Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Hi SteveA, I see that you have summarized the a lot of the same information from your email on the United States Railways wiki page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States_railways Looking through Paul's comments and yours, I don't see any specific information about exactly how one would go about identifying specific railways in Oregon so that they could be added to relations. For the railways, Paul may be objecting to the content of the name and ref tag on the Way objects themselves for the railway. However, it is not clear how to find out what the name actually should be. The wiki page does indicate that the name tag on the Way objects should match the name tag on the Relation object with type=route and route=railway tags. For many rails around Portland, these Relations (type=route, route=railway) have not yet been created. You mention 2 specific examples (type=route; route=railway): Brooklyn Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588) and Fallbridge Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651). Some of the Way objects in Fallbridge Subdivision are also contained in http://www.osm.org/relation/4734792. Both of the relations for Fallbridge Subdivision have FIXME tags expressing uncertainty about exactly where the route Relation should begin and end. How would one determine the exact end of the Relation for the Fallbridge Subdivision? Also, looking through the history of the above relations, I can't really find anything in the changeset tags regarding the source of the data about the railroads. Where do the names Brooklyn Subdivision and Fallbridge Subdivision come from? Paul mentions that we should be using the name Banfield Mainline but where does that name come from and what exactly does it refer to? Are there signs on the ground with these things? Peter On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:18 AM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: Hello Peter: The California/Rail wiki page you describe documents a couple of different ways we tag rail. OpenRailwayMap (ORM) documents a three tier (route=tracks, route=railway, route=train) method used in parts of Germany. As that page (as well as the USA Rail WikiProject) explain(s), because of the way TIGER entered rail in the USA, (and the way we structure and name rail) we often use just two of these, skipping route=tracks relations and jumping right to putting named rail into relations of route=railway: rail infrastructure. You might say that two ORM/German-style lower and middle level relations have been merged into a single middle level relation here in the USA. There are also (higher level, and the whole OSM world agrees) passenger rail relations: route=train (or route=light_rail, route=subway, route=tram...effectively at the same logical level as route=train). That's OSM rail structure in a nutshell. In Oregon, there are the Brooklyn Subdivision ( http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588), the Fallbridge Subdivision ( http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651)... these are (correctly) the middle-level infrastructure relations tagged route=railway. There are also (predictably, also, the higher-level) route=train passenger rail relations like Amtrak Cascades (http://www.osm.org/relation/71428) which are often made up of a group of Subdivisions (route=railway relations) like Brooklyn and parts of Fallbridge. THIS is what Paul was typing about in those Notes. Specifically, a (higher-level/passenger) route=train relation should not have as its name=* tag the name of the system (like MAX, BART, Metro or Amtrak), it should be the name of the passenger line (Green Line, Downtown to University...). And, the underlying (lower-level infrastructure) route=railway relation should be correctly named as the rail company (or public works department, transit district...) names it: often something like XYZ Subdivision or ABC Industrial Line. OSM's Transport Layer is handy to display (rather raw) railway=* and (at closer zoom levels) route=bus. ORM is handy to display rail infrastructure (with Infrastructure radio button selected), especially usage=* tags. OpenPublicTransportMap (http://openptmap.org) is handy to display passenger rail relations. The USA is largely under construction for all of these, but we've come a long way. It's all in those wikis. Makes sense? Regards, SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Moving historic railroad ways from OSM to OpenHistoricalMap
Has this user assessed these areas against the Surface Transportation Board data bank and if the right of way is rail banked? There is so many situations where to his naked eye on the ground he may not be able to see it. To a person like myself I can still find the signs on the earth of where the railroad once was. We even have roadways that were built on old right of ways. I see this act as vandalism of data. Nathan P email: natf...@gmail.com On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Minh Nguyen m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us wrote: On 2015-03-29 05:00, Mark Bradley wrote: Hello list. I have been communicating with a mapper who says he has been deleting abandoned railroads (the ones where the infrastructure is totally removed). As the premise of OSM is to only map ground-verifiable features (other than certain boundaries), I didn't want to argue with him, but I don't want to see this information lost either. I said I would look into transferring those ways to OpenHistoricalMap. Yesterday he sent me a message, saying he's identified two more abandoned railroads and he's giving me the opportunity to act on them before they get deleted. Can I export these ways from OSM and then import them into OHM? Or is there a better way or some other solution? Just wanted to point out that there's still a place in OSM for mapping railroad rights-of-way where the tracks have been pulled out but the ROW is still reserved and discernible. The Standard style no longer renders railway=abandoned, but it can still be a useful navigational landmark. In any case, I've CC'd the OpenHistoricalMap list, where all the experts hang out these days. -- m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us ___ 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] Moving historic railroad ways from OSM to OpenHistoricalMap
