Re: [Talk-us] Federally Funded Research R&D Centers: landuse=military?

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

> some special deal with the government that they only take federal
> funding.
>

Actually one MITRE division accepted some State government and Civil
Fedederal (e.g. DOT) contracts as well as DOD over the years. They
typically have separate accounting to keep civil money separate from mil ...

As someone noted, these are all specially chartered non-profits. industrial
/ science park like CERN makes sense.

Regarding Lincoln Labs, I forget if they have military security on their
driveway; if so, landuse remains military and they're a tenant. If they
have their own industrial access, maybe they are industrial.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] Railway start and end dates?

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Russ Nelson  wrote:

> And you don't need start_date:railway, because you've already created
> a relation for most every railway, so put start_date on the relation.
>

That's an excellent suggestion from a data point of view too.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Possible (Subtle) Vandalism

[Bill Ricker]

> Can someone check in on these edits from a wiki-vandal who was recently
> banned from Wikimedia sites? They also made some bad edits on our wiki that
> have since been reverted, but we should check to make sure his edits in the
> map were ok:

> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jermboy27/edits

One chrangeset is in my area, looks dubious.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/11454677

The change for Kimberly St, is giving a street name for an un-named
new-development street. Could be correct, could be vanity.

Lexington Drive cites source = Google Maps, which isn't kosher here;
also he assigned name to new development, could be vanity; no source
for speed limit added.

Albermarle Road (9279766) is duplicated, with addition hgv = no  added
 for two blocks  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hgv
looks dubious, there are houses and cross streets.

Wolcott Avenue (9242832) added access tags only

Coney Street (131624307) added cycleway = opposite_lane , which per
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway?uselang=en-US would
only be appropriate with  oneway=yes, which this does not have. I
haven't driven that block of Coney, but this seems inappropriate.

I could do a drive by on Saturday to check if Kimberly and Lexington
signs have been posted since BING imagery showed dirt, but looks bad
in other ways .

I will send a message to contributor OceanVortex whose changes were
potentially vandalized in case he(or she) has input.

bill

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Possible (Subtle) Vandalism

[Bill Ricker]

> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jermboy27/edits

Several other of his older change sets have been reverted already.

Warmbag fixed http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8351104 so
reverting that one would cause more harm.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Redaction bot is heading our way!

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Toby Murray  wrote:

> Well, here is a brief overview of the bot's activities for today.
> There are still a couple of areas that errored out or are still in
> progress but this should be most of it.
> http://ni.kwsn.net/~toby/OSM/redaction_bot_USA.png


Are the Red the decliners/blacklist and the Green ? whitelists ? or what
here ?

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] SOTM US Portland - Call for participation

[Bill Ricker]

>
> Do you have a story or project to share at State Of The Map US,
> Portland Oct 13-14? Now is the time to submit your abstract!
> ...



> See you all in Portland!
>

One assumes you mean the new Portland Oregon not old Portland Maine.

(Is it too much to expect OSM'ers of all people to realize there are more
than one Portland USA? I've rather given up on normals and non-geo-geek
geeks, but mappers ...)


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] SOTM US Portland - Call for participation

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> That's pretty pedantic, when most people assume Oregon by default given
> that it's the largest city on the planet with that name.
>

Damn straight it's pedantic. And parochial. They're both proud traditions
here in old New England.

I accept that remembering that Portland might be ambiguous to some
ignorable percentage of the population that will
be disappointed and embarrassed at being fooled once again when it's of
course not our Portland that some wonderful event is coming to is just too
much to expect from the cool kids spinning off other events in hometown of
OSCON.

But I think it's fair to expect it of self-appointed geo-encyclopedists.

But I was a bit harsh to complain on it to Martijn, who being a recent
transplant may reasonably have assumed the big Portland USA was named for
Portland UK. Sorry Martijn. (Good luck with the Springfields as even the
Simpsons can't keep them straight.)


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] US-Canadian boarder

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) <
calvin.metc...@state.ma.us> wrote:

> I noticed this
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=44.524&lon=-67.101&zoom=10&layers=M and
> really can’t make heads or tails of it. 
>
>
Way details
Way 121194904Details 

   - *border_status*: dispute
   - *source*: geobase


Aren't you glad Mass isn't responsible for Maine's borders anymore ?  :-)

Bill in Boston
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] osm data on boston.com, perhaps, definitely not atttributed

[Bill Ricker]

Good work Greg !


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] osm data on boston.com, perhaps, definitely not atttributed

[Bill Ricker]

Agreed.

The oddest thing to me is the behavior is specifically sensitive to being
iframed.
The src= link used directly has attribution

"© OpenStreetMap  and contributors, under an open
license "

but when used in iframe src= (exactly as shown as entire )

"Tiles courtesy of MapQuest "


If that's even correct on MapQuest (e.g. due to MapQuest ackn elsewhere on
page),
it should only be true if iframe referer is *.Mapquest.com not some other
site?

added thought -- If  osm.org is serving tiles *rendered* by MQ perhaps
*BOTH* are in order ! )
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] SPUI mapping

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Steve Coast  wrote:

> As nobody has linked to it yet;
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPUI
>

The entry for NH in the Wikipedia is in error; the History page shows one
attempt to correct it has been replace d by a different mistake?!

NH101@NH125 intersection as mapped
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?zoom=15&mlat=43.0265&mlon=-71.0738
is a classic Diamond, and imagery agrees.

The NH SPUI per Wikipedia History page 2008 edit is actually NH101@NH108.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?zoom=15&mlat=42.99247&mlon=-70.92666
which indeed is mapped as a SPUI and shows as such in imagery.


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] OSM in the news - BBC Radio Documentary "Mapping the Void"

[Bill Ricker]

BBC World Service Radio programme [sic] "The Documentary" playing for the
last several days has focussed on volunteer mapping, including OSM. Episode
title  "Mapping the Void".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01wl743
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/docarchive/docarchive_20140408-0906a.mp3


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Re Entire town missing - Haverhill, MA

[Bill Ricker]

> noticed a suspiciously empty area.
> It looks like someone deleted the entire town of Haverhill, MA.

I wonder if there is any way to tell if this was recent, or if the Tiger
data being replaced by MassGIS import may have replaced Haverhill by one
interstate by some misadventure of conversion? If the later, while it might
be quicker to restore Tiger but more optimal to get MassGIS data (?back?) in
there.

If there's no chance of MassGIS reload or restore, we have a golden
opportunity to go drive around :-)

-- 
Bill
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] bus-use only busways at metro station?

[Bill Ricker]

For the bus-only ramps and driveways  at a publicly operated rapid-transit /
bus interchange station, is there a better solution than adding
access=private ?

highway=residential was the import from MassGIS, which is obviously not
right, but what's right?

($300 fine if a "kiss and ride" private vehicle inadvertently errs and veers
in)
-- 
Bill in Boston
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Re Entire town missing - Haverhill, MA

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Dale Puch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just noticed, braintree is also missing, so eotroads_128 and 40
> freetown 102
> glouchester 107
> are not in the completed list of files, but I don't know if that proves they
> were not uploaded or not.

Gloucester looks pretty empty. rt.128 imported, interstates appear to
havebeen a separate upload, the rest are user entered by "DialH" which
makes import more challenging.


-- 
Bill
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

[Talk-us] Boston Coastline leak? Re: Where next?

[Bill Ricker]

On http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Boston and the main map, it
looks like we have a coastline lean in Boston.

Bill


On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Russ Nelson  wrote:
> I have mapping parties booked for the following cities:
>
> 1/31: Potsdam, NY (a practice party in my hometown)
> 2/14: Boston, MA (technically Somerville, but it's on the T)
> 2/21: New York, NY
>
> Where should I go next?  I have Baltimore, Philadelphia, and
> Pittsburgh on my plate.  Anybody wanting me to come to one of these
> cities sooner rather than later?  How about talks?  Can I give a talk
> to your cycling club or user group?  How about a geography class, or
> GIS association?
>
> --
> --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com   | Delegislation is a slippery
> Cloudmade supports http://openstreetmap.org/| slope to prosperity.
> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241   | Fewer laws, more freedom.
> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | Sheepdog  | (Not a GOP supporter).
>
> ___
> 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] Boston Coastline leak? Re: Where next?

