Re: [Talk-us] Hawaii GIS Data

[Scott Atwood]

This may work well in other states, but in Hawaii, most waterways are  
not navigable, except perhaps over short stretches, and many streams  
are dry most of the time.

-Scott

On Dec 4, 2009, at 20:40, "Matthew Luehrmann"  wrote:

>> I certainly wouldn't be slogging up thousands of streams and rivers  
>> - most
> of which are on private property  - trying to map any of them myself.
>
> Just as a note for those interested in mapping streams and rivers,  
> "the
> riverbed and banks, up to the ordinary high water mark, are state  
> land, held
> in trust for the public for navigation, fishing, and other non- 
> destructive
> visits."  For more info on the legality of traveling in streams and  
> rivers,
> check out this website:
> http://www.adventuresports.com/river/nors/us-law-menu.htm .  A day  
> kayaking
> or canoeing on the river can be quite relaxing, plus it could result  
> in a
> .GPX track for OSM.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: talk-us-boun...@openstreetmap.org
> [mailto:talk-us-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Mike N.
> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 19:51
> To: impo...@openstreetmap.org; OpenStreetMap U.S.
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data
>
>> Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to  
>> import
> loads of data?
>
>   I like to view OSM data as capable of creating some usable map  
> types on
> its own, rather than just a possible supplemental feed to Google  
> maps in the
> future.  As such, landmarks are key to a standalone map:
>
>A map without streams and rivers is not real to me.   That's  
> where the
> NHD import comes in.   After the import, I frequently update the  
> actual
> hydrography features for changes caused by new construction.   Not a  
> waste
> of time to me, and the map is useless without those hydro  
> landmarks.   I
> certainly wouldn't be slogging up thousands of streams and rivers -  
> most of
> which are on private property  - trying to map any of them myself.
>
>   Similarly, larger park boundaries could not be reasonably mapped  
> without
> special arrangements from park management to stray off marked trails  
> and
> file your survey plan.   Most parks would not allow casual access  
> off their
> marked trails for good reasons.So parks are another useful  
> landmark
> import.
>
>  Trails - if accurate, why not use them?  The end result is a good  
> start so
> a later mapper can spend time adding trail landmarks and details  
> rather than
> the trail itself.
>
>   Aside from that, I'll agree that importing just because some data is
> available is not good, and firsthand survey data is much more  
> valuable.
> After all, if someone wants to make their own "voting district" map  
> (which
> can change every year), they just combine the public voting district  
> data
> with the OSM features they need at that time.
>
> - Mike
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Hawaii GIS Data

[Tyler]

>
> Just as a note for those interested in mapping streams and rivers, "the
> riverbed and banks, up to the ordinary high water mark, are state land,
> held
> in trust for the public for navigation, fishing, and other non-destructive
> visits."  For more info on the legality of traveling in streams and rivers,
> check out this website:
> http://www.adventuresports.com/river/nors/us-law-menu.htm .  A day
> kayaking
> or canoeing on the river can be quite relaxing, plus it could result in a
> .GPX track for OSM.
>
>
Of course, if a landowner disagrees and shoots OSMers on site, that's a lot
of lost mapping. Calling ahead is nice.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Mike N.]

>If you have
> a look at how bride=yes, access=closed renders 

   It probably should have a marriage=unhappy to cover that case :-)
 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Randy]

Zeke Farwell wrote:

>access=seasonal makes sense to me in conjunction with the date_on, and
>date_off tags on the wiki.

On and off aren't clear to me. Does on mean open or closed? Probably open, 
but it isn't obvious, and might lose something in a language translation. 
I think date_open=03-01 and date_closed=10-30 would be more clear, for, 
for example the service road into a camping area. Maybe access=seasonal, 
weather_dependent=yes or even access=weather_dependent for the closings 
that are truly dependent on weather conditions and are not tied to a date, 
like some mountain highways.

-- 
Randy


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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Richard Weait]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 11:03 PM, Zeke Farwell  wrote:
[ ... ]
> I think access=no make sense for any closed road/bridge, but I'd like some
> supporting tags to supply the rest of the information.

That would be nice. I'd hope that the mapper reporting the closed
bridge in this case would add extra tags or at least the note tag as
applicable.  In this case perhaps closed = condemned and never to open
again?

> On another note, I don't like rendering of the access=no/private tag.

Now that is another matter.  Not "tagging" but rendering.  If you have
a look at how bride=yes, access=closed renders on the four default OSM
layers (mapnik, osmarender, cyclemap and nonames) you might find four
different renderings.  Suggestions to improve those should made at
http://trac/openstreetmap.org and filed under the name of the
renderer.  If you can include a mockup or the style file that would
make you some kind of super-hero.

> I probably should move this conversation to the tagging list at this point.
>  Is it just tagg...@openstreetmap.org?

No, I think you covered it.  ;-)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Hawaii GIS Data

[Matthew Luehrmann]

> I certainly wouldn't be slogging up thousands of streams and rivers - most
of which are on private property  - trying to map any of them myself.

Just as a note for those interested in mapping streams and rivers, "the
riverbed and banks, up to the ordinary high water mark, are state land, held
in trust for the public for navigation, fishing, and other non-destructive
visits."  For more info on the legality of traveling in streams and rivers,
check out this website:
http://www.adventuresports.com/river/nors/us-law-menu.htm .  A day kayaking
or canoeing on the river can be quite relaxing, plus it could result in a
.GPX track for OSM.


-Original Message-
From: talk-us-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-us-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Mike N.
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 19:51
To: impo...@openstreetmap.org; OpenStreetMap U.S.
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

>Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to import
loads of data?
 
