I enter a bit late in this discussion. But this was the only place I
found which discussed the issued of the nonoffical
routes, because I would like to do the same, so a kind of sharing of
unoffical cycling routes. with OSM.
I have a kind of mixed feeling about this. One one side I understand
] Relation/Routes and Hikes in open Country
I enter a bit late in this discussion. But this was the only place I found
which discussed the issued of the nonoffical
routes, because I would like to do the same, so a kind of sharing of
unoffical cycling routes. with OSM.
I have a kind of mixed
Yep that looks like it figures. I'll have to set up either a local 'http:'
copy of the data or a proxy as you suggest. Shame though, because both of
these make it harder for a 'mashup artist' to use relations and render
them on top of a slippy map.
Still doesn't work, and I don't speak
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 10:59:49AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yep that looks like it figures. I'll have to set up either a local 'http:'
copy of the data or a proxy as you suggest. Shame though, because both of
these make it harder for a 'mashup artist' to use relations and render
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:17:58 -0400
Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Add a 'projection: map.displayProjection' in the options of your GML
layer, by your format object.
Bingo!
I didn't really follow what Christoper meant, but I mucked around with
different projections and
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Simon Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:01:40 -0400
Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The OpenLayers parser doesn't do anything with relations themselves --
it wouldn't group the bits together into a single feature -- but it
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 07:18:33PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Simon Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:01:40 -0400
Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The OpenLayers parser doesn't do anything with relations themselves --
it
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 07:18:33PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Simon Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Best I can make out is that it is failing (siliently) to load the
data.
See http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/FrequentlyAskedQuestions#ProxyHost
for how to
Of course, you can just grab the relation file into the same dir as
the html and request it from the current directory. A cron job could
update the file reasonably frequently without putting much further
load on the main API server each time somebody views the page.
On 6/26/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Wow, I'm totally jealous of the landscape.
However, I don't think marking these as routes is appropriate. For
cycle routes we have the rough description that Cycle routes are
named or numbered or otherwise signed routes, which may go along roads
or dedicated cycle paths. . I don't see anything
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Nick Whitelegg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess this comes down as to whether things like walking routes should
be
stored in OSM itself or put in a different project. I guess we don't
want
to overload OSM with walking routes; however Freemap does aim to
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Nick Whitelegg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess this comes down as to whether things like walking routes should be
stored in OSM itself or put in a different project. I guess we don't want
to overload OSM with walking routes; however Freemap does aim to
Andy Allan wrote:
I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
*objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.
(...or the entire National
Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did
I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their
routes to OSM IDs.
If you plot a favourite walk on a Google Map, you're effectively just
drawing lines and points on a flat map. There's no tie-up with the
I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
*objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
Way in the US can certainly be included as a route.
Hi all,
I'm going to be a bit provocative
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 4:52 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd define it slightly differently - its do we want *subjective*
routes in OSM? I don't think anyone is arguing that notable
*objective* routes, like the Pennine Way in the UK or the Appalachian
Way in the US can certainly be included
Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did
I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their
routes to OSM IDs.
There is an example on OpenLayers showing how to superimpose an OSM file
on top of a slippy map.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 02:21:10PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Something I keep toying with is the idea of facilitating mashups (did
I really just say that?) by giving masher-uppers a way to tie their
routes to OSM IDs.
There is an example on OpenLayers showing how to superimpose
On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:01:40 -0400
Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The OpenLayers parser doesn't do anything with relations themselves --
it wouldn't group the bits together into a single feature -- but it
would take the ways and nodes and draw them into the map.
I spent the
Hi all,
I'm working on importing another set of tracks, see:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Bob_Spirko
I've done a couple of Relation/Routes and wanted some feedback on whether
this is the right way, or if not what is
http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.5/relation/18321
20 matches
Mail list logo