Hi, On 03/31/2015 08:04 AM, Natfoot wrote: There is so many situations where to his naked eye on the ground he may not be able to see it. To a person like myself I can still find the signs on the earth of where the railroad once was. Then map the signs that *are*, but not the railroad which - as you correctly say - once *was*. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Moving historic railroad ways from OSM to OpenHistoricalMap
On 2015-03-31 00:36, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 03/31/2015 08:04 AM, Natfoot wrote: There is so many situations where to his naked eye on the ground he may not be able to see it. To a person like myself I can still find the signs on the earth of where the railroad once was. Then map the signs that *are*, but not the railroad which - as you correctly say - once *was*. For many rights of way, the main remaining feature is a greenway cutting across farmland -- something you can easily armchair map, even. Personally, I'd rather map that ROW as a railway=abandoned way than as a natural=wood area, just as I avoid mapping roads as areas. On the ground, meanwhile, you'd tend to find no trespassing signs on railbanked ROWs, no? -- m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Paul, I did notice that map seemed to be free of copyright and said so on list. I very much appreciate this reminder: don't other-map into OSM. True. Like I said, be careful. That goes for me, too. Good thing I was, and generally am. Regards, Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Mappy Hour - Next Monday
Heya. Trying to keep my word, announcing next week's Mappy Hour SIX days in advance. And you asked for a theme or presentation each time - you're going to get it. Next week, Richard Welty will talk about OpenHistoricalMap. Read about it here: http://www.openhistoricalmap.org/about but better still, come join the Mappy Hour next week. I have a few more topics lined up, but if you have something you'd like to present - a mapping project, surveying experiences, local news from across the country, interesting collaborations, whatever really! we all want to hear about it. Just let me know. So tl;dr next Monday, 5:30pm PT, 8:30pm ET, Mappy Hour, on Google Hangouts, go to http://bit.ly/osm-mappy-hour (new - direct hangout link, hope this works!) Martijn van Exel skype: mvexel ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] mapathon coming up
Hey all, The Spring Mapathon is coming up. Me, I am going to be spending the weekend of Apr 11-12 at a wedding in NJ, but Salt Lake is covered by my fellow local mappers. Phew! Perhaps I can do some micro outdoor mapping around Jersey City... Other than that, so far only a few places listed at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Spring_Mapathon_2015 - but there's still time! Let's kick off this season properly with a 'Great Outdoors' mapathon from lots of places. But. If you'd rather stick with the tried and tested indoors thing - nothing wrong with that. Most important part is to get together and map. How about it? Martijn van Exel skype: mvexel ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential
Mark, Regarding dealing with high density areas, the issue has been discussed in some detail over on the LA Buildings import repository on GitHub. Check out the discussion and maps: https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues/9 -Elliott On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 8:43 PM Mark Bradley ethnicfoodisgr...@gmail.com wrote: I'm planning to import all the addressed buildings in Indianapolis into OSM. Others have done similar things in other places. I have an advantage, in that I have access to Indianapolis' GIS data, so the building outlines are already created. The addresses are attached to the buildings too. So I wouldn't worry about having too much detail. Mark Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 10:59:56 -0700 From: Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com To: Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas Message-ID: ade6e936-2a55-4747-b554-5fcc116a3...@fitchdesign.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, I’ve been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points –vs- house outlines? . . . What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? What we focus on mapping depends on our individual interests. For myself in built up areas that will be things that make automobile routing better (addresses, speed limits, turn lanes, road surfaces). I do, however, map buildings fairly often when adding addresses. I prefer outlines but don’t always use them. Usually I’ll put in points after my initial walking survey as it is fast and easy. Using OSMpad and JOSM it only takes a couple of minutes to upload address points. But it takes time to trace the building outlines from MapBox or Bing imagery so that comes later or not at all depending on my interest in the area. 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? If I am taking the time to do a building outline then I like it to be as faithful to the actual outline as I can make it. 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N I’ve only bothered adding driveways in a suburban area if there were a cluster of houses with a shared driveway away from the street where they are officially numbered. That said, I like the look of the area were you put in all driveways. In terms of clutter, I don’t consider the level of detail you have put in here clutter at all. I rather like the level of detail even if I don’t go that far myself. Cheers, Tod ___ 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] Best practices for high-density residential areas
