Re: [Talk-GB] University of Northampton new campus - mapper required

s, not sure how old they are. > > > > > > > > *From:* David Earl [mailto:da...@frankieandshadow.com > ] > *Sent:* 13 July 2018 17:11 > *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > *Subject:* [Talk-GB] University of Northampton new campus - mapper > required > > >

[Talk-GB] University of Northampton new campus - mapper required

The University of Northampton is opening a new campus very soon between between Bedford Road and New South Bridge Road. They would like to get a detailed campus map onto OSM as soon as possible, ideally by August 1. I haven't looked but I'm assuming this would have to be a ground survey as it is

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping dangerous - but valid - routes

I also marked some cycle crossings as hazardous, but perhaps with a certain amount of official legitimacy, in that I was preparing the data to use in cycle maps for Cambridgeshire County Council, and the ones I marked were ones they had provided but *they* recognised were not satisfactory: marking

Re: [Talk-GB] John Watson School, Oxford

Fwiw, there is the exact same situation in Ely: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/52.40627/0.25878 David On Thu, 6 Oct 2016 at 19:19, Lester Caine wrote: > On 06/10/16 18:56, Christian Ledermann wrote: > > How to map this? > The staring point is if you can identify

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 May 2015 at 14:27, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: Andy, the operator tags are all the same, not the building names. No, they really aren't. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148247775 - Churchill College (University of Cambridge) http

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

operators are companies and it'#s UK specific. A URL as an ID might be OK though, as those must belong to the organisation in question. Though they are always subject to change. On Sat, 23 May 2015 at 13:36 David Woolley for...@david-woolley.me.uk wrote: On 23/05/15 12:02, David Earl wrote

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

to indicate just the pitches (ie the white lines of a football pitch). Currently there are situations with two 'pitches' on top of each other. http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.40868/-2.37860 David Fox On 22/05/2015 14:58, David Earl wrote: Yes, the operator tags are the same when

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

the details then. Reorganising it dramatically four years on for the sake of it would probably mean U of C abandoning OSM as being too costly to maintain. On Sat, 23 May 2015 at 12:43 Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 22 May 2015 at 14:58, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

As I said, I think the upward compatible change for this is to use a tag with the unique ID of whatever operator (and I think URL would be a good one, not as a link, but an ID, since two people can't have the same one, and all orgs we'd be interested in would have one). That way operator remains

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 11:54 David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: The schema for tags that make the University map work is at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cambridge/University_of_Cambridge (I've just realised I haven't updated that page with a recent, unrelated new bit, I must

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

May 2015 at 12:30 David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: Does the main OSM rendering understand building=university? On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:27 Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote: Hi David, Thanks for the detailed info. My main concern is in terms of the consequences for other

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

the rest of the map back in return, so you really don't want to give them a slap in the face for doing so. David On Thu, 21 May 2015 at 23:13 Phillip Barnett phillip.p.barn...@gmail.com wrote: I'm a Cambridge mapper, but I'd advise doing nothing until you've spoken with David Earl who

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

2015-05-22 11:54 GMT+01:00 David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com: Hi Dan, Yes, Philip's right - I developed and continue to maintain the University map at http://map.cam.ac.uk (as well as doing all of the original street pattern mapping for Cambridge back in 2006). The University has

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

). It's *not* a candidate for a relation because there are no geographical relationships between the components. Richard On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:54 AM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: Hi Dan, Yes, Philip's right - I developed and continue to maintain the University map

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

Andy, the operator tags are all the same, not the building names. But also the assertion within a few dozen miles is wrong, as for Nottingham in China. On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 14:23 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 May 2015 at 14:03, Christopher Baines m...@cbaines.net wrote: On

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

you get a search hit where the result blobs are overlapping they should be merged into one. This is very hard to do, so it will cost a lot. On Fri, 22 May 2015 at 12:40 Dan S danstowell+...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-05-22 12:33 GMT+01:00 David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com: to render a map using

