On 29 September 2013 18:27, Andrew andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
OpenStreetmap HADW osmhadw@... writes:
My own assumption is that they are not a valid source, but I've just
discovered one route, by a contributor who has added several bus
routes, where their bus route finder web site has
I've just noticed (changeset 18037116) someone using this Land
Registry data search tool to actually populate, rather than simply
flag for re-survey postcode data. Given that the Land Registry
require a copyright notice, and, unlike OS Open Data, there is no such
copyright notice on OSM, is this
On 28 September 2013 20:45, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:
== Quote ==
I've just noticed (changeset 18037116) someone using this Land
Registry data search tool to actually populate, rather than simply
flag for re-survey postcode data. Given that the Land Registry
require a
On 28 September 2013 23:50, Nick Allen nick.allen...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyway, if you're looking for a project in OSM, adding addresses is easily
accomplished. Personally I currently use Keypad-Mapper 3 OSMTracker to do
my surveying, and the exercise does me the world of good.
If anyone
On 28 September 2013 20:52, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh I should add that I am a fan of source tags on the objects myself so I
add a source:postcode=Land Registry 'Price Paid' data tag (or =ONS
Postcode Centroids) to my edits. Not everyone agrees that source tags should
On 23 September 2013 11:39, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote:
I'm trying to get this user account suspended/banned:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Quercus1/edits
Whilst, if they fail to respond to a direct approach, such steps may
be needed...
I have tried contacting him/her to no
On 23/09/13 14:08, Tom Chance wrote: On 23 September 2013 12:27,
OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.com
mailto:osmh...@gmail.com wrote:
The edits seem to be seriously incompetent, rather than actually
bogus, or malicious.
I'm not sure, they are strange edits. On the one hand
On 23 September 2013 18:47, Peter Oliver p.d.oli...@mavit.org.uk wrote:
Didn't someone mention that this user was using JOSM? JOSM pre-populates
the comment field with the previously submitted comment.
The other thing it does is to add to an existing changeset, and the
changeset is left
On 16 September 2013 16:14, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2013 14:18, Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote:
If there is no license on their website regarding the information, then
shouldn't it be considered public domain?
Err, no. That's not how the law
On 16 September 2013 19:18, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote:
On 16/09/2013 17:35, Adam Hoyle wrote:
On 16 Sep 2013, at 16:14, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
Almost all retail sites will claim blanket copyright in every page of their
websites. Just to take one at
On 17 September 2013 09:01, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
s.
Unfortunately, CodePoint Open is the one dataset in the OS OpenData
collection that hasn't been cleared for use in OSM. See
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2013-July/015028.html
On 17 September 2013 09:15, SK53 sk53@gmail.com wrote:
Just a general point about shops. There is a perfectly good OPEN data source
containing address ( postcode centroid as lat/lon) available for all food
outlets covering most UK local authorities.
Aren't the postcode centroids subject to
On 15 September 2013 11:27, ael law_ence@ntlworld.com wrote:
It is a few years since I looked at any of this, but it had not occurred
to me that any copyright issue could arise. They are essentially modern
trig points. There is a mark on the ground, and their website publishes
the
I'm pretty sure that store locators pages on chain store web sites are
not safe sources, but can someone confirm this.
I've just come across a, recently added feature, purporting to be an
Asda supermarket building, way 237818118. As its only purported
source it quotes the URL of the store
On 15 September 2013 22:24, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
On 15/09/2013 21:41, OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
I'm pretty sure that store locators pages on chain store web sites are
not safe sources, but can someone confirm this.
What do mean by safe? Inaccurate? Unlawful?
Likely
On 13 September 2013 19:59, ael law_ence@ntlworld.com wrote:
No one has mentioned the OS gps (passive) stations: for example
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/472420260
On 10 September 2013 10:09, o...@k3v.eu wrote:
This has been discussed on the list before. Bing image alignment can be
quite poor
One unfortunate consequence of this is that there are areas of the map
where the majority of features are out of position by 15 or more feet,
because people have
On 13 September 2013 12:31, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Which is the higher priority, consistency or accuracy? Is it better to have
an internally consistent map, where everything is topologically correct but
possibly a little displaced by a uniform vector, or is it better to have
On 13 September 2013 12:55, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote:
Why do you suppose OS Streetview is correct? I find that compared to multiple
GPS tracks it is not always well aligned and more recent Bing imagery is
often better.
I did consider that possibility, but I did a search for that
On 13 September 2013 14:46, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
On 13/09/13 14:28, OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
How does one find that out for the tiles served by
os.openstreetmap.org, and if they are not using the high accuracy
conversions, why not? (OS' own online viewer also uses WGS84
On 7 September 2013 21:41, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
In practice, there is only one renderer for general users
That's a statement that could provoke some discussion, I suspect.
