> On Jan 2, 2024, at 3:36 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Thanks, fellas!
>
> There's my new thing I've learnt today! :-)
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 at 09:25, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 02/01/2024 22:03, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > Only thought there is should the
Because Graeme politely included a question mark, I'll do my best here to offer
my interpretation, which might actually approach and "answer" to his question:
whether a note=* or a description=*, each of these data are "in" OSM, as OSM is
a database. "Downstream" use cases, like a rendering,
On Nov 1, 2023, at 10:46 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 16:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Tried a test message from an outside e-mail but doesn't seem to have come
> through.
>
> Do you have to be subscribed to the list to be able to post to it?
>
> Yes
As I say, a low
My two cents.
Our forum and Discord require "accounts" to be registered at the OSM level (via
OAuth2 by registering for a volunteer Contributor account to OSM) and at "the
Discord level," something else again. A mailing list "merely" requires an
email address as an "account" to be registered
Oops, resending to the talk-au list as a whole:
On Oct 5, 2023, at 7:00 PM, Little Maps wrote:
> City = > 50,000 people
> Town = 5000 - 50,000
> Village = 1000 - 5000
> Hamlet = < 1000
>
> This kind of query gives a broad-brush pattern of how we can classify places
> into cities, towns etc.
FWIW, I find this discussion interesting and excellent. Please keep up the
good dialog, which I characterize here as “good work!"
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Whoops, meant to send this to the list, I sent it to Graeme only.
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: stevea
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by
> relative importance, not just population size)
> Date: October 1, 2023 at 9:17:40 P
outube.com/watch?v=3Yk8b8SB81o
[3] https://learnosm.org/en/josm/start-josm/
[4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Types_of_relation
> On May 29, 2023, at 6:24 PM, Josh Marshall wrote:
>
> Hey stevea, was this warning on relations due to any particular remark in
> this thread? ... I fee
I've said all this before: while editing relations in iD is technically
possible, it is tedious and difficult in the opinion of many. A great many
existing relations have also been broken by people using iD (I can't count how
many I have personally experienced). I find editing relations with
Nice work, everbody. I include Phil's use of the tool (chatbot mentioned), but
I do not directly address said chatbot, because it is not sentient. It is
merely a tool, well-used in this instance.
Tight snippet of OT there, Andrew; nice. (make, convert, makefile,
y'know...yeah).
Is that a
It seems the big joy in all this is that we are all quite correct.
It isn't so much a conflict as it is "what comes next." Sure, there are good
questions that haven't been answered yet, I look forward to those.
OSM isn't a battle. It is a project. We grow.
Does it matter what the survey
On May 3, 2023, at 11:07 AM, John Whelan wrote:
> A very accurate summation in my opinion.
> Imre Samu wrote on 5/3/2023 1:03 PM:
>> Courtney ezt írta (időpont: 2023. ápr. 30.,
>> V, 19:06):
>> This conversation has opened up important new questions. Why is the main
>> "Talk" channel the
I don't totally disagree with Greg's characterization of "unreasonable," as
"standardized / hashtagged" changeset comments are curt (even a touch rude) if
they are not super-well-documented (widely vetted, spoken about...) as to
what's going on, and easily have the ability to hide errors or
On Feb 11, 2023, at 9:41 AM, Mateusz Konieczny via talk
wrote:
> I propose to replace following surface tags by doing an automated edit:
> ...
To ma dla mnie sens, Mateusz. (Makes sense to me).
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
My local chapter of OSM is in the USA (OSM-US), but yes, I think you (all) are
on the right approach here: the "Australia / Oceania Chapter" (I think it is,
or is called) as a semi-formal sub-community within OSM, or even an "official"
chapter, is the "first stop" along the way of this sort of
My local chapter of OSM is in the USA (OSM-US), but yes, I think you (all) are
on the right approach here: the "Australia / Oceania Chapter" (I think it is,
or is called) as a semi-formal sub-community within OSM, or even an "official"
chapter, is the "first stop" along the way of this sort of
On Feb 9, 2023, at 3:00 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Feb 2023 at 12:31, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> And each culvert has a unique asset/ref identification (example Victorian
> Dept of Transport, Structure Number == SN2252)
>
> Sorry to be awkward, but do we have permission to use that
On 31/1/23 14:38, James via Talk-au wrote:
>> ...Does anyone have anything they'd like to add, any advice, or any reasons
>> I shouldn't go ahead with this?
