2009/12/4 Steve Bennett :
> The main focus is *adding* information to roads currently mapped as single
> (non-divided) roads. Gaining information. Not losing. There are a huge
> number of places that this will add information that was not previously
> mapped.
This opens up a can of worms about mic
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:28 PM, John Smith wrote:
> 2009/12/4 Steve Bennett :
> > Again, this proposal is not primarily about rendering. That's a nice
> benefit
> > in some cases. The goals are:
> > 1) More appropriate data structure
>
> How is this more appropriate, you are loosing real world inf
2009/12/4 Steve Bennett :
> Again, this proposal is not primarily about rendering. That's a nice benefit
> in some cases. The goals are:
> 1) More appropriate data structure
How is this more appropriate, you are loosing real world information
to improve rendering.
> 2) Better usability
How does
Awesome, nice to finally get some proper criticism :)
I'll write up the proposal as I see it. I think most of these comments are
assuming that somehow a single divider=* tag is going to replace all split
roads, including dual carriageway motorways etc. That's not what I'm
suggesting.
I like the c
> 2) There is a divided road that has been sketched out roughly, simply
> to indicate the division. (Very common, I think) Converting this to a
> simple divided=* tag doesn't lose information, and better indicates
> the actual level of information stored.
> Here's one that looks like 2):
> http://
2009/12/4 :
> These marks are part tourist attraction, part survey control. Most are
> located where a car with an in-built GPS can drive right up to it, so
> the driver can check the accuracy of their GPS signal.
The Gympie co-ords are wonky to say the least, it puts the marker near
Kilcoy/Summe
2009/12/4 Frederik Ramm :
> Nick,
> I assume that the POI collector not only lets you collect new POIs but
> also modify existing ones. For this, the existing ones must be shown as
> active elements on the map that the device displays. Given that the OSM
> server proper is too slow to answer real-t
Hello Mappers,
It is Queensland's (Australia) 150th birthday, and to celebrate, the Surveying and Spatial
Sciences Institute (SSSI) organised the placement of a number of commemorative
permanent marks around the state.
http://sssiq150.org/About-SSSI-Q150-Project.aspx
These marks are part touris
Nick,
Nick Black wrote:
> Mapzen POI Collector is a free iPhone app that makes it really easy to
> collect POIs for OpenStreetMap. Users locate themselves using the
> iPhone's built in GPS, position a pin at the location of the POI they
> want to add and then choose from a range of pre-selected ca
I've recently been given access to daily per-day GPS dumps for a bunch
of GPS devices. I'd like to produce some statistics from these GPX
files on a daily basis, like how many kilometers each device traveled,
charts per device / group of devices and so forth.
Is there any GPX analysis software (pr
2009/12/3 Richard Mann :
> Unless you want to write routines for pre-processing two almost-parallel
> ways back into a single way so it can be rendered neatly, I suggest it's a
> mapping problem. Don't make work for other people if you don't have to.
I thought we were trying to map the world in as
Hi,
OpenStreetMap mug is amazing! Do you plan to produce it also in bigger size?
I think cca 0.5 l, some one like
http://www.eshop-pro.cz/img/p/5830-8430-thickbox.jpg :-)
Current mug is too small for common every-day use (at least for me) and it's
pity but if bigger mug would be available, I wo
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> I'd have mentioned Estonia in the document if I knew about it, I only
> mentioned France, including a screenshot of how the attribution is
> displayed (requested by the lady...)
>
In Estonia we have a requirement to tag data mentioning Corine Land
Cover and version o
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 17:10, Margus Värton wrote:
> So my suggestion is to ask from Iceland's local environment agency or
> ministry.
> Actually I do not see much reason to reject Your proposal.
We've already looked into doing that but every ministry in Iceland has
an explicit policy dictating
> Begin forwarded message:
> > From: paul everett
> > Date: 3 December 2009 04:57:41 GMT
> > To: legal-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
First of all, please subscribe to the legal@ mailing list in order to post
questions. Emailing the list owner is awkward.
> > I am a plugin developer, developing p
2009/12/2 Peter Körner
> Hi
>
> > as an programmer my first bolean thoughts where
> An as a foreign national my thoughts were "And I thought OSM was an
> international project..".
>
>
what does not mean you can't use features that appear only in some parts of
the world. I never used village_g
There have been no comments to the "covered" proposal since the first
flurry. I'd like to move this to the Approved page if the group has no
objection, so I'll allow another day for comments, and then move it to
voting.
Yes, I know there are those who are dead set against voting, but that's
th
2009/12/2 OJ W
> so... do any of us know enough to mark this border on the OSM map?
>
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/6712250/Wrong-maps-landed-British-sailors-in-Iranian-captivity.html
>
> http://osm.org/go/zDsi62--
>
>
let's ask the different embassies (maybe inclu
2009/12/3 Anthony
>
> divider=none, divider=legal, and divider=physical is about the only
> part of that proposal that I'm fairly sure would work.
