sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 01:30 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com:
I am not aware about values that should be used in that case.
you are saying that landuse=forest is not a good tag to describe an area where
trees have just been logged and will soon be planted
On 17/08/2015 7:20 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
In that case it is perfectly OK to do not edit map and keep it as it
was (yes, as I
understand it and it seems to be a widely used in this way -
landuse=wood, natural=wood,
landcover=trees are used currently for the same objects).
Err disagree,
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:39 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
* A broken bridge with just a few meters left on both riverbanks
I surely wouldn't have removed this one. Isn't this a significant feature to
many people?
cheers
Martin
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:53 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
http://www.dieter-kloessing.de/Berlin/Berlin-Zehlendorf3.html#Anchor-Stammbahn-47857
That actually looks like disused rather than abandoned to me.
these are clearly abandoned, have been there (although
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 08:28 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
OSM IDs are too volatile, and IIRC there were objections to putting foreign
keys (like shop branch numbers) into OSM on the grounds that someone would
need to maintain that link.
Some people are adding
OK.
c'est fait.
on a retiré les éléments de tracling situés dans les URL.
Le 14 août 2015 21:30, osm.sanspourr...@spamgourmet.com a écrit :
Je prends acte du mea culpa (merci).
Pour la prise en compte, j'attends encore de voir.
À ce jour encore 101 liens pistants Ubiflow.
Mon critère :
On 17/08/2015 4:28 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
If only all this energy were directed at helping OSM forwards. We
haven't had a lot of progress in the last few years (I am not talking
about mapping as such, but about the OSM framework itself).
There are still periodical discussions about how to
In that case it is perfectly OK to do not edit map and keep it as it was
(yes, as I
understand it and it seems to be a widely used in this way - landuse=wood,
natural=wood,
landcover=trees are used currently for the same objects).
Probably landuse=forestry and landcover=trees would be a good idea
W dniu 17.08.2015 13:20, Warin napisał(a):
On 17/08/2015 7:20 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
In that case it is perfectly OK to do not edit map and keep it as it
was (yes, as I
understand it and it seems to be a widely used in this way -
landuse=wood, natural=wood,
landcover=trees are used
On 17/08/2015 10:48 PM, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
On 17/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:39 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
* A broken bridge with just a few meters left on both riverbanks
I surely wouldn't have removed this one.
On 17/08/2015 11:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
On 2015-08-17 13:37, Warin wrote:
On 17/08/2015 4:28 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
Will the free-tagging laissez-faire camp win, or will the
curated/managed tagging camp win?
I'm in the 'systematised free tagging' camp .. I want a structure
that has
Hi everyone.
FYI. We have several upcoming events [0] in Dumaguete, and I would love to
touch bases with local awesome(OSM) mappers.
20-21 Aug - Crowd-mapping with OSM :: The Asia Foundation + local partners
22 Aug, 0900~ - OSM Appreciation Seminar :: Foundation University
24 Aug, 0900~ - OSM
三浦です
On 2015年08月15日 21:57, Satoshi IIDA wrote:
いいだです。
OSM Cartoの v.2.33.0がリリースされ、osm.orgに適用されました。
おしらせありがとうございます。
今回の更新での大きな変更点は以下のとおりです。
* 森林のレンダリングが統一された
landuse=forest と natural=woodの色合いが統一されました。
そのため、京都・神戸・奈良と他の地域の森林地域レンダリングの色合いが異なる、という点が、
少なくともレンダリングの観点からは解消されました。
*
The definitive characteristic of US National Forests is that they are
administered/managed by the US National Forest Service.[5] Thus US
National Forests are administrative areas. Areas where the National
Forest Service has some jurisdiction and responsibility. However, National
Forests are
Joel Holdsworth writes:
...when the whole administrative area is clobbered with green.
What isn't forest shouldn't be tagged landuse=forest, and what is
should be. It is not obvious anything administrative (here) is
clobbered with green. It seems semantics are conflated, or I don't
On 17/08/2015 23:25, Rob Nickerson wrote:
So far there is little interest to do this on the OSM default render
style which seems odd to me given how much fuss there has been on this
list to recent changes to the footway/path style (over the last year)!
There's no interest to do this in the
On 17/08/2015 21:43, Rob Nickerson wrote:
... In regards to designation=*, are we now the only country that
makes a distinction between paths you have a legal right to walk on
and any other path that might exist because people happen to walk over
the land thus leaving a desire line path?
Hi
Thanks Andy,
Fully aware of access land, undocumented rights of way and permissive
paths. I just need to remember to be careful of what I write on this
mailing list (but I was trying not to write an essay).
