Hi,
That's great news. I am sure that you will make an easy-to-use configuration
system for selecting which features and tags will be imported into database. I
am awaiting the next release.
-Jukka-
Lähettäjä: Igor Brejc [mailto:igor.br...@gmail.co
Michal Migurski wrote:
> I think it will be necessary to retain both lines and areas [..]
Maybe lines and areas each serve a different purpose : areas describe
the physical layout of the world whereas lines describe navigation
paths. So maybe the debate should be re-framed as whether OpenStreetMap
2009/11/26 andrzej zaborowski :
> I assume layer is 0 if I don't add the layer tag.
Yes, which is usually anything at ground level.
> Hopefully this is the correct thing to assume because otherwise things
> will break if I have a bridge with no layer tag and a another bridge
No they won't break,
Hi,
I've implemented importing of OSM data into SpatiaLite DB and integrated it
successfully with Kosmos map rendering code. SpatiaLite OSM database can be
quite fast, but I had to learn a trick or two to reach good performance. I
even managed to import the latest UK data into it and it didn't com
2009/11/25 Dave F. :
> Shaun McDonald wrote:
>> on the way use highway=footway; bridge=yes; layer=1.
>
> I didn't think the layer=1 was necessary when there's only one bridge -
> it defaults to display above other objects.
> I only use in there a multiple bridges crossing each other.
I assume laye
Jon Burgess googlemail.com> writes:
> > Alternatively, are there plans to make an OSM driver for
> > ogr2ogr?
>
> Not that I know of. I'm sure you could fallback to some path like:
>
> osm -> postgres -> shapefile -> spatialite
I am doing it as osm -> postgres -> spatialite by using osm2pg
2009/11/25 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
> stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
> everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Should we
> go for it now ?
The main usage for this that I see wo
On Nov 25, 2009, at 4:40 PM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 8:09 AM, Anthony wrote:
>>
>> Now, how are you going to indicate a direction of travel on an area?
>> I guess you could come up with some way to do it, but you'd basically
>> be defining a way.
>
> Good point. Anyone got id
On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 02:40:53 +0200, Roy Wallace
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 8:09 AM, Anthony wrote:
>>
>> Now, how are you going to indicate a direction of travel on an area?
>> I guess you could come up with some way to do it, but you'd basically
>> be defining a way.
>
> Good point. Any
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 8:09 AM, Anthony wrote:
>
> Now, how are you going to indicate a direction of travel on an area?
> I guess you could come up with some way to do it, but you'd basically
> be defining a way.
Good point. Anyone got ideas on this? Maybe it is indeed necessary to
map each high
2009/11/26 Dan Homerick :
> I used an 'intermittent=yes' tag for a county-wide import I did.
FWIW, I also use intermittent=yes.
Cheers
Colin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2009/11/26 Anthony
>>
>> losing method into the winning method. By that time we'll have every
>> single area of the globe (except maybe the oceans) covered by an area,
>> right? :)
>
> or even by several areas and inside even more bo
2009/11/26 Anthony
> losing method into the winning method. By that time we'll have every
> single area of the globe (except maybe the oceans) covered by an area,
> right? :)
>
or even by several areas and inside even more boundaries... ;-)
cheers,
Martin
_
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> There have been several discussions whether area borders - such as
> landuse areas - should use the same nodes as streets they are adjacent
> to. Iirc, some participants complained that sharing nodes causes editing
> problems - making it hard
Dave F. wrote:
> I didn't think the layer=1 was necessary when there's only one bridge -
> it defaults to display above other objects.
This assumption isn't defined anywhere (afaik). Therefore, it relies on
arbitrary and undocumented implementation details of specific renderers,
which should be a
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2009/11/25 Anthony
>>
>> >>
>> >> I didn't know that was up for debate. I thought the consensus was
>> >> that they should not only share nodes, but they should share ways as
>> >> well.
>> >
>> > no, I don't think that's a good idea
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
> Wow. I hope you're in the minority on that one, because now that I
> discovered multipolygon relations there's no way I'm going back to
> mapping the exact same line three times (e.g. to represent a park
> adjacent to a residential area separated by a fence).
