Re: [Talk-us] Get your early bird ticket to State of the Map US!
On 01/28/2015 02:39 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Hello everyone! Early bird ticket sales for State of the Map US are open, find out all the details on our web site: http://openstreetmap.us/2014/12/early-bird/ Looking forward to the conference! A minor detail, but is there a reason why "Company/Organization" is mandatory on the registration page? I'm sure plenty of people are planning to participate as a private individuals. - Lars ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's
On February 3, 2015 2:39:42 PM CST, Clifford Snow wrote: > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Paul Johnson > wrote: > > > Wonder if we could get this added to the address presets, as this > (at > > least for the US) is a pretty big deal between office towers, > apartment > > buildings, trailer parks, and almost every other situation where you > have > > multiple tenants on the same cadastre lot... > > > +1 > > > -- > @osm_seattle > osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us > OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch > > > > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us Sounds like a good idea to me. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that." -- Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's
I use the same tag (addr:unit) been using it mostly for retail areas with suite numbers. Haven't used it anywhere else yet. On Feb 3, 2015 1:40 PM, "Clifford Snow" wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > >> Wonder if we could get this added to the address presets, as this (at >> least for the US) is a pretty big deal between office towers, apartment >> buildings, trailer parks, and almost every other situation where you have >> multiple tenants on the same cadastre lot... > > > +1 > > > -- > @osm_seattle > osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us > OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Updating tagging of public transport
On 2/3/2015 3:31 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Is the new style backwards compatible with the old style? The new Public Transport style is backward compatible and offers a more uniform tagging style with some additional capabilities (in my opinion). Especially in regards to potentially having OSM as being the dataset for the official GTFS feed in an area where the official data presently sucks, it'd be a travesty if the new style makes going to and from GTFS /more/ difficult for marginal (and primarily German micromapping) gains. Generally, it is not feasible to use OSM as a dataset backing an official GTFS feed. This is because the probability of the GTFS dataset being uploaded to Google and thereby violating the license if the street centerlines or stops were derived from OSM. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: > Wonder if we could get this added to the address presets, as this (at > least for the US) is a pretty big deal between office towers, apartment > buildings, trailer parks, and almost every other situation where you have > multiple tenants on the same cadastre lot... +1 -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's
Wonder if we could get this added to the address presets, as this (at least for the US) is a pretty big deal between office towers, apartment buildings, trailer parks, and almost every other situation where you have multiple tenants on the same cadastre lot... On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Darrell Fuhriman wrote: > It seems to be addr:unit, though it’s not widely used. It’s what I’ve been > using, though. > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:unit > > d. > > > On Feb 3, 2015, at 12:28, Paul Johnson wrote: > > What's the correct tag for unit number, anyway? This is driving me insane > since it's making it impossible to complete mapping the caravan site I live > in to a level of completeness that you can navigate by without trying to > find the unit numbers (which, stupidly, are all on the utility pedestals at > the *back* of the space, instead of by the roadside where they're not > blocked by slideouts routinely) > > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's
It seems to be addr:unit, though it’s not widely used. It’s what I’ve been using, though. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:unit d. On Feb 3, 2015, at 12:28, Paul Johnson wrote: > What's the correct tag for unit number, anyway? This is driving me insane > since it's making it impossible to complete mapping the caravan site I live > in to a level of completeness that you can navigate by without trying to find > the unit numbers (which, stupidly, are all on the utility pedestals at the > back of the space, instead of by the roadside where they're not blocked by > slideouts routinely) > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Updating tagging of public transport