On Jan 31, 2023, at 1:10 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do, say, 10 local to you and see how it goes. Making a mistake with 10
interpret" them seems it would help or even be best. Besides, reaching out to
the greater community (as you have to talk-au just now: noice!) is part of
OSM, so getting into that habit early is a good one!
Tenet number 2 of OSM: (after #1, "Don't copy from other maps") Have fun
On Jan 18, 2023, at 7:13 PM, john whelan wrote:
> Perhaps you could expand on the benefits of mapping them?
I don't wish to sound antagonistic, but that's like asking "what good is our
map" and expecting the infinite "creative and unexpected purposes" that have,
do and will evolve from our
I'd like to say "oh, please..." because this seems a bit harsh. But I
understand that people can be sensitive.
But this is OSM and I'd like to believe we live in a world that is more free
rather than less free. What's next, do we stop mapping pre-school or
kindergartens because they have
I am “with” Andy here, yet I am also “with" Frederik here: you might be able
to get away with this “most of the time,” but when it fails (and it will),
you’ll be disappointed and perhaps even upset with OSM. There is simply no
reason why we should be suggesting or supporting this. Because it
I'll state even more strongly than Frederik just did: "linking to an OSM
object by ID and expecting the ID to remain constant is asking for trouble" is
putting it mildly. It IS trouble. All it takes is one single change to one
single datum and boom, the assumption that doing so can work is
I mean, people use amenity=charging_station [1], which has a name=* tag. And I
think Europe imported a bunch of these over a decade ago. Maybe it's ME who is
behind the curve here? Dian and/or Phil linked this / raised this already.
Regarding what Warin says, OSM just MIGHT be either "a" or
network. And in my backyard, "we have ignition" (as in
net-positive fusion).
>From cold and rainy winter California, Happy Holidays, Happy '23, mates.
that Yank Stevea (in our/OSM's wiki, though not usually or maybe even ever in
Australia/
Thank you, Warin, thank you Mike, thank you Zeke: With Warin's
"clarifications," I think we move closer to something approaching a reasonable
way to say this. I would correct "renders" to "renderers," and perhaps change
it to "OSM's database and renderers...", but aside from that, +1.
> On
On Nov 28, 2022, at 5:57 AM, Maarten Deen wrote:
> Your remark seems reasonable ;)
Thanks, Maarten, I’m chuckling with mirthful laughter here.
> Thing is: this is not meant as a bot, so the usual caveats apply.
That IS an important consideration; thanks for highlighting that aspect. I
didn’t
See, saying “seems reasonable” actually seems reasonable, until one realizes
one doesn’t truly know. Ask yourself if others in OSM would agree if “seems
reasonable” is good enough to meet OSM’s criteria for data entry: you’ll get
mixed answers, though a sizable number will say “not really
Yes, thanks much, James! (For linking "Reporting Infringement to Microsoft").
I do wonder if simply forking and charging money for existing open-source
software is an egregious slap in the face to OSM (JOSM developers, especially),
although I'm not an attorney. So, I'd urge our LWG /
Without wishing to "diss" (disparage) Lukas's tool (I haven't evaluated it), I
would also urge caution here, for exactly the reasons DaveF outlines. I'm also
a partly-armchair mapper, but not (usually, if ever) using Python tools, rather
knowing that my "armchair-ing" is going to be of high
If choosing which version is "legitimate" (or preferred) is important, and
"leaving a review" is a (one) method for communicating that, I would underscore
that if you do leave a review, make very clear how one differs from the other.
On Nov 27, 2022, at 5:33 PM, john whelan wrote:
>
> Agreed
Sorry, I meant railway=proposed becoming railway=construction. The tag
state=proposed is something used (I do so frequently) in other routes besides
route=railway relations, like route=bicycle relations. I apologize for any
confusion.