[Bill Ricker]

> I don't think so. The Boston tile seems to switch between being
> all-water and being filled in based on who rendered it last, despite no
> significant change in data that I've observed. I'm pretty convinced that
> this is a rendering problem somewhere, not a coastline problem.

Hmm. the Coastline viewer is Flagging Chelsea Creek.
http://tile.openstreetmap.nl/coastlines.html?lon=-71.0861&lat=42.3736&zoom=13&layers=B00T



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Boston Coastline leak? Re: Where next?

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Christopher Schmidt
 wrote:
> just assumed it was a renderer problem instead of a data problem.

looks like it's both ?-)

can you or someone figure out what the fix is?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Boston Coastline leak? Re: Where next?

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Bill Ricker  wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Christopher Schmidt
>  wrote:
>> just assumed it was a renderer problem instead of a data problem.
>
> looks like it's both ?-)
>
> can you or someone figure out what the fix is?

seems to me that freshwater on the inland side of a dam with locks
should not be natural=coastline, so i am adding waterway=dam,lock=yes
to the Amelia Earhart Dam and converting the offending coastline
polygons to waterway=riverbank. this may not fix watever the intrinsic
problem is - polygons seem rightway round, clockwise wet. I am
unclear on how adjacent wet polygons should touch, maybe i should ask
that on Newbies :-)



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tiger Street Names and Copyright

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Russ Nelson  wrote:
>  Even if there is no purposeful
> Easter Egg,

 we use either feild observation or  Yahoo aerial imagery or other
open sources to verify actually existence to avoid such. original
question I Think assumed as much.

>  replications of errors only present in the map is evidence
> of copying, and it is copying that copyright exists to control.

right.  single source work is copying not research and thus illicit -
and dangerous for quality.


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Province / State borders

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 6:59 AM, Richard Weait  wrote:
> Borders for Vermont and New York appear "bolder" than for Minnesota and
> Illinois.  Have they been tagged differently, or duplicated?

an additional possibility is eastern borders are more wiggly following
terrain as opposed to ruler on a map by the surveyors following in the
wake of Lewis & Clark , and so those borders might render wider at low
zoom, because the points are dense and not aligned?  In the bad old
days, mapping systems had to decimate borders to scale before
rendering, which can alas truncate Cape Cod.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] silly borders

[Bill Ricker]

>  We should fix our fence.

Ayuh. Good fences make good naaybahs. [1]

> Shouldn't each
> border be a single way, with a relation for each adjacent region?

around whom does it go clockwise?

Shouldn't the entirety of a country's (state/province/county) be a
(multi)polygon for area?
Can that be emulated by relations, and would that be provided
abstraction or a pain in the punctuation for users of the data?

can the relation have a REVERSE option so that the entire outline can
be traced for a green's theorem planimeter area computation?

If there's an island between the lines, can it declare independence? [2]

> We should have a fence-mending party.

We want the fence nice and porous all summer  until after WorldCon Montreal. [3]

[1] http://writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/frost-mending.html
[2] http://isbn.nu/9780448054476
[3] http://www.anticipationsf.ca/

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] silly borders

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Matthew Schneider
 wrote:
>> Great.  Which one's correct?

looks to me like they were traced with subtly different projections
that supposedly were squared up but didn't quite fit.

E.g., Interesting factoid i just picked up - Warsaw Pact and NATO used
the same primary meridians etc for their UTM grids, but minorly
different geoids, optimize for their areas of interest, so you can't
directly use one side'gmap posits to call artillery of the other  ...
or plot their textual minefield on your map.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] [Talk-ca] silly borders

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Zeke Farwell  wrote:
> Canadian Geobase data to be more accurate than the TIGER data.

No surprise. Since Tiger is for the Census, it only has to have highly
accurate national border where it separates adjacent houses, in those
rare split towns. I'll bet Tiger's County-County  borders are far more
accurate than  US/State-TA/Province.

I'll bet MassGIS beats Tiger State & county too.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] "Historical" locations

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Russ Nelson  wrote:
> I'd prefer to see them left in, but with a :historic appended to the
> name of the tags.  In some cases, there remains evidence of the
> historical use, e.g. what was a schoolhouse is now a home.

Certainly moving or cloning the Historic marker into the tags, the
formal metadata, is better than it being only informal in the name.

That would make them disappear from the common renderings, but would
keep them in the database for use by a custom style or query?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] "Historical" locations

[Bill Ricker]

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Michal Migurski  wrote:
> Although tagging for the
> renderer is greatly discouraged, right now a lot of renders look
> wrong

Fixing the tags to say what it is is not "tagging for the renderer".
Many bad renders are diagnostic of truly semantically inadequate tags.
A good fix helps all possible sane renders and non-graphic users of the data.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Blame me for JOSM yellowness

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Apollinaris Schoell
 wrote:
> 2. http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=121u8tc&s=5
> this is a residential road imported from tiger. have fun to drive here

that does need surface condition and access tags. Maybe a bollard/chicane too.

but if it's a recorded (right of) way, it's a very good thing to have
it access=foot in our data until the developer finally paves it and
people for the census to count in 2020 move in. removing it shows
TomTom's assumption that there is only one use for GIS data, turn by
torn go-to nagging. not so.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Blame me for JOSM yellowness

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Apollinaris Schoell
 wrote:
> . and when it was
> implemented send a not[e] with  "blame me ..."

*chuckle*

fair point !



the commendable idea of option control is awkward to implement, since
this is a style setting in XML, not a java patch.

Does JOSM allow user override of XML standard values by trying to find
xml files outside the Jar before using the one in the jar?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Blame me for JOSM yellowness

[Bill Ricker]

On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Russ Nelson  wrote:

> Okay, it's pretty clear that most people don't want this change
> implemented.

but it's still the right thing to do.



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Massachusetts topo map

[Bill Ricker]

> I've been working on a topographic map based on OSM data,
> It's (currently) limited to the state of Massachusetts -

fun! Very pretty.

will need permalinks, I know a page that should link your render of
Fourth Cliff.

Day Blvd Beach in South Boston is rendering as a Swamp, as is Malibu Beach?

nice look over all, and in detail too. i like it

Bill in Boston
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Load Test For Me?

[Bill Ricker]

> I'm toying with using Google's AppEngine to serve up map tiles. Could you
> guys try browsing the following slippy map to do a load test for me?

nice. if i scroll too far it's a bit slow.

Lars's tiles are exactly what I would like to layer an openlayer over
... so I am very interested in what you're doing.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Massachusetts topo map

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Lars Ahlzen  wrote:
> These areas are classified as "FLATS" (i.e. tidal flats) in
> the MassGIS hydrography dataset

ah, well, they're clam flats with added sand for decor.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] GPS Babel format file to generate Open Layers Text Marker file ?

[Bill Ricker]

Has anyone already made a GPSbabel control format file  to specify the
lat-lan-title-desc-icon-icon-icon format for OpenLayers marker layer
file?

I suspect it's quite doable, but happy to reuse if it's there. (google
didn't find one)

(I already have perl and php scripts to do it from certain sources,
and may decide thats the way to go.)

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] Potential Datasources - New Hampshire state DOT GIS

[Bill Ricker]

Stumbled on this looking for something else, should be useful to our  NH
neighbors to the north, in case they haven't seen it. Apparently NH has GIS
by Dept instead of unified as in Mass.

*http://www.nh.gov/dot/org/projectdevelopment/planning/gis/*

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] users and diary nearest home ?

[Bill Ricker]

Would it be possible to see on the nearest users on /user/me page to
see 10 nearest users with activity? Of my 10 nearest, there is one
public edit, and one trace uploaded (for elsewhere), none joined the
city wiki page, and none with activity this year. I guess i can troll
for another 10 by moving my home pos, but filtering for or weighting
distance by  new-or-active would seem useful. Am I missing a way to do
that?

In the Diary, I would like to see nearby entries only sometimes. Is
there a way (besides patches welcome)?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] no streets in gloucester, ma??

