Re: [Talk-us] ref=* tags on links

On Aug 24, 2018, at 11:41 AM, Evin Fairchild wrote: > Hey, I totally agree that we need to fix the rendering so that the renderer > will show ref tags on route relations. But until then, it's impractical to > expect people to avoid putting the ref tags on the ways. Evin, we agree to disagree

Re: [Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 129, Issue 27

> Evin Fairchild wrote > The only way you can get people to stop putting reg tags on ways and only put > them on relations is if the renderer actually rendered reg tags from > relations. Currently it doesn't do this, so All good and correct so far... > it's impractical for people to do what

Re: [Talk-us] Food delivery services: Move-fast-and-break-trust

Though I'm "old enough in this project" to celebrate my first decade coming up, I haven't seen the English, German or ANY version in printed form — I'd now almost consider it a historic document! And while I seldom snarl "don't print, we need our trees" (I did co-develop PDF while at Adobe, so

Re: [Talk-us] Food delivery services: Move-fast-and-break-trust

I like Clifford's approach of "If you are curious and asking, I reply openly and honestly with my real name and a card I'm handing you so you may forthrightly know who I am and what I'm doing." In the very, very limited number of times I have also had what I can only characterize as "mild

Re: [Talk-us] place=locality on rail junction

On Aug 17, 2018, at 2:59 AM, talk-us-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: When I come upon these, what's The Right Thing? 'railway=junction ref="CPF 499"' instead? Hi Kevin: "Railroad place names" in the USA have a lore all their own. Sometimes and even often in remote/rural areas, simple

Re: [Talk-us] Proposition for changing the common name tag

I'll refrain from whether adding (or not) "of America" to the end has anything to do with cabals or sovereignty. I agree with Kevin (and others) that adding "it is never incorrect to add it" (can't hurt), usually helps and distinguishes Mexican states from the fifty north of the Rio Grande (in

Re: [Talk-us] [Talk-us-nps] [EXTERNAL] North Carolina National Park

Hi Nic: Several years ago I developed a ten-step process for importing USFS data (boundaries) into OSM using our JOSM editor (more difficult to use than web-based iD, but more powerful, too). These are pretty technical steps, suitable for an intermediate or advanced OSM volunteer, but they

Re: [Talk-us] State Open Data

Again, one of the most important things that might be said (in talk-us) about "State Open Data" is that there are at least fifty different sets of rules. "Check your state laws and county practices" remains excellent advice. Yes, it can be complex, but if in a state like California, we're in

Re: [Talk-us] State Open Data

could not be copyrighted > or sold at exorbitant prices in Florida for "cost recovery". At that time the > Attorney General's office had an open records advocate that would help > educate, communicate, and mediate with local governments about public records > laws. >>

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

r d’OSM et continueraient d’atteindre cet objectif. Bonne journée, Etienne Californie > On Aug 12, 2018, at 4:59 PM, James wrote: > > Résumé très facile: Paris ou la france ≠ Le Québec. > Le Québec fait les chose très différente de la France. > > On Sun., Aug. 12, 2018, 8:36 p.m. OSM

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

Ayant embarqué à bord de nombreux trains à Paris (pour choisir l'une des nombreuses villes que j'ai embarquées dans les trains), OSM aux Halles dit "operator=RATP" et "name=RER B". Certains disent que la pure consistance est stupide. Je dis "trouver ce qui fonctionne et rester cohérent".

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

ed with this and whilst we > > should cater to these foreign tourists I think what is on the signs locally > > will be less confusing to the locals unless of course we get many more > > people streaming in to escape Donald. > > > > Or have I misunderstood some p

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

probably get confused with this and whilst we > should cater to these foreign tourists I think what is on the signs locally > will be less confusing to the locals unless of course we get many more people > streaming in to escape Donald. > > Or have I misunderstood some poor

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

ry good or even excellent and well-thought out and discussed, as are developing public_transport OSM data in Canada. We're making a great map. Thank you again for spirited and interesting discussion. SteveA California > On Jul 16, 2018, at 6:06 PM, Damien Riegel wrote: > > On 12 July 2018 at

Re: [Talk-us] State Open Data

I'm not an attorney, though were I to attempt to sharpen focus on these two replies, I'd say that in California, it's more like this: data produced by state agencies (by our state government personnel "on the clock") publishing them as "produced by the state of California" cannot have onerous

[Talk-us] An interesting discussion on admin_level about "inclusiveness" with townships

