2010/1/16 Jim Croft :
> this is not to denigrate the actions, only to point out we can do even
> better in making information and data available.
Yes but it won't happen simply because greed and other selfish acts
will get in the way.
___
Talk-au mailin
2010/1/16 Roy Wallace :
> Interesting. But the catch is, as you say, "only what is edited from
> existing PD data". And if you have different mappers using different
If that's too much of a limitation then more drastic action would be
needed, nothing will please everyone all the time.
> licenses,
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 1:10 PM, James Livingston wrote:
> > On 15/01/2010, at 8:45 PM, Liz wrote:
> >> so perhaps the signs are actually meaningless in law
> >> they appear in council minutes so perhaps its a local council job
> >
> > From my searching,
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>
> For the time being, it might be best to tag them with a specific
> "local_traffic_only=yes" or something, so we know exactly what is
> being encoded.
+1. I've emailed QLD gov and Brisbane CC about what the signs mean,
though I'm not holdin
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 2:43 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
> If we can get people making editors to add tags to changesets based on
> your license preference then any PD data, even if it's changed later
> to become ODBL, can be collected.
...
> the changeset might be good enough, as long as
> the code c
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 10:19 AM, wrote:
> http://geosquan.blogspot.com/2010/01/haitian-earthquake-emphasizes-danger-of.html
including:
"For example, I watched Google, DigitalGlobe, and GeoEye all work
together to get stunning imagery collected, processed, and published
FREE to the international
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 1:10 PM, James Livingston wrote:
> On 15/01/2010, at 8:45 PM, Liz wrote:
>> so perhaps the signs are actually meaningless in law
>> they appear in council minutes so perhaps its a local council job
>
> From my searching, it looks like councils are responsible for putting up
I wonder if the police would bother pursuing the matter if people were
caught for the same offence on OSM...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Robin Paulson
Date: 2010/1/16
Subject: [OSM-talk] Florist apologises: A florist says changing
competitors' details on Google Maps 'became an a
2010/1/16 Roy Wallace :
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 12:16 PM, James Livingston wrote:
>>
>> It's all a matter of tradeoffs and what is most important to you - being
>> able to use it for whatever you want, or getting the most data in OSM.
>
> Well said. Funny thing is, they're not independent - i.e
2010/1/16 Liz :
> On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, John Smith wrote:
>> We're tagging what the sign states, what it means will vary between
>> legal jurisdictions...
>>
>> __
>>
> but first we have to find out what it really means, and what are the
> restrictions
I'm not disagr
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 12:16 PM, James Livingston wrote:
>
> It's all a matter of tradeoffs and what is most important to you - being able
> to use it for whatever you want, or getting the most data in OSM.
Well said. Funny thing is, they're not independent - i.e. making OSM
data more usable fo
On 16/01/2010, at 9:32 AM, John Smith wrote:
> This seems like a spurious argument, ok your suggestion will allow
> both projects to "profit" from your data, but any additions can't be
> shared back with your suggested project, nor will Google share any of
> it's data back, unless it's in Google's
Have begun adding OD routes (oversize vehicle routes) to the existing page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Victoria%2C_Australia/Routes.
I also note there have been a few changes made to the page. Would appreciate
all the help I can get on this, probably mapping the unmapped section
On 15/01/2010, at 8:45 PM, Liz wrote:
> so perhaps the signs are actually meaningless in law
> they appear in council minutes so perhaps its a local council job
>From my searching, it looks like councils are responsible for putting up these
>signs and I couldn't find any actual legal definition o
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, John Smith wrote:
> We're tagging what the sign states, what it means will vary between
> legal jurisdictions...
>
> __
>
but first we have to find out what it really means, and what are the
restrictions
how they compare to other restrictions
2010/1/16 Roy Wallace :
> The main issue that access=destination (i.e. applying to all traffic
> modes) is wrong - it isn't on the ground, and (quite probably...)
> isn't even in the legal books.