[Bill Ricker]

Hi Chris !

> 3 cities in MA wre never imported due to problems at the time of the
> import. IIRC, they were Braintree, Gloucester, and something else that I
> can't remember.

Looks like Freetown is still blank too?
http://osm.org/go/Zec_zlG--?layers=0B00FTF

Braintree was one you fixed and loaded. I recently noticed I forget to
re-download the Garmin file after Braintree was loaded, as I felt the
loss of rich data when I short cut thru to Weymouth. must do that ...

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] Fwd: [OSM-newbies] Roundabout direction

[Bill Ricker]

should have cc'd talk-us  before i hit send ...

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Jens Müller wrote:
> On 02.07.2009 16:09, Peter Childs wrote:
>>> You don't need a "oneway" tag :
>>> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout
>>> >
>>> > This is implied by the tag "junction=roundabout" itself (if it is not
>>> > oneway, then it is not a roundabout).
>>> >
>> That is not 100% true.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Roundabout_(Hemel_Hempstead)
>
> That's not one roundabout, that's a collection of several ones.

that's the difference between technical tagging and common usage. For
a motorist, it is one junction of roadways, to a mapper, it is
multiple roundabout  junctions of oneway=no links or if divided paired
oneway=yes links.

Of the four UK Magic Roundabouts, one  http://osm.org/go/eus_enMmc--
needs some love, there are no mini-roundabouts marked.

So on the four magic roundabouts, who has right of way? In the US,
most states give right of way to traffic in or leaving the roundabout
(or 'rotary' as we say), but some states in their wisdom were
heterodox, which makes a roundabout spanning the iirc VA MD border
treacherous as the rules change every half revolution. But there is a
tendency in some designs for drivers on what the feel is the thru road
to assume THEY have right of way irregardless, which appears to be the
intent of the engineers here http://osm.org/go/ZfIvvIBi7-- which has a
circular island with statue, but we instead of the usual YIELD sign
for entering traffic, we have STOP signs
herehttp://osm.org/go/ZfIvh2N4Y--  to prevent thru traffic sailing
thru to the detriment or circulation and pedestrians,

Are there any known Magic Roundabouts outside the UK? Wikipedia only
lists 4 in UK.

--
Bill in Boston
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed automated motorway_link mass edit

[Bill Ricker]

Would it be possible to FLAG the 2k orphan / singleend motorway_links
with an unreview tag?

regarding exceptions that prove the rule

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Yeah, you definitely have to be careful.  It's OK for a motorway to
> touch:
> 1. another motorway
> 2. a motorway_link
> 3. a non-mototorway, but only at its *END* node.  Not at its beginning
>   node
> 4. "service" roads.  Our friendly police officers love to use these
>   little spurs to hide for speed traps in Oregon. :)
> Here's where I-72 ends, for instance.

A couple of places where I wish we could fix the actual highway -

we have a streetlight between in interstate toll booth exit ramp (Mass
Pike I-90) and start of a free interstate bypass/spur misnamed(?)
I-291 that must have an exemption or two from federal rules -
http://osm.org/go/ZeV9lxiN-  (i suggest misnamed since I-2xx are
supposed to be bypasses with both ends on parent I-xx, so unless there
are abandoned plans to continue it north to I-91 it should be a
I-1/3/5xx Spur) They had to use the strobe red on the traffic light at
the turn, since sensible drivers know there's no traffic light after
toll going from one interstate to another right?

then there's this piece of work in Newburgh NY -
http://osm.org/go/Zc8iNVj6- where several stoplights and a shopping
plaza are substituting for a motorway_link ramp.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported

[Bill Ricker]

The Upper Charles Trail was included in the MASSgis import. It has a
note="under construction". As imported and proposed, it slavishly
followed a passenger and freight line straight to the center of town,
but Milford sensibly added scenic curves and grades, connecting a
picnic area and municipal ball fields, and using an interchange
underpass instead of digging anew where I-495 had obliterated the
rail. As fair as I can tell from web, it may not be completed much
beyond where I explored on foot in Milford.

What are the tags for abandoned RR right of way that is NOT a
biketrail, but still visible?

Is there any value to keeping the MASSGIS tags for the old right of
way and proposed route where it has been blocked by re-grading,
housing development, and or foliage?

How much of the MASSGIS tags should be copied to the as-built path, if any?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>  So abandonment is a serious legal step, and can
> revert ownership of the ROW, etc.   The tracks can still be present.

but preferably transferred to a railtrail org or the state

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Editing_Standards_and_Conventions for US Interstate highways

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

> I suppose it should.  In Mass you can be on 128 south and 93 north,
> going east.  This is confusing to people from away, and it might help to
> display it.
>

Used to. IIRC the state has dropped the MA-128 designation from Dedham to
Braintree.

Which if the case, we'd need a historical tag/relation.

A case that still exists without notoriety is US 3 follows I-95 N / MA-128 N
for the with of Burlington.

(Part of the problem of course is the ring roads are styled N and S by
federal standard instead of CW & CCW. Compounded by Feds or States  not
following standards for ring and spur.  And then i95 never being built
Dedham to Danvers as planned so that label is on the road that should have
been I-295.)

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] CANCELED - Boston and Marlboro MA August Mapping Parties

[Bill Ricker]

The Boston/Marlboro MA events scheduled for August 1st and 2nd are **
CANCELED**,
for lack of an Ambassador and we can't pull together enough of the local
cadre to do it on our own on short notice on the only dry weekend of summer.

The local cadre intend to spread the word at the MIT Flea in Sept and Oct,
and as many user groups and community meetings as we can.

Next Mapping Party TBD.

To help with future Boston/Mass events, sign up at Boston Wiki page


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Open Plaques project analogues for Rest of World ?

[Bill Ricker]

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Frankie
Roberto wrote in talk-tran...@osm:
> Heh. Sounds a bit like the geo information which is captured in the Open
> Plaques project (http://www.openplaques.org/) which I run...

I like it. Value add without overfilling the basemap repository.

Are there similar layered data initiatives for non-UK plaques and
historic markers? US or North America?

-- 
Bill in Boston usa
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] talk-us-ma: Duplicate nodes in mass

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> > But I think we
> > need some sort of "find duplicate nodes, and if they match
>

that was I believe the intention.


> > properties,
> > or just have different massgis import dates, merge them" bot.
>

or even same date but different time stamp.  This duplication is intrinsic
to the MassGIS format that was imported - each town was a separate dataset.

There are roughly 7.1 million nodes in Massachussetts, and 270k of them
> share the same location as another node. This is just an analysis based
> on location, not on tags, but it can be assumed that most of those 270k
> nodes are not intentionally duplicate.


they are intentionally duplicate in massGIS and uslessly duplicate in OSM
afaik from what Chris has said of the import.


> It is possible that there are
> duplicate ways as well.


not afaik. the vast majority are town border exact matches and probably some
at on ramps.


> > This is  > beyond my clue level presently.



> But it is not a big problem, it is something
> that could be fixed in a day.
>

I thought Chris had the beginings of a script that would do this.

It is possible that  if Lars, Shankar and I spent some tuits looking at
Frederik's script we could mutate it to do this.  It would be a nice example
for the Boston.PM presentation next month. I think he said it was uploaded
to a git host or somewhere?


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Boston transit info available

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Richard Weait  wrote:

> Boston is releasing their transit information for the Boston and
> surrounding areas.
>

the stops, stations and basic track info is already imported from MASS GIS.

opening the schedule data is wonderful but would be for a layered service.

route information might be importable as relations *if* we can match to
existing nodes.



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-newbies] Multiple gmapsupp.img files on Garmin

[Bill Ricker]

I will have to try this with my 76csx

Does it have to be loaded as gmapsupp.img and used once before each
renaming?

