Re: [Talk-us] Short 'connector' roads -- _link or not?

[Andrew]

The rule I've always followed is that it's the highest _link unless it's at an
intersection with a named street, in which case the names roads just
connect.

The only exception I think could make sense is if the *only *function of
the connector is to connect to a service road–like in a right-in/right-out
configuration– and U-turns aren't permitted. If the connector allows
U-turns on a dual-carriage arterial, then it ought to be a link so it has
the same priority in routing.

Thanks,

Andrew


On Tue, Nov 20, 2018, 4:07 PM Martijn van Exel  Hi,
> As I was creating more ‘unnamed roads’ challenges in MapRoulette, and spot
> checking them, I came across a number of cases like this one:
>
> https://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3313/task/6414594
>
> To my mind these need to be fixed, but I wanted to ask here first, so I
> can get the instructions right.
> Either such a segment is part of a 3 or 4 way intersection of higher class
> dual carriageway roads, in which case it should probably be named.
> Or as in this case, it is an extension of the service road, and it should
> be highway=service and remain unnamed like the service road itself.
> ..And I guess a third case is like
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/288576287 , which should be a _link?
>
> Advice welcome!
>
> Martijn
> ___
> 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] [Imports] Grand Junction, CO Fire Hydrant Import

[Andrew]

Just a quick thought, but have you checked out the Conflation plug-in in
JOSM? Assuming the hydrant number that will go in your ref tag is unique,
that would be an easy way to match or use a search radius on already mapped
hydrants and then merge tags.

The only other issue I could see is that you'll probably need to check how
closely the hydrant locations jive with OSM data. In other words, is the
precise location of the fire hydrant important, or its relative location
from a nearby street/building/landmark in OSM?

Your city data may be extremely precise and is likely based on a local
coordinate reference system (CRS), whereas data in OSM may have been
armchair mapped from different imagery with good or poor alignment over
time (and uses WGS84). Depending on the quality of both datasets,
reprojecting may solve some of the issues but you may have to do some
manual review starting out.

-Andrew

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 8:00 AM  I am in the process of talking to my local city GIS office about
> importing their fire hydrant dataset. I will then (probably) expand to
> the other municipalities in my area, and then stop there.
>
> One of their concerns is keeping the data on OSM up to date.
>
> I'll be talking to them on Friday, November 16th, 2018.
>
> Tags that are user visible on their arcgis application and probable
> relevant tags in OSM:
> Hydrant Number => ref
> Test Date => check_date, operational_status:date, or survey:date
> Pressure - Static/Residual => fire_hydrant:pressure (maybe add a new
> tags for difference in static/residual pressures?)
> Flow Rate => flow_rate (probably), possibly use fire:hydrant:awwa_class
> Flow at 20 PSI => No tagging scheme for this yet. Maybe add a new tag
> for that, like flow_rate:?
> Model Number => model (maybe add manufacturer as well)
> Owner => operator (probably change CITY to "City of Grand Junction, CO"
> or similar)
> Route Number => I have no clue what this is for
>
> Tags that I intend to add either manually or through using the model
> number:
> fire_hydrant:diameter
> couplings
> couplings:type
> couplings:diameters
> pillar:type
> water_source
> wrench, cap:wrench (currently under discussion on OpenStreetMap wiki)
>
>
> Advantages of an import:
> Data comes from an official source and is unlikely to be outdated
> I don't have to map every fire hydrant manually
>
> Disadvantages of an import
> May conflict with some of my fire hydrant edits.
> Assumption that the dataset is complete (it isn't, but it is close)
>
> When running the import, I intend to do the following:
> 1) Do a download via overpass of fire hydrants
> 2) Using hydrants that I know exist in their dataset and OSM, write a
> validation rule to ensure that no two hydrants are closer than 10
> feet/3 meters (assuming it is possible to do that using
> validator.mapcss rules)
> 3) Write validation rules to automagically add additional information
> to the fire hydrants, based off of spec sheets
>
> Somewhere in there, mess around with osmsync in order to enable easier
> updating of the data.
> ___
> Imports mailing list
> impo...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] North Central Texas Microsoft Building Import

[Andrew]

Hello mailing list-

This message is to give the community a heads-up that users in the
Dallas-Fort Worth area are beginning an import of the Microsoft Building
Footprints for the North Central Texas area.

This is a relatively simple import that will bring approximately 1.5
million building footprints to the 14-county metro area before moving on to
outlying rural counties that don't receive much attention.

You can find more information at the wiki article here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Microsoft_Building_Import_-_North_Central_Texas

Thanks,

Andrew Matheny
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Bing Building Import

[Andrew]

Hi all-

Have there been any ideas about how we want to handle the import process?

My thoughts are that this could be treated as a unified project for
"simple" imports that will not be conflating the footprints with other data
(e.g. address points).  My thought is we could adopt a streamlined process
like this to avoid filling up the imports lists when the experience of the
mapper needs to be reviewed rather than the actual import process itself:

   1. Write a project-level wiki page with standard instructions and tips
   with community feedback
   2. Have a table on the page (and maybe the Import Catalog) for local
   groups or users that would like to "claim" the import in a certain area and
   track import/validation progress.
   3. Get a few volunteers from the community who can serve as "project
   managers" to offer guidance and validation
   4. When a new user starts the import process, they complete a small test
   area and then message a project manager to get thumbs up and feedback
   before continuing on with the import
   5. We all use a special #bingbuildings changeset hashtag so that we can
   monitor and track progress
   6. Optionally, set up a project in the OSM-US tasking manager when the
   import is complete for validation purposes by the community at-large.

If someone is running an import that conflates the footprints with other
datasets (e.g. address points), that would go through the normal community
review process since we'll have a separate license and process to review.

Thanks,

Andrew

On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 12:32 PM Greg Morgan  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 1:34 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
>
>>
>> Greg,
>>
>> I will comment on a few of the new things you have written but like to
>> emphasize this is still not an import review because a lot of
>> information required for that is missing.  You could however read up
>> old discussions on previous building imports here to get an idea on the
>
> requirements and suggestions made for those.
>>
>
> Got it.  It is not a review but a helpful number of ideas.  Thank you for
> your time.
>
>
>> > [...]  In my early opinion, the foot prints are no
>> > better nor no worse than a craft mapper,s drawing
>>
>
>
>
>> This is always a pretty meaningless comparison because it is apples and
>> peaches.  When i talk about "quality aspects" i mean quantifiable
>> measures of quality.
>>
>> > [...]  As your
>> > other post provided an idea of starting with Montana, that will not
>> > be useful in my case.
>>
>> I suggested rural Montana might be a good place to start if you
>> intend "to poke the data for quality issues".  Since that is not what
>> you want to do my suggestion is pretty useless for you obviously.
>>
>> > > Microsoft's process documentation contains a number of hints that
>> > > indicate things can go wrong in the process in ways that are likely
>> > > to produce significant errors of kinds that are very unlikely to
>> > > happen in manual mapping.  Without having reliable data on how
>> > > often these things do happen (and how this varies between different
>> > > geographic settings) you would essentially be doing a blind import.
>> >
>>
>
> Christoph, as an analogy you have read that you can get sun burnt if you
> go outside.  Now you are afraid to go outside because you read about the
> resulting skin cancer. Microsoft is just saying that the data us good but
> use at your own risk.  They also point out that we should go through the
> import process.  Keeping up with the analogy, I have been sun burnt in
> Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, California, and Arizona for sure.  There
> are other states where I have been sun burnt but they are too numerous to
> list.  My point is that I understand what is rural America in all the
> states listed.  The sample I have provided so far is in rural Arizona.  It
> is not in metro Phoenix.  I can parse Montana but that would not add any
> any more detail to this discussion.  The test.osm file here is rural
> America but in Arizona by the border with Mexico.  People who live in this
> area are either retires or work for the border patrol.
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1I7BPMKLgABk8ikUdEPFpl6zKgh9E-sDN
>
>
>
>> > Depending on the craft mapper, hand drawn buildings can have the same
>> > problems. [...]
>>
>> As i have been very clear about this is not the case:
>>
>> > > Microsoft's process documentation contains a number of hints that
>> > > indicate things can go wrong in the process in ways that are likely
>&

Re: [Talk-us] Edit war after MapRoulette motorway downgrading task

[Andrew Matheny]

Clay-

I'm leaving a comment on the first changeset (57754161) asking for an
explanation. Not only do I think you were right on what you were doing
(weird motorway upgrades in Texas have been a project for me lately), but I
agree that this wasn't the best way to handle this.

I've copied everyone else in the mailing list so we don't have multiple
people messaging at the same time.

Thanks!

Andrew Matheny

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Clay Smalley  wrote:

> There is a MapRoulette task out for downgrading short sections of highways
> that had been mistakenly upgraded to motorways. I had been contributing to
> this task, and then today I got a foul message from a local contributor.
> They subsequently went through my recent edits and undid them, calling them
> "vandalism" in the changeset comments.
>
> The changesets in question:
> 57754161
> 57754261
> 57754283
> 57754364
> 57754463
> 57754500
> 57754519
> 57754581
> 57754609
> 57754659
> 57754778
> 57754847
>
> I'm... shocked. This is a really confrontational way of addressing things,
> and it really doesn't make me feel good contributing here. I'm just gonna
> take a break from editing for a bit. I don't want to add fuel to the fire
> by reverting the edits.
>
> What's the best way to address this?
>
> -Clay
>
> ___
> 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] Leonia, NJ doesn't want you to navigate through

[Andrew Matheny]

>are there matching street signs ?

I'm not sure. But if we know a street has legally-restricted access, I
think our tagging should match that access regardless of whether there's a
sign or not.

Example: Service roads inside an apartment complex (usually tagged
"access=private") are an example of tagging access without a sign.

If anything, I'm betting they'll have signs posted on the unaffected major
streets at city limits, which is where you'll often see signs about cell
phone usage while driving or red light cameras.

>of course, a better approach would be adding traffic calming features or
making roads one-way so that cut-through would not be beneficial much.

Respectfully, I don't think mapping features that don't actually exist is a
good practice in the long-run.

I think a conditional access tag is the best way to go here, since it's the
only one that will restrict access according to the city's ordinance.

Thanks,

Andrew

On Jan 8, 2018 1:28 PM, "Rihards"  wrote:

On 2018.01.08. 21:07, Andrew Matheny wrote:
> I believe the affected streets would just need a conditional access tag,
no?
>
> Something like:
>
> access:conditional=destination @ (06:00-10:00; 16:00-21:00)

are there matching street signs ?
of course, a better approach would be adding traffic calming features or
making roads one-way so that cut-through would not be beneficial much.
the reporting segment did not portray the local govt as being very
competent.

> Thanks,
>
> Andrew
>
> On Jan 8, 2018 12:55 PM, "Jack Burke"  <mailto:burke...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I'll leave it to others to decide what, if anything, we should do
> about this.
>
> http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2018/01/05/leonia-streets-off-
navigational-apps/
> <http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2018/01/05/leonia-streets-off-
navigational-apps/>
>
> --jack
>
> --
> Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology
...
--
 Rihards
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Leonia, NJ doesn't want you to navigate through

[Andrew Matheny]

I believe the affected streets would just need a conditional access tag, no?

Something like:

access:conditional=destination @ (06:00-10:00; 16:00-21:00)

Thanks,

Andrew

On Jan 8, 2018 12:55 PM, "Jack Burke"  wrote:

I'll leave it to others to decide what, if anything, we should do about
this.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2018/01/05/leonia-streets-off-navigational-apps/

--jack

-- 
Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology
___
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] [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Andrew Matheny]

Just a heads up for everybody-

I'll handle the redactions in the Dallas-Fort Worth area of Texas (Collin,
Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Tarrant, Johnson, and Wise Counties)

Thanks,

Andrew Matheny

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Max Erickson  wrote:

> I reviewed about 40 ways in New York. Here's an Overpass script for
> finding the ways that have not been changed since the redaction:
>
> https://gist.github.com/maxerickson/e02651cce99af983949b91f8d471fb23
>
> The ways are clustered quite a lot.
>
>
> Max
>
> ___
> 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] Texas - redacted roads.

[Andrew Matheny]

Nick-

I would check out the City of Austin's OpenData portal:
https://data.austintexas.gov/Locations-and-Maps/Street-Segment/t4fe-kr8c

The license is the same (PD) as when the initial building import was
completed, so you are good to go.

-Andrew

OSM: Andrew Matheny

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 1:22 AM, Nick Hocking 
wrote:

> at   http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/30.23990/-97.57717
>
> Openstreetmap has three missing roads, that Bing and Google have as, Joe
> Lane, Cleto Street and Fifnella way.
>
> Tiger 2017 does not have these. Is there any usable source for these Texas
> roads or, if not, does anyone have local knowledge of them or the ability
> to survey them?
>
> ___
> 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] guidelines regarding roads access

[Andrew Matheny]

I agree with everything Greg has said.

In the US, whether you tag a highway residential or service should
generally be determined by its function, not its access.

In the case of a gated community of single family homes, the named streets
serve the same function as named streets in other non-gated single family
neighborhoods. Hence I would tag those highway=residential and then
access=private. Then service for any driveways or alleys.

In the cases of other residential uses it would depend on the context.

For townhome or other single-family attached dwellings with named roads
that resemble detached single-family neighborhoods, I'd still tag as
residential.

On Trailer parks, I could be convinced to go with either residential or
service depending on the trailer park. Some are built like high density
single family neighborhoods and have named streets, in which case I would
use a residential tag. When I've seen some (usually smaller) trailer parks
where the highways resemble driveways more than they do streets, I've given
those service tags.