Hi all, Ive been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points vs- house outlines? Originally I had gone in to add points with building=house all over, but until an address is added, they simply don't show up *at all* on OSM, so I'm not sure that house points really help much. Adding an address means they show up as numbers, which I think is ugly, and this is probably all that's required for routing to work properly. I do understand that interpolation can work by pegging the addresses at each end, but around here when roads go around curves, there are holes in the sequences that individual numbering fixes. Example: all along Toulon Place (points, not outlines) http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68761/-117.65302layers=N [it still may be rendering those tiles] What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? a) House outlines are really helpful, thank you b) Outlines not necessary, the address is what matters, but knock yourself out c) please don't do outlines, it's clutter d) adding all these house outlines approaches vandalism e) something else? 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? So in my area I've been making the outlines look actually like the house, as best as I can, but there's no way I'm going to do this to every house in America. For other areas, assuming house outlines are warranted, I can use the building tool in JOSM (what a *great* tool) to make strictly rectangular outlines that vaguely approximate the shape of the house. What are the thoughts on this? a) A rectangular outline is great, thank you b) It's better than nothing, but only marginally so c) drawing squares on non-square things is inaccurate d) something else? I like a lot of detail 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N But in some neighborhood I've added driveways to all the houses just for consistency. I can see several schools of thought here: a) you don't need driveways in residential areas at all b) only include the driveway if it adds clarity that's not obvious c) adding them all isn't really a good use of time, but hey, knock yourself out d) holy crap, this makes things way too busy, please don't e) adding them everywhere approaches vandalism. f) something else? Thanks for any guidance or discussion. Steve --- Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571 st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy | unixwiz.net ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Nathan P writes: Keep me updated from Washington State. I work for a Railroad. Nathan, I believe a worthy method to keep updated is via a statewide wiki. I am an active (obsessive?!) contributor to the California/Railroads wiki, and there is also a Montana/Railroads wiki (not touched in about 2.5 years), but that's it as far as state-level rail wikis go. We can do better. It looks like you've been doing yeoman work on this in the greater Pacific Northwest, and I salute you. How about new state Railroad wikis in Oregon (Peter), Washington (Andrew?), and maybe New York (Russ)? It's a lot to ask, but a good wiki is an awesome resource. BTW, our Amtrak page [1] and routes have both enjoyed some really super improvement over the last few days. I anxiously await the next major rendering of OPTM [2] which will display passenger rail in the USA like never before. Maybe by April 2nd or 3rd? Regards, SteveA California [1] http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Amtrak [2] http://openptmap.org/?zoom=5lat=38lon=-98layers=BTFFT ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
Peter Dobratz writes: I don't see any specific information about exactly how one would go about identifying specific railways in Oregon so that they could be added to relations. Yes, Peter: I did that on purpose because I want to encourage OSM mappers to develop their own methods for discovering the names of rail subdivisions. One way I did this in California was to use our state's Public Utilities Commission (PUCs are state agencies that regulate railroads and other public utilities) Road/Rail Crossing Spreadsheet. Oregon's PUC likely has something similar (as should all other states). It shows all Road/Rail crossings in the state, along with the name of the subdivision/rail line. If you sort the sheet by the subdivision/line name, then milepost, you can essentially trace the rail line along known (already in OSM) streets/avenues/boulevards. This allows you to reverse engineer the name of an existing (TIGER-entered, poorly named) rail line in OSM as you can identify it by known landmarks (streets). Part of the reason I do this is because other places you might discover these data (subdivision names) are maps published by the rail corporations. But, be careful. For example, I have found that when I go to Union Pacific's web site to get a page that displays their network map, I get a login screen or a very high-zoom level map which is clearly copyright protected, meaning OSM cannot enter those data. However, a map I found on BNSF's web site [1] is clearly NOT copyright protected, so I believe I can use those data. These are usually very high-zoom level maps, meaning they are only useful to confirm that an existing line (again, from TIGER) has a certain name. They are not sufficient/detailed enough to enter the rail data from scratch. Are there signs on the ground with these things? No, there are usually not. Occasionally you will see a sign that says something like Entering Seabright Block but these are often traffic signalling areas, not entire subdivisions which are usually long -- hundreds of km -- stretches of contiguous rail. However, this doesn't mean that they are unnamed, just poorly signed. Rail companies name them internally, but because rail companies are regulated, they report these names to PUCs, and therefore give them to the public. It's just that the data can be difficult to discern. Persevere! For the railways, Paul may be objecting to the content of the name and ref tag on the Way objects themselves for the railway. However, it is not clear how to find out what the name actually should be. The wiki page does indicate that the name tag on the Way objects should match the name tag on the Relation object with type=route and route=railway tags. For many rails around Portland, these Relations (type=route, route=railway) have not yet been created. Yup. So: 1) Discover the correct names for rail infrastructure segments, 2) Tag them as such (usually the existing TIGER name= correctly can become the operator= tag), 3) Give them a usage= tag and 4) Collect into a route=railway relation identically named rail segments. That is the