I have been placing extra *.img in named subdirs and copying to Garmin/ to
select, but being able to switch without a usb connect would be much better,
since states in New England are so small, I can drive across a corner of  NH
or VT in not much longer than than it took to swap

Bill



On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 10:24 PM, swanilli  wrote:

> I have just accidentally discovered that it is possible to have
> multiple gmapsupp.img files on my Garmin Oregon 300. Since I have not
> seen this method mentioned anywhere else here it is.
>
> Problem: I regularly update my local OSM data (since I am in Australia
> from http://www.osmaustralia.org/garmin.php) but I also have other
> maps, notably topographic, on the Garmin uit that I don't change. If I
> upload the combined gmapsupp.img using MapSource it takes forever.
> What would be nice would be to only upload the tiles that have changed
> but the conventional advice is that there can only be one gmapsupp.img
> file per drive i.e. one in the base unit and one on the micro SD card.
>
> Method:
>
> 1. Upload to Garmin unit the unchanging maps. This creates (or
> overwrites) a file called gmapsupp.img.
>
> 2. Disconnect the Garmin unit, switch on, then open and check the map
> uploaded.
>
> 3. Reconnect the Garmin unit to your computer and locate the
> gmapsupp.img just created.
>
> 4. Change the file name to anything else e.g. gmapsupp-topo.img.
>
> 5. Disconnect the unit and switch on again. The original maps will
> still be there.
>
> 6. Reconnect and upload a new set of maps. This will create a new
> gmapsupp.img file but not overwrite the first lot of maps.
>
> 7. Repeat the steps above, changing the file name each time.
>
> 8. To overwrite data, change the name of the file back to gmapsupp.img
> and upload new maps. (No sure if the file can't just be deleted but I
> have been getting the "The map set is approximately nnMB, but only
> nnnMB is available in the destination. Please select fewer maps and
> try again." message from MapSource.)
>
>
> There seems to be no limit to the number of files that can be handled
> in this way. I have 16 at present making it very quick to add or
> update existing data.
>
> ___
> newbies mailing list
> newb...@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
>



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] TopOSM Colorado

[Bill Ricker]

> TopOSM-CO has a few important differences from TopOSM-MA:

What, MASSGIS doesn't cover Aspen?

> * Color-by-elevation in base layer.

interesting

> * Contour lines and hillshading generated from NED [1].

does that mean you're interpolating lines from a grid?

> * Hydrography (lakes, rivers, wetlands etc) from NHD [2].

which will eventually be in OSM

> * The hillshading, contour lines and map features are on separate
> layers. Use the layer switcher (top right "+") to toggle.

AWESOME. that's beautiful.

> Since the data is nationwide, the same technique could (theoretically)
> be used to generate a complete TopOSM map of the US, or even the world
> by using e.g. SRTM for elevation and OSM for hydrography.

requiring only a render farm plus some config ?

Use any perl in ingesting or anything?


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Unpaved streets

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 3:20 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> There are streets in my town (Stow, MA) that are definitely not paved
>> that I have driven on with a Saturn SC2 and not had a problem.
>
> OK, but can you drive them in a PT Cruiser Touring Edition, a Porche
> 911, or some other low-slung, stiff-suspension vehicle on it without
> problems?


Safer there than primary streets in Boston. A friend lost money on
every test drive when rebuilding Lotus Europa cars Boston as he had to
replace at least one strut. Between utility dig crews' bad patches and
Jack Frost's po-tholes and frost heaves, our paved streets are often
in worse condition than unpaved -- which can be much more cheaply
resurfaced in the spring with a grader.

However the Condition=Intolerable on Greg's Stowe streets sounds like
they've not been regraded and while there may be clearance for a
Porsche or Lotus (not so rutted at to be two wheel tracks), it might
be as hazardous for the sporty stiff suspension and decorative hubcaps
as my city streets.

Surface=gravel would be a data improvement to much of the tiger
imports in my original hometown upcountry in Maine, but I've heard
some of the winterized cottage neighborhoods have been paved in the
last few decades, either being converted from private to public
ownership or by subscription. Alas the cost to pave the one that would
improve the value of the backside of Dad's woods far exceeds the value
he'd gain.
-- 
Bill in Boston
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Another shot at a whole-US Garmin map

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Apollinaris Schoell  wrote:
> the tiles from this site are not routable. It is stated on the website.

thanks to Tiger and MassGIS issues, until we stitch the stacked nodes
along borders as well as certain onramps. the US just isn't routable.
other threads discussing how to fix.


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-newbies] Multiple gmapsupp.img files on Garmin

[Bill Ricker]

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Greg Troxel  wrote:
>> I will have to try this with my 76csx

> I tried with a Vista HCx and didn't get it to work.

Doesn't work with my 76csx either, which is fairly recent firmware i think.


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] U.S. Local Chapters

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Kate Chapman  wrote:
> I've heard various talk going on about local chapters in various places. I
> did a quick archive search but didn't find that much information regarding
> U.S. chapters.  There seems to be people interested, but perhaps working
> separately.

At least some US local cadre organize around the state and city
wiki.osm.org pages, with just an event announcement on the list.
eg http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Boston

I've been around 501(c)(3) and related state incorporation and
charitable regs more often than I'd like. I'd rather spend my mapping
time mapping and leave any corporate governance to the OSMF and
CloudMade.

Incorporation is useful if there are assets or liabilities.   I don't
see a cash flow in a OSM chapter.  If there isn't enough cash flow to
pay for Directors' Liability Insurance, incorporating just focuses
Liability on the Officers and Directors. The asset is the Map date,
rights for which are held by OSMF.  CloudMade and the OSMF should
handle the legal issues. Let's map.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] U.S. Local Chapters

[Bill Ricker]

If your are going to incorporate at a national level, please look at
examples of good and bad examples in the FOSS community.

GrokLaw linked to this discussion, which has relevance outside its own niche.
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20090914102959510


Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] U.S. Local Chapters

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Anthony  wrote:
> I'd recommend setting up the draft bylaws prior to making the decision of
> where to incorporate.  How we want to run the organization will help
> determine where (and whether) to incorporate.

Right, as otherwise the locality dictates what sort of bylaws you can have.

Anthony's point on the bylaws talk page that a discussion of
principles and alternatives should come before legally drafting seems
wise -- and drafting thzlegalese  to  match our principles and the law
of the chose state should be left to a professional.

Massachusetts has several oddities in recommended not-for-profit
bylaws  and THREE separate annual reporting requirements. It's the
only jurisdiction I have board / officer / bylaws-committee expertise
in, and I would have to recommend incorporating a national entity
elsewhere. There's probably a state with worse paperwork for a small
board,  but I don't know.

The only safe early choice is probably Delaware ... provided you don't
make replacement of provisional bylaws difficult, which error any good
Delaware attorney should help a provisional board from making. Per
expert I cited in previous post, it may be the only sane choice
anyway.

Having been a Director and Officer of a 501(c)(3) corporation subject
to Discovery in Litigation, I can not recommend serving on a Board
that does not have adequate Directors' Liability Insurance.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
I am not a lawyer, and Justice Scalia agrees it's better that way
http://url.ie/2k04

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

Re: [Talk-us] CDPs and admin_level

[Bill Ricker]

I sympathize with Greg, and if the surveyors and computational mappers
ruled the world, the real world we seek to model will be simpler.

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:44 PM, David Lynch  wrote:
> where city limits cross county lines,

WTF? Where does that happen? down where a county is called a parish
and is region within sound of a steeple?

 NYC inverts normal, iirc NYC is effectively a federation of
city-counties called boroughs, but no county line crosses NYC
boundary, right?

When Boston adsorbed towns in adjacent counties, Suffolk county gained
land too -- and likewise Boston and Suffolk released towns in the
harbor to a non-adjacent (on land) coastal county. (as a result,
Norfolk Co Mass is reputedly the only tripartite noncontiguous county
separated by towns in other counties not by water )

If State and National electoral districts are included, the
gerrymander boundary will assuredly cross, not follow, admin
boundaries higher than Ward & Precinct, which may be redrawn to
convenience the gerrymander.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] US Chapter Call?

