within
addresses.
In any case, if OSM is going to be a useful source of addresses for
businesses and the public, we need to replicate the official addresses
that everyone is currently used to using.
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 16:19, Chris Hill wrote:
> How are they verifiable? There is no open sou
On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 12:02, Alan Mackie wrote:
>
> I struggle with what to call the in that example.
>
> A recent suggestion for named terraces was to use addr:street=
> and addr:parentstreet=, but if the relates the
> whole building to to parentstreet, then reconstructing an address seems
ps at e.g.
https://osm.mathmos.net/nameless/amenity/place_of_worship simply
denote the type of OSM object: node, way or relation.
Robert.
--
Robert Whittaker
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
IP postcode, despite being in
Norfolk and closer to Norwich (NR) than Ipswich.)
On the basis that it's a required part of each address, I would
recommend that we do store the post town in OSM addresses. There are
significant advantages to storing it in a consistent way, and the best
existing
On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 18:05, Sean Blanchflower wrote:
> In case anyone's interested I set myself the lockdown project of ensuring all
> the active Anglican churches in England are mapped consistently in OSM, and
> have gotten as far as I realistically can for the moment.
>
>
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 13:18, Dave F via Talk-GB
wrote:
>
> https://snipboard.io/scrm5R.jpg
>
> There you go, free of any supposed copyright infringement.
Not quite. Before we're able to use any third-party data in OSM, we
need to verify that it is available under a suitable licence.
On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 12:37, Dave F wrote:
> On 08/12/2020 12:08, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 09:39, Mark Lee via Talk-GB
> > wrote:
> >> Hello. I've just added a missing public bridleway
> >> (https://www.openstreetmap.org
agging. Do you have permission to use information from the Definitive
Map in OpenStreetMap? Generally these maps have lines drawn on top of
Copyrighted Ordnance Survey base-maps, which means they're off-limits
for use in OSM.
Digitised Public Rights of Way data (without the base-map background
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 at 15:29, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB
wrote:
> A shame really, an open, standard API - and accompanying open source clients
> to the API - adopted by all councils for problem reporting would be a great
> thing to have.
It would indeed be great. An open standard for this
These restrictions will last
> > for
> > another couple of years – until the end of 2022 – which I know might seem a
> > long
> > way off, but hopefully will pass quickly. Then we’ll be happily able to
> > share
> > them with the OSM community, along with the
On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 at 12:35, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB
wrote:
> 28 Nov 2020, 10:48 by robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com:
>
> I guess the problem is that recycling_type=container is being used
> both for individual containers and for mini sites with a group of
> containers.
>
> Is it really a
On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 09:42, Jez Nicholson wrote:
> Agreed, "point" sucks as a value, I won't use itmy fundamental reason for
> it not being a 'centre' was size, but a Recycling Point _could_ be seen as a
> mini Recycling Centre that only accepts recyclable waste. You can see a
>
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 at 10:42, Jez Nicholson wrote:
> My personal opinion is that UPRNs never apply to a road or road section. They
> apply to something that you cannot see, like a grit bin that is no longer
> there.
It's definitely possible for UPRNs to be assigned to streets. I think
you can
On Sat, 7 Nov 2020 at 13:02, ael via Talk-GB wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 12:11:42PM +, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> > For anyone who's interested, I've just updated my "Survey Me" tool at
> > https://osm.mathmos.net/survey/ .
>
> I took a l
For anyone who's interested, I've just updated my "Survey Me" tool at
https://osm.mathmos.net/survey/ . It now includes food retail chains
where OSM mapping doesn't agree with the "Retail Points" dataset from
Geolytix ( https://blog.geolytix.net/tag/retail-points/ ).
Th
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 at 00:22, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Just in time for the AGM, I have just published OSM UK's first tile layer. No
> don't get too excited it is not a full map render. Instead I have produced a
> very simple tiling of the Land Registry polygon data now that this
n Great Britain. Reading
> https://cesafety.co.uk/list-of-public-access-defibrillators-across-the-uk
> from August 2019 reports that there are 5304 defibrillators in London alone.
