It seems we have a mass import of truck stops going on by user TorhamZed.
I have some concerns about this, since there doesn't seem to be any
documentation for this import, they appear to be tagged as caravan sites,
and sources cited on the ones I've noticed appear to be from the operator's
Access=no, boat=yes?
On Jun 25, 2013 6:01 PM, Thomas Colson thomas_col...@nps.gov wrote:
I’m tagging some camp sites as “boat=yes” to imply water access only, but
I don’t think this is right. Is there a water-only access tag?
___
Talk-us
On Jun 25, 2013 9:51 PM, Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO the first criterion I'd look for is: does this road carry the same
restrictions associated with a freeway in the state in question? For
example, in many states, freeways have posted access restriction signs
limiting use
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Richie Kennedy
richiekenned...@gmail.comwrote:
In Kansas, Signs indicating access restrictions are posted on the on-ramps
to interstates and some (but *not* all) non-interstate freeways. K-10, for
instance, has posted access restrictions on the Douglas County
and US:UT:Future as a county highway in 'Future County'. I guess it is
imaginable. Not likely, but imaginable.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I prefer the modifier proposal, since it prevents Future from being
confused with a county level network
richiekenned...@gmail.comwrote:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
But that goes back to are we trying to be consistent within OSM, or are
we trying to second guess the renderer to look like some other publisher's
map? Or to put it another way, Why are we
, then there would be
the possibility of confusion between US:UT:Future as a future state route
and US:UT:Future as a county highway in 'Future County'. I guess it is
imaginable. Not likely, but imaginable.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I prefer
guess it is
imaginable. Not likely, but imaginable.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I prefer the modifier proposal, since it prevents Future from being
confused with a county level network.
On Jun 24, 2013 11:16 PM, James Mast rickmastfa
There seems to be some disagreement on how to handle the super-two (or
super-four s California has a few of) highways. These highways are two
lanes, one each way (or four lanes, two each way) with no central division
or median, but freeway-like connecting ramps. Examples would be long
stretches
I prefer the modifier proposal, since it prevents Future from being
confused with a county level network.
On Jun 24, 2013 11:16 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
Later tonight, I'm planning on splitting up the relations for the
following Interstates (I-26, I-73, I-74) in North
. Not likely, but imaginable.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I prefer the modifier proposal, since it prevents Future from being
confused with a county level network.
On Jun 24, 2013 11:16 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com wrote:
Later tonight, I'm
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM, richiekenned...@gmail.com wrote:
I have marked US 169 between Iola and Chanute as Motorway because,
although it is a super-two, it is fully controlled access along this
segment. I believe this is consistent with the way most commercial
map-makers would mark
How about...
network=US:I
modifier=Future
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:53 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
* James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.com [2013-06-22 20:04 -0400]:
Yep, here's picture proof that I personally took a few years ago of a
Future I-26 shield:
Pretty cool so far, though for the Ref, it'd help a lot if it sorted
numerically rather than alphabetically. 117A shouldn't appear before 3...
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
Hi,
A few of us were talking about setting up custom highway shield
, 2013 8:25 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
TxDOT is cited in Wikipedia as documenting them as being the same network
(farm to market), and no RM and FM have the same number. They just change
the sign to RM when the route primarily passes through ranches instead of
farms. According
to, and/or
the cited source?
I'd rather solve this without more mailing list drama, if possible.
On Jun 20, 2013 9:06 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Check the Farm-to-market page on Wikipedia.
On Jun 19, 2013 11:00 PM, Clay Smalley claysmal...@gmail.com wrote:
Does the Wikipedia bit
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
Also, how is the situation on the state level? I notice that for some
states, there are no State Route relation pages. (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_Numbered_Highway_Relations#See_also
)
I'm
Curious if you guys are using US:KS for the network, which would fit the
pattern or not? I ask because on the way's ref tags, some people are
correctly using KS, but others are just using K.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, I'm guessing
and there are quite a lot of them. I made a Mapcraft
to help add relations to them all: http://mapcraft.nanodesu.ru/pie/269
I've made a little progress in the Texas Panhandle but we definitely need
more people to help out if it's gonna get done.