There is an interesting discussion initiated by Skybunny on whether townships and cities/villages subordinate to them are (or are not) "inclusive" for purposes of geocoding. https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_admin_level#Minor_Civil_Divisions.2C_distinguished_by_inclusiveness I

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

On Jul 12, 2018, at 1:46 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: > Damien's question appears to be about nodes like > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/438843513, which has > name=Berri-UQAM, operator=Société de transport de Montréal. > short_name=STM seems inappropriate here, we could do >

Re: [Talk-ca] Montréal: Inconsistency in Public Transportation Provider's Name

Hello Damien: I'm "meh, OK" with an operator=STM value, but I freely say I haven't checked in completely with whomever you mean by "the minority." (I "haven't heard of" any controversy one way or the other, STM or full-name. But that isn't saying much on my part). I watch what's up with

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2018-07-03

Hello Volker, old friend: Thank you for the Garmin history, thank you for the additional links! (I knew one, didn't know two). SteveA > On July 7, 2018 at 6:23:52 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote: > In fact Garmin started using OSM maps aleady in summer 2013 on the edge > Touring. This map goes by

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2018-07-03

Yes, indeed! If Garmin wanted to make its loyal hardware customers a bit happier, it could firmware-update how it draws various zoom levels and how much detail it those include. On an "old-school" device like my GPS 60 CSx, it may be prudent to trim and prune here and there when using OSM

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2018-07-03

I frequently download Dave's Garmin images for my (fairly ancient, yet still trusty!) Garmin GPS 60 CSx. (The fact that it runs on two AA NiMH rechargeable cells I can rotate into a pocket-sized solar charger while I'm in the wilderness has something to do with this). Yes, I have noticed that

Re: [Talk-us] named links

While I don't have "a dog in this fight," I also read our wiki which says "Link roads NORMALLY do not have names." (Emphasis mine). In the unusual (abnormal?) cases where they do (and I trust Paul wouldn't have added them unless they do), there is no contradiction with our wiki, rather an

Re: [Talk-us] Slack: Do we need an Alternative (was Planning an import in Price George...)

> Clifford Snow wrote: > I must admit I like Slack better than some other forms of communications. Truly, I think that's great. And again, the many forms of communication OSM uses, including new ones, are a natural part of a project as large and diverse as OSM is. There ARE a great many, some

Re: [Talk-us] Planning an Import in Prince George's County, Maryland

> Clifford Snow wrote: > If you haven't already joined our US Slack community, please sign up at > https://osmus-slack.herokuapp.com/. The community can help you with build > your import plan. Having met Clifford two summers ago, I admired, marveled at (and congratulated him upon!) his

[Talk-us] Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad: usage=branch -> usage=main?

I realize that distinctions between railway=rail + usage=* tags is subjective (even as OpenRailwayMap — ORM — renders main orange and branch yellow). Full disclosure: I have tried to sharpen focus in contributing to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging and related wiki

Re: [Talk-ca] A new available source of trail data in the Nanaimo area

On May 2, 2018, at 6:17 PM, Doug Hembry wrote: > I wanted to bring to the attention of Vancouver Island mappers a source of > some trail data in the Nanaimo area... After some back-and-forth consultation with the provider of the shapefile (Lynn, VP of the local horse

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

The legacy of TIGER-tagging will persist in OSM for a long, long time. That is the reality of the import we did, rough/sloppy data and all. This legacy serves as many lessons to be learned regarding the practice(s) of wide-scale imports. If it sounds like I'm saying "we made this bed, so now

[Talk-us] United States Bicycle Route ballots pending AASHTO approval

It's a busy time for new national bicycle routes in the USA's USBRS! To help OSM "get ahead of the curve" of May's AASHTO ballot, several USBR applications by state DOTs have been made available, allowing OSM to enter these state-at-a-time national bicycle route data. Currently a USBR 35

[Talk-us] USBR 66 in Missouri data available

The Spring, 2018 AASHTO ballots for new USBRs are now becoming available. If you wish to enter data into OSM for USBR 66 in Missouri, https://www.dropbox.com/sh/46ztv3epkgj5kv9/AABiIcGZILoUnSckJqzD0uNda?dl=0 downloads route data, including turn-by-turns and 30+ pages of rather nice,

Re: [Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

Project_United_States_railways if you wish to participate. Did you "play with trains" when you were younger? Please help improve OSM's "national train set" in the US: it's actually rather fun! SteveA California > On Apr 3, 2018, at 11:08 AM, OSM Volunteer steve