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

:49 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 22 May 2015 at 14:27, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: Andy, the operator tags are all the same, not the building names. No, they really aren't. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148247775 - Churchill College (University

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Cambridge meeting tonight

Thanks - that fits very neatly with a previous meeting in town, so I will try to get along to it. David On 10 February 2015 at 08:27, A. Mayer o...@mayera.net wrote: Hi - for those of you who haven't seen on Meetup or elsewhere: Our First meeting of the year Cambridge OpenStreetMap

Re: [Talk-GB] Life Ring - British English

On 16/06/2014 12:04, Brad Rogers wrote: On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 11:05:34 +0200 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: Hello Andreas, Is life ring how it is commonly referred to in British English. Just Always been referred to as lifebelts wherever I've been in England. Lifebuoy immediately

Re: [Talk-GB] Town v City (again, sorry!)

If you want to know population, we should use a population tag. Given its history, much as we might like to pretend otherwise, place=city etc really *is* no more than an arbitrary hint to the renderer, and not much good either because it doesn't reflect the other criteria that would determine

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Indoor walkways

On 04/04/2014 19:40, Dudley Ibbett wrote: I visited the NEC this week and tried using Osmand to navigate between Birmingham International Railway Station and the Hilton Hotel. Whilst the map was very helpful and has lots of detail, the suggested route took you via roads. How might you map the

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Indoor walkways

On 04/04/2014 20:01, David Earl wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147456596 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148248008 I'll post some photos of what these actually look like in a moment. http://www.frankieandshadow.com/xref/covered1.jpg http://www.frankieandshadow.com/xref/covered2.jpg

Re: [Talk-GB] Town v City

place=city, contrary to various differing cultural uses of the word City, used to be somewhere over a certain population, 100K IIRC. However, it appears the definition on the wiki has been substantially relaxed, as has town. Nevertheless it is still defined by size, albeit woolly: The largest

Re: [Talk-GB] Town v City

On 25/02/14 13:07, Philip Barnes wrote: That is absolutely my point, we should tag the facts and leave it to different renderers to then use those facts in the way that best suits their users. The question that needs to be answered is what fact does place=city represent in UK

Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding

I think it would be useful to have a means of indicating road closures etc which are different from simply pretending the road doesn't exist or doesn't allow certain users for a while. This would allow renderers to mark closures rather than just gaps or not visible at all, so people see there

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

Excellent, the close has been added. Thank you to whoever did that - thanks for listening. I also noticed on my rail journey yesterday that the GPS also tracks location on the main map, which I think is a really nice touch. David On 02/12/2013 13:17, Philip Barnes wrote: Not sure if its

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

Andy Robinson wrote: But how do I get the box back now that I’ve closed it ;-) Both the links it provided are duplicated in the banner anyway (Learn More == About and Start Mapping == Sign Up), it was always only signposting these more prominently. David

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

://Blogs.OpenStreetMap.org gets you there too of course Cheers Andy *From:*Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 02 December 2013 16:17 *To:* Talk GB *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website Where do I find community blogs now? On 2 December 2013 16:06, David Earl da

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

://Blogs.OpenStreetMap.org gets you there too of course Cheers Andy *From:*Brian Prangle [mailto:bpran...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 02 December 2013 16:17 *To:* Talk GB *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website Where do I find community blogs now? On 2 December 2013 16:06, David Earl da

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

On 15/11/2013 20:15, Rob Nickerson wrote: (The aim of this email is to provide prior knowledge of an upcoming change to the OSM website and to give you an opportunity to provide constructive feedback) I very much like the fact it is responsive on small screens. Would it be possible to have a

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

On 15/11/2013 20:15, Rob Nickerson wrote: (The aim of this email is to provide prior knowledge of an upcoming change to the OSM website and to give you an opportunity to provide constructive feedback) One other thing... notes are really helpful, and not immediately new though they were

