[Talk-us] The vandalism has begun
Even before April Fools: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10842511 I love how portions of US 2, US 83, and US 95 are now in Canada. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.562lon=-112.387zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.812lon=-101.089zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.5966lon=-116.9202zoom=12layers=M ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun
Add I-15 to that list as well as not being in Canada. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.3441lon=-111.9452zoom=13layers=M ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun
Hi, On 03/11/2012 10:58 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Even before April Fools: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10842511 I love how portions of US 2, US 83, and US 95 are now in Canada. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.562lon=-112.387zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.812lon=-101.089zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.5966lon=-116.9202zoom=12layers=M Happy to discuss this bot not in this setting. How about someone opens a thread with a sensible subject, asking sensible questions without talking about fools and vandals, then we can talk. Bye Frederik -- 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] The vandalism has begun
Frederik, can we get these reverted? I'd do it myself but I'm not confident enough with the revert tools and I doubt this changeset will revert cleanly. In the particular example of way 44925685, a quick look shows no tags that could not be recovered with TIGER and odbl=clean. As an aside, wasn't the view expressed on the rebuild conference call to go with a v0 concept for ways, in which case parts of the tagging would remain on the 1st? -Original Message- From: Nathan Edgars II [mailto:nerou...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:59 AM To: OpenStreetMap talk-us list Subject: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun Even before April Fools: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10842511 I love how portions of US 2, US 83, and US 95 are now in Canada. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.562lon=-112.387zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.812lon=-101.089zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.5966lon=-116.9202zoom=12layers=M ___ 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] The vandalism has begun
On 3/11/2012 6:35 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 03/11/2012 10:58 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Even before April Fools: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10842511 I love how portions of US 2, US 83, and US 95 are now in Canada. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.562lon=-112.387zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.812lon=-101.089zoom=11layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.5966lon=-116.9202zoom=12layers=M Happy to discuss this bot not in this setting. How about someone opens a thread with a sensible subject, asking sensible questions without talking about fools and vandals, then we can talk. How about you follow the automated edit guidelines if you don't want to be called a vandal? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes
I'd like to solicit some thoughts on the tagging for special routes (commonly known as bannered routes)[0]. In route relations, it's customary to separate the network and the reference number. How do or should special routes fit into that? I'm torn between three views and I'm not sure which of them is the best fit for the way people think about special routes in a general sense. Let's consider one of US Route 1's alternate routes[1]. We can think of it as: * An independent route within the US Highway system whose reference number happens to be alphanumeric. network=US:US ref=1 Alternate (but people might use ref=1 Alt, because that's what's on some of the signs) * A route within the subset of the US Highway system consisting of alternate routes: network=US:US:Alternate ref=1 * A route related to the main US Route 1, but with an additional tag indicating that it's a bannered offshoot: network=US:US ref=1 banner=Alternate I'm partial to the idea of separating the banner from the reference number, but I'm not sure how any of these ideas mesh with the understandings of people with more experience with road networks than I have. tagging@ is included because I'm not sure how global a practice this sort of thing is, even though it's quite common in the US. [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_route [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bannered_routes_of_U.S._Route_1#Alternate_routes -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- Wow, I'm being shot at from both sides. That means I *must* be right. :-) -- Larry Wall --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Printing out counties
I'm making print versions of OSM coverage in US counties: http://mike.teczno.com/notes/county-papers.html What additional data, whether OSM or Census or otherwise, should be on there? -mike. michal migurski- m...@stamen.com 415.558.1610 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Printing out counties
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Michal Migurski m...@stamen.com wrote: I'm making print versions of OSM coverage in US counties: http://mike.teczno.com/notes/county-papers.html What additional data, whether OSM or Census or otherwise, should be on there? - Public spaces (parks, zoos, police/fire stations, etc.) - Addressing (usually the lack thereof) - Building outlines These are the sorts of things that counties tend to already have data for. They'll either be impressed with how great OSM is or they'll show off their data and we can get them to give it to us :). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Printing out counties
On Mar 11, 2012, at 12:24 PM, Ian Dees wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Michal Migurski m...@stamen.com wrote: I'm making print versions of OSM coverage in US counties: http://mike.teczno.com/notes/county-papers.html What additional data, whether OSM or Census or otherwise, should be on there? - Public spaces (parks, zoos, police/fire stations, etc.) - Addressing (usually the lack thereof) - Building outlines These are the sorts of things that counties tend to already have data for. They'll either be impressed with how great OSM is or they'll show off their data and we can get them to give it to us :). I like the contrast between OSM is good and help make OSM good - maybe there's a way to detect which is the case, and adapt the wording around the maps to highlight this. -mike. michal migurski- m...@stamen.com 415.558.1610 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun
Can someone please revert changeset 10842511? It's too big for JOSM's reverter plugin. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Remapping from TIGER 2011
