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

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

Re: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network removal/reclassification

On 8/13/2020 3:41 PM, Simon Still wrote: Width of cycleyway is definitely useful if separated from traffic but some way of reflecting the comfort of the riding experience on marked routes would be a big step forward. Traffic Volumes,. Lane widths, traffic speed all contribute (as does

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On 17-Mar-20 02:08, Warin wrote: A single GPS trace is fine if that is all there is, better to average many GPS traces, in some locations I have 50+. Though, AIUI, once you've reached this level of precision, remaining errors are likely to be systematic (e.g. satellites in a particular

Re: [Talk-GB] What is farmland?

On 14-Dec-19 16:52, SK53 wrote: Like Dave I have come to the view that mapping individual fields as farmland is a good way to do it. I too concur. Here's the diary entry I wrote when I was doing the fields round here... https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jpsa/diary/17738 Cheers, John

Re: [Talk-GB] Common Land has stopped rendering

On 16-Mar-19 13:23, SK53 wrote: No, Carto is just one way of viewing OSM data. It has a small number of maintainers and although highly visible does not represent any 'official' view. Yes and no. For many people, the *point* of OSM is that it's a better version of Google maps. If data is

Re: [Talk-GB] We're missing changes to M1 Junction 36 which have apparently been in place for a year.

On 11-Feb-19 09:37, Paul Berry wrote: However I'm not overly keen on attempting to map the confluence of four major roads on foot. What have others done in similar circumstances? Driving round the roads with a GPSr in the car should get good enough data to be going on with. -- Cheers, John

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map houses

On 27-Nov-18 11:50, Lester Caine wrote: On 27/11/2018 11:40, John Aldridge wrote: It would be useful if there was a means of splitting buildings in the editor(s). I'm probably in a minority here, but since the mapper usually can't tell how the building is divided internally, it's more honest

Re: [Talk-GB] How to map houses

It would be useful if there was a means of splitting buildings in the editor(s). I'm probably in a minority here, but since the mapper usually can't tell how the building is divided internally, it's more honest to leave the building undivided and put the housenumber etc. tags on nodes on the

Re: [Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

I'd like to register a +1 in favour of accepting these historic counties. I *generally* agree with your principle of 'only mapping what is on the ground', but if we followed that strictly we wouldn't map current administrative boundaries either. These historic counties do, rightly or wrongly,

Re: [Talk-GB] Implicit speed limits: What to tag in built-up areas?

On 02-May-18 11:55, Philip Barnes wrote: I believe it's DoT policy not to allow 30mph repeaters (at least, someone told me that). True for roads with street lighting, but quite common, and required, on 30 mph roads with no street lights. Ah, yes, thank you (both) for the clarification.

Re: [Talk-GB] Implicit speed limits: What to tag in built-up areas?

On 01-May-18 16:29, Philip Barnes wrote: And yes, you may have to go back several roads before you see the speed limit sign. No all local authorities put up the repeater signs but that doesn't mean that the speed limit stops applying. And 30mph limits don't need repeaters, for example it is

Re: [Talk-GB] Public Rights of Way data for Cambridgeshire

One bit of feedback, from a first try at doing this for real: footpaths often cross parish boundaries, and at least in this area change their reference when they do so. But your slippy map only displays geometry for a single parish at a time, meaning that tracking the prow_ref value for the

Re: [Talk-GB] Public Rights of Way data for Cambridgeshire

On 11-May-17 00:20, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: The presence of prow_ref=* tags to allow matching with official data is almost non-existent.) So what's the best way to fix this? If I click on your map, it shows me something like Teversham FP 3 (MS: 0 | ΔL/L: —) which is a bit

Re: [Talk-GB] Propose automated edit to update NAPTAN data in the west mids

On 03-Feb-17 17:52, Brian Prangle wrote: In line with the automated edits policy there's a wikipage with full details I realise that this proposal is only for West Midlands, but if it were extended nationwide, I'd

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly task

Perhaps also worth trying to get the flow direction right. http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=water can be helpful here. -- Cheers, John On 04-Jan-17 15:22, Andy Townsend wrote: On 03/01/2017 22:34, Rob Nickerson wrote: Water sounds good. ... and to me too - in fact it's what I've been

Re: [Talk-GB] access:psv

On 13-Oct-16 18:51, Chris Hill wrote: I have written about this process more than once in the past, for example http://chris-osm.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/homogenised-data-no-thanks.html I agree with this... any formal tagging schema is going to end up obstructing useful mapping of circumstances

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

On 10-Oct-16 20:26, Dan S wrote: Really sorry for the stupid question, but: what is a participant in this quarterly project actually supposed to *do*? I asked a similar question a week or so ago. From the responses I got, I don't think there is a single shared vision of the goals of this

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

On 02-Oct-16 17:30, SK53 wrote: My personal rules on this have always been two independent sources of information OR a survey... FHRS data should contain full address details most of the time, so there should be no need to add anything from the website other than the url... By url do you

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

On 02-Oct-16 10:32, Jez Nicholson wrote: I have added the page to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Project I'm not quite clear what the concrete goals are here: is it just to add fhrs:id and addr:postcode tags to relevant establishments (and perhaps to map those

Re: [Talk-GB] Summer quarterly project

On 11-Sep-16 18:45, Brian Prangle wrote: Only a couple of weeks left - time to start thinking about our next quarterly project... Speed limits? There've been a whole lot of changes round here -- mostly new 20 mph limits -- recently! -- Cheers, John

Re: [Talk-GB] Does "Great Britain" need a relation with "place=island" on it?