I could also go either way on multi-family developments (like garden-style
apartment complexes), but usually I go with highway=service because they
function more like the interior roads of a shopping center or business park
even though they are technically residential uses. Access tags are added
when appropriate.

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

[Talk-us] Post-Harvey Event Imagery

[Andrew Matheny]

NOAA has released some post-Harvey event imagery [1] in Rockport and along
the coast that was hardest hit. It also includes a WMTS tile server in the
"About" tab.

Would this be a good candidate for a task in the OSM-us tasking manager?

Thanks,

Andrew

[1] https://storms.ngs.noaa.gov/storms/harvey/index.html
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Hurricane Harvey Dickinson, Texas Buildings

[Andrew Matheny]

If anyone has experience converting LIDAR into building footprints, the
state of Texas has put 1 meter LIDAR products into the public domain.
Here's an example quad:

https://tnris.org/data-download/#!/quad/Settegast

This could be used for an import if someone has the right tools to generate
nice, clean building footprints.

-Andrew

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Brian May  wrote:

> @kevinbullock and I have started a new OSM US Task to help add buildings
> to the areas around Houston hit hard by flooding. Dickinson is SE of
> Houston.
>
> #105 - Hurricane Harvey Dickinson Texas Buildings at
> http://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/105
>
> The idea is to have some level of coordination for adding buildings to OSM
> in and around Houston. The whole area has been and is being devastated by
> flooding, but we wanted to just start somewhere, complete this area, and
> then move on to another area that was hit particularly hard.
>
> Thanks for any contributions.
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Help reverting duplicate changeset

[Andrew Matheny]

Steve-

The "Revert Changeset" plugin in JOSM has been my go-to tool, and from what
I understand it does a good job checking for edits that have happened after
your Changeset.

After you run the plugin, I would also examine the data and run the
validator just to make sure there aren't any other issues before uploading.
And, as always, make sure your Changeset comments explain the reversion.

-Andrew

On Jun 29, 2017 12:10 PM, "Steve Friedl"  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I’ve been using GoMap!! on my iPhone, and last night it appears that the
> same changeset was submitted twice; it had been having apparent network
> issues, this morning I find duplicate objects.
>
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49907654
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49907654#map=16/33.6864/-117.8480>
>
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49908144
>
>
>
> I’d like some help reverting the second changeset, as far as I can tell
> they are identical, but I don’t know how to check if anybody **else** has
> made subsequent updates to items in either changeset. I’m not sure I care
> to validate 575 nodes and 57 ways by hand. Twice.
>
>
>
> Can anyone provide some guidance here? I’m fine if somebody just does this
> for me.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] [Imports] Fort Worth, Texas import

[Andrew Matheny]

Daniel-

Thanks for the heads up!

It looks like their footprints cover an area of the city that I've already
imported, but the height data would certainly be useful. I think it would
make sense to add this in to the import project.

Thanks!

Andrew Matheny

On Jun 21, 2017 11:56 PM, "Daniel O'Connor" 
wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> With https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Microsoft_Building_Footprint_Data
> also becoming available recently; any thoughts on (perhaps a separate
> project?) cross checking that against whats available in OSM in addition to
> the import here?
>
> Texas Lubbock, Longview,* part of Fort Worth*, Austin, downtown Houston,
> and Corpus Christi
>
> 236,466 buildings available
>
> On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 3:39 AM,  wrote:
>
>> Andrew,
>>
>>
>>
>> Looks good to me and a great follow up to the Dallas project.  I would
>> suggest contacting the project lead for project 95, they appear to work at
>> mapbox.  I contacted the mapbox user that created a digitizing project that
>> overlapped my import project and they changed the status on the
>> intersecting tiles to done.  This is keeping people from digitizing when
>> they could be importing higher quality data.
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Andrew Matheny 
>> *Sent: *Friday, May 26, 2017 4:57 PM
>> *To: *OpenStreetMap talk-us list ;
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> *Subject: *[Imports] Fort Worth, Texas import
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello all-
>>
>>
>>
>> With the Dallas building import completed except for 1 or 2 residential
>> blocks, I've begun planning a building import for Fort Worth, the next
>> largest city in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
>>
>>
>>
>> The permissions, process, and test results have been documented on the
>> Wiki here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fort_Worth,_Texas_import .
>>
>>
>>
>> There have also been some recent initiatives by the community (see
>> http://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/95 ) to trace buildings, and so
>> I'd like to accelerate this import project and have the community help
>> double check the imported data. This will help save the community's time
>> from having to start with a blank slate vs. being a pair of fresh eyes that
>> can make the data really, really good.
>>
>>
>>
>> As always, any feedback would be much appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrew Matheny
>>
>> andrewdmath...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Imports mailing list
>> impo...@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>>
>>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Need advice on a project i've taken on

[Andrew Matheny]

I think Walter makes a fair point, but on the other hand, issues with TIGER
data are easily apparent when looking at the streets (ways aren't straight,
curves are messy, intersections aren't square, etc.) or when armchair
mappers compare them to the imagery. If they're wanting to figure out which
ways may need review for geometry, the variety of philosophies on the
tiger:reviewed key should allow a search using that (since the most liberal
user usually removes the key after they fix geometry while the most
conservative leaves it until on-the-ground checking is done)

Other fields (like speed limits, surface, etc.) are only going to be there
if a user added that data at a later date. If someone's looking to add
those missing fields, I think they'd be more likely to run an OverPass
query or do a simple JOSM search of the objects in their dataframe rather
than going by the date it was last edited.

I think this is a great idea. To address Walter's point, I would think
about using a special username for this project (like TIGERzipremoval or
something) and making sure your changeset comments cleary state that it's
an automated edit to remove the obsolete tags. That way it's easy to see
when anyone pulls up a way's history.

On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 4:55 AM, Walter Nordmann  wrote:

> In Germany we say: don't touch an object just for cleanup.
>
> Cleanup without any other modifications (e.g in geometry)  will change the
> timestamp of that object (last changed!!!) and somebody may think: this way
> has been modified last week - so i don't need to check the geometry or the
> speed limit or something else.
>
> Ok, if you really change something, THEN you should cleanup old/unused
> tags.
>
> Regards
> walter, aka wambacher
>
>
> Am 11.06.2017 um 05:21 schrieb Mike N:
>
>>  I agree that removing the non standard tags is almost always OK.
>>
>>  What is the advantage of removing them all with an automated edit? Their
>> presence doesn't damage anything, and editors can add those tags to their
>> passive removal list.
>>
>>   The TIGER name expansion resulted in a large benefit by removing a
>> manual task.   Changing unused tags would only add to the history file for
>> a small benefit.
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Fort Worth, Texas import

[Andrew Matheny]

Hello all-

With the Dallas building import completed except for 1 or 2 residential
blocks, I've begun planning a building import for Fort Worth, the next
largest city in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

The permissions, process, and test results have been documented on the Wiki
here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fort_Worth,_Texas_import .

There have also been some recent initiatives by the community (see
http://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/95 ) to trace buildings, and so I'd
like to accelerate this import project and have the community help double
check the imported data. This will help save the community's time from
having to start with a blank slate vs. being a pair of fresh eyes that can
make the data really, really good.

As always, any feedback would be much appreciated.

Best Regards,

Andrew Matheny
andrewdmath...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Data team mapping buildings in Fort Worth and Dallas

[Andrew Matheny]

Jinal-

I would recommend using the Texas Orthophoto imagery for this area.

Back when I was importing the Building footprints for Dallas, I noticed the
Bing imagery in the Dallas-Fort Worth area is at least 5 years old.

The Texas Orthophoto imagery is flown every year and I believe what shows
now is from January 2017.

Also, for what its worth, I believe the City of Fort Worth has building
footprints that could be imported, but we just need to get the explicit
permission.

Thanks!

Andrew Matheny

On Thursday, May 25, 2017, Jinal Foflia  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> This is Jinal Foflia and I work with the Mapbox's Data team [0]. Our
> team is planning to work on improving the building footprints in Fort
Worth and Dallas [1] on OpenStreetMap. You can track the progress in our
/mapping ticket [2]. Let us know if you have any feedback, please post in
this thread or in the ticket.
>
> [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapbox#Mapbox_Data_Team
> [1] http://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/95
> [2] https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/297
>
> Cheers,
> Jinal Foflia
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] New User Group for Dallas-Fort Worth

[Andrew Matheny]

Hey there mappers!

I'm happy to announce the formation of DFWosm, a user group for the
Dallas-Fort Worth area.

I'll be posting more information on our website at http://DFWosm.org as we
get a date and location for our first meeting nailed down. If you'd like to
get involved, feel free to contact me.

Thanks!

Andrew Matheny
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Boston speed limit too Re: Michigan speed limit changes coming soon

[Andrew Guertin]

On 01/07/2017 06:49 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Greg Troxel  wrote:


Also, we do have the implicit 30 mph tagged on many roads.   While there
are usually not signs, it is entirely verifable.  One only has to read
the law and measure the distance between houses (or observe that the
area is built up with businesses).   These two tasks are entirely within
the ability of a typical mapper.



​the question then is, can we tell (without driving in circles) is if an
existing ​30 mph tag in Boston was implicit or explicit ... to find which
might need fixing


Isn't this what the source:maxspeed and maxspeed:type keys are supposed 
to solve? So the answer is that yes, you can tell, if the original 
mapper added enough detail when they mapped it.


No idea if mappers in Boston have added that detail for you, though...


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

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users

[Andrew Wiseman]

Warin said: "Targeting Pokemon contributors falls into a trap... the
assumption that a particular activity/group are all inclined to vandalism.

These new contributors could be very usefull ... if 'we' don't tar them all
with abusive thoughts."

Most definitely, we should assume good faith -- but I've been browsing my
area and noticed some inaccurate edits that are Pokemon related, like users
drawing tons of nonexistent footpaths over what is presumably their house
so they can catch Pokemon there, complete with names like "Looking for
Pokemon", "testing to see if Pokemon spawn here" and "I hope I catch some
here" -- clearly not official names or accurate data. We should definitely
be polite and suggest the correct way to edit, but also be aware of people
making bad or test edits. Some people are mapping the paths and
parks correctly, but a significant number aren't. Who knows, maybe this
could even be a good way to encourage folks to map hiking trails, parks and
so on. Engage Pokemon fans to do their own mapathons!

I was using this to find changesets that included the word "pokemon"
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-changesets?comment=pokemon#2/10.7/-4.9
 --- not the complete set of all Pokemon-related edits, of course, but it's
a start.

On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Jack Burke  wrote:

> They're using the same map they used in Ingress, a game they launched when
> still part of Google. That one is known to have come from Google. It makes
> sense that any map databases they had when the break happened would still
> be owned by the company; they just wouldn't have maps that included changes
> since then.
>
> A co-worker plays that game, and he and I compared Pokémon places in our
> area with the ones in that game, and they're identical.
>
> -jack
> --
> Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology
>
> On December 30, 2016 9:40:56 AM EST, Paul Johnson 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Targeting Pokemon contributors falls into a trap... the assumption that
>>> a particular activity/group are all inclined to vandalism.
>>
>>
>> Another trap, too:  Assuming that Niantic and/or Nintendo are using
>> OpenStreetMap for this game.  And if they are, then they're doing so
>> without attribution.  Without any attribution and with Niantic no longer
>> part of Alphabet (Google's parent company), it's not clear where they're
>> getting their map from.
>>
>> --
>>
>> 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
>
>


-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/

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

[Talk-us] City of Dallas Import

[Andrew Matheny]

Hello!

I've recently discovered that the city of Dallas has its GIS data available
for import.

I've documented an import project, permissions, and a test on the wiki page
at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dallas_Import. A link to the OSM
file from the test can be found there.

Let me know if you have any questions (or any suggestions)

Thanks!

Andrew Matheny
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Tagging karaoke bars?

[Andrew Wiseman]

Anybody know the best practice to tag it? I was thinking just tagging as a
bar (or restaurant, or whatever) then adding karaoke=yes , which seems to
be somewhat common on Taginfo, 166 uses.

The place I am thinking of is one of those spots where there's a bar and
you rent a small room with friends in which to sing (like in Lost in
Translation.)

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/karaoke

There was a proposal for a separate key for amenity=karaoke but it seems
pretty quiet, and there's only one use for that on Taginfo.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Karaoke_box

Thanks,
Andrew
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

[Andrew Wiseman]

On Thursday, September 29, 2016, Jeffrey Ollie  wrote:

> I think that you're all overthinking it, and trying to fit a European
> square into a US circle. First of all, the US doesn't have pubs, unless the
> owner is specifically trying to recreate the atmosphere of a European pub
> (or at least what an Americans think a European pub is). Doesn't matter if
> a European visiting the US would think of the establishment as such, they
> just don't really exist around here.
>

If that's the case then the majority of places we call bars in the US
should actually be tagged as "restaurant", no? Because a "bar" in OSM is a
place without food. But I don't think that's right.

Andrew


-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Bar vs Pub vs Restaurant in the US?

[Andrew Wiseman]

Hi all,

I was just thinking about this from an American context and went to the
Wiki, where someone else had the same question -- I think because we call
many places a bar. [1]

I think part of the confusion is because many municipalities in the US
require that places sell food if they sell alcohol, but to me, the food is
secondary. So thus they should be tagged as pubs.

The wiki uses a European context, so here's my attempt at classifying what
is what in the US. Let me know what you think.

To me, a "pub" in the US would be bars that have food, but the food isn't
the main attraction - you mainly go there to hang out or talk with friends
or watch the game or just drink, but they may have food too. For example, a
sports bar or your neighborhood bar if they have wings or nachos or
burgers, but that's not the main draw. Wonderland in DC, for a specific
example.