Re: [Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

I remain listening as to what OSM might best do with the network= tag on Amtrak routes. Some additional research (Wikipedia) reveals that "Amtrak services fall into three groups: short-haul service on the Northeast Corridor, state-supported short haul service outside the Northeast Corridor,

Re: [Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

On Mar 25, 2018, at 11:09 PM, Greg Morgan wrote: > I wonder what to do with some of the routes. For example, additional tracks > were added in the Tucson area. If we add a route, say, us 60 then an east and > west relation is created along with a master route. Do we do

Re: [Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

You're quite welcome. Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

I should have included: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States_railways as that is a better starting place (for your flavor of question) than our "at the top" Amtrak wiki. There's a lot to grok to become a good OSM rail editor (and don't forget updating wiki), yet, many

Re: [Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

Hi Greg: Great questions. If you are a rail public_transport:version=2 super-jockey, hey, polish them up to a firm buff and we'll marvel at their brilliant shine! However (and this is pedestrian me), I make "better" progress (higher quality data, at the expense of being slower) following

[Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

Gee, what a lot of good chatter here on this list! However, neither this list (nor this requestor) have heard a peep about changing a couple dozen Amtrak route network=* tags so all have value Amtrak. Too easy? I might simply ask forgiveness rather than permission or for feedback, though

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 Calgary Challenges and Best Practices

Whoops, put a closing quote on the alias (I truncated an apostrophe at the end of that line). And, of course, press return at the end of commands to the shell (command line interface). After this, you can "go get plugins" and configure them as you like. Now you are off and running JOSM on a

[Talk-us] Amtrak network=Amtrak tagging

Per our Amtrak wiki, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amtrak , I'd appreciate some feedback on conflating all Amtrak route=train relations to be tagged network=Amtrak. Currently, some have this tag, some have network=Amtrak Intercity. I find the latter to be superfluous and confusing and

Re: [Talk-us] Help fight advertising

So many good things being said by so many good people here. This is OSM at its best: organically growing goodness and correct actions by right-thinking people. Be bold, we might say out loud, as in "I delete spam and even just plain bad mapping when and as I see it." (Whether front door,

Re: [Talk-us] Help fight advertising

Even as I knew my "contact one SEO/Marketing firm, see what happens" approach was quite pedestrian in the grand scheme of "fighting advertising," I still though it valuable to share with the talk-us list so others could experience it too, put on their thinking caps and offer additional

Re: [Talk-us] Help fight advertising

Sent to Bright Valley Marketing via their website Contact text box: How can you help me? More like how can YOU help Bright Valley Marketing?! OK: you can stop putting advertising into your clients' OpenStreetMap (OSM) nodes. Phone, website, opening_hours, addr: fields: those are all OK.

Re: [Talk-us] Help fight advertising

I phoned a local business owner from Frederik's list and learned he used "Bright Valley Marketing" (https://www.brightvalleymarketing.com) out of Sacramento, California: it was they who apparently are the culprit. The business owner was happy to recognize and vaguely seemed to understand the

Re: [Talk-us] Help fight advertising

Thank you Frederik, thank you Ian. Yes! To both of you. I am glad to see Frederik encourages me to do what I (somewhat timidly, at first) already now do in earnest: sweep up when I see some poop in our map. It took me many years to grow my confidence as an OSM volunteer as "somebody who

Re: [Talk-us] Satus CDP

Albert Pundt writes > Many towns and suburbs in my area are only CDPs, and having proper boundaries > for them seems like it'd be useful, especially in more densely populated > areas. It's not like there's any fuzziness with them either, since they're > defined by the

Re: [Talk-us] Satus CDP

Brian Stromberg writes: > As someone who does research with Census data, it would be helpful to keep > all Census geographies in place (at least until Census decides to get rid of > them). Someone will use them at some point. Additionally, they're an official >

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names in Ontario

Hi Matthew: You do fine work here, yet I have a concern about "Township." I don't know if in Canada, a Township is a bit of an "odd duck" like it is in the USA. In the USA, we have county as admin_level=6, township as admin_level=7 (in about one-third of states) and city/town/village as

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names (Jarek Piórkowski)

> On 2018-02-19 05:08 PM, Jarek Piórkowski wrote: >> Have you passed by talk-gb? They have a fair amount of "St" names and >> some authority as to how to do things in OSM. I haven't, but I shall. As I say quite a bit (in our wiki, e.g. California/Railroads), "it's complicated around here."