Yesterday I did a serious bit of remapping from TIGER 2011 data in the LA area. I wanted to see what the process would be like and how much I could get done in a reasonable amount of time. I just wrote up a quick blog post about it and would welcome any comments on the subject. http://ksmapper.blogspot.com/2012/03/remapping-using-tiger-2011.html The one user I mention in the post is blars. I'm not sure if anyone on the west coast has been holding out on remapping, waiting to see if he will accept the new terms or not. Based on a couple of different sources, I believe it is highly unlikely that he will accept. This will leave parts of the west coast looking like the San Andreas Fault has unleashed the big one so there is a lot of work to do. http://yosmhm.neis-one.org/?blars=zoom=5lat=37.96469lon=-114.70606layers=B0Tu=blars Toby ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Remapping from TIGER 2011
On 3/11/2012 6:48 PM, Toby Murray wrote: I just wrote up a quick blog post about it and would welcome any comments on the subject. Last year I did all the new subdivisions in my whole county using TIGER 2010 against the original import. There were approximately 120 new subdivisions to add since then. It was all a manual process. I want to revisit Josh's handy new conflation plugin some more with this process in mind. I noticed the same thing you did - with large areas, it's easy to lose track of the boundaries of what you've already touched - particularly in mountainous areas. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun
I looked at the .CA lists and couldn't tell if this was due to removing data that isn't even CC-SA compliant, or making it easier to get a jump start on remapping. If the purpose is to make remapping easier, I think it is disrespectful of data consumers. Data consumers are aware of the 1 April date, after which time anything goes as far as removing non-ODBL data. They can prepare for 1 April by stopping real time updates, however this removal may have taken them by surprise. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun
On Mar 11, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Mike N wrote: I looked at the .CA lists and couldn't tell if this was due to removing data that isn't even CC-SA compliant, or making it easier to get a jump start on remapping. If the purpose is to make remapping easier, I think it is disrespectful of data consumers. Data consumers are aware of the 1 April date, after which time anything goes as far as removing non-ODBL data. They can prepare for 1 April by stopping real time updates, however this removal may have taken them by surprise. Agreed. It would be nice to archive the last or second to last planet of this month and not have giant chunks of data missing or broken. -mike. michal migurski- m...@stamen.com 415.558.1610 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes
On 3/11/12 11:16 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: I'm partial to the idea of separating the banner from the reference number, but I'm not sure how any of these ideas mesh with the understandings of people with more experience with road networks than I have. i like the idea of separating banners out too, but many current data consumers assume that they can just use the ref tag to label a route and be done with it. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes
* Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net [2012-03-11 20:59 -0400]: On 3/11/12 11:16 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: I'm partial to the idea of separating the banner from the reference number, but I'm not sure how any of these ideas mesh with the understandings of people with more experience with road networks than I have. i like the idea of separating banners out too, but many current data consumers assume that they can just use the ref tag to label a route and be done with it. I'm talking only about route relations, not the ways themselves. For route relations, we already split network and ref tags, so you already can't just use the ref tag. Also, there are few, if any, data consumers using route relations (a situation I'm working on rectifying, which prompted this email). -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (2) Thank you for your generous donation, Mr. Wirth. (1) Gee, I wish we hadn't backed down on 'noalias'. --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Remapping from TIGER 2011
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: On 3/11/2012 6:48 PM, Toby Murray wrote: I just wrote up a quick blog post about it and would welcome any comments on the subject. Great, thanks for sharing! I've added a link to the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Manual_conflation Last year I did all the new subdivisions in my whole county using TIGER 2010 against the original import. There were approximately 120 new subdivisions to add since then. It was all a manual process. I want to revisit Josh's handy new conflation plugin some more with this process in mind. Do you find the new subdivisions manually as well? Just a point of clarification regarding my conflation plugin [0]; currently it is geared towards finding 1-to-1 correspondences, such as matching GNIS nodes to areas. It does not handle N-to-M correspondences like you'll have with roads, and it doesn't take care of topology issues. However there is another user working on a TIGER conflation plugin which should handle these things, but I'm not sure how far he is from having something usable. That being said, I am sorely in need of getting feedback on the design of my conflation plugin. :) -Josh [0]: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Conflation ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes
It's obvious to me that the banner is not part of the network. US 1 Alternate is part of the U.S. Highway system (US:US), not some mythical U.S. Highway Alternate system. It also makes the most sense to put it in the ref tag. Otherwise there's inconsistency between an alternate signed as US 1 Alternate and one signed as US 1A (with the suffix in the shield). In each case I'll also use the modifier tag (modifier=Alternate/A). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Printing out counties
On Mar 11, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 03/11/2012 08:37 PM, Michal Migurski wrote: These are the sorts of things that counties tend to already have data for. They'll either be impressed with how great OSM is or they'll show off their data and we can get them to give it to us :). I like the contrast between OSM is good and help make OSM good - maybe there's a way to detect which is the case, and adapt the wording around the maps to highlight this. It would be ideal if the wording makes clear that the primary way of making OSM good is getting an account, logging in, and mapping; doing a mapping party, meeting other mappers in a pub, do cool stuff. Not taking county data and importing it ;) For sure, lot's of Join Us, Hippies!-type verbiage. =) -mike. michal migurski- m...@stamen.com 415.558.1610 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