___
Talk-au
Catching up on this thread (a bit on the late side, just upgraded macOS from
Monterey to Ventura) I could say a lot.
In short, I think you've got it right tagging construction=* when you get
actual digging, paving, power-poles and laying of rail. I like "well, we've
got road closures
Some historical perspective on a project like OSM, its growth, the social
aspects of "what that means and does to tagging" over time might be helpful.
The dates and numbers I'm about to offer as examples are wholly illustrative
(and indicate not arithmetic, but geometric growth, a very
As usual (nearly all of the time!), I appreciate and agree with your
well-stated clarifications, Frederik!
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Oct 25, 2022, at 12:42 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
a
> Question:
about mapping of old railway infrastructure.
Without "meaning to be mean," I say "oh, no, not again!" I say it like that
because OSM has had this discussion many, many times.
I'll be relatively brief here and have
Dialable, darn spell check.
And, in the US, the 1-800 or 1 (800) has become 800 or (800), though not +1-800
because these are "inward" only, without the preceding 1, though some places
might still need to dial this, our 11-digit / preceding 1 or 10-digit thing
(not terribly hard to figure out
Yeah, so this can be confusing. The 1300 prefix appears to be an
Australia-only way of dialing what is followed by a six digit number (and as
there are eight in the mnemonic, the last two are ignored, we get this in the
states with our 1800 and flavors, like 1888 and 1877 and 1866...
Solutions abound!
There is a pesky "only in this country toll-free dialing" sort of thing that is
a number domestically (AU only) and then what appears to be its international
number, something in NANPA's 710, or what is a moldy-oldy US federal government
"thing" with exactly one working
To be clear, "infrastructure" tagging as I described it doesn't necessarily
come first, it (only) would if an existing rail line needs to be entered into
OSM, then might be repurposed as a light_rail line. If there is no rail to be
repurposed, and it is brand-new-from-scratch passenger rail,
On Sep 15, 2022, at 4:38 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Work is due to start "soon" on the next extension of the GC Light Rail route.
>
> Details have been published about where it will be going, & where the
> stations will be located, site offices are now appearing & physical work is
>
Thanks, Ewen: you have inspired me to dig up his business card (hm, where’d I
put it?!) and do exactly that. Yes, I’m sure "a waiver could be signed and
copyright sorted,” as we really do have open data laws here and I’m sure with
the rightly-worded request, it could be done legally and
Some USA perspective: because of where I was, happening to go to a funky
little mountain organic food store and the proximity of this store to a
"CalFire" station (sort of two of them, in a regional sense...CalFire being the
California Department of Forestry, essentially the "state fire
Again, you folks are on the right track, here: keep discussing whether a
single bidirectional route (with summer-winter alternates) is better, though
that will require very careful role tag management — OR whether a single
super-relation representing "the whole route, with all of its
On Sep 10, 2022, at 2:21 AM, Ian Steer wrote:
>> What would people think about a structure that had a Munda Biddi
...
> - and I would give the winter section, and northbound one-way sections in the
> main route relation a role of “alternative"
Outstanding! I step further aside and let you
Nice.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
On Sep 6, 2022, at 12:36 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Bicentennial Nation Trail is broken by states (and that is a horse trail,
> a mtb trail and a hiking trail). It is not well mapped.
>
> The Overland Track is broken into segments - the 'normal' day lengths for
> hikers.
>
I forgot to say earlier, so I add here and now: on really huge routes like
this — thousands of kilometers long — it makes it more manageable for humans
(and OSM software like JOSM and other tools / end-use cases like renderers and
routers) to break up the route into logical sub-components.
