date:20201210


Concordo con Davide pure io ho trovato qualche modifica futuristica di xDeamon 
diciamo discutibile o quantomeno da riportare a tutti prima di farla.
Se sono state cancellate strade esistenti cmq vanno ripristinate giovedì, 10 
dicembre 2020, 11:40PM +01:00 da Davide Sandona  sandona.dav...@gmail.com :

>E' una questione complessa.
>
>Negli ultimi mesi l'utente xDeamon si è occupato di inserire su OSM diversi 
>percorsi stradali attualmente in fase di progettazione, quali l'A31 Nord, 
>segnalandoli con gli opportuni tag "construction".
>Una decina di giorni fa ho provato a contattarlo via messaggio privato, per 
>capire l'utilità di queste informazioni. Personalmente, non trovo nessun senso 
>nell'inserire in OSM tracciati che non sono ancora costruiti, né tantomeno 
>approvati.
>Sottolineo che non sono l'utente che fatto l'eliminazione massiva, tuttavia mi 
>trovo d'accordo con la sua modifica.
>
>In relazione al tracciato A31 nord sono già apparse diverse note (per esempio 
>2446844, 2446838). Non c'è ombra di dubbio che l'A31 Nord sia un argomento 
>scottante. Tuttavia non ritengo che OSM sia il posto giusto per scatenare una 
>polemica su questa autostrada controversa. Secondo la mia opinione, 
>fintantoché non c'è un progetto approvato con un via libera ai lavori, nessuna 
>informazione riguardante l'A31 nord dovrebbe essere presente in OSM. Secondo 
>me, OSM dovrebbe rappresentare lo stato attuale della mappa, non uno stato 
>passato, e sicuramente non uno stato futuro.
>
>[1]  https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/xDeamon
>
>Davide.
>
>Il giorno gio 10 dic 2020 alle ore 23:21 Matteo Zaffonato < zaff...@gmail.com> 
>ha scritto:
>>Ciao a tutti,
>>nei giorni scorsi ho notato alcune cancellazioni massive del tratto 
>>autostradale riportato nell'oggetto. I changeset coinvolti sono:
>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382919
>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382753
>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382323
>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368752
>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368387
>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368211
>>
>>Ho già contattato l'utente per un confronto e segnalato l'anomalia su OSMCHA, 
>>come devo comportarmi secondo voi?
>>
>>Ciao, grazie
>>Matteo ___
>>Talk-it mailing list
>>Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>___
>Talk-it mailing list
>Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Eliminazioni massive del tratto A31 Nord

2020-12-10 Thread Davide Sandona'

E' una questione complessa.

Negli ultimi mesi l'utente xDeamon si è occupato di inserire su OSM diversi
percorsi stradali attualmente in fase di progettazione, quali l'A31 Nord,
segnalandoli con gli opportuni tag "construction".
Una decina di giorni fa ho provato a contattarlo via messaggio privato, per
capire l'utilità di queste informazioni. Personalmente, non trovo nessun
senso nell'inserire in OSM tracciati che non sono ancora costruiti, né
tantomeno approvati.
Sottolineo che non sono l'utente che fatto l'eliminazione massiva, tuttavia
mi trovo d'accordo con la sua modifica.

In relazione al tracciato A31 nord sono già apparse diverse note (per
esempio 2446844, 2446838). Non c'è ombra di dubbio che l'A31 Nord sia un
argomento scottante. Tuttavia non ritengo che OSM sia il posto giusto per
scatenare una polemica su questa autostrada controversa. Secondo la mia
opinione, fintantoché non c'è un progetto approvato con un via libera ai
lavori, nessuna informazione riguardante l'A31 nord dovrebbe essere
presente in OSM. Secondo me, OSM dovrebbe rappresentare lo stato attuale
della mappa, non uno stato passato, e sicuramente non uno stato futuro.

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/xDeamon

Davide.


Il giorno gio 10 dic 2020 alle ore 23:21 Matteo Zaffonato 
ha scritto:

> Ciao a tutti,
> nei giorni scorsi ho notato alcune cancellazioni massive del tratto
> autostradale riportato nell'oggetto. I changeset coinvolti sono:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382919
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382753
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382323
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368752
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368387
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368211
>
> Ho già contattato l'utente per un confronto e segnalato l'anomalia su
> OSMCHA, come devo comportarmi secondo voi?
>
> Ciao, grazie
> Matteo
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Eliminazioni massive del tratto A31 Nord


Ho visto le note posizionate lungo quanto ha cancellato... praticamente 
contesta chi aveva inserito in costruzione la Valdastico nord però così facendo 
ha cancellato parte dello svincolo di Piovene che c'è già. Sulla questione del 
proseguo a nord dipende se c'è progetto approvato e inizio dei lavori penso, 
forse è stato prematuro inserirlo, ma non me ne intendo, certo poteva 
segnalarlo alla lista. Il revert per sistemare il casello di Piovene va cmq 
fatto. giovedì, 10 dicembre 2020, 11:22PM +01:00 da Matteo Zaffonato  
zaff...@gmail.com :

>Ciao a tutti,
>nei giorni scorsi ho notato alcune cancellazioni massive del tratto 
>autostradale riportato nell'oggetto. I changeset coinvolti sono:
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382919
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382753
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382323
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368752
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368387
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368211
>
>Ho già contattato l'utente per un confronto e segnalato l'anomalia su OSMCHA, 
>come devo comportarmi secondo voi?
>
>Ciao, grazie
>Matteo
>___
>Talk-it mailing list
>Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

2020-12-10 Thread Stefan Tauner

On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 19:27:03 +0100
Florian Kratochwil  wrote:

>> viele dieser Einfahrten sind mit service=alley getaggt. Sollte
>> eigentlich service=driveway sein, wie es bei einigen anderen eh schon
>> ist, oder?
> 
> Nein, diese Wege sind nicht alle gleich. Ich denke, dass das schon so 
> passt wie es getaggt ist. Dort, wo die Parkplätze nur vorne an der 
> Straße sind, ist "alley" sehr passend (hier mein leider wegen 
> Schneeregen nicht super scharfes Bild dazu: 
> https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/MBluLyfbuQaFdhgvEQbQg4)

Das seh ich nicht so. Die Definition von alley ist nicht superpräzise,
aber eigentlich gibt es die in Österreich kaum. Die beschreiben kleine
Zufahrtswege zwischen (nicht auf) Grundstücken, mit denen man oft deren
Hintereingänge erreichen kann. In unserem Fall träfe das eher auf die
Furt zu, wenn er denn befahrbar wäre.

Der highway=service führt bei uns aber direkt am Grundstück zu den
Haupteingängen der Häuser und ist auch relativ breit und unbegrenzt zu
den Seiten hin. Also ich würd das sicher nicht alley taggen.

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-it] Eliminazioni massive del tratto A31 Nord


Penso sia da fare un revert...
Per il tracciato non so se ci sia quello definitivo, ma dalla risposta penso 
sia qualcuno che voglia solo protestare... giovedì, 10 dicembre 2020, 11:22PM 
+01:00 da Matteo Zaffonato  zaff...@gmail.com :

>Ciao a tutti,
>nei giorni scorsi ho notato alcune cancellazioni massive del tratto 
>autostradale riportato nell'oggetto. I changeset coinvolti sono:
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382919
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382753
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382323
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368752
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368387
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368211
>
>Ho già contattato l'utente per un confronto e segnalato l'anomalia su OSMCHA, 
>come devo comportarmi secondo voi?
>
>Ciao, grazie
>Matteo
>___
>Talk-it mailing list
>Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

2020-12-10 Thread Stefan Tauner

On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 16:09:13 +0100
Friedrich Volkmann  wrote:

> On 10.12.20 15:09, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> > Welchen Nachteil siehst du, wenn wir solche Fälle mit permissive taggen?  
> Für den Anwender eher keine Nachteile. Aber man öffnet damit Pandoras 
> Büchse. Wenn hier ein Weg, auf dem kein Verbot angeschrieben ist, als 
> permissive getaggt werden soll, weil er auf Privatgrund liegt, müssten wir 
> konsequenterweise alle anderen Wege auf Privatgrund genauso taggen. Vom 
> Trampelpfad auf einer Wiese bis zum Weg durch eine Wohnhausanlage.

Nein, das müssten wir nicht. Wir können auch weiterhin mit Hausverstand
die Tags dort anwenden, wo sie einen Mehrwert darstellen, d.h. an
Stellen, wo Nutzer daran denken sollten, dass es nicht unplausibel ist,
dass sie nicht mehr so einfach und legal weiterkommen. Das könnte man
auch mit einer description lösen, aber das bringt keine wirklichen
Vorteile und den Nachteil, dass es nicht maschinenlesbar ist.
Die Einzigen, die so einem wie von dir beschriebenem Algorithmus strikt
folgen würden, sind PacMen und die sind ja alle doof.

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

[Talk-it] Eliminazioni massive del tratto A31 Nord

2020-12-10 Thread Matteo Zaffonato

Ciao a tutti,
nei giorni scorsi ho notato alcune cancellazioni massive del tratto
autostradale riportato nell'oggetto. I changeset coinvolti sono:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382919
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382753
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95382323
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368752
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368387
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95368211

Ho già contattato l'utente per un confronto e segnalato l'anomalia su
OSMCHA, come devo comportarmi secondo voi?

Ciao, grazie
Matteo
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread osm . sanspourriel


Le 10/12/2020 à 19:20, Leroy Olivier - leroy@gmail.com a écrit :

Bonjour à tous,

Sur le point "personnes ne s'exprimant pas sur les listes" : en
géomatique nous avons presque autant de femmes que d'hommes et ils
comme elles sont intéressés par OSM. Ce ne sont probablement pas les
seules mais je veux juste en déduire qu'il y a bien des contributrices
ou potentielles contributrices mais qu'on les lit peu sur les listes
de diffusion.

Je ne sais pas si c'est un effet "liste de diffusion"/syndrome de
l'imposteur ou problème de sexisme.

++
olivier


Bonjour, par rapport au fil de discussion de "Call to Take Action and
Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community", je pense
comme Christian que c'est plutôt un combat vision d'origine
(européenne)/vision nord-américaine AFAM avec des boulettes puantes de
part et d'autre.

Puantes ou vues comme puantes (Frederik s'est excusé d'avoir été mal
compris mais ne s'est pas excusé d'avoir insulté un candidat en le
comparant à Trump,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/woodpeck/diary/395065).

Et des femmes ont été choquées non qu'il le compare à Trump mais qu'il
dise qu'il pensait qu'un gars ayant des pensées aussi grossières que
Trump, et il citait son fameux délire sur les femmes qu'il prend par la
chatte, puisse être élu et que depuis 2016 il savait qu'on ne pouvait
faire de telle hypothèse et qu'il fallait explicitement faire campagne
contre.

Et quitte à choquer mesdames, ce qui me choque c'est qu'il compare la
personne à Trump, pas qu'il dise que Trump est un grossier personnage.

Et l'appel mélangeant les genres (avec notamment des candidats) avait du
coup tout pour déplaire.

Au final en réponse, Heather Leson (HOT) le remercie pour la clarification.

Certains y voient une agression contre Céline Jacquin (et donc du
sexisme), j'y vois une attaque contre un appel mal fichu.

Et voir les Étasuniens qui ont tendance "naturellement" à imposer leur
modèle réclamer de la diversité, ça passe mal aussi. Parce que comme le
faisait remarquer Leni, grosso modo tu as le choix d'être native speaker
ou proche pour participer aux échanges. Ceci me parait au moins aussi
violent et là non pas contre la moitié mais au moins 80% des habitants
de cette planète.

Andrew vient à l'instant de le dire : /The big problem I have with this
manifesto is that it brings divisive North American attitudes to a
worldwide project. /

Alors misogynie ou simple "agressivité" des listes ? Adrien disait qu'il
n'osait pas écrire sur la liste de peur d'être pris en grippe. Et sauf
erreur Adrien est un mâle blanc ;-).

Regardez (je ne vais pas le citer mais vous savez à qui je pense)
combien une personne sur cette liste a un ton que les autres jugent
agressifs mais que lui ne juge pas agressif.

Là on est entre personnes partageant grosso modo la même culture et on
voit la différence de ressenti.

Je ne trouve pas la liste agressive mais c'est peut-être parce que j'ai
connu bien plus agressif. Je parle de [OSM-talk-fr]

Misogyne non plus, ça ne veut pas dire qu'il n'y a jamais de remarque à
la con. Et dans ce cas si une personne se sent offensée, il est souvent
plus efficace de répondre en MP. Et de demander un avis à une autre
personne. Un collègue m'avait qu'une collègue me trouvait bien sauf que
j'étais très misogyne. Il lui a répondu qu'il ne connaissait pas de mec
plus féministe que moi. Et la parole la plus misogyne que j'ai entendue
c'est de la part d'une femme (je ne dis pas que c'est la règle !).

Le fait que ce soit par écrit, sans retour immédiat, fait que ça
s'enflamme plus facilement, à chacun de veiller à ne pas mettre d'huile
sur le feu. Et toujours essayer (c'est facile à dire) de voir comment
son message peut être mal interprété pour mieux le formuler, voir si
l'autre a mal compris (ou si on a mal compris). Mais ça c'est une
histoire de bienveillance, pas de misogynie.

> en géomatique nous avons presque autant de femmes que d'hommes et ils
comme elles sont intéressés par OSM.

Tu as des stats en terme de participation à OSM et aux listes ou c'est
au doigt mouillé ?

Jean-Yvon



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Andrew Hain

The big problem I have with this manifesto is that it brings divisive North 
American attitudes to a worldwide project. As a worldwide project, building a 
community of mappers from the whole world is our most important single 
diversity objective. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t encourage other 
underrepresented groups such as women, but we should step away from this kind 
of international combativeness and dog whistling. It may even be 
counterproductive: some feminists in my country think “diversity” has become a 
code word for misogyny.

--
Andrew


From: Celine Jacquin 
Sent: 09 December 2020 19:06
To: osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org ; 
talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive 
Behavior in the OSM Community

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted to 
the conversation in the osm-talk-list 
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html) 
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced for 
many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to 
diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable 
mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve diversity.

We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to sign 
it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing


On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

Céline Jacquin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] FWD: Re: House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB




Dec 10, 2020, 21:51 by sk53@gmail.com:

> However, I would regard > the Dutch 
> >  & Polish 
> communities approach of adding individual
> nodes for each address in the building irrespective of the actual address 
> position outline
> as incorrect mapping in the UK. In both cases, and probably > also in Denmark 
> > , this is 
> most
> likely because addresses have been imported from a national database and this 
> allows
> incremental updates from the same source. The problem with this is that it 
> prevents classic
> OSM iterative refinement, such as accurate mapping for indoor usage, for 
> instance to enable
> guidance for blind people. 
>
At least in Poland separate nodes for addresses are preferred as this:

- more accurate and allows to specify where given address actually is
- for example after mapping entrances, you can be guided to a correct one
- I am confused why it prevents 
"OSM iterative refinement, such as accurate mapping for indoor usage"
(maybe in UK addresses are assigned differently than in Poland)
- maybe it is related to fact that I am unaware of "address position outline"
existing in Poland - address is de facto assigned to building/plot/entrance
and in rare cases to complex objects such as a hospital or group of entrances
- it is common to have on street corner address from two streets in one building
(see 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.07413=19.93361#map=19/50.07413/19.93361
and three nearby buildings), mapping this as an interpolation would not work
(and least I think so)
- and yes, is easier to map and import

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-it] Laguna di Venezia verso Chioggia davanti Codevigo lungo la Romea


Osservando la mappa della zona ho osservato una possibile problematica in 
laguna con la zona ricoperta interamente d'acqua e alcune strade sembrano 
sommerse. Non essendomi mai occupato di landuse marini segnalo la cosa nel caso 
qualcuno di più esperto possa controllare.
Saluti___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Fwd: Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via talk

Dec 10, 2020, 22:46 by matkoni...@tutanota.com:

> (3)
> If girls are from young age discouraged from being interested in
> maps/geography/volunteering/etc then it is going to help
> in lower participation in projects for people interested in maps.
>
"If girls are from young age discouraged from being interested in
maps/geography/volunteering/etc then it is going to result
in lower participation of women in projects for people interested in maps."

would be better phrasing, I noticed too late that "help" has positive
connotations.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-it] Laguna di Venezia verso Chioggia zona davanti Codevigo


Osservando la mappa della zona ho osservato una possibile problematica in 
laguna con la zona ricoperta interamente d'acqua e alcune strade sembrano 
sommerse. Non essendomi mai occupato di landuse marini segnalo la cosa nel caso 
qualcuno di più esperto possa controllare.
Saluti___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Fwd: Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via talk

Dec 10, 2020, 20:58 by talk@openstreetmap.org:

> Underrepresentation of women and gender minorities, racial
> underrepresentation, geographic underrepresentation, these are all
> symptoms. If OSM did not systematically exclude these groups, these
> groups would not be underrepresented.
>
It is not so simple.

