[Talk-us] Good work with remapping!
I've been watching edits come in today and I see good work being done on interstates, especially in the LA area. It isn't the most fun work to do so thanks to everyone who is pitching in. I ended up finishing the cleanup on I-105. It's just a short one so that's not really a huge feat. To make dealing with relations easier, I tended to extend existing ways and then split them so that the editor took care of all the relation memberships for me. So for example, extending a bridge to meet up with the the next segment and then splitting the way and removing the bridge and layer tags from the new piece I had just drawn. I also ended up doing some reimporting from TIGER 2011 in the Irvine area because some neighborhoods that were just too far gone to bother salvaging. For example here is a before shot of one area: http://i.imgur.com/pEuIm.jpg (and actually, a couple of those roads are already fixed. I happened to have a P2 instance open after I had uploaded the new stuff from JOSM and P2 picked up some of the new roads before I grabbed the screen shot) Here is the current view: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.60425lon=-117.81902zoom=15 I decided to follow my previous TIGER remapping strategy[1] and it worked out fairly well. Some of the neighborhoods were gated communities so they only had 2 or 3 roads connecting out to the rest of the network. This made it very easy to remove the existing garbage and import one section at a time. It's a lot more complicated to do a reimport in an area with a regular grid pattern of roads because there are so many more external connections to make. If you come across such horribly misshapen areas and feel that it is a good candidate for a reimport, feel free to send me a message and I see what I can do, time permitting. [1] http://ksmapper.blogspot.com/2012/03/remapping-using-tiger-2011.html Keep up the good work! Toby ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD import: what data quality is acceptable?
On 07/22/2012 09:33 PM, Paul Norman wrote: The mappings on the wiki are not only incomplete and inconsistent, they're for an older NHD version and sometimes clearly wrong. I posted a better one (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-July/008502.html) earlier this month but it didn't attract any comments, and it's not complete either. It handles most of the FCodes but still is missing a couple. It also needs some post-processing to clean up over-noded ways and some other matters. Right. I downloaded and looked at your code, but I was already pretty far along when you posted that message. I'd mostly been working by diligently examining, each time I encountered an FCode that I haven't seen before, what the feature actually is, from personal knowledge. (I then often presume that other features having the same FCode are the same general sort of thing.) Except for likely having to invent some stuff for karst features, I think that I have a pretty sound tag mapping. I'll go back at some point and check how it differs from yours. At a quick glance, they're pretty similar. I'm using a somewhat different workflow, doing a lot of the heavy lifting in PostGIS. My general plan involves clipping of flowlines, areas and waterbodies to HU12 basins so that I have bite-sized pieces to process with minimal connections to make at the edges: ideally a single connection, but sometimes the HU12 watershed lines are slightly misdrawn and pull in tiny bits of streams that actually belong to another basin. PostGIS also gives me a fairly easy way to do collision checking and find candidates for conflation. Oh, by the way, my plan is to include nhd:reach_code and nhd:permanent_id tags, to facilitate conflation in the event that another NHD version obsoletes the current one. -- 73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Map Corps Revived - And Using the OSM Stack
I'm probably not supposed to email you all but I hate seeing unanswered questions. We have official publications about the project: FactSheet: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/fs20113103 Phase 1: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr2036 An OFR on Phase 2 is due out any day now. Watch the RSS feed here: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/#home Phase 1 was purely an evaluation of the OSM software. Phase 2 was a test to see if the data could be integrated into The National Map. Phase 3 is a test to see what it would be like in production. We switched to Potlatch2 at the end of Phase 1. Our version of P2 is modified (slightly) to only allow the very small number of structure types (nodes) that we need for The National Map to be added. In fact, we went through the entire system and disabled features that didn't fit our needs. The result is a much simpler user experience. We are hoping to submit the data to OSM itself but we are very sensitive to the issues of bulk uploads from authoritative data sources. We don't