I've got the AED data from all the Ambulance Services in the UK apart
from Northern Ireland and London in m
> Too transient/inaccurate for me, personally. Even my local LA can't
> publish an accurate list.
Seeing that the list gets changed almost every day leads me to believe they
have the same problem.
Also 440+ entries are duplicates so no, a correct list right from the start
seems to be too much
So, if the FHRS rating is say, from 2017, the information could be out-of-date
- but there's no way of knowing without a survey.
Anyway, I was aming for matching the data against fhrs:id because that is the
only really unique thing that could be associated with EOHO and OSM.
Or am I missin
(1.7 %)
...
checking those data against the FHRS-OpenData would be relatively easy and very
quick to implement and would allow for 96.5% of the entries to be checked. Once
one has the FHRS data finding an appropriate OSM object becomes easier.
Someone™ would have to do the coding and once licensing
lised.
Perhaps this is what's causing the following problem for me then. I
GPS-surveyed a lot of the roads on my estate a few years ago when
aerial imagery wasn't so good. I've got GPS traces in OSM that
consistently follow the pavements on each side of the road and will
line up nicely with the aerial
>
> It's not currently released under an open licence so not suitable for direct
> inclusion into OSM. I will see if I can get permission for the data to be
> used.
Sustrans' NCN data is available from
http://livingatlas-dcdev.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/54a66fa3c15d4e118e085fbd9b1
> name.
I'd tend to see the TOIDs are just an internal ID used in OS MasterMap
and not something that there's much value in adding to OSM. I'd have
thought that that USRN should be a sufficient unique reference number
for highways. (Everything in OS MasterMap has a TOID, and actually I
think
g.
HMPA2 (which is a Historic Marine Protected Area). This makes it
easier to identify by the listing as to the type of heritage
designation (suggest that code references/descriptors could be
included on a wiki for ref:hs=*)
On 23/07/2020 11:39, Tony OSM wrote:
Hi
When I started mapping these
and Monuments Commission for England (commonly
known as //Historic England <https://historicengland.org.uk/>//) has
given permission for the //National Heritage List for England
<https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/data-downloads/>//(NHLE)
to be used in OSM und
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 23:12, Nick wrote:
> Could the data be included in https://osm.mathmos.net/survey/ ?
I had a quick look at the National Charge Point Registry data a while
ago. I got as far as plotting a map showing both the OSM charge points
and those from the Registry:
ht
, Mark Goodge wrote:
It's the errors which are more of a problem, because it's generally
better not to map something than to map it wrongly.
This is a difficult point. Data is never 100% complete, and
frequently not 100% accurate. At what point it becomes better not to
have the thing in OSM
Again, this sounds like a perfect job for MapRoulette where the NCR goes into a
GeoJSON and people get to work on that data with what's in OSM already - the
part that requires effort is to correct what's bogus ;)
K
Am 21. Juli 2020 18:30:25 MESZ schrieb Mark Goodge :
>
>
>On 21/07/2
Is the National Chargepoint Registry data open for OSM now? If not somebody
should write a nice enough letter?
Kai
Am 21. Juli 2020 17:16:59 MESZ schrieb Mark Goodge :
>
>
>On 21/07/2020 12:58, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
>> 1538 nationwide.
>
>Which is a long way short
ben:
>
>
> Do we map electric vehicle charging points? If not, should we?
>
> None of the ones in my town are on OSM, at the moment. I could add them,
> but it seems a bit pointless if they're not generally mapped.
>
> Mark
>
>
Thanks for the effort.
No problem to vote for this, no "red flags" for me.
Tony
On 20/07/2020 22:11, Rob Nickerson wrote:
Hi all,
As discussed at the State of the Map online workshop, I took away an
action to draft a proposal page for ref:GB:uprn. This page is now up
online.