>
> And divider=physical goes against current mapping principles.
yes, you will also loose positional accuracy and slightly different details
of the
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Let's take this situation:
>
> B
> |
> A==C
>
> You're going from A to B. I'm saying that the router doesn't attempt to make
> the turn because the way A-C is marked as divided=median, and there's
> nothing at the int
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> ie:
> |
> =+=
> |
>
> With junction=fourway or whatever at the +.
"fourway" would be the only tag that's not ambiguous. Your "junction"
was already solved properly by turn restrictions.
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w
(Weird, did this email not get sent before - so many emails going back
and forth. Oops.)
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> no, I think this is a big con: there are (and will always be) people who
> change the map to different schemes, sometimes also loosing information
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:54 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Steve Bennett
> wrote:
> > Well, put it this way: if this was implemented, I would duplicate far
> > fewer roads in future.
>
> If it worked (and I really haven't delved into the details enough to
> check), I might
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Anthony wrote:
> I don't know. I read over the proposal again and I don't even get it,
> actually. Is the way supposed to be split before and after each
> intersection?
Maybe I should write up the proposal as I see it, but all I'm proposing is:
divider=* tag on
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Well, put it this way: if this was implemented, I would duplicate far
> fewer roads in future.
If it worked (and I really haven't delved into the details enough to
check), I might be convinced to add division information where I
otherwise wo
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2009/12/3 Anthony
>>
>> > Are there other downsides I'm missing?
>>
>> I think the biggest downside is that it creates two accepted ways to
>> map the same thing. Even that, I suppose, is not a problem, if we
>> make it clear that the
2009/12/3 Anthony
> > Are there other downsides I'm missing?
>
> I think the biggest downside is that it creates two accepted ways to
> map the same thing. Even that, I suppose, is not a problem, if we
> make it clear that the old way, which contains more information, is
> preferable.
>
no, I t
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:21 AM, Anthony wrote:
> And I think that's eventually where we're going. The distance between
> the centerlines is only part of the equation, but I wouldn't want to
> throw that information away. This is all moot, however, because I now
> understand that you have no inte
2009/12/3 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason :
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 08:47, Margus Värton wrote:
>> I am glad to inform You that CORINE Land Cover data for Estonia is
>> currently being imported. It takes some time and some manual or
>> semi-manual intervention but in few days we should have much improved
Steve Bennett wrote:
> Why? Primarily as a landmark, I would think. The fact that there is a
> median strip is more important, relatively, than that there is a
> median strip which is 83cm wide, surfaced in terracotta pavers
> overgrown with moss...
>
> Anyway, to back up slightly here, the benefi
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Are there other downsides I'm missing?
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention a big problem. Using forward/backward
breaks when a way is reversed. So divider=u_turn_forward and
divider=u_turn_backward are a bad idea.
___
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> I should also have asked whether the widths of the roads are
> accurately measured. Presumably we need to know the width of each road
> and the distance between them, at each point. But if you want to model
> the roads that accurately, probab
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 08:47, Margus Värton wrote:
>
>> I am glad to inform You that CORINE Land Cover data for Estonia is
>> currently being imported. It takes some time and some manual or
>> semi-manual intervention but in few days we should have much improved
2009/12/2 Richard Fairhurst
>
> You shouldn't need to add :area for it to render. :area just means
> "only use this rule if the way is closed" (i.e. start and end points
> are the same).
>
> So you might do:
>
>way [highway] [!junction] :area { fill-color: grey; }
>
> which would mean "fill i
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Anthony wrote:
> It doesn't seem to be general enough, but instead as an incomplete
> lump of special cases.
It covers the small, but salient, case of divided roads. Nothing more.
We're just talking about one key here.
> So routers are going to have to handle two
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 08:47, Margus Värton wrote:
> I am glad to inform You that CORINE Land Cover data for Estonia is
> currently being imported. It takes some time and some manual or
> semi-manual intervention but in few days we should have much improved
> map data.
That's nice. I was browsing
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Anthony wrote:
>> I'm not sure how this would work without using areas, though. And
>> even then, it'll be complicated. I think the proposal at
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Divided
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Anthony wrote:
> I'm not sure how this would work without using areas, though. And
> even then, it'll be complicated. I think the proposal at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Divided_road is
> far too kludgy and temporary
What do you find kl
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Nick Whitelegg
wrote:
> Agreed, while it's sensible for two ways in a dual carriageway, it seems
> OTT to have two ways for a road simply because it's got white lines down
> the middle. It seems to me to be introducing unnecessary complication, not
> to mention inc
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 4:06 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> I find the current practice of duplicating minor roads when there is a
> median strip pretty unsatisfactory.
I was thinking about this recently when we had the "map everything as
areas" thread, and I have to agree with you to some extent (tho
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Valent Turkovic
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Nick Black wrote:
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> Mapzen POI Collector was released into the App Store this morning.