That's certainl
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Scott Atwood wrote:
> I'm currently doing mapping for the island of Maui in Hawai'i. The leeward
> side of this island has a large number of streams that are dry nearly all
> the time, only containing water during periods of heavy rain. On maps,
> these streams a
Martin Koppenhoefer schrieb:
> 2009/11/25 Tobias Knerr
>
>> Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
>>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
>>> stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
>>> everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Shou
See
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Hydrography_Dataset
http://www.mail-archive.com/newb...@openstreetmap.org/msg03521.html
It sems 'obvious' :-) that this should be
waterway=stream
stream=intermittent
pgpvyQUE20BJu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
2009/11/25 Anthony
> >>
> >> I didn't know that was up for debate. I thought the consensus was
> >> that they should not only share nodes, but they should share ways as
> >> well.
> >
> > no, I don't think that's a good idea as the resulting multipolygons make
> the
> > situation unnecessarily c
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2009/11/25 Anthony
>>
>> I didn't know that was up for debate. I thought the consensus was
>> that they should not only share nodes, but they should share ways as
>> well.
>
> no, I don't think that's a good idea as the resulting mult
I'm currently doing mapping for the island of Maui in Hawai'i. The leeward
side of this island has a large number of streams that are dry nearly all
the time, only containing water during periods of heavy rain. On maps,
these streams are often depicted as dashed or dotted blue lines.
Is there an
I think I may understand your confusion here. You may think of "highway" to
mean a high-speed paved road on which motor vehicles travel. But within the
context of OSM, the "highway" tag is much more general purpose. Virtually
all formal and informal roads and paths should be tagged "highway",
ev
Dave F. schrieb:
>> on the way use highway=footway; bridge=yes; layer=1.
>>
> I didn't think the layer=1 was necessary when there's only one bridge -
> it defaults to display above other objects.
> I only use in there a multiple bridges crossing each other.
>
I don't trust any more on def
2009/11/25 Dave F.
> Shaun McDonald wrote:
> > on the way use highway=footway; bridge=yes; layer=1.
>
> I didn't think the layer=1 was necessary when there's only one bridge -
> it defaults to display above other objects.
> I only use in there a multiple bridges crossing each other.
>
AFAIK most
2009/11/25 Anthony
> I didn't know that was up for debate. I thought the consensus was
> that they should not only share nodes, but they should share ways as
> well.
>
no, I don't think that's a good idea as the resulting multipolygons make the
situation unnecessarily complicated.
cheers,
Mart
2009/11/25 Tobias Knerr
> Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
> > stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
> > everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Should we
> > go for it now ?
>
> Imo,
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> I'm not convinced that, say, a road should be mapped as *both* a way
> and an area - I don't see any need for that.
If the road doesn't have a constant width you basically need an area.
Now, how are you going to indicate a direction of travel
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Anthony wrote:
>
> Isn't it better in most situations to have both (ways and areas)
> rather than just one or the other?
>
> At an intersection, yes, there is one squarish section of road that I
> am capable of traveling on in any spot in any direction. But the
>
Shaun McDonald wrote:
> on the way use highway=footway; bridge=yes; layer=1.
I didn't think the layer=1 was necessary when there's only one bridge -
it defaults to display above other objects.
I only use in there a multiple bridges crossing each other.
Dave F.
_
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
> stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
> everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Should we
> go for it now ?
Imo, area mapping is too advanced for no
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 15:16 +, Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Has anybody written a tool like osm2pgsql for importing OSM data directly into
> SpatiaLite database?
If you want to have a go yourself you could look at:
http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/1371
This copied the postgres code a
You don't have to fill in *anything* in a preset. If you don't, then
all of the optional stuff is left out and you only get the
"bridge=yes" tag, which is useful if you've forgotten.