A "bar" would be a place that doesn't serve food at all, like a cocktail
bar or just some bar without food, where they might not have seats, which
is something the wiki suggests. The Adams Morgan area in Washington, DC has
a lot of these places, for example, where people stand around and drink
mostly, maybe dance too. McSorley's in New York would be another example of
a bar, with seats.

And a "restaurant" would be a place where there is alcohol but you mainly
go for food -- for example, bar and grill chains TGI Fridays, Applebee's,
Buffalo Wild Wings, etc. would fall into this category. So would non-chains
that are similar. I would posit that most people don't go to TGI Friday's
just to drink.

There's also "cafe" as a separate tag which can include food and alcohol,
but to me a cafe is a coffee shop that might also have beer or food, but
coffee is the main attraction -- like a Starbucks in the US.

What do you think? Am I way off? Browsing Taginfo and Overpass mostly seem
to agree with the above.

Here's the wiki discussion, my response is below. 1 -
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:amenity%3Dpub#Pub.2C_restaurant.2C_or_bar.3F

Andrew
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Old Aerodromes

[Andrew Wiseman]

I'm also glad to see this, and wish I had thought to mention it when I
first saw it! I was mapping in Knoxville, TN and there were a dozen
airports that clearly didn't exist. Most had in the past but weren't now,
so I tagged them with the appropriate life cycle prefix. I also noticed a
ton in SW Virginia, like somebody said many in forests and in the middle of
neighborhoods that clearly didn't exist anymore. I didn't realize it was
such a widespread thing!

Maproulette sounds like a good solution, maybe also add something about
looking it up online to make sure it's not just a wide space that planes
sometimes land in.

Or maybe there should be some tag difference between a proper airport with
scheduled flights, a civil aviation airport, and just a field where a
farmer might land?

Andrew

On Tuesday, April 12, 2016, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Elliott Plack  > wrote:
>
>> I am glad this conversation has restarted. A few of you, (Me, Paul,
>> others..) will recall a similar conversation on the openstreetmap-carto
>> repo a few years ago where I noted that there are simply too many of these
>> micro airports shown on the map. We discussed at great length how the
>> relative importance of aerodromes could potentially be used for rendering.
>>
>
> I'm not sure what my original thoughts were but where I'm currently at on
> this is if you're in a situation where all you understand mapwise is OSM
> and you're in an emergency situation where the destination now is
> "anywhere", then OSM is better than nothing, having at least runway
> centerlines (and preferably the same for taxiways) and perimeters is better
> (you can at least make a ballpark estimate of what *might* be a
> survivable landing).  This of course, with the tacit understanding that we
> are not the FAA (or whatever authority of record is relevant regionally)
> and no rational pilot worth his flight credentials would use it for more
> than the absolute most preliminary steps of planning.  Or as a decently
> accurate map for Flightgear, since that flight simulator uses OSM data for
> scenery already.
>
> From the ground, this isn't quite as important other than, say, being at
> even a moderately sized airport like OSU in Norman or Riverside in Jenks
> (both Oklahoma) where you might meet a friend in their plane at a specific
> tiedown and not be sure where to drive inside the airport to the
> appropriate tiedown/hangar.  Or at moderately large to huge airports,
> finding a specific airport-related industry and residences only accessible
> from a specific access in the perimeter (common with charter operators,
> maintenance hangars, general aviation, military operators, etc; and
> probably accounts for at least a hundred miles of near-airport GPXs and a
> couple dozen miles of inside-perimeter GPX for me).
>
> Bonus round a few years ago, attendees to Oklacon discovered the hard way
> that Watonga Regional Airport is 1) a runway capable of emergency landing a
> small commercial jetliner,  and 2) not secured.  Plus on at least one
> commercial map provider, had it's taxiways, accesses and runways mapped as
> a roadway, causing one especially confused person unfamiliar with the area
> (or airports in general) to drive the length of the runway.   Fortunately,
> Watonga's a *slllw* airport, and I don't recall hearing about anybody
> or any flights in imminent danger (as was the case when Meigs unexpectedly
> closed), so the incident only caused one person to be nicknamed Launchpad
> for a couple days.  So having the airports properly tagged could be just as
> important to *avoid* unintended traversal of airports as it can be to
> intentionally navigate to a specific airport location.
>
>
>> Given that map roulette is now handling these, I think this is a great
>> time to revisit this discussion. If maprouletters can change all these
>> point aerodromes to a polygon, then we can subjectively define airport
>> importance using the shape size.
>>
>
> I'm all in favor of mapping these as polygons and mapping the
> on-the-ground features, and possibly ground-based beacons where the
> identities can be independently verified (shouldn't be hard, tune to it on
> a capable radio, listen for the morse ident; in the midwest where there's
> basically noting but tilled field, these might also serve as a potential
> landmark as much as a lone tree does).  There's not much point in trying to
> map flight restrictions or paths, though, since there's no real good way to
> identify from the ground what these are.
>
> Like lakes and parks, editors probably ought to show a visible warning
> that things are Not Right when mapped as a node.
>


-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Railway crossing challenge for MapRoulette

[Andrew Guertin]

On 07/06/2015 10:46 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:

(In particular I am never sure whether to use crossing or level_crossing.)


My understanding is that railway=level_crossing is where cars cross a 
railway, and railway=crossing is where pedestrians cross. I'm not sure 
what to use where bikes cross.


--Andrew


___
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

[Andrew Guertin]

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

Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for outdoor mapping party

[Andrew Wiseman]

I'd also suggest the Pushpin app for iPhones too, it's a very quick way to
add points that you can then add the details to later. On a previous
mapathon I was doing Pushpin while my buddy was writing down the details
(address, hours, website etc) to add back when we got to the library. It
worked great!

Andrew

On Monday, March 9, 2015, stevea  wrote:

> I don't want to gush in a too self-congratulatory way, but the comments,
> tone, replies... we've seen on this thread have been awesome.  Very nicely
> contributed, everybody, back pats and thumbs up all around.
>
> Keeping quiet for a bit now,
>
> SteveA
> California
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>


-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Retail Example using OSM

[Andrew Wiseman]

It seems like it's a little out of date too, it doesn't include all the
buildings in Washington, DC, which were imported a month or so ago. Maybe
they get a regular dump or something.

In any case, cool to see!

Andrew

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Jack Burke  wrote:

> I'll be out on a limb and say that the reason is because they know not all
> locations for a particular business are mapped in OSM and so they don't
> want to rely on OSM for the actual locations.
>
> Which begs the question of why Where 2 Get It doesn't edit OSM themselves
> to add the locations (which I will answer by saying that W2GI knows that
> they aren't familiar enough with all the areas to do it properly).
>
> -jack
>
>
> On December 22, 2014 10:44:12 AM EST, Tod Fitch 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 22, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote:
>>
>> The company providing the service is Where 2 Get It (
>> http://www.where2getit.com/ ).  They provide maps for store locator
>> functions for a number of companies.  For example: Moe's Southwest Grill,
>> Safeway, Trader Joe's, Jo-Ann Fabric, Michael's.  OSM is used for the base
>> map with the store location placemarks as an overlay.  You can tell that
>> they are not utilizing the OSM data for the store locations because if you
>> look closely you can see that their placemarks don't always line up with
>> the actual locations of the stores in OSM.
>>
>> --Peter
>>
>> I had noticed that the nearest Michael's to me had the pin in the wrong
>> part of the shopping center (I am the one that mapped that Michael's
>> location for OSM and am pretty sure I have it right).
>>
>> Just looked at the Trader Joe's web site and it looks like they are using
>> background map data from NAVTEQ. But they also have the store nearest me in
>> the wrong location. :)
>>
>> --
>>
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
> --
> Typos courtesy of fancy auto-spell technology.
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>


-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Who controls data: Google Maps, others erasing Hollywood sign, but it's in OSM

[Andrew Wiseman]

That was me -- but I would argue it's an unusual way to tag it -- it's not
the individual letters that are important, it's the whole piece. You
wouldn't tag each president in Mount Rushmore and leave it at that, right?
To me the letters are secondary and to the whole. The FDR Memorial in DC is
the same way, each part is tagged, but there's a point for the whole thing.
Or maybe it should be tagged as an area, since the sign takes up an area?

Andrew

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 2014-11-25 16:48 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wiseman :
>
>> Interesting, but now it doesn't render. I saw it was gone and worried
>> somebody from that article took it off. Can we include a point in the
>> relation for it, so that it does render?
>
>
>
> Someone has indeed done this. IMHO we shouldn't duplicate the data (or
> non-data, in this case there are no more tags than name and
> tourism=attraction on the new node), we should find a way to render the
> name from the relation without "tagging for the renderer"-hacks. This would
> include changing osm2pgsql to deal with site-relations.
>
> I couldn't find any ticket for site-relations in the osm2pgsql and
> osm-carto repos, so I have added them.
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site
>



-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Who controls data: Google Maps, others erasing Hollywood sign, but it's in OSM

[Andrew Wiseman]

Interesting, but now it doesn't render. I saw it was gone and worried
somebody from that article took it off. Can we include a point in the
relation for it, so that it does render?

Andrew

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 4:43 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

>
> 2014-11-24 22:28 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wiseman :
>
>> The trails mentioned in the article seem to be present in OSM, although
>> with the gates mentioned:
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3202722073#map=16/34.1339/-118.3214
>>
>
>
>
> I have deleted this (recent) node, because the object was already mapped
> in greater detail:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1706337
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>



-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Who controls data: Google Maps, others erasing Hollywood sign, but it's in OSM

[Andrew Wiseman]

Hi all, first time post here (hope I'm doing everything right.)

There's an interesting article at Gizmodo about erasing the Hollywood sign
from Google Maps, Bing Maps, Apple Maps etc -- people who live on roads
nearby were complaining about hikers and tourists, and they got the LA City
Council, Google and a local website to change the walking directions so no
one goes through their neighborhood anymore, instead pointing them to other
viewpoints miles away.

To me it's an interesting example of why OSM is important, since anyone can
edit and add the data, not what the LA City Council or Google or some
NIMBYs think is important:

http://gizmodo.com/why-people-keep-trying-to-erase-the-hollywood-sign-from-1658084644

The trails mentioned in the article seem to be present in OSM, although
with the gates mentioned:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3202722073#map=16/34.1339/-118.3214

Andrew

-- 

600,000 DC residents don't have a vote in Congress -- http://www.dcvote.org/
<http://www.dcvote.org/about/index.cfm>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Edits needing investigation in Tennessee

[Andrew Guertin]

On 10/10/2014 11:54 AM, Andrew Guertin wrote:

While investigating changes in my area, I noticed that
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Rondale has quite a large number of
changes recently where they changed highway=* to highway=residential (*
including at least service[1], unclassified[1], tertiary[1], secondary,
primary[2], and trunk[2]).

I have messaged them specifically about the changes in Vermont, but
there are other changes in Tennessee that I'm not local to and wouldn't
feel comfortable discussing or reverting. In Vermont, the highway
changes were paired with other changes (road deletions, road additions,
road additions through buildings[3]...) that may (?) have come from
working with old aerial imagery. Is there anyone here from Tennessee to
check if similar problems exist in this user's edits to that area? And
would feel comfortable reverting if appropriate?


Rondale never responded, and I reverted the edits in my area. Since that 
time, they have continued to make the same type of edits. Yesterday, 
they recreated one of the edits that I had reverted. I have contacted 
the DWG for intervention.


--Andrew.


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

[Talk-us] Edits needing investigation in Tennessee

[Andrew Guertin]

While investigating changes in my area, I noticed that 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Rondale has quite a large number of 
changes recently where they changed highway=* to highway=residential (* 
including at least service[1], unclassified[1], tertiary[1], secondary, 
primary[2], and trunk[2]).


I have messaged them specifically about the changes in Vermont, but 
there are other changes in Tennessee that I'm not local to and wouldn't 
feel comfortable discussing or reverting. In Vermont, the highway 
changes were paired with other changes (road deletions, road additions, 
road additions through buildings[3]...) that may (?) have come from 
working with old aerial imagery. Is there anyone here from Tennessee to 
check if similar problems exist in this user's edits to that area? And 
would feel comfortable reverting if appropriate?


--Andrew


[1] http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=25947668
[2] http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=25904320
[3] http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=25967936

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

Re: [Talk-us] Prima Facie Speed Limits

[Andrew Guertin]

On 09/08/2014 05:27 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:

[...]
instead there is a state wide prima facie limit:
"source:maxspeed=US:CA:residential"
[...]


My state doesn't have such a limit, but my city does. Supposing I 
started tagging things with source:maxspeed=US:VT:Burlington, would 
anyone be upset that "Burlington" and "residential" are in the same 
place in the hierarchy?


(I'm hoping the answer here is no one cares, the value isn't intended to 
be machine parsable, and both values are understandable by humans.)


--Andrew

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

Re: [Talk-us] Beach routing

[Andrew Guertin]

On 07/09/2014 12:50 PM, Elliott Plack wrote:

OSM US:

I've been using some routing engines to map fitness routes (e.g. Strava)
that use OSM data. Along our US coasts, there are beaches. The beaches I'm
familiar with are popular with walkers and joggers to go up and down the
shore, since access is generally open to anyone along the water's edge. I'm
considering adding a `highway=path` along the beach to facilitate this. I'd
add the connections to the walking paths between parking lots and the beach
as well.

For uninterrupted strips of sandy beach, would a path be appropriate to
indicate walkability?

How the map looks now in iD: http://i.imgur.com/2EQ06BR.jpg
What I'd propose to do (note the connections):
http://i.imgur.com/i8dj6lQ.jpg
Area of the examples:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/38.45143/-75.04957


Today I learned about 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety_Mile_Beach,_New_Zealand , which is 
officially a public highway. Curiously, it's mapped in OSM with a 
separate way marked highway=path, bicycle=yes, which doesn't really 
match up with the Top Gear video of Jeremy Clarkson passing a tour bus 
at high speed.