   I like to view OSM data as capable of creating some usable map types on
its own, rather than just a possible supplemental feed to Google maps in the
future.  As such, landmarks are key to a standalone map:
 
A map without streams and rivers is not real to me.   That's where the
NHD import comes in.   After the import, I frequently update the actual
hydrography features for changes caused by new construction.   Not a waste
of time to me, and the map is useless without those hydro landmarks.   I
certainly wouldn't be slogging up thousands of streams and rivers - most of
which are on private property  - trying to map any of them myself.
 
   Similarly, larger park boundaries could not be reasonably mapped without
special arrangements from park management to stray off marked trails and
file your survey plan.   Most parks would not allow casual access off their
marked trails for good reasons.So parks are another useful landmark
import.
 
  Trails - if accurate, why not use them?  The end result is a good start so
a later mapper can spend time adding trail landmarks and details rather than
the trail itself.
 
   Aside from that, I'll agree that importing just because some data is
available is not good, and firsthand survey data is much more valuable.
After all, if someone wants to make their own "voting district" map (which
can change every year), they just combine the public voting district data
with the OSM features they need at that time.
 
 - Mike

 


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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Richard Welty]

On 12/4/09 11:03 PM, Zeke Farwell wrote:


I probably should move this conversation to the tagging list at this 
point.  Is it just tagg...@openstreetmap.org 
?



yes, and if you want to work up a proposal, feel free. i had said i 
would do it, but i just found out today

that i need to update my resume.

richard

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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Jeff Barlow]

Randy   wrote:

>
>access=seasonal, with a second tag for open or closed dates?

In the case of the mountain passes I have in mind the dates are
chosen each year by mother nature. 

-- 
Jeff Barlow
WB6CSV

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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Zeke Farwell]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Anthony  wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Zeke Farwell  wrote:
>
>> Here are all the reasons for a road existing but being closed
>> (distinguished from private) that I can think of:
>>
>>- Under construction  (this already has a tagging sytem)
>>- Damaged or blocked by disaster.  Re-construction or cleanup may be
>>pending or not.
>>- Old and unsafe. Re-construction may be pending or not.
>>- Blocked/unmaintained seasonally (winter in mountains, rainy season
>>in tropics, others?)
>>
>> I'll add this one:
>
> * State wants to help the ferry operators make more money by blocking off
> access to an island by bridge.
>

I guess we can add a general "Political" to the list then [?].
<<338.png>>___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Zeke Farwell]

>
> access=seasonal, with a second tag for open or closed dates?
>

access=seasonal makes sense to me in conjunction with the date_on, and
date_off tags on the wiki.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Zeke Farwell]

It seems to me that access is forbidden to a private road because the
landowner says so.  It is not a public right of way, and it will remain so
for the foreseeable future.  If a bridge that normally would be a public
right of way is closed, I would like to see that rendered differently on a
map from a private road.  On a low level the information is the same:  you
can't use this way.  But this leaves unanswered questions:  Is the way
completely unused and unmaintained, or is access just forbidden to the
public?  Is access forbidden indefinitely or will it be allowed again in the
future?  As a map user, I'd like to be able to easily find the answers to
these questions.

I think access=no make sense for any closed road/bridge, but I'd like some
supporting tags to supply the rest of the information.  The access page on
the wiki  mentions some time
restriction tags (date_on, date_off, time_on, time_off).  These could work
for seasonal or temporary closures but I'm not too sure how to use them.

On another note, I don't like rendering of the
access=no/privatetag.
 I think the red highlighting stands out way too much.  Private/closed
roads should stand out less than their open counterparts in my opinion.
highway=construction,
and 
rail=abandoned/disusedare
both less obvious on the sippy map than in use rail and highways.  Am
I
alone here, or do other people agree?

I probably should move this conversation to the tagging list at this point.
 Is it just tagg...@openstreetmap.org?


Zeke




On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Anthony  wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Zeke Farwell  wrote:
>
>>  In this case, I'd say the renderer is right.  Both access=private and
>>> access=no mean essentially the same thing - you aren't allowed there without
>>> explicit approval.  In the case of access=no, that approval happens to come
>>> from a government agency, but I see no reason that needs to be drawn
>>> differently.
>>
>>
>> I disagree, perhaps access=private and access=no do mean the same thing,
>> but in that case access=no is not a good option for a closed bridge.
>>
>
> Well, I didn't say they mean exactly the same thing, just essentially the
> same thing, within the context of a map.
>
> There are two distinct situations:
>>
>>1. A road/bridge is private and access is only allowed for specified
>>users.  Condition of the road is fine, so even if you are not allowed, you
>>could choose to break the rules and use the road/bridge as long as there 
>> is
>>no gate.
>>2. A road/bridge is closed because it is unsafe, under construction,
>>or impassible.  Even if you are granted access, it would not be desirable 
>> to
>>use said road/bridge.
>>
>>
> Road condition is separate from access=*.  Safety is separate from
> access=*.  In any case, access=closed tells us none of this.  There are
> perfectly safe roads which are in perfect condition, but which are closed.
>
>
>> It's been decided that access=private definitely indicates sitation 1.
>>  Situation 2 does not have a definite tagging scheme. Except for under
>> construction.
>>
>
> Sure it does.  There's smoothness=impassible, which arguably could also be
> used for unsafe.  If you don't like using smoothness=impassible to indicate
> an unsafe bridge, come up with some sort of safety=unsafe tag (not sure how
> verifiable it'll be, though).
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Undeletion