>> Mapzen POI Collector is a free iPhone app that makes it really easy to
>> collect POIs for OpenStree
>It's both, a rendering issue when the names are duplicated and a
>mapping issue about representing the turn restrictions. Note that It's
>a very old definition in OSM to say that we duplicate the ways when
>there is a physical division between the two ways (it's physically
>impossible to cross the
On 03/12/2009, at 10:19 PM, Ed Avis wrote:
> That was my interpretation too. It appears to me that if some well-meaning
> body released a set of data under the ODbL (which presumably we recommend as
> an appropriate licence for geodata) then the OSM project would not be able to
> use it. In other
To be fair, 'village green' has an explicit definition in English law, which is
presumably why whoever originally defined it put the word 'English' in. Agreed,
that it doesn't have to be in a village, but can be in (or, indeed, outside)
any sized population centre.
See http://www.oss.org.uk/vill
On 03/12/2009, at 10:19 PM, Mike Collinson wrote:
> - Whether friendly or unfriendly, they never have any obligation to merge in
> their data improvements into our database.
> - However, you or I can.
>
> Does that make sense?
I completely agree that they don't have to do anything towards mergin
moved to proposal from user-space to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Area
cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
2009/12/3 Steve Bennett
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
> > it allows to define things like: there is a kerb between the footway and
> the
> > street, but on given nodes there is a lowered kerb to crossover.
>
> Yes, it's certainly quite expressive, at the cost of
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Stevage_Divided_road.png
>
If dividers are so small and do not create any turn restrictions, I
just ignore them.
But you are lucky to have a source which allow you to go so deep in
details. Anyway, yo
Oops, I also meant to point out a screenshot of my mockup:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Stevage_Divided_road.png
(And an earlier version:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/images/archive/9/9e/20091203113817!Stevage_Divided_road.png
)
Sorry for the spam.
Steve
__
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> it allows to define things like: there is a kerb between the footway and the
> street, but on given nodes there is a lowered kerb to crossover.
Yes, it's certainly quite expressive, at the cost of complexity - and
having to use relatio
That's great news Margus, thanks for letting us know!
I'm always pleased to see more CORINE :)
Cheers, Joseph
2009/12/3 Margus Värton :
> Hi,
>
> I am glad to inform You that CORINE Land Cover data for Estonia is
> currently being imported. It takes some time and some manual or
> semi-manual i
2009/12/3 Steve Bennett
> Can I draw some attention to this:
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Divided_road
>
> I was going to propose exactly the same thing, pretty much. Maybe I'd
> quibble with some of the naming.
>
I am also working on a proposal (let's say it's in an
Ok, I've mocked up what it might look like.
Complicated to show you though:
1) http://www.geowiki.com/halcyon/
2) Lat: -37.821995 Lon: 144.919573
3) Add these lines to the of end of the big edit box:
way[highway=service][!divider]
{ color: white; width: 3; casing-width: 5; }
way[divider
On 03/12/2009, at 10.39, John Smith wrote:
> 2009/12/3 Steve Bennett :
>> I find the current practice of duplicating minor roads when there
>> is a
>> median strip pretty unsatisfactory. Even disregarding the effort, the
>> end result never renders well: usually the street name is written
>> tw
Sorry, one last example, also nearby:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.826282&lon=144.947554&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF
This mess might be much more understandable if pairs of lanes that
were physically together were rendered as pairs (with a line between
them), and those that were on separate p
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Richard Mann
wrote:
>> That's a problem with the rendering, not with the mapping.
>
> Unless you want to write routines for pre-processing two almost-parallel
> ways back into a single way so it can be rendered neatly, I suggest it's a
> mapping problem.
Yep, a ver
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Richard Mann
>> That's a problem with the rendering, not with the mapping.
>
> Unless you want to write routines for pre-processing two almost-parallel
> ways back into a single way so it can be rendered neatly, I suggest it's a
> mapping problem. Don't make work fo
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:39 AM, John Smith wrote:
> 2009/12/3 Steve Bennett :
> > I find the current practice of duplicating minor roads when there is a
> > median strip pretty unsatisfactory. Even disregarding the effort, the
> > end result never renders well: usually the street name is written
>
Begin forwarded message:
> From: paul everett
> Date: 3 December 2009 04:57:41 GMT
> To: legal-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: question about commercial use. import of data in OSM format
>
> Hi,
> I am a plugin developer, developing plugins for cinema4D. I am
> working on a plugin cal
2009/12/3 Steve Bennett :
> I find the current practice of duplicating minor roads when there is a
> median strip pretty unsatisfactory. Even disregarding the effort, the
> end result never renders well: usually the street name is written
> twice, the one-way arrows get messy etc.
That's a problem
Can I draw some attention to this:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Divided_road
I was going to propose exactly the same thing, pretty much. Maybe I'd
quibble with some of the naming.
I find the current practice of duplicating minor roads when there is a
median strip pretty u
Hi,
I am glad to inform You that CORINE Land Cover data for Estonia is
currently being imported. It takes some time and some manual or
semi-manual intervention but in few days we should have much improved
map data.
Regards,
- M -
___
talk mailing
... Yes, fully agreed ... (and I wasn't being terribly serious as it was
getting near time to go and open a bottle of foreign wine (;>) and watch a
movie).
Although it may sometimes be useful to supplement the internationally
applicable / useful with an indication of regional / national difference
63 matches
Mail list logo
