[Talk-us] Mappy Hour

[Martijn van Exel]

It's that Monday again!
Virtual Mappy Hour tonight.
Be there or be shape=square.

https://plus.google.com/events/c5lg5p742h9v8gu1jkp8n9hkkig

-- 
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Mappy Hour

[Paul Johnson]

Gonna have to pass on it this week, I'm in Lake City, Colorado for Bear Day
in Town Park right now.  If you happen to br east if the evacuation line,
come on over, Lake City is open.
On Jul 1, 2013 12:23 PM, "Martijn van Exel"  wrote:

> It's that Monday again!
> Virtual Mappy Hour tonight.
> Be there or be shape=square.
>
> https://plus.google.com/events/c5lg5p742h9v8gu1jkp8n9hkkig
>
> --
> Martijn van Exel
> http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
> http://openstreetmap.us/
>
> ___
> 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] An editathon in your city!

[Alex Barth]

Quick reminder:

As you head into a short first July week, think about hosting an editathon
on one or both days of the weekend of July 20 to 21. If you're in, get your
city up fast, even if you don't have all the details yet.

Thank you!

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_Summer_Editathon_2013

-- 
Alex Barth
Secretary
OpenStreetMap United States Inc.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Bridge naming

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

Thinking about bridge naming. Usually, a bridge will just have the same
name as the ways surrounding it. In those cases, the name= tag on the
bridge should just be the same as the name= tag on the connecting ways,
right?

Here's an example:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/172208150

On the other end of the spectrum, there's iconic bridges that everyone
knows by their specific name, like the Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate
Bridge. These both have the specific bridge name as the name= tag on the
corresponding way(s):

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/122660450
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52477381

There are actually several approaches suggested on the Bridge wiki on how
to tag bridge names[1]. The above cases represent the first approach: using
the name tag. This may not be appropriate everywhere, however: if the road
running across the bridge has a street name, wouldn't it be more
appropriate to reserve the name= tag for the street name and put the bridge
name in a name_1 or bridge:name tag? (The wiki suggests this in approach
#2. There is also an approach using bridge / tunnel relations. I am not a
big fan of that one myself).

Disadvantage of using a separate tag for bridge names is that they won't
get rendered on the default map, as far as I know. (Though that can be
changed.) The advantage is that the road itself maintains consistent
naming, in concordance with what I feel is the proper use of the name tag -
namely to reflect the official (signposted) name of the street.

How do you all feel about this? Bridge name on separate tag where the road
has a name itself or not?

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge - see 'How to map'
-- 
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Bridge naming

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2013/7/2 Martijn van Exel 
>
> There are actually several approaches suggested on the Bridge wiki on how
> to tag bridge names[1]. The above cases represent the first approach: using
> the name tag. This may not be appropriate everywhere, however: if the road
> running across the bridge has a street name, wouldn't it be more
> appropriate to reserve the name= tag for the street name and put the bridge
> name in a name_1 or bridge:name tag? (The wiki suggests this in approach
> #2. There is also an approach using bridge / tunnel relations. I am not a
> big fan of that one myself).
>
> Disadvantage of using a separate tag for bridge names is that they won't
> get rendered on the default map, as far as I know. (Though that can be
> changed.) The advantage is that the road itself maintains consistent
> naming, in concordance with what I feel is the proper use of the name tag -
> namely to reflect the official (signposted) name of the street.
>


IMHO we mostly don't map bridges yet, they are only implicit as an
attribute for a road (or railway) that runs over a bridge (bridge=yes on
the highway). In this mapping, it seems logical to use name for the name of
the road (highway) and bridge:name for the name of the bridge that it is
on. As soon as you map a bridge object (e.g. with a bridge relation or with
a (closed?) bridge way) you would use its name tag for the bridge name.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Bridge naming

[Clay Smalley]

I think it makes perfect sense to separate it into name=* and bridge:name=*
tags. The bridge:name=* currently isn't rendered, but theoretically, it
could be rendered differently and in a more appropriate/eye-catching way
than name=*. This leaves the case though, what if a bridge doesn't carry a
street name but only a bridge name (such as the aforementioned Golden Gate
Bridge and Brooklyn Bridge)?