I haven't seen any signs that distinguish between traffic, they just
state "Local Traffic Only" anythi
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 7:41 AM, John Smith wrote:
> 2010/1/16 Roy Wallace :
>> Interesting. So this potentially means all access=destination tags
>> should be changed to motor_vehicle=destination + motorcycle=yes. Would
>> be better to first get confirmation from government on the sign's
>> meani
2010/1/16 :
> Hi everyone,
>
> As I work to bring CommonMap to fruition I'm heartened that I'm not the only
> one
> that wants to see it happen.
>
> If you're handy to Brisbane tonight then come join the CommonMap association
> as
> part of the Samford Mapping Party
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.
Hi everyone,
As I work to bring CommonMap to fruition I'm heartened that I'm not the only one
that wants to see it happen.
If you're handy to Brisbane tonight then come join the CommonMap association as
part of the Samford Mapping Party
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Samford_Mapping_Party_Ja
2010/1/16 Roy Wallace :
> Interesting. So this potentially means all access=destination tags
> should be changed to motor_vehicle=destination + motorcycle=yes. Would
> be better to first get confirmation from government on the sign's
> meaning though...
Does this mean we should tag bus lanes in NS
2010/1/16 David Murn :
> Last time I checked, a bushfire doesnt change the geographical location
> of *everything*, like a 7.0 earthquake does. Im sure there were OSM
> updates in Australia after the fires of damaged infrastructure, but we
Damaged infrasturcture is only one issue, having accurate
2010/1/16 Alex (Maxious) Sadleir :
> Technological Disasters". It did get activated for the Australian
> bushfires but the USGS were the only ones to act on it and there's no
> published imagery:
> http://www.disasterscharter.org/web/charter/activation_details?p_r_p_1415474252_assetId=ACT-244
If I
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 8:56 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
> Motorbike riders are exempt from a number of things cars aren't,
...
> So doesn't entirely surprise me.
Interesting. So this potentially means all access=destination tags
should be changed to motor_vehicle=destination + motorcycle=yes. Would
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, Liz wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, David Murn wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 06:56 +1000, John Smith wrote:
> > > 2010/1/14 Jim Croft :
> > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti#2010_Earthquake_
> > > >Re sponse
> > > > http://blog.ushahidi.com/index.php/201
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, David Murn wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 06:56 +1000, John Smith wrote:
> > 2010/1/14 Jim Croft :
> > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti#2010_Earthquake_Re
> > >sponse http://blog.ushahidi.com/index.php/2010/01/13/haiti-earthquake/
> >
> > I'm not trying to
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 06:56 +1000, John Smith wrote:
> 2010/1/14 Jim Croft :
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti#2010_Earthquake_Response
> > http://blog.ushahidi.com/index.php/2010/01/13/haiti-earthquake/
>
> I'm not trying to detract from how badly off people are in Haiti...
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 7:56 AM, John Smith wrote:
> 2010/1/14 Jim Croft :
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Haiti#2010_Earthquake_Response
>> http://blog.ushahidi.com/index.php/2010/01/13/haiti-earthquake/
>
> I'm not trying to detract from how badly off people are in Haiti...
> b
2010/1/15 Roy Wallace :
> So this would seem to infer that motorbike riders don't have to obey
> Local Traffic Only signs. Strange (and/or incorrect).
Motorbike riders are exempt from a number of things cars aren't,
they're allowed to be in transit lanes without any other passengers,
they're allow
Sam Couter wrote:
Roy Wallace wrote:
So the routing software has to approximate the target node with some
other node that *is* connected... and if the router does this
approximation sub-optimally, this is a problem with the router, right?
How can it possibly know? Thi
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010, Roy Wallace wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> > Can you legally ride a bike
> > through a Local Traffic Only area?
>
> The closest I could find, for Queensland is from:
> http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/T/TrantOpRURR09.pdf
>
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Roy Wallace wrote:
>
> Can you legally ride a bike
> through a Local Traffic Only area?
The closest I could find, for Queensland is from:
http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/T/TrantOpRURR09.pdf
"97 (1) Road access signs: A driver must not drive on
2010/1/15 :
> Alcohol prohibited: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/384683
> it doesn't highlight St Leonard's Park. - Perhaps this is a bug I
> should file? (and where would I file it to?)
I don't think child relations do anything/much... this isn't so much a
bug as a feature enhance
32 matches
Mail list logo