On Jun 19, 2013 7:39 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
roads. There may be little
to no overlap between RM and FM, and they may serve the same purpose, but I
see no need to go through them all and change all of them to one network.
They are different networks according to the state of Texas.
On Jun 19, 2013 12:52 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
Kind of looking forward to that, too, since it would allow more accurately
mapping situations like Oregon, where State Highways are the original
numbers used on trailblazers and what ODOT refers to roads it's roadways
as, as opposed to the State Routes that usually traverse multiple state
.
** **
Kerry Irons
** **
** **
*From:* Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org]
*Sent:* Saturday, June 08, 2013 11:24 PM
*To:* OpenStreetMap talk-us list
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-us] Removing US Bicycle Route tags
** **
** **
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:18 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor
This would be an acceptable compromise.
On Jun 14, 2013 6:00 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
On 6/14/2013 5:43 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
We do map proposed routes, we don't map for the renderer.
earlier
In which I would really prefer this be addressed as a rendering issue. I
believe
Well, on the flip side, there's also been some serious damage from torquing
the primary and trunk tags on an indiscriminate nationwide basis that's
still in the process of being fixed two years later.
On Jun 12, 2013 8:49 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
I had some positive
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Darrell Fuhriman darr...@garnix.orgwrote:
But how would such a thing be tagged?
By boundary, what's the next level below city?
For instance, here in Portland, we have defined neighborhoods, which have
neighborhood associations, and a city bureau (the Office
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:52 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
It sounds like you want to add a feature to OSM/OCM so that the corridors
can be shown. From a mapping standpoint, I don’t see what this
accomplishes since the AASHTO map was created at the “50,000 foot level”
and
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:18 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
So Paul, what you really want is advocacy mapping. Not mapping reality
but mapping what you want to have. It comes as a great surprise to me that
this is what OSM is all about. Do you think this is the consensus of
I see the route numbers as potentially valuable to differentiate routes
where two may cross or duplex. Unless I'm missing something fundamental,
pretty much every aspect in a state=proposed relation isn't final until
it's official, including the route number. Especially since as far as I'm
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 5:35 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
Again Paul I don’t understand what you are saying: you state “if AASHTO is
already referring to them in proposals.” AASHTO has prepared a corridor
plan. AASHTO does not develop routes. Route development takes place
-Original Message-
From: Paul Johnson **
Sent: May 31, 2013 7:36 PM
To: ok...@gis.ou.edu, OpenStreetMap talk-us list **
Subject: [Talk-us] Post tornado HOT mapping
I would like to give a heads-up to any Humanitarian OSM Team folks on
this, since assistance may be needed as early
See, that's the crux of the thing, though... firstly, be aware that NE2
was banned because he was pushing his agenda against the wishes of the
community, and taking things off-list where things couldn't be discussed
with the community, so you're just as guilty as he is right now with that
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:49 AM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
Actually Paul, people have disagreed. There are those who have taken the
position in this exchange that Who does AASHTO think they are? I and
others have tried to clarify that.
Then I have to wonder why ACA is
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:03 AM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
You really are making this personal Paul, but I don’t understand why.
That's not the intent.
I only asked that those who might want to help clean up the mis-tagged
routes
could contact me directly. Is that some
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:37 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
**
Adventure Cycling did not propose the USBR route numbers. The route
numbering system and the corridor plan came from AASHTO. We had
representation on the AASHTO Task Force but were only one of many members
on
This creates major issues for many routes in the US, especially bike
routes, US Historic 66, US Historic 30, and US Historic 666, which due to
regional significance, unique and interesting signage, or both, frequently
are missing trailblazers, confirmation signage or way finding signage in
part or
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 5:40 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
I have no problem with OSM mappers putting proposed bike routes on maps but
they should not be assigning USBR route numbers to them when they are not
approved USBRs. In some cases there is a process underway to get a
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
The current discussion is about tagging a proposed bike route with a
number in USBR namespace, when the USBR naming authority has not put
that router/number into proposed status.
Then the relevant bodies need to stop bandying
What's the source for this system? Is it widely adopted?
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:01 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:
I just wanted to add that the CycleNet proposal I mentioned in my previous
post is simply a numbering protocol added to ALREADY EXISTING (Class I, II
and III)
Curious when the JOSM OpenStreetBugs feature will be updated to handle the
new Notes system, does anyone know?