I'm sure this means something for this topic, but I'm not sure what.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Beach routing

[Andrew Guertin]

On 07/09/2014 12:50 PM, Elliott Plack wrote:

OSM US:

I've been using some routing engines to map fitness routes (e.g. Strava)
that use OSM data. Along our US coasts, there are beaches. The beaches I'm
familiar with are popular with walkers and joggers to go up and down the
shore, since access is generally open to anyone along the water's edge. I'm
considering adding a `highway=path` along the beach to facilitate this. I'd
add the connections to the walking paths between parking lots and the beach
as well.

For uninterrupted strips of sandy beach, would a path be appropriate to
indicate walkability?

How the map looks now in iD: http://i.imgur.com/2EQ06BR.jpg
What I'd propose to do (note the connections):
http://i.imgur.com/i8dj6lQ.jpg
Area of the examples:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/38.45143/-75.04957

Thanks,


Contrary to the other replies, why not just teach the routers that 
beaches are something that can be walked (or ridden or driven) on?


Access restrictions can go on the beach itself, with bicycle tags if 
it's explicitly forbidden. There's no documented default value of 
surface for a beach, but sand is probably a decent guess. The beach can 
already be tagged with fee=*. Paths can connect to the beach area. All 
of this is already set and available for use by routers.


If you add a separate path, a router can't know whether it needs to 
apply the fee from the surrounding beach or not. If you also tag fee on 
the path, a user won't know whether having paid the fee for the beach 
also entitles them use of the path, or whether they can pay just for 
walking rights and not swimming. Surface needs to get tagged multiple 
times, as do any access restrictions. And in the end, it's really just 
not a path anyway.


That said, I understand the appeal of just making things work now, and I 
wouldn't be too beat up about it if paths do get added.


--Andrew

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

Re: [Talk-us] Sidewalks as footpaths

[Andrew Guertin]

On 04/30/2014 11:38 AM, William Morris wrote:

Is there a general OSM policy on marking sidewalks as highway=footway?
User dolphinling appears to have gone crazy in downtown Burlington,VT
tracing the sidewalks and calling them footways. Which wouldn't be a
problem if footways weren't so cartographically distinct in everyone's
stylesheets:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/44.47772/-73.21112

Should I:

1. Revert
2. Get in touch with the editor
3. Get over it

Thanks!

-Bill Morris
@vtcraghead


Hi Bill :)

I was following the tagging at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:footway%3Dsidewalk


I'm personally not a fan of the way Mapnik renders footways (I'd prefer 
a thin grey line rather than a dotted red line), but it hasn't yet 
bothered me enough to propose a Mapnik change--in large part because at 
low zooms the roads cover the sidewalks.


Do you have any concerns other than display? The wiki mentions some like 
it being harder for a pedestrian router to say something like "Follow 
the sidewalk along main street" with sidewalks as separate ways. If you 
have this or any other concern, I'm happy to add more detail to help 
mitigate them.


--Andrew

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

Re: [Talk-us] Aerial Imagery for Chittenden County, VT

[Andrew Guertin]

On 02/12/2014 11:15 PM, Andrew Guertin wrote:

I'm working on the rest of the county now, and I'll put it in the
same place when it's available. I expect it to take a week or two of
cpu time.

--Andrew


Quick update on this: conversion from jp2 to tiff and merging into one 
large (107GiB) file are complete, but I don't have enough disk space to 
start the tiling. I'll investigate as I have time.


--Andrew

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

[Talk-us] Aerial Imagery for Chittenden County, VT

[Andrew Guertin]

The Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission 
(http://www.ccrpcvt.org) recently acquired 15cm per pixel orthophotos 
for all of Chittenden County, Vermont, and has made them available 
online[1]. They seem very high quality, in both alignment and visibility 
of detail. They are also more recent--spring 2013--than anything else I 
know of.


I have received confirmation from them that they consider these images 
public domain, so I've started processing them and making them available 
as tiles for easy use in JOSM (or any other editor). I have all of 
Burlington processed so far. It can be used with the TMS url 
tms[20]:http://www.uvm.edu/~aguertin/ccrpc/{zoom}/{x}/{-y}.png . I'm 
working on the rest of the county now, and I'll put it in the same place 
when it's available. I expect it to take a week or two of cpu time.


--Andrew


[1] I've withheld the URL as they haven't publicized it and I don't want 
to be the cause of their server being hammered, but if you have some use 
for the original data, let me know.


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

Re: [Talk-us] Mappy Hour?

[Andrew Schaaf]

I was expecting one right now due to the calendar: 
http://openstreetmap.us/calendar/


On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:11 PM, Richard Welty  wrote:

> been a while since we had one, when is the next one planned for?
> 
> richard
> 
> -- 
> rwe...@averillpark.net
> Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
> OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
> Java - Web Applications - Search
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Relation member order/structure; best effort worth it?

[Andrew Hain]

Peter Davies  writes:

> Does anyone know if the Europeans (of which I'm one, oops) have any plans
to create route relations?  I have found none while in UK, NL, D, A, CH, I
and F this past two weeks, but perhaps I didn't look hard enough.
> 

Route relations for roads have occasionally be created in the UK but many
mappers are not keen on them.

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.region.gb/6235
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.region.gb/6731

Feel free to argue against from an international or any other viewpoint of
course.

--
Andrew


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

Re: [Talk-us] Bing imagery update

[Andrew Guertin]

Unfortunately, in my area (Burlington VT), it seems like the 2008-era 
high resolution images (zoom 20?) are no longer available, and only the 
2010? era zoom 19 are there.


On the Bing website I can still see the higher resolution images, but 
neither JOSM nor the Bing Imagery Analyzer is displaying them.


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

Re: [Talk-us] [OT] Anyone ever talked about adding more Land Ownership data to OSM?

[Andrew Guertin]

On 01/07/2013 10:45 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 1/7/13 10:37 PM, the Old Topo Depot wrote:
>> 
>> We do have an issue with US state and county borders, as some are 
>> missing, incorrect, incomplete or incorrectly tagged.  Perhaps we
>> can organize a cleanse the state and county borders project to
>> improve the data quality and currentness.
>> 
> i would like to switch the USGS based state border of NY for what i 
> perceive to be the somewhat more accurate borders from TIGER.  i've
> temporarily stalled on bringing in town borders from TIGER because of
> discrepancies along the state line between NY and New England. i
> gather that many of the state borders are USGS and that the TIGER
> borders may be better. this is a non-trivial exercise as any
> county/town borders that share ways with the state borders will need
> to be fixed up.
> 
> richard

If and when you do this, could you compare to the VCGI data for the
NY/VT border at
http://www.vcgi.org/dataware/?page=./search_tools/search_action.cfm&query=theme&theme=003&x=17&y=6
(BoundaryOther_BNDHASH layer)?

I plan to import VT town boundaries from that file at some point, but
was not planning on touching any of the state boundaries (except to
connect town boundaries to them). I'd be interested to know how well
that data source matches others for the state boundary, too, though.

Further information about this file (licensing, etc) on the imports list.

--Andrew

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

Re: [Talk-us] Importing highway surface tags

[Andrew Guertin]

On 12/20/2012 05:03 PM, Adam Franco wrote:
> * Has anyone located a good source for state or national road surface data?
> The TIGER data doesn't seem to include surface information as far as I can
> tell.

The VCGI EmergencyE911_RDS file has a field for this. Unfortunately,
58773 out of 64302 values (91%) are "Unknown".

The VCGI license doesn't explicitly give the permissions needed for OSM,
but when I asked to use the town boundaries layer they gave permission.
(I still need to get around to that...)

> * Is this a project that the OSM community in Vermont, the broader region,
> or nationally (assuming data is available) would support? I'd rather not do
> a lot of work to prepare it if there is no desire for inclusion in the data
> set.

I'd support it.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 59, Issue 20

[Andrew Guertin]

On 10/18/2012 07:58 PM, William Morris wrote:
> Third local mapper chimes in: As weird as the cartography will look (and
> I've seen it appear as such on OSM in other U.S. cities), Route 7 through
> Burlington has no business being listed as primary. I can hit a maximum of
> 25mph on the sections between stop signs, and by character that street is
> more of a Residential Road.
> 
> That said, it might be worth asking public works what they think; the city
> transportation layer on VCGI marks it as primary, but I wonder how they
> treat it locally (particularly with snow removal priority).
> 
> Either way the summit drink of choice should probably be a switchback :)
> 
> -Bill
> North Ave.

Oh, Hi Bill! I didn't count you because it seems most of your mapping
has been outside Vermont, but I should have realized you'd still have
the right combination of local knowledge and OSM experience. Sorry about
that!

--Andrew

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

Re: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification

[Andrew Guertin]

On 10/19/2012 07:55 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> 
>> Primary highways generally lack stop signs; however, stop signs may
>> control major intersections in rural areas with low traffic volumes
>> and occur rarely elsewhere.
> 
>> The most notable example of this is North Willard Street[2]. It is 
>> part of US Route 7, but as can be seen with Bing Imagery, it is 
>> narrow, made narrower by street parking on both sides, and is 
>> controlled by stop signs. Similarly, Main Street is part of US 
>> Route 2, but has many lights, and does not even satisfy the "near 
>> the highest speed generally allowed on surface streets" note about 
>> secondary streets.
> 
> My take from dealing with this (around Mass):
> 
> If it's a US highway, then it's highway=primary, period.  A US 
> highway is important simply by virtue of being designated US 
> highway.

Good to hear. Which area of Massachusetts is this from? My experience
with driving there is mostly on 93 and 2 and in Boston, so I don't
really have a good handle on what a US highway "feels" like there.

> Note that speed limits etc. should be tagged, so routing is not just
>  on classification.

A good reminder, yes. I should add this to my plans.

> But I don't know anywhere where a US highway is not important in 
> terms of cultural/transportation geography, even if it isn't the 
> first choice for long-distance travel. [...]

> An example in vermont that's kind of iffy is 100.  I see parts of it
>  are primary, and parts of it secondary.  As a non-local who's driven
>  it only a few times I have no basis for questioning local judgement.
>  But I would tend to think that 100 is more important than most other
>  NS roads that aren't US5 and US7. But, the other state roads that
> 100 are more important than should be secondary, so it's really in 
> between primary and secondary and thus a tough call.

I'm not actually too familiar with 100--I don't know that I've actually
ever been on it myself. VPR had a long repeated segment on it recently,
where a pair of commentators traveled its length and talked about one
town each week. My impression is that it has cultural significance, but
that for going from the bottom of the state to the top, most people
would find their way 7 or 91/89 first.

> US7 should really be primary.  Even if it's slow in cities, it's the 
> main road where it goes (I89 aside, and generally the 'is it primary'
> test discounts interstates).  I am assuming that if you are in
> Shelburne and going to Colchester (and we stipulate that interstates
> are unusable), you'd drive on 7, including North Willard street.  Or
> at least someone not really familiar with the area would. Is that off
> base?

I can't really speak for what someone unfamiliar with the area would do,
but I have made that trip many many times, and there are many different
ways, each approximately equally good:
* 7 the whole way
* 7 -> Colchester Ave
* 7 -> Cliff -> Prospect -> Colchester
* 7 ->-> Union -> Winooski -> 7
* (if starting farther south) Spear -> East -> Colchester
* 7 -> 189 -> 89
* 7 ->-> Pine ->-> Battery -> Pearl/Colchester
* ...

Of these, I see most people take the interstate, followed by 7 ->
Colchester Ave, with Spear Street being a popular choice for a calmer,
lower-traffic drive. Staying on 7 is probably more common than the
weirder routes involving Cliff or Pine, but it wouldn't get you there
significantly faster than them (or slower than the more popular ones).


I took a look at traffic numbers from
http://www.ccrpc.us/data/traffic.php?town=BURLINGTON&yrs=A&year=2011&count=ATR.

The traffic on various parts of North Willard Street ranges from ~7000
cars/day in some areas to only 2900 for "US 7 North of North St."
Meanwhile, both Colchester Ave and Riverside Ave are usually ~15000 and
never below 1.

I'm not really sure how to interpret this.

--Andrew

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

Re: [Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification

[Andrew Guertin]

On 10/18/2012 05:07 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Guertin  
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> There are two active mappers in the Burlington, Vermont area, and we
>> disagree about how the roads should be classified, so we're looking for
>> more opinions.
> 
> If you are both local mappers, I suggest that you actually meet face
> to face and share a beverage.  [...]

While not a bad idea, I don't think that this is necessary or helpful
for this case. We're both impressed with each other's work, and (it
seems through text at least) perfectly willing to accept the other's
viewpoint, it's just that now we've realized that the docs are ambiguous
enough to make *both* viewpoints valid, and we'd like to choose the one
that most closely matches the rest of the map, especially in nearby areas.

In other words, amicable disagreement, not a budding edit war. :)

--Andrew

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

[Talk-us] Burlington, Vermont road classification

[Andrew Guertin]

Hi,

There are two active mappers in the Burlington, Vermont area, and we
disagree about how the roads should be classified, so we're looking for
more opinions.

The crux of the problem is the answer to the question: Which is more
important, outside/official classifications, or physical characteristics?

The tagging pages on the wiki don't really provide clarity on this
matter. For example, from [1],
> Almost all other U.S. Highways get highway=primary. A primary
> highway generally provides the best route (excluding motorways)
> connecting adjacent cities or communities

> Even where U.S. Highways connect only smaller communities, they still
> merit highway=primary

but

> Primary highways generally lack stop signs; however, stop signs may 
> control major intersections in rural areas with low traffic volumes 
> and occur rarely elsewhere.