Re: [Talk-GB] Advice needed for maxweight turning restriction

On 12/10/2013 21:00, Philip Barnes wrote: I came across an odd situation where a road is on way, except for cycles and vehicles over 13'3 high. Its a residential area of Shrewsbury which would be a useful rat run, hence the oneway. But to make it complicated, there is are industrial units, and a

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Guided Busway Cycleway

On 16/09/2013 10:08, Oliver Jowett wrote: On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 11:58 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com mailto:da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: It's signposted as a bridleway (only the northern section), so it is technically correct. On the basis of map whatbyou see

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Guided Busway Cycleway

On 16/09/2013 12:52, Oliver Jowett wrote: I'll try to ride the length of the path some time checking what exactly is signposted. http://www.cyclestreets.net/location/32577/ I wonder if cyclestreets assigns different costs to highway=bridleway vs highway=cycleway? It does show them

Re: [Talk-GB] Using store locator as source

On 16/09/2013 17:35, Adam Hoyle wrote: On 16 Sep 2013, at 16:14, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: Err, no. That's not how the law works - either on copyright or on database rights. Lol, good point - perhaps I should ask if any of them can attribute a license to the locations on their

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Guided Busway Cycleway

It's signposted as a bridleway (only the northern section), so it is technically correct. On the basis of map whatbyou see on the ground, thats a valid change. So long as it have bicycle=yes, and retains the NCN information, I don't think it matters that much. Oliver is right though, use by horses

Re: [Talk-GB] Phone numbers in little England

Bournemouth (01202)[1] and before long Brighton and Hove (01273), Aberdeen (01224), Milton Keynes (01908), Bradford (01274) and Cambridge (01223) which are all running short of numbers[2], require or will require the 'area code' to be dialled as part of the number, even if you are inside the

Re: [Talk-GB] Usage of lanes / turn restrictions versus multiple ways when road is not divided

On 09/05/2013 12:56, Jason Cunningham wrote: UK legislation is fairly clear that Traffic Islands (with or without hatched markings before are after) are not considered to create two carriagways. We're not mapping legislation, but nethertheless I wouldnt create two carriageways for a traffic

Re: [Talk-GB] Usage of lanes / turn restrictions versus multiple ways when road is not divided

On 09/05/2013 13:30, Oliver Jowett wrote: If there's a better way to represent this while keeping enough information to be able to route sensibly, how should it be done? You can set up turn restrictions with relations where necessary. But as John said, it doesn't do much for pedestrians (or

Re: [Talk-GB] Complaining about refs on roads again!

On 01/05/2013 09:15, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: if someone comes with an alternative proposal for tagging those reference numbers on more minor roads (i.e. a specific key to use), which gains widespread support in the UK, I'd be happy to go along with that. According to

Re: [Talk-GB] Missing place=city nodes: Manchester, Leeds

On 28/04/2013 09:49, Nick Whitelegg wrote: Hi, I've noticed (through doing nominatim searches) that a small number of UK cities (i.e. Manchester and Leeds) do not appear to have a place=city node, only an administrative boundary. Is this deliberate? I've tried other large UK cities and all of

Re: [Talk-GB] Missing place=city nodes: Manchester, Leeds

On 28/04/2013 13:57, Dave F. wrote: General point: Please don't attach place tags onto other way/polygon objects. They often get deleted when the ways are unpicked then re-added. Indeed. And I would say don't try to use nodes or ways for multiple purposes at all. So putting a node at the

Re: [Talk-GB] Missing place=city nodes: Manchester, Leeds

On 28/04/2013 15:21, Andrew wrote: David Earl david@... writes: In general, it shouldn't be necessary to have a node and an area which represent the same thing. In this case the nodes and areas do not represent the same thing. The areas are the local government districts called Leeds

Re: [Talk-GB] NCN 28?

On 20/04/2013 13:58, Kevin Peat wrote: I am not that familiar with NCN signage. Why are the route numbers sometimes shown in brackets and sometimes not? Just as with ordinary road signs in the UK, the number in brackets means this is the way to route N rather than being route N itself.