Also curious if the Skobbler folks follow the list, and what the thoughts
are of either incorporating their Mapdust category features (I find them
handy) into Notes, and/or possibly
I would like to give a heads-up to any Humanitarian OSM Team folks on this,
since assistance may be needed as early as this weekend given developing
events with dangerous storms moving through most major Oklahoma cities at
this hour.
This looks like it's going to be another hairy day for
Not a cafe, then, that'd be more of a restaurant.
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:21 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.comwrote:
I have often seen the term used in the USA by casual-dining restaurants
that cook from scratch, instead of relying on the heavily pre-prepared food
characteristic of
While it tries to be more like an upscale fast-food place, it's core
concept and the way people interact with it is definitely cafe.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Peter Dobratz pe...@dobratz.us wrote:
I've never been to a Tim Hortons, but it looks like it's very similar to
the Dunkin'
While it tries to be more like an upscale fast-food place, it's core
concept and the way people interact with it is definitely cafe.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Peter Dobratz pe...@dobratz.us wrote:
I've never been to a Tim Hortons, but it looks like it's very similar to
the Dunkin'
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
I just discovered that iD presumes that some tags are exclusive, e.g. you
can't add (at least not via preset) on the same way (line) more than one of
these tags: highway, railway, power but afaik it is common
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:30 AM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.comwrote:
So, you are saying that if the tram tracks are located in the highway, but
off-center, then the map should not reflect the ground truth? I have seen
numerous streets where there are tram tracks in both directions, and
Throwing this into the list, I believe this makes the 9 aerial for Moore
OK for us.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
Date: May 23, 2013 10:20 AM
Subject: RE: [Talk-us] Fwd: [okgis] Moore Tornado Aerials- May 21, 2013
To: Taylor Denniston tay...@btls.us
OK, I'm trying to get started on disaster mapping in the Moore area
following the storm, since we're talking about a 22 mile track that is
affecting navigation and basic mobility in a long swath at the primary
egress to a major metro, not to mention everyday navigation for people
working and doing
really want to map the exact current conditions?
I am not trying to be difficult, just want to make a positive
contribution, and not do something that someone else will have to spend
effort to undo.
Thanks,
Mike
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote
Having a hard time locating any updated imagery, but if anyone wants to get
started on mapping Sunday's devastation, here's the kmz. Stay safe, many
of today's storms are near or on the same tracks.
http://gis.ou.edu/sympa/arc/okgis/2013-05/msg00050.html
I have to wonder if we're not running into UKisms that don't apply to the
US at all, similar to what we ran into with road routes. Perhaps another
scheme is needed, similar to how road networks work out. I've run into
similar issues with local cycleways, where the LCNs really ought to be
divided
On Apr 21, 2013 12:29 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote:
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
It's a little bit of a chicken/egg thing right now. As far as I'm
aware, rendering of tribal nations went offline in mapnik around the time I
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.orgwrote:
I wonder if someone would be willing to make a proper proposal for 3 and
5.
I'd be willing, but not after more research. I think we need
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote:
In the US, Federally recognized tribes seem to be somewhere equal to state
or higher, thus admin level 3 would seem more appropriate. But then there
are cases where the the tribe occupies a small city. Question, how
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
Am 21/apr/2013 um 19:59 schrieb Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
Is rendering the issue or tagging?
Yes.
IMHO we should get the tagging right and rendering will follow. As we
don't have similar
OK, but would you apply this to Scotland and Wales? Because that's an
analogous situation in the UK.
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 8:33 AM, tshrub my-email-confirmat...@online.dewrote:
...
hi,
here
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=protected_area
something is prepared.
may be
On Apr 20, 2013 7:23 PM, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:
On 2013-04-20 19:24, Paul Johnson wrote:
OK, but would you apply this to Scotland and Wales? Because that's an
analogous situation in the UK.
Not really.
Scotland/England/Wales are clearly administrative boundaries
On Apr 20, 2013 8:53 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote:
One part of my original message I still need help with. Why aren't we
adding these boundaries to OSM? If it is just that no one as added any or
is there an issue I'm not aware of? Personally I'd like to start adding in
these
The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive (particularly
with the rendering, which suggested indian nations and reservations were
the same and more of a touristic draw than administratively significant).
