On Thursday 21 May 2009, Guenther Meyer wrote:
relations are one of only three basic structures in OSM (node - way
- relation), can we please assume that someone mapping with OSM can
grasp three concepts? He already should be able to deal with them
now anyway.
they are, but at least for
On Thursday 21 May 2009, Mario Salvini wrote:
Even every relevant road for _ONE_ city in one relation won't work,
because the membercount of a relation is limited since API 0.6.
This methode won't create any benefit.
Well, apparently it isn't limited, and luckily it isn't. It would be an
On Thursday 21 May 2009, Radomir Cernoch wrote:
Ben Laenen píše v Čt 21. 05. 2009 v 17:54 +0200:
So while it seems to be a polygon vs tags on ways discussion:
I wonder what people have against using relations to combine all
roads in one built-up area, or one maxspeed zone, or some other
On Thursday 21 May 2009, you wrote:
On 21 May 2009, at 18:17, Ben Laenen wrote:
On Thursday 21 May 2009, Mario Salvini wrote:
Even every relevant road for _ONE_ city in one relation won't
work, because the membercount of a relation is limited since API
0.6. This methode won't create any
On Friday 22 May 2009, Andy Allan wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com
wrote:
A typical city here would look like all roads inside the built-up
area inside one relation, and when there are roads inside it with
another speed limit, tag those ways
On Friday 22 May 2009, you wrote:
See if you think that my stuff was about rendering, then you are
missing the point. It's all about data processing. Even the bit about
translucent colouring is not about rendering (that's easy -
opacity=0.7) it's about *processing* (unwinding relations into
On Friday 22 May 2009, you wrote:
For years and years of my professional career I had to listen to the
stuff people (my customers) spouted about gathering data yet then had
absolutely no real idea of how it would be used. That was some magic
computers worked. Processing the data (of which
On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 09:56:42AM +0200, Ivan Garcia wrote:
Hi Peter, which your approach, I believe that the render by osm
will be the same than a normal residential street
No, I guess, it will have a red dashed transparent line drawn over
On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Paul Johnson wrote:
Ben Laenen wrote:
It's clearly a public road so you shouldn't use highway=service
here.
Alleyways are clearly public roads, and those are highway=service
service=alley...
But I think there's a big difference in alleys that should be tagged
On Thursday 28 May 2009, you wrote:
Ben Laenen wrote:
It's clearly a public road so you shouldn't use highway=service
here.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway says about
highway=service: Generally for access to a building, motorway
service station, beach, campsite, industrial
Xav wrote:
Hi all,
On this page :
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmotorway_link
it is implicitly written that the ref of a link should be the reference
of the road from which the link depends. For example, a motorway_link
to/from the motorway A 1 will be referenced as A 1.
Hi,
can someone look at the svg rendering on the wiki? There are currently two
problems with it:
* they aren't rendered with a transparent background anymore (this used to be
the case until some time ago)
* the image page for some reason sometimes thinks the rendered image is a bit
smaller
Tyler wrote:
Rendering of SVG is done in browser,
No it isn't (here), it's done on the server by MediaWiki: it takes an svg and
converts it to png (using rsvg or some other program on the server) when the
image appears on a page, and it sends the png to the browser. The image used
on
Peter Childs wrote:
2009/7/10 Stanislav Brabec u...@penguin.cz:
Hallo.
Is there a way how to map a street with access=destination valid just
only for one direction? In the reverse direction it is a standard drive
through street.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/30764132
The
Simon Wood wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 12:14:45 +0200
Ivo van den Maagdenberg ivo.vdmaagdenb...@gmail.com wrote:
Just noticed a marked scenic route for cars. Any suggestions for the
route tag fort the relation that could mark this kind of routes?
name=..., type=route, route=car
I have
Joseph Booker wrote:
It is still a route through (several?) roads though. The 'network' key
allows you to differentiate between E-roads, tourists routes, other
country route numbers, etc.
With that argument you should also tag bus, cycle and walking routes with
route=road.
I don't want to
How do you select the people in the working group? You might have dozens of
people interested to do some work, so who would choose the lucky ones, and
how would it be done without dropping into some popularity contest? Or would
you allow competing working groups working on the same problem?
