: Re: [talk-au] Bicentennial National Trail is not a dedicated bicycle
route
On 14/09/2014 11:25 AM, Mark Rennick wrote:
I note there has been mapping of the Bicentennial National Trail as a ‘bicycle
route’ in the Victorian Alpine National Park area.
I have two comments on this:
1
On 14/09/2014 11:25 AM, Mark Rennick wrote:
I note there has been mapping of the Bicentennial National Trail as a
‘bicycle route’ in the Victorian Alpine National Park area.
I have two comments on this:
1.*This trail is not a dedicated ‘bicycle route’*. //
As stated on the http://www.bicen
I note there has been mapping of the Bicentennial National Trail as a
'bicycle route' in the Victorian Alpine National Park area.
I have two comments on this:
1.This trail is not a dedicated 'bicycle route'.
As stated on the http://www.bicentennialnationaltrail.com.au/about/ web
si
Sun Dec 1 19:41:34 UTC 2013
>
> From: Adrian adrianplaskitt at hotmail.com
> To:
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Bicentennial National Trail
> Message-ID:
>mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Sun Dec 1 19:41:34 UTC 2013, Adria
Hi Steve,
Are you telling me that, for the sake of showing the route in your site
http://cycletour.org1. for every rail trail, we should have 4 duplicated
relations - bicycle, mtb, walker, horse
2. for every bike route, there should be 3 duplicated relations - bicycle, mtb,
walker
Why don't yo
On 30 November 2013 Ian Sergeant wrote:
> We have relations for admin boundaries for entire countries,
> and relations for cross-country railways and highways.
> They'd seriously break if we made them into relations and
> super-relations just to satisfy someone's idea of how many
> is manageable.
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ian Sergeant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems the point of the three relations is to identify which parts
> of the trail are accessible to which categories of users. How do you
> intend to encapsulate that info?
>
> What is the basis for splitting the trail into state s
On 30 November 2013 14:56, Mander Li wrote:
> No such problem. There is one and only one official route that walker, MTB
> and horse are able to take on; ie the existing 3 relations should be exactly
> the same.
Cool. So obviously you have the right idea that they should be de-duplicated.
> The
> It seems the point of the three relations is to identify which parts
of the trail are accessible to which categories of users. How do you
intend to encapsulate that info?
No such problem. There is one and only one official route that walker, MTB and
horse are able to take on; ie the existing 3
Hi,
It seems the point of the three relations is to identify which parts
of the trail are accessible to which categories of users. How do you
intend to encapsulate that info?
What is the basis for splitting the trail into state sections, and
putting three relations into another reln? I don't th
I tried to create a "Bicentennial National Trail" relation, but found 4
relations of this name:
Relation 176684: created in July 2009 by John Henderson with route=hiking. This
covers 213km from Canberra CBD to Taralga (half way between Canberra and Sydney)
Relation 2347837 created on 13/8/2012
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Nick Hocking wrote:
> They also need to have topographical maps for their trail guides but I'm not
> sure whether OSM has that yet for Australia. It turns out that the trail I
> was riding on is part of the BNT but is not yet mapped as such in OSM, so
> I'll have t
Am happy to help re technical convos - can talk about postgis/mapnik to
render, or other things like slippy map solutions
On Apr 30, 2013 5:35 PM, "John Henderson" wrote:
> On 30/04/13 14:29, Nick Hocking wrote:
>
> The other day I was riding the push bike along some trails and got
>> talking to
On 2013-04-30 10:02, John Henderson wrote:
I'd be delighted to offer what help I can.
If it's any use, Qld portion dataset is available and may be on a
compatible licence:
http://www.nrm.qld.gov.au/services_resources/item_details.php?item_id=34193
The data is hard to link to: in the "Searc
On 30/04/13 14:29, Nick Hocking wrote:
The other day I was riding the push bike along some trails and got
talking to some horse riders.
It turns out the Lady (Jenny) is the ACT coordinator for (and also
the secretary of) the Bicentennial National Trail Ltd. Naturally I
dropped the term Openstre
Hi
The other day I was riding the push bike along some trails and got talking
to some horse riders.
It turns out the Lady (Jenny) is the ACT coordinator for (and also the
secretary of) the Bicentennial National Trail Ltd. Naturally I dropped the
term Openstreetmap and it appears that they are ver
On 06/10/11 17:17, Steve Bennett wrote:
Interesting. Who makes the changes? Do they update any signs?
I did the initial mapping and some changes, but I notice that others
have contributed updates.
Generally, new signage gets added (although old signs on disused
sections usually get left there
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 5:08 PM, John Henderson wrote:
> Not to mention that BNT maps are usually out-of-date before they're even
> printed.
>
> Even in my area (the part already mapped), the exact route changes several
> times a year.
Interesting. Who makes the changes? Do they update any signs?
On 06/10/11 16:47, Steve Bennett wrote:
It would be very cool to have it fully mapped. As a trail, it has the
same issue as some other trails like the Tasmanania Trail, which
really work best for horses and are problematic for cyclists (poor
surface, obstacles) and hikers (lacking interest, long
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Chris Barham wrote:
> I suppose that the reason it's not on OSM is because the guidebooks
> with the route have to be purchased, are copyrighted, and in some
> cases out of print or very hard to find.
Yeah I know a bit about the BNT. It's also hard to directly map
Am I reading it right, that it is 250m accuracy data, with the trail as at
it was 20 years ago?
If so, we may want to consider the data quality.
Ian.
On 6 October 2011 13:56, Chris Barham wrote:
> The 5,330 km National Trail known as the "Australian Bicentennial
> National Trail (BNT)", is o
The 5,330 km National Trail known as the "Australian Bicentennial
National Trail (BNT)", is only partially mapped in OSM.
Refs:
OSM existing Route Relation: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/176684
There is a website regarding the trail here http://www.nationaltrail.com.au/
I suppose t
22 matches
Mail list logo