Problem may be outside OSM.

(1)
Significant part of geographic underrepresentation
is caused by simple fact that in many places people
have simply no time for such hobby and certainly no 
time and resources for mailing list discussions

https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/water/
"2.2 billion people lack access to safely managed drinking water"
- in such situations you are pretty unlikely to become 
involved in OSM

Malaria alone kills 400 000 people every year,
basically all of that is preventable or treatable
(hopefully it is OK to plug here
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Malaria_Foundation )

(2)
OSM editing is illegal in China
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_data_in_China

If someone is going to start going against Chinese 
government it is unlikely that they select mapping in OSM
as the top priority or even as a symbolic protest.

(3)
If girls are from young age discouraged from being interested in
maps/geography/volunteering/etc then it is going to help
in lower participation in projects for people interested in maps.

And for example "women are likely to be confused by maps"
stereotype is one that I encountered and it is of a kind that
is self-perpetuating.

(4)
Mappers from North Korea are underrepresented,
and in very large part it is not fault of OSM community.

---

We can try to limit damage and encourage participation,
but there are external factors that we will not overcome
(though hopefully we can take part in reducing them).

But even with OSM being 100% ideal many of mentioned
groups would be still underrepresented.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [talk-cz] Fwd: OSM uvitaci skript

Dne 10. 12. 20 v 16:50 Jozef Riha napsal(a):
> wtfpl ked uz to musi byt..

Předpokládám verze 2 :)

Udělal jsem
https://github.com/osmcz/greeter-osm

Trošku jsem pročistil kód. Umožnil jsem nezadávat username a heslo v configu -
program se na to zeptá. Země se teď může
specifikovat v configu.

Musel jsem quotovat uživatel a zemi.

Pokud by chtěl nekdo upravit texty pro ČR, tak zde:
https://github.com/osmcz/greeter-osm/blob/main/.greeterrc
resp. asi bych časem udělal různé configy pro různé země.
Časem upravím README.

Ale zatím válčím s tím, že mi to vůbec neodešle tu zprávu. Ani ta původní
verze, ani ta nová.

Píše mi to:
DEBUG:root:sending message to user tkk
DEBUG:root:Sending {'authenticity_token':
'X6Fa2Hfy/NQ0Li3RI4pOn7PiNiJPYQ+mQs+5CJDYGMQdQK+UKTRn/pDIKcBMa0v7p9DfLY3m1q3mrLWNeqcojA==',
'message[title]':
'Privitanie', 'display_name': 'tkk', 'message[body]': 'Ahoj tkk,\n\ndakujeme Ti
za Tvoj prvy prispevok do mapy
OpenStreetMap. Dovolujeme si Ta srdecne privitat medzi komunitou nadsencov,
ktori podobnymi upravami zlepsuju ci
doplnuju mapu uz niekolko rokov. Ak je toto skor jednorazova zalezitost,
nevadi, mozno vo svojom okoli poznas niekoho,
kto trebars rad chodi do lesa, bicykluje alebo ma vasen pre mapy a tak budeme
radi, ak sa so svojou skusenostou podelis.
Sposobov, akym mozno prispiet je mnoho - okrem samotneho editovania to moze byt
aj napriklad nahravanie gps logov,
nahlasovanie chyb alebo samotna propagacia projektu.\n\nAk mas chut sa cokolvek
spytat alebo len sa podelit so svojimi
skusenostami ci napadom na vylepsenie, radi Ta uvidime na
osm...@googlegroups.com
(https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/osm_sk). Mozno budes mat zaujem sa
stretnut na nami organizovanej akcii alebo
vybehnut s lokalnymi pouzivatelmi na malu mapovacku - je to len na Tebe.\n\nA
nezabudni na zlate pravidlo OpenStreetMap:
bez (vyslovneho) povolenia z cudzich map (Google Mapy, hiking a pod) nic
nekopirujeme! :-)\n\nVela stastia, \nteam
freemap.sk \nwiki.freemap.sk ', 'commit': 'Odeslat'}
DEBUG:urllib3.connectionpool:Starting new HTTPS connection (1):
www.openstreetmap.org:443
DEBUG:urllib3.connectionpool:https://www.openstreetmap.org:443 "POST /messages
HTTP/1.1" 422 0
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/msuchy/projects/greeter-osm/./greeter_osm.py", line 174, in

osm_send(token, 'Privitanie', message, rcpt_quoted, req_cookies)
File "/home/msuchy/projects/greeter-osm/./greeter_osm.py", line 87, in
osm_send
req_send.raise_for_status()
File "/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/requests/models.py", line 941, in
raise_for_status
raise HTTPError(http_error_msg, response=self)
requests.exceptions.HTTPError: 422 Client Error: Unprocessable Entity for url:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/messages

Což vůbec netuším co s tím. Kdyby to mohl zkusit někdo kdo nemá v username
diakritiku tak by to bylo fajn.

Mirek

___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Edward Catmur via Talk-GB

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:52 PM Martin Wynne  wrote:

>
> Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually banned?
>
>
I don’t know the legal basis, but according to OSM there are plenty of
cycleways or roads from which pedestrians are banned in London:

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/113w

As one example, where the Embankment superhighway passes the Tideway works
just up from the Hungerford bridge, pedestrians are very clearly told to
use the opposite sidewalk. Google SV:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5063194,-0.1223057,3a,26.8y,207.48h,85.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqF_1bNzLwyaHTn2LSmJFvQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Although the signs have a red background, so that may be a temporary order
(temporary as in several years’ duration).
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FWD: Re: House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread SK53

addr:interpolation used on single buildings has certainly been our standard
practice in the East Midlands for 9 or 10 years now. It's now often used in
conjunction with addr:flats or addr:unit, but also with addr:housenumber,
which I think was the first usage. It was obvious early on that multiple
addresses in one building needed to be distinguished from buildings with a
single address formed from multiple housenumbers (17-21 Xxxx Road).
addr:interpolation not only fuflils that role, but also allows the actual
number of addresses to be notated.

Extensive parts of St Anns, an inner city suburb of Nottingham redeveloped
in the late 1970s are precisely like this, with blocks containing flats
usually 6-7 units of 3 flats (one on the ground floor & 2 spanning 2 floors
above). This works fine, is understandable by mappers and relatively easy
to parse for data consumers. It's use arose from the circumstances of
mapping every address in a reasonably wide area. I think it's still true to
say that only a few places in Britain have extensive address mapping (& not
hugely different from this map
 I created back in
2014).

Addressing elsewhere in Europe is likely to be different from the UK, and I
see little value in asking people unfamiliar with the nitty gritty of
capturing UK addresses for their opinions on the best approach. The
current wiki
page 
states that there is no consensus on the matter. In the same manner I will
leave it to Spaniards to worry about how to map floor and door (common
address components there, although surprisingly widely used
 on OSM) and
inhabitants of former parts of the Austro-Hungarian empire to worry
about conscription
numbers 
(context from German wikipedia
).
However, I would regard the Dutch
 & Polish
communities approach of adding individual nodes for each address in the
building irrespective of the actual address position outline as incorrect
mapping in the UK. In both cases, and probably also in Denmark
, this is
most likely because addresses have been imported from a national database
and this allows incremental updates from the same source. The problem with
this is that it prevents classic OSM iterative refinement, such as accurate
mapping for indoor usage, for instance to enable guidance for blind people.

tl;dr: addr:interpolation on single buildings works fine, has been in use
in the UK for about 10 year; there's significant variation in address
mapping between communities.

Jerry

On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 19:15, Dan S  wrote:

> That JOSM rendering is just a limitation in JOSM's rendering - I'd
> imagine it was unplanned.
>
> I'd be happy to see that second solution (i.e. make clear the
> interpretation of the tag, for closed ways). I don't necessarily think
> it needs a proposal/vote but I'd be happy to see it happen!
>
> Best
> Dan
>
>
> Op do 10 dec. 2020 om 18:37 schreef ipswichmapper--- via Talk-GB
> :
> >
> >
> > Date: 10 Dec 2020, 18:34
> > From: ipswichmap...@tutanota.com
> > To: mattatt...@gmail.com
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] House number ranges that are only odd or even
> >
> > This issue also came to my mind. addr:interpolation on a building
> doesn't seem appropriate. JOSM, for example, renders it as a dotted line
> around the edge of the building (as if that is the addr:interpolation
> way).  Clearly then, addr:interpolation isn't meant for buildings.
> >
> > Currently, I do 1;3;5;7;9 (here is an example of this:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222193468/history [old versions of this
> building have that tagging scheme])
> >
> > Probably, a proposal needs to be created to either create a new tag or
> change addr:interpolation so that its meaning is different on closed and
> open ways.
> >
> > I think the latter solution is better, as people probably already tag
> buildings with an addr:interpolation.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > IpswichMapper
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > 10 Dec 2020, 15:37 by mattatt...@gmail.com:
> >
> > Is there a way when specifying a range for addr:housenumber to indicate
> it's only for even or odd numbers?
> >
> > When walking around my local area I have come across some blocks that
> will have a sign indicating for example house numbers 1 to 21 odd only.
> Similarly when there is just one building drawn for a whole street of
> terrace houses the number range will only be or odd even depending on the
> side of the road.
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>

[OSM-legal-talk] Brexit & EU database rights

2020-12-10 Thread Edward Bainton

A pleasure meeting you all at LWG this evening.

I saw Brexit in the minutes for September
"At the end of year we won't be losing database rights immediately."

General guidance I've seen appears to say:
- database rights accrued before 2021-01-01 persist (as I've seen discussed
in minutes)
- database rights accrued from 2021-01-01 will exist only in the UK (if at
all: I can't see any enabling legislation after a quick look, and this may
have gone into the Govt's "later" tray - so copyright may be the only
protection).

The last point suggests to me that any edits made after 2020-01-01 will
have less protection than so far has been the case.

Is that your understanding? Or is the database as a whole protected because
the architecture has been built, and subsequent edits are protected
modifications of an already-protected creation?
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Midgard

This whole thread caused me great distress on account of some messages I saw 
that came across as
polarizing.

The reason I would be discouraged from joining OSM discussion right now would 
be hostility and
passive aggressive bickering. And this is among people who I suppose all mean 
the best for each
other.

So please, everyone, if you write a message, consider rereading it to make sure 
it doesn't sound
aggressive or polarising.

Peace.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths




On 10/12/2020 14:08, Tony Shield wrote:

/Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually banned?
/

Unfortunately yes - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/827379295

Quite clear signage - Mapillary - 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=53.66933432657343=-2.6290113968031967=17=_ir_HmYAIa4H0rnj1JrO8A=photo

//


Although, having said that, there's no equivalent prohibition sign when 
approaching that section from the other end. And the point where that 
cycleway crosses the M6 slip road is clearly signalled as a "Toucan" 
(pedestrians and cycles) crossing:


https://goo.gl/maps/gKBbuspimGe9ZjaAA

Since a route that you can use as a pedestrian in one direction but not 
the other would be somewhat absurd (and something that UK highway law 
makes no provision for), I'm more inclined to think that the sign at the 
Chorley end (at the intersection with Temple Way) does not, in fact, 
have legal force. It seems to me that it's more likely to be the result 
of an over-zealous highway officer getting the wrong signage installed.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

2020-12-10 Thread Friedrich Volkmann


On 10.12.20 19:27, Florian Kratochwil wrote:
Was ist überhaupt der default-access-Wert für barrier=gate? Habe das auf die 
schnelle nicht gefunden.


Erst mal muss man sich fragen, was access-Tags auf barriers überhaupt 
bedeuten sollen. Wer das Türl öffnen und schließen darf, oder wer durchgehen 
darf, oder wer sich ins Türl hineinstellen darf? Meiner Meinung nach macht 
nur die erste Option Sinn. Wer durchgehen darf, das ergibt sich aus den 
Berechtigungen auf den Weg (oder die Fläche) auf der anderen Seite.


Also wenn auf dem Türl steht "Öffnen verboten" => access=private.
Wenn draufsteht "Privatgrund, Betreten verboten" => access=private auf den 
Weg (bzw. die Fläche) auf der anderen Seite.

Wenn nichts draufsteht, aber zugesperrt => keine access-Tags, nur locked=yes.

Default ergibt sich aus dem Gesetz. In Östereich gilt wie wahrscheinlich 
überall sonst auch: Was nicht verboten ist, ist erlaubt.


Defaults für highway=*:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions

Eine entsprechende Seite für barrier=* gibt es nicht, weil man "yes" 
annehmen kann bzw. weil die Bedeutung noch nicht definiert ist, s.o. 
Anderslautende Behauptungen im Wiki stammen von Einzeltätern und beruhen auf 
keinem Konsens.


--
Friedrich K. Volkmann   http://www.volki.at/
Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [talk-cz] Fwd: OSM uvitaci skript

2020-12-10 Thread Jozef Riha

wtfpl ked uz to musi byt..

Dňa št 10. 12. 2020, 16:14 Martin Ždila 
napísal(a):

> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 4:13 PM Miroslav Suchy  wrote:
>
>> Dne 08. 12. 20 v 23:19 Martin Ždila napsal(a):
>> > Ahojte,
>> >
>> > Na SotM sme sa bavili o "greeting" sktipte, tak preposielam čo
>> používame.
>>
>> Super. Ještě chybí licence? Pod jakou licencí to můžeme používat?
>>
>
> Jose?
>
>
>> Pokud mi někdo dáte práva k
>>   https://github.com/osmcz
>> tak bych tam založil projekt a upravil to tam pro potřeby CZE. Můj GH
>> login je xsuchy.
>>
>> Mirek
>>
>> ___
>> talk-cz mailing list
>> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>>
>
>
> --
> Ing. Martin Ždila 
> OZ Freemap Slovakia
> tel:+421-908-363-848
> mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk
> http://www.freemap.sk/
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How do I join the meeting tonight?

2020-12-10 Thread Kathleen Lu via legal-talk

Edward, please use this BBB link: https://osmvideo.cloud68.co/user/gui-ztm-dqh

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 11:23 AM Mateusz Konieczny via legal-talk
 wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Dec 10, 2020, 18:32 by bainton@gmail.com:
>
> though can't see how to set up Push to Talk
>
> big blue cog => audio input tab (selected by default) -> Transmission panel
>
> Change dropdown from "voice activity" to "Push to talk"
>
> Seems that it should work
>
> The wiki has a HOT server listed, but LWG isn't part of HOT? (See below sig)
>
> It is a bit confusing, but yes - HOT server, OSMF group,
> License Working Group (LWG) channel
>
> Disclaimer: I am not experienced and it is possibly that something may be 
> wrong
> in my text.
>
> If you join we can test whatever it works.
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Fwd: Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Kathleen Lu via talk

First, let me say that I do know Frederik personally, I have had
pleasant dinners with him and hope to do so again post-pandemic. He
has apologised for his poor choice of words, and I accept his apology.

The volume of attacks and hostile tone against Celine in reaction to
the document she shared demonstrates exactly why OSM is not a
welcoming community for the majority of women. For myself, I find the
listservs to be the least welcoming part of the community. These
comments are not enough to prevent me from mapping and participating,
but they are discouraging and demotivating.

A lot of people on this list are conflating systems of discrimination
and inequality with hostile intent. Systems are not personal and are
not about intent. Discrimination and inequality can be structural, and
can and do take place without intent, sometimes by accident, sometimes
due to structural inequities not within the immediate control of the
actor(s) examining the issue.

To make a non-technical analogy, if you step on someone's foot by
accident, you still stepped on their foot, and their foot still hurts.
Apologising helps, but it would be better if you didn't step on their
foot in the future. If one group has shoes and another group does not,
the group without shoes is more likely to be on the end of painful
steps. How do you solve such a systematic problem? One option would be
to give everyone shoes. Another would be for those with shoes to step
more carefully. Right now, society demands that those without shoes do
the work of dodging everyone else's steps, documenting a list of times
they've been stepped on, and explaining why getting stepped on hurts.