Ulf Lamping wrote:
Liz schrieb:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Nop wrote:
You cannot force anything but you can discourage putting presets for
disputed tags in editors (if it is frowned upon as some sort of indirect
vandalism and rolled back) and you can make an organised effort to bring
a newly
Greg Troxel wrote:
John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com writes:
It's most likely going to have to be jurisdiction specific, not just
country specific in some instances. Going the other way and dealing
with footway for example, NSW Vic doesn't allow cyclists on
footpaths, but ACT does.
filip wolters wrote:
Neen, ik begrijp het niet meer.
In onderstaande link zie je dat voor bv. een cinema alleen een node kan
gebruikt worden. En een plaats om een auto te huren kunnen zowel met node
als area gemaakt worden. Waar zit de logica en waar vind ik een plaats waar
alles goed
Vincent MEURISSE wrote:
On Thursday 20 August 2009 12:28:07 pm Ben Laenen wrote:
Ach, dat is inderdaad niet erg consequent gedocumenteerd, maar wat die
map features pagina ook zegt, voor alles van
shop/amenity/sport/nog_een_paar dat je op een node kan zetten, kan je ook
op een polygoon
Roland Olbricht wrote:
I suppose this brings up all the stuff about path tagging again, but, how
do people in general tag vague, ill-defined countryside paths?
The sort of things I'm talking about are either very narrow and
occasionally hard to follow paths through woods, or, firebreaks
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2009/8/30 Christoph Eckert c...@christeck.de:
If a car can use it, it's a track, not a path.
+1
Anyway, I have removed motorcar from the list of options, as tagwatch
does not show significant use (10 times motorcar=no in Europe). If the
removal triggers some
Emilie Laffray wrote:
2009/9/11 Valent Turkovic valent.turko...@gmail.com
Hi there,
I'm wondering how to map different quarters of some city, town and
villages.
Currently on wiki I only found place=suburb tag and I see that it is used
also for mapping city's quarters.
Only issue
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2009/10/10 OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com:
multiple plans would overlap each other and look weird?
look weird where? I guess these would not be rendered in standard maps
(or just in advanced planning phases and for main plans like
motorways, airports, etc.).
I
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2009/10/12 Ben Laenen benlae...@gmail.com:
I made a proposal:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:planned
So what's the difference with highway=proposed + proposed=...?
I can't seem to find the wiki page, but highway=proposed is already in
use and it's
Richard Mann wrote:
If there's a lane in the wrong direction, that'll be marked (as being on
both sides). If there's a separate track adjacent to the road, that'll be
marked. But cycle tracks don't get marked if they are attached to the road
(so cycleway=track and cycleway=opposite don't get
Tobias Knerr wrote:
Imo, this shouldn't be considered in isolation. There's a whole lot of
situations where the value for a key, such as oneway, maxspeed,
maxweight, access, is different depending on vehicle or other conditions
- a common example is maxspeed:hgv (note that nobody is using
Tobias Knerr wrote:
Ben Laenen wrote:
So that's completely incorrect, bicycle:oneway=no already appeared on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Access_restrict
ions a long time before the extended conditions for access tags proposal
was created (although, indeed
On Sunday 14 September 2008, Gervase Markham wrote:
Shaun McDonald wrote:
The nonames map is hosted by CloudMade, we update them from the
planet file each week. The updates typically appear on a Thursday.
What is the official way (read: way that the map will recognise) of
marking a road to
ot;;
google_ad_width = 160;
google_ad_height = 600;
google_ad_format = "160x600_as";
google_ad_channel = "8427791634";
google_color_border = "FF";
google_color_bg = "FF";
google_color_link = "006792";
google_color_url = "006792";
go
On Thursday 02 October 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
Matthias Julius wrote:
I don't. I think it follows the principle of least surprise
better if implied values don't change too much.
Great, then we should leave this as-is (implied oneway=yes for
motorway_link)
That would work if it weren't
On Thursday 02 October 2008, Alex Mauer wrote:
Ben Laenen wrote:
There are three options:
1. make no assumptions: This means every single motorway_link
needs to have a oneway=yes or oneway=no (or oneway=-1). A pain
for taggers, and doesn't help makers of routing applications who
still
Hi all,
just a little question about recent Potlatch versions: I've noticed that
from time to time changes are uploaded while objects are still
selected. I remember that it used to be that it only uploaded changes
on deselecting.