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

On 20/03/2013 09:25, Brad Rogers wrote: Both those links are the same, and both seem to point (for me anyway) to the original except buses junction. It's not just you, Andy. I got the same result and thought it must be me. Sigh. I corrected them immediately afterwards.

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

On 19/03/2013 14:04, David Fisher wrote: Hi Shaun, I take it you're referring to Ipswich? In which case, I can sort of see the logic. It's not one-way, it's no entry, so when the excepting conditions are satisfied it becomes two-way. In Croydon's case there's that no motor vehicles sign at

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

On 19/03/2013 20:10, Simon Blake wrote: Could I ask the panel about http://goo.gl/maps/y9Zj3 ? If you look towards the road to the right (Parliament St, Gloucester), there are No Entry signs with no exceptions signed, but on the road it says Buses and taxis only. Equally, the sign under the

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

On 19/03/2013 20:34, David Earl wrote: On 19/03/2013 20:10, Simon Blake wrote: Could I ask the panel about http://goo.gl/maps/y9Zj3 ? If you look towards the road to the right (Parliament St, Gloucester), there are No Entry signs with no exceptions signed, but on the road it says Buses

Re: [Talk-GB] Using UK postcode data to generate a heat map

Do you know about openheatmap (http://www.openheatmap.com )? Basically you can supply spreadsheets of locations vs data and it will do the graphics for you. It doesn't know about postcodes, but if you have the means to get locations for postcodes you don't have to do any of the rest. David

Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone famiiar with Hay-on-Wye?

On 06/01/2013 14:02, SomeoneElse wrote: I recently deleted a doodle in Hay-on-Wye, but after doing so noticed that to there northwest there seem to be a cycle path and a footpath _very_ close together: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.073537lon=-3.130221zoom=18layers=M I guess that this

Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign

On 31/10/2012 15:29, Andy Robinson wrote: Shaun McDonald [mailto:sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk] wrote: Sent: 31 October 2012 15:21 To: Matt Williams Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Ambiguous restrictions sign On 31 Oct 2012, at 14:49, Matt Williams li...@milliams.com wrote:

Re: [Talk-GB] Building Numbers

On Wednesday, July 25, 2012, Chris Hill wrote: On 25/07/12 22:16, Chris Baines wrote: I have been playing around with OSM on my university's campus [1], I have most of the buildings and their names on OSM, but not the numbers. My university are quite good with data, you can see the building

Re: [Talk-GB] Stations and platforms=*

Might this be of help, if the info were included with the station. It seems to be official: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_railway_station_categories David On 28/06/2012 11:15, Jonathan Bennett wrote: tl;dr: Please tag your local station(s) with platforms=n where n2 I had a

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 20/06/2012 14:57, Graham Stewart (GrahamS) wrote: Merging this data I see that some ways that just lead to an NCN route (but are not actually part of the continuous route) are still marked with the ncn=yes;ncn_ref=xx tags for the route the lead to. What's the feeling on this? I'm a bit torn:

Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 route is open data!

On 23/01/2012 20:21, Jason Cunningham wrote: Good to see the data being released, But I don't believe this proposed route should yet be added to OSM. You'll regularly here the phrase map what's on the ground, but we all(?) accept upcoming changes to what's on the ground can be mapped, and

Re: [Talk-GB] Misguided user kane123

I bet you this is liam123 in a different guise. He's editing in the same area doing quite similar things. David On 13/01/2012 13:41, Andy Allan wrote: Anyone fancy dealing with http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kane123 ? All of their changesets so far are bogus, and need reverting. Cheers,

Re: [Talk-GB] License change anonymous edits

On 10/01/2012 11:44, Peter Miller wrote: Is there no way in this case to formally 'claim' the IPR for this features on the basis that we have moved them and edited all the surrounding features? Exactly the question I raised on talk on Monday. I don't think you even need to have moved

Re: [Talk-GB] License change anonymous edits

On 10/01/2012 13:46, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Michael Collinson wrote: +1 to Richard's suggestion odbl=clean Just a tiny little clarification - this isn't something I've dreamed up, it's a real live tag with 9,000 occurrences in the database already, and which is being used by status

