Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > I don't want to be annoying, but what about the ordinary roads, which > don't fit in the above classification. With houses on both side but > limited to 50km/h for example. Well, this is why I don't like the highway=residential tag. > Inside h

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Steve Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > >> I don't want to be annoying, but what about the ordinary roads, which >> don't fit in the above classification. With houses on both side but >> limited to 50km/h for exa

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On 11/07/2008 09:43, Steve Hill wrote: > The definition of living_street is a bit vague in the wiki. A relevant > bit seems to be: > "Simply tagging them with something like highway=residential, max_speed=7, > motorcar=yes, motorcycle=yes, bicycle=yes" > > Which implies to me that the living_st

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On 11/07/2008 09:43, Steve Hill wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > >> I don't want to be annoying, but what about the ordinary roads, which >> don't fit in the above classification. With houses on both side but >> limited to 50km/h for example. > > Well, this is why I d

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > But from the your description here, what do you tag > roads that are 30mph and don't have a centre line? i.e. the single > most common type here. That's a bit of a judgement call depending on the situation I think. Most of the streets on hous

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote: > The equivalent here, to which the tag would be applied, is known as > "Home Zone", and it has a specific sign: > http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/general/coll_newroadsignsandmarkingsleaf/dft_roads_022863-16.jpg > (which is taken from this page > http://

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote: > I don't see the problem in that example: > > highway=residential > maxspeed=50 Yes, in that case. Although I think tagging roads lined with houses as "highway=tertiary, abutters=residential" is better - really the only difference between a tertiary road

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On 11/07/2008 10:26, Steve Hill wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote: > >> The equivalent here, to which the tag would be applied, is known as >> "Home Zone", and it has a specific sign: >> http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tss/general/coll_newroadsignsandmarkingsleaf/dft_roads_022863-16.

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, David Earl wrote: > At least the rules governing 20mph areas (not specifically Home Zones) have > been relaxed a bit to make them easier to implement (though Cambridgeshire is > till very reluctant, places like Hull and Portsmouth have been really > progressive on this). T

[OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

Hello, I've been promoting OSM in the charity I work for (www.bioregional.com), especially now the export facility makes it trivial. We'd like to use OSM maps in our publications, but several of my colleagues are reluctant because there are pubs all over the maps! Would it be possible to remove

Re: [OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

While it might not help Tom's immediate needs, a Next Big Thing for the slippy map would be the introduction of selective rendering on the Export tag for either of the main layers. Particularly POIs. For example the ability to do a SOTM location map with, say, ATMs, eating places and supermark

[OSM-talk] Potlatch in Gnash - not far off?

Good news from the Gnash developers: Begin forwarded message: From: Sandro Santilli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 11 July 2008 13:17:18 BDT Subject: [bug #21756] Potlatch OpenStreetMap editor displays heavily offset Follow-up Comment #21, bug #21756 (project gnash): Since you got distracted by

Re: [OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

lol, I agree with your colleagues: those pint glasses are unacceptably bad taste (btw, mosques and synagogues are still rendered with a Christian cross in Mapnik.) Regards, Lucas De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Tom Chance Enviado el: vie 11/07/2008 13:47 P

Re: [OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio wrote: > lol, I agree with your colleagues: those pint glasses are > unacceptably bad taste Someone should tell the Ordnance Survey - they have them all over their Explorer maps... cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list ta

Re: [OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

You could have a look at Kosmos, you can there define your own rendering rules, and render maps as you wish. as it is a standalone windows software, with no dependencies, it really is fast and easy to setup. cheers patrick Tom Chance wrote: Hello, I've been promoting OSM in the charity I wor

Re: [OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

Yes, I'll send them and email myself. And in the meantimeTom: you can force the OSM guys to remove those awful pint glasses if you prove that that icon is copyrighted ;-) (check the Ordnance Survey website.) cheers Lucas De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre

Re: [OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

Hi Tom, have a look at: http://www.lenz-online.de/cgi-bin/osm/osmpoinit.pl?lat=51.161&lon=0.009&zoom=11&layers=B00FTF It allows you to choose the POIs you are interested in. Cheers, christof Tom Chance schrieb: > Hello, > > I've been promoting OSM in the charity I work for (www.bioregional.c

Re: [OSM-talk] Pubs on mapnik layer - can we remove them?

On 11 Jul 2008, at 14:24, Juan Lucas Dominguez Rubio wrote: Yes, I'll send them and email myself. And in the meantimeTom: you can force the OSM guys to remove those awful pint glasses if you prove that that icon is copyrighted ;-) It is copylefted by me and I find those pints quite u

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Er, I've driven past that one a handful of times (some friends used to > live in Pontardawe) and if it's the road I'm thinking of - down > towards the KFC - it _is_ unclassified. Well, either that or tertiary; It can't possibly be unclassified - an

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

Apologies, I missed the link in the previous email: [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.50163 &lon=-1.87931&zoom=17&layers=B00FTF Cheers Andy >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it land or sea: how to map a swamp?

There is a "wetland" proposal which includes wetland=mangrove. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Wetland_areas In the area where I am working at the moment http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-0.85&lon=-46.991&zoom=9&layers=0B0FTF (almost) all the coastline is drawn along

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

Steve Hill wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > >> Er, I've driven past that one a handful of times (some friends >> used to >> live in Pontardawe) and if it's the road I'm thinking of - down >> towards the KFC - it _is_ unclassified. Well, either that or >> tertiary; > > I

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it land or sea: how to map a swamp?

Thanks for pointing to this one, certainly much more useful and general than adding natural=mangrove. Mike Limerick At 03:27 PM 11/07/2008, Ulf Mehlig wrote: >There is a "wetland" proposal which includes wetland=mangrove. > >http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Wetland_area

Re: [OSM-talk] Misclassified roads

Alex Wilson wrote: > Perhaps a compromise would be to add a new tag: something like > 'needs_review=true'. After a revisit of the road, the tag can be > removed and the road classification left as is or modified as appropriate. > > Cheers, > > Alex > Wouldn't it be better to have a last_reviewed