Underrepresentation of women and gender minorities, racial
underrepresentation, geographic underrepresentation, these are all
symptoms. If OSM did not systematically exclude these groups, these
groups would not be underrepresented. Such a problem is not unique to
OSM, nor is it easy to solve. Step 1 is to recognize the problem. A
vocal contingent of the community is not willing to do that. I believe
this contingent is vocal but not a majority of OSM, but
overrepresented on the listservs. I would encourage those who are
watching this firestorm to consider that the listservs are a very poor
representation of the OSM community and the views of its members. I
would also strongly encourage those watching to vote in the OSMF Board
elections.

Kathleen

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 11:25 AM  wrote:
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> as usual when it comes to this kind of complex topics I have the feeling that 
> people tend to writing about only that part which is interesting to them, 
> throw that piece into the arena and in the end there is a lot of confusion, 
> misunderstanding and no constructive way out.
>
> For this reason let me try to tackle things separately to get a clearer 
> picture.
>
> 1. The message by Frederik: The starting point for the whole debate, so we 
> should be aligned about its interpretation. It seems obvious to me, and not 
> only after further clarification by the author, that Trump's quote in NO WAY 
> reflects Frederik's mindset. Anybody suggesting this should be disqualified 
> from further debate as it completely lacks objective basis. One could then 
> argue that he could have backed the same argument, the same message with a 
> different quote, a different wording. That is right and it implies the 
> following: Whatever you say, no matter how valid your point is, no matter 
> what the context of the wording is and even if you are only quoting: don't 
> use words with a sexual connotation because the sole mention of it will 
> offend some people. If that's what it takes to make those people feel more 
> comfortable I am fine with it. To avoid misunderstandings based on cultural 
> differences regarding what is allowed I consequently encourage to create a 
> list of "undesirable wordings" so everybody knows what is acceptable or not.
>
> What really strikes me is that if Frederik had used a similar quote, e.g. "I 
> could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t 
> lose any voters", nothing of all this would have happened. This reminds me of 
> the censorship logic apparently used in US movies: You can show how people 
> kill, torture, severe limbs - but don't you dare show a nipple because that 
> could offend.
>
> Bottomline: We are not discussing a general offensive attitude nor an 
> individual offensive message, we are discussing the pure wording of a message.
>
> 2. The topic of Fredrik's message
>
> A real pity this is taking a backseat, especially because it is somehow 
> linked to what many people are apparently fighting for: Diversity, Open 
> Community, Inclusion etc.
>
> I´ll try to keep it short as it is worth a big debate on its own: This is 
> about Facebook. Their business model is based on the opposite of everything 
> this community should stand for. They represent the antagonism of a free, 
> self-determined,

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Dave F via Talk-GB


That's weird.
Save for some tactile paving what's the difference between North & South?

DaveF

On 10/12/2020 14:08, Tony Shield wrote:
/Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually 
banned?

/

Unfortunately yes - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/827379295

Quite clear signage - Mapillary - 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=53.66933432657343=-2.6290113968031967=17=_ir_HmYAIa4H0rnj1JrO8A=photo

//

When I walk there I take my chances on the illegal walking along a 
cycleway rather than the 50 mph dual carriageway where it is legal to 
walk.



Tony Shield - TonyS999

.

On 10/12/2020 12:47, Martin Wynne wrote:
My reasons for changing it, is that it is shared use path with a 
greater number of people of foot than bicycle (about 5:2)


Many public bridleways have many more walkers and cyclists using it 
than actual horse-riders. But are still mapped as bridleways.


Map it as a cycleway, unless it is a public bridleway, in which case 
map it as bridleway. You are mapping the status, not the actual usage.


My feeling is that a highway should be mapped at the highest level of 
permitted usage. The assumption is that pedestrians can go almost 
anywhere anyway. Motorways excepted.


Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually 
banned?


cheers,

Martin.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths




On 10/12/2020 16:28, Ken Kilfedder wrote:

> I think there are enough items that look and act like a cycles-only
way to make it worth having a fourth item in your hierarchy- whatever
the legal position.


But route-finding software needs to know the legal position. Mapping 
something as cycles-only, when in fact it can also be used on foot, will 
break a lot of valid pedestrian routes.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[talk-latam] Integrarse

2020-12-10 Thread Seralia Martinez

Hola buenas tardes Maritza, siguiendo el curso de los correos anteriores
acerca del capítulo youthmappers Panamá, la principal preocupación como
parte de una comunidad es el trabajo que ustedes como un grupo organizado
de jóvenes estudiantes de la Universidad de Panamá están llevando en los
diferentes actividades de mapeo que organizan, no entiendo si ustedes
reciben una capacitación para introducir a los nuevos miembros o como es el
proceder del capítulo pero como futuros líderes debe ser de su interés y
motivación ser los responsables de su aprendizaje así como dicta el
principio del aprendizaje constructivista, que quiero decir con esto, no es
buscar recursos en el internet es buscar los recursos en el wiki de
openstreetmap donde podrás encontrar una infinidad de videos tutoriales
para principiantes y para seguir reforzando los conocimientos adquiridos.
Es más motivador ser capacitados por un compañero en quien se tiene la
confianza de hacer preguntas que dejar la responsabilidad a personas fuera
de su grupo.
Te comparto el enlace de la wiki.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Videotutoriales

Se les ha invitado y se les reitera la invitación a los miembros del grupo
que se unan a la comunidad de Panamá en telegram y no entiendo el miedo a
integrarse y participar de las discusiones, dices que se han sentido
intimidados por los mensajes y han perdido miembros? cuales miembros se
pueden recuperar?, nos gustaría poder conocer a todos los miembros del
capítulo y no solo a los presidentes, creo que es parte importante para
integrarse y conocer de su voz sus intereses y las dificultades que tienen
en el mapeo para así poder apoyarlos.
Saludos cordiales.


Seralia Martínez
___
talk-latam mailing list
talk-latam@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-latam

Re: [Talk-at] Gefahr durch Internet-Bergrouten

2020-12-10 Thread Robert Grübler

Am 09.12.2020 schrieb Friedrich Volkmann:
> Wie ich schon tausendmal geschrieben habe, gibt es zwischen 
> Wandern und Klettern keine klare Trennlinie.
:
> Natürlich ist dritter Grad kein Wanderweg, aber die Grenze 
> fix zwischen 2 und 3 anzusetzen finde ich zu unelastisch
:
> Demnach dürften wir so ziemlich gar keine Wege als path mappen

Interessant, du kommentierst alles, nur den Kern meiner Argumentation nicht. 
Offenbar hab ich es schlecht formuliert. Lass es mich noch einmal versuchen.

Das Problem – einen klare Trennlinie zwischen Wandern und Klettern zu ziehen – 
haben nicht nur wir, sondern auch die Alpenvereine. Sie haben das Problem 
gelöst, indem sie die „Alpine ROUTE“ zwischen dem klassischen Wandern und dem 
Klettern geschoben haben.

Alpine Route – T5 bis T6 oder kleiner(!) – i.d.R. weder gewartet noch angelegt
Bergwege – T2 bis T4 – gewartet und markiert; Grade: blau, rot, schwarz
...[1] Schwierigkeitsskalen: 
https://www.alpenverein.de/bergsport/aktiv-sein/bergsport-die-schwierigkeits-skalen_aid_27599.html
 
...[2] Begriffsbestimmungen, Seite 25 „1.6.1.2Geltungsbereich“: 
https://www.alpenverein.at/portal_wAssets/docs/berg-aktiv/wege_touren/wegehandbuch_digital.pdf
 

[1] visualisiert das recht gut. Für T1 bis T4 passt die generische Bedeutung 
von „path“ (und nein, das ist kein urzeitliches Relikt). Für die „Alpine ROUTE“ 
braucht es etwas anderes. „climbing=route“ könnte ich mir gut vorstellen, es 
ist bereits 458x verwendet. Auch gibt es eine Karte, die es renderd.

LG Robert



___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How do I join the meeting tonight?

2020-12-10 Thread Mateusz Konieczny via legal-talk




Dec 10, 2020, 18:32 by bainton@gmail.com:

> though can't see how to set up Push to Talk
>
big blue cog => audio input tab (selected by default) -> Transmission panel

Change dropdown from "voice activity" to "Push to talk"

Seems that it should work

> The > wiki >  has a HOT server 
> listed, but LWG isn't part of HOT? (See below sig)
>
It is a bit confusing, but yes - HOT server, OSMF group,
License Working Group (LWG) channel

Disclaimer: I am not experienced and it is possibly that something may be wrong
in my text.

If you join we can test whatever it works.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [Talk-GB] FWD: Re: House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread Dan S

That JOSM rendering is just a limitation in JOSM's rendering - I'd
imagine it was unplanned.

I'd be happy to see that second solution (i.e. make clear the
interpretation of the tag, for closed ways). I don't necessarily think
it needs a proposal/vote but I'd be happy to see it happen!

Best
Dan


Op do 10 dec. 2020 om 18:37 schreef ipswichmapper--- via Talk-GB
:
>
>
> Date: 10 Dec 2020, 18:34
> From: ipswichmap...@tutanota.com
> To: mattatt...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] House number ranges that are only odd or even
>
> This issue also came to my mind. addr:interpolation on a building doesn't 
> seem appropriate. JOSM, for example, renders it as a dotted line around the 
> edge of the building (as if that is the addr:interpolation way).  Clearly 
> then, addr:interpolation isn't meant for buildings.
>
> Currently, I do 1;3;5;7;9 (here is an example of this: 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222193468/history [old versions of this 
> building have that tagging scheme])
>
> Probably, a proposal needs to be created to either create a new tag or change 
> addr:interpolation so that its meaning is different on closed and open ways.
>
> I think the latter solution is better, as people probably already tag 
> buildings with an addr:interpolation.
>
> Thanks,
> IpswichMapper
>
> --
>
>
> 10 Dec 2020, 15:37 by mattatt...@gmail.com:
>
> Is there a way when specifying a range for addr:housenumber to indicate it's 
> only for even or odd numbers?
>
> When walking around my local area I have come across some blocks that will 
> have a sign indicating for example house numbers 1 to 21 odd only. Similarly 
> when there is just one building drawn for a whole street of terrace houses 
> the number range will only be or odd even depending on the side of the road.
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Yves via talk

Niels, Arnalielsewhere post wasn't about mapping, the map is used to illustrate 
something. 
I agree with others comments pledging for more time to be taken to read someone 
else's lines. 
Yves___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread ipswichmapper--- via Talk-GB

Just to add by the way, in a country like netherlands "cycleways" are paved 
paths dedicated to cycles. You can't walk on there because there are also 
sidewalks to walk on. E.g.:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/pAL4yr927e4/maxresdefault.jpg

--  


10 Dec 2020, 14:08 by tonyo...@gmail.com:

>
> Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians areactually 
> banned? 
>
>
> Unfortunately yes - > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/827379295
>
>
> Quite clear signage - Mapillary - > 
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=53.66933432657343=-2.6290113968031967=17=_ir_HmYAIa4H0rnj1JrO8A=photo>
>   
>
> When I walk there I take my chances on  the illegal walking along a 
> cycleway rather than the 50 mph dual  carriageway where it is legal to 
> walk.
>
>
> Tony Shield - TonyS999
>
> .
>
> On 10/12/2020 12:47, Martin Wynne  wrote:
>
>>> My reasons for changing it, is that it isshared use path with a 
>>> greater number of people of foot thanbicycle (about 5:2) 
>>>
>>
>> Many public bridleways have many more walkers and cyclists using  it 
>> than actual horse-riders. But are still mapped as bridleways.
>>  
>>  Map it as a cycleway, unless it is a public bridleway, in which  case 
>> map it as bridleway. You are mapping the status, not the  actual usage. 
>>  
>>  My feeling is that a highway should be mapped at the highest level  of 
>> permitted usage. The assumption is that pedestrians can go  almost 
>> anywhere anyway. Motorways excepted. 
>>  
>>  Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually  
>> banned? 
>>  
>>  cheers, 
>>  
>>  Martin. 
>>  
>>  ___ 
>>  Talk-GB mailing list 
>>  >> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org>>  
>>  >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>>  
>>

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread ipswichmapper--- via Talk-GB

Didn't know this tagging scheme existed actually. Every single path that allows 
both cycling and walking is tagged as "highway=cycleway", "foot=yes" and 
"segregated=no" in my area (as well as "footway=sidewalk" sometimes)

-- 
 


10 Dec 2020, 12:24 by epicthom...@gmail.com:

> I've reached a stalemate with another mapper about the tagging of a rural 
> shared use path. He mapped the path initially a few years ago as 
> highway=cycleway and I've recently changed it to highway=path, 
> bicycle=designated & foot=designated (as well as the other tags that apply to 
> it).
> My reasons for changing it, is that it is shared use path with a greater 
> number of people of foot than bicycle (about 5:2), the path is designed for 
> both types of user & not the whole route has a blacktop surface (therefore 
> not suitable for road bikes, these bits do have their surface tagged though 
> so that shouldn't be an issue for routers).
> His argument for keeping it as highway=cycleway is because his render is not 
> configured to show highway=path & bicycle=designated the same as 
> highway=cycleway. Other reasons are because it is part of the NCN Route 88, 
> as such it is "cared" for sustrans. Also it is a  well used cycle route. Both 
> of which are very much true, and are tagged with the appropriate relations to 
> reflect this.
>
> I've put this to the Data Working Group, and they have suggested that I ask 
> the community here to see what the consensus is.
> I don't mind what the outcome is, however I am not satisfied with the sole 
> reason being because it renders differently.
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94598759
>
>
> Thank you,
> -- 
> T> homas > J
>

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] FWD: Re: House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread ipswichmapper--- via Talk-GB


Date: 10 Dec 2020, 18:34
From: ipswichmap...@tutanota.com
To: mattatt...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] House number ranges that are only odd or even


> This issue also came to my mind. addr:interpolation on a building doesn't 
> seem appropriate. JOSM, for example, renders it as a dotted line around the 
> edge of the building (as if that is the addr:interpolation way).  Clearly 
> then, addr:interpolation isn't meant for buildings.
>
> Currently, I do 1;3;5;7;9 (here is an example of this: > 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222193468/history>  [old versions of this 
> building have that tagging scheme])
>
> Probably, a proposal needs to be created to either create a new tag or change 
> addr:interpolation so that its meaning is different on closed and open ways.
>
> I think the latter solution is better, as people probably already tag 
> buildings with an addr:interpolation.
>
> Thanks,
> IpswichMapper
>
> -- 
>
>
> 10 Dec 2020, 15:37 by mattatt...@gmail.com:
>
>> Is there a way when specifying a range for addr:housenumber to indicate it's 
>> only for even or odd numbers?
>>
>> When walking around my local area I have come across some blocks that will 
>> have a sign indicating for example house numbers 1 to 21 odd only. Similarly 
>> when there is just one building drawn for a whole street of terrace houses 
>> the number range will only be or odd even depending on the side of the road.
>>
>
>

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

2020-12-10 Thread Florian Kratochwil




Am 10.12.20 um 13:35 schrieb Stefan Tauner:

Inwiefern findest du, dass das permissive nicht korrekt ist? Ich denke
nicht, dass es dafür ein besseres Tagging gibt bzw. anders gesagt, ich
würde behaupten, dass das in Österreich genau das Richtige ist.

Ich glaube eh, dass permissive das richtige Tagging ist, aber Friedrich 
hat schon recht, dass es nicht der "Standarfall mit Schild bis auf 
Widerruf" ist.


Meine Begründung, warum es nicht foot=yes ist: Weil es von der 
nördlichen Seite ohne Schlüssel nur mit drübergreifen geöffnet werden 
kann. Das ist finde ich ganz klar nicht "yes", das könnte im Extremfall 
sogar als Fuß-Einbahn (ausgenommen "private") gesehen werden.


Was ist überhaupt der default-access-Wert für barrier=gate? Habe das auf 
die schnelle nicht gefunden.



---

Meinst du gleich bei der nächsten "Einfahrt", beim 2. Furt, oder den
Einfahrten, wo das eh schon getaggt war (access=private statt
vehicle=private)?

Ja, ich meine das und das war schon richtig eingetragen dort. Hier das 
Foto dazu: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/pK5LuiSDGUKP9b0k4O79vl



---

viele dieser Einfahrten sind mit service=alley getaggt. Sollte
eigentlich service=driveway sein, wie es bei einigen anderen eh schon
ist, oder?