[Richard Welty]

On 12/4/09 9:08 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:



On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Richard Welty > wrote:


is there a mechanism for determining in which changeset objects
were deleted?


not that I know in Potlatch. But I am not an expert on Potlatch.
But as soon as you can identify the object id you can get the full 
history

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node//history
or
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way//history

and search when the change happened.

thanks, that helps a lot.

what i'm looking at is why a bunch of ways in the area around Horseheads 
& Elmira NY

disappeared mid-November. here is one of the ways that vanished:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/13037976/history

i see its last appearance is in this changeset:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/3138279

which seems well matched to the area where all the ways went MIA. when a way
is deleted, i take it that it gets the next version with no nodes.

a day later, Jeremy Adams did this one:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/3151711

which didn't seem like it touched any of the ways i'm trying to track 
down -- they

weren't there any more.

richard

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

Re: [Talk-us] Undeletion

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

>  On 12/4/09 5:02 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
>
> you can open the area in Potlatch and hit U
> deleted objects will appear in red and after unlock they are restored for
> normal edit.
> works very well if there aren't hundreds of other deleted objects in the
> same area
>
> is there a mechanism for determining in which changeset objects were
> deleted?
>
>
not that I know in Potlatch. But I am not an expert on Potlatch.
But as soon as you can identify the object id you can get the full history
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node//history
or
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way//history

and search when the change happened.


thanks,
>   richard
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Anthony]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Shaun McDonald wrote:

> Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to import
> loads of data?
>

Why do some people insist on wasting time surveying data that someone else
has already surveyed?

Probably much the same reasons.  It can be fun :).


> usually imported data is of a rather low standard or the import isn't done
> right, and it's really, really hard to do an import correctly.
>

A valid warning, however.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Scott Atwood]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Dave Hansen  wrote:

> On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 00:12 +, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> > Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to
> > import loads of data?
>
> Mapping is fun, but I personally think it is more fun when you're
> enhancing someone else's work rather than starting from a blank slate.
> Whatever floats your boat, I guess.
>

Personally, I find a blank slate a lot more intimidating and overwhelming
that improving some data.  Most of my mapping experience is in the south San
Francisco Bay Area.  By the time I started mapping, the area was pretty
thoroughly mapped, from TIGER imports and a fairly active local mapping
community.

I relish the opportunity to improve the quality of the local map.
 Sometimes, that means I get to add a whole neighborhood subdivision that
wasn't included in the TIGER import.  Sometimes that means I get to add
details that aren't part of TIGER and that are often over looked, like bike
lanes, parking lots, traffic calming devices, and railroad crossings.
 Sometimes, I even get to clean up TIGER data, for example by realigning it
to GPS traces or satellite images.

Perhaps I'm not a typical mapper, but I don't find the existence of bulk
imported local data to have been particular inhibiting in my activity level.


> Anyway, Scott, I'd encourage you to find some specific goals that you'd
> like to achieve with the import.  It may not be worth importing things
> just because they are available.  Is there something specific missing
> from or lacking in OSM that the import could help with?


I would be happy to just start small, with something like the water data:
 streams, waterfalls, canals, and dams, since these are import basic
landmarks, and in the context of Hawaii, very difficult to map any other
way.

-Scott


-- 
Scott Atwood

The hill isn't in the way, it is the way.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Tyler]

>
> A map without streams and rivers is not real to me.   That's where the
> NHD import comes in.   After the import, I frequently update the
> actual hydrography features for changes caused by new construction.   Not a
> waste of time to me, and the map is useless without those hydro landmarks.
> I certainly wouldn't be slogging up thousands of streams and rivers - most
> of which are on private property  - trying to map any of them myself.
>

I started an import of the rivers, streams, waterbodies, park trails, forest
trails, and national park and forest boundaries in the upper left corner of
Washington before the NHD importing got entirely underway. I made some--what
I now consider to be--pretty big mistakes, but it would have been impossible
to actually go and survey all of that data. And with there being 10 mappers
on the Olympic Peninsula (about half the size of Massachusetts, 2,000 mi^2
smaller than Hawaii) it would have taken decades, not years. At least now
the data is there, mostly correct and can be easily fixed.

   Aside from that, I'll agree that importing just because some data is
> available is not good, and firsthand survey data is much more valuable.
>

I think everyone feels this way. I've got some cool species range data but
I'm not going to toss it up on OSM geocommons, sure, but there's no reason
for that to be in OSM at this time. I get particularly irked when I hear
people wanting to spend time and effort importing all of the Wal-marts or
whatever (Walmart should import Walmart, it's in their best interests to
have RVers find them, so let them import and maintain their locations).

That being said, I'd not stop or even try to discourage anyone if it's
relevant data.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Mike N.]

>Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to import loads 
>of data?

   I like to view OSM data as capable of creating some usable map types on its 
own, rather than just a possible supplemental feed to Google maps in the 
future.  As such, landmarks are key to a standalone map:

A map without streams and rivers is not real to me.   That's where the NHD 
import comes in.   After the import, I frequently update the actual hydrography 
features for changes caused by new construction.   Not a waste of time to me, 
and the map is useless without those hydro landmarks.   I certainly wouldn't be 
slogging up thousands of streams and rivers - most of which are on private 
property  - trying to map any of them myself.

   Similarly, larger park boundaries could not be reasonably mapped without 
special arrangements from park management to stray off marked trails and file 
your survey plan.   Most parks would not allow casual access off their marked 
trails for good reasons.So parks are another useful landmark import.