I'm surprised if this is just England and Wales as I would have thought
some other
Therefore,
tagging them as protected areas is appropriate (not withstanding the
fact that not much in a National Forest seems protected based upon my
visit to a section of the Roosevelt National Forest yesterday).
+1 agree with everything you say.
Also, come help me map the land-cover! -
Serge Wroclawski writes:
TIGER wasn't what I was referring to.
Please don't speak on my behalf.
Very well. Feel free to point to anything anywhere that people are
afraid to delete. I want to see 1) something that obviously doesn't
belong there, 2) which isn't TIGER and 3) evidence that
Hi James,
but I did receive approval from the city that we could import data
from data.ottawa.ca/dataset http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset. Which I
documented here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Permission
I'm not a legal expert, but I think that OSM would have
Just re-discovered Strava [0] last week, you can overlay their
anonymized traces in JOSM and iD and use as reference for mapping
roads. I found a lot of unmapped roads in several areas last week.
Also, interesting to see in strava where cyclists and runners go.
Very few traces in SLEX versus
On 17/08/2015 11:54 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 08/17/2015 03:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
So if I think something is useful to me, and I am prepared to maintain
it to my own satisfaction, I can feel free add it
I'd think it should be documented in the wiki .. so others can 'see' what it is
On 8/17/2015 3:25 PM, Rob Nickerson wrote:
I'm surprised if this is just England and Wales as I would have
thought some other country has some way of documenting paths in a
legal context and as such this may be relevant for other countries
I'm not aware of any countries which quite have the
2015-08-17 6:04 GMT-03:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 08:28 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
OSM IDs are too volatile, and IIRC there were objections to putting
foreign keys (like shop branch numbers) into OSM on the grounds
On 8/17/2015 8:20 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote:
Hi James,
but I did receive approval from the city that we could import data
from data.ottawa.ca/dataset http://data.ottawa.ca/dataset. Which I
documented here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Permission
I'm
Hey Chethan,
This is such a lovely idea. The map looks very informative.
Great job! :)
More power to the people,
Aruna
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
On 16/08/2015, Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com wrote:
2015-08-16 15:27 GMT+02:00 Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com:
landuse=forest does not imply the area is completely tree covered.
Note that in typical usage it means exactly this. Maybe original intention
was for that tag was to mean
On 17/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:39 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
* A broken bridge with just a few meters left on both riverbanks
I surely wouldn't have removed this one. Isn't this a significant feature to
many people?
In
Yeah I posted a question about this last week:
https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/44763/tagging-us-national-forests
To me landuse=forest is pretty clearly incorrect. It should be
boundary=protected_area,protect_class=6 and the rendering rules should be
patched to make it appear similar
On 2015-08-17 13:37, Warin wrote:
On 17/08/2015 4:28 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
If only all this energy were directed at helping OSM forwards. We haven't
had a lot of progress in the last few years (I am not talking about mapping
as such, but about the OSM framework itself).
There
I removed the landuse=forest from the national forest relations in Utah:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33392465.
The map will look very white :( but at least it's not wrong anymore.
Martijn van Exel
Secretary, US Chapter
OpenStreetMap
http://openstreetmap.us/
http://osm.org/
skype:
Richard --
I filed a bug for this, there was some discussion, and I closed it:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1754
Feel free to reopen if you think this needs more discussion. The consensus
seemed to be that lakes within forests should be tagged as inner of the
forest
On 16/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
which landuse is good for an area where trees have just been logged and
will soon be planted again?
landuse=forest, which I've always reasoned of as being landuse=forestry :)
Which landuse value is suitable for an area
where
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 11:20 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com:
Probably landuse=forestry and landcover=trees would be a good idea and I
would
support such proposal.
how do you suggest to put names? On locality nodes? On landuse objects? If you
do the latter
Hi,
On 08/17/2015 03:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
So if I think something is useful to me, and I am prepared to maintain
it to my own satisfaction, I can feel free add it
... to a file on your local computer where it will continue to please
you for years to come ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik
Laba diena!
Nejauši uzskrēju šādiem datiem, saimniecībā varbūt noder. Nav ne jausmas
vai un kā šie dati iet kopā ar OSM licenci. Vai pietiek tags ar atsauci ©
Datu izmantošas gadījumā atsauce uz AS “Latvijas valsts meži” ir obligāta.
Hi OSM enthusiast's,
As I had a long weekend, decided to visit Tirumala for the
first time. On 14th August, customised the OSM Tirumala data with
Mapbox Studio and left Bengaluru in the evening with printed A3 size map
which costed me JUST Rs. 32 at Printo shop. I was thinking to
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 07:27:11PM -0700, Paul Norman wrote:
This email is also in user diary form at osm.org/user/pnorman/diary/35589
where issue numbers are linked.
