On 11/01/19 21:45, Markus wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen wrote:
On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
* -32.0914374, 116.0129206
Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming fr
A left turn there would be legal, unless there is a local sign.
So I would not place a turn restriction on it base on satellite imagery.
On 12/01/19 07:47, Jem wrote:
Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn
restriction here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeli
Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn restriction
here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeline.
I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does that form part of
the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of whether there is a sign present.
On Fri, 11 Jan 201
Hi all
As the CES ends by the end of today, I'd find great to list any interesting
insight or uses some of you may have seen during this week there.
I wasn't in Las Vegas and I didn't notice many reuse of renders nor data.
What about you?
François
___
In my mind I'd always thought about using OSM for urban planning to be
something for places with little money such as the third world but it
appears that in many places the economic boundaries of a city do not
coincide with the political boundaries and different levels of government
are involved in
Yes, obviously, but is there anything that marks a certain area as Kurdistan? I
haven’t found anything.
Google maps doesn’t delete the entire map area but aren’t allowed to show which
area is normally called Kurdistan for Turkish citizens since Turkey denies its
existance.
/Andreas
Skickat fr
On this post you can find an image about how we would edit these cases:
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/AU-NZ_mapping_projects/issues/5
Regards,
Petra
-Original Message-
From: Marc Gemis
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 2:51 PM
To: Maarten Deen
Cc:
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Editing roa
If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.
m.
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more
I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
drive. As such I don't see
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:23, Jem wrote:
>
> I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a no-left-turn
> restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past. But to
> be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that
> I'd map that place like that:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have
>Please see https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/
>...
>Simon
Ok, so not compatible, clarified, thanks
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.or
Please see https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/
And really, besides all the other problems with the wiki, deducing
anything from the membership of an article in one of the multiple 10'000
essentially random categories is not a good idea.
Simon
Am 11.01.2019 um 12:01 sc
Hi, please, just to confirm if yes or no:
The Scientific journal PLOS is told Open Access, as they say:
"REPRODUCTION OF ARTICLES - Articles and **accompanying materials** published
by PLOS on the PLOS Sites, unless otherwise indicated, are licensed by the
respective authors of such articles for
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen wrote:
>
> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
>
> >
> > See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >
> > * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
>
> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
> the motorw
15 matches
Mail list logo