  Trails - if accurate, why not use them?  The end result is a good start so a 
later mapper can spend time adding trail landmarks and details rather than the 
trail itself.

   Aside from that, I'll agree that importing just because some data is 
available is not good, and firsthand survey data is much more valuable.   After 
all, if someone wants to make their own "voting district" map (which can change 
every year), they just combine the public voting district data with the OSM 
features they need at that time.

 - Mike

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

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Scott Atwood]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Shaun McDonald wrote:

> Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to import
> loads of data?
>
> Please take a read of
> http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/shine/archives/2009/11/10/the-pottery-club/
>
> Please go out and map what's out on the ground, as usually imported data is
> of a rather low standard or the import isn't done right, and it's really,
> really hard to do an import correctly.
>
>
> On 5 Dec 2009, at 00:00, Scott Atwood wrote:
>
> The Hawaii state government has a sizable repository of GIS data that could
> be useful to import into OSM:  http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/gis/.  I have
> contacted a manager in the GIS department by telephone and verified that
> this GIS data is in the public domain, and therefore available for import
> into OSM.
>
> Hawaii has pretty good road coverage from a import of 2007 TIGER data on
> O'ahu, and an ongoing import of 2009 TIGER data for the remaining islands,
> so the roads data provided by the GIS department probably doesn't need to be
> considered.But there is a lot of other data available that isn't
> currently in OSM, such as:
>
>* Streams, waterfalls, dams, and canals (Does the National Hydrography
> Dataset cover Hawaii?)
>* Coral reefs
>* Offshore islets
>* Mile markers
>
>
> Not so sure these belong in OSM.
>

I would argue that streams, waterfalls, dams, and canals are extremely
relevant things to map.Many of these features are in areas of heavy
vegetation and extremely rugged terrain which makes surveying them by hand
or via satellite imagery very challenging.

Coral reefs are extremely import to coastal navigation, recreation, and
tourism in Hawaii, and once again, very difficult to accurately map.

Offshore islets can probably be mapped via satellite imagery.  Mapping them
by direct survey is difficult or impossible, since many of them are
protected seabird sanctuaries and/or hazardous to get to.

Road navigation in Hawaii tends to reference mile markers far more often
than in any other location I've been to.  Travel guides often give
directions using mile markers as landmarks, and tourist maps often include
mile markers.


>* Trails
>* Parks
>* Schools
>
>
> Um haven't these already been imported? Not just current ones, but historic
> ones too, and schools that opened 4 years ago aren't in there?
>

Some trails, have been import, some have been manually survey.  Many are
missing entirely.

National Park boundaries have  been imported, but most other parks seem to
be missing.

I don't know about schools on O'ahu, but there doesn't seem to have been any
schools imported on the neighbor islands.

   * Hotels
>* Assorted administrative boundaries
>
>
> You'll probably find that most of these are in there already.
>

Hotels, no.  Some administrative boundaries have been imported.   Others
have not.



> Do some publicity, run some mapping parties. The reason OSM has worked in
> Germany is due to plenty of publicity.
>

Mapping parties are great and will certainly help improve the quality of the
more compact urbanized land areas of Hawaii.  But much of the state is
undeveloped and difficult to access, so importing data from external sources
should be considered as part of the strategy of filling out the map.

-Scott

-- 
Scott Atwood

The hill isn't in the way, it is the way.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Dave Hansen]

On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 00:12 +, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> Please take a read of
> http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/shine/archives/2009/11/10/the-pottery-club/ 

Don't forget that OSM was turning away US mappers for a long time
telling them to come back once TIGER was imported.  It isn't that way
any more, thank goodness.

-- Dave


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

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Dave Hansen]

On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 16:22 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Anyway, Scott, I'd encourage you to find some specific goals that you'd
> like to achieve with the import.  It may not be worth importing things
> just because they are available.  Is there something specific missing
> from or lacking in OSM that the import could help with?  

The thing that caught my eye, personally, was the trails.  But, I'm a
hiker, so that's what I care about by default.

-- Dave


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

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Dave Hansen]

On Sat, 2009-12-05 at 00:12 +, Shaun McDonald wrote:
> Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to
> import loads of data?

Mapping is fun, but I personally think it is more fun when you're
enhancing someone else's work rather than starting from a blank slate.
Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

Anyway, Scott, I'd encourage you to find some specific goals that you'd
like to achieve with the import.  It may not be worth importing things
just because they are available.  Is there something specific missing
from or lacking in OSM that the import could help with?  

-- Dave


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

Re: [Talk-us] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Shaun McDonald]

Why oh why oh why do some people insist on wasting time trying to import loads 
of data?

Please take a read of 
http://www.gravitystorm.co.uk/shine/archives/2009/11/10/the-pottery-club/

Please go out and map what's out on the ground, as usually imported data is of 
a rather low standard or the import isn't done right, and it's really, really 
hard to do an import correctly.


On 5 Dec 2009, at 00:00, Scott Atwood wrote:

> The Hawaii state government has a sizable repository of GIS data that could 
> be useful to import into OSM:  http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/gis/.  I have 
> contacted a manager in the GIS department by telephone and verified that this 
> GIS data is in the public domain, and therefore available for import into OSM.
> 
> Hawaii has pretty good road coverage from a import of 2007 TIGER data on 
> O'ahu, and an ongoing import of 2009 TIGER data for the remaining islands, so 
> the roads data provided by the GIS department probably doesn't need to be 
> considered.But there is a lot of other data available that isn't 
> currently in OSM, such as:
> 
>* Streams, waterfalls, dams, and canals (Does the National Hydrography 
> Dataset cover Hawaii?)
>* Coral reefs
>* Offshore islets
>* Mile markers

Not so sure these belong in OSM.

