okay, that's reassuring. Concerning those roads that I'm fairly sure are canals... I suppose could try to re-tag them as canals and so perhaps preserve some useful info. The issue I see with that is that I don't think they are located accurately and I can't capture GPS tracks for many of them as they are located on private property, not public right of ways. I am reticent to tag something I can't personally verify as reviewed. Not sure how to handle that. -- Jeff Barlow WB6CSV ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Jeff Barlow j...@wb6csv.net wrote: Hi, I'm new here and a little unsure of how best to proceed. I'm having some issues getting JOSM to run but I expect to get those sorted out soon. Then I want to start working on TIGER fixup. I'm located in central Oregon, near Bend. I see a lot of mapped roads around here, imported from TIGER, that are clearly very wrong. Most are simply incorrectly located. I can edit those from my own GPS tracks fairly easily and tag them as reviewed. good Others, all unnamed, I'm less sure how to handle. Many are not roads at all. Some just simply don't exist. I'm not sure where they came from. Others seem to roughly correspond to irrigation canals. Should I simply delete these or just change their tags so they don't render as roads? If the latter, how should they be tagged? delete them, tiger is full off old roads which don't exist at all. Sometimes it may be still used as a hiking, cycle path or track. then change the highway tag. OTOH, there are new roads that aren't in the currently imported version of the TIGER data. These I can clearly GPS and map. again use your GPS and yahoo images In all of these cases I'm unsure of how my edits will coexist future imports of TIGER 2009, 2010, etc. For instance if I just delete bogus roads will they come back like zombies? no worries, there are no plans to merge any tiger data with new imports. this is such a difficult task. very unlikely that any one will volunteer for such a project. Perhaps there's some guidance in the Wiki about all this but I have yet to come across it. you can also try to search the archives, there was couple of threads about this topic. and most important have fun and don't be shy to make your own decisions how to fix things. after all tiger is just a start. -- Jeff Barlow WB6CSV ___ 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] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Jeff Barlow j...@wb6csv.net wrote: Others, all unnamed, I'm less sure how to handle. Many are not roads at all. Some just simply don't exist. I'm not sure where they came from. Others seem to roughly correspond to irrigation canals. If it's unnamed, says tiger:reviewed=no, and you can't find any evidence that it exists, delete it. TIGER has a *lot* of these and they're almost all no longer in existence. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
On 12/3/09 8:21 PM, Anthony wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Jeff Barlowj...@wb6csv.net wrote: Others, all unnamed, I'm less sure how to handle. Many are not roads at all. Some just simply don't exist. I'm not sure where they came from. Others seem to roughly correspond to irrigation canals. If it's unnamed, says tiger:reviewed=no, and you can't find any evidence that it exists, delete it. TIGER has a *lot* of these and they're almost all no longer in existence. Tiger also seems to have some roads which developers imagined might come into existence. i've found and deleted a few of these. old rail lines should be switched over to railway=abandoned if the tracks are gone. if they've been converted into cycleways it's ok to leave railway=abandoned while adding highway=cycleway. i've done that for a bunch of the Mohawk-Hudson Bike-Hike trail, which uses quite a bit of the old roadbed of the long defunct Troy Schenectady Railroad (aka New York Central, Penn Central, Conrail, and lastly DH). richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
I am trying to figure out how to mark up a foot bridge that is closed. The bridge is still standing, but it is gated off because it is unsafe. To me, it doesn't make sense to remove the bridge, like in the case of a bridge that has been washed out. The bridge is still standing, but I want to be able to indicate that the path isn't passable. Is there a standard way of marking this up? Thanks, David. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
On 12/3/09 9:44 PM, David Fawcett wrote: I am trying to figure out how to mark up a foot bridge that is closed. The bridge is still standing, but it is gated off because it is unsafe. To me, it doesn't make sense to remove the bridge, like in the case of a bridge that has been washed out. The bridge is still standing, but I want to be able to indicate that the path isn't passable. Is there a standard way of marking this up? for that matter, marking roads closed would be good as well. i know of several examples of closed roads and bridges in upstate NY that may or may not be reopened depending on rehab/replacement, etc. something as simple as closed=yes/closed=temporary/closed=indefinite would seem to suffice. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER fixup guidance wanted
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Jeff Barlow j...@wb6csv.net wrote: Some of the local bogus roads seem to at least roughly correspond to irrigation canals. One of the ways TIGER segments were generated is by scanning satellite photos and/or old maps for things that looked like roads. That's likely where these particular anomalies came from. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
I am trying to figure out how to mark up a foot bridge that is closed. The bridge is still standing, but it is gated off because it is unsafe. To me, it doesn't make sense to remove the bridge, like in the case of a bridge that has been washed out. The bridge is still standing, but I want to be able to indicate that the path isn't passable. Is there a standard way of marking this up? for that matter, marking roads closed would be good as well. i know of several examples of closed roads and bridges in upstate NY that may or may not be reopened depending on rehab/replacement, etc. something as simple as closed=yes/closed=temporary/closed=indefinite would seem to suffice. The Crown Point bridge (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28436071) comes to mind; it's constructed of non-reinforced concrete and was essentially condemned recently with only a few hours notice (http://www.poststar.com/news/local/article_e77cd748-ba8b-11de-9ff0-001cc4c03286.html). If you decide what an appropriate tag is, would you mind updating this at the same time? seth ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
What's wrong with access=no? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:44 PM, David Fawcett david.fawc...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to figure out how to mark up a foot bridge that is closed. The bridge is still standing, but it is gated off because it is unsafe. To me, it doesn't make sense to remove the bridge, like in the case of a bridge that has been washed out. The bridge is still standing, but I want to be able to indicate that the path isn't passable. Is there a standard way of marking this up? Thanks, David. Try access=no, which I think works with mapnik rendering. You can use that in combination with other tags, like closed=yes or whatever else you think is appropriate. -Kate ___ 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] Marking closed bridges