Hi Rob,
thanks for the nudge, they have a nice amount of brands, it would be great to
be able to use their data freely :)
@all,
where would I document the request (and the eventual permission) in the Wiki?
It seems that under https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Permissions#Europe
there's no
#map=18/52.97843/-1.15535>.
Mapping listed sties was a particular interest when Will & Richard
Phillips created Evesham Mapped
<http://www.evesham-mapped.org.uk/map/?z=17=-1.92185=52.11616=OSM,1,16=listedbuildings>,
so buildings and gardens are covered at least.
Jerry
On Wed,
not go and start adding data to OSM just yet, please.
Kai
> Dave F via Talk-GB hat am 16. Juli 2020 um 14:53
> geschrieben:
>
>
> Hi
> Did you obtain them from their website? If so, could you post the link?
> What's the content? Just location co-ordinates?
>
> DaveF
sking them if this data could be used to check all the places
against OSM data and, if needed correct and/or create them, right?
K
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Whilst mapping some of my local historic places I have found Scheduled
Monuments. They are described in the Historic England list as Heritage
Category: Scheduled Monument and has a List Entry Number.
Building are listed as Heritage Category: Listed Building , Grade: (I,
II*, II) and a list
> I've made an FOI request yesterday and am awaiting a reply. What we could
> also do is find a local mapper to answer what he knows about the street.
Getting back to something fun, this is what turned up yesterday:
***
Your request:
In the ELTHORNE ward, SOA E01001248, there’s a small
> I've been asked to clarify this as it might come across as a personal
> attack which was not intended, sorry.
Apology accepted, but ...
> The, very well funded, organizations in OSM space that claim
> "Humanitarian" for themselves, market themselves mainly by having a
nly today discovered that there's a
JOSM team and an OSM organization.
It might be worth checking whether the projects could be moved to the OSM org.
Kai
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Good evening list!
During last week's Missing Maps London event I got to know the mobile App
"MapSwipe". This app is used to identify Imagery Tiles with specific features
like buildings, roads, etc. in countries with low map coverage (i.e.
developing/least developed countries). It is a
mplies
that it is, then unless a route is on their website or literature it is
not part of the NCN. OSM does not have the right to make a decision like
that no matter how good the intentions.
So please do not tag as ncn; but please keep as a route.
As the route is tagged mtb I think that
t;
>We could do the same. If we don't know whether it is permissible to tag
>it Fairfield Road in OSM, and there is no actual sign on it, we could
>call it Fairfields Road.
>
>Martin.
>
>___
>Talk-GB mailing li
:
>>
>> To find the USRN of the path, you need to use the lookup tables supplied
>> by OS. Doing that, we find that the associated USRN is 20602512.
>>
>> Now, there's no open data source which will directly tell you the name
>> of a USRN (at least, not until
On 05.07.2020 18:45, Kai Michael Poppe - OSM wrote:
> On 05.07.2020 17:51, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> Naive question - can that be added as a layer in JOSM? If so, how?
> I'll have to check whether I can manage that anyway with the new server
> now. Will come back to this.
Meh. 3
Good afternoon everyone.
> Additionally, I'll try to setup a server in my small farm to host this
> for everyone. If I could manage this, I'll write to the list again.
Please find every information you need to add the USRN to your JOSM here:
Good morning list!
Whilst investigating another matter I found, that you could host your
own WMS (Web Map Service) Server with the cross-platform software
GeoServer and then add this to your JOSM as a background layer.
Now the USRN Geopackage from OS only contains the ref:GB:usrn (is this
Hi Marc,
Thanks for the reply. I'll make it my task to find an out of date copyright map
that brings the full name, wherever I might find it :)
Have a great weekend!
Kai
Am 4. Juli 2020 13:02:59 MESZ schrieb Mark Goodge :
>
>
>On 04/07/2020 06:16, Kai Michael Poppe - OSM wrote:
On 03.07.2020 12:57, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/uprn/ (zoom in to level 16 to show the
>> data)
>
> Thank you.