OpenStreetMap Carto 2.33.0 has been released. This release focuses on
cartographic style improvements, but the release notes
On Monday 17 August 2015, Martijn van Exel wrote:
I removed the landuse=forest from the national forest relations in
Utah: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33392465.
To find further occurances you can use:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/aZs
You will also see there that many national forests
Hello everyone, I was informed that before any kind of data import was to
be approved by the community. Unfortunately I have imported a bit of data
into openstreetmap and for this I am sorry.
but I did receive approval from the city that we could import data from
data.ottawa.ca/dataset. Which I
Folks,
This whole discussion going back more than a year ago has
been dominated by very European concepts of what is a forest.
I live in the dry, high western United States, where forests are
very different from those in Europe (not leafy!) but are no less
forests. How would you tag the
This whole discussion going back more than a year ago has
been dominated by very European concepts of what is a forest.
I think that's the problem.
In europe (and for that matter the whole of OSM) forest == trees. Every
square foot of a landuse=forest area should be covered in trees.
The issue, as I see it, is that the OSM landuse=forest means that all the land
so designated is used for timber production. Thus the long discussions about
natural=wood, landcover=trees, etc. In the case of the US National Forests, the
boundaries are still tagged with boundary=national_park,
But, in the United States, forests are not always about
timber production. You won't get any timber for building from
a pinon-juniper forest. The trees are too small (though you will
get great pinon nuts and mesquite charcoal).
It would be a serious problem for OSM if we don't
Piedāvāju ielikt source=Latvijas Valsts Meži un importēt iekšā.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 5:15 PM Pēteris Brūns peteris.br...@gmail.com
wrote:
Laba diena!
Nejauši uzskrēju šādiem datiem, saimniecībā varbūt noder. Nav ne jausmas
vai un kā šie dati iet kopā ar OSM licenci. Vai pietiek tags ar
I see your point that it's not a natural forest, but national
forests are important institutions as preserves, especially, in addition
to their other uses (recreation, research).
Having just returned from a camping vacation in the Southwest,
I am especially aware that the
I am disappointed to see landuse=forest removed from the very
quintessence of what our wiki defines as forest: our USDA's
National Forests. True, our wiki page (forest) defines four distinct
tagging approaches which use this tag, all of which can be assumed to
be correct, even as they might
My removing the landuse tags from the Utah national forest objects is part
of the process of achieving that consensus, is the way I see it. It's a
simple change that could easily be reverted, and I think it helps the
discussion to actually see the outcome of the change. Apologies for posting
my
On 17/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 17.08.2015 um 11:20 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com:
Probably landuse=forestry and landcover=trees would be a good idea and I
would support such proposal.
how do you suggest to put names? On locality nodes?
I have seen lots of “bike shedding” on this and I am of the opinion that
landuse=forest should be removed from the US national forest boundary
relations. But I was unaware that a consensus had been achieved. If it has,
perhaps the wiki page at
Hi,
it occurs that people crosspost to several OSM lists.
Problem arises when someone tries to reply to such posts
- most people are not subscribed to all the same lists like
the original poster and hence everyone gets plenty of bounces
and does not reach all intended recipients.
So I am
I did the same to the Roosevelt National Forest a couple of weeks ago:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/40.6167/-105.3240
Hopefully we can patch the rendering rules to display
boundary=protected_area
Joel
On 17/08/15 15:44, Martijn van Exel wrote:
I removed the landuse=forest from the
Op 17 aug. 2015, om 16:48 heeft Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org het
volgende geschreven:
Richard --
I filed a bug for this, there was some discussion, and I closed it:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1754
On 17/08/2015, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/08/2015 7:20 PM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
In that case it is perfectly OK to do not edit map and keep it as it
was
The problem with that is that the map will be wrong for 5-15 years
(depending on what kind of trees are being grown). I
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 17:05 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
You would also have to have overlapping landuse forest areas.
When would you need that ?
when a forest with a name is part of a bigger forest with a different name
cheers
Martin
Hello everyone, I was informed that before any kind of data import was to
be approved by the community. Unfortunately I have imported a bit of data
into openstreetmap and for this I am sorry.
but I did receive approval from the city that we could import data from
data.ottawa.ca/dataset. Which I
It worked before, it can work this way again.
It worked to some degree, but it was rather a road-block to adding more
detail. It won't every be possible to produce a detailed image like this:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/49.1850/7.9723
...when the whole administrative area is clobbered
If we end up opting to maintain current landuse=forest tagging for national
forests, then we may create a MapRoulette challenge to highlight all
'forest internal' way features and have folks convert them into inner
members of the NF multipolygon.