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Kate Chapman  wrote:
> unless there is a major push that we should do things outside of working
> hours

that rubs my fur the wrong way.

holding meetings during working hours will bias attendance in favor of
those sponsored by an interested corporate entity and the
retired/unemployed/student, and against those with a day job.  Most
voluntary organizations don't start discriminating against average
members' access to meetings until the professional management and
decorative board members have begun wrenching control from the actual
volunteers.

if this Chapter is to be an obvious sham front for CM, by all means,
hold meetings at 1pm PDT/PST workdays, that will tell other GIS
vendors to buy seats on the board fast or be shut out.

if that is NOT our intention, don't make it look like it is.

obviously, most meetings with lawyers will require a *subcommittee*
that can speak with lawyers in business hours.

Geography - Hawaii, Alaska,  and some US administered territories
would also be in scope for this chapter, so there's far more than 3
time zones spanning the potentially interested parties (plus Indiana).

Speaking of parties, the Ubuntu semi-annual release parties will be
rolling through timezones on Oct 29th. eg 7pm EDT  Boston.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] US Chapter Call?

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Sarah Manley  wrote:
> Agreed that call a call during business hours will be difficult for a lot of
> people to attend. To be fair then, should we try for a saturday?

Thanks Sara, Kate -- that should help people *feel* included, even if
they *choose* not to call in.

(as i will choose not to -- big weather conference here saturday, one
of my favorite uses for maps)

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] meta Re: NY: I-87 Junction with I-84 in Newburgh

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Richard Welty  wrote:
> if we get obnoxious enough, we can get pushed to our own list, right?

right

but we all have interstate intersections, and I can think of one in my
state as messed up by the engineers and or politicians to the extent
of similar issues as that one

(in the midst of which i have dined, while bypassing the pay-parking
facility called Taaapaaan Zee Bridge
 ... how many A's in TZB?)

--
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] NY: I-87 Junction with I-84 in Newburgh

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Richard Welty  wrote:
> The interchange between I-87 (the Thruway) and I-84 in Newburgh is being
> extensively
> redone, with new ramps in new locations and significant changes in
> traffic pattern

Hallelujah.  Will we be able to transit from one to the other via ramp
without hitting a local revenue enhancement light and shopping Mall
entrance?

This would be worth marking on OpenStreetBugs too if someone else hadn't already
http://openstreetbugs.appspot.com/?lon=-73.89549700612197&lat=41.45682957793533&zoom=10


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] Massachusetts County reservoir tagging Re: Salt Fork Lake rendering issue

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Seth Fitzsimmons  wrote:

> That looks likely.  Quabbin Reservoir (Western MA) is also rendering
> similarly:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.3749&lon=-72.2847&zoom=12&layers=0B00FTF
>
> Last I checked, landuse=reservoir is being rendered like natural=water
> even though it shouldn't be.  With the MassGIS OpenSpace import, lots
> of landuse=reservoir polys were imported and represent "protected
> areas", not water.
>

Looks like tag use in the import was wrong as well as spelled wrong. So when
Seth fixed the spelling it flooded the county.

too much water in Holden and adjacent towns on all three -
Mapnik,  Osmarender , CycleMap render
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.3728&lon=-71.8307&zoom=14&layers=00B0FTF

compare to
http://toposm.com/ma/?zoom=15&layers=B000&lat=42.3518&lon=-71.8634
which uses MASSgis hydro layer.

Mass GIS landuse of was imported, but those borders are the protected
watershed boudary,  not waterline. Was tagged Landuse=resvoir, and ignored,
until Seth noticed typo. Now are being rendered as wet to the property
boundary.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/29759122
*source*= MassGIS OpenSpace (http://www.mass.gov/mgis/osp.htm)
*landuse*=reservoir

Per Wiki, the three Renders are all correctly interpreting tag
*landuse*=reservoir
as water surface.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreservoir

landuse=basin looks closer to the sense of the imported poly
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dbasin

Comment?


(I stumbled on this looking at the RailTrail.)

--

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map Update

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Richard Welty wrote:

> when looping through the parking lot to drop my daughter off at school,
> they winked in
> and out on the GPS display.
>

is perhaps the file too big for some models of garmin to process in real
time?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map Update

[Bill Ricker]

> is perhaps the file too big for some models of garmin to process in real
> time?
>
> i suppose, but it really seems like a couple of badly rendered tiles.
>

I'll  try it on my 76csx eventually .


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map Update

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Dave Hansen  wrote:

> > I'll  try it on my 76csx eventually .
>
> That's what I've got.  It seems to work pretty darn well.


That's very good news. Here in new england the state files are just too
small, one can drive across several and back on one tank of gas, and my
attempt to follow instructions to merge a newenland img file choked on the
bounding-box overlaps due to non-convex borders.   I was annoyed when i
drove off the map yesterday. -- the cloudmad qa map for Massachusetts covers
98% of Rhode Island since its cradled in Cap Cod's shoulder, but not the
southernmost tip of Newport where i was exploring a fort and incidentally
mapping yesterday. But passenger new the right detours so got some key
waypoints for future use too.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map Update

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

> so is there anything i should do/try/whatever?
>


have you used your state's cloudmade map that he built these from? they can
be a little hard to read, i crank backlight full and adjust viewing angle to
optimal.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Routable Mass Re: Whole-US Garmin Map Update

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Greg Troxel  wrote:
>  roads are disconnected at state boundaries due to being cut with a
>  non-splitter tool.  (splitter has special logic to insert nodes on
>  ways at tile boundaries.)  I think I had this problem when using
>  e.g. massachusetts.osm.bz2

i expect Massachusetts to be even stranger routing than rest of US
since the MassGIS file replicated nodes in each town file.  we had
talked of programatically collapsing the dup nodes.

I also am downloading Lambertus maps both from Dave and Lambertus to
experiment with.

(I don't  mind having routing on built-in and details on OSM ... as i
only have coarse builtin map and only use routing for through-routes,
i use range-and-azimuth for terminal guidance.)

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] More Garmin Maps

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Shaun McDonald
 wrote:
>> I don't think the Cloudmade-created maps I posted last time are really
>> meant for daily use.  I think they're intended to help people track down
>> and survey things like missing street names.
>
> That's correct, they are the error/noname edition.

I like those for everyday use ... i can notice the noname streets as i go by.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER considered harmful

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> Used state data instead, if I were to do a mass import.  Oregon GEO
> knows what they're doing, the US Census (along with the rest of the
> federal government) barely acknowledges we exist.  Which would you
> rather trust?

indeed, that's why there are massgis: tags instead of tiger: tags in
Massachusetts.

We get our own parochial weirdnesses as a result, but it's better than
TIGER in so many ways (even re oneway randomness).  I did a little
work on Rhode Island after a recent roadtrip and was reminded how
nasty raw TIGER imports are eg around interchanges. The one area
MassGIS fails us is finer granularity of the non-routable boundaries
off the primary thoroughfares, but it should be scriptably repairable.

Oregon GEO is quite possibly as enlightened about licensing as MassGIS
too -- if their data are better than Tiger and compatibly licensed
with OSM, it's worth importing as replacement for unfixed Tiger or
Tiger that only you have only un-abbreviated.  Hard part is deciding
what to do about the hand edits, either to tiger imports or new where
old tiger had nothing. This is the same as the discussion about
replacing old tiger with new.


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] More Garmin Maps

[Bill Ricker]

The Lambertus maps are very nice, drove around a bit today.


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] Appalachian Trail not rendering

[Bill Ricker]

I looked since someone asked

> Do these[Lambertus maps]  include hiking trails / tracks too?

Yes, but there's a universal render or data problems with some trails.

Lambertus and http://osm.org/go/ZfZ1jfd0-?layers=0B00FTF
both have local trails on Mt Washington, like

Lion Head Trail http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/42185886
   * name: Lion Head Trail
   * highway: path

 but neither show

The Appalachian Trail http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/32605362
   * name: Appalachaian Trail
   * surface: dirt
   * route: hiking
   * created_by: Potlatch 0.10f

Looks like we need a robo edit to add highway= tags to the AT and
anything similarly tagged.

--
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

[Talk-us] Maine Turnpike ?

[Bill Ricker]

Is anyone in Maine (USA) working on the Maine Turnpike?

