Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik viewer for OSM data - UI suggestions?

On Sunday 04 May 2008 22:44, Gervase Markham wrote: > Nick Whitelegg wrote: > > My idea is to try and shield the user from the XML file altogether. > > Rather than get a user to open an XML file, I'd like users to be able to > > simply open an OSM file, download data from the API, or retrieve data

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Road crossings proposal[0], appears to be in limbo, and I'm > wondering if the correct procedure as described on > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features has been > followed. It ap

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

Hi, > * Some people started tagging *and rendering* crossings, using a > particular tagging scheme. > * Some other people, who weren't actually out doing the work, started > complaining about what was going on [1] May I take this as a cue to suggest a complete overhaul of the whole RfC/vote/etc

[OSM-talk] Sorting out rivers and islands

I have real problems with rivers and islands. I have been giving Washington DC a bit of a spring clean over the weekend but I can't get parts of the river to work properly. There is a large island that hasn't rendered, and a part of the river north of the George Washington Memorial Parkway is not r

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Andy Allan wrote: > [2] Another brilliant example of how people make themselves feel > useful by doing the trivially easy bit, c.f. tracing from Yahoo with > no intention of naming the roads. I'm just going to voice an opinion (feel free to ignore it :) - putting roads on the

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, * Some people started tagging *and rendering* crossings, using a particular tagging scheme. * Some other people, who weren't actually out doing the work, started complaining about what was going on [1] May I take this as a cue to suggest a compl

[OSM-talk] spur railways?

I notice that 'railway=spur' is used a lot in the tiger data. Here is an example (where the railway continues north out of Davis as a 'spur'). http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.57568 &lon=-121.74505&zoom=16 However it doesn't re

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

I totally agree. A map is basically a drawing, so the most important thing is the shape of the ways themselves. I would sooner say that the trivial part is adding the place-names. Lucas De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Steve Hill Enviado el: mar 06/05/2008 1

Re: [OSM-talk] Track offsets

Steve, I've seen this problem a long time ago when I was using some software to convert a track I had previously made from live data, I think using UPSUtility. I got a similar 50 to 100m parallel error. I think it turned out to be a conversion error between the OSGB or possibly UTM format that UPS

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

Andy Allan wrote: > On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists) > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> * been discussed on this list back in August 2007[]; (hmm, does that >> count as a proper RFC?), > > We didn't "discuss the proposal" in that thread. What actually happened was

Re: [OSM-talk] Track offsets

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Andy Robinson (blackadder) wrote: > Converting the track within GPSUtility before then saving as a gpx I think > finally fixed the problem, but it was too long ago now to be sure exactly > what I did. Hmm, ok - thanks, I might see if that helps correct the error. The thing i

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Steve Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 6 May 2008, Andy Allan wrote: > > > [2] Another brilliant example of how people make themselves feel > > useful by doing the trivially easy bit, c.f. tracing from Yahoo with > > no intention of naming the roads. > >

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Steve Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2. If the road is on the map it becomes much easier for people who are > familiar with the area to fill in the details such as the name - no > equipment is needed (such as GPS), they don't need to get off their backside > an

[OSM-talk] Track offsets

I've come across a problem with one of my methods of collecting tracks - I'm hoping someone might have some input: I've got a computer in my car which connects to my (old style) eTrex Venture GPS via a serial cable. The computer runs gpsd to talk to the GPS. It also runs Kismet which does th

[OSM-talk] Fixing unnamed ways & places (was: [t*gg*ng] Road crossings proposal - status?)

Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio wrote: > I totally agree. A map is basically a drawing, so the most important > thing is the shape of the ways themselves. I would sooner say that > the trivial part is adding the place-names. It's also easy enough to actively seek out and tag unnamed ways, though harde

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I totally agree. A map is basically a drawing, so the most important thing > is the shape of the ways themselves. I would sooner say that the trivial > part is adding the place-names. > No. Quite simply

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Andy Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My advice would be to document the predominant use of the tag first, Putting my wiki skills where my mouth is: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:crossing - hopefully useful to show what's in the db as we debate th

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, 6 May 2008, Dave Stubbs wrote: >> Chris Jones (who runs the Welsh language OSM) has been working on an AJAX >> thing to make fixing road names easy without having to understand the >> editors - I see this as a really good thing since it gets more people >> contributing to the project,

Re: [OSM-talk] Sorting out rivers and islands

Web site copy directionIn DC a) I'd make a relation combining the outer bank and the inner island b) tag both as natural = water ,rather waterway = riverbank, as I believe rendering of waterway = riverbank is not supported by mapnik, as that tag is still a proposed tag. For the Oregon island:

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

Andy Allan wrote: > * Some people started tagging *and rendering* crossings, using a > particular tagging scheme. > * Some other people, who weren't actually out doing the work, started > complaining about what was going on [1] > * This second group made an extremely detailed (or overcomplicated, >

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hmm, I see it differently. As I recall: > *Some people said "this is the way it will be". Since they have dev > access, they also added their method to the rendering system, Let me be blunt: I don't have dev access, and

Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain

On May 3, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > For me, it seems ironic that a project spawned from licensing issues > over map data has found itself in a situation where licensing issues > are still a problem, and hopefully the license update will resolve > these and make using OSM data easi

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

Andy Allan wrote: > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hmm, I see it differently. As I recall: >> *Some people said "this is the way it will be". Since they have dev >> access, they also added their method to the rendering system, > > Let me be blunt:

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andy Allan wrote: > > Let me be blunt: I don't have dev access, and I don't have SVN access > > either. So stop with the moaning, and get your facts straight. > > I didn't say you personally did that. But if the group of p

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andy Allan wrote: > > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hmm, I see it differently. As I recall: > >> *Some people said "this is the way it will be". Since they have dev > >>

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

Andy Allan wrote: > least if you're making > proposals on how to tag pedestrian crossings, the first piece of > research should be how they are *already* being tagged. If you're not > aware of it, that's no excuse for ignoring it. Umm, OK. I'll keep that in mind if I ever make a proposal for how

Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain

On May 6, 2008, at 9:44 AM, Nathan Vander Wilt wrote: > [blah, blah, blah] I hope that I did make my concerns clear without offending anyone too greatly. Regardless, it would probably be more helpful to say what I hope could be done to address my concerns, instead of just more-or- less compla

Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Nathan Vander Wilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 6, 2008, at 9:44 AM, Nathan Vander Wilt wrote: >> [blah, blah, blah] > > I hope that I did make my concerns clear without offending anyone too > greatly. Regardless, it would probably be more helpful to say what

[OSM-talk] [tagging] Against source=survey

The tag source=survey hides the fact that those coordinates were derived from the signal provided by a particular infrastructure: the US satellites. Maybe those ways derived from GPS tracks should be tagged source=NASA or source=Pentagon, instead of source=survey, which does not cite the true so

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Against source=survey

Why not go all the way and say source=cesium? In all seriousness, though, what's wrong with source=GPS as an alternative? Survey, to me, implies a crew out with tripods and such. Karl On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The tag source=survey

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] spur railways?

2008/5/6 Peter Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I notice that 'railway=spur' is used a lot in the tiger data. Here is an > example (where the railway continues north out of Davis as a 'spur'). > > http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=38.57568&lon=-121.74505&zoom=16 > > > However it doesn't render in Mapnik o

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Against source=survey

Karl Newman wrote: >Sent: 06 May 2008 8:58 PM >To: Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio >Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Against source=survey > >Why not go all the way and say source=cesium? In all seriousness, though, >what's wrong with source=GPS as an alternative? Survey, to

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] spur railways?

Robin Paulson wrote: > of the two no votes, i suspect one (Hawke/Alex Mauer) is an objection > based on 'namespacing'. as this still has not been widely accepted, > would you consider changing your vote to a yes, alex? Namespacing aside, I still think 'service=' is too vague. However, as I don't

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

> Fair enough; I missed that because I didn't read below your signoff > (which happened to be at the break in my mailreader). So, OK, there's > another 60 beyond what I found in tagwatch. Who wants to bet they're > all in the UK, and those 60 were added since tagwatch was updated on 12 > Apr

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Road crossings proposal - status?

Dave Stubbs wrote: > Some more stats for you on the end of the mail. looking at your stats, I count the same 478 tags following Andy's original mailing list post consisting exclusively of the animal-based system. (+refuge, but that was apparently never used at all.) And I count 157 following th

Re: [OSM-talk] tracking down the 'owner' of a track

On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 11:06:13PM +0100, Shaun McDonald wrote: > On 5 May 2008, at 22:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Is there a method of tracking down the 'owner' of a GPS track? > > > > There is a trac ticket for this: > http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/274 "Opened 2 years

[OSM-talk] golf course marking

Hi, I am a newbie to OSM, and am trying to mark up a golf course. I have gone through (and added some remarks to) the proposal here: http:// wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Golf_course, but could not understand exactly how to implement it. So I tried with using existing k

Re: [OSM-talk] golf course marking

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I am a newbie to OSM, and am trying to mark up a golf course. I have > gone through (and added some remarks to) the proposal here: http:// > wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Golf_course, but