Re: [Talk-GB] License change anonymous edits

On 10/01/2012 14:53, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 01/10/12 15:37, Frederik Ramm wrote: Yes, the trouble is when Frederik pointed this out and referred to the page, it says it is for cases where the suspect edit has been wiped out, not simply verified from other sources. How can you change the

Re: [Talk-GB] License change anonymous edits

On 10/01/2012 16:05, Richard Fairhurst wrote: David Earl wrote: Why does pressing the keys make any difference whatsoever? The original contributor doesn't own the copyright in the name, only their contribution, and by marking it odbl clean I'm making an alternative contribution which asserts

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Licence Change

I did the same around Teversham/Cherry Hinton last week, and also looked at what I'd need to do to replace unlicensed contributions. I've written personally to the following: smncrsk Martin Green user_4538 Roman Robert Duncan Dave Tracey NickF HendrikG Simon Proven of which only the last has

Re: [Talk-GB] Project Drake - mapping the University of Cambridge

On 06/12/2011 12:54, Stephen Gower wrote: On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 05:44:48PM +, David Earl wrote: I was appointed to the project from that [...] Congratulations! Thank you! and also published the tagging schema I'm working to ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cambridge

[Talk-GB] Project Drake - mapping the University of Cambridge

You may remember the announcement of the University of Cambridge's OpenStreetMap project back in July ( http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2011-July/012067.html ). I was appointed to the project from that and I have now written up a bit about what I'm doing on my OSM diary (

Re: [Talk-GB] Copyright issues of checking details on other websites

On 05/07/2011 11:26, Richard Fairhurst wrote: David Earl wrote: Even then, to infringe database copyright under UK law you would have to copy a substantial part of the database. Checking or obtaining a few names against such a list isn't database copyright infringement Oh, absolutely

Re: [Talk-GB] Copyright issues of checking details on other websites

On 05/07/2011 12:28, Nick Austin wrote: On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:58 AM, David Earlda...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: To take a different example, the Royal Mail (still) claims database copyright over the PAF (postcode address file) database. Would crowd sourcing the address vs postcode data

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot

On 09/06/2011 17:36, Ed Avis wrote: What stops more people using OSM? While I agree with your other points, even before you get to the data, I think the first reason is people don't know about it. And for most people, why would you not just use Google maps even if you did? David

Re: [Talk-GB] Roadside cycle-lanes vs. off-road cycle-paths

On 15/04/2011 19:50, David Earl wrote: there's various lane indications such as cycleway=lane ... PS if you want examples, Cambridge and the surrounding area is particularly dense with all the variations of these all over the place. David

Re: [Talk-GB] Postcode centroids

On 21/01/2011 10:02, Kevin Peat wrote: So I should delete the various admin boundaries in the db then as they cannot be viewed on the ground? Well said. I absolutely agree admin boundaries have the same kind of status as postcodes. I think there is value in visualising postcodes, and while

Re: [Talk-GB] Postcode centroids

On 21/01/2011 10:10, Tom Hughes wrote: On 21/01/11 10:02, Kevin Peat wrote: So I should delete the various admin boundaries in the db then as they cannot be viewed on the ground? They may not be viewable on the ground, but they are real in the sense that somebody has defined them by

Re: [Talk-GB] Street name disagreement - whose right or wrong?

On Sunday, 26 December 2010, Richard r...@f2s.com wrote: My personal opinion is that Signed on the ground should always take precedence. +1 But you can always use alt_ name where there is another variant (or even completely different name). David

Re: [Talk-GB] Visualising speed limits

On Monday, November 1, 2010, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: On 29/10/2010 22:22, thomas van der veen wrote: You might like to take note that nothing is implicit in OSM. There are no defaults as renderers or

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Anyone near Huntingdon who could do me a favour?