important work that has been underway in California (and many other states) for the past several months. Especially if usage= tags are also applied to rail segments, ORM will display these with a pleasing contiguous line. Yes, usage= tags can be a bit nebulous to determine, too, just do your best using these [2] guidelines. You mention 2 specific examples (type=route; route=railway): Brooklyn Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588http://www.osm.org/relation/2203588) and Fallbridge Subdivision (http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651http://www.osm.org/relation/1443651). Some of the Way objects in Fallbridge Subdivision are also contained in http://www.osm.org/relation/4734792http://www.osm.org/relation/4734792. Both of the relations for Fallbridge Subdivision have FIXME tags expressing uncertainty about exactly where the route Relation should begin and end. How would one determine the exact end of the Relation for the Fallbridge Subdivision? It looks like I made an error by adding 4734792, as I didn't see the existing 1443651. I believe this is a forgivable mistake, and I'm sorry I made it. I will remove 4734792 forthwith. Regarding how to determine where the exact boundaries are: I can't give you a perfect answer in every case. Often, subdivisions begin and end at a yard, a junction or a station, but not always. The rail owner gets to say definitively, and again, the PUC should document this (somewhere). Also, looking through the history of the above relations, I can't really find anything in the changeset tags regarding the source of the data about the railroads. Where do the names Brooklyn Subdivision and Fallbridge Subdivision come from? The names come from the rail company/owner of the line. Especially for rail with passenger routes, this will
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas
On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, Ive been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points vs- house outlines? . . . What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? What we focus on mapping depends on our individual interests. For myself in built up areas that will be things that make automobile routing better (addresses, speed limits, turn lanes, road surfaces). I do, however, map buildings fairly often when adding addresses. I prefer outlines but don’t always use them. Usually I’ll put in points after my initial walking survey as it is fast and easy. Using OSMpad and JOSM it only takes a couple of minutes to upload address points. But it takes time to trace the building outlines from MapBox or Bing imagery so that comes later or not at all depending on my interest in the area. 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? If I am taking the time to do a building outline then I like it to be as faithful to the actual outline as I can make it. 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N I’ve only bothered adding driveways in a suburban area if there were a cluster of houses with a shared driveway away from the street where they are officially numbered. That said, I like the look of the area were you put in all driveways. In terms of clutter, I don’t consider the level of detail you have put in here clutter at all. I rather like the level of detail even if I don’t go that far myself. Cheers, Tod smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
On 3/31/2015 11:02 AM, stevea wrote: Part of the reason I do this is because other places you might discover these data (subdivision names) are maps published by the rail corporations. But, be careful. For example, I have found that when I go to Union Pacific's web site to get a page that displays their network map, I get a login screen or a very high-zoom level map which is clearly copyright protected, meaning OSM cannot enter those data. However, a map I found on BNSF's web site [1] is clearly NOT copyright protected, so I believe I can use those data. These are usually very high-zoom level maps, meaning they are only useful to confirm that an existing line (again, from TIGER) has a certain name. They are not sufficient/detailed enough to enter the rail data from scratch. Without some kind of license giving permission, you cannot use other maps with OSM. The absence of a copyright notice has no impact on if something is protected by copyright* and I see nothing on the BNSF map to imply it is public domain. * With some exceptions, mainly around old works. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas
I’ve been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. 1) Address points –vs- house outlines? The Orange County GIS data, including the parcel database, probably with the associated addresses has recently been released into the public domain. If there isn't a specific point address layer, I'm sure there are some of in the Seattle OSM group that can generate one for you from the parcel centroids to assist with an import. Also, some of the individual cities may have building footprints, but you would have to identify those, I didn't get that far into the weeds. https://media.ocgov.com/gov/pw/survey/services/lis.asp and http://geospatial.blogs.com/geospatial/2013/08/orange-county-parcel-file-now-freely-downloadable.html Michael Patrick Seattle OSM ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas
On 03/31/2015 01:07 PM, Steve Friedl wrote: 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? So in my area I've been making the outlines look actually like the house, as best as I can, but there's no way I'm going to do this to every house in America. For other areas, assuming house outlines are warranted, I can use the building tool in JOSM (what a *great* tool) to make strictly rectangular outlines that vaguely approximate the shape of the house. What are the thoughts on this? a) A rectangular outline is great, thank you b) It's better than nothing, but only marginally so c) drawing squares on non-square things is inaccurate d) something else? Focusing just on this one, I often approximate buildings by rectangles when they're not technically but are pretty close. Lots of buildings seem to be a rectangle with a part of one wall that sticks out by a meter or two, or to have a bay window, or any other of an endless number of tiny variations. If it's close enough that a rectangle is the right shape at a lower level of detail, then there's absolutely nothing wrong with mapping it at lower detail. Sometimes, like for a clearly L-shaped building, it's just better to add the two more vertices though. --Andrew ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2015-03-29