Is the new style backwards compatible with the old style? Especially in regards to potentially having OSM as being the dataset for the official GTFS feed in an area where the official data presently sucks, it'd be a travesty if the new style makes going to and from GTFS *more* difficult for marginal (and primarily German micromapping) gains. On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Saikrishna Arcot wrote: > Part of the problem between the tagging schemes and the rendering is that > it's a chicken-and-egg problem; a new tagging scheme is created, but > rendering support isn't there yet (partly because it's a somewhat complex > structure), so people might not use that scheme. However, if there were > many instances of using the newer scheme, then it would be justified for > the renderers to add support for that scheme. > > (On the rendering topic, though, I can confirm that OSM's transport map > does support the newer scheme, as does Öpnvkarte, OpenStreetBrowser, > OsmAnd, so it's not lacking.) > > A slightly bigger issue I see is that there are two formats for tagging > transportation routes, which will not only require data consumers to code > for both formats, but will also make it harder to link a bus route tagged > using the newer format be "connected" to another bus route using the older > format. I feel that this should be resolved quickly. > > On Saturday, November 29, 2014 02:02:01 stevea wrote: > > >it is not clear if the new way is actually better, at least the > > >current data stats show that mappers still prefer the "old" method, > > >at least for bus stops, as it is simpler (you need just one tag > > >highway=bus_stop instead of two: public_transport=platform and > > >bus=yes, for the same information content), and the new style cannot > > >be rendered on the main map, because of the lack of the bus-key (the > > >rendering db only "knows" that there is some kind of stop, but it > > >cannot determine if it is a tram stop, a bus stop or whatelse). > > > > > >I wouldn't "re-tag", ie. won't remove tags, but you can add the > > >public_transport=* tags if you want to support also this scheme. > > > > Is what I hear Martin saying here is that tagging with an old style > > because it renders AND tagging with a newer syntax that doesn't is > > OK? (As in, "doing two things at once, even if they achieve > > different, but good and worthy goals, is right"?) If so, part of > > what it says is that syntax is rather distantly connected to > > rendering. Read that again, as I think it is important. It is about > > what might be called OSM's "transmission." > > > > Not everybody understands the full process of how changes in syntax > > (e.g. voted upon tagging) turn into "what we see mapped." There are > > human consensus processes there, there are coding processes there > > (including bug fixes, actual writing of render code..) there is quite > > much more than just that there. It is a complicated moving set of > > parts. It is "let's map bus routes, OK, let's describe better syntax > > for bus routes, OK (but we don't render that today"). Now what? > > That's a real "hit the brakes and think about how to do it better, so > > discuss" moment. > > > > As we recognize distance between what people want to see represented > > in the map (how they tag) with the syntax of doing so (actual tags > > that get into OSM's data) can we better discuss this? We can and > > should, I say. Deep, I know. My point is that a person wanting to > > understand how to influence this is very much helped by understanding > > it (as much of it as possible, as much of it as we can describe as > > what we intend...) in the first place. How might one see such moving > > parts of OSM and how they a) work today? and b) work better in the > > future as we intend them? It goes deeper than public transport > > tagging, but that is a good example through this transmission. > > > > Look, I know: some of us work on our transmission, and they must. A > > lot more of us -- and there are many -- are only quite vaguely aware > > of how it works, or how we might best induce positive change into its > > workings. We can do better. Good discussion so far, but it seems we > > are only scratching this surface. > > > > SteveA > > California > -- > Saikrishna Arcot > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's
What's the correct tag for unit number, anyway? This is driving me insane since it's making it impossible to complete mapping the caravan site I live in to a level of completeness that you can navigate by without trying to find the unit numbers (which, stupidly, are all on the utility pedestals at the *back* of the space, instead of by the roadside where they're not blocked by slideouts routinely) On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Richard Weait wrote: > That would depend on the navigation app in question, wouldn't it? If > we mappers include more data, well structured, complete and up to > date, app developers will be more inclined / motivated to make their > apps work with it, I would think. > > I think, based on your email, that you and I are mapping malls in a > similar fashion. > > Add the whole building with address, name, etc, then add nodes for > each shop or other amenity. Include the unit number on the node if > that is also available. > > This approach seems to work well with hotels (with internal > restaurant) condo residences with ground floor retail, etc. > > Best regards and happy mapping, > > Richard > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Help with the SCALE 13x "HOT Booth"
Hi All, The Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)(1) is putting together a booth at the Southern California Linux Expo. We are looking for volunteers and I thought the OSM-US community might be interested in helping us. Volunteers get a ticket to the expo and to spread the joy of OpenStreetMap to the attendees. If you are interested please contact me directly. Best, -Kate (1) http://hot.openstreetmap.org/ (2) http://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/13x ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