The most notable example of this is North Willard Street[2]. It is part
of US Route 7, but as can be seen with Bing Imagery, it is narrow, made
narrower by street parking on both sides, and is controlled by stop
signs. Similarly, Main Street is part of US Route 2, but has many
lights, and does not even satisfy the "near the highest speed generally
allowed on surface streets" note about secondary streets.

Of note, there is in fact no path to get from US 7 south of Burlington
to US 7 north of Burlington without stopping at at least one stop sign,
except for the interstate. Should this imply that there just aren't any
major roads here?


We're especially interested in input from nearby states--the rest of New
England and northern New York, but of course anyone with an opinion
please chime in!

Thanks,
--Andrew






[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
[2]
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.48388&lon=-73.20368&zoom=16&layers=M

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

[Talk-us] videos of presentations from SOTM 12

[Andrew Salzberg]

Hi,

does anyone know if the videos of presentations from SOTM 12 are going to
be compiled/uploaded anywhere? Would love to look back at some of them and
highlight/share some with folks I know who weren't there.

thanks!

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

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping coastlines

[Andrew Allison]

Hello, ,my US counterparts:

Originally I have not been editing the US side of the great lakes. But
with the deadline approaching  I'll do some cross boarder mapping.

That is unless someone on the US side of the boarder would prefer the
great lakes and St Lawrence seaway.

    Andrew

AKA Purple Mustang


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Getting ready for the license change

[Andrew Cleveland]

On Sat, 2012-01-14 at 00:18 +0100, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> On 13 January 2012 22:50, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:44:30PM -0700, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> >
> >> I do that too. There is of course a small chance of the decliner
> >> changing his or her mind, so I only delete data that is tainted by a
> >> decliner that I have personally been in touch with about the license
> >> change and my best judgement is that his / her decision is final.
> >
> > Speaking of, has anyone talked to balrog-kun yet?  I know he was at
> > one point insanely prolific and I often stumble across his data, he's
> > currently a decliner.
> 
> I'm balrog-kun, if you see my data in the US you can add odbl=clean*
> because I haven't used any non-ODbL sources outside of Europe.  But I
> have used such sources in Europe and so (Richard Weait says..) this is
> not compatible with CT 1.2.4.  This is not the main reason I have
> declined CT, but in any case all of my own work is ODbL compatible and
> me saying that probably has more legal value than a half-automatic
> click-through.. well, unless I'm not balrog-kun, but then I couldn't
> have put it on the user page.
> 
> I'm not in Oregon these days which is why no new data is appearing from me.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> * provided other authors in the history also license their
> contributions ODbL, which old LWG minutes say is *not* implied by CT
> acceptance.
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

So every TIGER way in the western US will require the odbl=clean tag?





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

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] MA towns

[Andrew S. J. Sawyer]

Great work Calvin, regarding the coastline you may want to check to see if
it is the average high water mark which is used for the
[natural=coastline<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline>],
just a heads up. When I can, I'll lend my help to the NH/Mass border, etc.

Andrew

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:26, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) <
calvin.metc...@state.ma.us> wrote:

>
> All right so http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37626989/admin.zip
> It retags all ways that make up counties to be admin_level=6;8
> It adds a way with admin_level=8 and boundary=administrative to any town
> boarder that currently doesn't have one
> All ways are non overlapping and are split based on where they need to be
> so that the same way can be used for both towns on the boarder
>
> To do once this is done
> -Redo the ways that make up both the ma outside boarder and the ma counties
> boarders. So that they are they are shared and not overlapping.
> -check out the coastline and see if it makes sense to replace it with the
> massgis one (it is probably going to be more accurate, the new boarders are
> significantly better then the old ones)
> -Start create relations for all the towns.
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) [mailto:calvin.metc...@state.ma.us]
> >Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 10:09 AM
> >To: 'Richard Weait'
> >Cc: impo...@openstreetmap.org; talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> >Subject: Re: [Imports] [Talk-us] MA towns
> >
> >So I did do that with stow as a test, I deleted the current
> >boarder added the new one, turned it into a relation, and
> >merged each of the overlapping county boarders into it.
> >What I intended to do was to import admin data only where
> >there was not already existing data, but didn't notice that a
> >few of the counties were only tagged as admin=6 in the
> >relation but not in the underlying ways.
> >
> >So what I can do is go through and take those out and then
> >edit the ways that make up those relations to add the correct
> >tags to the way.
> >
> >A thing to point out is that with the exception of the
> >counties (which are a bit of a mess as it looks like whoever
> >uploaded them used polygons, so there are double ways at each
> >border.) There is not much of the internal boundaries in ma
> >already, and I'm hoping these new one will make it
> >significantly easier for people to edit and add boundary
> >relations for their own towns.
> >
> >Does that make sense ?
> >
> >>-Original Message-
> >>From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com]
> >>Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 9:50 AM
> >>To: Metcalf, Calvin
> >>Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org; impo...@openstreetmap.org
> >>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] MA towns
> >>
> >>On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT)
> >> wrote:
> >>>  If nobody objects I'll start uploading the towns from the
> >>admin8 file and stow file
> >>
> >>Dear Calvin,
> >>
> >>I have an objection and a suggestion.  See below.
> >>
> >>> I noticed that a couple of the counties are only relations
> >>(i.e. the ways aren't tagged admin_level=6) so no lines are
> >>going to go in there.
> >>
> >>I'm not sure I understand what you say here.  Are you saying that some
> >>admin areas are only tagged on the relations?  Are you also saying you
> >>object to such tagging only on the relations?  Or are you saying that
> >>you won't upload into areas that are tagged only on the relations?
> >>
> >>> With this done all borders in Mass will be represented by a
> >>tagged way, if that looks good I can put in the new counties
> >>and state boarder files that don't include any overlaps.
> >>
> >>I believe that this thread (perhaps the other threads on the same
> >>topic) has established that MA borders are sub-optimal.  Those borders
> >>are from various imported sources.  Those imported sources disagree
> >>with each other as shown by crossings and parallel borders where they
> >>should be a shared line.
> >>
> >>My objection is this.  Importing state wide data from yet another
> >>source without addressing the existing border weaknesses will make the
> >>MA border condition worse, not better.
> >>
> >>My suggestion is this.  Please consider _editing_, not _importing_,
> >>these town boundaries in a way that greatly improves MA borders.  Work
> >>in very small areas at 

Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Mass towns

[Andrew S. Sawyer]

I believe the Mass state line, like NH extends into the ocean as well. While 
some of the towns or counties may not, the legal border should conform to what 
is proscribed. Just as the border between NH and VT conforms largely to the 
western edge of the Connecticut River except where they both have agreed 
otherwise. 

The county boundaries from TIGER are not very accurate. The ones from the 
Census Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS) 
(http://www.census.gov/geo/www/bas/bas11/bas11_download.html) I used the 
boundaries to double check the NH borders along the coast. 

Sorry for sending this early. 

Andrew
Andrew S. Sawyer

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-Original Message-
From: Greg Troxel 
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:54:16 
To: Metcalf\, Calvin \(DOT\)
Cc: impo...@openstreetmap.org; 
talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Mass towns

___
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] [Imports] Mass towns

[Andrew S. Sawyer]

I belive the Mass state line, like NH extends into the ocean as well. While 
some of the towns or counties may not, the legal border should conform to what 
is proscribed. Just as the border between NH and VT conforms largely to the 
western edge of the Connecticut River except where they both have agreed 
otherwise. 

The county boundaruies from TIGER are not very accurate. The ones from the 
Census Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS) (
Andrew S. Sawyer

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-Original Message-
From: Greg Troxel 
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:54:16 
To: Metcalf\, Calvin \(DOT\)
Cc: impo...@openstreetmap.org; 
talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Mass towns

___
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] Use of ref-tag on state highways

[Andrew S. Sawyer]

I think one route tag as a primary would work in NH as the DOT uses primary 
routes on mile markers for the freeways. Relations can handle showing the other 
routes. 

Andrew

Andrew S. Sawyer

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-Original Message-
From: Henk Hoff 
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:47:26 
To: Alan Mintz
Cc: 
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

For starters, this is a more constructive response than the "go away". Thanks.

There is a ref-tag on a way and a ref-tag in the relation. Although they are 
both called "ref", that does not directly mean they're the same.

My suggestion: use the way-ref for the most important one. If you want to know 
to which other routes the way is also part of: look at the relations the way is 
part of.



Op 21 aug. 2011, om 20:22 heeft Alan Mintz het volgende geschreven:

> At 2011-08-21 10:57, Henk Hoff wrote:
>> For every rule we can find exceptions.
> 
> In this case, I will guess the exceptions (shared routes) are less than 5% of 
> the ways.
> 
> 
>> The basic idea behind the decision-tree was: use the most important / most 
>> logical route for the way-ref tag.
> 
> If you know the "important one", make it the first value in the series.
> 
> 
>> Putting every single route-label in the ref-tag is not a good idea.
> 
> Why? I guess that 95% have only one, 4% have two, and the remaining 1% might 
> have more (I seem to remember seeing 4 in the midwest somewhere). Remember 
> we're only talking about the road routes themselves. Bike routes, etc. go in  
> their own tags.
> 
> 
>> If you want to identify a whole route, use a relation. Based on the 
>> relations (a way is part of) a routing engine could then identify under 
>> which other route numbers this road is also known by.
> 
> As someone pointed out, once you put them in a relation, the tags on the ways 
> become duplicative. While this is generally bad database design, it's also 
> true that many consumers don't deal with relations, and so we need the 
> duplication and the problems that go with it.
> 
> --
> Alan Mintz 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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 mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Use of ref-tag on state highways

[Andrew Cleveland]

On Sat, 2011-08-20 at 09:32 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: 
> I have noticed that Mapquest prefers to only display numbers in their
> state highway shields and they are actively looking for state postal
> codes and stripping them off. So apparently the convention of using
> state postal codes is well enough established for them to base their
> rendering rules on it.
> 
> Toby
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Unfortunately when the route number itself begins with a letter (like
county routes in California), Mapquest strips the first letter off,
making the shield incorrect.

-Andrew



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

Re: [Talk-us] red light cameras?

[Andrew Cleveland]

On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 21:59 -0700, Dion Dock wrote: 
> There's a tagging convention for speed cameras, highway=speed_camera, 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dspeed_camera.
> 
> Is there a convention for red light cameras?
> 
> -Dion

I think so:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:enforcement
-Andrew


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

Re: [Talk-us] County road network relations

[Andrew Cleveland]

On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 17:02 -0700, Alan Mintz wrote: 
> At 2011-04-10 16:28, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> >On 4/10/2011 7:25 PM, Alan Mintz wrote:
> >>At 2011-04-10 14:00, Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote:
> >>>What's the consensus for county roads in the US?
> >>
> >>I don't know what the consensus is.
> >>
> >>County roads in California are of the form [A-Z][0-9][0-9]. I tag Orange
> >>County route S18 as:
> >>
> >>network="US:CA:Orange"
> >>+ ref="CR S18"
> >
> >How does this work with routes that cross county lines? California has a 
> >statewide numbering system, with the letter roughly representing the part 
> >of the state.
> 
> Yup - that is problematic. I think, when I marked Orange County S18 last 
> year, I didn't see any other county road tagging to go by. 
> http://www.cahighways.org/county.html shows that there are some occurrences 
> of this. I apparently expected to break them at the county lines, I guess, 
> so as to agree with signage. That is, Orange County S99 would be a 
> different route than San Diego S99. network="US:CA:Orange;US:CA:San Diego" 
> on the relation seems workable.
> 
>   It's almost like they defined super-groups of counties identified by 
> those letters. I'll have to crunch that table to see if that's the case so 
> we could have network=US:CA:S + ref="CR S18". Maybe add an is_in:county tag 
> to the individual segments to avoid losing that important info.
> 
> I realize this is kind of scattered. On my way out the door.
> 
> 
> --
> Alan Mintz 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Hi,

That's correct that the county routes are grouped into "zones" which
don't necessarily coincide with counties. There are nine zones (A, B, D,
E, G, J, N, R, S).

There are some county route relations here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/California/State_Highway_Relations#County_Highways
though it's not set in stone obviously. I guess either US:CA:[zone] or
US:CA:CR as suggested would work.



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

Re: [Talk-us] US Interstate exit junction exit_to tag

[Andrew Cleveland]

On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 14:40 -0500, Ian Dees wrote:

> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Mike N  wrote:
> 
> On 3/28/2011 3:19 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> 
> In this picture:
> 
> http://www.nomadchallenge.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/likelike-highway-honolulu.jpg
> 
> 
> What
> is the proposed tag for the highway=motorway_junction
> node?
> Are we tagging the node with exactly what is on the
> sign or are we
> looking down the road and coming up with text on our
> own?
> 
> 
>  Where possible, this will duplicate the sign.  The thinking
> is that sign contents are carefully chosen for maximum clarity
> to drivers, and to distinguish them from nearby exits.  That
> will not necessarily be the nearest main road the exit leads
> to. The Wiki would have the exit node as
> 
> ref=20A
> name=
> exit_to=HI 63 North; Likelike Hwy
> 
>  (Exit Only optional also, I suppose)
> 
> 
> Ok, that makes sense. I am thinking of the case where a GPS provider
> or directions provider uses our data and wants to have "Take exit 20A
> towards HI 63 North Likelike Hwy" on the screen or spoken via TTS.
> 
> 
> With that in mind I think it's important that the exit_to tag only
> include verbage on the sign (and not stuff we make up).


Just a nitpick: For exit numbers that consist of both a number and a
letter, should we insert a space? For example "20A" vs. "20 A".

