Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Hello: Does anybody see any more problem areas? Pretty much no more polygon problems I think. Or maybe I hope Andrew / CancevImports On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 08:05 -0400, Andrew wrote: > On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 11:27 -0400, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > > > > On 2017-07-17

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 11:27 -0400, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > On 2017-07-17 10:27 AM, Jochen Topf wrote: > > > > > > There is a new layer with this data now in the OSMI: > > http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas=-64.28033=53.722 > > 07=8=same_tags_on_outer_ring > > Thanks, Jochen! That's

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

That is helpful! Thank Jochen Daniel -Original Message- From: Jochen Topf [mailto:joc...@remote.org] Sent: Monday, 17 July, 2017 10:27 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 09:52:48AM +0200, Jochen Topf wrote: > &g

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On 2017-07-17 10:27 AM, Jochen Topf wrote: > > There is a new layer with this data now in the OSMI: > http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas=-64.28033=53.72207=8=same_tags_on_outer_ring Thanks, Jochen! That's very helpful. Looks like CanvecImports cleaned up many of the thousands of giant

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 09:52:48AM +0200, Jochen Topf wrote: > > How difficult would it be to add this to OSM inspector? Not everybody has > > Postgres running, and is able to use osm2pgsql. Yes, there is documentation, > > but it requires some technical skills. Also, it would be very convenient

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

data on this list. Cheers, Daniel From: Begin Daniel [mailto:jfd...@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, 3 July, 2017 16:00 To: Alan Richards; Stewart C. Russell Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems Thanks everyone, Stewart sent me an example I can use ☺ Daniel From

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Thanks everyone, Stewart sent me an example I can use ☺ Daniel From: Begin Daniel [mailto:jfd...@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, 3 July, 2017 09:53 To: Alan Richards; Stewart C. Russell Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems If someone could provide me

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, 3 July, 2017 00:51 To: Stewart C. Russell Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems Thanks for a good workflow - I cleared up 8 so far pretty quickly around Hope, BC. There's a bunch in a cluster around Merritt too. I'm guessing it's

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Thanks for a good workflow - I cleared up 8 so far pretty quickly around Hope, BC. There's a bunch in a cluster around Merritt too. I'm guessing it's certain imports or import authors vs others that makes the difference. alarobric On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Stewart C. Russell

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On 2017-07-02 04:41 PM, Begin Daniel wrote: > > However, since the same translator was used for all the polygons, the > problem should also appear on water bodies, etc. The problem may have > been related to the complexity of the polygons to convert. Hi Daniel - yes, I'm seeing a bunch of water

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/9832. -Original Message- From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 1 July, 2017 17:43 To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems Hi James, > Canvec 10.0 doesnt have the issues of double tagging, j

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On 2017-07-01 05:22 PM, Jochen Topf wrote: > > There is nothing specific about woods here. It seems, though, that the root problem in Canada is *mostly* related to woods imported from Canvec. And we have some very large forestry relations indeed. I was finding that the JOSM process was using 13

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Depends where you get the data I think, canvec from ftp is different from canvec from toporama/atlas On Jul 1, 2017 5:44 PM, "Stewart C. Russell" wrote: > Hi James, > > > Canvec 10.0 doesnt have the issues of double tagging, just overlapping > > I've found a whole bunch of

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Hi James, > Canvec 10.0 doesnt have the issues of double tagging, just overlapping I've found a whole bunch of Canvec 10 data with this problem west of Sudbury. I think it may still be an issue with later versions. Stewart ___ Talk-ca mailing list

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 04:04:25PM -0400, Stewart C. Russell wrote: > On 2017-07-01 04:30 AM, Frank Steggink wrote: > > > > To all, this is the procedure I used yesterday, and probably something > > similar also by Pierre. > > * Not sure if it is a requirement, but it's better to use 64 bit Java.

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On 2017-07-01 04:30 AM, Frank Steggink wrote: > > To all, this is the procedure I used yesterday, and probably something > similar also by Pierre. > * Not sure if it is a requirement, but it's better to use 64 bit Java. > … Thanks for this, Frank. I think I've found a way to make this a bit

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

es2...@gmail.com> À : Frank Steggink <stegg...@steggink.org> Cc : Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> Envoyé le : samedi 1 juillet 2017 8h25 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems Error free Québec, just in time for Canada day! Good job Pierre :-) On J

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Error free Québec, just in time for Canada day! Good job Pierre :-) On Jul 1, 2017 4:34 AM, "Frank Steggink" wrote: > Hi Jochen, > > Maybe a MapRoulette challenge might even not be necessary. Yesterday I > started to clean up a bit in Québec, but since it was already past

