Re: [Talk-us] hello world / draw on maps
Jeremy, jeremy jozwik wrote: > im looking for the equivalent of using google my maps. drawing custom > content on osm drawn maps. If you can live with static maps (not zoomable/pannable) then have a look at http://ojw.dev.openstreetmap.org/StaticMap/ - this creates maps that you can embed without Flash or even JavaScript. Likely to work even in NCSA Mosaic ;-) Bye Frederik nstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] hello world / draw on maps
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Nick Black wrote: > Welcome to OSM :-) > > Umapper has a Flash app that lets you do exactly what you are asking: > http://www.umapper.com/ > > -- > Nick hmmm, what browser / os have you used that link with? iceweasel and epiphany both do odd things for the map display. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] hello world / draw on maps
Welcome to OSM :-) Umapper has a Flash app that lets you do exactly what you are asking: http://www.umapper.com/ -- Nick On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 9:16 PM, jeremy jozwik wrote: > my fist osm related mailing list post, greetings everyone. > > ive been mulling over this for a few days now and have as of yet not > found any websites with this feature. > > im looking for the equivalent of using google my maps. drawing custom > content on osm drawn maps. > not actually adding mapping information, but using the osm as > background information for web accessible information. > > does anyone know of any websites that can offer this kind of feature? > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > -- -- Nick Black twitter.com/nick_b ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] hello world / draw on maps
my fist osm related mailing list post, greetings everyone. ive been mulling over this for a few days now and have as of yet not found any websites with this feature. im looking for the equivalent of using google my maps. drawing custom content on osm drawn maps. not actually adding mapping information, but using the osm as background information for web accessible information. does anyone know of any websites that can offer this kind of feature? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] Aeroway=Aerodrome Modifier Tags?
As a side note to the airport tagging discussion, it strikes me that, more than any other area of the world I've looked at, the USA at zoom 15 in OSM is littered with airports/airfields. Most of these were added by the GNIS import. Either the US has a much greater density of airfields/airports than other parts of the world, many airfields/airports have yet to be mapped in other areas of the world, or the GNIS import brought in a bunch of airfields that are no longer in operation. Has anyone noticed a bunch old airfields in their area created by the GNIS import that really shouldn't be on the map. All I know is that when I look at the aerial imagery where some of these airfields/airports are supposed to be, all I see is a field. Could be that it's just a grass runway…. In my town there's one airport that's supposedly in the middle of the golf course. Zeke On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Zeke Farwell wrote: > Steve, > > I like this as a possible solution as well. Perhaps the admin_level tag > could be used? Same as for boundaries. The challenges in my eyes are not > making the tagging scheme overly complicated, and making if verifiable based > on physical characteristics. In my opinion OSM only needs three levels max, > and maybe two would do it. > >- One would encompass all commercial passenger airports from small to >gigantic. Generally even smaller airports are fairly well spaced out, >except in very large metropolitan areas where there may be more than one >(Chicago has O'Hare and Midway), so these could be rendered at a high zoom >level. >- Another level would encompass minor aerodromes and airfields that >don't serve commercial passenger flights but are more than a simple landing >strip. They have some buildings and are still sizeable. These could >probably be rendered at one or two levels lower. >- A third level would be only for the most basic aerodromes. Basic >runways or landing strips with only very small buildings if any. These >would only be of local interest and should be rendered at a relatively low >zoom only. > > We could certainly call these levels 1, 2, and 3 instead of Airport, > Airfield, and Landing Strip. I'm just sick of seeing lots of extremely > minor landing strips rendered at the same importance as O'Hare International > Airport at zoom 15 on the map. Do you think more than three levels are > needed? Maybe just two: Large and Small. > > Zeke > > > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: > >> >> IMHO, if the only distinction between them is >> size/importance/hierarchy, then it just creates pain and confusion to >> create all these extra words, particularly for non-english speakers. >> Why not: >> >> aeroway=aerodrome >> importance=1 >> importance=2 >> etc. >> >> Make 5 intercontinental airports and 1 tiny amateur airfields. This >> also avoids the problem when Podunck Airfield is actually an >> international airport (yet "aerodrome=airfield" seems more intuitive), >> and removes a whole bunch of subjective issues to do with the >> connotations of each name. >> >> Steve >> >> ___ >> Tagging mailing list >> tagg...@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] Aeroway=Aerodrome Modifier Tags?