These are based off of Lambertus's work here: http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl If you have questions or comments about these maps, please feel free to ask. However, please do not send me private mail. The odds are, someone else will have the same questions, and by asking on the talk-us@ list, others can benefit. Downloads: http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2015-03-29 Map to visualize what each file contains: http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2015-03-29/kml/kml.html FAQ Why did you do this? I wrote scripts to joined them myself to lessen the impact of doing a large join on Lambertus's server. I've also cut them in large longitude swaths that should fit conveniently on removable media. http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2015-03-29 Can or should I seed the torrents? Yes!! If you use the .torrent files, please seed. That web server is in the UK, and it helps to have some peers on this side of the Atlantic. Why is my map missing small rectangular areas? There have been some missing tiles from Lambertus's map (the red rectangles), I don't see any at the moment, so you may want to update if you had issues with the last set. Why can I not copy the large files to my new SD card? If you buy a new card (especially SDHC), some are FAT16 from the factory. I had to reformat it to let me create a 2GB file. Does your map cover Mexico/Canada? Yes!! I have, for the purposes of this map, annexed Ontario in to the USA. Some areas of North America that are close to the US also just happen to get pulled in to these maps. This might not happen forever, and if you would like your non-US area to get included, let me know. -- Dave ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USA Rail: Calling all OSM railfans! (especially in California)
On 3/31/15 4:58 PM, Paul Norman wrote: On 3/31/2015 11:02 AM, stevea wrote: Part of the reason I do this is because other places you might discover these data (subdivision names) are maps published by the rail corporations. But, be careful. For example, I have found that when I go to Union Pacific's web site to get a page that displays their network map, I get a login screen or a very high-zoom level map which is clearly copyright protected, meaning OSM cannot enter those data. However, a map I found on BNSF's web site [1] is clearly NOT copyright protected, so I believe I can use those data. These are usually very high-zoom level maps, meaning they are only useful to confirm that an existing line (again, from TIGER) has a certain name. They are not sufficient/detailed enough to enter the rail data from scratch. Without some kind of license giving permission, you cannot use other maps with OSM. The absence of a copyright notice has no impact on if something is protected by copyright* and I see nothing on the BNSF map to imply it is public domain. * With some exceptions, mainly around old works. the specific break point for the US is March 1st 1989, when the US finally joined the Berne Convention. before this, explicit copyright notices were required in the US; afterwards US copyright law became much more consistent with international norms and all works are under copyright whether there is notice or not. the Berne convention dates from 1886, but the original list of signatories was fairly small. now, membership in the WTO requires that countries adapt nearly all provisions of the convention. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential
I'm planning to import all the addressed buildings in Indianapolis into OSM. Others have done similar things in other places. I have an advantage, in that I have access to Indianapolis' GIS data, so the building outlines are already created. The addresses are attached to the buildings too. So I wouldn't worry about having too much detail. Mark Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 10:59:56 -0700 From: Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com mailto:t...@fitchdesign.com To: Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net mailto:st...@unixwiz.net Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas Message-ID: ade6e936-2a55-4747-b554-5fcc116a3...@fitchdesign.com mailto:ade6e936-2a55-4747-b554-5fcc116a3...@fitchdesign.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net mailto:st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, I've been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points -vs- house outlines? . . . What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? What we focus on mapping depends on our individual interests. For myself in built up areas that will be things that make automobile routing better (addresses, speed limits, turn lanes, road surfaces). I do, however, map buildings fairly often when adding addresses. I prefer outlines but don't always use them. Usually I'll put in points after my initial walking survey as it is fast and easy. Using OSMpad and JOSM it only takes a couple of minutes to upload address points. But it takes time to trace the building outlines from MapBox or Bing imagery so that comes later or not at all depending on my interest in the area. 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? If I am taking the time to do a building outline then I like it to be as faithful to the actual outline as I can make it. 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N layers=N I've only bothered adding driveways in a suburban area if there were a cluster of houses with a shared driveway away from the street where they are officially numbered. That said, I like the look of the area were you put in all driveways. In terms of clutter, I don't consider the level of detail you have put in here clutter at all. I rather like the level of detail even if I don't go that far myself. Cheers, Tod ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