>* Trails
>* Parks
>* Schools

Um haven't these already been imported? Not just current ones, but historic 
ones too, and schools that opened 4 years ago aren't in there?

>* Hotels
>* Assorted administrative boundaries

You'll probably find that most of these are in there already.

>* Land use categorization.
>* etc.
> 
> There has been relatively little mapping activity in Hawaii outside of O'ahu, 
> so these data sets are unlikely to conflict with much existing work on the 
> neighbor islands.  More careful consideration would have to be given for data 
> imports for O'ahu.
> 

Do some publicity, run some mapping parties. The reason OSM has worked in 
Germany is due to plenty of publicity.

Shaun

> I have not made any investigation into the accuracy of any of this data yet, 
> and honestly, I'm not sure what sort of tools or techniques would be useful 
> for evaluating the accuracy.
> 
> -Scott
>  
> 
> -- 
> Scott Atwood
> 
> The hill isn't in the way, it is the way.
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] HI: Hawaii GIS Data

[Scott Atwood]

The Hawaii state government has a sizable repository of GIS data that could
be useful to import into OSM:  http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/gis/.  I have
contacted a manager in the GIS department by telephone and verified that
this GIS data is in the public domain, and therefore available for import
into OSM.

Hawaii has pretty good road coverage from a import of 2007 TIGER data on
O'ahu, and an ongoing import of 2009 TIGER data for the remaining islands,
so the roads data provided by the GIS department probably doesn't need to be
considered.But there is a lot of other data available that isn't
currently in OSM, such as:

   * Streams, waterfalls, dams, and canals (Does the National Hydrography
Dataset cover Hawaii?)
   * Coral reefs
   * Offshore islets
   * Mile markers
   * Trails
   * Parks
   * Schools
   * Hotels
   * Assorted administrative boundaries
   * Land use categorization.
   * etc.

There has been relatively little mapping activity in Hawaii outside of
O'ahu, so these data sets are unlikely to conflict with much existing work
on the neighbor islands.  More careful consideration would have to be given
for data imports for O'ahu.

I have not made any investigation into the accuracy of any of this data yet,
and honestly, I'm not sure what sort of tools or techniques would be useful
for evaluating the accuracy.

-Scott


-- 
Scott Atwood

The hill isn't in the way, it is the way.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Randy]

Jeff Barlow wrote:

>Zeke Farwell   wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>Out here in the west we have many highways over mountain passes
>that are regularly closed during the winter. On typical paper
>maps there is text along them that says "closed in winter". Seems
>to me we need something similar.

access=seasonal, with a second tag for open or closed dates?

-- 
Randy


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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Richard Shank]

Jeff Barlow wrote:

Zeke Farwell   wrote:

  

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.



Out here in the west we have many highways over mountain passes
that are regularly closed during the winter. On typical paper
maps there is text along them that says "closed in winter". Seems
to me we need something similar. 

  

Or chains required is something else you will see.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Geodatabase

[Emilie Laffray]

McGuire, Matthew wrote:
>
> Has anyone had considered a Planet.osm à Geodatabase conversion that
> works the same as the osm2pgsql?
>
>  
>
> The geodatabase standard is not published, but there is an XML
> transfer standard.
>
> http://support.esri.com/index.cfm?fa=knowledgebase.whitepapers.viewPaper&PID=43&MetaID=695
> 
>
> The advantage of having this available is that there is a large
> community of map enthusiasts that are professionally committed to
> ArcGIS through their employment.  Exposing them to OSM on their own
> terms will help expand our contributor base in the US.
>

I had a quick look at the document and I am not sure that it would
actually be trivial to implement such a tool. First, we would only be
able initially to build geometries. Also, based on my quick look, I
don't know how we would be coding all the parameters in the database.
Based on what I read, you need to have fixed fields to get it to work,
which is going against the strong variety of data found in OSM. You
would need to have something lossy like osm2pgsql to use. I don't find
this satisfying.
In addition, to use more functionalities like the road and junction
elements, you would need to build a tool way more complicated than
osm2pgsql. I am not convinced about that tool. Of course, if you were to
offer to code, that would be different :) Also, if you can convert a SHP
into that XML format, then you can easily do it from a postgis database.

Emilie Laffray



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Undeletion

[Richard Welty]

On 12/4/09 5:02 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:

you can open the area in Potlatch and hit U
deleted objects will appear in red and after unlock they are restored 
for normal edit.
works very well if there aren't hundreds of other deleted objects in 
the same area
is there a mechanism for determining in which changeset objects were 
deleted?


thanks,
  richard

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

Re: [Talk-us] Undeletion

[Apollinaris Schoell]

you can open the area in Potlatch and hit U
deleted objects will appear in red and after unlock they are restored for
normal edit.
works very well if there aren't hundreds of other deleted objects in the
same area


On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Christopher Covington  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I noticed a service road near my house (that I'm pretty sure was in OSM)
> got deleted. It used to connect Stadium Rd and the footpath coming off
> of Warren St:
>
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.22219&lon=-80.41622&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF
>
> Perhaps its just poor memory and I drew the footpath in without
> connecting it to a service road. TIGER/OSM seemed to have all the
> service roads around campus, though.
>
> How can I investigate this? The history function on the website doesn't
> seem to have information meant for human consumption (I mean I could
> read the XML changesets by hand but thats not very effective). JOSM
> wants you to select something before you can view its history.
>
> Thanks,
> Chris C.
>
> ___
> 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] Undeletion

[Christopher Covington]

Hi all,

I noticed a service road near my house (that I'm pretty sure was in OSM)
got deleted. It used to connect Stadium Rd and the footpath coming off
of Warren St:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.22219&lon=-80.41622&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF

Perhaps its just poor memory and I drew the footpath in without
connecting it to a service road. TIGER/OSM seemed to have all the
service roads around campus, though.