The MUTCD
( http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm#section2E31 ) says
"Suffix letters shall be used for exit numbering at a multi-exit
interchange. The suffix letter shall also be included on the exit number
plaque and shall be separated from the exit number by a space having a
width of between 1/2 and 3/4 of the height of the suffix letter."

Obviously this would depend on how each state agency actually does their
signs. In the Likelike Hwy. example there appears to me to be a thin
space between the "20" and the "A". Maybe a thin space (U+2009) would
work? Though that might be making things more complicated than they need
to be.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Caltrans exit numbers

[Andrew Cleveland]

On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 23:13 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: 
> For what it's worth, I did something similar here in Kansas. The
> Department of Transportation didn't have any obvious notices about
> copyright on the website so I sent them an email and asked. They
> replied and said that all the maps published on their website are
> public domain. So I added exit numbers along I-70 and I-35 from the
> general transportation map.
> 
> As I have traveled along them since then I have verified and added
> name=* tags (although I guess that is about to get changed to exit_to)
> 
> Toby
> 
> 
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Andrew Cleveland
>  wrote:
> > Caltrans has freeway exit numbers for all California state and Interstate
> > routes available at
> > http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/calnexus/index.htm . Their
> > "Conditions of Use" ( http://www.dot.ca.gov/use.html#ownership ) say "In
> > general, information presented on this web site, unless otherwise indicated,
> > is considered in the public domain."
> >
> > Is it OK legally to use this data in OSM? I only plan to add exit numbers in
> > areas that are familiar to me. Thanks in advance.
> > ___
> > 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

Thanks. The only indication I can find other than the statement on
ca.gov is that Wikipedia takes anything created by the state of
California obtained as public record to be in the public domain
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-CAGov ). So I think it is a
fair assumption that the exit data is public domain as well (though I'm
not a lawyer obviously).

-Andrew



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

[Talk-us] Caltrans exit numbers

[Andrew Cleveland]

Caltrans has freeway exit numbers for all California state and
Interstate routes available at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/calnexus/index.htm . Their
"Conditions of Use" ( http://www.dot.ca.gov/use.html#ownership ) say "In
general, information presented on this web site, unless otherwise
indicated, is considered in the public domain."

Is it OK legally to use this data in OSM? I only plan to add exit
numbers in areas that are familiar to me. Thanks in advance. 
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] USPS Address Database

[Andrew Ayre]

Anthony wrote:

(*) Incidentally, if you'd like to buy a copy of the database and give
it to me, I'd be willing to be the guinea pig who redistributes it, or


Buying the database and giving it to you is probably against the terms 
of the license, possibly leaving that person open to being a guinea pig 
also.


Andy

--
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER edited map updated with Toby's suggestion

[Andrew Ayre]

Sorry, the village of Summerhaven, which I totally reworked in Sep 2009 
is still shown in red:


http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=12&lat=32.438&lon=-110.75635&layers=B

Andy

Antony Pegg wrote:

All,

sorry I didnt write this sooner

Last week we updated the TIGER edited map to include the logic suggested 
by Toby for checking the number of versions.


Many thanks to Gravitystorm for the changes and ArtemP for the installation

Please let us know if that's helped improve what you were expecting to see

Thanks
Ant


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

Re: [Talk-us] US-Mexico border precision

[Andrew S. J. Sawyer]

The Neddles dispute is not too much different from the dispute NH and
Maine had over their boundary stretching from the Piscataqua River to
the Isles of Shoals. Mainly it was over whether Seavy Island
(Portsmouth Naval Shipyard) belonged to NH or ME. The Supreme Court of
the US ruled in two cases involving the boundary giving Seavey Island
to Maine and fixing most of the  boundary.

I bring this up because various datasets may have different depictions
of a boundary. I recall (haven't searched) that issues involving
disputed maritime boundaries. What are your thoughts on tagging
disputed boundaries according to the typical manner but adding
"disputed=yes" and "disputed:note=[description of who claims and brief
description of why]."

Renderers will have to make their own decision as to which boundary
they will render or if they render both, etc.

Tying back to the US-Mexico boundary it would make sense to obtain the
highest-resolution boundary from each side and tag according to above.
I don't like boundary clutter but we should be able/try to
differentiate between poor resolution and disputed boundaries. I
acknowledge this is sometimes easier said than done.

Andrew S. J. Sawyer
Lee, New Hampshire

On 12/17/2010, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> On 12/17/2010 12:47 AM, Alan Mintz wrote:
>> At 2010-12-16 19:39, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> You'd think, but then you have Needles, Arizona, which California keeps
>>> trying to claim.
>>
>> OK, I'll take the bait. Huh?
>
> Needles has been in a three-way dispute with Nevada, Arizona and
> California over which state they actually belong to for most of my
> lifetime.  It largely has to do with the want for Needles to not be in
> California and the language used in various agreements about where the
> state line is relative to the present course of the Colorado River.
>
>

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

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER 2010 Imports

[Andrew Ayre]

Andrew Ayre wrote:

Alan Mintz wrote:

At 2010-12-15 10:04, Ian Dees wrote:
Look at the TIGER edited map. There is *lots* of untouched TIGER data 
in OSM:


http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=9&lat=40.07546&lon=-76.32&layers=B 
<http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=9&lat=40.07546&lon=-76.32&layers=B> 



Do you know what the criteria are for red vs. green? Unless this came 
from a very old dataset (<2009), I believe it's wrong. I see _way_ too 
much red in places where I've done a lot of work.


There was a village that was so messed up in TIGER I ripped it all out
and redid it from my GPS traces in September 2009. I can clearly
recognize my many hours of work, and this map shows it all in red. So I
don't think it can be trusted for deciding on where to import. Sorry.

http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=9&lat=40.07546&lon=-76.32&layers=B 


Sorry, wrong link. Here is the right one:

http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=15&lat=32.44121&lon=-110.75789&layers=B

--
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER 2010 Imports

[Andrew Ayre]

Alan Mintz wrote:

At 2010-12-15 10:04, Ian Dees wrote:
Look at the TIGER edited map. There is *lots* of untouched TIGER data 
in OSM:


http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=9&lat=40.07546&lon=-76.32&layers=B 



Do you know what the criteria are for red vs. green? Unless this came 
from a very old dataset (<2009), I believe it's wrong. I see _way_ too 
much red in places where I've done a lot of work.


There was a village that was so messed up in TIGER I ripped it all out
and redid it from my GPS traces in September 2009. I can clearly
recognize my many hours of work, and this map shows it all in red. So I
don't think it can be trusted for deciding on where to import. Sorry.

http://open.mapquestapi.com/tigerviewer/index.html?zoom=9&lat=40.07546&lon=-76.32&layers=B

Andy

--
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposal: delete census-designated place polygons

[Andrew]

Val Kartchner  writes:

> I'd like to use "place=neighborhood" as well.  Can we get a consensus to
> make this addition?

The tag place=suburb is establish for much this purpose. This also avoids
spelling issues with neighbo(u)rhood.

--
Andrew
























































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

Re: [Talk-us] Route Tagging Consensus

[Andrew S. J. Sawyer]

Is there a reason to have the network tag with "networkUS:state:county"
instead of three separate tags for "network:country" "network:state" and
"network:county" in the case of county roads and two in the case of state,
etc. Having a "network:country=" tag will clear up any confusion in which
country the route is in.

I don't think a simple US:state:county tag will suffice as people have
complained about parsing. Such a tag would likely have to be tagged
"network:location=US:state:county" as you would have to differentiate
between interstates, highways, etc. easily. By having a network and location
tags you could know the location and type of road. Additionally this would
allow for rendering of shields or determining the type route for other
rendering differentiation purposes.

I think because other tags break out location based on country, state,
county, etc it would be wise to also do so with network tagging. There are
many counties that have the same name that are in different locations. Other
OSM users have expressed issues with relying on pre-possessing to gather
location data.

Andrew

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 09:57, Peter Budny  wrote:

> Toby Murray  writes:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Paul Johnson 
> wrote:
> >> On 10/25/2010 08:43 AM, Zeke Farwell wrote:
> >>
> >>> For Michigan route 12:
> >>> ref=12
> >>> network=state
> >>> state=michigan
> >>>
> >>> For Bennington County route 16 in Vermont:
> >>> ref=16
> >>> network=county
> >>> state=vermont
> >>> county=bennington
> >>
> >> I like it, though it should be pointed out that this is more difficult
> >> unless we're talking about route relations.
> >
> > I kind of like this system as well. It is clear and easy to
> > understand. The only problem (as pointed out before) is that it breaks
> > the network tag compared to the rest of the world. Can we use it
> > anyway? :)
>
> What about making it "network=US:state" or "network=US:county"?  That
> way it's easy to tell US states apart from states in other countries.
> Does that ruin its simplicity and elegance?
> --
> Peter Budny  \
> Georgia Tech  \
> CS PhD student \
>
> ___
> 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] Route Tagging Consensus

[Andrew S. J. Sawyer]

What about using "network:country" "network:state" etc for routes and
the example of the NY route running into PA would be solved. If you
wanted an "is_in" tag that route would have to be split into two
relations.

Andrew


On 10/25/2010, Nathan Edgars II  wrote:
> is_in doesn't work; part of New York State Route 17 is in Pennsylvania.
>
> ___
> 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] Route Tagging Consensus

[Andrew S. J. Sawyer]

I also agree with Phil. The operative tag is the "network" tag. Which
should refer to either country, state, county as found in the "is_in"
tags, without having to have a "new" tag. I think this is the way to
go.

Andrew

On 10/25/2010, Phil! Gold  wrote:
> * Zeke Farwell  [2010-10-25 09:43 -0400]:
>> For those who do want to render different shields for each state and/or
>> county routes why not use sub tags as we commonly do for many other
>> osm features
>
> Ian has suggested the established is_in= tag for this purpose, and Alex
> Mauer has suggested a relation that contains all the routes for a (state
> or lower) network.
>
> Personally, of those two, I think I prefer is_in=.
>
>> For Michigan route 12:
>> ref=12
>> network=state
>> state=michigan
>
> Keep in mind that any tagging we do needs to be compatible with global
> usage, and network= is already in use.  I'd suggest something along the
> lines of "US:State" and "US:County" to fit in with "US:I" and "US:US".
> (And also to continue keeping our own namespace for values.)
>
> --
> ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/
> PGP: 026A27F2  print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248  9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2
> --- --
>   "Quick, you must come with me," she said.  You're in great danger!"
>   "Why?"
>   "Because I will kill you if you don't."
>-- _Sourcery_, Terry Pratchett
>  --- --
>
> ___
> 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] Route Tagging Consensus

[Andrew S. J. Sawyer]

I like Zeke's approach.

Andrew


On 10/25/2010, Zeke Farwell  wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
>
>> I don't know what to call it, but values would be interstate, us_route,
>> state_route, county_route, etc. The specific information about what
>> county/state it's in, the human readable name, the prefix, etc. should all
>> be stored in different tags (and not stuffed into one long network=* tag).
>>
>
>
> This sounds like a great use for the network tag to me.  There are basically
> 4 highway networks in this country:  Interstate, US, State, and County.  I
> know that technically each state and county has it's own separate network,
> but most renderers are just going to display generic shields for state &
> county.  For those who do want to render different shields for each state
> and/or county routes why not use sub tags as we commonly do for many other
> osm features:
>
> For Michigan route 12:
> ref=12
> network=state
> state=michigan
>
> For Bennington County route 16 in Vermont:
> ref=16
> network=county
> state=vermont
> county=bennington
>
>
> Zeke
>

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

Re: [Talk-us] US BLM Designated Wilderness

[Andrew Ayre]

I've already imported the wilderness areas for Region 3 of the Forest 
Service (Arizona and New Mexico), as that region has what appeared (to 
me anyway) high quality data. For example:


http://osm.org/go/TlYKG1b-

So I would suggest you do it region by region and check you are not 
duplicating what might already be there. There is a section on the wiki 
that lists the status of Forest Service region imports.


Andy

Erik Burrows wrote:

I'd like to volunteer to import the rest of these designated wilderness
areas into the OSM database as a bulk import. 


Any objections, suggestions, comments?

Thanks,
  Erik Burrows



--
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Resigning in protest

[Andrew Ayre]

I'm British and I have nothing to do with it. I'm sure I'm not the only 
one. Please don't generalize a large group of people. Thanks.

Andy

Chris Hunter wrote:
> 
>   
> 
> Well, between the new links on the map and today's WIKI edit, it looks 
> like the Brits have decided to shove the ODbL down our throats after 
> all. I have major philosophical issues with the way the license change 
> is being handled, and feel that I can no longer participate in the OSM 
> project.

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] proposed first principles for United States road tagging

[Andrew Sawyer]

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 16:08, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> Richard Welty wrote:
>
> > probably a better example are the unpaved state highways that may be
> found
> > in some parts of New Hampshire. they do have signage, are they secondary
> > because they're state highways?
>
> I would say so.  There's the "surface" tag, too...  surface=gravel,
> surface=unpaved...
>
> Not to be super technical, but in New Hampshire all public roads are state
highways. The distinction you are likely referencing is the numbered State
routes which are maintained by NH DOT (except some city/town centers) and
known as the New Hampshire Highway System.

A question that I have is whether or not NH Routes should ever be listed as
Primary or Tertiary? I know in Mass its been done using a functional usage
criteria, whereas I have used the US Routes get to be Primary, NH Routes
Secondary and routes that connect town centers that aren't the other two are
tertiary. I know this is the debate that we are having, but it would seem
that either we leave it to regions or states to decide or try a one size
fits all approach based off the British system which doesn't seem to match
up very well (at least terminology wise) with the US and its intricacies.