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

Thank you, Matthew. As I said, "slavishly follow rules," no, not necessarily. "Understand the issues," yes, through good dialog. I like what I see here, it allows good consensus to emerge, tedious and perhaps even a bit annoying as it may be. :-) SteveA On Feb 19, 2018, at 2:00 PM, Matthew

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways (Ben Miller)

Chiming in my +1 that county-at-at-time is a good, workable approach for TIGER cleanup. I review the Ito! map's red highways/freeways first, then red major roads, then get to orange. Joe Larson in San Luis Obispo (part of the firefighters there) spent a couple of years coordinating this

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names in Ontario

It's good to see that admin_level tags (always 8? they might be 7 if township, that's a chunky topic...) are there. What I mean by "cutting room floor recycling" includes this thought: it couldn't hurt to update/touch-up/fix these after a cursory examination that's they are

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

On Feb 16, 2018, at 7:50 PM, Bill & Kathy Patterson wrote: > It would seem to me that an official place name should take precedence over > OSM protocols. If we expand the abbreviations (or contractions), of St. and > Ste., then are we not altering the

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

We call it TALK-ca for a reason! We call it OPENStreetMap for a reason! Consensus doesn't always come easy! Thanks to everyone for good discussion. SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

I stand corrected, thank you everybody. BTW I do my best not to abbreviate thinks like "DC" for District of Columbia, but I now better understand that "St." in many cases has now truly become the official name, abbreviation included. SteveA ___

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

at 12:50 PM, James <james2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > http://saultstemarie.ca/ > > thats how its written. even on signs to there > > On Feb 16, 2018 3:47 PM, "OSM Volunteer stevea" <stevea...@softworkers.com> > wrote: > On Feb 16, 2018, at 9:41 AM, Matthew D

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

On Feb 12, 2018, at 6:02 PM, Bernie Connors wrote: > I see the use of "City of" as indicating the official name of a municipality > as it is defined in legislation. Here in New Brunswick the Municipalities > Act‎ defines the official names of municipalities. Some opt to

Re: [Talk-ca] Formatting of Municipality Names

> i believe "city of" is redundant as its a classification vs a name. > Would we say "village of maniwaki"? nope. What "we say" and what "OSM tags" can vary slightly. Although with names, "what we say" is a great place to start and very largely correct. This is a topic which can explode

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

On Feb 12, 2018, at 1:07 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: > Thank you Steve for that ITO link. I was unaware of that and it really is a > nice tool to see the overall status of the TIGER fixup in an area. You are welcome, Tod; I'm happy to share what I know. > I used to simply delete

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

Clifford Snow wrote > How many of the TIGER imported streets are still untouched? Thanks for rallying us with this great thrust forward, Clifford, with excellent Challenges, resources and direction. I'd like to add one more tool I use for TIGER cleanup, the Ito! map

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools

I'd love to see in OSM (with a nod by STATCAN?) a Canadian "model building" (one will do), linked in the wiki. Richly-tagged and well done, to provide a standard to shoot for. To close a small, tight QA loop, as it were. "Here is what we'd like to see more of." Start small, document it.

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

Please see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:level SteveA ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

I repeat myself: less buzzword-compliance, please. More embracing of tried-and-true OSM tenets and culture, like front-loaded planning, ongoing, wide-area project management on something with nationwide scope as this, wiki writing/updating both intent and ongoing status, making available

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i OSM Distributed Model and Education

On Jan 30, 2018, at 7:49 AM, Jonathan Brown wrote: > I don’t mind reviewing the OSM education wiki for lessons learned and > “promising practices” and seeing how it might inform the design of a mapathon > event aligned to the K-12 curricula and postsecondary capstone project

Re: [Talk-ca] Preferred phone number format

> • There are additionally ~45 phone numbers that use letters instead of > digits (eg 1-555-GOT-BEER) > • ";" separator is used occasionally to indicate multiple phone > numbers. " ", "," and "/" are also used. > • There are random comments in the phone number field (not sure

Re: [Talk-us] tiger name issue in New York

I encourage you to edit wiki, Max, it is an important part of OSM-ing, if you are one who does, fantastic. Honest updates or better data, it's easy to write and comes naturally to many. Please, go for It! Steve ___ Talk-us mailing list

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

On Jan 29, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-29 04:37 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> >> OSM is delighted to receive building data in Canada, truly we are. >> (Provided they are high-quality data). I have heard the process o

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

Um, "dyed-in-the-wool." Steve ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] using image recognition to create building foot prints.