Also you can use the description tag for any additional explanation: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description -Kate Try access=no, which I think works with mapnik rendering. You can use that in combination with other tags, like closed=yes or whatever else you think is appropriate. -Kate ___ 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] Marking closed bridges
On 12/3/09 10:28 PM, Seth Fitzsimmons wrote: for that matter, marking roads closed would be good as well. i know of several examples of closed roads and bridges in upstate NY that may or may not be reopened depending on rehab/replacement, etc. something as simple as closed=yes/closed=temporary/closed=indefinite would seem to suffice. The Crown Point bridge (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28436071) comes to mind; it's constructed of non-reinforced concrete and was essentially condemned recently with only a few hours notice (http://www.poststar.com/news/local/article_e77cd748-ba8b-11de-9ff0-001cc4c03286.html). that was one of the ones i had in mind. there's also a closed highway bridge over the big rail yard in southern albany county that has the locals up in arms, and a closed street in downtown albany that may be reopened if the renovation of the adjacent courthouse is ever finished (i'm not holding my breath.) If you decide what an appropriate tag is, would you mind updating this at the same time? i don't think i get to decide this. i think that if no one has a standard answer here, i'll bring it up on the tagging list. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
I agree that it would be good to have a standard answer. I am thinking that the tag should be used for both symbology and connectivity. On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 12/3/09 10:28 PM, Seth Fitzsimmons wrote: for that matter, marking roads closed would be good as well. i know of several examples of closed roads and bridges in upstate NY that may or may not be reopened depending on rehab/replacement, etc. something as simple as closed=yes/closed=temporary/closed=indefinite would seem to suffice. The Crown Point bridge (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28436071) comes to mind; it's constructed of non-reinforced concrete and was essentially condemned recently with only a few hours notice (http://www.poststar.com/news/local/article_e77cd748-ba8b-11de-9ff0-001cc4c03286.html). that was one of the ones i had in mind. there's also a closed highway bridge over the big rail yard in southern albany county that has the locals up in arms, and a closed street in downtown albany that may be reopened if the renovation of the adjacent courthouse is ever finished (i'm not holding my breath.) If you decide what an appropriate tag is, would you mind updating this at the same time? i don't think i get to decide this. i think that if no one has a standard answer here, i'll bring it up on the tagging list. richard ___ 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] Marking closed bridges
On 12/3/09 11:00 PM, David Fawcett wrote: I agree that it would be good to have a standard answer. I am thinking that the tag should be used for both symbology and connectivity. i'm going to try out the suggested access=no/description=blahblahblah method see what i think about it. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
On 12/3/09 11:27 PM, Richard Welty wrote: On 12/3/09 11:00 PM, David Fawcett wrote: I agree that it would be good to have a standard answer. I am thinking that the tag should be used for both symbology and connectivity. i'm going to try out the suggested access=no/description=blahblahblah method see what i think about it. and now that i've seen it, the mapnik rendering is not distinguishable from access=private on the other hand, we don't tag to get a specific rendering effect from an existing renderer. maybe an additional term on access (access=closed), so that some future renderer will be able to distinguish the different reasons for restricted access. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
The Crown Point bridge (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28436071) comes to mind; it's constructed of non-reinforced concrete and was essentially condemned recently with only a few hours notice ( http://www.poststar.com/news/local/article_e77cd748-ba8b-11de-9ff0-001cc4c03286.html ). If you decide what an appropriate tag is, would you mind updating this at the same time? I haven't decided on an appropriate tag, but I went ahead an removed the Crown Point Bridge from the map to keep things up to date. I left the way intact, just removed the highway and bridge tags so nothing gets renderedhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.03215lon=-73.42277zoom=16layers=B000FTF. I also left a note explaining the current situation for the next mapper who edits the area. When an appropriate tag is decided upon, or a new bridge is built, this way can be updated. That's the beauty of OSM! As for tagging, here's how we do roads/bridges that are under construction: highway = construction construction = primary why not use this same structure for closed roads/bridges? highway = closed closed = primary The Crown Point bridge is currently closed. Soon it will be demolished. Then construction on a new one will begin. Because this is the usual cycle, I think the rendering that is used for roads under construction (dashed linehttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.44777lon=-73.21343zoom=16layers=B000FTF) would make sense for closed roads/bridges as well. I'l probably tag the Crown Point bridge as under construction right now, but tagging for the renderer is wrong. However, if I did it would be true in 6 months! Actually this road tagged as under constructionhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.44777lon=-73.21343zoom=16layers=B000FTF, probably shouldn't be. Construction was stopped on it years ago, so at this point it's just closed. Anyhow, that's a good reason for rendering of closed construction to be the same or similar. There is a fine line between them. Construction implies it will be open in the future, Closed does not. Subtle difference for the slippy map, but important for the underlying data. Zeke Burlington, VT ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges
something as simple as closed=yes/closed=temporary/closed=indefinite would seem to suffice. I like this proposal as it could also encompass regular seasonal closures. There are many roads through the mountains in Vermont that are generally closed from Nov 1st through May 30th each year due to snow. These could be tagged as: closed = Nov-May or closed = yearly closure_dates = Nov-May The hard part would be getting Mapnik to render this information. It would either have to be smart enough to change to the closed rendering during the specified dates, or have a different rendering for roads that are closed seasonally with the dates indicated after the name. Zeke Burlington, VT ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
