On 8 June 2011 21:20, Brian Prangle wrote:
> The Warwick additions are all names in the defunct Stoneleigh Agricultural
> Show site. Must get over there and do a survey to see what's happening to
> any redevelopment there - unless anyone else wants to volunteer!
> I'm firmly of the opinion that
On 8 June 2011 09:39, TimSC wrote:
> On 08/06/11 08:15, Peter Miller wrote:
>>
>> My experience is that the LWG never makes definitive statements!
>>
>
> I find that annoying sometimes but, if we are to follow to Spinoza's example
> that we should "made a ceaseless effort not to [...] scorn human
On 8 June 2011 14:18, Ed Avis wrote:
> Steve Doerr writes:
>
>>I wonder if the good folks at ITO could devise a way to analyse the
>>not:name tags in the database and see whether any of them are now
>>redundant? In other words, are the OS correcting any of the mistakes we
>>appear to have identif
Cool Chris. Are you updating tile rendering for those areas you have
previously made available?
Cheers
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hill [mailto:o...@raggedred.net]
Sent: 08 June 2011 22:01
To: Talk GB
Subject: [Talk-GB] Code point updates
I have finished loading the latest OS Co
Kev,
What I’ve done a couple of times is to create a way encompassing the
development and adding all the relevant details to that. As extra tags along
with landuse=residential usually. I often find that if it’s a one road affair
the new name for the road which comes along late in the develop
On 08/06/11 21:20, Brian Prangle wrote:
I'm firmly of the opinion that this is not work for a bot unless a tag
is added such as verified=no so we humans can search for what hasn't
been surveyed.
Wholly agree.
A bot will just replicate the OS errors and then we'll never find them!
Also agree
I have finished loading the latest OS CodePoint to create the post code
overlays for England, Scotland and Wales. More info here:
http://codepoint.raggedred.net/
--
Cheers, Chris
user: chillly
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http:
Looking at the cyclemap to see if I had made all the changes I thought I had
I noticed the very prominent Knightshayes text on the map
http://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=13&lat=52.92356&lon=-1.12127&layers=B0
This is a new housing development which when I added it to the map was still
under constru
The Warwick additions are all names in the defunct Stoneleigh Agricultural
Show site. Must get over there and do a survey to see what's happening to
any redevelopment there - unless anyone else wants to volunteer!
I'm firmly of the opinion that this is not work for a bot unless a tag is
added su
On 8 June 2011 07:58, Peter Miller wrote:
> Following on swiftly from Musical Chairs OSM Analaysis is now also
> running with the new OS Locator data.
>
> Warwickshire is the biggest gainer/looser with 33 new names; over half
> of the districts have got at least one new road and there are now onl
TimSC wrote:
> Straw man.
> [...]
> Sigh.
> [...]
> It is ridiculous
> [...]
> I guess I should not surprised you can't see the benefits
> [...]
> This seems to be a common thread of your arguments - you make wild claims
Fair enough. It's fairly evident you don't see stuff on the same wavelength
a
On 08/06/11 15:58, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
TimSC wrote:
While this this strictly true it is sometimes hard to associate
external records with specific OSM objects. Some importing of reference
and ID numbers makes this easier.
It's only hard because no-one's yet built a tool to do it
On 08/06/2011 15:58, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
TimSC wrote:
On 07/06/11 14:37, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
You don't need to put stuff into OSM to make it mashable-uppable. Most
competent licences will have a Collective Work/Database provision to
enable this.
While this this strictly true it is so
TimSC wrote:
> On 07/06/11 14:37, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>> You don't need to put stuff into OSM to make it mashable-uppable. Most
>> competent licences will have a Collective Work/Database provision to
>> enable this.
> While this this strictly true it is sometimes hard to associate
> external
:-( sorry
Steve
stevecoast.com
On Jun 8, 2011, at 2:14, Chris Fleming wrote:
> On 07/06/11 19:18, Steve Coast wrote:
>> or saturday night
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Board_Meeting_June_2011
>>
>> Would be awesome to see you there
>>
>> Steve
>>
> With a little b
Steve Doerr writes:
>I wonder if the good folks at ITO could devise a way to analyse the
>not:name tags in the database and see whether any of them are now
>redundant? In other words, are the OS correcting any of the mistakes we
>appear to have identified?
It would be cool to see a comparison
On Wednesday 08 June 2011, Steve Doerr wrote:
> I wonder if the good folks at ITO could devise a way to analyse the
> not:name tags in the database and see whether any of them are now
> redundant? In other words, are the OS correcting any of the mistakes we
> appear to have identified?
I don't
On 08/06/2011 07:58, Peter Miller wrote:
Following on swiftly from Musical Chairs OSM Analaysis is now also
running with the new OS Locator data.
Warwickshire is the biggest gainer/looser with 33 new names; over half
of the districts have got at least one new road and there are now only
8 places
On 08/06/2011 08:15, Peter Miller wrote:
...
On a separate note. Would you be able to do a comparison between place
names in NatGaz and in OSM. I think we will be surprised how many
places we are still missing from OSM. My guess is that OSM only
contains about 65% of the 50K places in that databa
On 07/06/11 19:18, Steve Coast wrote:
or saturday night
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Board_Meeting_June_2011
Would be awesome to see you there
Steve
With a little bit more notice I would have been able to make it down :(
:(
Cheers
Chris
___
On 08/06/11 08:15, Peter Miller wrote:
My experience is that the LWG never makes definitive statements!
I find that annoying sometimes but, if we are to follow to Spinoza's
example that we should "made a ceaseless effort not to [...] scorn human
actions, but to understand them", LWG have t
On 3 June 2011 11:45, TimSC wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Some stats on OSM coverage of Kent. I tried to pair the records of KCC
> OpenKent with the OSM database. Assuming the KCC list is complete (which it
> is usually, but not entirely), we can estimate OSM's coverage in the area.
>
> Schools: 618 of 9
Following on swiftly from Musical Chairs OSM Analaysis is now also
running with the new OS Locator data.
Warwickshire is the biggest gainer/looser with 33 new names; over half
of the districts have got at least one new road and there are now only
8 places still at 100%. We do have 51 at over 99%
23 matches
Mail list logo