How can I investigate this? The history function on the website doesn't
seem to have information meant for human consumption (I mean I could
read the XML changesets by hand but thats not very effective). JOSM
wants you to select something before you can view its history.

Thanks,
Chris C.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Geodatabase

[Kate Chapman]

I don't know a ton about Geodatabases but I'm pretty sure you need to  
purchase an ESRI product to write to them.  It would be a good idea to  
have a conversion available though.


Kate

On Dec 4, 2009, at 3:52 PM, "McGuire, Matthew" > wrote:


Has anyone had considered a Planet.osm à Geodatabase conversion that 
 works the same as the osm2pgsql?




The geodatabase standard is not published, but there is an XML  
transfer standard.


http://support.esri.com/index.cfm?fa=knowledgebase.whitepapers.viewPaper&PID=43&MetaID=695

The advantage of having this available is that there is a large  
community of map enthusiasts that are professionally committed to  
ArcGIS through their employment.  Exposing them to OSM on their own  
terms will help expand our contributor base in the US.


Matt









___
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] Geodatabase

[McGuire, Matthew]

Has anyone had considered a Planet.osm --> Geodatabase conversion that works 
the same as the osm2pgsql?

The geodatabase standard is not published, but there is an XML transfer 
standard.
http://support.esri.com/index.cfm?fa=knowledgebase.whitepapers.viewPaper&PID=43&MetaID=695
The advantage of having this available is that there is a large community of 
map enthusiasts that are professionally committed to ArcGIS through their 
employment.  Exposing them to OSM on their own terms will help expand our 
contributor base in the US.
Matt




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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Jeff Barlow]

Zeke Farwell   wrote:

> 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.

Out here in the west we have many highways over mountain passes
that are regularly closed during the winter. On typical paper
maps there is text along them that says "closed in winter". Seems
to me we need something similar. 

-- 
Jeff Barlow
WB6CSV

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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Anthony]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Zeke Farwell  wrote:

> Here are all the reasons for a road existing but being closed
> (distinguished from private) that I can think of:
>
>- Under construction  (this already has a tagging sytem)
>- Damaged or blocked by disaster.  Re-construction or cleanup may be
>pending or not.
>- Old and unsafe. Re-construction may be pending or not.
>- Blocked/unmaintained seasonally (winter in mountains, rainy season in
>tropics, others?)
>
> I'll add this one:

* State wants to help the ferry operators make more money by blocking off
access to an island by bridge.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Anthony]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Anthony  wrote:

> There are perfectly safe roads which are in perfect condition, but which
> are closed.
>

For example, the bridge between Ellis Island and the mainland of New
Jersey.  Should that be tagged with access=private, access=no,
access=closed, access=emergency, access=official, or something else?
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Anthony]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Zeke Farwell  wrote:

> In this case, I'd say the renderer is right.  Both access=private and
>> access=no mean essentially the same thing - you aren't allowed there without
>> explicit approval.  In the case of access=no, that approval happens to come
>> from a government agency, but I see no reason that needs to be drawn
>> differently.
>
>
> I disagree, perhaps access=private and access=no do mean the same thing,
> but in that case access=no is not a good option for a closed bridge.
>

Well, I didn't say they mean exactly the same thing, just essentially the
same thing, within the context of a map.

There are two distinct situations:
>
>1. A road/bridge is private and access is only allowed for specified
>users.  Condition of the road is fine, so even if you are not allowed, you
>could choose to break the rules and use the road/bridge as long as there is
>no gate.
>2. A road/bridge is closed because it is unsafe, under construction, or
>impassible.  Even if you are granted access, it would not be desirable to
>use said road/bridge.
>
>
Road condition is separate from access=*.  Safety is separate from
access=*.  In any case, access=closed tells us none of this.  There are
perfectly safe roads which are in perfect condition, but which are closed.


> It's been decided that access=private definitely indicates sitation 1.
>  Situation 2 does not have a definite tagging scheme. Except for under
> construction.
>

Sure it does.  There's smoothness=impassible, which arguably could also be
used for unsafe.  If you don't like using smoothness=impassible to indicate
an unsafe bridge, come up with some sort of safety=unsafe tag (not sure how
verifiable it'll be, though).
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Zeke Farwell]

>
> for that matter, there are roads in the Alps that don't get plowed,
> are there any european mappers following this list who know
> if those get tagged for seasonal closure, and if so, how?
>

I've seen a variety of discussions about seasonal closures on the wiki, but
none with lasting results.  One thing I have seen mentioned is that any
seasonal closure tagging scheme should encompass closure due to snow in
winter for mountainous regions, as well as flooding in the rainy season for
tropical areas.

Here are all the reasons for a road existing but being closed (distinguished
from private) that I can think of:

   - Under construction  (this already has a tagging sytem)
   - Damaged or blocked by disaster.  Re-construction or cleanup may be
   pending or not.
   - Old and unsafe. Re-construction may be pending or not.
   - Blocked/unmaintained seasonally (winter in mountains, rainy season in
   tropics, others?)