As I said before, I am just trying to ease the
* stevea stevea...@softworkers.com [150817 20:08]:
I am disappointed to see landuse=forest removed from the very
quintessence of what our wiki defines as forest: our USDA's
National Forests. [..]
[..] It does
not appear that a consensus is reached about this, as Martijn (and
what appear
Hi
My thoughts as follows:
This is really going to be something for a UK specific rendering. It is
actually quite useful as a QC exercise to rendering footways/paths with and
without a designation tag. Something I do on my own Garmin map. The
presumption on my part being that ideally we
On 17/08/15 20:46, Viesturs Zarins wrote:
Piedāvāju ielikt source=Latvijas Valsts Meži un importēt iekšā.
specifiska licence nav noraadiita un laikam vieniigais nosaciijums ir
atsauce. imports laikam buutu ok... bet ar ljoti uzmaniigu
saliidzinaashanu ar esoshajiem datiem, celju savienojumiem
Paldies Pēterim!
Šie dati noderēs man savos darbos. :)
Par datu importēšanu.
Jautājums ko mēs vispār gribam importēt - domājams, ka tās ir stigas.
Bet pirmkārt jau ka dati ir poligoni, kurus protams var pārveidot par
līnijām, bet galvenais, ka dabā ne vienmēr kvartāla līnija ir stiga.
Cieņā
On Monday 17 August 2015, Charlotte Wolter wrote:
And, Christoph, the forests are divided into subunits
because that's how they are administered and because many national
forests are made up of physically separate subunits. They can be as
much as 100 miles apart. For example, the
Stigas manuprāt tur nebija, atvasināt protams var, bet tad tikai sanāks
kvartāl stigas. Un ar importu tiešām jābūt uzmanīgiem. Es drīzāk teiktu, ka
šos kvartālu datus var izmantot esošo mežu precizēšanai, bet šaubos par
importu. Vairs lāga neatceros, bet kvartāla ietvaros var būt ne tikai mežs,
Unfortunately the magnifying glass is hidden away someplace so my old
microprint copy of the Oxford English Dictionary is hard to read. I see “An
extensive tract of land covered with trees and undergrowth, sometimes
intermingled with pasture.”, Or “A woodland district, usually belonging to the
Hi,
Sorry, bit last minute but Glasgow social meetup is cancelled tomorrow.
But will be meeting again soon. Watch this space for updates
Thanks,
Tim ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
I've used natural=woods for areas formerly in agriculture that were not
naturally growing in with trees. This seemed more appropriate than
forest as they are not really being managed for harvest.
I could go either way on the National Forest tagging issue. While
technically they are managed as
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Richard ricoz@gmail.com wrote:
So I am wondering - would there be some option to relax the
rules so that reply-crossposting would work without being
subscribed to every single list?
Debian has an open list policy and it doesn't seem to be for the worse.
Hi everyone,
Disclaimer - I do have a degree in forestry, but only loosely continue to
follow the field. I would agree with the camp that says 'no' to landuse=forest
broadly used for all National Forests. I think someone said 'because you can
pick up sticks, etc. for campfires' but this is
Effectivement.
En espérant voir les mêmes progrès sur les autres points soulevés.
Cordialement,
Jean-Yvon
Le 17/08/2015 11:59, Support Sefaireconnaitre -
supp...@sefaireconnaitre.com a écrit :
OK.
c'est fait.
on a retiré les éléments de tracling situés dans les URL.
Le 14 août 2015 21:30,
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
No. Unfortunately, all that a data consumer can gather from landuse=forest
or natural=wood is that there are trees there.
Data consumers should be able to determine how much land is set aside for
harvest with landuse=forest.
Apologies for length.
Tod Fitch writes:
...there is little or no logging in the forests in the mountains of
Southern California (in or out of the administrative boundaries of
the US Forest Service).
I'm not sure you know this to be true: Cleveland National Forest is
a big place, publicly
Thanks Dudley.
I'm not sure that I agree that this is UK specific. We render roads
according to their status (motorway to unclassified), and as such I see
potential to do this for paths irrespective of country. In regards to
designation=*, are we now the only country that makes a distinction
On 8/17/2015 10:10 AM, Tod Fitch wrote:
The issue, as I see it, is that the OSM landuse=forest means that all
the land so designated is used for timber production
No. Unfortunately, all that a data consumer can gather from
landuse=forest or natural=wood is that there are trees there.
I have set up a preview at
http://bl.ocks.org/pnorman/raw/c61d6b11193081910866 of the proposed road
rendering changes done by Matkoniecz as part of GSOC. There are more
details at
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-131638433,
but please keep in mind
Russ,
TIGER wasn't what I was referring to.
Please don't speak on my behalf.
- Serge
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
77 matches
Mail list logo