I've suggested using administrative level 3 and 5 for the purpose in north
Sounds like all the more reason to try this.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:01 PM, NopMap ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
Jean-Marc Liotier wrote
On learning that, any normal Openstreetmap user immediately wonders how
to access the log.
Is anyone here aware of connectivity and API for those systems
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
The previous tagging was inadequate, bordering on offensive
Which tagging was that?
It is my understanding that First Nations boundaries just
As previously stated, admin levels 3 and 5 depending on status as a nation
or reservation, respectively.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Richard
I think we need to get lanes and turn lanes nailed down a bit first...then
there's the whole bit about how you're going to detect changes in lane
counts along the way, since this almost certainly would require splitting
ways to get counts accurate (and a big reason why I abandoned trying to
nail
Right, but if the road has lanes open for travel, then it's highway=*,
construction=minor, *not* highway=construction.
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 10:22 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.comwrote:
Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't access=no implied
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't access=no implied with any
construction=* value other than minor? At least this is the feel I got
from live use as the way mkgmap interprets things.
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Clifford Snow writes:
How do you tag
It it's going to reopen, change highway=* to construction=*, then add
highway=construction.
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.uswrote:
How do you tag roads that are out of service. We have a section of Widbey
Island that was wiped out by a landslide. It will
Yes, TriMet did edit bike data in Portland, and you can get bike directions
from their trip planner.
On Mar 26, 2013 9:37 AM, alyssa wright alyssapwri...@gmail.com wrote:
mentioned this to alex earlier, but i believe trimet was also editing bike
path data though not sure what came of that. the
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote:
On 3/17/13 11:09 PM, Evan Robohm wrote:
My question is how literally should we as mappers
tag them--like the Wiki page says or as they're advertised
on road signs? This also applies to how ramps are
tagged--does
Let's not chide people for keeping this discussion on the list in the open
where it belongs.
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 9:12 AM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
Alex,
I am in contact with the mappers involved as they have responded to my
initial message. This discussion with your
that
are
not in communication.
Kerry
-Original Message-
From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org]
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 12:35 AM
To: OpenStreetMap talk-us list
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA
What I mean to say is these were likely
If I can get the route through Oregon, I wouldn't mind finishing out that
route.
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:03 AM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
Nathan,
Thanks for letting me know the source of the OSM/OCM maps. Paul Johnson
has
contacted me as well.
As you may have seen
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 6:04 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
It's fine to tag a route as proposed but proposed by who?
Let's not get hung up in the semantics; it basically means for all
practical purposes not live yet.
___
Talk-us
If it's showing up with an under construction or proposed status, it's
subject to change and there for approximate visualization in those cases.
If you'd like to propose a better way to handle that situation, I'm sure
the folks involved would love to hear it!
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 2:48 PM,
-
From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 3:19 PM
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk-us list
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] US Bicycle Routes in KY, TN, AL, MS, and GA
If it's showing up with an under construction or proposed status, it's
subject to change
On Friday, March 8, 2013, Mario Danelli wrote:
Dear all,
I just released Android country versions of the Master City game
Where can we find out more about this game?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Thursday, February 21, 2013, Greg Troxel wrote:
I have lots of traces, have drawn ways from them (in josm), and I
haven't uploaded any of them. So not having traces in one's accounts
should not lead to the conclusion that GPS was not used.
Curious why someone would keep this information
On Thursday, February 21, 2013, Mike N wrote:
On 2/21/2013 5:05 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Curious why someone would keep this information to themselves rather
than aiding others in improving the map.
In my case, it's sheer laziness. I would also prefer to block out
sections around my
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
o You don't have users making changes that nobody visiting the
county real property office will fine.
Sounds like a good use for a WMS layer with the current official data
accessible to editors, and vigilant locals
On Feb 14, 2013 2:54 AM, Kevin Peat k...@k3v.eu wrote:
On 14 Feb 2013 01:10, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
Annoyingly, most of the cool goodies like on-screen speed limit and
overspeed alert and lane assist aren't available in the mkgmap output as
far as I can tell¹...
