Dermot McNally wrote:
I can't tell if this is your words or something you've quoted,
My words; and, in hindsight, loose ones. Let's try something like:
Note: Any canal measurements which are in feet and inches are given as
\d+ft( \d+in)?. That is, a number, followed by ft as an
abbreviation,
On 04/02/2008, Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note: canal measurements are given in feet and inches, as \d+ft(
\d+in)?. That is, a number, followed by ft as an abbreviation, a
space, and then optionally a number and in.
I can't tell if this is your words or something you've quoted,
Based on the discussion from a few weeks ago, I've made a number of new
proposals relating to canals which are now listed on the Proposed
Features page at the bottom of various categories:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features#Proposed_Features_-_Waterway
Abigail Brady wrote:
I've tagged low bridges in Leicester with maxheight=15'0, for example.
That's what the sign on the bridge says, that should be represented in
the database.
I definitely think that's wrong. Even if we decide to have units in the
database, that does not mean we need to
On 24/01/2008 10:34, Gervase Markham wrote:
Sven Grüner wrote:
I don't know of any country using the metric system that is familiar
with the term kph. The unit symbol is km/h and so everbody uses *kmh*.
Google understands kph:
Gervase Markham wrote:
Sent: 24 January 2008 10:34 AM
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping canals
Sven Grüner wrote:
I don't know of any country using the metric system that is familiar
with the term kph. The unit symbol is km/h and so everbody uses
*kmh*.
Google
On Jan 24, 2008 12:12 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OSM will always need smart and sophisticated processing.
But need should draw a line somewhere. I think we should declare
anyone trying to add:
speed=45ft 6 13/16in per second
as insane and we should not be expected
On Jan 24, 2008 11:26 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also worried about people using gauges adding 5ft 5in somewhere,
we should at least require decimals.
I've tagged low bridges in Leicester with maxheight=15'0, for example.
That's what the sign on the bridge says,
On 24/01/2008, Abigail Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We need for the UK to keep imperial measurements in the DB.
Our challenge is to manage to do this while also keeping the data
interpretable. If an in-truck navigation system knows that this
particular truck needs a clearance of 5m then
Dermot McNally wrote:
My favourite suggestion so far is that a second key be introduced -
either for the original measurement (my favourite, since it retains
the traditional meaning of the existing key) or for the normalised
equivalent.
This is what I was thinking all along. On the one
At 03:34 PM 1/24/2008, Jo wrote:
Dermot McNally wrote:
My favourite suggestion so far is that a second key be introduced -
either for the original measurement (my favourite, since it retains
the traditional meaning of the existing key) or for the normalised
equivalent.
This is what I was
Andy Robinson (blackadder) wrote:
(Actually, on checking with a calculator, 7*12*2.54=213.36. So I'm
doing a bit of unconscious rounding already.)
Indeed, the exact conversion is to multiply/divide by 0.3058
Er, you mean 0.3048, right?
(one inch is _defined as_ 25.4mm, and has been for many
On 22/01/2008 22:53, 80n wrote:
I don't think *renderers* really need to know much about speed limits.
If a road is tagged with 73000furlongsperfortnight then a renderer might
show that on a map, but it's probably not going to try to convert it to
any other units - why would it need to?
I
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 09:44:32PM +, Stephen Gower wrote:
(amenity=pumpout;water_point), and to come up with a separate tag for
what we refer to as Elsan disposal (a drain where you can empty your
Porta-Potti!). amenity=poo_hole could be misconstrued.
That reminds me of
On 23/01/2008, David Earl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had in mind (and it'll probably stay in mind!) a renderer which showed
you a ground level view of the street you were moving along with
upcoming turnings and so on, like a satnav display, which showed
signposts - no right turn, this way to
On Jan 23, 2008, at 11:44, David Earl wrote:
I had in mind (and it'll probably stay in mind!) a renderer which
showed
you a ground level view of the street you were moving along with
upcoming turnings and so on, like a satnav display, which showed
signposts - no right turn, this way to
Hi Gerv - I've snipped lots below - if I haven't commented on any
part, I pretty much agree.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 06:36:48PM +, Gervase Markham wrote:
Narrow sections are denoted by maxwidth. One narrowboat (just over 7
feet) is given as 2.5m. Two boats is 5m. It's not necessary
Stephen Gower wrote:
Hi Gerv - I've snipped lots below - if I haven't commented on any
part, I pretty much agree.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 06:36:48PM +, Gervase Markham wrote:
Narrow sections are denoted by maxwidth. One narrowboat (just over 7
feet) is given as 2.5m. Two boats is
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
A few more comments, and like Stephen, I've not commented on those
where I agree. Generally we should make sure that tags are applicable
to all navigable waterways, so river navigations as well as canals.
Sure.
If you have correctly tagged a waterway with
On 22/01/2008, Richard Fairhurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
maxspeed=110 -- assumed km/h
maxspeed=70mph -- unit stated
maxwidth=2.14 -- assumed metres
maxwidht=7ft -- unit stated
I'm uneasy about this - up till now, these fields were assumed to
contain pure numbers, with the ease of
On Jan 22, 2008 2:17 PM, Dermot McNally [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 22/01/2008, Richard Fairhurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
maxspeed=110 -- assumed km/h
maxspeed=70mph -- unit stated
maxwidth=2.14 -- assumed metres
maxwidht=7ft -- unit stated
I'm uneasy about this - up till now,
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 02:25:57PM +, Gervase Markham wrote:
Any GPS can distinguish two points 70ft apart, can't they?