want to do this until we have a good way to manage the process. One thought was to only update the same features that are in OSM but haven't been changed. The data we are looking at was part of the GNIS database which was bulk uploaded into OSM in 2009. Most of that data is untouched (except for bots) in OSM and still has the USGS feature ID (gnis:feature_id) saved in a tag. In theory, we could automatically update only the data from our system with matching gnis:feature_id tags in OSM that haven't been touched by humans. The rest of the data would have to managed manually. We do create a nightly planet file: http://navigator.er.usgs.gov/planet/planet.osm Feel free to explore the data. You can also explore the system without creating an account using guest as the user ID and usgsguest as the password. Changes from that account are reverted nightly. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. Wolf 720-334-7734 On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Charlotte Wolter techl...@techlady.comwrote: Ian, ****I read through their Web site. ****They used Potlatch 1 for two pilot projects in crowdsourcing (yes, they used the word) topographic data. Apparently they were pleased enough with the results to plan to move ahead, at some point, with crowdsourced topographic mapping. I hope they have taken a look at Potlatch 2. ****They also mentioned OSM several times on a couple of Web pages, which was nice publicity. Charlotte At 02:50 PM 7/22/2012, you wrote: Yep. They announced it prematurely. They'll have more information about it in the near future. On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Adam Schreiber adam.schreiber+...@gmail.com wrote: Ian, The link appears to be dead. Was the video taken down? Cheers, Adam On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I saw a tweet from @USGS today mentioning that the National Map Corps are starting up again. If you don't know what the National Map Corps is, think of it like OpenStreetMap for the US Government. Volunteer mappers correcting and adding to the topo maps all over the country. I'm sure there are others with much more information, but it was a pretty epic project and is the source for lots of the free and public domain data we use to this day. For the last year or two (or three?) Eric Wolf's been working to adapt the OpenStreetMap stack to the USGS's needs, and it looks like it that work has finally been released. Check out this video for more information: http://gallery.usgs.gov/videos/552. Skip to 4:10 or so to see it in action. Hopefully Eric and others will respond here and tell us more about it! -Ian ___ 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 ** ** Charlotte Wolter 927 18th Street Suite A Santa Monica, California 90403 +1-310-597-4040 techl...@techlady.com Skype: thetechlady *The Four Internet Freedoms* Freedom to visit any site on the Internet Freedom to access any content or service that is not illegal Freedom to attach any device that does not interfere with the network Freedom to know all the terms of a service, particularly any that would affect the first three freedoms. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Park boundaries
Hi, On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote: a search for 'Golden Spike' yields nada. I was about to draw a boundary=national_park[3] around it with a name tag, so it would be a little easier to find. But it turns out the NPS has a boundary shapefile for all National Parks, Historic Sites, Rivers, Parkways, Lakeshores and more than a dozen other categories[4]. I wouldn't object to importing park boundaries. But, I find boundary=national_park odd, relative to the rest of boundary=*. For truly large parks, it makes some sense. A related issue is tagging the polygon rather than the boundary, and the landuse=conservation/leisure=recreatation_ground tagging (not really right for parks, but actually the combination describes the NPS mission). So I have a mild preference (not backed up by volunteering) to make the park boundary/polygon tagging a bit more baked before importing. Boundary is used on ways and relations (and even on nodes..). I don't have a problem with using boundary ways if the boundaries are a set of disjoint, simple polygons like in this case. It's a shame that they are not rendered in default mapnik but that argument can't prevail over logical classification arguments. Maybe we should just introduce a new set of boundary= tags for the various NPS domains: boundary=national_historic_site boundary=national_historic_park boundary=national_forest[1] There are 37 classes in total, most of them with only a few instances. What do y'all think of that idea? [1] Already in use, oddly 182 out of 183 uses are nodes, seems like an unfinished or ill-advised edit session: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/boundary=national_forest#overview -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD import: what data quality is acceptable?
