Re: [Talk-us] bike rail trail as built vs as proposed and imported
On 12 Aug 2009, at 12:55, Greg Troxel wrote: Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net writes: On 08/11/2009 06:10 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: But, is abandoned really in use in other countries to mean what in the US we call old railroad grade? (Here I am taking USGS norms to be established practice in the US.) Probably not; however, it is accepted practice in OSM. As you say, someone with more familiarity with railroad procedures and how they differ between the US and elsewhere might be able to answer that. I think one of the bugs in OSM is failure to follow established practice. But that's not worth worrying about in this case. Do please join the 'talk-transit' list where we would love to talk about tagging public transport related stuff and where I often push for OSM to follow established practice'. Talk-transit is *the* list where we can get a lot of these issues resolved in an internationally consistent way. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit Do also check out the public transport section of the wiki which is developing fast at present. more help would be appreciated. Here is the new public_transport wiki page with links to all the main transport modes. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport And here is the category for public transport:- http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Public_transport Regards, Peter Miller ITO World ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Updated: ITO image of 'a year of edits' for North America
We have updated the 'year of edits' image on Flickr for North America and it is very impressive what is happening there. Lights are coming on all over the place! http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterito/3087316306/in/set-72157610770048763/ Do zoom in on areas of the US and then to some cities where we also have updated images and check out other parts of the world in the 'from time to time' set. Regards, Peter Miller ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] US Online Mapping Parties
On 9 Jul 2009, at 02:30, Nicholas Vetrovec wrote: I'm not sure what an online mapping party would look like. I'm picturing a concerted effort to knock off a map feature where mappers could share their expertise and work on the same feature in multiple places. Barry Parr Were you thinking of doing this via irc? Or did you have some other ideas for how to collaborate? Dave IRC of voice chat would be good for comunication during the party. We would pick a city, town, area to work on as one mostly using the arial imagery to map out features and realign roads ect.. but as a larger group, we can knock out large areas at once. I wanted to start out by discussing things we can work on as a group, areas that need a lot of fixing up, stuff that can be easily worked on in an olnile environment. Maybe we should start a wiki for organizing and planning the online party. A virtual mapping party could be as simple as agreeing to focus effort on a particular area over a period of time, create a wiki with a task list and a 'cake' and a way for people to claim tasks and then advertise it on talk-us and also on talk. For a while I would do work on water features in the area of a US mapping party in the week before the event because I had been frustrated and mystified about how to get water, islands and rivers to work in other places for over a year on both osmarender and mapnik. When I cracked it I decided to take that role more generally. I did work on water in Portland, Pittsburgh, Washington and Tampa for example. I also did stuff around New Orleans and Houston. So... one could for example create a 'cake' for an area on the wiki and then people could claim sections for the cake for tiger fix-up and water etc. No necessity for IRC or conference calls, just the sense of community created by working together for a bigger goal. There could be a mentoring focus as well, but it should allow people in many time- zones to participate - and do remember to Europe based arm-chair mappers who have completed their home areas! One could be pretty ambitious, such as covering all interstate tiger fixup for a state and also major rivers. The idea of use these mapping parties in conjunction with work on the ground seems very powerful and I would suggest that you always create arm-chair and time-zone independent tasks in association with physical mapping parties to help build a wider community around the place. Possibly we could have a 'twinning' program where towns in different countries 'twin' to share effort and swapping tagging techniques. Twinning would be a great way of stopping tagging diverging around the world and learning from other places. Regards, Peter Miller (PeterIto) ___ 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] Updated 'A year of edits' images for the USA
We have just updated out 'A year of edits' images for the USA on our Flickr site and it shows how fast OSM is growing in the US: Compare this image for the 6th March 09: http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterito/3087316306/ With this one for from 25th October 08 http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterito/2970814514 There are images for other parts of the world available in the 'From time to time' set http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterito/sets/72157610770048763/ Regards, Peter Miller ITO World Ltd www.itoworld.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?
On 31 Jan 2009, at 17:56, Bill Ricker wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Bill Ricker bill.n1...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@metacarta.com 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 :-) I have done some work on the coastline and rivers in and around Boston and I think the coastline should be clear now. This should be confirmed by tomorrows update of Coastline viewer and hopefully the mapnik update thus week will be ok. The bay in Boston is still not rendering properly yet. I am not sure why yet but will keep plugging away it at. There is some more 'grooming' needed of the coastline to get it to follow reality a bit better, I have done the main bits but I am probably done with that now. Some of the rivers could also do with 'grooming' to get their edges to match reality a bit better and some rivers still seem to be missing entirely, however, again I have done what I am going to do. Have a great mapping weekend! Peter -- 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 mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Boston Coastline leak? Re: Where next?
On 31 Jan 2009, at 17:56, Bill Ricker wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Bill Ricker bill.n1...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@metacarta.com 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 :-) Coastlines, rivers and water are not really for newbies! There are a lot of traps to fall into and just to help osmrender and mapnik render things differently and have different time-delays until you can see the results! Adjacent polygons should share one edge, although that it not possible with coastline which needs to be a single chain. I have sorted out some joins between bits if river and between river and coastline. I have sorted some broken coastline including one long section that was the wrong way round to the north of Boston that wouldn't have helped. I have connected the coastline is a few places where it was broken by bridges into two unconnected parts. I have cleaned up some rivers and added a few new ones and added the 'mystic' lakes. Do be aware that the coastline viewer is complaining at present about a number of features are that probably ok because of the big error to the north. I think we now need to wait for the coastline viewer to get updated on monday at about 11:30UTC to see what else needs to be done. I will have another go tomorrow. Regards, Peter Miller -- 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 mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Track or path?
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Russ Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Should the trail have its own way which shares the bulk of its nodes and path with the railroad way? Or should the railroad and highway portions of the trail be marked with ... something? And how to carry the name of the trail the entire length even though it travels on the railroad, highway, and a purpose-built section? In theory that's what relations are for, but there doesn't seem to be much renderer support except possibly for bicycle routes even though there are specifications for other types of routes. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relation:route I tried marking some sections of Interstate as relations around Memphis once using route=road to try to get co-signed routes to render right in Mapnik (e.g. with separate markers for each route number), but nothing seemed to ever render. This is certainly what route relations are for but you are also right that the renderers are not yet using them fully (and that cycles are the most obvious current user). I have found them very useful to mark local paths, long distance paths, cycle routes (local, regional and national) and Sometimes I find that the same way is tagged with a road reference, one or more cycle references and also one or more paths. Only the road reference is part of the way, the rest is all done with relations. It is clearly a challenge for a renderer to display all this information and in reality we can expect renderers to only display information that relates to their purpose, so a walking map may not always show the cycle route numbers, and a cycle map may not show the walking route numbers and road maps may not show the cycle/walking information. The use of relations to show overlapping road numbers is also fine, indeed in time we may decide to code road references in this way as a matter of course. Do bear in mind that Relations are a pretty new idea and you can expect more support from the tools in the near future. ITO certainly intends to offer some interesting tools using relations in the future. Regards, Peter Miller ITO World Ltd Chris ___ 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