Nein, diese Wege sind nicht alle gleich. Ich denke, dass das schon so 
passt wie es getaggt ist. Dort, wo die Parkplätze nur vorne an der 
Straße sind, ist "alley" sehr passend (hier mein leider wegen 
Schneeregen nicht super scharfes Bild dazu: 
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/MBluLyfbuQaFdhgvEQbQg4)


Weiter westlich, wo Parkplätze auch weiter hinten sind, passt driveway 
besser. Siehe hier: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/lVq4w8tZIFftmbKuMFfDPg


Die Gebäude dort sind verschiedener als es auf der Karte aussieht und 
auch diese "highway=service" haben verschiedene Charaktere.


lg
Florian



___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Leroy Olivier

Bonjour à tous,

Sur le point "personnes ne s'exprimant pas sur les listes" : en géomatique
nous avons presque autant de femmes que d'hommes et ils comme elles sont
intéressés par OSM. Ce ne sont probablement pas les seules mais je veux
juste en déduire qu'il y a bien des contributrices ou potentielles
contributrices mais qu'on les lit peu sur les listes de diffusion.

Je ne sais pas si c'est un effet "liste de diffusion"/syndrome de
l'imposteur ou problème de sexisme.

++
olivier

Le jeu. 10 déc. 2020 à 19:06, Éric Gillet  a
écrit :

> Le 10/12/2020 à 18:40, deuzeffe a écrit :
> > Le 10/12/2020 à 18:10, Éric Gillet a écrit :
> >
> > Merci Eric de montrer un exemple de la discrimination culturelle.
> >
> > --
> > deuzeffe, don't feed the troll, oui, je sais.
>
> Ah j'oubliais, merci pour l'insulte ! Rien de mieux pour créer un esprit
> d'écoute et de respect d'autrui.
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>


-- 
Olivier Leroy
Docteur Géographie et Environnement
Post-doctorant EVS IMU GOURAMIC
06.18.37.18.08
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-at] PLZ und Ortsvorwahlen von Österreich

2020-12-10 Thread Johann Haag

Am Do., 10. Dez. 2020 um 13:53 Uhr schrieb Philipp Kolmann via Talk-at <
talk-at@openstreetmap.org>:

>
>
> Am 10.12.2020 um 06:35 schrieb Johann Haag:
>
> danke für die aufmunternden Worte. Hab erst mal die ersten Mails
>> verdauen müssen.
>>
> Hallo Phillip, entschuldige wenn meine Wortmeldung vielleicht zu forsch
> war. Ich finde Dein Projekt durchaus interessant, nur was hat dieses mit
> OpenStreetMap gemein. Du könntest für Dein Projekt schließlich als
> Kartenhintergrund genausogut Google oder auch die Basemap verwenden.
>
>
> Das stimmt natürlich. Ich dachte nur, vielleicht ist es für jemanden von
> OSM auch interessant...
>
> Du hast sicher bemerkt dass ich in Wien nun in OpenStreetMap, die
> Telefonvorwahl eingetragen habe, auch Eine Region in Vorarlberg ist bereits
> erfasst. Ich würde gerne wissen ob ich Deine Karte hierzu für OpenStreetMap
> nutzen darf, bisher habe ich hierzu von Dir noch keine Antwort erhalten.
>
>
> Hab ich ansich in der Mail gestern inline geschrieben, aber hier nochmal.
> Gerne kannst du die Daten für OSM wieder verwenden. Ich habe nur bestehende
> Datenbanken zusammengetragen und versucht möglichst richtig
> zusammenzufügen. Ist aber mit keiner Gewähr, das sich da nicht doch ein
> Fehler eingeschlichen hat.
>

Hallo Phillip, das ist nun eine sehr erfreuliche Information,
mit welchem Tagging sollte man Telefonvorwahlen in Österreich eintragen ?.

Lg Johann

>
> lg
> Philipp
> ___
> Talk-at mailing list
> Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
>


-- 
Elektronikermeister Johann Haag
Innsbruckerstraße 42
6380 St. Johann in Tirol
ÖSTERREICH
Tel: +43 664/174 7414
Mailto:johannh...@hxg.at
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?


Le 10/12/2020 à 14:15, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :

On 12/10/20 2:07 PM, Baptiste Lemoine - Cipher Bliss wrote:
J'ai hâte qu'une femme donne son avis sur la mysoginie dans la 
communauté OSM.


Aucune ne le fera - et pour cause: une femme qui s'en plaint sera 
étiquetée emmerdeuse féministe. Ça fait partie du problème.


Tu disais ?
--
deuzeffe

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?


Le 10/12/2020 à 12:35, Christian Quest a écrit :
J'espère ne pas ouvrir une boite de pandore avec ce message... mais bon, 
je prends le risque.


Suis-je aveugle et sourd ?


Voilà Christian, la boîte est ouverte. J'espère que tes yeux voient un 
peu mieux et tes oreilles entendent davantage.


Je répète qu'il n'y a rien de systémique pro-actif. Pour le reste...
--
deuzeffe

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?


Le 10/12/2020 à 19:00, Éric Gillet a écrit :
Donc, tu demandes aux personnes qui sont discriminées/mises de 
côté/ostracisées de ce *cacher* derrière un pseudo pour ne plus 
qu'elles soient discriminées (et après l'avoir affirmé, qu'elles le 
sont). Tu le vois le biais culturel, là ? Tu rends ces personnes 
responsables de leur mise de côté (par ce qu'elles sont) alors que ce 
sont les gens qui discriminent qui doivent changer leur comportement. 
Et c'est l'affaire de tout le monde.


Je ne demande rien à personne. Je donne mon avis sur la situation et 
invite quiconque à en faire de même, en suggérant une alternative 
(poster sous pseudo) si la personne s’attend à des réactions 
discriminatoires comme la tienne.


Ton avis est donc : "que les personnes qui se sentent discriminées le 
disent et se cachent derrière un pseudo".



Tout le contraire de se cacher.


Euh... Si ces personnes postent sous pseudo après avoir été attaquées, 
j'espère qu'elles ne claironneront pas quel est leur pseudo...


Je sais personnellement à quel point ça peut fatiguant de répondre à de 
tels messages, 


Comme tu dis : c'est un vrai tonneau de Danaïdes que de détricoter des 
références culturelles solidement ancrées.



la preuve avec ton attaque mal placée.


J'essaie de te montrer ce qu'une femme entend quand tu demandes aux 
personnes, dont des femmes, qui se sentent discriminées de se cacher 
derrière un pseudo. Si tu te sens attaqué, c'est ton problème, pas le 
mien (tu vois ce que ça fait ?)


C'est juste mettre la poussière sous le tapis et ne pas se changer 
soi-même.
Se changer sur quel points, dans quelle direction ? Sans avoir le point 
de vue des personnes impactées c'est facile de prendre des mesures 
impertinentes, voire contre-productives. Je ne suis pas omniscient.


Je te donne des indices dans mon courriel plus ou moins général. Ici, je 
te propose d'envisager l'opinion que tu donnes d'un autre point de vue. 
Je ne peux pas le faire à ta place.

--
deuzeffe

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Éric Gillet


Le 10/12/2020 à 18:40, deuzeffe a écrit :

Le 10/12/2020 à 18:10, Éric Gillet a écrit :

Merci Eric de montrer un exemple de la discrimination culturelle.

--
deuzeffe, don't feed the troll, oui, je sais.


Ah j'oubliais, merci pour l'insulte ! Rien de mieux pour créer un esprit 
d'écoute et de respect d'autrui.



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Éric Gillet


Le 10/12/2020 à 18:40, deuzeffe a écrit :

Le 10/12/2020 à 18:10, Éric Gillet a écrit :

Merci Eric de montrer un exemple de la discrimination culturelle.

J'espère que si des personnes sont discriminées ou ont le sentiment 
de l'être elle se manifesteront, quitte à ce qu'elles utilisent un 
alias.


Donc, tu demandes aux personnes qui sont discriminées/mises de 
côté/ostracisées de ce *cacher* derrière un pseudo pour ne plus 
qu'elles soient discriminées (et après l'avoir affirmé, qu'elles le 
sont). Tu le vois le biais culturel, là ? Tu rends ces personnes 
responsables de leur mise de côté (par ce qu'elles sont) alors que ce 
sont les gens qui discriminent qui doivent changer leur comportement. 
Et c'est l'affaire de tout le monde.


Je ne demande rien à personne. Je donne mon avis sur la situation et 
invite quiconque à en faire de même, en suggérant une alternative 
(poster sous pseudo) si la personne s’attend à des réactions 
discriminatoires comme la tienne.


Tout le contraire de se cacher.

Je sais personnellement à quel point ça peut fatiguant de répondre à de 
tels messages, la preuve avec ton attaque mal placée.




Contrairement à d'autres endroits, témoigner anonymement me semble 
facile sur une liste de diffusion donc le frein devrait pas être très 
grand.


C'est juste mettre la poussière sous le tapis et ne pas se changer 
soi-même.
Se changer sur quel points, dans quelle direction ? Sans avoir le point 
de vue des personnes impactées c'est facile de prendre des mesures 
impertinentes, voire contre-productives. Je ne suis pas omniscient.


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How do I join the meeting tonight?

2020-12-10 Thread Kathleen Lu via legal-talk

Hi Edward,
OSMF and its working groups have traditionally used the HOT server.
Mumble is not a Web application.
However, we are looking at moving to BBB. A BBB link for this meeting
has not been circulated yet, so please use Mumble for the time being.
Best,
Kathleen

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 9:36 AM Edward Bainton  wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> I was hoping to audit the meeting tonight, with a view to possibly 
> volunteering. I now have Mumble installed (though can't see how to set up 
> Push to Talk)
>
> How do I find the group call and join it? Is there some kind of web address 
> or something to be input somewhere?
>
> The wiki has a HOT server listed, but LWG isn't part of HOT? (See below sig)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Edward
>
> When the program starts you will be asked to connect to a server click the 
> Add New button and enter in the information for the HOT server:
>
> Label: This is just a name for the server for yourself, enter: HOT
> Address: The actual address of the server, enter: talk.hotosm.org
> Port: The port that the server uses, leave this at the default value of: 64738
> Username: A username to identify yourself on the server, please pick one to 
> use.
>
> This Mumble server is intended for use by the OpenStreetMap community only.
>
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?


Le 10/12/2020 à 18:10, Éric Gillet a écrit :

Merci Eric de montrer un exemple de la discrimination culturelle.

J'espère que si des personnes sont discriminées ou ont le sentiment de 
l'être elle se manifesteront, quitte à ce qu'elles utilisent un alias.


Donc, tu demandes aux personnes qui sont discriminées/mises de 
côté/ostracisées de ce *cacher* derrière un pseudo pour ne plus qu'elles 
soient discriminées (et après l'avoir affirmé, qu'elles le sont). Tu le 
vois le biais culturel, là ? Tu rends ces personnes responsables de leur 
mise de côté (par ce qu'elles sont) alors que ce sont les gens qui 
discriminent qui doivent changer leur comportement. Et c'est l'affaire 
de tout le monde.


Contrairement à d'autres endroits, témoigner anonymement me semble 
facile sur une liste de diffusion donc le frein devrait pas être très grand.


C'est juste mettre la poussière sous le tapis et ne pas se changer soi-même.
--
deuzeffe, don't feed the troll, oui, je sais.

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

2020-12-10 Thread Tony Shield


Hi

I like the idea.

Can it be extended to be a UK based map which is has greater prominence 
to aspects such as the recent discussion about cyclists and paths?



Does anyone have an idea of how it could be made to happen - could we 
(OSM UK) fund and maintain it with commitment for say 2 years? Using 
volunteers or donated equipment or personal funding commitments? Do we 
know the size of server required to support a given load? Can we manage 
the required operations and security?



Tony Shield - TonyS999




On 04/12/2020 15:40, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB wrote:

Hi,

Just floating an idea for a possible OSMUK site, namely an OSMUK 
'semi-official'  web application for walkers and hikers.


This could provide similar functionality to sites such as the 
Ramblers' Pathwatch 
(https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/pathwatch-report-path-features-and-problems.aspx) 
allowing users to report path problems as well as nice views, 
historical sites and so on. It could also provide info such as train 
or bus times (by clicking on a rail station), beers served (for a 
pub), routing via public transport to a given countryside location, 
and so on.


Reported path problems could be then made available via an API, which 
could be used by councils - and, given we have the council ROW data 
available to us via rowmaps.com  - the right of way reference could be 
sourced from this if it's not in OSM already.


For rendering, we could perhaps use Andy Townsend's SomeoneElse-style, 
maybe tweaked a little, as it appears to be the most actively 
maintained of all the England and Wales renderings. This could be 
setup on our own server, I seem to remember experimenting with this a 
couple of years ago when the OSMUK idea was first floated, on a server 
which had been loaned to the community (I need to re-check my emails, 
and indeed check if this server is still open for us to use!)


I've done similar things to this in the past on a small scale, e.g. 
Freemap (free-map.org.uk) once had the facility to add path problems, 
but now we have the OSMUK organisation in existence, maybe a 
semi-official OSMUK walkers' map with added functionality would have 
greater traction and it's something that could be launched as a 
project on GitHub?


Thanks,
Nick



Disclaimer 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-legal-talk] How do I join the meeting tonight?

2020-12-10 Thread Edward Bainton

Hi all

I was hoping to audit the meeting tonight, with a view to possibly
volunteering. I now have Mumble installed (though can't see how to set up
Push to Talk)

*How do I find the group call and join it?* Is there some kind of web
address or something to be input somewhere?

The wiki  has a HOT server
listed, but LWG isn't part of HOT? (See below sig)

Thanks,

Edward


   - When the program starts you will be asked to connect to a server click
   the *Add New* button and enter in the information for the HOT server:
  - Label: This is just a name for the server for yourself, enter: *HOT*
  - Address: The actual address of the server, enter: *talk.hotosm.org
  *
  - Port: The port that the server uses, leave this at the default
  value of: *64738*
  - Username: A username to identify yourself on the server, *please
  pick one to use*.
   - This Mumble server is *intended for use by the OpenStreetMap community
   only*.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?


Le 10/12/2020 à 14:15, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :

On 12/10/20 2:07 PM, Baptiste Lemoine - Cipher Bliss wrote:
J'ai hâte qu'une femme donne son avis sur la mysoginie dans la 
communauté OSM.


J'arrive, j'arrive !
(même si mon pseudo n'est pas forcément facile à décoder de prime abord)

Aucune ne le fera - et pour cause: une femme qui s'en plaint sera 
étiquetée emmerdeuse féministe. Ça fait partie du problème.


Que tu crois, mon n'veu !

Commençons par *ma* définition des termes :
- misogyne : qui n'aime pas les femmes, point barre, sans préjuger du 
comportement conséquent ;
- sexiste : qui va systématiquement (à titre individuel/collectif, j'y 
reviens plus bas) se comporter comme un sagouin envers les femmes 
(puisqu'on parle de misogynie et non de misandrie) faire des 
remarques/réponses/allusions renvoyant les femmes à leur rôle fantasmé 
de mémère en cuisine ou de péripatéticienne, les rabaissant très 
souvent, etc.


Partant de là, mon ressenti.

J'ai un compte osm.org depuis 2016 et je suis contributrice active 
depuis 2018.


Je ne ressens _pas de misogynie/sexisme *systémique*_ dans osm-fr. J'ai 
été très bien accueillie en tant que débutante, on m'a expliqué comment 
il fallait faire/ne pas faire, on m'a laissé voguer, on répond (pas 
toujours) à mes questions, on me met le pied à l'étrier, on m'intègre, 
on m'inclut. Bref, pas grand chose à dire. Du point de vue 
technique/info., je n'ai aucune compétence : ça n'empêche pas certains 
de me demander de l'aide autour de trucs techniques (ils se 
reconnaîtront...).
Je ne peux que déplorer que le bureau de l'asso. n'ait des femmes qu'aux 
postes qui leur sont traditionnellement dévolus... bien que le nouveau 
CA soit un peu plus mixte que le précédent, me semble-t-il. Ou que peu 
de contributrices s'expriment ici.  Mais je n'ai pas souvenir que l'une 
d'entre elles aient été ostracisée à cause de son genre. Ça serait 
peut-être l'inverse (et c'est tout aussi sexiste ^^)


En revanche, il y a des _comportements individuels *sexistes*_ : quand 
c'est en privé, rien d'autre à faire que de mettre fin à la 
conversation. Mais quand c'est public, difficile de ne pas voir une 
certaine cécité masculine, volontaire ou culturelle, dans l'absence de 
réaction publique.
Je ne saurais vous conseiller d'être attentif à la tournure ou au 
contenu de réponses faites aux quelques femmes qui s'expriment sur la 
liste. Ou éventuellement, pour les plus assidus d'entre vous, de la 
tournure des commentaires de changeset bancal provenant de 
contributrices identifiées comme telles. Voire aux solutions proposées 
de-ci de-là pour lutter contre la discrimination.