From: Kevin Kenny [mailto:kken...@nycap.rr.com] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 5:45 AM To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] NHD import: what data quality is acceptable? On 07/22/2012 09:33 PM, Paul Norman wrote: The mappings on the wiki are not only incomplete and inconsistent, they're for an older NHD version and sometimes clearly wrong. I posted a better one (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-July/008502.htm l) earlier this month but it didn't attract any comments, and it's not complete either. It handles most of the FCodes but still is missing a couple. It also needs some post-processing to clean up over-noded ways and some other matters. Right. I downloaded and looked at your code, but I was already pretty far along when you posted that message. I'd mostly been working by diligently examining, each time I encountered an FCode that I haven't seen before, what the feature actually is, from personal knowledge. (I then often presume that other features having the same FCode are the same general sort of thing.) This unfortunately falls short. I find that you need to check the FCode across at least 3 different parts of the country to be sure. I've found there are regional variations in how FCodes are used. I hope to get back to my code in the next week. With the redaction it hasn't been a high priority. Also, no one has proposed a NHD import lately. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Park boundaries
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: boundary=national_historic_site boundary=national_historic_park boundary=national_forest[1] There are 37 classes in total, most of them with only a few instances. What do y'all think of that idea? Perhaps add a us: prefix to the value? boundary=us:national_historic_site boundary=us:national_historic_park boundary=us:national_forest Also, what about tagging for areas managed by the US Fish Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (recreation areas surrounding dams/lakes created for flood control purposes, not sure if they have an official name). -- Jeff Ollie ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Bike infrastructure
Hi all,
I'm trying to complete local bicycle infrastructure here in and around
Salt Lake City. I obtained GIS data (a shapefile) containing local
bike infrastructure[1], and a lot of it is already in there. I do have
a few questions:
* Some streets are marked 'quiet streets'. This does not imply any
special rights for cyclists as far as I know, but would be a preferred
route (over busier, less safe streets). How to tag that?
* There are different types of 'shared lanes'. ('green shared lane',
'shared lane marking', etc.). How to tag these?
* The 'signed shared roadway' that I think I asked about before still
puzzles me. It is just a sign saying 'bikes share the road' as far as
I know, but does not imply any special rights for cyclists. How does
this map onto OSM tagging, if at all?
If anyone wants to help out by the way, here's a JOSM WMS URL you can
use:
wms:http://lima.schaaltreinen.nl:8080/geoserver/schaaltreinen/wms?SERVICE=WMSFORMAT=image/pngVERSION=1.1.1SERVICE=WMSREQUEST=GetMapLayers=schaaltreinen:SLCBikeRoutesSTYLES=TRANSPARENT=trueSRS={proj}WIDTH={width}HEIGHT={height}BBOX={bbox}
By the way, is there any way to have geoserver serve up TMS style URLs?
[1] This map is based off of the same data:
http://www.bikeslc.com/WheretoRide/PDF/SLC2011BikeMapWebsite.pdf
--
martijn van exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Map Corps Revived - And Using the OSM Stack
Eric, Thanks for the info. I might be mistaken, but I recall looking at the public crowd sourcing pilot. I noticed that a lot of edits submitted by the public were sourced from copyright or license restricted sources. There were comments from contributors like per Google or per yellowpages.com. I wonder what the USGS's stance on these sources is? Mike On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Eric Wolf ebw...@gmail.com wrote: I'm probably not supposed to email you all but I hate seeing unanswered questions. We have official publications about the project: FactSheet: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/fs20113103 Phase 1: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr2036 An OFR on Phase 2 is due out any day now. Watch the RSS feed here: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/#home Phase 1 was purely an evaluation of the OSM software. Phase 2 was a test to see if the data could be integrated into The National Map. Phase 3 is a test to see what it would be like in production. We switched to Potlatch2 at the end of Phase 1. Our version of P2 is modified (slightly) to only allow the very small number of structure types (nodes) that we need for The National Map to be added. In fact, we went through the entire system and disabled features that didn't fit our needs. The result is a much simpler user experience. We are hoping to submit the data to OSM itself but we are very sensitive to the issues of bulk uploads from authoritative data sources. We don't want to do this until we have a good way to manage the process. One thought was to only update the same features that are in OSM but haven't been changed. The data we are looking at was part of the GNIS database which was bulk uploaded into OSM in 2009. Most of that data is untouched (except for bots) in OSM and still has the USGS feature ID (gnis:feature_id) saved in a tag. In theory, we could automatically update only the data from our system with matching gnis:feature_id tags in OSM that haven't been touched by humans. The rest of the data would have to managed manually. We do create a nightly planet file: http://navigator.er.usgs.gov/planet/planet.osm Feel free to explore the data. You can also explore the system without creating an account using guest as the user ID and usgsguest as the password. Changes from that account are reverted nightly. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. Wolf 720-334-7734 On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Charlotte Wolter techl...@techlady.com wrote: Ian, I read through their Web site. They used Potlatch 1 for two pilot projects in crowdsourcing (yes, they used the word) topographic data. Apparently they were pleased enough with the results to plan to move ahead, at some point, with crowdsourced topographic mapping. I hope they have taken a look at Potlatch 2. They also mentioned OSM several times on a couple of Web pages, which was nice publicity. Charlotte At 02:50 PM 7/22/2012, you wrote: Yep. They announced it prematurely. They'll have more information about it in the near future. On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Adam Schreiber adam.schreiber+...@gmail.com wrote: Ian, The link appears to be dead. Was the video taken down? Cheers, Adam On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, I saw a tweet from @USGS today mentioning that the National Map Corps are starting up again. If you don't know what the National Map Corps is, think of it like OpenStreetMap for the US Government. Volunteer mappers correcting and adding to the topo maps all over the country. I'm sure there are others with much more information, but it was a pretty epic project and is the source for lots of the free and public domain data we use to this day. For the last year or two (or three?) Eric Wolf's been working to adapt the OpenStreetMap stack to the USGS's needs, and it looks like it that work has finally been released. Check out this video for more information: http://gallery.usgs.gov/videos/552. Skip to 4:10 or so to see it in action. Hopefully Eric and others will respond here and tell us more about it! -Ian ___ 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 Charlotte Wolter 927 18th Street Suite A Santa Monica, California 90403 +1-310-597-4040 techl...@techlady.com Skype: thetechlady The Four Internet Freedoms Freedom to visit any site on the Internet Freedom to access any content or service that is not illegal Freedom to attach any device that does not interfere with the network Freedom to know all the terms of a service, particularly any that would affect the first three
Re: [Talk-us] National Park boundaries
Hi, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote: On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:46 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: boundary=national_historic_site boundary=national_historic_park boundary=national_forest[1] There are 37 classes in total, most of them with only a few instances. What do y'all think of that idea? Perhaps add a us: prefix to the value? boundary=us:national_historic_site boundary=us:national_historic_park boundary=us:national_forest I like that idea, in spite of the boundary=national_park convention already in place. Also, what about tagging for areas managed by the US Fish Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (recreation areas surrounding dams/lakes created for flood control purposes, not sure if they have an official name). Is there any reason why we should not use a similar convention? boundary=national_wildlife_refuge etc. -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD import: what data quality is acceptable?
On 07/23/2012 10:49 AM, Paul Norman wrote: This unfortunately falls short. I find that you need to check the FCode across at least 3 different parts of the country to be sure. I've found there are regional variations in how FCodes are used. But I'm not *doing* 3 different parts of the country. I'm doing *my* part of the country. I'm not touching areas where I have no knowledge of the local geography. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] OSM Meetup in Metro Atlanta (Late Notice)
How did it go? I ran a meetup in Salt Lake[1] on Saturday and we had six people, two new to OSM. We talked about mapping priorities, the effects of the license change (we have a decliner in the area who has been very active in the past), and went out mapping downtown businesses. It was fun, and we are going to ramp up the frequency and choose specific areas to get together and map. Martijn [1] http://www.meetup.com/wasatchwizardsofosm/events/50910652/ On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Bill R. WASHBURN dygitulju...@gmail.com wrote: Join some Georgia mappers tomorrow at 1 pm at Mac McGee's on the square in Decatur for a get-together. See https://www.facebook.com/events/448096875225289 for more details. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] OSM Meetup in Metro Atlanta (Late Notice)
Hi, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: On 7/23/2012 1:04 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: We talked about mapping priorities, the effects of the license change It's good to hear about your meetup group, and that it's growing. I'm very glad I won't have to try to explain the details and warnings about the license change to new mappers. I try to not go into too much detail about the background (which I have trouble understanding on a legal level anyway) and focus on the practical consequences. -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] OSM Meetup in Metro Atlanta (Late Notice)
Martijn, What mapping devices/processes are used to gather and update OSM data ? Best, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: On 7/23/2012 1:04 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: We talked about mapping priorities, the effects of the license change It's good to hear about your meetup group, and that it's growing. I'm very glad I won't have to try to explain the details and warnings about the license change to new mappers. I try to not go into too much detail about the background (which I have trouble understanding on a legal level anyway) and focus on the practical consequences. -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John Novak 585-OLD-TOPOS (585-653-8676) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Park boundaries
Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org writes: Hi, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote: Perhaps add a us: prefix to the value? boundary=us:national_historic_site boundary=us:national_historic_park boundary=us:national_forest I like that idea, in spite of the boundary=national_park convention already in place. The question is about hierarchy and the requirements imposed on downstream data consumers. Starting as above, we will have hundreds of boundary tags. And, this is a departure from landuse/leisure/natural which is functional tagging rather than named tagging. I would suggest thinking through how these tags are to be used by renderers and mkgmap (and other transformation tools), and how those transforms will be maintained as new tag values are added. An alternative would be to define park public_forest tags for boundary, and subtag for types. That way processing tools that don't grok the subtags can still do something reasonable. pgpczZqpRUhlQ.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] OSM Meetup in Metro Atlanta (Late Notice)
In a typical mapping party, I bring GPS devices and walking papers. The GPS devices are not so useful in urban areas, for two reasons: reduced accuracy because of buildings, and street network already in place. I use the traces exclusively to georeference images from my digital camera. Increasingly, I also explain the use of apps (OSMTracker, Vespucci) as most people bring a smartphone. iPhones are not so useful as there are not too many OSM specific data collection apps available (I remember iLOE but don't know if that's still maintained? Also MapZen, discontinued afaik. Excuse my iOS ignorance, I haven't done much on that platform lately.) OSMTracker in particular is a personal favorite because it features geotagged photos and voice recordings - just open the output folder of one OSMTracker session in JOSM and everything is right there. Amazing. Oh and of course the indispensable OSM Vests(tm)[1] Martijn. [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Congressional_Cemetery_Mapping_Party.JPG On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM, the Old Topo Depot oldto...@novacell.com wrote: Martijn, What mapping devices/processes are used to gather and update OSM data ? Best, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: On 7/23/2012 1:04 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: We talked about mapping priorities, the effects of the license change It's good to hear about your meetup group, and that it's growing. I'm very glad I won't have to try to explain the details and warnings about the license change to new mappers. I try to not go into too much detail about the background (which I have trouble understanding on a legal level anyway) and focus on the practical consequences. -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John Novak 585-OLD-TOPOS (585-653-8676) -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Park boundaries
On 07/23/2012 12:50 PM, Steven Johnson wrote: Martijn all, I rather like the samples you gave: boundary=national_historic_site boundary=national_historic_park etc. They are simple, straightforward, and unambiguous. (The pattern could also be extended to other boundary types.) In the Forest Preserve of New York State (which comprises what's popularly known as the Adirondack Park and the Catskill Park), we have an existing precedent for coding the parcels landuse=forest. Since (as I mentioned earlier) I've been contemplating reimporting the cadastral data for those, I'm going to follow this discussion with interest. If you're working on a set of values for types of government land, here's New York's zoo of land classifications: Within the Forest Preserve (and other Department of Environmental Conservation lands): ADMINISTRATIVE CANOE AREA HISTORIC INTENSIVE USE PRIMITIVE PRIMITIVE BICYCLE CORRIDOR PRIMITIVE CORRIDOR UNCLASSIFIED WILDERNESS WILD FOREST 'Wilderness' is the most stringent of these, with foot travel only, and the desire to keep the area as close to the appearance of being entirely untrammeled by humanity. (I've just returned from a trip to such an area; one of the toughest hikes I've ever done.) 'Wild Forest' is next; it has historically been logged or otherwise developed, but is being managed with the intent of allowing it to revert to a natural state. Some Wild Forest trails allow snowmobiling, ATV, or Motorized Access for Persons With Disabilities. Primitive is next up; it may have areas where car camping is permitted, but is unlikely to have any facilities beyond lean-to's, piped springs, or pit latrines. A few primitive areas exist as corridors through wilder areas to allow longer-distance mountain bike, equestrian, or snowmobile travel. Finally, Historic or Intensive Use areas are likely to be developed for tourism, and include campgrounds, ski areas, historic sites, and the like. Administrative lands house DEC offices and maintenance facilities, and Unclassified lands include mostly Unique Areas, which have _sui generis_ rules. I think that most of these can be recoded as combinations like landuse=forest foot=yes bicycle=no horse=yes ski=yes atv=no nysdec:mappwd=no, but I'd want to include the original designation so that the tag clusters can be changed _en masse_ if, say, the rules for what's allowed in a Wild Forest change. And yes, these things get encoded - believe it or not - in the facility name. New York State does have a 'Diamond Notch State Primitive Bicycle Corridor' that