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Hi Jochen, Maybe a MapRoulette challenge might even not be necessary. Yesterday I started to clean up a bit in Québec, but since it was already past midnight for me, I wanted to continue this morning. To my surprise Pierre has done a lot of work and now the entire province of Québec looks to

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:47:36PM +0200, Frank Steggink wrote: > On 30-06-2017 21:21, Jochen Topf wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:16:40PM +0200, Frank Steggink wrote: > > > Maybe I'm not understanding it, but in the OSM inspector [1] I just see > > > one > > > case of old style

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

treetmap.org> *Envoyé le :* vendredi 30 juin 2017 16h04 *Objet :* Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems If it's just removing tags, on inner polygons of a multipolygon, that should be manageable in itself... is there a way you are querying for said items without setting up a postgresql database

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

If we have a overpass query that Pierre provided, we can create a maproulette task...then everyone can contribute! I can read up on how to create a task or ask Martjin --- Si nous avons un query overpass que Pierre nous ont fournit, on pourrais créer une tache maproulette...pour que tout le monde

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On 30-06-2017 21:21, Jochen Topf wrote: On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:16:40PM +0200, Frank Steggink wrote: Maybe I'm not understanding it, but in the OSM inspector [1] I just see one case of old style multipolygon, in Manitoba. Last week, when you posted your original message, I just saw one case

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

penStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> Envoyé le : vendredi 30 juin 2017 16h04 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems If it's just removing tags, on inner polygons of a multipolygon, that should be manageable in itself... is there a way you are querying for said items without setti

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

If it's just removing tags, on inner polygons of a multipolygon, that should be manageable in itself... is there a way you are querying for said items without setting up a postgresql database? On Jun 30, 2017 3:57 PM, "James" wrote: > To be fairyour example is from

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

To be fairyour example is from Canvec 4.0.that's reaaallly oldwas it possible that was a way of tagging back in the days? Or was it created initially as a polygon and was later converted to a relation? Canvec 10.0 doesnt have the issues of double tagging, just overlapping On

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:16:40PM +0200, Frank Steggink wrote: > Maybe I'm not understanding it, but in the OSM inspector [1] I just see one > case of old style multipolygon, in Manitoba. Last week, when you posted your > original message, I just saw one case in New Brunswick. IIRC, it was a

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

t;>>because every user of the data has to work around this or handle the >>>complaints. >>> * The Canadian community steps up and fixes the data, automatically or >>>manually. >>> * We ask the Data Working Group to remove the broken import. >>&g

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

remove the broken import. >> >> Jochen >> >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:38:15AM +0200, Jochen Topf wrote: >> >>> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:38:15 +0200 >>> From: Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> >>> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org >>

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

2 Jun 2017 11:38:15 +0200 From: Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems Hi! In the last days the OpenStreetMap Carto Style 4.0 is being deployed on the OSMF tile servers. This new version of the style doesn't take old-style mult

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

munity steps up and fixes the data, automatically or > >   manually. > > * We ask the Data Working Group to remove the broken import. > > > > Jochen > > > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:38:15AM +0200, Jochen Topf wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

e broken import. > > Jochen > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:38:15AM +0200, Jochen Topf wrote: > > Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:38:15 +0200 > > From: Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> > > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > Subject: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems &

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

un 2017 11:38:15 +0200 > > From: Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> > > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > Subject: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems > > > > Hi! > > > > In the last days the OpenStreetMap Carto Style 4.0 is being deployed on > > the OSMF tile

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Jochen cela ressemble a des menaces. Bon, il y a de meilleures façons de motiver les communautés locales. Bonne journée    Pierre De : Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> À : talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : vendredi 30 juin 2017 3h53 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon pr

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

a, automatically or > manually. > * We ask the Data Working Group to remove the broken import. > > Jochen > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:38:15AM +0200, Jochen Topf wrote: > > Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:38:15 +0200 > > From: Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> >

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

manually. * We ask the Data Working Group to remove the broken import. Jochen On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:38:15AM +0200, Jochen Topf wrote: > Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:38:15 +0200 > From: Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon p

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

lt;joc...@remote.org> > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems > > Hi! > > In the last days the OpenStreetMap Carto Style 4.0 is being deployed on > the OSMF tile servers. This new version of the style doesn't take > old-style multipolygons (whe

Re: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Jun 2017 11:38:15 +0200 > From: Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems > > Hi! > > In the last days the OpenStreetMap Carto Style 4.0 is being deployed on > the OSMF tile servers. This new version of t

[Talk-ca] Multipolygon problems

Hi! In the last days the OpenStreetMap Carto Style 4.0 is being deployed on the OSMF tile servers. This new version of the style doesn't take old-style multipolygons (where the tags are on the outer ways instead of on the relation) into account any more. In a huge effort in the last months we