--
deuzeffe, qui a un exemple tout frais qui vient de paraître dans la 
liste (en plus d'une grande gu**le)








___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Niels Elgaard Larsen

arnalie faye vicario:

Hello/kumusta,

What an overwhelming response!

This is my first time to email thru the global osm talk; it really takes true grit to 
join the conversations, huge thanks to the people who inspired me and sparked the flame.

I will keep it short and redirect you to a (short) OSM Diary I wrote on Why WOMEN are 
pushing for a safe and inclusive space in OSM: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/arnalielsewhere/diary/395064 

You diary example is a great argument for the workings of OSM. We can tag everything 
and data consumers can use what they need.

But why have you not tagged
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/100466621
with lit=yes ?

And all this has nothing with these mailing lists.

It also has nothing to do with welcoming diversity and inclusion.
I, and surely many other white males, have tagged thousands of ways and paths with 
lit=yes.

Not only for the benefit of women. There are also men that need it for security. And 
children (both boys and girls) or their parents. It could be used to assist vehicles 
in handling lights and speed, etc. Or for astronomers.

And we have not discouraged any women or men from tagging where ways are lit.

I just checked with overpass and I have edited more than 32.000 ways with lit 
set.
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1133

So I do feel disappointed by your diary implying that as a white male I am 
unwelcoming diversity and inclusion by ignoring lit tags.

I think you should encourage women to tag more with lit=yes/no and other things you 
believe are more important to women. Not that men could not also do it (like I am).

But we are volunteers and there is nothing wrong in tagging the things that are most 
useful to us. For example I have very little interest in manholes or power-poles.
But I have tagged 300+ bars with smoking. Because I prefer to have my beers without 
smoke. It is of course also useful to smokers looking for a bar, which is fine with 
me as it just makes OSM more useful.
I am not particularly interested in volleyball, but I have made sure that all rowing 
clubs in and close to Denmark are in OSM.

About 280 of them: https://agol.dk/elgaard/roklubber.html

I also think that routing apps could take advantage of lit tags by having a "prefer 
lit roads" option. That it outside the scope of OSM, but as we get more ways tagget 
with "lit", it get more likely to happen and more useful.

A slide from @mapmakerdavid states "it takes good relationships to navigate an 
ocean.”

=Arnalie

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 10, 2020, at 8:01 PM, James  wrote:

> The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable fact.

>Right, this is true. Sadly true. Something I also know from Linux Communities 
and other Open Source/Open Data Communities.

Same in programming and IT fields, firefighters, mechanics, carpenters, 
construction workers, taxi drivers, etc etc...

Now is it a simple lack of interest in the field? Gate keeping? 
Discrimination/Sexism? Is it because of tradition that is still lingering?

We should work with other humans and see why as well as question ourselves what can 
we do/change?

We should treat other fellow humans, despite sex, race or country of origin, as we 
would want to be treated.

Would you like to be put down based on your employer, despite your knowledge? 
Probably not, then don't do it

Would you like to be put down based on your genitalia, despite being quite 
knowledgeable? No? Then don't do it.

On Thu., Dec. 10, 2020, 6:38 a.m. tilmanreinecke--- via talk, 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:

> The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable fact.

Right, this is true. Sadly true. Something I also know from Linux 
Communities
and other Open Source/Open Data Communities.

> The simplest explanation for this is the systematic institutional 
hostility
towards women in the OSM community.

I did not hear about something like that what can be called "systematic". 
Are
you sure that we have something like that in OSM? If yes, then please point 
to
where that happened. I am pretty sure that this is not something 
systematic. I
know women not feeling this way as you because OpenStreetMap is an open and
welcoming community.

Greetings

Sören

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive
Behavior in the OSM Community
From: Clay Smalley __
To: Celine Jacquin __
CC: osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org ,osm __

I'm noticing a pattern here in the replies to this email:

Only men have replied. This is, unfortunately, par for the course on the
OSM mailing lists. The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable 
fact.
The simplest explanation for this is the systematic institutional 
hostility
towards women in the OSM community. The

[OSM-talk] Fwd: Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Celine Jacquin

Hello everyone
Thank you for your answers.

And thanks for the supportive messages.

I will give a general response, trying to cover all the points that I can
extend, and trying to be clear despite my limited time and fluency in
English.

Above all, I would like you to become aware of the harshness of the
responses that reach me when directing myself to myself, when this
initiative is collective, and is that of a large number of women who are
already confronting and documenting, researching, have been analyzing and
drawing on testimonies for many years now (see the main mission of
Geochicas, the context in which this community was formed; see also the
different initiatives and activities in different countries of our fellow
signatories).
The responses in the regional chats, since yesterday, have reached varying
levels of sometimes intolerable discrimination, and also a general effort
to deflect the problem that we raise by pointing out all the details, flaws
in our declaration (made in 1 day between people who have already a great
workload, because no, a large number of us are not people from the
privileged circle of corporations closely linked to OSM located in rich
countries, a common criticism in chats).
Many members of Geochicas testified that they did not have the energy to
take part in the debate on lists and chats, because of the level of
aggressiveness that can be seen there.

This to come back to the point already shared many times in all possible
communication channels: women, from southern countries, OSM members, are
materially limited to participate in all the activities that we would like,
in particular the activities of high levels such as participating in the
board, and animatedly limited by aggressiveness of any type, direct or
indirect, frontal or underlying, in all types of communication.

Reading the reactions to our initiative since yesterday, as well as the
numerous invitations to make my own copy of OSM and leave it (we will
document these comments in an organized way for those who do not believe
it), demotivated me to participate in the board meeting today, and affected
for the next few days surely, but also, deeply disappointed by what I
generally experience as a beautiful commitment and a nice community (when I
participate little in the debates and do not realize what is happening
there).

Some concrete points to your answers:

- Directly targeting a person who expresses herself clearly on behalf of a
community, deliberately mistaking the interlocutor, is equivalent to
looking for a target rather than establishing a dialogue.

- Our statement is not a direct and personal reaction to Frederick's email.
His email is simply an incident that motivates us to react again, in a new
way, in the continuity of our different actions on this same line. Nothing
to do with a strategy of avoiding the theme of the entry of representatives
of Facebook to the board. Nothing personal either. We are all convinced
that an individual who makes unfortunate choices in his expression (this
also happens to anybody and we strive to recognize it), can also be a
valuable member of OSM. This does not change our point at all.

- We are not talking specifically about quotas, we invite the OMSF to think
collegially about solutions and to integrate various people in the search
for a solution, by adapting to the limits of these people to be able to
participate in it also (therefore seek real solutions to the participation).

- We did not have time in 1 day to think of the right support to share this
statement. Google is clearly not a good solution. The statement shared
yesterday due to the board meeting is a draft, it will then (very soon) be
posted on the wiki.

- As has already been said, you cannot explain to a perpetually offended
group, which expresses it as such, that the remarks which offend them are
not offensive. If a person is offended, it is because the terms of
collective expression must be reviewed. Without it, you assume without
saying it that you do not want to give voice or take into account what
these people are telling you and what they are experiencing.

- Diversity is clearly a large and complex issue, and we all fail at one
level or another. But working to improve diversity means being open to
petitions and always improving our rank of understanding it. Criticizing
the search for diversity by demonstrating the limits of others is what I
can call: sabotaging this search for diversity.
The correct way is to always humbly re-read our own words when someone
points out an offense.
Considering the fact of not offending anyone in such a large community
utopian, would that be a way of saying that it is pointless and useless to
work to improve the inclusiveness of our modes of expression? Is there an
excuse to continue to be violent on any scale without limit? I also believe
that it's hard not to offend anyone and to understand everyone's codes, but
the secret to the recipe lies in *being willing and

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Éric Gillet


Le 10/12/2020 à 12:35, Christian Quest a écrit :
J'espère ne pas ouvrir une boite de pandore avec ce message... mais 
bon, je prends le risque.



Depuis hier, il y a des échanges assez rudes sur la misogynie qui 
régnerait dans la communauté OSM ("systemic behavior").


Ce n'est pas la première fois que le sujet est posé et c'est normal 
que la question se pose quand on voit la répartition hommes/femmes au 
sein du projet, quel que soit le niveau où l'on regarde.


Je suis peut être naïf de croire qu'on n'a pas ce problème en France, 
mais il est bien difficile de ressentir la misogynie quand on est un 
homme, tout comme on ne perçoit pas autant le racisme en fonction de 
ses origines.


A lire certains messages sur talk@, j'ai l'impression d'être dans un 
autre monde, ici, dans notre communauté française.


De mémoire, jamais nous n'avons ressenti l'intérêt d'avoir un "code of 
conduct", jamais je n'ai eu d'écho de quelconque problème de cet ordre.


Suis-je aveugle et sourd ?


Je n'ai pas vu de discours discriminant un groupe de population. Ça me 
semble bon enfant ici.
Il y a des désaccords, des avis bien tranchés des fois, mais rien de 
déplacé à ma connaissance.


J'espère que si des personnes sont discriminées ou ont le sentiment de 
l'être elle se manifesteront, quitte à ce qu'elles utilisent un alias. 
Contrairement à d'autres endroits, témoigner anonymement me semble 
facile sur une liste de diffusion donc le frein devrait pas être très grand.


J'imagine que c'est le message de F. Ramm 
 
qui a soulevé cette question, mais je n'y vois rien de sexiste.
La citation est très désagréable à lire, mais c'est justement pour 
critiquer la personne qui l'a dit et donc condamner la fermement la 
misogynie.
L'analogie avec l'élection OSMF est douteuse, il aurait pu trouver un 
meilleur exemple, mais pas de discrimination à mon sens. Au contraire.


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread Dan S

I use addr:interpolation on single items as in Mat's example, just as
much as on an explicit "interpolation way". It seems to me the concept
is perfectly adaptable. For example, an address-search-engine should
have no trouble digesting these two almost-the-same uses of
addr:interpolation.

Cheers
Dan

Op do 10 dec. 2020 om 16:04 schreef Ken Kilfedder :
>
> Isn't addr:interpolation only for ranges of housenumbers on an interpolation 
> way?
>
> In this case the question seems to be about a residential building containing 
> only even numbered units?
>
> If you just say addr:housenumber=2-20, it could mean that 19 is included.  If 
> you say addr:housenumber=2;4;6;8;10;12;14;16;18;20 - that might be correct, 
> but it seems a bit inefficient.
>
> ---
> https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
> spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk
>
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2020, at 3:43 PM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> > On 10/12/2020 15:37, Mat Attlee wrote:
> > > Is there a way when specifying a range for addr:housenumber to indicate
> > > it's only for even or odd numbers?
> >
> > https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/addr:interpolation#values
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >Jeremy
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Martin Wynne


On 10/12/2020 14:13, John Aldridge wrote:



There'd be a whole lot less temptation to tag for the renderer, if the 
renderers rendered for the tags a bit better!


Agreed, and while we are on the subject, please can we have *tracks* 
rendered on the standard map as a double line? As they are on most maps.


Martin.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Dave F via Talk-GB


I believe you're incorrect.

Cycleways can be shared use with pedestrians, & almost always are in the UK.

Cycleway/footway/path tags are not based on usage figures. Cycleway 
allows for two modes of transport, footway allows one.  Likewise 
'bridleway' allows for three modes - horse/bicycle/foot.


The path tag was an invention after contributors got confused by the 
above. It should be removed from the database.


Your 'surface' comment is irrelevant to your problem.

Tagging *incorrectly* to suit the renderer/router should not occur, but 
given it's a part of a NCN route, this is clearly a correct tag.


DaveF

On 10/12/2020 12:24, Thomas Jarvis wrote:

I've reached a stalemate with another mapper about the tagging of a rural
shared use path. He mapped the path initially a few years ago as
highway=cycleway and I've recently changed it to highway=path,
bicycle=designated & foot=designated (as well as the other tags that apply
to it).
My reasons for changing it, is that it is shared use path with a greater
number of people of foot than bicycle (about 5:2), the path is designed for
both types of user & not the whole route has a blacktop surface (therefore
not suitable for road bikes, these bits do have their surface tagged though
so that shouldn't be an issue for routers).
His argument for keeping it as highway=cycleway is because his render is
not configured to show highway=path & bicycle=designated the same as
highway=cycleway. Other reasons are because it is part of the NCN Route 88,
as such it is "cared" for sustrans. Also it is a  well used cycle route.
Both of which are very much true, and are tagged with the
appropriate relations to reflect this.

I've put this to the Data Working Group, and they have suggested that I ask
the community here to see what the consensus is.
I don't mind what the outcome is, however I am not satisfied with the sole
reason being because it renders differently.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94598759


Thank you,

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Solar panels on Alvares House in Homerton

2020-12-10 Thread Mat Attlee

I have conducted some more surveys of the area and neither from street
level or looking from a neighbouring building am I able to see a play area
so it's possible it's a rooftop play area and not accessible by non
residents of the building.

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 15:44, Jez Nicholson  wrote:

> As an aside, I do see on RightMove that the thing that looks like a
> swimming pool isn'tit is a children's play area.
>
> You could check the planning permission maybe?
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 3:09 PM Mat Attlee  wrote:
>
>> In surveying and adding Alvares House in Homerton in London, I noticed
>> that the Bing aerial photos seem to indicate solar panels on the roof
>> though I can't find any details on them
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/882360871
>>
>> Cheers
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Ken Kilfedder

 
> ...this distinction doesn't really exist in the UK. The default legal 
> position for for any public highway in the UK is that any permission for 
> any class of user also includes permission for any class of user prior 
> to that in the hierarchy, unless explicitly stated (and signed) 
> otherwise. 

I'm sure that is the legal position.  However, on the ground it's usually 
perfectly clear whether a way is a cyclepath/cyclelane or a footpath/sidewalk 
etc.   That's a separate issue to who is allowed on it.  


> [..]
> 
> Personally, I think the default OSM map render should follow that 
> hierarchy, with minor highways and paths having a three-way distinction:
> 
> pedestrians only
> pedestrians and cycles
> all vehicles

I think there are enough items that look and act like a cycles-only way to make 
it worth having a fourth item in your hierarchy- whatever the legal position.




---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths




On 10/12/2020 15:39, Phillip Barnett wrote:

“  any road that cars can use is also open to cyclists and
pedestrians ” Pedestrians? Are you sure about that? Yes, you can walk
along country roads that lack pavements, but try that in a town and
I’m pretty sure you’d get stopped quite quickly.


Legally, yes. Of course, if there is a separate footway then it would 
obviously be wiser to use it. But you are not breaking any law by 
walking in the carriageway. Unless it's a motorway or designated special 
road, with signage to explicitly indicate that pedestrians are not allowed.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

2020-12-10 Thread Lars Gravengaard

OK alm.vej er det asfalt brede eller brede mellem fuldt optukne linier?

For så skal vi vel også til at måle bredden på grus rabatten? For der kan
man jo også køre ud.