There seem to be two major groups of roads: limited access and everything
else. Within those groups there are variations that at some level get
tedious in distinguishing between various classifications that depend on
routing/lanes/max speed. In some respects a standard is important, but it
has to describe and differentiate between the roads. I think that a regional
approach, especially in NE, would be best while maintaining some uniformity
across the US and World. I would propose more, but I find it difficult given
the current structure. It would seem that there be two major tagging
classifications could dominate the tagging:
1. administrative (coming from the authorities over it - route numbers,
administrative designations of classification, etc.)
2. functional (coming from actual usage criteria, like number of lanes,
width, etc)

The first is going to be easier to tag and edit, whereas the latter is going
to be more intensive with reviewing official GIS data and personal
observations. Just some thoughts. I don't propose to reinvent the wheel,
maybe this can be accomplished with Relations or current tagging and leave
people quibbling over colors to renders?

Some thoughts and my two cents.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Incorporation

[Andrew Ayre]

I took Serge saying:

"As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN, 
and then work on the non-profit part"

to mean something different to what you just described. Sorry...

Andy

Kate Chapman wrote:
> Since we are going to incorporate as a non-profit the benefits of 
> incorporating in Delaware aren't as great as they would be if we were a 
> for profit business.  Our intention is to apply for tax exempt status 
> both federally and in the state or district that we do incorporate in.  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kate
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Peter Batty  <mailto:peter.ba...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> As I've mentioned before, every lawyer I have ever talked to about
> this has told me to incorporate in Delaware. My current company
> Spatial Networking is based in Colorado but incorporated in Delaware
> through a "registered agent" - you can find lots of these via Google.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Ayre  <mailto:a...@britishideas.com>> wrote:
> 
> I believe that California will charge $800 per year income tax for
> for-profit corporations even if you make a loss or no profit...
> 
> A large number of Corporations in the US are incorporated in
> Delaware
> because my understanding is that they are very friendly towards
> businesses and easy to deal with.
> 
> Andy
> 
> Serge Wroclawski wrote:
>  > There are two major "candidates" for incorporation at the
> moment. The
>  > first is California, with the possible help of an attorney
> that works
>  > with OSM International. Unfortunately this has been difficult
> as the
>  > attorney is quite busy at the moment, and so asking him to do
> more
>  > pro-bono work may be difficult going forward.
> 
>  > As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get
> our EIN,
>  > and then work on the non-profit part- part of which will be the
>  > mission statement and other documents we're working on at the
> same
>  > time.
> 
> --
> Andy
> PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Peter Batty - President, Spatial Networking
> W: +1 303 339 0957  M: +1 720 346 3954
> Blog: http://geothought.blogspot.com
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto: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

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Incorporation

[Andrew Ayre]

I believe that California will charge $800 per year income tax for 
for-profit corporations even if you make a loss or no profit...

A large number of Corporations in the US are incorporated in Delaware 
because my understanding is that they are very friendly towards 
businesses and easy to deal with.

Andy

Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> There are two major "candidates" for incorporation at the moment. The
> first is California, with the possible help of an attorney that works
> with OSM International. Unfortunately this has been difficult as the
> attorney is quite busy at the moment, and so asking him to do more
> pro-bono work may be difficult going forward.

> As discussed, we can incorporate as a corporate entity, get our EIN,
> and then work on the non-profit part- part of which will be the
> mission statement and other documents we're working on at the same
> time.

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Lake Winnepesaki rendering issue

[Andrew Sawyer]

Thanks for taking a look.  On the Information Freeway site it still shows a
rendering issue. I notice that the Mapnik layer was getting changes faster.
I tried manually forcing a rerender via the site, but nothing substantial
has changed. Should the islands not have natural:land? Does t...@h not like
that tag?

I am glad it doesn't appear that I made an editing error.  I posted my
original e-mail to the t...@h list. Hopefully someone over there can lend their
expertise. Is there a lot of data behinds the scene that affects the
rendering, but the typical user cant see?

Andrew S. Sawyer
http://www.facebook.com/assawyer



On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 18:30, Lennard  wrote:

> David ``Smith'' wrote:
>
> > Oops, I should have looked at your links *before* I sent my response.
> > As it turns out, your lake looks just fine in Mapnik, but Osmarender
> > is having some problems.  I'm pretty sure it's a rendering issue that
> > the Osmarender or t...@h guys need to fix, because I've seen issues like
> > this in Illinois too.
>
> It wasn't quite right in mapnik too, especially in the lower zooms that
> hadn't been rerendered yet. The islands had drowned, and the roads were
> now in the lake. I looked at it in JOSM, couldn't see fault, and had the
> lower zooms rerendered, and that cleared it up.
>
> My guess was that there was an error with the data, and it got cleared
> up, and osmarender/t...@h still has to rerender?
>
> BTW: The current osm.org mapnik layer is now running with a new type of
> diffs, which shouldn't drop (parts of) large changesets as the old
> minutely diffs did, and give faster updates to boot!
>
> --
> Lennard
>
> ___
> 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] Fwd: Lake Winnepesaki rendering issue

[Andrew Sawyer]

I have been experiencing what I think to be a error with the rendering of
islands in Lake Winnepesaki in New Hampshire. I tried copying the tagging
convention from Lake Champlain (Vermont/NY border), but it seems to render
the islands incorrectly as small lakes in two of the tiles in the
middle-bottom of the lake.  I don't know what I am doing wrong.

I have attached the link to the Information Freeware, OSM, and OSM Relation
Analyzer pages for your convenience.
http://informationfreeway.org/?lat=43.61625379229798&lon=-71.36002480862106&zoom=12&layers=BF000F
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=43.6329746246338&layers=0B00FTF&lon=-71.3110542297363&zoom=12
http://betaplace.emaitie.de/webapps.relation-analyzer/analyze.jsp?relationId=63730&useCache=false


Some details about the tagging of the lake:
There are 9 ways comprising the outer border of the lake with
"natural:water" as the tag and belong to Relation #63730 with the role of
"outer" and have a direction of clockwise
There are 152 self-contained ways (islands) belonging to the relation with
"natural:land" with the role of "inner" which as far as I know have a
direction of counter-clockwise

The relation is tagged with the following:
name:Lake Winnepesaki
natural:water
type:multipolygon

I don't know if I edited the lake wrong or its a rendering problem or a
combination of both.

Thanks,

Andrew S. Sawyer
http://www.facebook.com/assawyer
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] To Do Lists

[Andrew Ayre]

Hi,

Thanks - I looked at the Chicago page and it has some ideas. I am 
working on Tucson and you can see my list of project ideas so far on the 
wiki page for it:

   http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tucson%2C_Arizona

Feedback is appreciated.

Andy

Nicholas Vetrovec wrote:
> Chicago, Illinois has a fairly thorough wiki page that also works well with 
> the state and country pages. There are a few others, but each city page 
> should be linked on the state pages to make them easy to locate.
> What city are you working in?
> 
>> I would like to compile a To Do list for the wiki to encourage people in 
>> my city to help. I've created a template page so far for the city.
>>
>> I've seen the wiki page on fixing the Tiger data, but there is much more 
>> to do than just that. Has anyone created a complete list of everything 
>> needed to be done for a US city, that I can copy?
>>
>> I can compile a list myself but if someone else has already done it then 
>> there is no need to reinvent the wheel, etc. I also want to be thorough.
>>
>> thanks, Andy
>>
>> -- 
>> Andy
>> PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] To Do Lists

[Andrew Ayre]

I would like to compile a To Do list for the wiki to encourage people in 
my city to help. I've created a template page so far for the city.

I've seen the wiki page on fixing the Tiger data, but there is much more 
to do than just that. Has anyone created a complete list of everything 
needed to be done for a US city, that I can copy?

I can compile a list myself but if someone else has already done it then 
there is no need to reinvent the wheel, etc. I also want to be thorough.

thanks, Andy

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Data Upload

[Andrew Ayre]

Hi Dave,

Thanks. How would I test it without risking putting dummy data or 
partial data on the public server? I've tried to use another upload 
script with api06.dev.openstreetmap.org and mysql.dev.openstreetmap.org 
but they don't appear to be functional (server error 500).

Andy

Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-07-18 at 20:07 -0700, Andrew Ayre wrote:
>> I tried bulk_upload.py and it gave me a 404 error.
> 
> I've used this in the past:
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bulk_upload.pl
> 
> Evidently it hasn't been updated to 0.6 yet.  But, honestly, that
> shouldn't be *that* hard to do.
> 
> -- Dave
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Data Upload

[Andrew Ayre]

Thanks Tyler and Dave.

I tried bulk_upload.py and it gave me a 404 error.

I then tried the uploader here:

http://www.openstreetmap.pl/balrog/bulkupload/

and it complained that the OSM file was not a 0.6 OSM file. Well, I
created it in the latest version of JOSM...

I then tried bulk_upload.php and it gave me "Fatal error: The API
returned:" and then blank. It's uploaded something, but who knows what?

I'm now trying JOSM again - it's saying 15 hours for a 5Mb upload

So, does anyone have a reliable means of uploading OSM files created in 
JOSM?

Andy

Andrew Ayre wrote:
> After working on a new set of data for import, is there a faster way of 
> uploading it than with JOSM? For example I have an OSM file with 30k 
> nodes in it. JOSM says it will take four hours. Then after an hour the 
> connection is reset.
> 
> I understand there is some overhead with changesets, etc. but 4 hours 
> for a 5Mb file is painful.
> 
> I saw a method using curl but that was for API 0.5.
> 
> thanks, Andy
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] Data Upload

[Andrew Ayre]

After working on a new set of data for import, is there a faster way of 
uploading it than with JOSM? For example I have an OSM file with 30k 
nodes in it. JOSM says it will take four hours. Then after an hour the 
connection is reset.

I understand there is some overhead with changesets, etc. but 4 hours 
for a 5Mb file is painful.

I saw a method using curl but that was for API 0.5.

thanks, Andy

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] US Forest Service Wilderness Areas

[Andrew Ayre]

The other question I have is: region 2 wilderness areas consist of 72 
closed ways spread over two states. Should they all be put into a single 
boundary relation, should they each have their own boundary relation, or 
should I not use boundary relations at all?

Andy

Andrew Ayre wrote:
> Hi, I am nearly finished with import of region 3 of the US Forest 
> Service. Thanks to everyone that gave me help, especially Tyler.
> 
> Next I am importing the region 3 wilderness areas. These are part of the 
> US National Forests, but they are areas where there should be no 
> evidence of human activity.
> 
> Is there already a consensus on the tags that should be used for these 
> areas?
> 
> Andy
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] US Forest Service Wilderness Areas

[Andrew Ayre]

Hi, I am nearly finished with import of region 3 of the US Forest 
Service. Thanks to everyone that gave me help, especially Tyler.

Next I am importing the region 3 wilderness areas. These are part of the 
US National Forests, but they are areas where there should be no 
evidence of human activity.

Is there already a consensus on the tags that should be used for these 
areas?

Andy

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Frustrated

[Andrew Ayre]

OK, I'll give that a try.

Except I am now in a mess with the JOSM plugins. I made the mistake of 
clicking on "Update" because the waydownloader plugin wasn't installing.

validator requires JOSM 1725
waydownloader requires JOSM 1722
wmsplugin requires JOSM 1722

They won't run on the latest version 1743.
They won't run on version 1720.

Unfortuanately JOSM 1722 - 1727 have a critical bug and are blocked from 
editing data.

So I am stuck again, but now with JOSM and it's plugins.

Andy

Tyler wrote:
> Hey Andy,
> 
> I just checked out the area on your user history page and it looks like 
> it's mostly you and elyk editing there (mostly you, it's possible a 
> county/state boundary was turned into a relation). This following would 
> be my solution as XAPI doesn't seem to be using recent data.
> 
> In JOSM make sure you have the waydownloader plugin.  Download a small 
> area containing only one of your boundaries of interest. If it is part 
> of a relation go to the relation manager and select download all 
> members. otherwise just go to the end of that way and do a "download 
> way" in the tools menu. Continue doing this with until you have all of 
> your ways/nodes of interest. change and upload.
> 
> You don't want to upload over previous data as you'll be duplicating 
> nodes and ways which is a real mess. You can also download your 
> changeset xml (from your edit history) and modify those files to do what 
> you want (say delete or modify nodes).
> 
> Once XAPI is consistently up and running it would be the appropriate way 
> to do this sort of thing.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Andrew Ayre  <mailto:a...@britishideas.com>> wrote:
> 
> Update:
> 
> When I go to the live slippy map and look at the piece that was deleted
> I see someone added a boundary relation. So the piece is still there,
> but JOSM wants to remove it. Totally confused..
> 
> Andy
> 
> Andrew Ayre wrote:
>  > Perhaps I am going about this the wrong way, but I am about ready to
>  > give up.
>  >
>  > 
>  > I started uploading the forest boundaries for Arizona using JOSM.
>  > Working well so far. However I saw that I made a mistake with one
> of the
>  > tags. So now I started re-uploading all my data using my original OSM
>  > files to correct the tag mistake.
>  >
>  > I used my original OSM files because I cannot see a way of
> downloading
>  > just my data, even though I have a unique UUID tag for it all.
> The data
>  > covers 1000's of square miles and JOSM will only let you tediously
>  > download it in small pieces, along with vast amounts of other
> data that
>  > is not interesting to me.
>  >
>  > When I go to upload I am getting conflicts saying someone else has
>  > modified a primitive. I have a choice to keep mine or use theirs.
> There
>  > is no indication in JOSM of which node this is and seemingly no
> way of
>  > working out what the change is. So I blindly choose to use theirs
> - err
>  > on the side of caution.
>  >
>  > I go through this cycle about 20 times and start to see a pattern -
>  > someone has deleted an entire section of the national forest, even
>  > though I got this data from the US Forest Service. What?? Am I
> wasting
>  > my time with this?
>  >
>  > OK, so now I want to see all the changes that have been made and
> I try
>  > to update the current data set. Oops. JOSM won't let you do that
> because
>  > I haven't downloaded anything. Strange, because it will let me update
>  > single nodes and selections. However the selections have to be 50
> nodes
>  > or less, which is totally useless. My dataset has maybe 1,000 nodes.
>  >
>  > OK, perhaps I can just delete that changed section from my file and
>  > upload the rest, fixing the tags for that - nope - JOSM wants to
> delete
>  > from the server the data I delete. That's not what I want because I'm
>  > not sure what effect that would have.
>  >
>  > So now I'm thinking that maybe I will just leave that incorrect
> tag in
>  > there for someone else to worry about, as this is now too much of
> a hassle.
>  > 
>  >
>  > If I am going about this the wrong way please let me know.
>  >
>  > Andy
>  >
>

Re: [Talk-us] Frustrated

[Andrew Ayre]

Update:

When I go to the live slippy map and look at the piece that was deleted 
I see someone added a boundary relation. So the piece is still there, 
but JOSM wants to remove it. Totally confused..

