Robin Paulson writes:
> i've done some quite detailed editing near where i live, i'd
> appreciate anyone who is interested taking a look and responding.
>
> i'm not sure what to make of the result. for one, my partner, a
> non-mapper, has told me she finds it very confusing, which potentially
>
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Robin Paulson wrote:
> i've done some quite detailed editing near where i live, i'd appreciate
> anyone who is interested taking a look and responding.
>
> i'm not sure what to make of the result. for one, my partner, a non-mapper,
> has told me she finds it very c
i've done some quite detailed editing near where i live, i'd appreciate
anyone who is interested taking a look and responding.
i'm not sure what to make of the result. for one, my partner, a
non-mapper, has told me she finds it very confusing, which potentially
raises questions
http://www.op
* Mike N [2012-11-20 13:58 -0500]:
> I also remove reviewed when I have verified the geometry and general
> road type, although others use the reviewed flag as a a sign that it has
> been verified on the ground.
Yeah, I only remove the tiger:reviewed tag once I've verified both the
geometry and t
On 11/20/2012 11:04 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
tiger:county
tiger:zip_left
tiger:zip_right
These are the only ones I use regularly, although there are probably
sources to derive them. I also remove reviewed when I have verified
the geometry and general road type, although others use the rev
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
> tiger:name_base
>
> tiger:name_direction_suffix
>
> tiger:name_direction_prefix
>
> tiger:name_type
>
> tiger:reviewed
I don't have opinions on the other tags, but those listed above are important.
- Serge
_
Aside from the automatically dropped tags there are:
tiger:cfcc
tiger:county
tiger:name_base
tiger:name_direction_suffix
tiger:name_direction_prefix
tiger:name_type
tiger:reviewed
tiger:zip_left
tiger:zip_right
My practice is to drop county if the county relation exists and is valid
Yeah, in preparation for Operation Cowboy I have tried to get a few
things done to make things easier on remote mappers.
I sent a pull request to update the P2 imagery URL to point at a new
set of TIGER road name tiles that have all the abbreviations expanded
so there is less uncertainty for armch
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Brian DeRocher wrote:
> I feel it's important to maintain at least some reference to the TIGER
> edge it came from. The edge has details like lfromadd, ltoadd, rfromaddd
> and rtoadd. These are the "house" numbers on the left and right sides of
> the street.
>
I feel it's important to maintain at least some reference to the TIGER edge it
came from. The edge has details like lfromadd, ltoadd, rfromaddd and rtoadd.
These are the "house" numbers on the left and right sides of the street.
This was useful to me as i connected Nomintatim to TIGER edges in
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Henning Scholland wrote:
> Hi Josh,
> so if I understand you correct, all TIGER-tag could be removed, if the
> geometry of the object is checked and object has a name-tag?
>
This is what I do.
> Is this a general opinion in US-community?
>
I'd venture to say y
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Henning Scholland wrote:
> [...]
> Which of above tags are obsolete and should be removed after checking the
> object against aerial image and gps-tracks?
>
JOSM and Potlatch are conservative with removing tags, which is good
considering users can edit objects w
On 20 November 2012 00:03, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Has anyone compared the etrex20 to the gpsmap 60Csx regarding
> positional accuracy? Recently got strange problems on my 60Csx (can
> turn it on, but when turned off it won't switch on again unless I
> remove the batteries for a second, and I
Henning asked:
> Which of above tags are obsolete and should be removed after
checking the object
> against aerial image and gps-tracks?
JOSM already discards (some) obsolete Tiger tags:
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/7915
And a similar patch
https://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/4552 wa
Hi,
because of Operation Cowboy many users will become into contact with
TIGER-tags and don't really now ho to deal with them.
There are:
tiger:cfcc
tiger:county
tiger:name_base
tiger:name_direction_suffix
tiger:name_direction_prefix
tiger:name_type
tiger:reviewed
tiger:seperated
tiger:source
So thanks to everybody for the feedback.
In the meanwhile the user of the changeset has agreed to revert all of his
changesets for the area. But on the other hand user zors1843 has reverted
the changeset affecting the coastline. So now I guess I'll simply leave
things as they are - I think any fur
Hi Martin,
2012/11/20 Martin Koppenhoefer
> Had a similar problem, this is the ticket:
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/8156
>
Yes, I think that's exactly the problem I've experienced.
Best regards,
Michael
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstre
Hi,
I gave the Walking Papers database a kick and it's back.
FYI, Field Papers was developed for a social science / crisis response client
and is aimed at more general data collection needs vs. the Walking Papers focus
on OSM exclusively. Both do multi-page atlases and both produce prints that
18 matches
Mail list logo