On 10/08/2010 21:31, Richard Moss wrote: On Tue 10/08/10 16:36 , David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com sent: I'm doing a printed cycle map which covers, among other places, Huntingdon. This needs to include the old Houghton Road which has been re-opened for bikes and buses since I surveyed

[Talk-GB] Launch of Mapping for Change social enterprise

This reached me via a roundabout route about an event on Thursday late afternoon. Is anyone from OSM involved? Is anyone going? Is someone in the London area able to go? Looks light up our street, so to speak. http://www.mappingforchange.org.uk and in particular:

Re: [Talk-GB] tracing lakes with Potlatch

On 06/04/2010 17:51, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: A lot of stuff nowadays is done from aerial imagery, but they can still drop back to traditional surveying methods if required. It was a strange coincidence that I met an OS surveyor, theodolite in hand, doing just that when I was

Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey

I thought it was very interesting to look at the OS and OSM overlaid on each other on the WMS link someone posted. 1. I was very impressed with how really accurate OSM is compared to OS where I know it has been done systematically 2. I was disappointed to see how out of date the OS data is -

[Talk-GB] London Underground roundel

might be able to take that position also. Many thanks, David Earl ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] London Underground roundel

On 25/03/2010 13:36, Thomas Wood wrote: Wow, good work. I suppose this will start a flood of localisation requests for other metro systems, this will probably be a good thing - it'll force our mapnik localisation to be made better! (maybe I could target it as a GSoC project for myself...) As

Re: [Talk-GB] Questions about highway classification

On 09/03/2010 11:29, Nathan Edgars II wrote: I'm currently trying to form a sort of consensus as to the best way of defining the classes of highway in the US, and a bit of information about the UK would help. I know about the definitions used (trunk=primary route network, primary=A roads,

Re: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network - filling the gaps

Does anyone know what happens to ncn11 south of Stansted Mountfitchet? I mapped it through to there a few months ago and then went back to take it further but couldn't find it on the ground. I'd assumed it followed the Lea valley maybe via Bishops Stortford and Harlow, but the signs just

[Talk-gb-midanglia] Fwd: National Trust Press Release - Reach Bridge Brings Lodes Way a Step Closer

Original Message Subject:National Trust Press Release - Reach Bridge Brings Lodes Way a Step Closer Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 11:17:18 - From: Cooper, Howard howard.coo...@nationaltrust.org.uk 5 March 2010 *Reach** Bridge** Brings Lodes Way a Step Closer* **

Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey response

On 14/01/2010 18:27, Dave F. wrote: Andy, The taxpayers have already paid for it, many times over. I resent having to pay £7.50 for a map I've already financed to construct. As I've paid for it, I think it should be given to me free of charge. For a paper map, I think not. You've helped pay

[Talk-GB] OSM mention on You and Yours

There was an item on this lunchtime's You and Yours on BBC Radio 4 (a consumer magazine programme) about mapping, Ordnance Survey and satnav, which also mentioned OSM. It's 35:30 minutes in at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00p4l7x David

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding some additional building around the Angel area of London?

On 11/11/2009 10:39, Richard Mann wrote: I found this a useful summary of the UK copyright position: http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p09_fair_use That's about the general concept. This was the reason for my comment that our use on a street map would be akin to news reporting

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding some additional building around the Angel areaof London?

to show their store locations on the map were we to ask them, as essentially free advertising, and I do hope TfL might be able to take that position also. Many thanks, David Earl ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding some additional building around theAngel areaof London?

On 11/11/2009 12:40, Peter Miller wrote: I do also agree with Richard in that there are numerous possible map styles emphasising many different sorts of features in a lot of different languages Sure, but there are some that are so iconic they are the expectation. And as others said and

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding some additional building around the Angel area of London?

On 11/11/2009 12:44, Peter Childs wrote: OSM also has the advantage that you can render your map your self, If you want Yellow Primary Roads, London Transport Symbol for train stations etc etc then go ahead, If you infridge copy right on your own rendering its not in the OSM data so OSM can't

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding some additional building around the Angel area of London?

it on, and take it off if they complain. Richard On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 2:22 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com mailto:da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: On 10/11/2009 13:21, Peter Miller wrote: On 10 Nov 2009, at 12:41, Ed Avis wrote: Are we legally permitted

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding some additional building around the Angel area of London?