Andy

Andrew Ayre wrote:
> Perhaps I am going about this the wrong way, but I am about ready to 
> give up.
> 
> 
> I started uploading the forest boundaries for Arizona using JOSM. 
> Working well so far. However I saw that I made a mistake with one of the 
> tags. So now I started re-uploading all my data using my original OSM 
> files to correct the tag mistake.
> 
> I used my original OSM files because I cannot see a way of downloading 
> just my data, even though I have a unique UUID tag for it all. The data 
> covers 1000's of square miles and JOSM will only let you tediously 
> download it in small pieces, along with vast amounts of other data that 
> is not interesting to me.
> 
> When I go to upload I am getting conflicts saying someone else has 
> modified a primitive. I have a choice to keep mine or use theirs. There 
> is no indication in JOSM of which node this is and seemingly no way of 
> working out what the change is. So I blindly choose to use theirs - err 
> on the side of caution.
> 
> I go through this cycle about 20 times and start to see a pattern - 
> someone has deleted an entire section of the national forest, even 
> though I got this data from the US Forest Service. What?? Am I wasting 
> my time with this?
> 
> OK, so now I want to see all the changes that have been made and I try 
> to update the current data set. Oops. JOSM won't let you do that because 
> I haven't downloaded anything. Strange, because it will let me update 
> single nodes and selections. However the selections have to be 50 nodes 
> or less, which is totally useless. My dataset has maybe 1,000 nodes.
> 
> OK, perhaps I can just delete that changed section from my file and 
> upload the rest, fixing the tags for that - nope - JOSM wants to delete 
> from the server the data I delete. That's not what I want because I'm 
> not sure what effect that would have.
> 
> So now I'm thinking that maybe I will just leave that incorrect tag in 
> there for someone else to worry about, as this is now too much of a hassle.
> 
> 
> If I am going about this the wrong way please let me know.
> 
> Andy
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] Frustrated

[Andrew Ayre]

Perhaps I am going about this the wrong way, but I am about ready to 
give up.


I started uploading the forest boundaries for Arizona using JOSM. 
Working well so far. However I saw that I made a mistake with one of the 
tags. So now I started re-uploading all my data using my original OSM 
files to correct the tag mistake.

I used my original OSM files because I cannot see a way of downloading 
just my data, even though I have a unique UUID tag for it all. The data 
covers 1000's of square miles and JOSM will only let you tediously 
download it in small pieces, along with vast amounts of other data that 
is not interesting to me.

When I go to upload I am getting conflicts saying someone else has 
modified a primitive. I have a choice to keep mine or use theirs. There 
is no indication in JOSM of which node this is and seemingly no way of 
working out what the change is. So I blindly choose to use theirs - err 
on the side of caution.

I go through this cycle about 20 times and start to see a pattern - 
someone has deleted an entire section of the national forest, even 
though I got this data from the US Forest Service. What?? Am I wasting 
my time with this?

OK, so now I want to see all the changes that have been made and I try 
to update the current data set. Oops. JOSM won't let you do that because 
I haven't downloaded anything. Strange, because it will let me update 
single nodes and selections. However the selections have to be 50 nodes 
or less, which is totally useless. My dataset has maybe 1,000 nodes.

OK, perhaps I can just delete that changed section from my file and 
upload the rest, fixing the tags for that - nope - JOSM wants to delete 
from the server the data I delete. That's not what I want because I'm 
not sure what effect that would have.

So now I'm thinking that maybe I will just leave that incorrect tag in 
there for someone else to worry about, as this is now too much of a hassle.


If I am going about this the wrong way please let me know.

Andy

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Mapping of State/county/national parks

[Andrew Ayre]

Does boundary=national_park have nothing to do with US National Parks? 
I.e. it's just a park at the national level?

Andy

Tyler wrote:
> Just tagging the underlying landtypes and uses is fine (aside from most 
> of them not being natural) but doesn't at all account for the difference 
> between scrubland/seashore/whatever where you will be shot to death if 
> you trespass (military installations) and that which you're free to roam 
> around on and is designated a park.
>  
> 
> Then use the boundary key.  If you way up each of the unique
> sections, then create a multipolygon relation out of all of the
> boundary ways and additional multipolygons for each of the various
> landuses or ground covers.
> 
> 
> Boundaries are a good solution, and are easy for the national lands set 
> aside for recreation boundary=national_park covers them nicely (and 
> renderers could easily decide to render them as filled green 
> areas--standard practice).
> 
> Through a quick discussion on #osm I'm going with boundary=national_park 
> (for all parks that aren't urban parks), admin_level="whatever the 
> operator level is", operator="whoever the operator is" and 
> ownership="whoever the owner is" parsing that out to re-tag it 
> consistently later should be relatively trivial.
> 
> Thanks for the discussion Adam,
> 
> -Tyler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Fixing Alignments in JOSM

[Andrew Ayre]

Thanks for the hints Russ!

Andy

Russ Nelson wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2009, at 2:57 PM, Andrew Ayre wrote:
>> So I need to split the North-South way into two pieces and it  
>> intersects
>> the East-West way in two places.
> 
> Select the node where both roads are joined.
> Press 'g' to unglue (or Unglue Ways on the menu)
> You'll have two nodes in the same spot.
> Click and drag the node to the right, so the road on the south is  
> aligned properly.
> (Unfortunately, sometimes you'll get the wrong node.  If so, then move  
> it south a bit, then move the correct node to the right.  Move the  
> east-west node back where it belongs.  Click back on the north-south  
> node to select it).
> Now the road on the north is misaligned.
> Split that way using 'p' (or Split Way on the menu).
> Again, unglue the node from the north and south ways using 'g'.
> Move the end of the north way back where it belongs.
> Select both nodes (they should be right on top of each other) by  
> drawing a box around them both.
> Join them together using 'm' (or Merge Nodes on the menu).
> 
> If you have any trouble with this procedure, just ask and I'll do a  
> video tutorial on it.
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Fixing Alignments in JOSM

[Andrew Ayre]

Dave,

That worked. Perfect!

Thanks, Andy

Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 12:35 -0700, Andrew Ayre wrote:
>> They are on the same level. The north-south alignment of the street
>> was 
>> changed at an intersection. Here is a screen shot:
>>
>> http://files.britishideas.com/public/mapping/staggered.jpg
> 
> I'd probably:
> 
> 1. Take Sahuara's way and make a new node near its intersection with 5th
> 2. Split the way at both the new node and the existing 5th and Sahuara
>node, making 3 ways.
> 3. Delete the short way that connects the south Sahuara with 5th
> 4. Take the now dangling Sahuara and drag its end node over to the
>proper place on 5th and join the Sahuara end node with 5th.
> 
> You'll end up with 2 ways where there used to be one, but that's OK.  Is
> that what you were asking?
> 
> -- Dave
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Fixing Alignments in JOSM

[Andrew Ayre]

Hi Apollinaris,

They are on the same level. The north-south alignment of the street was 
changed at an intersection. Here is a screen shot:

http://files.britishideas.com/public/mapping/staggered.jpg

Andy

Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
> not sure if I understand correct. by staggered do you mean they are on 
> different levels via bridges or underpass?
> then there is no need to split. instead
> 1) unglue the node, you will have 2 nodes at exact same location. one 
> belongs to way one the other to way 2
> 2) if need to move: both are selected after unglue and will move 
> together. you need to select one only. otherwise a move seems like they 
> are still joined.
> 3) split ways and add tunnel,bridge,layer tags as needed.
> 
> in general split, unglue works like this
> split can be done on any node of a way except start/end
> unglue can be done on any node shared by 2 ways.

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] Fixing Alignments in JOSM

[Andrew Ayre]

Hi Dave,

It is the node at 32.2289, -110.8667, although there are lots of these 
"minor" issues. It's the North-South way that needs to be staggered.

Thanks! Andy

Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 11:57 -0700, Andrew Ayre wrote:
>> So I need to split the North-South way into two pieces and it intersects 
>> the East-West way in two places.
>>
>> I cannot figure out how to do this in JOSM. I've tried everything - 
>> splitting a way at nodes, ungluing, etc. The way always remains joined. 
>> Can someone please give me a step by step guide to fixing this alignment 
>> problem?
> 
> Sounds like a fun intersection. :)
> 
> Could you give us some coordinates for it?  I'll go take a look and see
> if I can explain what best to do.
> 
> -- Dave
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] Fixing Alignments in JOSM

[Andrew Ayre]

I'm not sure if I can clearly explain my problem, but I'll try.

The tiger street alignments are a mess in my area and I'm trying to fix 
them. I will come across a situation where there is a North-South way 
that crosses an East-West way. Thet are joined with a common node. 
However in reality it is a staggered junction.

So I need to split the North-South way into two pieces and it intersects 
the East-West way in two places.

I cannot figure out how to do this in JOSM. I've tried everything - 
splitting a way at nodes, ungluing, etc. The way always remains joined. 
Can someone please give me a step by step guide to fixing this alignment 
problem?

I hope I explained it clearly enough.

Thanks, Andy

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] National Atlas

[Andrew Ayre]

OK, I have the data in JOSM in the WGS84 projection as a GPX file. I 
converted the GPX layer to a data layer. I then zoomed in to one small 
distinct piece and selected all the nodes.

Next I went to the menu and choose Forest and entered a name for this 
piece (Coronado National Forest). However the area wasn't shaded.

Is this the right way to do it?

Andy

Tyler wrote:
> I know that for the National Park boundaries the 
> national atlas data is much worse than park specific data. I would 
> suspect that to be the case for national forest boundaries as well on 
> the National Atlas. As Eric said, most government data is alright to use.
> 
> I found the Forest service site for region 3 [1] and I tossed the admin 
> boundaries and and the wilderness boundaries into Arc and compared that 
> data with the national atlas forest boundaries data. I can confirm the 
> national atlas data has much less detail than the FS data. The forest 
> service data is also unambiguous in terms of copyright and is usable on OSM.
> 
> But what you gain in resolution you also lose in terms of import speed. 
> Also, check out the National Forest Service data on the wiki and add 
> your project to it [2]. 
> 
> [1] http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/gis/datasets.shtml
> [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_Forest_Service_Data
> 
> Happy mapping!
> 
> -Tyler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

Re: [Talk-us] National Atlas

[Andrew Ayre]

Thanks Tyler and Eric!

Andy

Tyler wrote:
> I know that for the National Park boundaries the 
> national atlas data is much worse than park specific data. I would 
> suspect that to be the case for national forest boundaries as well on 
> the National Atlas. As Eric said, most government data is alright to use.
> 
> I found the Forest service site for region 3 [1] and I tossed the admin 
> boundaries and and the wilderness boundaries into Arc and compared that 
> data with the national atlas forest boundaries data. I can confirm the 
> national atlas data has much less detail than the FS data. The forest 
> service data is also unambiguous in terms of copyright and is usable on OSM.
> 
> But what you gain in resolution you also lose in terms of import speed. 
> Also, check out the National Forest Service data on the wiki and add 
> your project to it [2]. 
> 
> [1] http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/gis/datasets.shtml
> [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_Forest_Service_Data
> 
> Happy mapping!
> 
> -Tyler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] National Atlas

[Andrew Ayre]

Hi,

I see the National Atlas has a shapefile download for Federal lands. I'm 
interested in getting the National forests in Arizona into OSM, but the 
data sets I've found so far are crude. This one has good detail IIRC.

I can't find licensing information for this government site. Is all US 
Government data OK to use or do I need to find something explicit? Any 
ideas on this particular data?

http://nationalatlas.gov/atlasftp.html#fedlanp

Andy

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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

[Talk-us] TIGER Data in Wrong Place

[Andrew Ayre]

Hi! When I load OSM data into my GPS unit using mkgmap for a place in 
the UK then it is accurate. When I load OSM data for Tucson, Arizona 
then it is off by perhaps 100ft.

I would like to make the maps for Tucson usable, so my questions are:

   - how do I tell where this problem begins and ends?

   - how do I fix it?

I don't have the time to manually move everything, so there must be some 
kind of automated solution? Does this problem exist for the whole of the 
US? Is it well understood?

Also if you look at the diagonal (NW-SE) part of the Arizona-Mexico 
border there are streets in the US that appear in Mexico - the whole 
border area appears to be a mess. How do I know what needs to be done to 
fix this? The error looks larger than 100ft.

Andy

-- 
Andy
PGP Key ID: 0xDC1B5864

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