Personally I think these should all be rendered in generally the same style
on the Mapnik slippy map.  A note in parenthesis rendered after the road
name could be used to show the reason for closure. This could be a separate
tag.  To most map viewers what matters is that the road is closed, not the
reason.  These 4 cases do overlap and could be combined somewhat, but I
think having some differentiating data in the DB is good because, although
it's not needed for a general road map, it could be useful for a more
specific map in the future.


> this weekend, i'll see about pulling this together into a proposal
> and bring it up on the tagging list.
>

Thanks Richard!

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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Zeke Farwell]

>
> In this case, I'd say the renderer is right.  Both access=private and
> access=no mean essentially the same thing - you aren't allowed there without
> explicit approval.  In the case of access=no, that approval happens to come
> from a government agency, but I see no reason that needs to be drawn
> differently.


I disagree, perhaps access=private and access=no do mean the same thing, but
in that case access=no is not a good option for a closed bridge.  There are
two distinct situations:

   1. A road/bridge is private and access is only allowed for specified
   users.  Condition of the road is fine, so even if you are not allowed, you
   could choose to break the rules and use the road/bridge as long as there is
   no gate.
   2. A road/bridge is closed because it is unsafe, under construction, or
   impassible.  Even if you are granted access, it would not be desirable to
   use said road/bridge.

It's been decided that access=private definitely indicates sitation 1.
 Situation 2 does not have a definite tagging scheme. Except for under
construction.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Anthony]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Matthias Julius wrote:

> Richard Welty  writes:
> > 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.
>
> Exactly!  Don't tag for the renderer!
>

In this case, I'd say the renderer is right.  Both access=private and
access=no mean essentially the same thing - you aren't allowed there without
explicit approval.  In the case of access=no, that approval happens to come
from a government agency, but I see no reason that needs to be drawn
differently.


> > maybe an additional term on access ("access=closed"), so that some
> > future renderer will be
> > able to distinguish the different reasons for restricted access.
>
> If the public does not have access at all then access=no is the
> appropriate tag, IMO.
>

+1
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Incorporation

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Andrew Ayre  wrote:
> I took Serge saying:
>
> "As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN, and
> then work on the non-profit part"

I guess my shorthand wasn't clear.

Registration as a corporate entity is a separate step from tax
exemption and they're always done as two steps (since there's a
waiting period for non-profit entities anyway).

We can begin this process by registering as a corporate entity (which
would us to open a bank account, get funds, get a board together,
etc.) while we work on the task of getting our articles of
incorporation ready for approval.

The only difference will be that the organization won't be tax exempt.

It's true that for normal for-profit corporations, the tax laws in
Delaware make it very attractive to register in.

The same isn't true for non-profits. Instead the issues for
non-profits are about qualifications and procedures that non-profits
must follow.

DC is known as being very non-profit friendly (low requirements for
registration, paperwork, filing, etc.) That's probably due to a
combination of non-profit legislation and the fact that DC is home to
such a large number of non-profit entities.

That's also not to say we won't have to keep very close tabs on our
accounting, but that the number and complexity of the hoops to go
through for our final registration are fairly low.

- Serge

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

Re: [Talk-us] Incorporation

[Andrew Ayre]

I took Serge saying:

"As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN, 
and then work on the non-profit part"

to mean something different to what you just described. Sorry...

Andy

Kate Chapman wrote:
> Since we are going to incorporate as a non-profit the benefits of 
> incorporating in Delaware aren't as great as they would be if we were a 
> for profit business.  Our intention is to apply for tax exempt status 
> both federally and in the state or district that we do incorporate in.  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kate
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Peter Batty  > wrote:
> 
> As I've mentioned before, every lawyer I have ever talked to about
> this has told me to incorporate in Delaware. My current company
> Spatial Networking is based in Colorado but incorporated in Delaware
> through a "registered agent" - you can find lots of these via Google.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ayre  > wrote:
> 
> I believe that California will charge $800 per year income tax for
> for-profit corporations even if you make a loss or no profit...
> 
> A large number of Corporations in the US are incorporated in
> Delaware
> because my understanding is that they are very friendly towards
> businesses and easy to deal with.
> 
> Andy
> 
> Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>  > There are two major "candidates" for incorporation at the
> moment. The
>  > first is California, with the possible help of an attorney
> that works
>  > with OSM International. Unfortunately this has been difficult
> as the
>  > attorney is quite busy at the moment, and so asking him to do
> more
>  > pro-bono work may be difficult going forward.
> 
>  > As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get
> our EIN,
>  > and then work on the non-profit part- part of which will be the
>  > mission statement and other documents we're working on at the
> same
>  > time.
> 
> --
> Andy
> PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Peter Batty - President, Spatial Networking
> W: +1 303 339 0957  M: +1 720 346 3954
> Blog: http://geothought.blogspot.com
> 
> ___
> 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

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Incorporation

[Kate Chapman]

Since we are going to incorporate as a non-profit the benefits of
incorporating in Delaware aren't as great as they would be if we were a for
profit business.  Our intention is to apply for tax exempt status both
federally and in the state or district that we do incorporate in.