On Jan 29, 2018, at 12:15 PM, john whelan wrote: > ·NRCan is working on a methodology to extract building footprints, > including topographic elevation and height attributes, from LiDAR > Traditionally OSM has not been happy with this sort of thing. The accuracy

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

OK, I've redacted Halifax changes. From four to three (municipalities with license now "green.") Steve > On Jan 28, 2018, at 7:39 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 2018-01-28 09:16 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> Halifax also looks lik

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

Halifax also looks like it grants explicit permission. Cautiously, I change Halifax to green (and remove strikeout type in Contributors), as I don't think we need LWG to "offer benediction" when the owner of the data grants explicit permission, as this link appears to do. If I'm wrong about

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 project

And...you're off and running (better and better). This is a process, everybody. Nobody wants to be slapping anybody around. I like the way we've been polite and patient with each other here. Regards, SteveA > On Jan 28, 2018, at 4:47 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > > Inline

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

Smiling here, thank you for wiki-ing fresher status in both wikis! (It's quite doable, yes?). Steve > On Jan 28, 2018, at 3:40 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > Great, seems like we have a list of 3 ok ones: > Ottawa (approved license) > Gatineau + Montreal (explicit approval

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 28, 2018, at 2:39 PM, James wrote: > CC Attribution is compatible with explicit permission, so Gatineau and > Montreal may remain on the list. Oh, how I sometimes dislike the word "may!" I know, I know, our good talk-ca dialog intends to help wider understanding

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 28, 2018, at 1:27 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > Steve A, > I suspect nobody fully knows the current status of licences... So I would > agree with the action that you wrote: > every city except for Ottawa rightfully should be removed to end the > confusion, updating both

[Talk-ca] BC2020 perspectives

I see so many simultaneous (some unconfused, some confused) efforts in OSM's WikiProject BC2020. Here, I identify what I see from an out-of-Canada yet long-time OSM contributor perspective. While the following must necessarily remain high-level, I do not wish to over-simplify, though it can

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 28, 2018, at 11:29 AM, john whelan wrote: > > If you map from Bing imagery there is no issue. If you do map from Bing > please use the building_tool plugin in JOSM. We tend to find new mappers > using iD are not very accurate. Thanks, John, that's a helpful

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 28, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Jonathan Brown wrote: > If we have a description of the scope of the work involved in updating the > BC2020 OD tables, I don’t mind trying to find some senior students who could > be trained to take on this task for locations in Ontario. It

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 26, 2018, at 8:12 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-26 09:56 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> What I did was to "back-populate" the list of "approved" (by whom? when? >> how did these get here?) list of Canadian

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 26, 2018, at 8:02 PM, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > If we got the Toronto licence approved tomorrow and none of the > municipal licences changed for the better, at this rate we'd have all of > the BC2020 data cleared for use by 2088 … Now, no reason to let optimism wither;

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

On Jan 26, 2018, at 6:42 PM, john whelan wrote: > I'm under the impression that Ottawa was the first city to move to the Open > Data 2.0 licence created by Treasury Board. > > I'm also under the impression that it is the only one that has had its > benediction from the

[Talk-ca] BC2020 OD_tables wiki and project status

The first (municipal) OD table in https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_Canada/Building_Canada_2020/building_OD_tables now uses green/yellow/red color-coding to better display accurate status in those cells of rows in the "License" and "Completion in OSM" columns. These give a certain "at a

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10

rnia > On Jan 26, 2018, at 2:13 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2018-01-25 04:00 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: >> The other wiki (linked to in the "main" BC2020i wiki's "Inventory of >> Current Building Data Sets" section): >> h

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

On Jan 25, 2018, at 8:55 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > I'm all for using the wiki, just want to consider the maintenance effort of > keeping the tasking manager in sync with the wiki. If someone wants to do > that, so much the better! Wikis can get stale quickly without

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

> There are many more tasks on the task manager related to buildings if you are > so inclined to add them. Is that the best way to go? or people can check > the task manager for projects in their area of interest? (new tasks can be > easily added to the task manager... just ask!) I sort of

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

On Jan 25, 2018, at 8:30 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > I should mention that there are others in Ottawa working on completing the > buildings. The City import only had urban buildings. Since the city of > Ottawa is the largest rural city in Canada, so much work still to do.

