Re: [OSM-dev] Gosmore patch to rebuild pak

Can you not reply with strong words like 'spamming' on messages like these? It sounds so much nicer to point good intending people to the Trac website [1] and have them create tickets and attach the patches there... [1] http://trac.openstreetmap.org (choose component 'gosmore' when submitting tic

[OSM-dev] Quantifying

Hi all - I tried to do a rough analysis (for an article I'm writing) of the composition of an API response by character count. If anyone knows more about this or has opinions or ideas for better (but lightweight) means of quantifying this, i'd love to hear them. > I’ve been wondering how much of

Re: [OSM-dev] Gosmore patch to rebuild pak

On 01/10/09 20:34, Christian Müller wrote: > gosmore fails to rebuild a pak file since the introduction of FWRITE > macro definition. Reason: Can you not send these messages to the developer of gosmore rather than spamming the dev list with them? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://ww

[OSM-dev] Gosmore patch to rebuild pak

Hi, gosmore fails to rebuild a pak file since the introduction of FWRITE macro definition. Reason: fwrite(buf, elemsize, numelems, pak) returns the number of elems written. fwrite (idx, fsize, 1, pak) will fail, if there is an empty file, in this case fsize is 0. fwrite is told to write 1 ele

[OSM-dev] Gosmore not Public Domain anymore?

Hi there, in applications/rendering/gosmore [17734:17737] the public domain disclaimer, which used to be the first line in g

Re: [OSM-dev] potlach has wrong preset

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >Sent: 01 October 2009 2:11 PM >To: Richard Fairhurst >Cc: dev@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] potlach has wrong preset > >2009/10/1 Richard Fairhurst : >> >> valentt wrote: >>> Hi, I have noticed that Potlach assigns wrong tags for dirt "dirt >track". >>> >>> W

Re: [OSM-dev] Open sou...@dtu

Hi there, Well do you mean as coders or as editors? First you should start by reviewing the maps of the places you know. Look up your home town and check if it is ok. If you see something missing, use the editor or josm.openstreetmap.de for fixing it. mike __

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

2009/10/2 David Lynch : > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 06:20, David Earl wrote: >> On 01/10/2009 03:25, SteveC wrote: >>> I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. >> >> I would like to go further than Steve proposes, but I understand it is a >> hard sell to the anarchist wing of OSM while be

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 06:20, David Earl wrote: > On 01/10/2009 03:25, SteveC wrote: >> I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. > > I would like to go further than Steve proposes, but I understand it is a > hard sell to the anarchist wing of OSM while being welcome to the > conformist

[OSM-dev] Open sou...@dtu

We are a group of students from Delhi Technological University and Head,Open Source Society in the college .We wish to work on OSM as a project with an active participation.Please may you guide us for the same. Regards, Nipun Batra Open Source Society Delhi Technological University India

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

2009/10/1 Dave Stubbs : > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:33 PM, John Smith wrote: >> 2009/10/1 Dave Stubbs : >> >>> That argument is bogus. >>> It's much easier to do the translations on a couple of servers rather >>> than make the 100,000's editors more complicated so that they use more >>> laptop batt

Re: [OSM-dev] potlach has wrong preset

2009/10/1 Richard Fairhurst : > > valentt wrote: >> Hi, I have noticed that Potlach assigns wrong tags for dirt "dirt track". >> >> When you select "dirt track" potlach adds highway=track and >> surface=dirt tags. That wouldn't be an issue if the icon beside it >> wouldn't be man walking. There sho

Re: [OSM-dev] The OpenStreetMap website is now translatable at Translatewiki

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > I've now fixed Potlatch up so that it can be Translated on > Translatewiki. Now it just needs to be imported into Translatewiki. > > I've put up a notice on the OSM wiki so that confused Translators > won't use it in the interim: >

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 1:33 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/10/1 Dave Stubbs : > >> That argument is bogus. >> It's much easier to do the translations on a couple of servers rather >> than make the 100,000's editors more complicated so that they use more >> laptop battery and make all the mappers hav

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

2009/10/1 Dave Stubbs : > That argument is bogus. > It's much easier to do the translations on a couple of servers rather > than make the 100,000's editors more complicated so that they use more > laptop battery and make all the mappers have to go home early. Well JOSM is already doing it, so it