more or less bisects the 'Hunter Mountain-West Kill State Wilderness'. Both of which are comprised in the Catskill Park (which comprises a tremendous amount of tightly-regulated private land, as well as the State-owned parcels). Outside DEC-administered lands: These are the ones in the shapefiles that NYSGIS offers: County Park County Forest County Fish Hatchery County Boat Launch County Recreation Area Federal Reservation Federal Military National Cemetery Federal Corrections Facility VA Medical Center Federal Non-Recreational Land (otherwise unclassified) National Historic Site National Scenic Trail National Forest National Wildlife Refuge National Recreation Area Municipal Recreation Area State Office SUNY Research Center State Corrections Facility State Psychiatric Center State Military [used for National Guard facilities] State Non-Recreational Land (otherwise unclassified) State Park State Marine Park State Boat Launch State Special Use Area State Canal Park State Historic Site State Education Center State Fish Hatchery State Tree Nursery State Unique Area State Natural Resource Management Area State Wildlife Management Area State Multiple Use Area State Wetland State Tidal Wetland State Recreation Area (otherwise unclassified) State Forest State Reforestation Area I'm preparing a Freedom of Information Act request to get electronic cadastre for New York City recreational watershed (public access) New York City recreational watershed (access by permit) There are a few large parcels formally owned by the Nature Conservancy over which the state has a permanent easement to offer public recreational access. And, to top it all off, there are the Blue Lines, which enclose the Adirondack and Catskill Parks. These two Parks comprise both State land and highly-regulated private land. What to do with all of this? It's useful, but your guess is as good as mine how to code it. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Map Corps Revived - And Using the OSM Stack
Mike et al, Here is my personal, educated view on the way volunteers working on the USGS prototype VGI system employed information from Google: The guidelines the USGS provides to contributors specifically states that Google is not an authoritative source, which is more of an issue than copyright. The guidelines do suggest that Google and YellowPages are reasonable sources to corroborative the factual state information with authoritative sources. Further, the kinds of structures were are mapping are things like hospitals and police stations. IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, it would be astoundingly unethical for any data provider to intentionally give false information about these things for the purpose of establishing copyright. Interestingly, in Phase 2 there were some structures that got changed back to the initial state from GNIS. After a little digging, it was noted that the first volunteer fixed incorrect information from the GNIS import but then the second volunteer (during our volunteer quality control process) changed it back, citing Google as the source. Unfortunately, Google was reporting data they imported from GNIS but didn't cite their source! Even within the very controlled setting of Phase 2, volunteers contributing to the project acted in ways the USGS had not anticipated. Neither the precise legal boundaries nor the best practices for utilizing potentially copyrighted information for the documentation or verification of fact are understood. One of the (many) reasons the project is still considered a prototype is that the USGS is seeking to better understand how these things interact, especially in the context of creating an authoritative database. Again, this is my personal view on the issue. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. Wolf 720-334-7734 On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Eric, Thanks for the info. I might be mistaken, but I recall looking at the public crowd sourcing pilot. I noticed that a lot of edits submitted by the public were sourced from copyright or license restricted sources. There were comments from contributors like per Google or per yellowpages.com. I wonder what the USGS's stance on these sources is? Mike On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Eric Wolf ebw...@gmail.com wrote: I'm probably not supposed to email you all but I hate seeing unanswered questions. We have official publications about the project: FactSheet: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/fs20113103 Phase 1: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr2036 An OFR on Phase 2 is due out any day now. Watch the RSS feed here: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/#home Phase 1 was purely an evaluation of the OSM software. Phase 2 was a test to see if the data could be integrated into The National Map. Phase 3 is a test to see what it would be like in production. We switched to Potlatch2 at the end of Phase 1. Our version of P2 is modified (slightly) to only allow the very small number of structure types (nodes) that we need for The National Map to be added. In fact, we went through the entire system and disabled features that didn't fit our needs. The result is a much simpler user experience. We are hoping to submit the data to OSM itself but we are very sensitive to the issues of bulk uploads from authoritative data sources. We don't want to do this until we have a good way to manage the process. One thought was to only update the same features that are in OSM but haven't been changed. The data we are looking at was part of the GNIS database which was bulk uploaded into OSM in 2009. Most of that data is untouched (except for bots) in OSM and still has the USGS feature ID (gnis:feature_id) saved in a tag. In theory, we could automatically update only the data from our system with matching gnis:feature_id tags in OSM that haven't been touched by humans. The rest of the data would have to managed manually. We do create a nightly planet file: http://navigator.er.usgs.gov/planet/planet.osm Feel free to explore the data. You can also explore the system without creating an account using guest as the user ID and usgsguest as the password. Changes from that account are reverted nightly. -Eric -=--=---===---=--=-=--=---==---=--=-=- Eric B. Wolf 720-334-7734 On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Charlotte Wolter techl...