Mvh
Lars Bloch Gravengaard



tor. d. 10. dec. 2020 16.46 skrev Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk <
talk-dk@openstreetmap.org>:

> Hvilket vil være misvisende. Forestil dig et køretøj der skal finde vej
> alt efter hvor bred vejen FAKTISK er. Da vil den vise at det på ingen måde
> er muligt at passere på grund af for lidt bredde på vejen, selvom det
> faktisk er.
> On 2020-12-10 09:33, Lars Gravengaard wrote:
>
> Hvad med at angive vejbreden til mål mellem de stiplede streger?
>
> Så kan ruteberegningen måske vælge en anden rute / se at ruten tager
> længere tid.
>
> Mvh
> Lars Bloch Gravengaard
>
>
> tor. d. 10. dec. 2020 07.05 skrev :
>
>> Jeg køber Mikko's forslag.
>>
>> Vejdirektoratet & COWI definerer vejtypen således:
>> "En 2 minus 1 vej er en vej, som visuelt kun har én vognbane, der
>> benyttes af trafikanter i begge retninger, og hvor der er etableret brudte
>> kantlinjer i begge sider af vejen. Kantbanerne benyttes af cyklister og
>> fodgængere og som vigeareal, når to modkørende trafikanter mødes.
>> Kantbanerne er ikke forbeholdt bløde trafikanter – den brudte kantlinje må
>> gerne overskrides af køretøjer".
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 at 4:46 AM
>> From: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk" 
>> To: talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
>> Cc: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen" 
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej
>> Mit forslag er:
>> highway=*
>> cycleway=shared_lanes <- den er ikke til diskussion, for det er hvad
>> det er
>> Om man derefter vil tagge med en af disse tænker jeg er op til én selv.
>> De giver det samme resultat:
>> lanes=1
>> oneway=nolanes:both_ways=1 Under alle omstændigheder skal 2-minus-1-veje
>> aldrig tagges med lanes=2, da det er en helt anden vejtype som faktisk har
>> to lanes: vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A[
>> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A=photo] [
>> mapillary.com]
>>
>> Om man vil tilføje description=2-minus-1-vej, må være op til en selv.
>>
>> Det kan der ud over være nyttigt, som Asger Frank skriver, at være på
>> udkig efter fartbegrænsninger (de eksisterer nogle, men ikke alle, steder),
>> og det kan være nyttigt at tjekke bredden på vejen.
>>
>>
>> ___ Talk-dk mailing list
>> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk]
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-dk mailing list
>> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-dk mailing 
> listTalk-dk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
>
> ___
> Talk-dk mailing list
> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
>
___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Jean-Marc Liotier


On 12/10/20 2:55 PM, Baptiste Lemoine - Cipher Bliss wrote:

Aucune ne le fera - et pour cause: une femme qui s'en plaint sera étiquetée 
emmerdeuse féministe. Ça fait partie du problème.

sauf si personne n'est là pour dire que le féminisme emmerde la communauté OSM, 
voire - syons fous - que c'est un combat qui est soutenu officiellement et que 
nous ne tolérerons pas les comportements qui iraient à l'encontre de cela.


Le silence des détracteurs n'empêche pas l'ostracisme - c'est la 
situation courante en entreprise. Les plus hardies se réfugient derrière 
un mandat syndical et s'auto-placardisent au passage, les autres 
finissent par partir et seules restent quelques spécimen avec des 
piquants et quelques autres renfermées dans leur résignation.


Le soutien officiel explicite est un bon début - c'est même la condition 
de tout autre progrès. Dans le milieu de l'informatique, on entend 
encore des blagues misogynes ou homophobes - pour se sentir légitime à 
en faire remarque à leur auteur, même un homme a besoin de d'appui, 
surtout lorsque l'auteur lui est hiérarchiquement supérieur.



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread Ken Kilfedder

Isn't addr:interpolation only for ranges of housenumbers on an interpolation 
way?

In this case the question seems to be about a residential building containing 
only even numbered units?  

If you just say addr:housenumber=2-20, it could mean that 19 is included.  If 
you say addr:housenumber=2;4;6;8;10;12;14;16;18;20 - that might be correct, but 
it seems a bit inefficient. 

---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk

On Thu, 10 Dec 2020, at 3:43 PM, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> On 10/12/2020 15:37, Mat Attlee wrote:
> > Is there a way when specifying a range for addr:housenumber to indicate
> > it's only for even or odd numbers?
> 
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/addr:interpolation#values
> -- 
> Cheers,
>Jeremy
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Fabian Hernandez via talk

 For a community to be resilient, resilient individuals are required. Those who 
are offended by everything only contribute to lessening the resistance of the 
community. Those who group by collectives only crush the first minority, the 
individual. Meritocracy should be the form of government, and if anyone 
believes that it is not, it is because he sees a lack of merits in himself, or 
in a group that he sees without merits.

In no way is it good to propose to silence one group to favor another, it is 
the problem we have now. We can all speak and the helicopter gunships will not 
be silenced. Everyone has the same right to speak no more and no less. Long 
live freedom of expression!
  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Sébastien Dinot

Baptiste Lemoine - Cipher Bliss a écrit :
> On peut s’inspirer de ce que font le collectif Women Who Code aussi.
> Pourquoi pas faire des mapathons réservés aux femmes, ou pas forcément
> réservés mais indiquant que c’est le public cible?

Créer une événement réservé à une minorité, j’ai connu mieux comme
initiative favorisant l’inclusion. ;)

Mais si cela s’avère efficace pour mettre le pied à l’étrier à des
personnes qui n’oseraient pas se pointer dans un évènement ouvert à tous
pour faire leurs premiers pas, ça se tente. Ne reste plus qu’à trouver
des représentant(e)s desdites minorités pour animer ces évènements...

En ce qui me concerne, l'évènement le plus inclusif que j'ai connu a été
la première édition de Opération Libre, à Brocas, en avril 2013 :

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Op%C3%A9ration_Libre

C'est la nature de l'évènement, plus qu'un quelconque ciblage, qui l'a
rendu inclusif. D'autres personnes abonnées à cette liste pourront en
témoigner, nous étions à peine une demi-douzaine de mappeurs (et pas
plus de deux douzaines de contributeurs tous horizons confondus), mais
l'évènement a eu une fréquentation honorable, avec des visiteurs aux
profils et aux préoccupations les plus variés. Nous avons pu initier
quelques personnes à la cartographie, y compris des enfants qui se sont
fait un plaisir d'aller faire des relevés sur le terrain avec moi, et de
reporter ensuite dans OSM ce qu'ils avaient noté, GPS, appareil photo et
bloc-note en main. J'ai rarement eu l'occasion de toucher un public
aussi éclectique. Et qui sait, peut-être en est-il resté quelque chose
à Brocas...

Plus tard, j'ai aussi participé à un mapathon orienté accessibilité
à Toulouse. Nous étions là encore peu nombreux, une poignée de
contributeurs aguerris et d'autres personnes souhaitant s'initier à OSM
pour créer des cartes utiles aux personnes à mobilité réduite. Sur le
terrain, par groupes de trois, nous étions accompagnés par des personnes
à mobilité réduite, qui nous ont montré tout ce qui pouvait gêner leurs
déplacements, leur compliquer la vie, leur interdire l'accès à des
lieux. J'ai personnellement beaucoup appris ce jour-là (un seul hôtel
réellement accessible sur une dizaine visités, aucune pharmacie
accessible, aucun cabinet médical accessible, des trottoirs traitres,
des distributeurs de billets soit-disant adaptés, mais bel et bien
inutilisables par des personnes en fauteuil roulant). Je porte désormais
un autre regard sur l'aménagement de Toulouse (changer le regard, c'est
aussi ça l'inclusion).

Sébastien

-- 
Sébastien Dinot, sebastien.di...@free.fr
http://www.palabritudes.net/
Ne goûtez pas au logiciel libre, vous ne pourriez plus vous en passer !

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread Jeremy Harris


On 10/12/2020 15:37, Mat Attlee wrote:

Is there a way when specifying a range for addr:housenumber to indicate
it's only for even or odd numbers?


https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/addr:interpolation#values
--
Cheers,
  Jeremy

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

2020-12-10 Thread Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk


En korrekt måde at angive bredden på vejbanen er lanes:width=*

On 2020-12-10 09:33, Lars Gravengaard wrote:

Hvad med at angive vejbreden til mål mellem de stiplede streger?

Så kan ruteberegningen måske vælge en anden rute / se at ruten tager 
længere tid.


Mvh
Lars Bloch Gravengaard


tor. d. 10. dec. 2020 07.05 skrev >:


Jeg køber Mikko's forslag.

Vejdirektoratet & COWI definerer vejtypen således:
"En 2 minus 1 vej er en vej, som visuelt kun har én vognbane, der
benyttes af trafikanter i begge retninger, og hvor der er
etableret brudte kantlinjer i begge sider af vejen. Kantbanerne
benyttes af cyklister og fodgængere og som vigeareal, når to
modkørende trafikanter mødes. Kantbanerne er ikke forbeholdt bløde
trafikanter – den brudte kantlinje må gerne overskrides af køretøjer".



Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 at 4:46 AM
From: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk"
mailto:talk-dk@openstreetmap.org>>
To: talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 
Cc: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen" mailto:lists.openstreetmap@a22.dk>>
Subject: Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej
Mit forslag er:
highway=*
cycleway=shared_lanes     <- den er ikke til diskussion, for det
er hvad det er
Om man derefter vil tagge med en af disse tænker jeg er op til én
selv. De giver det samme resultat:
lanes=1
oneway=nolanes:both_ways=1 Under alle omstændigheder skal
2-minus-1-veje aldrig tagges med lanes=2, da det er en helt anden
vejtype som faktisk har to lanes:

vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A[https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A=photo
]
[mapillary.com ]

Om man vil tilføje description=2-minus-1-vej, må være op til en selv.

Det kan der ud over være nyttigt, som Asger Frank skriver, at være
på udkig efter fartbegrænsninger (de eksisterer nogle, men ikke
alle, steder),
og det kan være nyttigt at tjekke bredden på vejen.


___ Talk-dk mailing
list Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk]





___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk



___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [talk-latam] Fwd: Respuesta a [Ticket#2020120710000024]

2020-12-10 Thread Maritza Rodríguez

Señor Mario Frasca nosotras somos estudiantes de la Universidad de Panamá,
estuvimos presentes y participamos en la reunión del 17 de septiembre de
2020.

Atentamente:
Maritza Rodríguez  (maritza20r) y Karen Martínez (Karen Martínez)
 Jóvenes Mapeadoeres Universidad de Panamá.


El mar, 8 dic 2020 a las 18:06, Mario Frasca () escribió:

> There is one point which I do need to clarify, because this is a
> misrepresentation of the facts and it offends me.
>
> Maritza20r writes:
>
> >
> >   Un ejemplo de esto es cuando nuestros estudiantes pidieron su ayuda
> >   y apoyo durante la reunión del 17 de septiembre. En lugar de ayudar
> >   a proporcionar recursos, simplemente nos escribió que los buscáramos
> >   los recursos en el Internet
> >
> there were no students in the meeting
> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mariotomo/diary/394356), the
> question was posed by Marcela Zeballos (YouthMappers International. I
> don't know her precise role, she didn't introduce herself), and I was so
> surprised to hear such a lack of familiarity with our resources on the
> wiki that I did cut it short, saying "el wiki está repleno".  mind you:
> not "the internet", but our Wiki.
>
> I've tried to be as helpful as I can when suggesting how to correct
> mistakes, but I guess that after comment after comment without feedback
> I might have forgotten the usual local customs of avoiding correcting
> people you don't know personally.  anyhow:
>
> >
> >   sin embargo, sus acciones han provocado que los estudiantes
> >   universitarios panameños se sientan desanimados e intimidados de
> >   participar en su propia comunidad local de OSM y desarrollar sus
> >   habilidades
> >
> that this chapter dares blame me for not being able to keep editors
> within OSM, that's preposterous.
>
> mis dos comentarios a la profesora:
>
> https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4366436
>
> de la lista selecciono unos comentarios, todos sin respuesta, que
> evidentemente asustaron a los estudiantes
> (
> https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=248722
> ):
>
> > Hola Karen, mapeaste unos edificios de la escuela como escuelas, no
> > como edificios. te los mejoro yo? o quieres revisarlo después de haber
> > leído el wiki?
> > hola Marianne. perdona, pero no creo que estés mejorando mucho la
> > situación. los tres edificios 391365287, 391365288, 391365286 los has
> > puesto en la posición de sus techos; el edificio 416514095 lo has
> > identificado con un agua de su techo; el nuevo edificio 881437025 lo
> > has ex...
> > hola Karen. perdona, pero no creo que estés mejorando mucho la
> > situación. me parece que estés mapeando manchas en los techos,
> > seguramente querrás revisar lo que acabas de poner, quizás te ayuden
> > las fotos de Bing.
> > hola Emilce. seguramente te habrán comentado tus asesores y
> > compañeras: en iD existe la manera muy sencilla para que los edificios
> > resulten rectangulares. en la realidad, casi todos los ángulos de las
> > casas son rectos.
> > hola Andrés. si mapeas por interés personal, y quieres mejorar, pues
> > estás haciendo errores bien raros … tenemos un grupo:
> > https://t.me/Comunidad_OSM_Panama
> > serás bienvenido, y ojalá sigas mapeando y mejorando.
> > estás en un proceso de aprendizaje, cierto? si quieres ayuda, estamos
> > a toda disposición. me confirmas tu interés por seguir mapeando?
> > hola, gracias por contribuir al mapa de OSM. si necesitas ayuda, por
> > favor ponte en contacto con la comunidad, hay varias maneras de
> > hacerlo. por ejemplo los grupos OSM en Telegram. en esta contribución
> > sólo te faltó etiquetar correctamente el camino.
> > hola, gracias por intentar mejorar el mapa de Colón. no le tengas
> > miedo a borrar los errores ajenos. el edificio ahí al lado no existe,
> > puedes quitarlo.
> > hola. no está **tan** mal la mejora que propusiste, pero no está
> > completa y no está correcta. tu objetivo cuál es? porqué no mejoras
> > los errores ajenos de al lado?
> > hola. que bien ver unas ediciones más que aceptables. bueno, podrías
> > alinear mejor, quizás utilizando mejores herramientas. si necesitas
> > apoyo, hay un grupo Telegram en que hablamos entre maperos interesados
> > en Panamá.
> > https://t.me/Comunidad_OSM_Panama
> > hola, necesitas ayuda para mejorar tu estilo de mapeo? un campo de
> > futbal que un compañero mapeó como edificio, le añadiste nombre, pero
> > no mejoraste el error. nadie te está dando indicaciones? no perteneces
> > a un grupo? si quieres, tenemos uno en Telegram: https://t.m...
> > nadie te está apoyando en el aprendizaje? mapeaste como edificio un
> > campo de futbal. si necesitas ayuda por favor entra en el grupo
> > Telegram https://t.me/Comunidad_OSM_Panama
> > hola. disculpa, pero demasiado aproximadas estas contribuciones. ponte
> > en contacto con los maperos activos en Santiago para coordinar
> > esfuerzos. gracias por tu interés en OSM, y ojalá sigas mejorando tus
> > prácticas.
> > Hola

Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej

2020-12-10 Thread Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk

Hvilket vil være misvisende. Forestil dig et køretøj der skal finde vej 
alt efter hvor bred vejen FAKTISK er. Da vil den vise at det på ingen 
måde er muligt at passere på grund af for lidt bredde på vejen, selvom 
det faktisk er.


On 2020-12-10 09:33, Lars Gravengaard wrote:

Hvad med at angive vejbreden til mål mellem de stiplede streger?

Så kan ruteberegningen måske vælge en anden rute / se at ruten tager 
længere tid.


Mvh
Lars Bloch Gravengaard


tor. d. 10. dec. 2020 07.05 skrev >:


Jeg køber Mikko's forslag.

Vejdirektoratet & COWI definerer vejtypen således:
"En 2 minus 1 vej er en vej, som visuelt kun har én vognbane, der
benyttes af trafikanter i begge retninger, og hvor der er
etableret brudte kantlinjer i begge sider af vejen. Kantbanerne
benyttes af cyklister og fodgængere og som vigeareal, når to
modkørende trafikanter mødes. Kantbanerne er ikke forbeholdt bløde
trafikanter – den brudte kantlinje må gerne overskrides af køretøjer".



Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 at 4:46 AM
From: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen via Talk-dk"
mailto:talk-dk@openstreetmap.org>>
To: talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 
Cc: "Mikko Lukas Räsaänen" mailto:lists.openstreetmap@a22.dk>>
Subject: Re: [Talk-dk] 2 minus 1 vej
Mit forslag er:
highway=*
cycleway=shared_lanes     <- den er ikke til diskussion, for det
er hvad det er
Om man derefter vil tagge med en af disse tænker jeg er op til én
selv. De giver det samme resultat:
lanes=1
oneway=nolanes:both_ways=1 Under alle omstændigheder skal
2-minus-1-veje aldrig tagges med lanes=2, da det er en helt anden
vejtype som faktisk har to lanes:

vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A[https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=vPMKB9xfS_IWpMbXnSxv2A=photo
]
[mapillary.com ]

Om man vil tilføje description=2-minus-1-vej, må være op til en selv.

Det kan der ud over være nyttigt, som Asger Frank skriver, at være
på udkig efter fartbegrænsninger (de eksisterer nogle, men ikke
alle, steder),
og det kan være nyttigt at tjekke bredden på vejen.