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

El Jueves, 1 de Octubre de 2009, SteveC escribió: > Thoughts? Likenesses -1; implications +1. e.g.: highway=autobahn implies highway=motorway highway=motorway implies oneway=yes highway=motorway implies highway=road Basically it's just the same idea, but by using the word "imply", it suddenly

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:54 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/10/1 David Earl : >> On 01/10/2009 03:25, SteveC wrote: >>> I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. >> >> I would like to go further than Steve proposes, but I understand it is a >> hard sell to the anarchist wing of OSM while

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

2009/10/1 David Earl : > Keeping multiple, probably different, descriptions and translations across > all the programs that use OSM is the thing that seems crazy to me. Sorry, misunderstood what you were suggesting, I agree 100% I've done something similar in the past when we want to have consist

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On 01/10/2009 12:54, John Smith wrote: > 2009/10/1 David Earl : >> On 01/10/2009 03:25, SteveC wrote: >>> I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. >> I would like to go further than Steve proposes, but I understand it is a >> hard sell to the anarchist wing of OSM while being welco

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

2009/10/1 David Earl : > On 01/10/2009 03:25, SteveC wrote: >> I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. > > I would like to go further than Steve proposes, but I understand it is a > hard sell to the anarchist wing of OSM while being welcome to the > conformist wing. But I really think

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On 01/10/2009 03:25, SteveC wrote: > I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. I would like to go further than Steve proposes, but I understand it is a hard sell to the anarchist wing of OSM while being welcome to the conformist wing. But I really think what I outline below treads a

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Jonathan Bennett wrote: > Andy Allan wrote: >> We have already, it's been made and engineered and everything. Don't >> mistake endless unproductive waffle on the mailing lists as evidence >> that a problem hasn't been solved - it's just people who aren't >> capable

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

Andy Allan wrote: > We have already, it's been made and engineered and everything. Don't > mistake endless unproductive waffle on the mailing lists as evidence > that a problem hasn't been solved - it's just people who aren't > capable pleading to the gods to come and save them from themselves. >

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Dave Stubbs wrote: >> One of the big questions is whether all of this would make life >> easier or harder for the renderers -- it would definitely raise the >> tech start bar. > > Standard libraries ftw. > > People's unwillingness to do

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

Dave Stubbs wrote: > One of the big questions is whether all of this would make life > easier or harder for the renderers -- it would definitely raise the > tech start bar. Standard libraries ftw. People's unwillingness to do any form of pre-processing on an increasingly varied OSM dataset nev

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

SteveC wrote: > I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. It might be > solving a problem that doesn't exist or someone might have done > it and I've missed it. Wow, lots of issues here. And since > I'm not a socialist moral relativist ...I am, almost, then I get a head-start on t

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:25 AM, SteveC wrote: > I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. It might be > solving a problem that doesn't exist or someone might have done it and > I've missed it. We have already, it's been made and engineered and everything. Don't mistake endless unproduc

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 3:25 AM, SteveC wrote: > I want to revive a very old idea - tag equivalences. It might be > solving a problem that doesn't exist or someone might have done it and > I've missed it. > Closest I got was the osmosis tagtransform plugin [1]. I made that because people keep in

Re: [OSM-dev] potlach has wrong preset

valentt wrote: > Hi, I have noticed that Potlach assigns wrong tags for dirt "dirt track". > > When you select "dirt track" potlach adds highway=track and > surface=dirt tags. That wouldn't be an issue if the icon beside it > wouldn't be man walking. There should be a car icon instead of > man

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

2009/10/1 SteveC I think it is an interesting idea. It would make some people happy about tag proliferation and gradually it has the possibility of fixing things up. The debate on orchard, plantage, farmland could be partially be solved by this mechanism, while allowing application developers to

Re: [OSM-dev] potlach has wrong preset

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 14:25:29 +, Valent Turkovic wrote: > Hi, I have noticed that Potlach assigns wrong tags for dirt "dirt > track". > > When you select "dirt track" potlach adds highway=track and surface=dirt > tags. That wouldn't be an issue if the icon beside it wouldn't be man > walking.

Re: [OSM-dev] likenesses

Hi, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > Inasmuch as the underlying concepts are identical (more or less), I > don't like the idea that we can use different key name or values to > represent those concepts. Thing is, the underlying concepts will very often be "more or less" identical but never really.