On 29 Apr 2013 22:01, "Rovastar" wrote:
>
> Great however the OSM referenced has been shoehorned in there (not
> complaining though), as the cartographers mentioned finding the new 2000ft
> "mountain" just seemed to use Ordinance Surveynotably the wrong height
> appears on OSM and not updated.
Nice find, I've contacted them to ask if they would like to add them to
OSM, or publish the measurements somewhere under the ODBL.
Regards,
Tom
On 30 April 2013 08:05, Kevin Peat wrote:
>
> On 29 Apr 2013 22:01, "Rovastar" wrote:
> >
> > Great however the OSM referenced has been shoehorned in
One of my little hopes (which I'm very very slowly attacking) is to have
OSM have all the walls and fences and suchlike to the same standard as
OS (them being very useful to walkers and suchlike).
I noticed that lots of fields, for example in
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.92332&lon=-1.7091&
On 30 April 2013 09:38, Henry Gomersall wrote:
> Am I the only one that has been drawing walls and not fields? It's nice
> to have fields as individual logical units, but they're defined by the
> walls, so it strikes me the wall should be the defining characteristic.
> Is this a software problem
Well I'm definitely in favour of mapping the boundary ways: hedges, fences,
walls.
I do not see any general value in mapping fields one by one, unless there
are particular cultural reasons (for instance the Cheshire Cheese in Hope,
Derbyshire, has maps showing all the historical field names on the
This adding of refs on roads is getting ridiculous. I just was geotagging
some photos and I noticed this: http://osm.org/go/eu1a7D4X.
A number of unclassified & residential roads have been tagged in Cheshire
(can't remember which one it is because this is on the border) with
obviously internal hig
Hi,
I have been spending a lot of time looking at Taginfo and golf courses. I would
like to layout the best way to map a golf course based on what I have found.
I was thinking of creating a page "HOWTO map a golf course 2013"
This is not a proposal for tags, I would link to Taginfo pages of ta
Have you seen Richard Weait's page on this subject :
http://weait.com/node/21.
And fewer of those named ways to make the hole names look nice :-)
Jerry
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Bob Kerr <
openstreetmapcraigmil...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been spending a lot of time looking
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 11:15 +0100, Ed Loach wrote:
> I can't post to list at moment (stupid ISP) so am sending offlist
> reply. I use landuse=farmland for the land (usually in areas greater
> than a single field) and then add barrier=hedge or barrier=fence as
> appropriate (I've not generally encou
There is also an ITO Map for Golf courses: http://www.itoworld.com/map/47
Shaun
On 30 Apr 2013, at 12:07, "sk53.osm" wrote:
> Have you seen Richard Weait's page on this subject : http://weait.com/node/21.
>
> And fewer of those named ways to make the hole names look nice :-)
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
Hedges are also rendered at higher zoom levels.
Mapping hedges alongside roads had inspired me to try mapping roads as areas,
not too sure if its been a success.
Phil (trigpoint)
--
Sent from my Nokia N9
On 30/04/2013 12:09 Henry Gomersall wrote:
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 11:15 +0100, Ed Loach
Thanks,
I have seen Richards page before but I am a lot further on, I have found out
that there are something like 50 tags ranging from golf=tee_area,
amenity=shelter, landuse=grass, golf=ball_washer. I noticed that there are even
some folk that are attempting to put in pars and indexes. I just
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 10:24 +0100, Tom Chance wrote:
> On 30 April 2013 09:38, Henry Gomersall wrote:
> Am I the only one that has been drawing walls and not fields?
> It's nice
> to have fields as individual logical units, but they're
> defined by the
> wal
On 30/04/2013 09:38, Henry Gomersall wrote:
I noticed that lots of fields, for example in
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.92332&lon=-1.7091&zoom=15&layers=M
are shown as closed loops of landuse=field. Clearly walls/fences and
enclosed fields are somewhat equivalent, but subtly different in t
Henry Gomersall wrote:
That's interesting. So it seems that Mapnik _is_ rendering fences.