With up to about a 20m error (which in practice seems to be about right), you
might be out by ~65ft.
(Granted, both points are likely to be out by the same amount if taken
Dave Stubbs wrote:
And what is the exact SI equivalent of 30mph?
According to the current UK Highway Code, 30mph = 48km/h.
I can give you an approximation: 48.28032km/h.
What happens though if everyone sticks in 48 instead.. close enough
isn't it?
If the UK Department for Transport ever
Dave Stubbs wrote:
This is really not difficult to handle.
You check for a unit, if you don't understand the unit you pretend the
tag didn't exist.
So this means that some renderers won't render some values; whereas if
we standardised on metres, then all renderers would render all values.
On Jan 22, 2008 5:02 PM, Simon Hewison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Stubbs wrote:
And what is the exact SI equivalent of 30mph?
According to the current UK Highway Code, 30mph = 48km/h.
It's wrong ;-)
I can give you an approximation: 48.28032km/h.
What happens though if everyone
On Jan 22, 2008 5:39 PM, Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Stubbs wrote:
This is really not difficult to handle.
You check for a unit, if you don't understand the unit you pretend the
tag didn't exist.
So this means that some renderers won't render some values; whereas if
we
And what is the exact SI equivalent of 30mph?
I can give you an approximation: 48.28032km/h.
What happens though if everyone sticks in 48 instead.. close enough isn't
it?
Nitpicking, but 48.28032 km/h *is* exact.
Although in the usual SI unit, 30 mph would be 13.4112 m/s (exactly).
Richard B
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 11:43:25AM +, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Amenities
-
New tag value: amenity=sanitary_station
Sanitary station is a really misleading (but sadly widespread) term.
Better to group all the constituent services
(amenity=pumpout;water_point), and to come
Dave Stubbs wrote:
But some of them will be incorrect. And how do I now make a renderer
that gives the speed limit in the unit it's actually specified?
We seem to have a choice between:
1) Making renderers which need to understand the units they want to
render on the map, and are capable of
On Jan 23, 2008 12:12 AM, Dermot McNally [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So now let's consider items like distances, depths, heights and other
items that can be rendered in either metric or imperial (and for all I
know, maybe other) units. I happen to be a user of metric measures, so
I want to see
Gervase Markham wrote:
As people may know, the UK has an extensive system of canals.
OK. So here's a load of proposals rather than questions :-) There are
quite a few, so it seems sensible to me to bat them around here as a
unified set before taking them to the wiki.
Canals
--
Canals are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martijn Verwijmeren wrote:
| On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:39:19 +
| Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| - Locks have a maximum width and length, universally measured in
| feet.
|
| Do you brits really live in a different universe?
|
| Please,
All canals have towpaths
No. Some canals are now disused so sections of the towpath are gone (now
private land/buildings etc.), some canals aren't for navigation/boats (I
know of one used to supply a fountain by Hampton Court Palace and the
man-made river/canal runs for several miles).
I think
On 17/01/2008 20:51, Gregory wrote:
All canals have towpaths
No. Some canals are now disused so sections of the towpath are gone (now
private land/buildings etc.), some canals aren't for navigation/boats (I
know of one used to supply a fountain by Hampton Court Palace and the
man-made
Gervase Markham wrote
Sent: 17 January 2008 10:43 PM
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping canals
Gregory wrote:
All canals have towpaths
No.
OK, yes, that was a generalisation. Almost all canals on the used
sections of recreational canal on the map I gave a link to have
Hi Gervase,
first of all: OSM evolves (as steve is saying). Take on step after the
other and apply everything you've learned from the previous one to the
next. So it's not smart to do everything in the first step because then
there's nothing left to make better for the next, if you catch my
Sven Grüner schrieb:
Tag them seperately! Depending on their condition and usage it could be
footway, bridleway, track or even residential. The tracktype-tag might
not be the best way to tag quality
...but is still widely used.
(I meant to say)
___
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:39:19 +
Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Locks have a maximum width and length, universally measured in
feet.
Do you brits really live in a different universe?
Please, whatever tags you design: Make them usable in more countries
than just the UK. France
Gregory wrote:
All canals have towpaths
No.
OK, yes, that was a generalisation. Almost all canals on the used
sections of recreational canal on the map I gave a link to have
towpaths. The vast majority of canals have towpaths.
I think locks were changed to nodes rather than ways so the gate
Gregory wrote:
I think there is someone on OSM who lives on a canal boat, or does
quite a bit of canal boating. I seem to remember them providing
some input into discussions, but can't remember who they are.
That'd be me. :) I live on a boat half the week, my day-job is editor
of
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 01:24 +0100, Martijn Verwijmeren wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:39:19 +
Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Locks have a maximum width and length, universally measured in
feet.
Do you brits really live in a different universe?
Not all of us, feet are a
41 matches
Mail list logo