Re: [Talk-ca] building imports (was Re: Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10)

On Jan 25, 2018, at 8:13 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > I'm not who the "movers and shakers" are really. There is nobody really > driving this project that I am aware of (the wiki suggests we should have a > steering committee). Every time I see email sent to the original

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 119, Issue 10

On Jan 25, 2018, at 12:16 PM, john whelan wrote: > About six years ago I wanted to import the local bus stops but the licences > weren't aligned. It took about five years for the Canadian Federal > Government to first adopt an Open Government license that was open enough

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools

On Jan 23, 2018, at 5:53 PM, john whelan wrote: > It should have been 60 per hour. Apols. I can probably map at one per five > seconds but new mappers did and will take much longer. The iD figures of > four to twenty buildings per mapathon session are real numbers. OK,

Re: [Talk-ca] BC2020i and Mapathons with High Schools

I agree that absolute novices unfamiliar with OSM are not what we might call "an ideal candidate," for BC2020i but it certainly has been and can be done. That said, "coming with Java preloaded" is a certain kind of "trigger warning" that "you have to be this tall to ride the ride." That's

Re: [Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

John Whelan says: > Thoughts? There are obviously "deep thoughts" going on regarding how OSM can document and provide better geo data, routing and maps for Canadian cyclists: my hat is off to the serious "front-loading" going on here and I wish to encourage it so that it may flourish.

Re: [Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

James wrote: There's also documentation that Ottawa is using(not final thats why its not on the wiki) with example pictures: https://github.com/osmottawa/OSM-Bike-Ottawa-Tagging-Guide/blob/master/README.md There are differences with respect to US bike pathes Thanks for the link to that page,

[Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

Oops, the bicycle router I wanted to refer to in my previous is http://cycle.travel by Richard Fairhurst (whom I inexplicably confused with Simon Poole). SteveA California ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org

[Talk-ca] A message aimed more at Ottawa

Hello talk-ca: I'm resurrecting a month-old thread (about bicycling) as my initial post here. I'm a California-based (USA) nearly nine-year veteran of OSM. My wiki user page at https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/User:Stevea shares some details of my mapping, including parks and other

[Talk-us] [Imports-us] New to lists and would like to suggest some imports

I would add that the guidance of an OSM volunteer with some experience with importing can be quite helpful. It is easy to be eager to complete an import. It can be challenging, especially for novice mappers or those unexperienced with "medium-sized" projects like this to do one for the first

Re: [Talk-us] Leonia, NJ doesn't want you to navigate through

What most of us largely "know" (in this context, as we, myself included, posit both opinion and potential solutions) comes from a web-based news article. It isn't clear to me that a local ordinance has already passed specifying "something." Same with signs on-the-ground, speaking personally,

Re: [Talk-us] Leonia, NJ doesn't want you to navigate through

First, as they are public (not private) streets, anybody has the right to traverse them. Yes, a local ordinance might (in the near future) prohibit access for "cut-through," it is the right of the municipality to pass such an ordinance and for local police to enforce it. "We don't want the

Re: [Talk-us] Parks, again

There is a lot to unpack in this discussion. First, OSM has the strong tenet that we should not code (data tag) for the renderer. That is sound advice and largely serves us well, but it fails to directly address that there is no point to being an OSM volunteer unless there ARE renderers which

Re: [Talk-us] Parks, again

On January 4, 2018 at 6:21:03 PM PST, Bradley White wrote: >> I don't think the title >> given to a piece of land should necessarily have bearing on the data >> representation, in the same way "Hampstead Heath" doesn't get >> "natural=heath" just because it's in the

Re: [Talk-us] Parks, again

On January 4, 2018 at 6:21:03 PM PST, Bradley White wrote: >> As you say "feel like Type 2" I think is where it fuzzies in my mind. Parks >> go to 3, 4, even 11 and beyond. Parks have a wide range of "experiences" >> besides 1 and 2. > > So do roads. There are

Re: [Talk-us] Parks, again

On Jan 3, 2018, at 5:24 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: > I think the National Park term causes a lot of problems. As I see it, > there are two kinds of places: > > 1) a natural area with some accomodation for human use, which is mostly > natural except for a few bits. > > 2) a

Re: [Talk-us] Potential vandalism in Northern California (Pokémon Go?)

On Jan 3, 2018, at 4:00 AM, Andy Townsend wrote: > Currently the wiki page > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark defines an OSM > "leisure=park" using a few words, and illustrates it with a picture of part > of Central Park in New York. It then goes on to

<    1   2   3   4   >