___ Talk-dk mailing
list Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk]





___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk



___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Ken Kilfedder

Following a little research, there was a proposal in the Carto style to do 
something like my 5-point suggestion.   You can read the details here, and 
contribute (or give the 'thumbs up' upvotes to contributions you like:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1321 

---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk

On Thu, 10 Dec 2020, at 3:37 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 12:42, Ken Kilfedder  
> wrote:
> > highway=cycleway with nothing to say that foot is allowed - blue dashes as 
> > at present.
> > highway=footway with nothing to say bicyles are allowed - red dashes as at 
> > present.
> > highway=cycleway with foot expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line (maybe 
> > blue long dash interspersed with red short dash)
> > highway=footway with bikes expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line (maybe 
> > red long dash interspersed with blue short dash)
> > With segregated=yes - possibly, at higher zoom levels, show blue dashes in 
> > parallel with red - the right way round if possible.
> 
> Something like this would be a big step forwards IMO. "highway=footway
> with bikes expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line" this one in
> particular.
> 
> I'm with Richard
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333 , highway=path
> is meaningless. I think highway=cycleway is something designed and
> built expressly for bicycles, typically smooth, wide, signed.
> 
> Thus I'd mark a public footpath as highway=footway always, adding
> bicycle=designated if necessary (it is a footpath for pedestrians with
> added permission).
> 
> Similarly, I'd mark a sidewalk as highway=footway, footway=sidewalk,
> adding bicycle=designatedy, segregated=no if it is a shared space
> (again, it is an area for pedestrians with added rights for bicycles).
> 
> The tough case is a sidewalk with a segregated cycle lane (designed
> and built as such). I'd prefer highway=footway for all sidewalks, but
> the segregation implies highway=cycleway, segregated=yes,
> footway=sidewalk
> 
> I don't think highway=path is much use at all really.
> 
> Stephen
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Phillip Barnett

“  any road that cars can use is also open to cyclists and pedestrians ”
Pedestrians? Are you sure about that? Yes, you can walk along country roads 
that lack pavements, but try that in a town and I’m pretty sure you’d get 
stopped quite quickly.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 10 Dec 2020, at 15:21, Mark Goodge  wrote:
> 
> any road that cars can use is also open to cyclists and pedestrians

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] House number ranges that are only odd or even

2020-12-10 Thread Mat Attlee

Is there a way when specifying a range for addr:housenumber to indicate
it's only for even or odd numbers?

When walking around my local area I have come across some blocks that will
have a sign indicating for example house numbers 1 to 21 odd only.
Similarly when there is just one building drawn for a whole street of
terrace houses the number range will only be or odd even depending on the
side of the road.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Stephen Colebourne

On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 at 12:42, Ken Kilfedder  wrote:
> highway=cycleway with nothing to say that foot is allowed - blue dashes as at 
> present.
> highway=footway with nothing to say bicyles are allowed - red dashes as at 
> present.
> highway=cycleway with foot expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line (maybe 
> blue long dash interspersed with red short dash)
> highway=footway with bikes expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line (maybe 
> red long dash interspersed with blue short dash)
> With segregated=yes - possibly, at higher zoom levels, show blue dashes in 
> parallel with red - the right way round if possible.

Something like this would be a big step forwards IMO. "highway=footway
with bikes expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line" this one in
particular.

I'm with Richard
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Richard/diary/20333 , highway=path
is meaningless. I think highway=cycleway is something designed and
built expressly for bicycles, typically smooth, wide, signed.

Thus I'd mark a public footpath as highway=footway always, adding
bicycle=designated if necessary (it is a footpath for pedestrians with
added permission).

Similarly, I'd mark a sidewalk as highway=footway, footway=sidewalk,
adding bicycle=designatedy, segregated=no if it is a shared space
(again, it is an area for pedestrians with added rights for bicycles).

The tough case is a sidewalk with a segregated cycle lane (designed
and built as such). I'd prefer highway=footway for all sidewalks, but
the segregation implies highway=cycleway, segregated=yes,
footway=sidewalk

I don't think highway=path is much use at all really.

Stephen

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Simon Still

> On 10 Dec 2020, at 14:13, John Aldridge  wrote:
> 
> On 12/10/2020 12:41 PM, Ken Kilfedder wrote:
>> As a break from 'tagging for the renderer', I'd like to see rendering for 
>> the tags.
> 
> A long standing grump of mine!

And mine.  I think the CycleMap render has a lot of issues with clarity.

(I’ve just gone in and removed a load of sections of road in Lambeth tagged as 
‘cycle route’ which have no route markings on the ground, do not form part of 
the current generation of C or Q routes, nor a numbered London Cycle Network 
Route (and were not on the LCN maps I have).  Also considering removing some 
other sections which may have correctly been marked as un-numbered LCN but 
which are no longer visible on the street in any way - though one does now run 
through a new Low Traffic Neighbourhood so *would* be a useful route if 
signed….) 

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-cz] Fwd: OSM uvitaci skript

2020-12-10 Thread Tom Ka

Poslal jsem ti na github pozvanku. Bye. tom.k

čt 10. 12. 2020 v 16:12 odesílatel Miroslav Suchy  napsal:
>
> Dne 08. 12. 20 v 23:19 Martin Ždila napsal(a):
> > Ahojte,
> >
> > Na SotM sme sa bavili o "greeting" sktipte, tak preposielam čo používame.
>
> Super. Ještě chybí licence? Pod jakou licencí to můžeme používat?
>
> Pokud mi někdo dáte práva k
>   https://github.com/osmcz
> tak bych tam založil projekt a upravil to tam pro potřeby CZE. Můj GH login 
> je xsuchy.
>
> Mirek
>
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths




On 10/12/2020 12:41, Ken Kilfedder wrote:
As a break from 'tagging for the renderer', I'd like to see rendering 
for the tags.  It would save a lot of heartarche if the map on osm.org 
showed shared-use paths explicitly.   


I entirely agree! I think the real problem here is that the standard OSM 
render simply doesn't handle highways restricted to non-motorised users 
very well at all, and hence there's a strong incentive to people to 
modify the tags to try and workaround that issue.


However...

Perhaps as follows:-


  * highway=cycleway with nothing to say that foot is allowed - blue
dashes as at present.
  * highway=footway with nothing to say bicyles are allowed - red dashes
as at present.
  * highway=cycleway with foot expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line
(maybe blue long dash interspersed with red short dash)
  * highway=footway with bikes expressly allowed - blue/red dashed line
(maybe red long dash interspersed with blue short dash)
  * With segregated=yes - possibly, at higher zoom levels, show blue
dashes in parallel with red - the right way round if possible.


...this distinction doesn't really exist in the UK. The default legal 
position for for any public highway in the UK is that any permission for 
any class of user also includes permission for any class of user prior 
to that in the hierarchy, unless explicitly stated (and signed) 
otherwise. The hierarchy in question being:


pedestrians
cyclists
horse riders and horse-drawn vehicles
motor vehicles

So any cycleway in the UK is also a footway, unless pedestrians are 
explicitly prohibited, and any road that cars can use is also open to 
cyclists and pedestrians (unless, again, they are explicitly prohibited, 
such as on motorways). There's certainly no general legal distinction 
between a cycleway that allows pedestrians and a footway that allows 
cycles - they are both, in law, exactly the same, and are both in law, a 
shared-use path. Even a segregated shared-use path is still legally 
usable across its entire width by pedestrians, even if that's typically 
discouraged.


Personally, I think the default OSM map render should follow that 
hierarchy, with minor highways and paths having a three-way distinction:


pedestrians only
pedestrians and cycles
all vehicles

(I'd disregard horses in this context, although tagging bridleways in 
rural areas would still be useful and it would be helpful to have that 
indicated somehow on the default render).


I think that would solve the issue here, and prevent a lot of anonymous 
notes.


Anyone know off hand where/how to propose this?  Or even willing to help 
on coding up a demo?


Another issue here is that the default OSM map render is intended to be 
global, but other countries don't necessarily have the same highway 
hierarchy as the UK. In some countries, cycleways that pedestrians are 
prohibited from using may be the norm (I have a feeling that is the case 
in The Netherlands, for example). This is one of the reasons why I think 
that the default render ought to be location-aware, in order to reflect 
different highway laws in different places.


But, also, it's a good reason to press on with creating a specifically 
UK stylesheet, so that OSM on a .uk domain looks different to that on a 
.org domain, with the former being styled to match British practice.


Mark

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-cz] Změny v mapě pro ochranu přírody

2020-12-10 Thread Tom Ka

čt 10. 12. 2020 v 14:46 odesílatel Miroslav Suchy  napsal:
>
> Dne 10. 12. 20 v 13:09 Tom Ka napsal(a):
> >  Naopak explicitne vyjadrit, ze
> > dana oblast ma (nejake) omezeni pristupu by mohlo byt uzitecne,
> > relativne jednoduche a udrzitelne a i pro renderer nebo jine
> > zpracovani dostatecne srozumitelne.
>
> Jenže tohle musíš řešit v renderu. A jak to zajistíš ve všech renderech co 
> jich je. Navíc pravidla pro pohyb po
> protected_area různě po světě můžou být různé.

ano, ale pokud je to jen na nekterych cestach, tak je to stejne
nahouby, kdyz to bude na relaci, tak to ma sanci renderer, ktery o to
stoji resit systemove. A ruzna pravidla by prave mohla byt definovana
v te jedne relaci - tohle ted neexistuje, musel by se udelat novy
navrh - mozna s vyuzitim existujicich tagu.

Bye

___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-cz] Fwd: OSM uvitaci skript

2020-12-10 Thread Martin Ždila

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 4:13 PM Miroslav Suchy  wrote:

> Dne 08. 12. 20 v 23:19 Martin Ždila napsal(a):
> > Ahojte,
> >
> > Na SotM sme sa bavili o "greeting" sktipte, tak preposielam čo používame.
>
> Super. Ještě chybí licence? Pod jakou licencí to můžeme používat?
>

Jose?


> Pokud mi někdo dáte práva k
>   https://github.com/osmcz
> tak bych tam založil projekt a upravil to tam pro potřeby CZE. Můj GH
> login je xsuchy.
>
> Mirek
>
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>


-- 
Ing. Martin Ždila 
OZ Freemap Slovakia
tel:+421-908-363-848
mailto:martin.zd...@freemap.sk
http://www.freemap.sk/
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

2020-12-10 Thread Friedrich Volkmann


On 10.12.20 15:09, Stefan Tauner wrote:

Welchen Nachteil siehst du, wenn wir solche Fälle mit permissive taggen?
Für den Anwender eher keine Nachteile. Aber man öffnet damit Pandoras 
Büchse. Wenn hier ein Weg, auf dem kein Verbot angeschrieben ist, als 
permissive getaggt werden soll, weil er auf Privatgrund liegt, müssten wir 
konsequenterweise alle anderen Wege auf Privatgrund genauso taggen. Vom 
Trampelpfad auf einer Wiese bis zum Weg durch eine Wohnhausanlage.


Privat hat übrigens 2 Bedeutungen: Zum einen die Besitz- und 
Eigentumsverhältnisse, zum anderen die Privatsphäre. Ein Grundstück kann in 
Privateigentum stehen, aber trotzdem frei zugänglich sein (Wald, Wiese...). 
Ein Schrebergarten ist vielleicht Gemeindeeigentum, aber der Pächter liegt 
dort nackt am Swimmingpool und verlässt sich darauf, dass keiner übern Zaun 
steigt.


--
Friedrich K. Volkmann   http://www.volki.at/
Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [talk-cz] Fwd: OSM uvitaci skript

Dne 08. 12. 20 v 23:19 Martin Ždila napsal(a):
> Ahojte,
> 
> Na SotM sme sa bavili o "greeting" sktipte, tak preposielam čo používame.

Super. Ještě chybí licence? Pod jakou licencí to můžeme používat?

Pokud mi někdo dáte práva k
  https://github.com/osmcz
tak bych tam založil projekt a upravil to tam pro potřeby CZE. Můj GH login je 
xsuchy.

Mirek

___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community (Celine Jacquin)

2020-12-10 Thread Fabian Hernandez via talk

 That document is despicable, promoting discrimination of some groups 
pretending to help others.

Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0600
From: Celine Jacquin 
To: osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org, talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic
 Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted
to the conversation in the osm-talk-list (
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html)
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced
for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to
diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable
mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve
diversity.

We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to
sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing

On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

Céline Jacquin
-
  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSRM-talk] OSRM Table Service

2020-12-10 Thread Sasha Khapyorsky

Hello,

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:43 PM Ata Abdollahi 
wrote:

> Hello
> I want to use the table service. It gives an error when I use annotations.
> I use the Windows version of OSRM
> please guide me
>

https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/blob/master/docs/http.md




> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>
___
OSRM-talk mailing list
OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Jacques Lavignotte




Le 10/12/2020 à 14:15, Jean-Marc Liotier a écrit :

On 12/10/20 2:07 PM, Baptiste Lemoine - Cipher Bliss wrote:
J'ai hâte qu'une femme donne son avis sur la mysoginie dans la 
communauté OSM.


Aucune ne le fera - et pour cause: une femme qui s'en plaint sera 
étiquetée emmerdeuse féministe. Ça fait partie du problème.


Sauf si collectivement nous commençons à nous habituer à un autre 
comportement.




--
GnuPg : 156520BBC8F5B1E3 Because privacy matters.
« Quand est-ce qu'on mange ? » AD (c) (tm)

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread John Aldridge


On 12/10/2020 12:41 PM, Ken Kilfedder wrote:
As a break from 'tagging for the renderer', I'd like to see rendering 
for the tags.


A long standing grump of mine!

We see lots of excellent effort put in to designing tagging schemes 
which could support a wide variety of applications, but rather little 
into creating those applications themselves, most especially 
consumer-directed maps.


As it is, the conversation typically goes

   Please don't tag for the renderer!

   Oh, sorry, how do I get The Map to look right then?

   You don't, The Map is intended for map creators, not end users

   Eh?

   But it's no problem, you can create your own map on your own server
   which renders however you want it to. All you need is a degree in
   computer science.

In fact, various people have bravely done this, but (a) you can't find 
those maps because they're not indexed from the OSM or OSMUK pages, (b) 
they sometimes don't cover the whole country, (c) they run on 
underpowered hardware, and (d) oh, that map worked last year, but it's 
gone missing now.


There'd be a whole lot less temptation to tag for the renderer, if the 
renderers rendered for the tags a bit better!


I appear to be in a grumpy mood today. Sorry! I love OSM really :)

John

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-cz] Změny v mapě pro ochranu přírody

Dne 10. 12. 20 v 9:23 Antonin Tuma via talk-cz napsal(a):
> Dobrý den,
> budete-li vstřícní k požadavkům ochrany přírody, pak vám nabízíme z území 
> naší působnosti různé opravy chyb, které jsme
> zjistili, a aktualizace vaší mapy (máte zastaralé údaje třeba k hranicícm 
> zvláště chráněných území).

Rádi bude spolupracovat s vámi, tak jako spolupracujeme s mnoha jinými 
organizacemi. Je ovšem nutné si uvědomit:

* OSM nemá žádného vlastníka a ředitele, který by něco nařizoval. Jsme hromada 
dobrovolníku, která se snaží navrhovat
pravidla podle jakých jedná.
* základní pravidlo zní: "je to na zemi, je to v mapě".

Pokud nás upozorníte na chyby v mapě, tak budeme moc rádi. Takovými chybami 
zcela jistě jsou:

* zrušené turistické cesty
* zákaz vstupu na cestu v určité období - koukám, že mapy.cz mají takové 
omezení na cestě ke Kostelíku a my ne. Pokud mě
odkážete na nějaký zdroj, tak to rád do OSM přidám.
* zákaz vstupu na cesty v CHKO (tady řešíme jak to technicky značit, nechci to 
zbytečně komplikovat)

Za takové podněty budeme rádi a budeme na ně promptně reagovat.

Správné rozhodně není mazat z mapy cokoliv co v terénu existuje. A nabídky 
"něco za něco" nás nechávají chladnými. Resp.
trošku něketeré lidi popuzují. Je to jako by vám někdo nabídl, že vám do Punkvy 
vypustí splašky z autoservisu, ale jako
vstřícný krok vám posbírá odpadky po lese. To by se vám asi taky nelíbilo.