I have rolled
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Steve Coast st...@asklater.com wrote:
Brian
Personally I think it's brilliant you're working on this, and I'd love OSM
to work hand in hand to make it happen. Ideally I'd love OSM to be the
repository for this, it helps everybody.
I'm with Steve on this.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
Marginal. While this doesn't *always* mean that something shouldn't be
mapped, we're a crowd-sourced map, and including something the crowd can't
improve on seems questionable.
Or it means someone in the crowd nailed it
I'm starting to wonder if something could be adapted from the cycleway node
style network tagging.
On Feb 13, 2013 8:41 AM, Joseph Reeves iknowjos...@gmail.com wrote:
The thing with the UK is that you get places named after junctions -
Church Cross, or whatever. That may well be a locality, but
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
My other advice is that you can put osm data on a microsd, and take it
to the store and try it. See the mkgmap docs/wiki, but basically, once
you get the file, call it /Garmin/gmapsupp.img. Just power down the
unit, put in
:
On 2/13/2013 6:27 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Considering that there's nearly 40 in the area within relation 161645
(Oklahoma), I'd honestly be surprised if there aren't at least 50-something
just within states starting with O.
AFAIK, all of the reservations in Oklahoma were allotted before
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:18 PM, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote:
In other words, New York is just as sovereign as is New Zealand, South
Dakota is as much a nation-state as South Korea. I am not an attorney, but
I can read. This makes for 51 independent jurisdictions: the fifty
What's the best tool to get Garmin devices to show maxspeed on screen?
AFAICT, mkgmap doesn't handle including speed limit data so it appears on
screen during navigation, thus also providing speed limit alerts. This
would not only be useful for navigation, but also for finding incorrectly
tagged
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:37 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
In my opinion, if you get in an argument with Anthony or NE2 and you are
right, you are still wrong. They argue for the sport. The entire point of
their argument is the conflict, not the potential for resolution.
So
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:09 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/14989711
NE2 has ignored the discussion intentionally and reverted against
consensus.
You can't
So can we revert NE2's revert from last night?
On Feb 11, 2013 10:35 AM, Michael Patrick geodes...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI, an official ruling from Mouseland. This email stuff is pretty cool,
one can actually directly ask somebody who is a Subject Matter Expert! ;-)
Michael
--
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
Your information on NE2 is grossly inaccurate.
NE2 makes very few positive edits, and many, many destructive ones, as
well as previous threats to make more edits that conform with his (and
only his) vision of the
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
His malice is encapsulated in his inability to work with other
people. For example, I dislike a particular global modification to my
work that he has made. I know that he has more spare time than me to
pursue his ideas,
So he's conveniently ignoring the left turn only arrow there preventing a
straight-on movement?
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote:
NE2 asked me to share this diary entry with the list:
The question isn't whether or not it's popular. It's popular to drive the
wrong way on one-way streets or left of the centerlines in Portland. But
that doesn't make it legal.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:21 PM, James Mast rickmastfa...@hotmail.comwrote:
Well, if you do look at the imagery, it
are obvious, but which we think are unconventional?
Paul Johnson writes:
So he's conveniently ignoring the left turn only arrow there preventing
a
straight-on movement?
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
NE2 asked me to share this diary
/Sections/0316.151.html
)
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
wrote:
Looking through the making turns section of the Florida driver's
manual,
the maneuver NE2 proposes and the argument you're giving to explain it
still
doesn't work. You turn
the turn using the left-most lane?
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
The same one. It also says to look at the diagram for examples, and
shows
turns into the nearest available lane.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Put the turn restriction back in. And NE2, if you're reading this?
Leave it there.
Done.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Wait, what? It's clearly part of the same intersection.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Put the turn
Someone with local knowledge might want to look over the ref=* tags in
Florida, a lot seem to be missing the context that let you know what
network they're a part of.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/14989711
NE2 has ignored the discussion intentionally and reverted against consensus.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Put the turn
, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Good point, though was hoping someone in the Orlando area other than NE2
could weigh in (since this is a rare example of me chasing a Mapdust bug
out to his area).
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Apollinaris Schöll ascho...@gmail.comwrote
901 - 1000 of 1503 matches
Mail list logo