So, when does it exactly upload changes now? I used to find it
On Sunday 12 October 2008, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Ben Laenen wrote:
just a little question about recent Potlatch versions: I've noticed
that
from time to time changes are uploaded while objects are still
selected. I remember that it used to be that it only uploaded
changes
On Tuesday 14 October 2008, Stefan Monnier wrote:
Tagging a road as something implies certain rules, surely, and only
when those rules are different from the standard (for that country)
should you need to say so. Same as the oneway=no discussion that
went on previously.
All those
On Friday 17 October 2008, Gert Gremmen wrote:
In general roads have been drawn too wide.
While it is difficult to draw roads on scale
in terms of width, the new mapnik style is too wide.
Since we're now discussing some mapnik style changes, here are some:
* You should render tunnels (or
On Friday 17 October 2008, Tristan Scott wrote:
righto; votes cleared. proposal modified. new vote set in a week's
time.
I'm not keen on the enforcement direction being forwards and
backwards. I can think of examples:
* Common mobile station on a bridge - on a way which has no relation
to
Hi all,
I'm wondering what in English language the exact difference is between
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:amenity=pub and
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:amenity=cafe
I always thought they were the same thing... So, how do you decide
whether a place is a café or
On Saturday 18 October 2008, Pete Lawrence wrote:
Hello,
Pubs tend to be more centred around alcoholic drinks, typically
busiest during the evenings. Whereas cafe's tend to be more centred
around food during the day time. In the UK it is pretty easy to
distinguish between the two,
On Wednesday 22 October 2008, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
vegard wrote:
Is it really so important for the map to look the same in Chile
and in China?
Of course not, green trunk roads and blue motorways don't make a lot of
sense in 99% of the world. It makes
On Friday 07 November 2008, Nic Roets wrote:
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Ben Laenen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thursday 06 November 2008, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
I like this idea of having country specific presets in the
editors instead of having renderers to be country sprecific
On Thursday 06 November 2008, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
JOSM could be extended to ask in the install : are you mapping in
Germany or in Italy ?
If germany, a track could be recorded as :
highway=track
motorcar=no
In Italy, a track could be recorded as :
highway=track
motocar=yes
I
On Monday 24 November 2008, David Earl wrote:
I'm also reconsidering adding in as well as near (and comma) as
the separator. The problem is that there are a couple of place names
in England which have In in their names - Henley-In-Arden for
example. (A second problem is that since it works
On Tuesday 02 December 2008, Gustav Foseid wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:14 PM, David Earl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
I think we could do with a richer hierarchy something like this:
metropolis 500,000
city 100,000
large_town 25,000? 40,000?
town 10,000
On Tuesday 09 December 2008, Christoph Eckert wrote:
Hi,
But meanwhile - mostly because it is so easy to do in JOSM - many
people simply tag the whole shebang (addr:country, addr:town,
addr:post_code, addr:street, addr:house_number) onto every house
node.
though I attended the workshop
Hi all,
can someone please fix this up:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28575357
it's a deleted way which is still belonging to two relations
The theory on how it happened is this: We were fixing up a relation with
two people at the same time in Potlatch, and when moyogo deleted a
On Wednesday 17 December 2008, Elena of Valhalla wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Peter Miller
peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote:
I wound be very interested to see the first time that a transport
authority took a person to court for promoting their services but
there may be a first
On Sunday 21 December 2008, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
OJ W wrote:
Doesn't layer=-1 mean that something should be 'below' the landuse
polygons when rendering? So if you have a river at level=-1 on a
landuse=farm, then you will never see the river because it's under
the (default layer=0)
On Thursday 08 January 2009, Patrick Kilian wrote:
Hi,
The last days the administrative boundaries have been disappearing
and re-appearing on the t...@h tiles on new renderings, and now it
seems like they're not re-appearing anymore. Can this be looked
into?
