On 2020-02-13 00:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> sent from a phone
>
>> Il giorno 13 feb 2020, alle ore 00:05, Colin Smale
>> ha scritto:
>>
>> Locations are stored in OSM as pairs of {lat,lon} and I assume these are
>> both 64-bit floats in the database.
>
> AFAIK they are stored as intege
The problem?
Large areas of blank map that, when viewed zoomed out, look to be tree
covered areas.
Result:
Initial mappers tag the large areas as tree covered, ignoring details
such as lakes, tree cuttings etc.
Some time later details of lakes, tree cuts are added. this may be some
years
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 13 feb 2020, alle ore 00:05, Colin Smale ha
> scritto:
>
> Locations are stored in OSM as pairs of {lat,lon} and I assume these are both
> 64-bit floats in the database.
AFAIK they are stored as integers (shifting the decimals)
Cheers Martin
___
On 2020-02-12 23:34, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> sent from a phone
>
> Il giorno 12 feb 2020, alle ore 14:06, Colin Smale ha
> scritto:
>
> Exactly this. A hobbyist or volunteer CAN verify an admin boundary (where it
> is available as open data) - it is independently verifiable. It is
> obj
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 12 feb 2020, alle ore 14:06, Colin Smale ha
> scritto:
>
> Exactly this. A hobbyist or volunteer CAN verify an admin boundary (where it
> is available as open data) - it is independently verifiable. It is
> objectively of better quality than an OTG observation
Hi Mateusz
The link below shows north of Canada areas, where the wood landcover correspond
in general to Canvec imports. The blank areas are mostly not mapped yet except
some lakes and
infrastructures.https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=5/55.740/-79.804
But for Labrador, the contributors have mad
While I second Mateusz, the obvious solution for data users who may want to get
rid of them in OSM is to filter them out.
Yves ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Feb 12, 2020, 01:54 by pierz...@yahoo.fr:
> > > > pierz...@yahoo.fr
> > > If we could keep the wood landcover outside of OSM, it would greatly
> > > simplify mapping of such areas and dramatically reduce the Mulipolygons
> > > problems where huge multipolygons are created with inner for lakes a
Hi,
There is an ongoing discussion to clarify if whatever explicit
abstaining is the same as no vote during the process of approving a
proposal. [1] Please feel free to participate in the discussion.
I'll send another message to the tagging mailing list.
Happy mapping.
Regards,
Daniel
[1
On 2020-02-12 10:42, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2020-02-12 10:28, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> Where a boundary coincides with the centre line of
>> a road for example, and there is a discrepancy in OSM between the
>> locations of the two, there should be a recognition that the
>> professiona
Colin doesn’t seem to be advocating for deference to and worship of authorities
in all situations. That’s an over the top interpretation.
It’s maybe better to say that it’s something to consider when evaluating data —
as we always look at a mappers context in OSM when looking at edits and
revis
On Feb 12, 2020, at 12:28 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> Start with "If A, then B" where A is "it is on the ground" and B is "you may
> map it." Now, try the contrapositive "If not B, then not A" (in logic
> notation: ¬B -> ¬A).
>
> this is not how complex situations work. "If its black i
Hi,
On 2020-02-12 10:28, Colin Smale wrote:
> Where a boundary coincides with the centre line of
> a road for example, and there is a discrepancy in OSM between the
> locations of the two, there should be a recognition that the
> professionally surveyed locations are more likely to be correct
I d
On 2020-02-12 09:28, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I believe it is a misconception to think it must be "visible" on the ground,
> rather it must be determinable on the ground / "in loco". There might well be
> nothing to "see", but you could still check on the ground, by talking to the
> local p
Am Mi., 12. Feb. 2020 um 01:29 Uhr schrieb stevea :
> On Feb 11, 2020, at 3:45 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via talk <
> talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> > OTG is not "everything must be mapped on survey", it means
> > that direct survey (what is actually existing) overrides official data,
> opinions and
15 matches
Mail list logo