Steve, I like this as a possible solution as well. Perhaps the admin_level tag could be used? Same as for boundaries. The challenges in my eyes are not making the tagging scheme overly complicated, and making if verifiable based on physical characteristics. In my opinion OSM only needs three levels max, and maybe two would do it. - One would encompass all commercial passenger airports from small to gigantic. Generally even smaller airports are fairly well spaced out, except in very large metropolitan areas where there may be more than one (Chicago has O'Hare and Midway), so these could be rendered at a high zoom level. - Another level would encompass minor aerodromes and airfields that don't serve commercial passenger flights but are more than a simple landing strip. They have some buildings and are still sizeable. These could probably be rendered at one or two levels lower. - A third level would be only for the most basic aerodromes. Basic runways or landing strips with only very small buildings if any. These would only be of local interest and should be rendered at a relatively low zoom only. We could certainly call these levels 1, 2, and 3 instead of Airport, Airfield, and Landing Strip. I'm just sick of seeing lots of extremely minor landing strips rendered at the same importance as O'Hare International Airport at zoom 15 on the map. Do you think more than three levels are needed? Maybe just two: Large and Small. Zeke On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: > > IMHO, if the only distinction between them is > size/importance/hierarchy, then it just creates pain and confusion to > create all these extra words, particularly for non-english speakers. > Why not: > > aeroway=aerodrome > importance=1 > importance=2 > etc. > > Make 5 intercontinental airports and 1 tiny amateur airfields. This > also avoids the problem when Podunck Airfield is actually an > international airport (yet "aerodrome=airfield" seems more intuitive), > and removes a whole bunch of subjective issues to do with the > connotations of each name. > > Steve > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > tagg...@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] Aeroway=Aerodrome Modifier Tags?
Thanks for the link, Dave. I've though about similar classification schemes to what's listed there. Something like this in decreasing importance: aerodrome = international aerodrome = regional aerodrome = local The problem I see with this terminology is that it's more subjective, and it's harder to define based on physical characteristics. A very small airfield may in fact classified as an international airport because it receives the occasional international flight. This doesn't mean it has the same level of importance as Heathrow in london or JFK in the US. Zeke On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Dave F. wrote: > I'm no expert but wouldn't there be some official definition between sizes? > > This is what I found on a quick search: > http://www.answers.com/topic/airport-classification > > Cheers > Dave F. > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > tagg...@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best sources for boundary lines?
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Apollinaris Schoell > wrote: > > my experience is that TIGER is the worst. > Well, there's certainly worse, such as the "USGS 2001 County Boundary" > import, which has way too few nodes to get any sort of precision. I've > been replacing this with 2008/2009 TIGER data. > forgot this one, have replaced it entirely already in CA with official state data ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best sources for boundary lines?
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: > my experience is that TIGER is the worst. Well, there's certainly worse, such as the "USGS 2001 County Boundary" import, which has way too few nodes to get any sort of precision. I've been replacing this with 2008/2009 TIGER data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best sources for boundary lines?
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > (note: I'm talking about boundaries that have stayed in the same place > during recent times, not those that change every year by annexations.) > While the TIGER data is pretty good for these boundaries, it has some > precision issues. For example, at > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.81072&lon=-74.06072&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF > the line is shown following Paterson Plank Road over the Turnpike, > while USGS places it on the former pre-Turnpike alignment of the road: > http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=40.80869,-74.06204&z=16&t=T Other (probably > unusable) sources such as http://gis.co.bergen.nj.us/appbase/ and > http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/gis/maps/bergen.pdf agree with > USGS. > > So the question is: for boundaries that have not changed since the > USGS topos were created, can it be assumed that they will be more > precise than the TIGER data? Are there any other usable sources that > will be more precise than TIGER? > > my experience is that TIGER is the worst. USGS also matches with natural features fences, ... where this can be checked against Yahoo sat images. for better data you can try to get state/county data. be careful to use USGS from terraserver. a couple of areas are shifted or randomly stretched. > ___ > 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] Best sources for boundary lines?
(note: I'm talking about boundaries that have stayed in the same place during recent times, not those that change every year by annexations.) While the TIGER data is pretty good for these boundaries, it has some precision issues. For example, at http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.81072&lon=-74.06072&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF the line is shown following Paterson Plank Road over the Turnpike, while USGS places it on the former pre-Turnpike alignment of the road: http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=40.80869,-74.06204&z=16&t=T Other (probably unusable) sources such as http://gis.co.bergen.nj.us/appbase/ and http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/gis/maps/bergen.pdf agree with USGS. So the question is: for boundaries that have not changed since the USGS topos were created, can it be assumed that they will be more precise than the TIGER data? Are there any other usable sources that will be more precise than TIGER? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] Aeroway=Aerodrome Modifier Tags?
I'm no expert but wouldn't there be some official definition between sizes? This is what I found on a quick search: http://www.answers.com/topic/airport-classification Cheers Dave F. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Aeroway=Aerodrome Modifier Tags?
"i have a real problem with tagging highway=residential to get an airstrip to look "right". instead, you should tag it correctly and open a ticket to get the renderer fixed." +1 -Original Message- From: talk-us-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-us-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Welty Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 7:29 PM To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Aeroway=Aerodrome Modifier Tags? On 6/12/10 7:35 PM, Val Kartchner wrote: > On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 17:19 -0400, Zeke Farwell wrote: > >> >> RC Airstrip: >> aeroway=aerodrome >> aerodrome=rc_airstrip >> > I know we're not supposed to "tag for the renderer", but I tried tagging > a RC strip this way. It comes out VERY wide and very short. I ended up > tagging it as a residential street so that it would look reasonable. On > the ground it is about that wide anyway. > > i suggest that we should change the formulation: don't tag inaccurately to influence rendering. i have a real problem with tagging highway=residential to get an airstrip to look "right". instead, you should tag it correctly and open a ticket to get the renderer fixed. 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