On Sep 5, 2022, at 5:25 PM, Ian Steer wrote:
>> For the "north only" and "south only" segments, I would certainly keep both
>> of these "directional" segments in the one "main" relation, but tagged with
>> role tags: usually "forward" if the direction of the way corresponds to the
>> direction
On Sep 5, 2022, at 12:23 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Be careful with the automated tool .. you can end up with the route
> comprising some 'north bound' bits with some 'south bound bits'.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the automated tool," Warin. I'm only suggesting
to use
BTW, I very much recommend using JOSM as your preferred editor when editing
relations, especially route relations. IMO, the route relation editor in JOSM
is superior to all others. Don't forget to click the "sort relation" button as
a last step in the relation editor window before you close
On Sep 4, 2022, at 8:10 PM, Ian Steer wrote:
> I am a volunteer with the Munda Biddi Trail Foundation, and do my best to
> keep the Munda Biddi Trail route relation (5810814) up-to-date. The trail is
> 1,000km from Perth to Albany.
>
> There is a child route relation (Munda Biddi Alternate,
It makes a lot of sense. In the states / USA, we (OSM as state and governments
rather naturally cleave here for us) "split at state boundaries" all the time
(as regards to highways and routes). It is "sane in the long run" I believe is
widely believed.
Things "come into better focus" for
On Aug 18, 2022, at 12:42 AM, Michael Collinson wrote:
> Purely as a question: Is there a case for actually mapping the whole cycleway
> separately as a cycleway? As a cyclist, I like to see what I have in store.
> Argument for: Well, that is what it is, a dual use cycleway and hard
>
On Aug 17, 2022, at 8:12 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 12:26, Little Maps wrote:
> Hi folks, is there any consensus on how to tag cycling on motorway shoulders?
>
> In some places, the simple tag bicycle=yes (or no) is used.
>
> We should explicitly tag every motorway with
On Aug 17, 2022, at 7:23 PM, Little Maps wrote:
> Hi folks, is there any consensus on how to tag cycling on motorway shoulders?
>
> In some places, the simple tag bicycle=yes (or no) is used. This is straight
> forward. In others, the left hand shoulder is tagged as a cycle lane, using
>
Graeme: You are possibly / likely correct about assumptions regarding size
(I'm not local, I haven't seen the devices, I don't know of any standardisation
/ competition-in-the-traffic-camera-marketplace you have in Oz). However,
also, you might 'not' be correct about assumptions regarding
On Aug 10, 2022, at 11:45 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> I wasn't familiar with "Drop-Bears" (until I looked up that good-natured hoax)
>
> Neither was this lady! :-)
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwmoiUrC02g
I have no idea how everybody (except for the British reporter, of course,
On Aug 10, 2022, at 11:32 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Imagine how Australian you'll feel being the one to add the row to that wiki
> with "Crocodiles are present."
>
> Snakes, spiders. sharks, Drop-Bears ... :-)
Oops, I meant hazard=leeches (not hazard:leeches). Gotta get the syntax
On Aug 10, 2022, at 10:05 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> The hazard tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hazard seems like a
> good fit to warn of crocs.
Agreed: I shared some input with the author on this tag. It is deliberately
"open-ended" with rough/loose categories right now of area
I'm not saying it should, but it could: somebody sees both usefulness to
specify and usefulness to tag (heavily implying serious usefulness to "seeing
the bigger picture of data" after they are entered and become geospatial) and
makes a proposal that craftily "gathers" silos together into one
On Jul 27, 2022, at 1:02 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27/7/22 17:13, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au wrote:
>> is it clearly signposted as cannabis factory farm at its location?
I sincerely doubt this would ever happen, but if it did, you can bet their
security is much, much
On Jul 26, 2022, at 6:05 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 at 10:42, stevea wrote:
> We map cannabis facilities in California; cannabis is legal here.
>
> Production facilities, or only shops?
I have mapped several shops, as their location must "thread carefu
On Jul 26, 2022, at 5:31 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Have just spotted a Note where an anonymous user has given company name &
> address details for a Medicinal Cannabis plant.
>
> Checking to confirm details & found a news article that said, yes, the plant
> is near Mildura, but "Due to
> On Jun 26, 2022, at 6:46 PM, Dian Ågesson wrote:
> Unfortunately bus lane restrictions are not the same in each state and
> territory.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Transportation.
> As there isn't a consistent delineation about what counts as a public
On Jun 26, 2022, at 6:24 PM, Ben Kelley wrote:
> I'm not sure if this helps, but a "bus lane" allows buses, taxis, bicycles
> and hire cars. A "bus only lane" allows only buses (not taxis and hire cars).