On 18-Aug-16 14:47, Craig Wallace wrote: The Garmin maps is another question. They seem to label the whole area with the island name, which is often unhelpful and confusing, even for smaller islands. Probably better just to have a label in the middle of the island, or on the coast. If anyone

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project April-June 2016

On 01-Apr-16 13:06, Steve Doerr wrote: On 01/04/2016 11:51, Ed Loach wrote: With noon rapidly approaching I'll withdraw my earlier suggestion regarding deleting sadly-lacking-in-information buildings as part of a future project. LOL. Brilliant! Took me in. Doh! Me too! -- Cheers, John

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project April-June 2016

On 01-Apr-16 11:51, Ed Loach wrote: With noon rapidly approaching I'll withdraw my earlier suggestion regarding deleting sadly-lacking-in-information buildings as part of a future project. In my earlier reply I should have said that the general principle of a quarterly project to add

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project April-June 2016

On 01-Apr-16 08:30, Ed Loach wrote: I was thinking of a different possible project which perhaps we can postpone until a different quarter rather than starting today. There are a lot of buildings which have been traced from various imagery layers but with no other useful information on them. Is

Re: [Talk-GB] Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

On 29-Mar-16 10:19, Rob Nickerson wrote: Should we attempt to include everything that is in the open data datasets plus our on the ground additions (manually or, unless we suddenly get many more mappers, by some form of controlled merge) or should we leave the end users with the task of mixing

Re: [Talk-GB] Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

On 26-Mar-16 06:30, Rob Nickerson wrote: >And there seems to be some more >open data on the way from the OS. Interesting. A good opportunity but maybe also a threat - I wonder what quality of map can now be produced from OGL and other open data and how that compares to OSM. We already have

Re: [Talk-GB] Pubs as areas: should be map the property or the building?

On 14-Mar-16 10:43, Stuart Reynolds wrote: The one pub that I plotted, I added when I was doing a couple of nearby schools and noticed that it was missing. I used exactly the same principle as for the schools - an outer “amenity=pub” polygon and an inner “building=pub” for the actual building.

Re: [Talk-GB] place=village/town/city

On 15-Feb-16 13:48, Colin Smale wrote: And would this mean that St Davids is place=town, place:designation=city or the other way round? I have no axe to grind here (the city I live near has a population >100,000 anyway), but if the former, I suspect the residents of St David's would not be

Re: [Talk-GB] Additional Tagging Suggestions for Schools

On 12-Feb-16 20:22, Lester Caine wrote: On 12/02/16 19:34, John Aldridge wrote: On 12-Feb-16 17:31, Lester Caine wrote: I adopted the standard of official_name=xxx where the edubase listing differs from the signage or other local 'format'... I'm not objecting, but why did you feel you wanted

Re: [Talk-GB] UK style rendering port ...

I hope this can be done, too, if it makes it easier to be much more responsive about making the renderer respect best UK tagging practice. One of the reasons, IMO, that its difficult to prevent people tagging for the renderer, is that there currently seems to be little attempt, when a tagging

Re: [Talk-GB] Postbox refs

On 03/04/2015 18:49, Rob Nickerson wrote: Hi, I've noticed recently that postbox references have started appearing with a D on the end (same ref as before just with a D added to the end). This seems to be in areas where RM have updated the collection times. Does anyone know what the D means?

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Projects Update

On 03/04/2015 15:55, Colin Smale wrote: So now instead of having two versions of the name (1. according to the council and 2. according to the sign) we are to have a third version, according to OSM? That's not what I meant, unless I've misunderstood you. There's the definitive name according

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Projects Update

On 03/04/2015 14:59, Colin Smale wrote: Why not tag both spelling variants? They are both correct in their own frame of reference. If it differs to what is on the ground, we can use official_name=* for the name given by the local authority, warts an' all. I wouldn't have a problem with this

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Projects Update

On 03/04/2015 13:43, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: While I'm here, one thing it might be good to discuss in relation to this project is how best to tag some of the different types of delivery/collection infrastructure... I had a go a while ago at working out what the consensus was on

Re: [Talk-GB] Advice on footpaths - when should they be separate, when not?