OSM mapa není jenom turistická mapa, ale používá ji široké spektrum lidí včetně 
jednotek integrovaného záchraného
systému, pro které může mít informace o existenci nebo neexistenci cesty cenu 
lidského života. Tady ani trochu
nepřeháním, takový případ máme dobře zdokumentovaný při zemětřesení v Nepálu.

S pozdravem
Miroslav Suchý

___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

2020-12-10 Thread Stefan Tauner

On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 14:44:44 +0100
Friedrich Volkmann  wrote:

> In OSM mappen wir keine Gesetze, sondern was wir vor Ort vorfinden.
> 
> Ohne Insiderwissen wissen wir nicht, wo der Privatgrund anfängt

Das Insiderwissen, das der Zaun und das Türl dort nicht in öffentlichem
Besitz ist. "OK". 
Diese dogmatische Sichtweise wirkt nicht besonders überzeugend auf mich.

Welchen Nachteil siehst du, wenn wir solche Fälle mit permissive taggen?

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

2020-12-10 Thread Tony Shield


/Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually banned?
/

Unfortunately yes - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/827379295

Quite clear signage - Mapillary - 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=53.66933432657343=-2.6290113968031967=17=_ir_HmYAIa4H0rnj1JrO8A=photo

//

When I walk there I take my chances on the illegal walking along a 
cycleway rather than the 50 mph dual carriageway where it is legal to walk.



Tony Shield - TonyS999

.

On 10/12/2020 12:47, Martin Wynne wrote:
My reasons for changing it, is that it is shared use path with a 
greater number of people of foot than bicycle (about 5:2)


Many public bridleways have many more walkers and cyclists using it 
than actual horse-riders. But are still mapped as bridleways.


Map it as a cycleway, unless it is a public bridleway, in which case 
map it as bridleway. You are mapping the status, not the actual usage.


My feeling is that a highway should be mapped at the highest level of 
permitted usage. The assumption is that pedestrians can go almost 
anywhere anyway. Motorways excepted.


Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually 
banned?


cheers,

Martin.

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Open Street Misogynie ?

2020-12-10 Thread Baptiste Lemoine - Cipher Bliss

> Aucune ne le fera - et pour cause: une femme qui s'en plaint sera étiquetée 
> emmerdeuse féministe. Ça fait partie du problème.

sauf si personne n'est là pour dire que le féminisme emmerde la communauté OSM, 
voire - syons fous - que c'est un combat qui est soutenu officiellement et que 
nous ne tolérerons pas les comportements qui iraient à l'encontre de cela.

> Si vous voulez avoir l’avis des intéressées, je vous invite à écouter le
podcast de l’émission Libre à Vous, sur le thème « Les femmes et
l’informatique » :
> https://www.april.org/libre-a-vous-diffusee-mardi-5-novembre-2019-sur-radio-cause-commune-les-femmes-et-l-informatique-goo

Dans une des émissions (que je recommande également, ça sort tous les Mardis) 
il y avait Catherine Dufour qui présentait son livre sur Ada Lovelace (la 
beauté des nombres), et d'autres qui parlaient de leur action pour inclure des 
femmes dans les métiers STEM, et que pour beaucoup de femmes qui ont souhaité 
poursuivre leur voie dans cette direction, c'était la façon dont leur père les 
avait encouragé et soutenu dans cette démarche qui avait joué le plus grand 
rôle.
Moi aussi j'ai une fille, et je compte bien l'encourager à explorer le domaine 
;)

On peut s'inspirer de ce que font le collectif Women Who Code aussi. Pourquoi 
pas faire des mapathons réservés aux femmes, ou pas forcément réservés mais 
indiquant que c'est le public cible?

Je sais que ça fait peur de se sentir exclu en tant qu'homme de quelque chose 
pour la première fois de sa vie, et qu'on peut trouver ça scandaleux, mais il 
faut voir que pour beaucoup de femmes, le meilleur moyen de ne pas du tout 
subir cette oppression quotidienne c'est de pouvoir d'abord se retrouver entre 
femmes.

Juste une idée comme ça.

Baptiste LEMOINE - Dirigeant de Cipher Bliss.com ,
---

Tel 0185461173  / Signal 0627130837 , Telegram: Tykayn , Mastodon: @tykayn, 
Riot: @tykaynchu:matrix.org N° SIRET: 79942416300035 GPG: 64A8 9B18 65E6 6523 
FD86 7CB5 8796 1FCA F978 54FF clé Duniter / Ğ1: 
8c4mVVPAHd4yLYcxWM4U8Z3zUb4WpRX1iGtX5T7tbEFE - tykayn

Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
Le jeudi 10 décembre 2020 14:20, Sébastien Dinot  a 
écrit :

> Bonjour à tous,
> 

> Christian Quest a écrit :
> 

> > Suis-je aveugle et sourd ?
> 

> Je n’ai pas le souvenir d’avoir été témoin de propos misogynes sur cette
> liste, mais je suis loin de lire tous les messages et force est de
> constater qu’OSM n’échappe pas aux stéréotypes du monde des technologies
> de l’information : je croise énormément moins de femmes que d’hommes sur
> les listes et les évènements OSM.
> 

> J’ai le souci de la mixité depuis longtemps, car quelques expériences
> m’ont convaincu que la mixité était préférable partout. J’ai aussi une
> fille et l’idée qu’elle ait à subir des comportements ou propos aussi
> odieux que déplacés que ceux dont témoignent certaines femmes dans leur
> travail ou ailleurs m’est insupportable. Je ne voudrais pas qu’un jour,
> à l’instar de Sarah Sharp, elle ait à claquer la porte d’un projet qui
> lui tient à cœur et où sa compétence est indiscutable, à cause de sa
> communauté de crétins.
> 

> Pour ma part, j’ai la chance de travailler dans une ESN qui compte 25 %
> de femmes, proportion qui tombe malheureusement à 20 % si on exclut les
> services transverses (RH, comptabilité, achats, service juridique,
> marketing...), et qui dégringole à 4 % si on ne considère que la filière
> des experts. Il y aurait là matière à une étude sociologique ! Il faut
> savoir que la moyenne dans les ESN est autour des 12 % et qu’elle tombe
> à 6 % dans les ESN spécialisées dans le logiciel libre (les SSLL). Là
> aussi, cela questionne...
> 

> Je ne connais pas la proportion de contributrices à OSM, mais j’ai
> l’impression que nous sommes dans la lignée des SSLL, voire qu'elles
> nous devancent. :(
> 

> Si vous voulez avoir l’avis des intéressées, je vous invite à écouter le
> podcast de l’émission Libre à Vous, sur le thème « Les femmes et
> l’informatique » :
> 

> https://www.april.org/libre-a-vous-diffusee-mardi-5-novembre-2019-sur-radio-cause-commune-les-femmes-et-l-informatique-goo
> 

> (l’émission dure 1h30, mais vous trouverez en bas de la page ci-dessus
> un lien vers la partie traitant spécifiquement du sujet).
> 

> Cette émission a nourri ma réflexion, même si je n'adhère pas à tout ce
> qui y est dit. J’ai trouvé intéressante la piste consistant à mettre
> plus en avant les femmes qui ont un profil technique (ou qui
> contribuent, c'est la même chose) pour rendre visibles des modèles
> auxquels les autres femmes, notamment les adolescentes, pourront
> s'identifier.
> 

> Sébastien
> 

>

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Mapbox-GL JS version 2: vers la fin de l'Opensource sur les tuiles vectorielles

2020-12-10 Thread Frédéric Rodrigo

Les choses avancent vite. De multiples forks ont été lancés, mais un 
consensus de regroupement a été obtenue autour du fork MapLibre.


Déclaration commune : 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UB8VJ6_vMD9Zxfem7cunwa_G-hXo_ZRY1IeF5iGlh4w/view


Une préversion renommée est déjà dispo.

https://github.com/maplibre/maplibre-gl-js




Le 08/12/2020 à 21:30, Frédéric Rodrigo a écrit :

Le 08/12/2020 à 21:15, osm.sanspourr...@spamgourmet.com a écrit :

> Cette annonce risque de refroidir un peu.

D'autant que Mapbox avait pris soin d'embaucher un développeur du libre
bien investi sur les tuiles vectorielles histoire s'assécher le marais.

Alors oui OpenLayers et Leaflet sont de bon candidats.


OpenLayers faut des tuiles vectorielles, et est même compatibles avec 
les styles de MapBox GL.


Mais Leaflet ne fait pas de vectoriel.

Il y aussi Tangram de mapzen et Harp.gl de HERE dans le paysage des 
tuiles vecto. Ils supportent les mêmes tuiles, mais pas les mêmes 
formats de style.



Tiens le développeur de Leaflet a aussi été recruté par MapBox (mais 
a fini par

refaire évoluer sa pile).


Le créateur de Leaflet et le Mapbox GL est la même personne : Vladimir 
Agafonkin.




Il serait intéressant de voir l'option que prennent les professionnels
qui utilisent de la tuile vectorielle.


Il sont bien embêté.



Je pense à MapTiler et d'un autre côté la position de
https://openmaptiles.org/ https://github.com/openmaptiles sera
intéressante


Il n'y a pas MapTiler d'un coté et OpenMapTiles de l'autre, c'est le 
même personnes.




(ils ont des SDK pour les clients Android et Apple basés
sur le SDK de MapBox).


Mapbox a déjà fait la même chose avec le SDK mobile. C'était attendu 
pour Mapbox GL JS... mais peut être pas aussi vite.





Jean-Yvon

Le 08/12/2020 à 18:36, Thomas Gratier - osgeo.mailingl...@gmail.com a
écrit :

Salut à tous,

La licence suite à la sortie de Mapbox-GL JS 2.0 change
https://github.com/mapbox/mapbox-gl-js/releases/tag/v2.0.0


Il va falloir envisager de passer à OpenLayers ou à une autre solution
apparemment. Je me trompe?
Avis? Réactions? Intéressé au regard des discussions pour avoir plus
de support des tuiles vectorielles dans OpenStreetMap, en particulier
au niveau des rendus. Cette annonce risque de refroidir un peu.


Cordialement

Thomas 





___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-at] Kartenhinweis ohne Ortsaugenschein aufgelöst

2020-12-10 Thread Friedrich Volkmann


On 10.12.20 13:49, Stefan Tauner wrote:

Berechtigungen nur dann taggen, wenn welche angeschrieben sind. Ist hier
nicht der Fall => foot=permissive bitte weglassen.


Wieso? Es ist ja offensichtlich so, dass das Privatgrund ist, aber
momentan keine rechtliche Einschränkung für Fußgänger besteht, weil der
Besitzer kein Schild aufgestellt hat. Er könnte aber jederzeit.
Du würdest dementsprechend nur mit permissive taggen, wenn dort explizit
steht "durchgang/zugang bis auf widerruf gestattet"? Ist das
rechtlich nicht equivalent?


In OSM mappen wir keine Gesetze, sondern was wir vor Ort vorfinden.

Ohne Insiderwissen wissen wir nicht, wo der Privatgrund anfängt und aufhört, 
ob das Türl absichtlich oder unabsichtlich unversperrt ist, ob der 
Eigentümer es mag, wenn Fremde durchgehen und auch nicht ob auf den 
Durchgang bereits ein Servitut besteht.


Wenn "bis auf Widerruf" steht, ist klar, dass ein Widerruf einzukalkulieren 
ist. Andernfalls müssen wir von dem ausgehen, was wir sehen. Also dass die 
Benutzung nicht verboten, somit erlaubt ist.


Natürlich kann der Besitzer das Türl jederzeit zusperren, genauso wie er auf 
seinem Grundstück neue Zäune aufstellen kann. Wenn so was passiert, müssen 
wir die OSM-Daten halt aktualisieren. Das bei jedem Weg präventiv zu taggen 
wäre übertrieben, so als würde man alle Gründflächen als landuse=greenfield 
taggen, weil ja vielleicht irgendwann in der Zukunft drauf gebaut wird.


--
Friedrich K. Volkmann   http://www.volki.at/
Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread arnalie faye vicario

Hello/kumusta,

What an overwhelming response! 

This is my first time to email thru the global osm talk; it really takes true 
grit to join the conversations, huge thanks to the people who inspired me and 
sparked the flame.

I will keep it short and redirect you to a (short) OSM Diary I wrote on Why 
WOMEN are pushing for a safe and inclusive space in OSM: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/arnalielsewhere/diary/395064

A slide from @mapmakerdavid states "it takes good relationships to navigate an 
ocean.”

=Arnalie

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 10, 2020, at 8:01 PM, James  wrote:
> 
> 
> > The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable fact.
> 
> >Right, this is true. Sadly true. Something I also know from Linux 
> >Communities and other Open Source/Open Data Communities.
> 
> Same in programming and IT fields, firefighters, mechanics, carpenters, 
> construction workers, taxi drivers, etc etc...
> 
> Now is it a simple lack of interest in the field? Gate keeping? 
> Discrimination/Sexism? Is it because of tradition that is still lingering?
> 
> We should work with other humans and see why as well as question ourselves 
> what can we do/change?
> 
> We should treat other fellow humans, despite sex, race or country of origin, 
> as we would want to be treated.
> 
> Would you like to be put down based on your employer, despite your knowledge? 
> Probably not, then don't do it
> 
> Would you like to be put down based on your genitalia, despite being quite 
> knowledgeable? No? Then don't do it.
> 
>> On Thu., Dec. 10, 2020, 6:38 a.m. tilmanreinecke--- via talk, 
>>  wrote:
>> > The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable fact.
>> 
>> Right, this is true. Sadly true. Something I also know from Linux 
>> Communities and other Open Source/Open Data Communities.
>> 
>> > The simplest explanation for this is the systematic institutional 
>> > hostility towards women in the OSM community.
>> 
>> I did not hear about something like that what can be called "systematic". 
>> Are you sure that we have something like that in OSM? If yes, then please 
>> point to where that happened. I am pretty sure that this is not something 
>> systematic. I know women not feeling this way as you because OpenStreetMap 
>> is an open and welcoming community.
>> 
>> Greetings
>> 
>> Sören
>> 
>> 
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive 
>> Behavior in the OSM Community
>> From: Clay Smalley 
>> To: Celine Jacquin 
>> CC: osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org,osm 
>> 
>> 
>> I'm noticing a pattern here in the replies to this email:
>> 
>> Only men have replied. This is, unfortunately, par for the course on the OSM 
>> mailing lists. The lack of discussion by non-men is an undeniable fact. The 
>> simplest explanation for this is the systematic institutional hostility 
>> towards women in the OSM community. The replies themselves are the best 
>> evidence of this.
>> 
>> These men replying have taken it upon themselves to explain to a woman what 
>> constitutes misogyny. News flash: you do not get to decide what offends 
>> other people. If you are a man, misogyny will never happen to you by 
>> definition. If you are a man, you have never been, are not, and will never 
>> be a victim of misogyny. This isn't your area of expertise. Listen to the 
>> experts.
>> 
>> Some men replying have even mentioned how this draft letter hurts their 
>> feelings. These men need to slow down and consider for a moment that their 
>> temporarily hurt feelings are less important than the safety of women. Men's 
>> feelings are irrelevant to issues where women are victims.
>> 
>> As far as I know, various OSM-affiliated groups have codes of conduct, but 
>> there isn't one governing these mailing lists. We need to adopt a code of 
>> conduct yesterday.
>> 
>> -Clay (they/them)
>> 
>>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:13 PM Celine Jacquin  wrote:
>>> Hello everybody
>>> I hope you are all well
>>> 
>>> We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted 
>>> to the conversation in the osm-talk-list 
>>> (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html) 
>>> considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced 
>>> for many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to 
>>> diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
>>> That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable 
>>> mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve 
>>> diversity.
>>> 
>>> We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to 
>>> sign it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome): 
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On behalf of the signatories
>>> Best regards
>>> 
>>> Céline Jacquin
>>> ___
>>> talk mailing

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Jiri Vlasak

My bad. This was meant to HOT mailing list [1]. Sorry.

[1]: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/2020-December/015409.html

jiri

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

2020-12-10 Thread Jiri Vlasak

For the ones who are interested in the whole discussion:

- talk mailing list archive:

- https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085736.html

- osmf-talk mailing list archive:

- 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2020-December/007541.html
- 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2020-December/007523.html
- 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2020-December/007530.html

Links to archived messages in Dec 2020:

- https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/thread.html
- https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2020-December/thread.html

jiri

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [talk-cz] Změny v mapě pro ochranu přírody