On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thinking about bridge naming. Usually, a bridge will just have the same
> name as the ways surrounding it. In those cases, the name= tag on the
> bridge should just be the same as the name= tag on the connecting ways,
> right?
>
> Here's an example:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/172208150
>
> On the other end of the spectrum, there's iconic bridges that everyone
> knows by their specific name, like the Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate
> Bridge. These both have the specific bridge name as the name= tag on the
> corresponding way(s):
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/122660450
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/52477381
>
> There are actually several approaches suggested on the Bridge wiki on how
> to tag bridge names[1]. The above cases represent the first approach: using
> the name tag. This may not be appropriate everywhere, however: if the road
> running across the bridge has a street name, wouldn't it be more
> appropriate to reserve the name= tag for the street name and put the bridge
> name in a name_1 or bridge:name tag? (The wiki suggests this in approach
> #2. There is also an approach using bridge / tunnel relations. I am not a
> big fan of that one myself).
>
> Disadvantage of using a separate tag for bridge names is that they won't
> get rendered on the default map, as far as I know. (Though that can be
> changed.) The advantage is that the road itself maintains consistent
> naming, in concordance with what I feel is the proper use of the name tag -
> namely to reflect the official (signposted) name of the street.
>
> How do you all feel about this? Bridge name on separate tag where the road
> has a name itself or not?
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge - see 'How to map'
>  --
> Martijn van Exel
> http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
> http://openstreetmap.us/
>
> ___
> 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] Mappy Hour

[stevea]

It's that Monday again!
Virtual Mappy Hour tonight.
Be there or be shape=square.

https://plus.google.com/events/c5lg5p742h9v8gu1jkp8n9hkkig


I would like to, but I cannot agree to Google's Terms of Service. 
Notably, I agree to give certain rights to contributions of mine to 
OpenStreetMap, but I cannot agree to give to Google everything Google 
characterizes as "My Content" in a Google Hangout.  So, I may lurk, 
but I will not participate.


I know this has been raised as an issue here before, but are we any 
closer to answering:  Is there an online (audio/video) venue which 
has less onerous Terms of Service than Google's?  A way to 
technologically solve a delightfully impromptu meeting like this 
without using a corporate host that insists upon taking from us 
everything we discuss within its digital domain?


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

Re: [Talk-us] Mappy Hour

[Martijn van Exel]

Steve,

I understand your concern, believe me, I do. I too want public OSM events
to be as inclusive as possible.
We were actually just talking about alternatives during the mappy hour (for
different reasons) and the conclusion for now was that there is not a
mature  alternative available yet that would allow us to communicate in a
similar fashion. In the mean time, if you happen upon a promising
candidate, please feel free to make a suggestion at any time.

Best
Martijn



On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:39 PM, stevea  wrote:

> **
>
> It's that Monday again!
>
> Virtual Mappy Hour tonight.
>
> Be there or be shape=square.
>
>
> https://plus.google.com/events/c5lg5p742h9v8gu1jkp8n9hkkig
>
>
> I would like to, but I cannot agree to Google's Terms of Service.
> Notably, I agree to give certain rights to contributions of mine to
> OpenStreetMap, but I cannot agree to give to Google everything Google
> characterizes as "My Content" in a Google Hangout.  So, I may lurk, but I
> will not participate.
>
> I know this has been raised as an issue here before, but are we any closer
> to answering:  Is there an online (audio/video) venue which has less
> onerous Terms of Service than Google's?  A way to technologically solve a
> delightfully impromptu meeting like this without using a corporate host
> that insists upon taking from us everything we discuss within its digital
> domain?
>
> SteveA
> California
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>


-- 
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Mappy Hour

[Ian Dees]

On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:39 PM, stevea  wrote:

> **
>
> It's that Monday again!
>
> Virtual Mappy Hour tonight.
>
> Be there or be shape=square.
>
>
> https://plus.google.com/events/c5lg5p742h9v8gu1jkp8n9hkkig
>
>
> I would like to, but I cannot agree to Google's Terms of Service.
> Notably, I agree to give certain rights to contributions of mine to
> OpenStreetMap, but I cannot agree to give to Google everything Google
> characterizes as "My Content" in a Google Hangout.  So, I may lurk, but I
> will not participate.
>

Every service that carries your content will have a similar clause in their
Terms of Use because (I imagine) their lawyers tell them without such a
clause they can't transmit your content from your computer to others.


> I know this has been raised as an issue here before, but are we any closer
> to answering:  Is there an online (audio/video) venue which has less
> onerous Terms of Service than Google's?  A way to technologically solve a
> delightfully impromptu meeting like this without using a corporate host
> that insists upon taking from us everything we discuss within its digital
> domain?
>

No, there is nothing that comes close to the Google Hangout service. You
don't have to sign in to Google to view the YouTube stream that accompanies
these hangouts, we just have to make sure and post the YouTube link every
time.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Bridge naming

[Clifford Snow]

On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Clay Smalley  wrote:

> I think it makes perfect sense to separate it into name=* and
> bridge:name=* tags. The bridge:name=* currently isn't rendered, but
> theoretically, it could be rendered differently and in a more
> appropriate/eye-catching way than name=*. This leaves the case though, what
> if a bridge doesn't carry a street name but only a bridge name (such as the
> aforementioned Golden Gate Bridge and Brooklyn Bridge)?
>

+1


-- 
Clifford

OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Update on highway shield rendering

[Toby Murray]

For those interested in highway shields:

Phil, Ian and myself put some more time in on getting shields working on
the OSM-US server last week. We actually got things mostly working but did
run into a brick wall. Unfortunately postgres 8.4 doesn't support how the
image data is being handled. The fix is to upgrade to a newer version of
postgres however that is a slightly complicated matter. Ian is planning
some hardware upgrades for the server in the near future which will
alleviate some of the issues. So as of now we are waiting on the server
changes/upgrades to happen before we start rendering shields.

But the good news is I actually got an instance up and running on a VM I
have been using here at home. So it is definitely possible!

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

Re: [Talk-us] Update on highway shield rendering

[Martijn van Exel]

Thanks for the update, Toby. I am definitely excited about this. Let me
know if there's anything I can do to help move this forward!


On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Toby Murray  wrote:

> For those interested in highway shields:
>
> Phil, Ian and myself put some more time in on getting shields working on
> the OSM-US server last week. We actually got things mostly working but did
> run into a brick wall. Unfortunately postgres 8.4 doesn't support how the
> image data is being handled. The fix is to upgrade to a newer version of
> postgres however that is a slightly complicated matter. Ian is planning
> some hardware upgrades for the server in the near future which will
> alleviate some of the issues. So as of now we are waiting on the server
> changes/upgrades to happen before we start rendering shields.
>
> But the good news is I actually got an instance up and running on a VM I
> have been using here at home. So it is definitely possible!
>
> Toby
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>


-- 
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Update on highway shield rendering

[stevea]

+1 to Martijn's excitement:  I, too, find this a neat and appropriate 
front for the us-servers to be serving up specific tiles about.  Good 
luck getting postgres technical glitches ironed out!


While it sounds like Ian & Co. have your hands full, another "neat 
and appropriate front" which I believe was once discussed here for 
the us-servers were slightly altered versions of mapnik.  They might 
have experimental and new render rules (I believe we were talking 
about boundary=national_park and related matters a few months back). 
I'm not banging the door down about this, and I'm not quite sure how 
to word a specific request (maybe participate in a discussion about 
some possibilities, though, YES!).  More like "I'm still thinking 
about this" (funky mapnik renderers with cool new rules we agree 
would be neat to try).