This in an intentional
On Tuesday 13 January 2009, Ed Loach wrote:
the parentheses around Oman should be reversed.
problem in the UTF8 shaper (or lack thereof) ?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=22.08lon=59.1zoom=6layers=
B000FTF
It looks like they were removed yesterday from the node which I'm
guessing is
On Saturday 31 January 2009, Lester Caine wrote:
Marc Schütz wrote:
4) Split the roundabout as needed, tag all parts as
junction=roundabout (don't use a roundabout relation), and add only
the needed parts into the route.
5) Properly define a relation so that it does not need to know every
On Sunday 08 February 2009, Gary68 wrote:
in europe there are 202 ways with more than 1950 nodes. complete
lists can be found here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/SomeChecks
or the europe file directly:
http://www.gary68.de/osm/qa/some/len_europe.htm
Does this suggest that there will be
On Sunday 08 February 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
It will be a 2000 node limit. It is now quickly documented at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.6#New_Limit
s
OK, as long as there's no limit on the number of relation members, I'm
happy :-)
Ben
On Sunday 08 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Ben Laenen wrote:
OK, as long as there's no limit on the number of relation members,
I'm happy :-)
I'm pretty sure there will be, it is not implemented yet but I
believe we said it would be 1.000. Relations with more members become
Did someone break the boundary rendering on the Mapnik layers?
It looks like all boundary relations on a given way are now rendering,
and that means that if two or more relations for different admin_levels
are on one way, different kinds of borders are rendered on top of each
other.
I guess
On Wednesday 18 February 2009, Ben Laenen wrote:
Did someone break the boundary rendering on the Mapnik layers?
It looks like all boundary relations on a given way are now
rendering, and that means that if two or more relations for different
admin_levels are on one way, different kinds
It looks like we finally got some kind of License plan for the step
towards the new license, so everyone check
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Implementation_Plan
Let me start with the obvious questions first:
* why don't you split between the votes whether you like
On Friday 27 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
I'll comment on various other aspects later but:
Ben Laenen wrote:
And what with the countless relations? If there's one way added to
it by someone that didn't give approval, the only thing you can do
is remove the relation
On Friday 27 February 2009, Peter Miller wrote:
Would it be appropriate to continue this conversation on legal-talk?
Talk is very busy at the moment and we have a lovely list of our own
:)
I think this discussion is important enough to take place on the talk
mailing list. If it's held on the
On Friday 27 February 2009, Grant Slater wrote:
Read the full announcement in all its glory:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-February/001
958.html
Discussion is best on legal-talk or the avenues as per announcement.
I keep disagreeing. This is important enough to be
On Friday 27 February 2009, Dave Stubbs wrote:
And even if you take the ultra cautious approach and say all edits
are deserving of copyright protection, you can still draw a line
around minor edits both temporal and spatial ie: a single edit can
only possibly infect edits made after it, and
On Friday 27 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Lambertus wrote:
If we change to the new license then do we have a tool available
that will remind me of the bits that are going to be rolled back
because of my contribution being dependent on someone who did not
agree to the license? I
On Friday 27 February 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Ben Laenen wrote:
I care about whether the database will still
be clean after a possible change (meaning, properly licensed).
The current license is anything but properly licensed.
At least it's under one license, and no-one questions
On Friday 27 February 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Ben Laenen wrote:
As long as there's no answer to it [...]
I wouldn't even accept [...]
I would refuse [...]
I want a very detailed answer [...]
that's really not my concern [...]
Hey, this is a collaborative project. No-one
On Saturday 28 February 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
My hope basically when starting this thread was that these
fundamental issues would have been cleared up by now in
legal-talk or wherever since you now made the schedule available.
Seriously - who is this you?!!!
With you I mean the
On Wednesday 04 March 2009, Ed Avis wrote:
The only sound rule that can be sure to stand up in court is to
delete all data from the contributors who didn't give explicit
permission, and all data that depends on it. Period.
I agree that the only legal sound way to do it is by removing all
On Thursday 05 March 2009, SteveC wrote:
On 4 Mar 2009, at 23:51, Nop wrote:
2. Provide translations of this in the major languages. Most
people speak English to some degree, but some don't and something
of this importance and with so much legalese involved does need
to be in your
On Wednesday 11 March 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
It has been pointed out that Steve, apart from being a CM manager, is
also the founder of the project and thus has to juggle various roles.