Otherwise, you can just add it as an attribute. The typing completion
makes it very easy. Click on "Add", type "
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> Mapping the crossing of two roads, four cycleways and four sidewalks all
> as surfaces requires about twenty times as many nodes as mapping the
> crossing of two linear roads. That is a hefty increase in complexity,
> especially when havi
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 13:11, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
> stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
> everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Should we
> go for it now ?
It's good t
Hi,
Has anybody written a tool like osm2pgsql for importing OSM data directly into
SpatiaLite database? Alternatively, are there plans to make an OSM driver for
ogr2ogr?
-Jukka Rahkonen-
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.ope
On 25/11/2009 14:45, Shalabh wrote:
> JOSM does not give me that option of a bridge under hiking trail,
> atleast not while using the presets. If I use the highway tag with a
> bridge, consider this. I have a hiking trail marked as an 'demanding
> alpine hiking' 50 km from any humanity and then
Shalabh gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> JOSM does not give me that option of a bridge under hiking trail, atleast not
while using the presets.
Forget the presets, you can tag how ever you want in OSM. Split your trail from
both ends of the bridge, select that part and add tag "bridge=yes" with the +
Shalabh wrote:
> JOSM does not give me that option of a bridge under hiking trail,
> atleast not while using the presets. If I use the highway tag with a
> bridge, consider this. I have a hiking trail marked as an 'demanding
> alpine hiking' 50 km from any humanity and then I have a bridge tagged
>
Shalabh wrote:
> using highway tag means giving speed limits.
You don't have to - it is optional.
> I am using the path=hiking trail for the trail and would ideally need a
> bridge attribute 'yes' within the hiking trail.
Add the "bridge=yes" tag - it works just fine for that.
___
JOSM does not give me that option of a bridge under hiking trail, atleast
not while using the presets. If I use the highway tag with a bridge,
consider this. I have a hiking trail marked as an 'demanding alpine hiking'
50 km from any humanity and then I have a bridge tagged as highway in the
middle
Dont think my question was specific enough. I am using JOSM for this and
using highway tag means giving speed limits.
I am using the path=hiking trail for the trail and would ideally need a
bridge attribute 'yes' within the hiking trail.
Regards,
Shalabh
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Russ Nel
Shalabh writes:
> Was mapping a few hiking trails with foot-only bridges on the trail and
> could not figure out a way to mark these bridge since the only bridge
> waypoint needs the same parameters as a highway.
>
> Any pointers on how to do this best?
Sure. Any bridgey thing can be tagged
2009/11/25 Jean-Marc Liotier :
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
> stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
> everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Should we
> go for it now ?
>
> Mapping the crossing of two roads,
On 25 Nov 2009, at 11:45, Shalabh wrote:
> Was mapping a few hiking trails with foot-only bridges on the trail and could
> not figure out a way to mark these bridge since the only bridge waypoint
> needs the same parameters as a highway.
>
> Any pointers on how to do this best?
>
on the way
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:11:29 +0100, Jean-Marc Liotier
wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
> stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
> everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Should we
> go for it now ?
Not
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason's diary entry last week (http://j.mp/8ESP8o)
stired my interest. Using a few examples, he showed how mapping
everything as an area - or as a volume - makes ultimate sense. Should we
go for it now ?
Mapping the crossing of two roads, four cycleways and four sidewalks all
Was mapping a few hiking trails with foot-only bridges on the trail and
could not figure out a way to mark these bridge since the only bridge
waypoint needs the same parameters as a highway.
Any pointers on how to do this best?
Regards,
Shalabh
___
talk
2009/11/25 Frederik Ramm
> Hi,
>
> Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
> > El Martes, 24 de Noviembre de 2009, Frederik Ramm escribió:
> >> Maybe "~= 100km", but "== 60 nm".
> >
> > Am I the only one who has read that as "60 nanometers"?
>
> No, a certain Martin K. has already reported the same. I'd say i
Andrew Errington wrote:
> When I slide the aerial photos around (by holding the space bar) the
> photo layer jumps around and seem to snap to positions far away
> from where the mouse is. This didn't used to happen.
>
> I'm sure this is not the right place to file a bug report
Please post a tic
51 matches
Mail list logo