Thanks,

Kate



On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Peter Batty  wrote:

> As I've mentioned before, every lawyer I have ever talked to about this has
> told me to incorporate in Delaware. My current company Spatial Networking is
> based in Colorado but incorporated in Delaware through a "registered agent"
> - you can find lots of these via Google.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ayre wrote:
>
>> I believe that California will charge $800 per year income tax for
>> for-profit corporations even if you make a loss or no profit...
>>
>> A large number of Corporations in the US are incorporated in Delaware
>> because my understanding is that they are very friendly towards
>> businesses and easy to deal with.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>> > There are two major "candidates" for incorporation at the moment. The
>> > first is California, with the possible help of an attorney that works
>> > with OSM International. Unfortunately this has been difficult as the
>> > attorney is quite busy at the moment, and so asking him to do more
>> > pro-bono work may be difficult going forward.
>>
>> > As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN,
>> > and then work on the non-profit part- part of which will be the
>> > mission statement and other documents we're working on at the same
>> > time.
>>
>> --
>> Andy
>> PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Batty - President, Spatial Networking
> W: +1 303 339 0957  M: +1 720 346 3954
> Blog: http://geothought.blogspot.com
>
> ___
> 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

[Matthias Julius]

Richard Welty  writes:

> 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.

Exactly!  Don't tag for the 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.

If the public does not have access at all then access=no is the
appropriate tag, IMO.

If you want to indicate the reason that should go into a separate tag.

I don't think it is a good idea to invent a new access tag for every
nuance of access restriction.  No application can keep up with all
those.

If you want access=no to be rendered differently from access=private
you can try to convince the people in charge of the rendering styles
to do that.

Matthias

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

Re: [Talk-us] Incorporation

[Peter Batty]

As I've mentioned before, every lawyer I have ever talked to about this has
told me to incorporate in Delaware. My current company Spatial Networking is
based in Colorado but incorporated in Delaware through a "registered agent"
- you can find lots of these via Google.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ayre  wrote:

> I believe that California will charge $800 per year income tax for
> for-profit corporations even if you make a loss or no profit...
>
> A large number of Corporations in the US are incorporated in Delaware
> because my understanding is that they are very friendly towards
> businesses and easy to deal with.
>
> Andy
>
> Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> > There are two major "candidates" for incorporation at the moment. The
> > first is California, with the possible help of an attorney that works
> > with OSM International. Unfortunately this has been difficult as the
> > attorney is quite busy at the moment, and so asking him to do more
> > pro-bono work may be difficult going forward.
>
> > As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN,
> > and then work on the non-profit part- part of which will be the
> > mission statement and other documents we're working on at the same
> > time.
>
> --
> Andy
> PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
Peter Batty - President, Spatial Networking
W: +1 303 339 0957  M: +1 720 346 3954
Blog: http://geothought.blogspot.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Incorporation

[Andrew Ayre]

I believe that California will charge $800 per year income tax for 
for-profit corporations even if you make a loss or no profit...

A large number of Corporations in the US are incorporated in Delaware 
because my understanding is that they are very friendly towards 
businesses and easy to deal with.

Andy

Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> There are two major "candidates" for incorporation at the moment. The
> first is California, with the possible help of an attorney that works
> with OSM International. Unfortunately this has been difficult as the
> attorney is quite busy at the moment, and so asking him to do more
> pro-bono work may be difficult going forward.

> As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN,
> and then work on the non-profit part- part of which will be the
> mission statement and other documents we're working on at the same
> time.

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] Incorporation

[Serge Wroclawski]

I want to apologize for taking this long to get back to everyone about
the incorporation documents. I've had the flu since Monday and only
today have I completely come out of it.

So appologies for the delay. I've added a few pages to the US Chapter
page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States

It's a bit spartan right now, but here's a summary on the discussion
on the calls:

There are two major "candidates" for incorporation at the moment. The
first is California, with the possible help of an attorney that works
with OSM International. Unfortunately this has been difficult as the
attorney is quite busy at the moment, and so asking him to do more
pro-bono work may be difficult going forward.

The other major candidate is the District of Columbia. DC has a
relatively straightforward incorporation process and several of us on
the call (who live in/around DC) have been involved with incorporating
other non-profits.

As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN,
and then work on the non-profit part- part of which will be the
mission statement and other documents we're working on at the same
time.

We don't actually need an attorney to file for any of this, but I've
been assured by one attorney that they would be willing to help us on
a limited basis. In addition, I know that Kate is talking to several
attorneys, and we're looking at trying to find some law school
students who might be willing to help us. DC has the most lawyers of
anywhere in the world, so while I'm not saying it will be easy, it
should be fairly doable.

To that end, we're gathering up the steps that need to be taken for
the incorporation, as well as non-profit status (which will require
mission statement, decision on membership, a board of directors, a
budget, etc.)

But one step at a time.

- Serge

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

Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects

[SteveC]

my mistake

On Dec 4, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Sarah Manley wrote:

> No just talk-us, not the actually lists were contacted. 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 2:43 PM, SteveC  wrote:
> 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 
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects
> > To: Dale Puch 
> > 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 
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects
> > To: Dave Hansen 
> > Cc: Dale Puch , talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > Message-ID: 
> > 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
> 
> 

Yours &c.

Steve


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

Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects

[Sarah Manley]

No just talk-us, not the actually lists were contacted.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 2:43 PM, SteveC  wrote:

> 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 
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects
> > To: Dale Puch 
> > 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 
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Francisco / Bay area projects
> > To: Dave Hansen 
> > Cc: Dale Puch , talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > Message-ID: 
> > 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

Re: [Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Richard Welty]

On 12/4/09 12:45 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote:


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

i like this second one, with a little tweaking it might also cover
a projected reopening after renovation/replacement.

it would also account for seasonal roads, there are a number of
lovely dirt roads in Washington County with signage warning
that the town doesn't plow them.

for that matter, there are roads in the Alps that don't get plowed,
are there any european mappers following this list who know
if those get tagged for seasonal closure, and if so, how?

this weekend, i'll see about pulling this together into a proposal
and bring it up on the tagging list.

richard


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