Great tool!
So, a few months ago I stumbled upon a note
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2158104#map=19/51.49829/-0.32762)
that StreetComplete left
Agree with ref:GB:uprn and ref:GB:usrn.
Yes we do need to understand the data. If a usrn is given to a road,
then the road is extended is the extension included in the original usrn
or given a new usrn. Plenty of scope for decisions when using in OSM.
T
On 03/07/2020 16:55, Robert Skedgell
As we have access to the data and Robert Whittaker has produced a great
UPRN locations map, how are we planning to tag OSM objects?
ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn
have been suggested as tags - I think this is the way to go.
There is also Key:ref:NPLG:UPRN:1 in the wiki.
Question: Should uprn
11:23, Tony OSM wrote:
There was a reference to £1000 worth of data being made free each
month to individual users - can't find out how this works yet. This
may allow us as individuals to populate OSM and OSM essentially
aggregates the data - rather like postcode data.
Generally reconstr
Thanks Russ - didn't know about https://os.openstreetmap.org/
Free beer or free speech - I'm looking at.
T
On 03/07/2020 11:35, Russ Garrett wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 11:24, Tony OSM wrote:
There was a reference to £1000 worth of data being made free each month
to individual users
I spent part of yesterday navigating the relevant OS and LandRegistry
sites and trying to figure out what we can do.
We can basically put UPRN and USRN into OSM freely - the license is
written to enable that. OS have also separated out the ability to match
UPRN and USRN to address and street
I'm not completely sure if/how we can best make use of the new OS
OpenData (UPRNs, USRNs and related links) in OpenStreetMap, but as a
first step I've set up a quick slippy map with the UPRN locations
shown:
https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/uprn/ (zoom in to level 16 to show the data)
The UPRN
2020, at 6:25 PM, Tony OSM wrote:
Reported in Local Newspapers
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/long-awaited-20m-road-linking-18495724
the road has opened.
Can anyone point me to a definitive line to allow me to map it, or does
anyone else want to map it corre
Hi Rob
I think a meeting this weekend is a good idea.
Even if a basic discussion of what we understand is available and the
creation of an agenda of how to use the data.
Tony Shield
On 29/06/2020 20:37, Rob Nickerson wrote:
Hi all,
The new open data comes out on Wednesday this week (land
Hi Rob,
I'd go for the week following - apart from Saturday being the 4th and
Sunday the 5th of July :-)
Kai
On 29.06.2020 21:37, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The new open data comes out on Wednesday this week (land ownership
> boundaries, Unique Property Reference Number, etc). We are
in this
changset:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68842940
---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk
On Sat, 27 Jun 2020, at 6:25 PM, Tony OSM wrote:
Reported in Local Newspapers
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/long-awaited-20m-road
move the most glaring
mistakes out of the way!
Have a great evening!
Kai
On 26.06.2020 23:33, Kai Michael Poppe - OSM wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Version 0.1.3 is now available for download from
> https://github.com/kmpoppe/fhrsPlugin
>
> Thank you all for being so
I question the meaning of the word 'secret' when used in a newspaper. My
observations are that secret means the reporter didn't know about it.
Tony
On 28/06/2020 00:47, David Woolley wrote:
On 27/06/2020 23:37, Dave Love wrote:
I was going to map a covered reservoir round here that I've
proposed in OSM but I don't know enough to
confirm that is the correct path.
Tony Shield
TonyS999
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
allow, so what will be policy of updating OSM data with new
shapes from INSPIRE.
Tony Shield
TonyS999
On 27/06/2020 08:58, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 20:50, Rob Nickerson wrote:
Looks like 1 July will be a big open data release day. Not only do we get the
USRN
s
>
> Should we attempt to coordinate something to prevent a mixture of uses across
> those OSMers who may want to do something with this date?