Please then accept that besides running Geofabrik, I, too, am an
active member of the OSM community and
Will it be recorded?
On Saturday 14 March 2009, Mike Collinson wrote:
This is an informal discussion about the ODbL license and adoption
process where anyone can dial in on a phone.
It's at 3pm UK time (15:00 GMT/UTC) on Saturday and will be held in
English. Call one of the numbers at
On Saturday 14 March 2009, Pierre-André Jacquod wrote:
Hi,
great stuff...
With my first go a couple of weeks back for 8 languages I did do
fallback to at least 'name' using views as suggested on the wiki,
setting this up for 40 languages however was somewhat less trivial
and I felt that
It looks like the t...@h rendering is horribly broken since yesterday. When
tiles are updated only a tiny amount of features are still rendered,
and the rest is just a gray field. For example
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.3755lon=4.3508zoom=12layers=0B00FTF
Is this in the process of
On Thursday 26 March 2009, Richard Mann wrote:
I thought a quick tagwatch of footway/path/bridleway/cycleway might
be pertinent.
Europe: footway 556k - cycleway 166k - path 66k - bridleway 11k
Germany: footway 268k - cycleway 57k - path 45k - bridleway 1k
Netherlands: footway 19k - cycleway
On Sunday 26 April 2009, Tobias Knerr wrote:
Renaud MICHEL schrieb:
I didn't find an answer in the wiki, how should I tag roads that
are one way for motorized vehicles but two way for bicycle?
The documented and established way to do so is
oneway=yes + cycleway=opposite,
see
On Wednesday 29 April 2009, Tobias Knerr wrote:
Kurt Roeckx schrieb:
I'm looking for a way to map restrictions for a zone. This
includes things like maxspeed, maxweight and parking restriction.
I want to avoid having to place those tags on all the roads inside
the zone, specially for
On Thursday 30 April 2009, you wrote:
So you assume that well-designed, liberally licensed (!= GPL) Open
Source libraries will exist for all major programming languages and
platforms soon? Well, until then, I'll continue to assume that the
goal of OSM data being used in creative and unexpected
On Thursday 30 April 2009, Andy Allan wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Richard Mann
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com wrote:
I'd support that highway=path needs to be rendered in the cycle map
layer, especially now it's becoming clearer how it's being used
Every time it gets
On Tuesday 05 May 2009, Emilie Laffray wrote:
What might be interesting and worth a discussion: A tag to describe
the default language of this object, e.g. language=en. This could
als be several tags, e.g.
name=België - Belgique - Belgien
name:nl=België
name:fr=Belgique
On Thursday 07 May 2009, Maarten Deen wrote:
That still does not solve completely the problem in dual-language
areas like Brussels, but there both local names are in the name tag
(as both local names are on street signs).
Streets in Brussels are almost all tagged with both name:nl and name:fr
On Thursday 07 May 2009, Tal wrote:
Imagine that you plan a business trip to Tel-Aviv and want to print
yourself a map of the city. Or maybe you'll be spending a week in
Cairo. Can you not see the benefit in having a map with the street
names in a different language than the one on the sign?
Quick question for which I didn't find an answer in the wiki:
* is there a maximum length of tags (keys and/or values)? (I'm sure there was
one, but I don't know if there's still a limit today)
* if there is, what is it (and is in it number of bytes, or number of
characters)?
Greetings
Ben
Steve Bennett wrote:
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
I don't why he feels the need to do this, it seems a pointless task, but
why do you think it reduces accuracy to remove trailing zeros?
2m =2.0m
It reduces *indication of accuracy*.
There's a
Chris Hunter wrote:
According to the WIKI and some discussions back in April (
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2009-April/000976.html)
and again in September (
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2009-September/001597.html
), the US Interstate system was going
Andrew Gregory wrote:
I'd been thinking for a long time that the OSM wiki needed a table with
some common street name abbreviations (if it exists, I can't find it).