On 01/12/2014 11:39, Stuart Reynolds wrote: Looking for some advice in Bletchley, specifically, but to answer a more general point about footpaths. : So what is the guidance here? Ought the road have a distinct footpath both sides? Or not footpath, and use the tags on the road, or just

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

On 31/10/2014 22:51, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Dear all, Voting is now open for the proposal to unify the names of chain shops within the UK by renaming them. I'm genuinely not sure about this proposal. Philosophically, I think OSM is a *mapping* project (duh!), and so the correct name is

Re: [Talk-GB] Post NaPTAN edits (Cambridge area)

Thanks for your help, Richard Brian. -- Cheers, John ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Post NaPTAN edits (Cambridge area)

I've been reading the NaPTAN import thread, and saw a reference to the Novam viewer, which thinks that I should fix a few stops round here. Before I do that, I'd like to check that I'm going to do it right! Presumably I should simply update the positions of the stops, if necessary, based on

Re: [Talk-GB] Life Ring - British English

I've always heard them called lifebelts. -- Cheers, John On 16/06/2014 10:30, Richard Mann wrote: en-gb is probably lifebuoy I've never heard it called a life ring - that's too vague a name. Most people would probably refer to it by starting to describe it - one of those red ring things that

Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding

On 07/02/2014 12:37, John Baker wrote: Always to play the devils advocate. We have all heard about mapping for the renderer but are you mapping for the third party data providers that is slow at updating the planet data. They should use the data correctly. It is annoying the stale content

[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices

office. Unmapped ones can be found by looking for large numbers of post codes in the same place. I wrote a bit about adding them to OSM herehttp://sk53-osm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/british-postcodes-on-openstreetmap.html . Jerry On 15 January 2014 17:59, John Aldridge j...@jjdash.demon.co.uk

[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices

To which I replied... ---BeginMessage--- [[ Did you mean to email me privately, rather than the list? Should I copy this email to the list? ]] On 17/01/2014 09:48, SK53 wrote: First of all don't go by definitions on the wiki. The consensus tag (at least in UK) is amenity=post_depot. Second,

[Talk-GB] Fwd: Re: Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices

be to add this to Nominatim which would enable people to find such things without them being rendered. By all means copy back to list. On 17 January 2014 10:41, John Aldridge j...@jjdash.demon.co.uk wrote: [[ Did you mean to email me privately, rather than the list? Should I copy this email

Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices

On 17/01/2014 15:54, SK53 wrote: Tagging for the renderer is very important, and pushing things in so they get rendered has a serious deleterious affect on the data. I use OSM data as data: when someone degrades the meaning by overloading a tag, this can mean that all of the data become

Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices

On 16/01/2014 09:34, Pierre Riteau wrote: On Wed, 15 Jan 2014, at 05:59 PM, John Aldridge wrote: On 15/01/2014 17:49, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: On 15 January 2014 16:03, John Aldridge j...@jjdash.demon.co.uk wrote: If I believed there was a snowflake in hell's chance of getting

Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices

On 15/01/2014 17:49, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: On 15 January 2014 16:03, John Aldridge j...@jjdash.demon.co.uk wrote: If I believed there was a snowflake in hell's chance of getting amenity=post_depot objects displayed on the default map, I'd be more sympathetic, but as it is I think

[Talk-GB] Royal Mail Parcelforce delivery offices

Is there a consensus on how to tag Royal Mail Parcel Force delivery offices? Are these amenity=post_office, or something else? Presumably Parcelforce offices are distinguished by being tagged operator=Parcelforce? Apologies if I've missed something in the documentation or help -- I did

Re: [Talk-GB] Question regarding OS Opendata

On 27/12/2013 15:07, tony wroblewski wrote: I have a question regarding the OS Opendata. How accurately aligned is it? I've noticed that in some places the bing orphophotos match up almost perfectly to the buildings below, and it other areas there can be some difference (sometimes up to a meter

Re: [Talk-GB] walls versus landuse=field

On 30/04/2013 09:38, Henry Gomersall wrote: I noticed that lots of fields, for example in http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.92332lon=-1.7091zoom=15layers=M are shown as closed loops of landuse=field. Clearly walls/fences and enclosed fields are somewhat equivalent, but subtly different in

[Talk-GB] Invisible/impassable rights-of-way

All this discussion of rights of way reminds me: is there a consensus about how (and whether) to map rights-of-way which are either impassable or invisible? I've encountered examples of both round here, and have so far chosen not to map them at all, on the grounds that we're trying to map the

Re: [Talk-GB] Invisible/impassable rights-of-way

On 25/01/2013 18:52, Andy Street wrote: On Fri, 2013-01-25 at 13:58 +, Dave F. wrote: Blockages of ways are often just temporary. I disagree with Andy Street's comment: If you can't traverse a right of way then it shouldn't have a highway tag. Okay perhaps I could have been clearer but I

Re: [Talk-GB] [OSM-talk] Rendering of Farmland not 'Light' enough?

On 06/01/2013 10:13, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: On 6 January 2013 01:54, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: In the first proposal, I find it very difficult to see the difference between the farmland and the non-tagged areas. It's a bit easier in the second proposal. It could

Re: [Talk-GB] Marking landuse and field boundaries

On 31/12/2012 21:59, Graham Jones wrote: I would like to see field boundaries and land uses in OSM, for the same reason as you. I think the main reason that there are not many in there, is that they are very difficult to survey. I second that! See my diary entry