When down east recently I noticed I was getting routing that wanted to
turn at overpasses. I de-tiger-ied exit 48 and the US 302 overpass,
dropping spuious inter connect nodes and adding bridges, checking
ramps; but the whole thing needs scanning.  If someone who's a
year-round Mainer as opposed to my once-and-future status is working
on it I won't butt in.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Import of EPA data

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

> I am generally in favor of imports.  But EPA superfund site data seems
> to be getting close to "there should be mashup with this data and osm as
> the baselayer" as opposed to importing it.
>

+1

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Nokia N900 ?

[Bill Ricker]

Separate Nokia question, anyone try the OSM map editing app from the
N800/810 on the new N900 with 3G ?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Nokia N900 ?

[Bill Ricker]

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Claudius  wrote:
> Are you referring to OSM2Go?

I think that is the one the N8x0 owners have recommended. Thanks for the info.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] script for adding layer=1 to bridges

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 2:13 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> > I've noticed that a lot of bridges don't include a layer= tag.  I
> > suspect this is because they render OK in mapnik...but not so well with
> > osmarenderer.  (Consider the railroad
> > in
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.76931&lon=-84.53762&zoom=17&layers=0B00FTF
> .)
>
> I'd suggest to modify Osmarender rather than the data, then.


No this is  Tiger import data, the data arrived  wrong and was half
corrected. (much of tiger has intersecting nodes where there should be
bridges. some bridge insertion went without layering), It missing all but
implied layering of bridge-nature. What we can't tell without checking
satellite view is whether the bridge is at grade level with the Railroad in
a ditch, or if the bridge pitches up over the RR.

If two otherwise uncorrected tiger records cross with a bridge, the bridge
should be level-of-other + 1 , which normally would make it layer=1 as Tiger
has no layers.
If three, hard to tell which is top ...



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] script for adding layer=1 to bridges

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 8:47 PM, David ``Smith'' wrote:

> Since some people consider
> the entire "layer" tag to be "tagging for the renderer" these people
> probably don't think it's important to add thorough layer information;
>

I would agree with your disagreement with such people. But I understand
their confusion. The *naming* of layer=* is unfortunately renderish, but it
carries real meaning beyond the oldschool mapmakers' plate masks. I would
wish the tag:layer had been more abstractly named tag:level. ah well.

I would also prefer real altitudes on all points rather than ordinal
relative levels (whether misnamed layer or not), but that's a bit of an ask.
And would cause semantic problems when ways become buildings (foundation or
roof elevation? include vertical segments?).


Ordering of the bridges in
http://www.stockphotopro.com/photo-thumbs-2/stockphotopro_33168BXD_no_title.jpgfrom
top-most to bottom-most is Data.

Likewise ordering of tunnel ramps weaving out of our Big Dig is Data.

It is DATA that a Transit line is in a uncovered ditch even when it's not
under a bridge.

Some non-rendering data-using software (or a person using data access) will
want to know up from down.
Silly example -- I could write a script to find examples of various
topological knots in the interchange ramp network, and which is under or
over at a crossing is critical.
Truck routing really need to know headroom at each underpass too, but we
don't have that usually.


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
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

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> I can think of several interstates that are unpaved and undivided,
> though all of them are in Alaska.
>

wow that's news to me. Are they limited access ?
How do those get tagged? highway=trunk, surface=dirt, divided=no  ?

"The exception that proves the rule" means *tests*  as in proof-testing gun
or armor. ...

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Garmin Geko 201 date problem reported

[Bill Ricker]

 Garmin Geko 201  reportedly has dates displayed and recorded in tracks are
off by decades.
See http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/10/garmin_dates/
http://www.gpspassion.com/FORUMSEN/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=132684

Surprised I don't see this on either list yet ... forward to any
GPS-relevant lists that don't have it yet.

It is Unclear if it has run off the end of its Y2K fix or has hit some
similar glitch; they say random number of decades off per restart, which
doesn't fit the Y2K paradigm or the Y2K windowing patch either, so YMMV.
Supposedly they're working on a firmware fix.



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] the meaning of trunk in the US

[Bill Ricker]

Does  your language

there are generally no driveways with direct access.
>

refer to single-family driveways or businesses?

I took a look with GoogleEarth. [It's ok, I'm not mapping that road.] The
divided section with 2-lanes plus turn-lanes cut into the median is
certainly not a motorway but is pretty good. There are so many turn lanes
it's in no way limited.

Usage here in Massachusetts, Trunk was used for divided,  limited access
that didn't quite make Motorway for reasons i can't elucidate;  divided with
driveways is is tagged Primary.

So I would say 301 is a Primary, at least in towns and areas where turn
lanes are frequent.
It might be Trunk in the boonies where left turn lanes are far between?

We could use a  biit more guidance in the wiki ..

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 19-03-2010

[Bill Ricker]

So do all SD-cable Garmins handle huge map files equally well or not ?



-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Lord-Castillo, Brett <
blord-casti...@stlouisco.com> wrote:

> River City Blvd/River City Casino Blvd; many people think the first is an
> abbreviation of the former. It isn't, two different streets that will route
> mail (and traffic) to two different sets of addresses
>

At least they're spelled differently.

In Boston, E911 call-takers need the Zip code implicit in the phone line
(wired or cell tower) to disambiguate exactly the same street name. Every
town that merged into Boston already had a Washington St  and none gave them
up.
http://maps.google.com/maps?oi=map&q=Washington%20St%2C%20Suffolk%2C%20MA
Also Charles, Mt Vernon, Park, ...

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Street Naming Conventions

[Bill Ricker]

One hopes the de-Bot-ing Bot will leave alone areas what weren't botted or
have no "tiger:name_base" tags.
Here in Boston, we have *massgis:way_id*= instead of tiger:* tags, and are
unabbreviated.

Sadly the naming conventions in the so called 'real world' (or the 1:1 scale
map :-) are not well followed and can not be relied upon. Near where we have
"E Street" intersecting  "East First Street", we have quite oddly "West
First Street" **extending past** "East First Street" at an angle, "East
First Street" having crossed the line of E-W demarcation, Dorchester Street,
to make up the slack when the street grid changes alignment to conform to
the land.  "West First Street" continues as "East Second Street"!
http://osm.org/go/ZfIvnO2Y

The other end of Dorchester Street is its intersection with Dorchester
Avenue, more confusion. This is at Andrew Square, which of course is *not*
square since it has 6 ways converging. (In Boston our major squares are not
square, and Circles needn't be circular either, although they probably once
were.)

Dorchester Avenue is colloquially known as Dot Ave, do we have a tag for
that?

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] OSM in the Linux press

[Bill Ricker]

As seen on OpenGeoData @OpenStreetMap Twitter --

@openstreetmap  Jon '*maddog*' Hall's
Picks OSM for one of Today's Six Best OSS Projects
 http://opengeodata.org/jon-maddog-halls-picks-osm-for-one-of-todays

=>
http://www.linux.com/news/software/applications/301412-jon-maddog-halls-picks-for-todays-six-best-oss-projects-

Backstory -- Jon 'maddog' Hall is currently Executive Director of Linux
International, longtime board member of Usenix, and writes a monthly column
for Linux Magazine (the US one, not the UK one). He was one of Linus
Torvold's earliest supporters in industry, and is perhaps the premier
graybeard spokesperson for FLOSS. For ideas for the 'list' column, Jon
polled his local LUG mailing list for nominations. Although I am in Boston,
I subscribe to the GNHLUG list since the groups overlap and they have
interesting discussions, and I shop their table at the big hamfest. Both
GNHLUG and BLU had gotten briefed on OSM by Richard Weait a couple years
ago. So two of us independently nominated OSM to Jon for his list, not
knowing the other was doing so. In a small enough poll, two votes wins!

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] US meetups?

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Jim McAndrew  wrote:
> Who is paying for these meetup.com groups?

Even if someone pays -- CloudMade did at one point, back when there
were Ambassadors -- I won't log into that service, period. The local
MySQL group uses it, and I find their Meetup invites a real turnoff.

One yahoo group/list I am on self-spams themselves from a yahoo
calendar, seems less obnoxious.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] US meetups?