@techlady.com wrote: Ian, I read through their Web site. They used Potlatch 1 for two pilot projects in crowdsourcing (yes, they used the word) topographic data. Apparently they were pleased enough with the results to plan to move ahead, at some point, with crowdsourced topographic mapping. I hope they have taken a look at Potlatch 2. They also mentioned OSM several times on a couple of Web pages, which was nice
Re: [Talk-us] OSM Meetup in Metro Atlanta (Late Notice)
On 7/23/12, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Increasingly, I also explain the use of apps (OSMTracker, Vespucci) as most people bring a smartphone. iPhones are not so useful as there are not too many OSM specific data collection apps available (I remember iLOE but don't know if that's still maintained? Also MapZen, discontinued afaik. I have recently switched from pen + notebook to using my iPhone 4S almost exclusively for taking notes. I agree that there are not a whole lot of OSM-specific apps that I have found on iOS. I do find the OpenMaps app useful for quickly displaying the Mapnik rendering of my current location. Also, the GPSTrack app is useful for recording a track that I later email to myself and load into JOSM. Mainly, though I just use the built-in Camera app and Notes app. I usually find details in the photos that I didn't notice while I was taking the pictures, and if I forget where I took the picture, they are geotagged. I use the Notes app mainly for recording house numbers and other things that seem easier to just type in rather than taking a picture. Peter ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Map Corps Revived - And Using the OSM Stack
On 7/23/2012 1:58 PM, Eric Wolf wrote: Interestingly, in Phase 2 there were some structures that got changed back to the initial state from GNIS. After a little digging, it was noted that the first volunteer fixed incorrect information from the GNIS import but then the second volunteer (during our volunteer quality control process) changed it back, citing Google as the source. Unfortunately, Google was reporting data they imported from GNIS but didn't cite their source! Even within the very controlled setting of Phase 2, volunteers contributing to the project acted in ways the USGS had not anticipated. Fascinating! I have noticed this when trying to research something that has moved - the original source of many Google hits is obviously the original GNIS data point. I have moved many churches and schools who outgrew their original location and rebuilt halfway across town. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Bike infrastructure
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to complete local bicycle infrastructure here in and around
Salt Lake City. I obtained GIS data (a shapefile) containing local
bike infrastructure[1], and a lot of it is already in there. I do have
a few questions:
* Some streets are marked 'quiet streets'. This does not imply any
special rights for cyclists as far as I know, but would be a preferred
route (over busier, less safe streets). How to tag that?
Depending on if it's especially low speed and shared space or not, I'd try:
highway=living_street
or
highway=residential
bicycle=designated
* There are different types of 'shared lanes'. ('green shared lane',
'shared lane marking', etc.). How to tag these?
bicycle=designated
* The 'signed shared roadway' that I think I asked about before still
puzzles me. It is just a sign saying 'bikes share the road' as far as
I know, but does not imply any special rights for cyclists. How does
this map onto OSM tagging, if at all?
bicycle=designated
And I'd add these as members to an appropriate LCN relation as applicable
in any case.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Routing tests
Hi, On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: I think this topic deserves its own thread. On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I have had a first stab at it. http://apmon.dev.openstreetmap.org/us_routing_grid.html I was going to work on I-15 SW of Las Vegas but issues there that prevented routing over it in SW direction seem to have been resolved already. Was there some effort to coordinate efforts that I missed? Otherwise a wiki page with a list of challenged stretches of interstate could work? -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Routing tests
That was me How does http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:JohnANovak/Interstates fit your requirements ? On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Hi, On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: I think this topic deserves its own thread. On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I have had a first stab at it. http://apmon.dev.openstreetmap.org/us_routing_grid.html I was going to work on I-15 SW of Las Vegas but issues there that prevented routing over it in SW direction seem to have been resolved already. Was there some effort to coordinate efforts that I missed? Otherwise a wiki page with a list of challenged stretches of interstate could work? -- martijn van exel http://oegeo.wordpress.com ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- John Novak 585-OLD-TOPOS (585-653-8676) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