> (Neither allow rental cars.)
>
> The psv wiki page suggests tagging individual types if
On Jun 26, 2022, at 5:57 PM, David Vidovic via Talk-au
wrote:
> In regards to PSV (Public Service Vehicles), I understand this encompasses
> buses/coaches.
>
> For a "bus only" way such as a bus bay, I see common tagging [access=no] +
> [psv=yes] used.
>
> Does anyone know if a Taxi is
Again, a recommendation to deal with imagery offset "smears:" start with the
"street network" (grid, whatever) first. That "lays down the meridians" as
accurately as you know with minimal effort right down to the centerlines of
multiple-lane tarmac. The small (er) stuff like buildings, those
On Jun 22, 2022, at 6:45 PM, Alex Sims wrote:
> I’ve now got a relatively (<$100 + postage) Mouse GPS. It is amazingly
> accurate. That’s the good news.
>
> Now I can see a whole bunch of streets, buildings etc out by 1-5 meters as
> *some* features were traced without correcting the image
I'll start and finish by saying "be careful."
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Truthfully, I’ve seen it both ways: that’s partly why I asked (somewhat, but
not completely rhetorically) “which (one of the two landuse tags) renders?”
(Farmland or residential?)
I wasn’t tagging for the renderer, I was tagging according to the wiki, and
only after many years after that
I don’t know what Oz'll end up doing, but I’ve been mapping landuse=farm, which
became landuse=farmland, since 2009. I’ve also used landuse=farmyard (renders
in Carto as a “stronger tan-orange” compared to “faint orange” for farmland),
but I initially restricted my use of farmyard to what (in
Thank you (Alex) for the wide notification that DWG is aware.
I'll let DWG handle it, while I'll say out loud (I already have, I sharpen my
meaning here and now), "that shouldn't have happened, Mapbox" (not Sergey, but
higher up in Mapbox than Sergey). Somebody was "asleep at the switch."
OK, I've found the links, but a couple of things:
1) On the wiki page (about "linting," I've used "lint" in C code, is that what
you mean?), I don't want to see "examples," (although, they are better than
nothing), I want to see SPECIFICS.
2) The GitHub page is also pretty vague. You say
Mmmm, yeah: I'll second Graeme's "that doesn't make much sense to me."
What does "review a subset of the detections to better understand the types of
issues" actually mean?
And, "1st iteration"...of WHAT?
What data?
How can we give feedback on a "related issue" that is neither stated nor
I say this "from a great distance," but here goes: if you consider that
AU:Urban or AU:rural (and/or similar) are QUITE LOOSE compared to EXPLICIT
tagging, you might be able to nudge things ahead in a semantic parsing sense.
It won't be perfect, it likely never will be (ambiguities about
Very nice to see this discussion. At this point, I believe I am some Yank who
babbles too much.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
On Apr 19, 2022, at 4:29 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> ...Otherwise I think this will always be lacking in OSM until those maxspeed
> tags are set.
Right: this is the crux of what I was getting at. Explicit data in OSM can be
trusted, implicitly inferring data because of "defaults," well, not so
On Apr 18, 2022, at 6:50 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> We're using OSM and pgrouting and it's GREAT!
>
> Something that I have found difficult to come to terms with, is assigning a
> "default speed" for unclassified roads (without a maxspeed tag). This is
> because in metro area's these are
I'm mighty obliged to you for that excellent synopsis; thank you.
Yes, at a certain point such "proposals" have to "be discussed amongst
yourselves," of course, I've seen this and you are in a "certain stage" of such
things. Then there is your primer on "Aussie 2, 4, 6," excellent. Yeh, the
See, what I'm getting at is saying ACT District is 5, yet 7 means District,
well, that ambiguity trips me up.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
On Apr 10, 2022, at 5:53 PM, Dian Ågesson wrote:
> Thanks Andrew,
>
> I'll make the adjustments to level 7 and 9 in the update guidelines as I
> prepare them.
>
> I can also add the Districts of the ACT in at Level 5 as well, although
> should it be documented for all states' counties?