On 10/11/2009 15:02, Richard Mann wrote: But simply reproducing their name or logo to represent them is just free advertising, and they'd be laughed out of court. Rubbish. It's their property and they can decide who uses it and where. They may well not have any objection, but if they did,

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding some additional building around the Angel area of London?

On 10/11/2009 19:35, Peter Miller wrote: On 10 Nov 2009, at 19:05, Tom Chance wrote: We get permission from TfL, or we seek costly legal advice. I agree that the cautious approach would be to ask. I was wondering if we could use the argument that it is in the background (as is a photo of

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Cambridgeshire Guided Bus

On 09/11/2009 15:15, David Earl wrote: Their page doesn't call it a bridleway either Actually, following the link in the corner to http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/transport/thebusway/community/rights/ it then says: New bridleway and cycleway: To make sure people can still enjoy this route

Re: [Talk-GB] Inaccurate Sea Boundary of England

On 15/10/2009 11:02, Ed Avis wrote: Ed Loach e...@... writes: As only Sealand recognise Sealand and no UN member does (from the wiki article you quote), I can't see the claim that the sea boundary of England is wrong can be justified. Who would have expected an edit war in the English

Re: [Talk-gb-midanglia] Wisbech

On 14/10/2009 13:40, David Earl wrote: As I mentioned, I'd like to promote a Wisbech mapping party. There's a sign up page now: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fenland/WisbechMappingParty2009-11 David ___ Talk-gb-midanglia mailing list Talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Wisbech mapping party

I'm planning a mapping party for the weekend of 14/15 November to map Wisbech, Cambridgeshire and environs. Anyone fancy a weekend in the Fens? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fenland/WisbechMappingParty2009-11 David ___ Talk-GB mailing list

Re: [Talk-GB] Ordnance Survey 7th series available

NPE maps have always had major alignment problems which have seemed to me to be worse in the eastern side of the country. There's also a new problem, but I don't know whether it is in the JOSM WMS plugin, the tile server or what. Consider three JOSM screenshots:

[Talk-GB] NAPTAN pay_scale_area

I notice that we now have this area name = Cambridge public_transport = pay_scale_area ref = CAMBDGE source = naptan_import which looks like it delimits the area within which the Cambridge megarider bus tickets are valid (Pay scale area is not a term in public parlance). Problem is,

[Talk-GB] Vote for TalkTalk's OSM-using hero

As those of you paying attention will know, CycleStreets (www.cyclestreets.net) is a routing and photo-map application for cyclists based on OSM data. It's primary developer is Simon Nuttall and he has been nominated for TalkTalk's digital hero award, which offers a much needed £5K to help

Re: [Talk-GB] liam123 facts

On 19/09/2009 07:30, Frederik Ramm wrote: I have reverted the remaining edits so that, to my knowledge as per now, not as single object should be in the state last modified by liam123. Thank you very much for doing this. David ___ Talk-GB mailing

Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest

On 18/09/2009 11:17, Lennard wrote: And about removal/deactivation/hiding of Potlatch's live editing mode: yes, please. We've had a case in Belgium as well, recently, of someone dicking about in live mode, apparently unaware of the destructive nature of their actions. +1 But I don't think

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Mapper

Well done, and congratulations! I saw the feed come through earlier on this morning and have been working through reviewing the changes in my area. In my so far futile attempts to reload the namefinder index, I've found the same thing - the time to reload seems to be exponential with the size.

Re: [Talk-GB] liam123's latest

On 18/09/2009 12:13, Dave Stubbs wrote: On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Brian Prangle bpran...@googlemail.com wrote: I may be being a simpleton but can't we just disable write privileges for this user to the database? Then he can continue editing but it all has no effect If somebody

  1   2   >