Re: [OSM-talk] Road Surface Type Map

On 2015-06-18 04:23, Hans De Kryger wrote: Does anyone know of a map that displays road surface type? If not maybe it been a good idea to request one from itomap. It would be a lot of help to mappers who map those tags. Itomap has one:

Re: [OSM-talk] Road Surface Type Map

On 18/06/2015 12:23 PM, Hans De Kryger wrote: Does anyone know of a map that displays road surface type? If not maybe it been a good idea to request one from itomap. It would be a lot of help to mappers who map those tags. OSMAnd has a function to display road surface... it does display the

[OSM-talk] Road Surface Type Map

Does anyone know of a map that displays road surface type? If not maybe it been a good idea to request one from itomap. It would be a lot of help to mappers who map those tags. *Regards,* *Hans* *http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13 *

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-ko] OSM and CartoDB in use for MERS mapping

Well, It is especially notable since it was created while S.Korea gov refused to publish the name of medical facilities. Then someone got the map data from OSM and analyzed the known facts (somehow), then created the page with the map. ps. I see my contribution, too! (I created a node which is now

[OSM-talk] Response to discussion about OSM and local mappers article

I’m really glad to see all this discussion sparked by my post, which I have enjoyed reading. I’m sorry I wasn’t on this list to reply directly to many posts. (My article is here in case you did not see https://medium.com/@ricaji/openstreetmap-mapping-power-to-the-people-e938c38da93d

Re: [OSM-talk] getmap in osm mode

On 6/17/2015 10:41 AM, Daniel Koć wrote: getmap works with so called public static image APIs, which are provided by Mapquest and Google. AFAIR, OSM does *not* provide such an API - at least at last time I checked. But, I've read that OSM now provides direct routing. If they would also provide

Re: [OSM-talk] Some thoughts against remote mapping

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:07 AM, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: > > What I've been mulling over is the "home location" data on the > profile. Right now it's close to useless. I'd like to be able to set > multiple areas (not points) and rate them "can survey / good local > knowledge / particularly inter

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 05:55:18PM +0100, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 09:00 +, Janko Mihelić wrote: > > If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing > > services even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can > > be a way. Neither OSRM, ORS or

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 09:00:37AM +, Janko Mihelić wrote: > If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing services > even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can be a way. > Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict that, and that's > IMHO one of

[OSM-talk] getmap in osm mode

Out of curiosity - there is a "getmap" TeX package: http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/getmap which can put the maps directly from the net using just the address. Currently it uses Google Maps and MapQuest, but not the other OSM maps we have, so I asked the author of getmap a

Re: [OSM-talk] Some thoughts against remote mapping

This Friday night I'm going to close out the quick, three question survey on remote mapping thread. If you haven't answered the survey already, go to https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TRQYHFP to answer the three questions. Clifford On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > O

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 09:00 +, Janko Mihelić wrote: > If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing > services even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can > be a way. Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict > that, and that's IMHO one of the cr

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

Hi, Am 2015-06-17 um 05:33 schrieb Hans De Kryger: > Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of > joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service > out there? Am i missing something? There are differences in history between these two projects.

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

2015-06-17 16:27 GMT+02:00 Lester Caine : > On 17/06/15 04:33, Hans De Kryger wrote: > > Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of > > joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service > > out there? as far as I understand these 2 services us

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

OSMR requires a link to centre on a desired location so they can start a new route, not load an existing one. I'm aware of 'zoom to user' but that shares location data. Many people don't like doing that. Unless I'm missing something, the 'generate link' you describe doesn't zoom to the route

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On 17/06/15 04:33, Hans De Kryger wrote: > Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of > joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service > out there? Am i missing something? I know it's nice to have different > services for different uses but this

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

Hi, > In theory competition drives functionality improvements, although in > this case it's not clear if this happened. Any map based website that > doesn't include a permalink option isn't worth using, Unless it's been > recently added & is very well hidden OSMR hasn't this option. OSRM has the

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

In theory competition drives functionality improvements, although in this case it's not clear if this happened. Any map based website that doesn't include a permalink option isn't worth using, Unless it's been recently added & is very well hidden OSMR hasn't this option. On 17/06/2015 04:33, H

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

> Can someone who actually works with commercial navigation data say if > "via ways" have an equivalent in their systems? TomTom and HERE data both have restrictions that are comprised of multiple via edges (ways). At MapQuest, my team and I integrated these restrictions into the routing engine an

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On 2015-06-17 15:08, Michał Brzozowski wrote: On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: Imagine a single-carriageway road crossing a dual-carriageway road. All turns are allowed except u-turns from one side of the dual-carriageway to the other. This common situation can only b

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] README tag with editor support

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > > so i have two things in mind here: > > 1) formalize the README tag as a way to caution future mappers > > 2) request editor support, when someone goes to change a > README tagged entity, it would be nice if editors would popup > a dialog s

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: > Imagine a single-carriageway road crossing a dual-carriageway road. > All turns are allowed except u-turns from one side of the > dual-carriageway to the other. This common situation can only be > modeled using a turn restriction with a

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On Wed Jun 17 13:47:31 2015 GMT+0100, Michael Reichert wrote: > Hi, > > Am 2015-06-17 um 14:38 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar: > > This has been fixed in Osmand early this year after being reported > > more than 2 years ago. Unfortunately, multiple via ways are still not > > supported. > > I wonder

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

Imagine a single-carriageway road crossing a dual-carriageway road. All turns are allowed except u-turns from one side of the dual-carriageway to the other. This common situation can only be modeled using a turn restriction with a via way. Now if the via way had to be split for any reason, then yo

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

Hi, Am 2015-06-17 um 14:38 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar: > This has been fixed in Osmand early this year after being reported > more than 2 years ago. Unfortunately, multiple via ways are still not > supported. I wonder if a via way instead of an via node is necessary so much. I wonder more where

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

This has been fixed in Osmand early this year after being reported more than 2 years ago. Unfortunately, multiple via ways are still not supported. https://code.google.com/p/osmand/issues/detail?id=1729 On 6/17/15, Janko Mihelić wrote: > If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

This was bothering me, too. But aren't we expecting too much? I guess that via ways could be not that easy to implement for all but the simplest cases (where it can be reduced to via nodes, anyway - like no U-turn on a double carriageway which intersects with a single-carriageway road). Can someon

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

On 17/06/2015 05:33, Hans De Kryger wrote: Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service out there? Am i missing something ? I know it's nice to have different services for different uses but this

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

Depends what you're after really. I'm impressed by GraphHopper's job in suggesting a foot route between Southampton and the village I spent my teenage years, 60km away - it actually suggests a route very close to the one I would have chosen myself. A bit more roads than ideal, but it is impress

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing services even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can be a way. Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict that, and that's IMHO one of the crucial parts of a routing engine. When one of them starts routin