When I started surveying I kept on finding weird abbreviations that took
some searching to figure out (all the other online maps
Felix Hartmann wrote:
If in OSM we really want to get in more mountainbikers, we have to start
with unofficial routes. I will think about it for the night, and put up
a wiki page tomorrow, put some notices on this on the big forums
(hopefully they will get ~5000 pageviews, put them in my
Felix Hartmann wrote:
On 03.05.2010 21:47, Ben Laenen wrote:
Here's the thing: we just do not map unofficial routes. Only the ones
that are signposted. There are enough sites where you can submit your
route suggestions, and there's no reason why this should be in the OSM
database.
Well
On Monday 12 March 2012 20:06:13 Alex Barth wrote:
- Is there an official database rebuild schedule and where can I find it?
- Until when exactly will the pre-license change OSM database be available?
While we're on the subject: is the algorithm that determines which objects
will be deleted or
On Thursday 26 July 2012 11:48:39 Jo wrote:
Anyway, as far as OSM goes, it's the first mapper who maps something who
decides on which order is being used.
Slightly more difficult: It's true that the first mapper decides for the
region of Brussels-capital, which is bilingual. But in the
On Friday 27 July 2012 04:56:43 Tirkon wrote:
Rue de
Quelque Chose
Iets
straat
With names it can be compacted as
Avenue
John Doe
laan
For me as a non native dutch/french this looks obfuscating.
Is this the way you find it on the streetname-signs
Is there a way to see the proposed colour changes for someone who isn't colour
blind and can't take the test?
Ben
On Sunday 07 October 2012 15:54:02 johannes.kroe...@hcu-hamburg.de wrote:
Hi there,
I am a geomatics student currently working on my bachelor thesis (in
Germany, not sure how
Maarten Deen wrote:
As highway=path means no motorized traffic, it might be a footpath or
cyclepath or bridleway (or others). That's the more specific part.
highway=path doesn't mean no motorized traffic, if means no wide vehicles.
So no cars, but mopeds are still allowed.
Greetings
Ben
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Kai Krueger kakrue...@gmail.com wrote:
with all the talk about imports recently, I am wondering which countries
have actually _not_ seen any imports so far? I.e. which communities have
chosen to build all their data from traditional surveying and ignored any
Ed Avis wrote:
Patrick Kilian osm at petschge.de writes:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bruxelles-Brussel.jpg
See two names on the ground.
To me that would suggest putting the French name into 'name'
I suggest you don't, or you'd end up in an edit war otherwise. Linguistic
issues
Toby Murray wrote:
In my area it looks like a couple of small rural grass strips was
added. The hospital helipad was initially duplicated but then
re-deleted in a subsequent changeset by the same user. So it looks
like there was at least SOME attempt at de-duplicating things, even if
it was
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Thomas Davie wrote:
Because it will show the genuine trend – at the moment, a quick glance at
the graph would suggest that the no vote is expanding at the same rate,
and at the same level as the yes vote. I agree that we can't clearly
show that they're not at the
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
To all active members of OSM !
I found that only 250 or so OSM contributors out of 250.000
are actually members of OSMF.
That is about 0.1 %.
Nevertheless it's that 0.1 % that actually decides what will
happen with OSM in the close
Dermot McNally wrote:
On 10 June 2011 22:16, TimSC mappingli...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
I think you are confusing support the relicense with accept the
relicense and that difference is significant.
Not at all - I know of no form of democracy that distinguishes between
grudging
Richard Weait wrote:
After careful consideration, effective immediately Mikel Maron, Andy
Robinson and Mike Collinson have access to the moderation system
across the main OSM mailing lists. They will use their best judgment
according to the a
On Sunday 08 February 2015 13:55:04 Glenn Plas wrote:
I'm being paid to keep ArcelorMittal site in Zelzate up to date, I
actually receive detailed plans from AM to accomplish this. Especially
all their emergency exist are very important to them.
Ah, I was wondering when I was redrawing all
Dit zijn stukjes over pleinen waar enkele routes over gaan, je kan moeilijk
het hele plein toevoegen omdat je dan de exacte route verliest, en aangezien
er niets verschillend in realiteit is kan je er ook niet echt een
highway=footway of pedestrian aan geven. Vandaar dus route=foot/bicycle, en
301 - 400 of 523 matches
Mail list logo