So, after highway shield rendering is solved and up, maybe this can 
move from back burner to front burner.  Think about it, folks: 
experimental mapnik renderings to do cool stuff with park boundaries, 
perhaps admin_level boundaries...your imagination is the limit.  We 
might start with a few small changes and see how that goes.  Might be 
a way to propose world-wide changes (only if they are consensus-based 
improvements) into mapnik, if we even want to go to such a place.


If we do, starting a new thread ("Experimental mapnik rendering 
rules"?) seems appropriate.  If the us has servers (it appears we 
do), we just might have some interesting ideas to try out!


Just (re-) throwing it out there,

SteveA
California



For those interested in highway shields:

Phil, Ian and myself put some more time in on getting shields 
working on the OSM-US server last week. We actually got things 
mostly working but did run into a brick wall. Unfortunately postgres 
8.4 doesn't support how the image data is being handled. The fix is 
to upgrade to a newer version of postgres however that is a slightly 
complicated matter. Ian is planning some hardware upgrades for the 
server in the near future which will alleviate some of the issues. 
So as of now we are waiting on the server changes/upgrades to happen 
before we start rendering shields.


But the good news is I actually got an instance up and running on a 
VM I have been using here at home. So it is definitely possible!


Toby


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

Re: [Talk-us] Update on highway shield rendering

[Toby Murray]

This actually came up when we were talking about the shields last week. The
shields rendering is actually a full mapnik stylesheet, not just an
overlay. Phil pointed out that this is the only way to avoid conflicts. So
it is essentially a full osm.org mapnik stylesheet (from a few months ago
but it hasn't changed much recently) with the shields logic added in. It
could definitely be tweaked with more US-specific rules. Of course
osm.orgis about to move to a carto based stylesheet instead of the
hand-tweaked
XML that things are based on now. This is being done because the
hand-crafted XML is a pain to maintain. Not sure if we can port the shields
logic to that setup yet. But either way, yes there are definitely some
possibilities here.

Toby



On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:30 PM, stevea  wrote:

> +1 to Martijn's excitement:  I, too, find this a neat and appropriate
> front for the us-servers to be serving up specific tiles about.  Good luck
> getting postgres technical glitches ironed out!
>
> While it sounds like Ian & Co. have your hands full, another "neat and
> appropriate front" which I believe was once discussed here for the
> us-servers were slightly altered versions of mapnik.  They might have
> experimental and new render rules (I believe we were talking about
> boundary=national_park and related matters a few months back). I'm not
> banging the door down about this, and I'm not quite sure how to word a
> specific request (maybe participate in a discussion about some
> possibilities, though, YES!).  More like "I'm still thinking about this"
> (funky mapnik renderers with cool new rules we agree would be neat to try).
>
> So, after highway shield rendering is solved and up, maybe this can move
> from back burner to front burner.  Think about it, folks: experimental
> mapnik renderings to do cool stuff with park boundaries, perhaps
> admin_level boundaries...your imagination is the limit.  We might start
> with a few small changes and see how that goes.  Might be a way to propose
> world-wide changes (only if they are consensus-based improvements) into
> mapnik, if we even want to go to such a place.
>
> If we do, starting a new thread ("Experimental mapnik rendering rules"?)
> seems appropriate.  If the us has servers (it appears we do), we just might
> have some interesting ideas to try out!
>
> Just (re-) throwing it out there,
>
> SteveA
> California
>
>
>
>  For those interested in highway shields:
>>
>> Phil, Ian and myself put some more time in on getting shields working on
>> the OSM-US server last week. We actually got things mostly working but did
>> run into a brick wall. Unfortunately postgres 8.4 doesn't support how the
>> image data is being handled. The fix is to upgrade to a newer version of
>> postgres however that is a slightly complicated matter. Ian is planning
>> some hardware upgrades for the server in the near future which will
>> alleviate some of the issues. So as of now we are waiting on the server
>> changes/upgrades to happen before we start rendering shields.
>>
>> But the good news is I actually got an instance up and running on a VM I
>> have been using here at home. So it is definitely possible!
>>
>> Toby
>>
>
> __**_
> 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