Who's the arbiter of what is rendered in the main map?
There's a "trac" subject for it, but as I understand it requests for
"what gets rendered on the main map" are a bit backed up right now
because the
On 30/04/2013 12:09, Henry Gomersall wrote:
That's interesting. So it seems that Mapnik _is_ rendering fences.
AFAIK, mapnik has rendered linear barrier for quite a while. The problem
it did have, which appears to have been sorted now, was landuse &
barrier tags within the same polygon. Previ
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 13:03 +0100, SomeoneElse wrote:
> > barrier=wall is very common in the areas that interest me (the
> lakes),
> > and very useful info to walkers too.
>
>
> For info, barrier=wall is currently also rendered:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.04915&lon=-1.68855&zoom=1
On 30 April 2013 12:32, Henry Gomersall wrote:
> Does meadow mean grazing land? Do we define high fell land as "meadow"
> as well when it's used for grazing sheep?
>
> Perhaps a landuse=grazing should be available.
>
If you wanted to define field types, I'd suggest the following tags. This
is mo
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 13:35 +0100, Tom Chance wrote:
> On 30 April 2013 12:32, Henry Gomersall wrote:
> Does meadow mean grazing land? Do we define high fell land as
> "meadow"
> as well when it's used for grazing sheep?
>
> Perhaps a landuse=grazing should
On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 13:48 +0100, Henry Gomersall wrote:
> Yeah, I had a look, but I can't see anything about mountainous pasture
> land. The issue is land that is very clearly strongly influenced by
> the
> presence of animals, but isn't farmland as such. meadow is probably
> acceptable, but does
Hi all,
This feels like an appropriate thread to butt into and ask: is there an
accepted tag for grassy chalk downland, as found in southern England?
Would natural=fell be appropriate here too, or is that for proper
mountainous territory? If not, would something like "natural=grassland,
grassland=
This is quite reasonable, although as I use farmland for all agriculture
(but not viticulture or orchards) I had never appreciated that it seems to
have become synonymous with arable.
I still think landuse=farmland, farmland=arable is a better way of tagging
(& a tad friendlier to data consumers).
This is one of the calcareous grasslands; downland sounds good, although
chalk_downland might be more precise.
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, David Fisher wrote:
> Hi all,
> This feels like an appropriate thread to butt into and ask: is there an
> accepted tag for grassy chalk downland, as fo
On 30 April 2013 12:21, Bob Kerr wrote:
> Is there no precedent for HOWTO documents like there are with other
> opensource projects?
Sure, there's loads of pages on the wiki describing how to map
particular types of things - they are called "Feature" pages. These
naturally refer to lots of speci
On 30 April 2013 11:39, sk53.osm wrote:
> This adding of refs on roads is getting ridiculous. I just was geotagging
> some photos and I noticed this: http://osm.org/go/eu1a7D4X.
>
> A number of unclassified & residential roads have been tagged in Cheshire
> (can't remember which one it is because
On 30 April 2013 19:21, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
wrote:
> I would still maintain that it is appropriate to use the ref key for
> such reference numbers. Internal or not, it's still the primary
> official reference number for that stretch of road. I would argue that
> the "problem" with the num
-Original Message-
From: Andy Allan [mailto:gravityst...@gmail.com]
Sent: 30 April 2013 19:45
To: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
Cc: talk-gb
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Complaining about refs on roads again!
>I'd appreciate it if we can all accept the most sensible position, and move
these non-
On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Andy Allan wrote:
> On 30 April 2013 19:21, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
> wrote:
> > I would still maintain that it is appropriate to use the ref key for
> > such reference numbers. Internal or not, it's still the primary
> > official reference number for that stretch of
Hope is slowly becoming reality in the Peak District. We will eventually end
up with a better map than the OS 1:25 because it will also be possible to map
the types of barrier, the types of stiles, gates, kissing gates etc.
The current OSM website rendering seems to be geared towards urban envi
29 matches
Mail list logo