If you have a look at the questions on help.osm.org you'll see
If anyone is able to attend a club meeting in Burnt Oak, Edgware
between 8 and 10 this evening with evangelism materials for
OpenStreetMap, ideally a live demo, could they contact me off list. I
didn't check the club programme until I was in the office, so won't be
able to collect any any
On 9 September 2013 20:05, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
I'm currently playing in an area where the highest resolution imagery is
still an older view, while as I zoom out we step to newer imagery which is
some distance off from the map tracks. I'm fairly happy with the map as I
have
I keep coming across cases where marking the access to a way based on
primary category will imply that the way is not suitable for use on
foot. That becomes particularly interesting with barriers, as in
those cases, the sidewalk may bypass the barrier.
For concrete examples, I'll use Northwick
Is there a mechanism for getting requests onto the wish list for the
Open Street Map Mapnk style sheets?
The particular issue is that now that people can trace quite small
features, some areas are getting overloaded with private foot paths
and private car parks (not to mention alleys and
On 7 September 2013 14:46, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
Streetmaps do tend to be abstractions of the real world, and
openstreetmap ceased to be be a mere streetmap several years ago, and is
a far far better map than a mere streetmap can ever be. The word
streetmap implies urban,
On 7 September 2013 14:36, les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
Sent from my android device so the quoting is crapp!
-Original Message-
From: OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.com
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 13:44
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways
On 28 August 2013 09:50, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
new-fangled expensive wedding licences. Or telling my local vicar and his
wife that they live in a place of worship.
That does rather assume the right building has been marked! I've just
come across a case where the OS have marked
On 29 August 2013 09:42, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
comparable to the European Environment Agency's Urban Atlas. The slides are
here. I think there are enough details in the methodology for anyone to
You might have warned me about the size of the document, so I
downloaded it at off
On 29 August 2013 11:59, Barry Cornelius barrycorneliu...@gmail.com wrote:
adding the information to OSM as the data provided by a council can be
out-of-date and it is necessary to check whether the data agrees with what's
on the ground. There are also licensing issues.
The councils'
On 28 August 2013 23:15, Dudley Ibbett dudleyibb...@hotmail.com wrote:
This would perhaps suggest they should be marked as ways with barrier=hedge
and hedge=line_of_trees or perhaps just the latter.
An alternative might be to use natural=tree_row which is defined in the wiki
but the examples
On 24 August 2013 12:32, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
I doubt if anyone checks the Naptan account: it's an import account largely
to separate personal mapping from imports. Furthermore I don't know how
active the user who co-ordinated the imports is these days: info is
available on the
The rules for places of worship differ from other amenities in that
there is a strong diktat that only the actual building (where there is
a building) should be tagged. This seems to be partially backed up by
an assumption that all places of worship are medieval churches with
graveyards, so that
On 28 August 2013 09:50, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
churchyard (probably the tag you are looking for landuse=churchyard, to
heavily used but in existence) instead of a church: you need one of the
I was hoping for something with less Christian connotations. Besides
having a zero
NaPTAN stops can be placed in one of the following categories
(initially the not-verified one):
- not-verified (imported but not surveyed on the ground);
- verified (NaPTAN data has been correlated with a physical stop on
the ground and the location adjusted, if necessary);
- physically not
On 22 August 2013 10:03, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
website=xxx - which will give the details (if we could access them from the
map)
I'm not sure if I can quote the website in this case as Google may
have a database copyright on it. I generally only quote websites if
they are
On 22 August 2013 15:46, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote:
In the West Midlands we have dozens of these which cater mainly for Asian
weddings and celebrations where large extended families have to be catered
for. Probably the same in most large urban areas. I generally just tag them
as
On 22 August 2013 18:57, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
I am not sure what your issue was with highway=path etc, but do you mean
rationalising as in the sense of reducing the number of tags, thus losing
(subtle) distinctions? I can't see how that is the same as the phone number
On 22 August 2013 10:03, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
website=xxx - which will give the details (if we could access them from the
map)
If you access it from http://www.openlinkmap.org/ you can access them
from the map (and also phone numbers).
On 23 August 2013 22:15, Paul Bivand paul.biv...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
However, I normally ignore spacing because the concept of area code is dying.
There is a secondary reason for spacing and that is that short term
memory can only cope with about 7 things at once, so it is a good idea
to
On 21 August 2013 14:44, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:
Banqueting hall seems rather specific.
These types of places may be used for a wide variety of events, so may be
known by different names. eg might be used for conferences, exhibition, live
music etc.
I think a more generic
Something I've noticed is that the British seem to be particularly bad
at entering phone numbers properly, in particular, more than half of
them have been entered in national format; even the Americans seem to
get this one right and so do other countries.
Other common problems are:
- the bogus
On 22 August 2013 08:07, OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 August 2013 14:44, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:
That's probably better than banqueting hall. On the other hand, it
needs to be distinguished from the concept exposition centre which
One other possible
On 22 August 2013 08:41, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
specialist market band wagon, 'Banqueting hall' is another use that could be
applied anywhere, but I can see that being a specialist type of restaurant
rather than a 'hall' since essentially it's a place to eat with some form of
On 22 August 2013 08:43, Oliver Jowett oliver.jow...@gmail.com wrote:
- no delimiter (+442079460676)
- misplaced delimiter (+44 207 946 0676)
Aren't these unambiguous already?
They breach the existing guidelines, which call for the (UK usage)
area code to be delimited. In particular, in
45 matches
Mail list logo