>
Speaking from personal experience as only one participant over many years
(between say, 2012 with some agreement in 2015 and some refinement 2020) in a
big country with a lot of states and dozens of their idiosyncrasies, getting
admin_level values "right" can be a true, multi-year-long wrangle
To be sure everyone reading knows, JOSM's buffer has amazing undo capacity, I
believe "all the way back to the beginning of the session." And there's the
fact you can edit, edit, play with things all day and night long, then you
simply do not upload to the OSM servers (and into the fabric of
On Apr 7, 2022, at 10:36 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> It means JOSM hasn't downloaded all the member ways, in one of the panels on
> the right showing the relation, right clicking download incomplete members
> will fetch them all.
Yes, Graeme, if you see in the bottom left pane of JOSM's
On Apr 7, 2022, at 10:31 PM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Well your router would need to look up the specific default whether that's
> something in the routing engine configuration, pulled from the OSM wiki, or
> pulled from the Victoria state relation def:* tags.
Right, I agree: that's part of the
On Apr 7, 2022, at 9:53 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> I think this is getting too much into mapping regulations, we could just have
> no bicycle tag and leave it to data consumers to apply the regional defaults.
>
> What would that do to bike routing?
There is bicycle infrastructure tagging
In the spirit of the OSM tenet of "be bold," and because you (all) have been so
open about the real vandalism / destruction this one person (account) is doing
to our map, I say "go ahead and revert his changesets yourself."
I've done this before when "the clear and present danger" of vandalism
Yes, as someone very involved with bicycle routing (and infrastructure), thank
you for noting the distinction that bicycle infrastructure tagging is ONE thing
(and important) and bicycle route tagging (inclusion of usually the latter
elements in a route relation) is ANOTHER (important) thing.
On Mar 7, 2022, at 12:41 AM, David Wales wrote:
> ...I took the opportunity to belatedly add this.
It’s like a good story with a wonderful happy ending.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
On Mar 2, 2022, at 1:18 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Have they simply forgotten that they posted them, so a reminder would og
> their memory; or as suggested, do they want somebody else to do the actual
> mapping work for them?
Let's not forget that a Note is often added by a "lesser
This might be tangential to the discussion, on the other hand, it might be a
kind of "hidden" or unstated assumption about how ways are "interpreted" in OSM
to mean some implied given semantic, which in my opinion, they shouldn't do.
So it could be revealing. Here goes: any given way should
Not boring at all; mighty impressive knock-down, actually. Go Team Oz!
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Nice.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
On Feb 20, 2022, at 2:41 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 at 18:24, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Some of ours, such as the India Pacific, are tourist only,
>
> I thought the IP also delivered some freight / supplies to the "towns"
> (alright - flyspecks!) across
On Feb 19, 2022, at 4:11 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Someone is mapping a 'train tour' into OSM.
> Should such things be mapped?
Yes. As someone who extensively maps rail infrastructure relations
(route=railway) as well as both passenger routes (route=train,
route=light_rail,
Lisa, also, please know that it can take different times for the various "zoom
levels" of the map to show the same data. For example, zoomed way up close,
all might look correct, then you zoom out (and it's OK), but you zoom out "one
more level" and it's like it was yesterday, or two days ago.
Yup, Lisa, what Thorsten said: it may be that somebody else has made an edit
"in the meantime" and you are really seeing the nodes in the map as they are
"right now."
It may be that you are witnessing that many people can edit the same data.
When this gets messy," it is called an "Edit
On Feb 17, 2022, at 8:16 PM, Lisa wrote:
> Thank you for such a quick response :)
OSM: We aim to please!
> When I go into Edit mode the old node that needs to be removed isn't
> displaying, but when I am not in edit mode I can see it?
> Am I using the wrong method of editing it?
> Or do I
On Feb 17, 2022, at 7:51 PM, Lisa wrote:
(a question)
Hi Lisa: I'm assuming you are using the iD editor. It seems you know the
difference between the new node being correct and the old node "needing to go,"
you can click on a node and delete it like this:
Select the node with a single
1 - 100 von 961 matches
Mail list logo