[Bill Ricker]

> Some of the Meetup groups I organize have switched over to Facebook because
> a majority of the mappers are already using the service, its super easy to
> do and free


Coming from a computer security & privacy background as I do, Facebook is
even more off-putting to me than Meetup. Their open-sourcing their base code
is nice, but ... their "privacy" policy and App security almost justifies
Apple's closed garden model.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Resigning in protest

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Richard Welty  wrote:
> this change is pretty
> much necessary for OSM to achieve its goals. my new employer runs all
> this stuff through their lawyers; they would probably not approve the
> CCBYSA and probably would approve the new license, as it rather exactly
> addresses the things that they worry about.

My current $DayJob is unlikely to use OSM data* but we likewise have
lawyers review FLOSS licenses same as for commercial licenses, and in
my role I am one of the software people liaising with Legal on these
issues. What we can do with 'copyleft' licenses**  is much more
restricted than things with BY-ish *** or simply CC-ish terms (Apache,
MIT licenses). From that stand-point I see the new license as a great
step forward.

  * (a $DayJob++ which did use OSM data is one of the few upgrades I
can imagine)
 ** (Copyleft is SA for software, GPL is the best known)
*** (and those only if it doesn't require brag screens: BSD2 Ok, BSD1 no)

As to Process:  communications in a volunteer movement is often, if
not alway, deeply flawed. This is to be expected: If we were
communicators not mappers, we'd be in Toastmasters Inc, not in OSM.
The few that are good at both are precious, but may still wish to
spend some of their time mapping!  At least the OSMF is still by and
for the volunteers who choose to upgrade to OSMF membership, and not
run by and for the paid office staff, as so many foundations wind up.
The LWG process appears to have blind-sided some heads-down mappers,
the LWG heard its own message and assumed others did, and has not
chosen to continuously over-communicate outside their list & wiki.
That seems to me a well-intentioned lapse, and might have been
sensible, as continuous argument on all lists might have annoyed More
folks than the seeming blindsiding.
 Why didn't we get much warning here? Lately, talk-us has been
distracted by the urgent necessity of a Chapter, which I will
grudgingly admit has been transparently communicated quite well here,
mostly avoiding misunderstanding (and Kate nipped one or two in the
bud with charming humility).  This may have lead us to expect loud
announcements here on any other changes, but our self selected talk-us
leaders/representatives are busy getting standing to represent us in
license negotiations with Governments, not with OSMF.  If both needed
doing, sooner is better for each. Oh well, murphy strikes again.

I can understand a Process objection, as, although as volunteer
process goes, I'm favorably impressed, that is a matter for personal
opinion and emotion: headsdown mappers who are overtaken by events may
feel real pain this week or soon, and I would not deny that very real
human reaction.

I can understand and respect that someone for whom CCBYSA is a weak
compromise for 'Information wants to be free' who wants to see 19th
Century Intellectual Property concepts whither in the 21st Century
prefer  maximally viral copyleft licences in the meantime. In that
line, I note the PD-User tag proposal, and will give that due
consideration. While agreeing much IP law reform is needed (and that
DMCA & ACTA aren't it), I do wish creatives still be *able* to retain
some rights to their work, whether opt-in or opt-out.

I can understand that someone who sees the slippy map as 'the OSM'
might feel the new license is too weak, but the old saw of "Tag for
the database not the renderer" applies: OSM is the planet.osm file,
not the Mapnik slippy. If someone copyrights an embellished jpg output
by mapnik with their style guide, it harms me not, as I can still
output any Mapnik jpg I like, however similar or different, so long as
I don't sign THEIR name to it.

For the purposes of building a open central single mapping database,
the new license seems well balanced to my jaundiced eye, and fits my
uses better, and will allow the BBC to show our maps.

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Resigning in protest

[Bill Ricker]

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Dave Hansen  wrote:
> Some very smart lawyers at very big companies in the US

and in law schools also based on what i read on web

> claim that PD  doesn't really exist,

as Congress has mangled our laws, that seems to be the state here now:
Copyright is innate in all creative works, with no opt in nor opt out,
only licensing. Some Rights signed away in life revert to heirs upon
death, and under the Mickey Mouse Act, survive 75 years. Exactly how
extending the copyrights of the dead retroactively served the single
specific end specified in the Constitution of encouraging practice of
useful arts escapes me ... Walt Disney has drawn no mice by his own
hands since the extension ...

> outside what would otherwise be government-held > copyright.

Yes, According to the IP gurus I've read, the closest to true PD
recognized in current US law is US Govt Copyright.

> PD might make it worse.

CCPD, CC0, MIT, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL are all attempts to
codify the intent of PD or as close as one can get in current US Law.
CCPD/CC0 and the {{PD-user}} tag have the advantage that if the
digital revolution ever results in an opt-in copyright system or legal
establishment of opt-out / real PD in US law, the dedication to PD may
be recognized retroactively.

>  Let's just blame the lawyers. :)

It should be a conflict of interest for a lawyer to sit in a legislature.


-- 
Bill
 IANAL but i actually read the stuff
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] MassGIS source/attribution tags

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

> then I'd say that sounds good.
>

+1

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Percentage of data imported vs mapped

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:56 AM, McGuire, Matthew <
matt.mcgu...@metc.state.mn.us> wrote:

> It would be fun to see the relative state to state activity and, of course,
> compare it to international activity



not having to reverse engineer the map since the  TIGER was available (and
other sources are coming available some faster some slower Eg, MASS was
loaded from state data not Tiger) results in much more 'studio' work (fixing
TIGER overpasses to pass over not intersect, fixing TIGER ramps to intersect
the motorway so oneways go right) and much less of what the rest-of-OSM call
'real mapping' field work. Every year in any community, there are a few new
streets, some new big buildings, a few realigned intersections, but there
are no vast areas of white empty map to go on a mapping expedition.

My biggest challenge is figuring out a workflow for fixing turn restrictions
on existing intersections.


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] umapper, linux, and YOU!

[Bill Ricker]

I am still on Ubuntu Karmic, and can see a map on that link

adobe-flashplugin/karmic uptodate 10.1.53.64-1karmic1
firefox-3.0/karmic-security uptodate 3.5.9+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.9.10.1

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Reply-to field in list messages

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Jeffrey Ollie  wrote:

> http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html
>
> And then please let this topic go away.


+1


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Reply-to field in list messages

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Mike N.  wrote:

>  Actually I inadvertently published a private email when I first joined
> because it was not set up to reply to the list.  I saw the weirdness, and
> thought it was like another list which had a dead reply-to address and got
> in the habit of manually putting in the listserv address instead of just
> reply, and didn't notice that the mail was only addressed to me.


Wow, that's a new one on me  and I've seen this argument for more
decades than most. Congratudelences on a unique use case !

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] how to tag US townships?

[Bill Ricker]

Maine still has unincorporated cartesian townships with names like
"Township 7 Range 4".
This is timber country with few permanent settlements.
 A few have recieved names, likely by incorporation (idk).

iirc, in Maine the legal difference between "town" and "city" is as in
Mass from which it separated, based on whether the incorporated
community was most recently chartered to have a primary executive
branch (Mayor etc) or not (Town Meeting and standing commitees). Mass
has some "Towns" with (elective, no longer universal membership) Town
Meetings of larger population than some "Cities" with Mayor and/or
City Manager plus Council.

(Universal membership town meeting was a blast when i was 18 in Maine,
straight out of Norman Rockwell's Freedom series.)

Mass also had one county disincorporated in bankruptcy. Some towns
have at least threatened to do likewise, dumping all responsibility on
enclosing jurisdiction.


On 10/21/10, Greg Troxel  wrote:
>
> Nathan Edgars II  writes:
>
>> Read the link you provided: "In the remaining nine town or township
>> states (Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota,
>> Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and Wisconsin), there is no
>> geographic overlapping of these two kinds of units." (In Wisconsin and
>> the New England states they're called towns.)
>
> In Mass cities and towns are the same thing for this discussion.  (And I
> agree they don't overlap.)
>


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

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

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> place=suburb doesn't work for inner-city neighborhoods.


nor for truly rural named crossroad settlements of no legal standing, of
which some yet remain

-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] NE2: Changeset 6612910: What is?

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> > As far as Creek Turnpike and US 169, pics or it doesn't exist.
>
> Certainly, but given that stopping is prohibited and there is a minimum
> speed limit, how do you propose these be taken?


Dash mounted hands free video seems safer than explosive bolts on the wheel
to arrange for an opportune emergency stop.

A passenger that is a competent photographer in bright daylight might work
too


-- 
Bill
n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Boston parkways, was Re: Long-distance scenic roads

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Nathan Edgars II  wrote:
> I have been on Route 2 there, and it goes nowhere near the Science Museum.

Yes, that's correct. Route numbers do not need to follow named roads.
That road's changing names & numbers are never ending source of local
trivia and can confuse even local OSMers.  In Greg's defense, his
daily commute uses the other part of Rt 2 in Cambridge.

Rt 2 leaves Rt 3 as 3 becomes Mem Drive, 2 then crosses into Boston;
US Rt 3 S diverges from MA Rt  16 W and continues on easterly on Mem
Drive and turns into MA Rt 3 at 2A (Mass Ave?) before it crosses
Longfellow Bridge aka Salt'n'Pepper Bridge into Boston (to followed by
 1-93 to Rt 128) - If Land Blvd which extends to MOS.ORG dam and the
Prison Pt Bridge has any route designation, I'm unaware of it. OSM
seems correct on this.

This inter-leaving of US 2, US/MA 3, MA16, and US 20 and MA 9 is
simplified in the folksonomy.

To add to the difficulty the emerald necklace MDC Parkways have the
obvious continuity even though they change name frequently and rarely
carry a route # for long.

The parkways that for a time carried US 1 S had it re-routed along
I-93 S and one exit of I-95 N and are no longer even badged 1A, though
some US 1 signs are as yet out there.  [
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/U.S._Route_1_in_Massachusetts#Relocation_in_Boston
]


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Women trust GPS, drive SUV into Lake

[Bill Ricker]

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 6:15 AM, Mike N  wrote:
>  I did check the OSM map to be sure there were no non-existing roads shown
> crossing the lake.

When NOT using turn-by-turn but boater-style azimuth-range guidance, I
have looked to turn down a county/town borders. Those gray lines go
straight to where I want to go, and can cross lakes.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com

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

Re: [Talk-us] Disney (was Re: access=destination vs access=private)

[Bill Ricker]

Disney runs its own Reedy Creek Planning District (and Fire Dept], so some
records from the 1960's and 1970's might not be in OC's system; building
permits are filled with OC, but Land Use may not be in the system you're
looking at. Waste/Submerged would be correct status in 1960 prior to Disney
development, not current status. Sounds like that website is not current
source for Reedy Creek documents.

On Oct 1st, WDW will celebrate 40 years since opening day.
Land acquisition started in the mid 60's , as soon as Walt realized DLP was
getting hemmed in by Disney-fueled growth in Anaheim. The Bonnet Creek
parcel is the one enclave of non-Disney land within the development.

 There's a very nice history of the property in the American Surveyor
magazine, "Mapping The World".
http://www.amerisurv.com/content/view/4387/153/
& backstory of article
http://www.wintertime.com/OH/Disney/WDW/WDW2006/ACSM.html

The thru-roads across WDW property might or might not be registered as
Public Right of Way against the deeds, but have been open to the public for
up to 40 years.

What is the goal here ?

Bill *o*

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Anthony  wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:29 AM, Nathan Edgars II 
> wrote:
> > On 9/12/2011 7:17 PM, Anthony wrote:
> >>
> >> The fact that the land is owned by Walt Disney Parks does not preclude
> >> the fact that they have granted a right of way through it.
> >>
> >> According to Orange County property records, the 65.13 acres of land
> >> is owned by Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US Inc.  However, 11 acres
> >> of it is under the land use "right of way" (the rest is wasteland or
> >> submerged).
> >>  http://beta.ocpafl.org/searches/ParcelSearch.aspx?pid=28241700017
> >
> > I don't know how this figure was calculated. But I've looked at records
> from
> > Disney's beginning to the present day and no easement was ever granted to
> > the public for this road.
>
> How exhaustive of a search have you done?  Did you check the previous
> owners?  When was the road first built?  Who built it?  When did
> Disney purchase the land?
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Disney (was Re: access=destination vs access=private)

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Anthony  wrote:

> We're trying to figure out whether this sign restricts the use of the
> road, or if it's BS:
>

It asserts their right to uninvite  someone who provokes them and then order
them to leave, on pain of arrest for tresspass.
The sign prima-facie denies a formal or traditional right of way; it denies
access=yes and access=permissive.

Lacking proof that OC or FL have recorded a formal RoW (i saw that search
for such was, unsurprisingly, negative), the OSM tradition is to map the
signage, right?

So this could be access=destination , which should allow routing at ends but
not for thru traffic.

If they weren't  graded Tertiary or better, they'd highway=service, same as
any shopping mall's access roads -- which ought to used for routes as if
access=destination  -- it's just a bigger and more elaborate road network
within a single bigger, more elaborate enterprise campus, so needs explicit.

( In practical terms it matters not much.  Unless the short-cutting vehicle
is a truck whose cab or trailer is labelled for a retail chain, or gets
stuck under a low overpass, it is very hard for WDW Security to tell
a trespasser is not a guest without following them gate to gate. To become a
guest momentarily, all you need do is pull into a WDW hotel parking area and
walk in to ask a question about diner reservations. And the sweep of Victory
makes it not a useful shortcut to anywhere.   )

Will be down there for a couple days soon, but no car this trip, may not
pass this sign even on bus. Will pass it in January. As an annual pass
holder and DVC member deeded to BLT, I will pass that sign with a
clear conscience.


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Disney (was Re: access=destination vs access=private)

[Bill Ricker]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> Yes, although the removal of the guard does make it possible to avoid the
> main gate and parking fee by making the whole loop and turning around at the
> Car Care Center ("guests" includes all theme park visitors).


A guard on Vista never prevented that, as claiming a reservation(even just
for dinner) at a hotel would have been sufficient to get through either main
gate or side gate and thus to the loop. Only a guard, on the ramp from car
care loop to parking, actively checking parking receipts, could prevent
that.

And one can legitimately pick up or drop kiss-n-ride guests at the TTC
coming thru Victory or World Drive main gate without parking or paying.
(Which means your friends can ride the monorail for free, while you drive
back to Walgreens for free parking. But if they don't eventually go to a
park ticketing point, they're still liable to being deemed trespassing
unless otherwise guests somehow.)

Hmm  when we have a few days at SSP in JAN i may use that loop - will have
parking pass, so no need to go through gate to get a receipt, and would be
using Victory from SSP.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Disney (was Re: access=destination vs access=private)

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:42 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> On 9/14/2011 10:50 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
>
>> And the sweep of Victory makes it not a useful shortcut to anywhere.
>>
>
> I assume you mean Vista? Anyway, it could be used as a shortcut, but not
> much shorter than CR 535: http://g.co/maps/6uzx9


Right, from almost everywhere to almost everywhere, 535 would be better than
Vista. As long as the marked cast-member-only section of World Blvd is
access=private, routing should avoid it.

I took a wrong turn and wound up on Backstage Drive once, had to turn around
at the CM-only gate. I wanted the next *thru* right, not *next* right, and
was overzoomed on GPS so non-thru-road still looked like a turn. :-)

As I understand it, the guest-access roads should be access=destination, and
cast-member parking  roads access=private.




-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Disney (was Re: access=destination vs access=private)

[Bill Ricker]

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> Is this still marked cast only? I haven't been on World Drive there in
> years, but I do know that as of last weekend the entrance from Reams i


I'll try to remember to look at signage on World Dr at Contemporary Dr when
I'm there in a few weeks. I don't seem to have a photo in the cross-walk in
the right direction.

If Reams to World is signed for guests, that explains why one of the Annual
Pass podcasters is entering that way routinely. i'll have to detour to come
back from shopping that way in January just for fun once :-)

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1...@gmail.com
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us