I'm not sure about the INSPIRE polygons, but for USRNs and UPRNs, I'd
imagine it will be useful to add these identifiers to the appropriate
OS
Hi everyone,
Version 0.1.3 is now available for download from
https://github.com/kmpoppe/fhrsPlugin
Thank you all for being so active in helping with the development of
this small part of the OSM bubble!
Good n8!
Kai
On 26.06.2020 17:48, Tony OSM wrote:
> Hi Kai
>
> Was
Hi Kai
Was thinking that automatically selecting the first array element which
will be highlighted in the display will solve it.
My belt and braces is to catch that exception and display a suitable
error message ( should never occur)
Tony
On 26/06/2020 16:35, Kai Michael Poppe - OSM wrote
without the user having to
select it.
Kai
On 26.06.2020 17:14, Tony OSM wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I get that also. In my case its caused by not selecting an entry in
> the table presented after the initial Search entry. I've reported this
> issue & Kai is aware.
>
> Tony
>
&g
Hi
I get that also. In my case its caused by not selecting an entry in the
table presented after the initial Search entry. I've reported this issue
& Kai is aware.
Tony
On 26/06/2020 15:54, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
I'm getting this after selecting the Search Entry option:
will not return any result. This is why one of these is required.
From what I understand, Dave was asking for a why to locate _any_ estabishment in the vicinity that hasn't got an ID, but should. Let's see if this is doable :)
Kai
Tony OSM hat am 26
log appears offering
which tags to be selected for adding to the OSM object including the FHRS:ID
I've reported one issue, but otherwise I regards this as a great assistant.
Tony Shield
TonyS999
On 26/06/2020 12:02, o...@poppe.dev wrote:
And of course, you're right Dave, it would be great to loo
have FHRS info - searching through each and every one of them could take some time though.
Kai
Dave F via Talk-GB <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> hat am 26. Juni 2020 um 12:39 geschrieben:
As the OSM entity has to a
:-)
Kai
Dave F via Talk-GB <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> hat am 26. Juni 2020 um 12:39 geschrieben:
As the OSM entity has to already contain the FHRS:ID tag it limits the
usefulness of this plugin. Won't most have addres
Hi Kai
I've looked at github and your OSM profile - impressive, more so than
mine. Pleased to make your acquaintance.
I will download the fhrs app and give you feedback.
Regards
Tony
On 26/06/2020 10:45, o...@poppe.dev wrote:
Hey Tony,
as I'm from the other side of the Channel, I doubt
Hey Tony,
as I'm from the other side of the Channel, I doubt that there's someone from the UK community that knows me well enough to reassure you about my person (I could always ask people from the German Telegram group to tell you I'm not a lunatic *g*)
Hi Kai
I'd like to help as its a good idea - however I don't know you, so could
you get some community people who are well known to vouch for you, its
just that I don't want strange software on my machine.
Regards
Tony Shield
TonyS999
On 26/06/2020 05:58, Kai Michael Poppe - OSM wrote
Good morning everyone,
I built a plugin for JOSM that allows you to merge data from the FHRS
API into OSM with a few clicks. I'd love to find some people that would
be willing to test the 0.1.2 version and report bugs they found and/or
comment on the user experience.
Just throw me a line at o
Campaign on a project to bring data from the Transport For London
Cycling Infrastructure Database to OSM.
As part of this the question arose as to how to tag cycle
facilities that are give more protection and comfort than a
painted lane on the road but not as much as a fully protected
Hi
Yes a very good idea.
I'm in North West England - the main driver in this area is Manchester.
I have seen social media and news outlets showing photos of Deansgate,
Manchester with expanded pedestrian areas and expanded cycle lanes;
motor vehicles removed - but I don't know if there are
Hi
I had the Lancashire KML file handy (as you do), looked up JOSM import
and found the OpenData plug in. Dropped the KML file onto the plug in
and it created a lancashire.kml layer with all of the ways on the layer
and the kml fields as tags.
When combined with OSM data and ESRI imagery
ot;
Nick
*From:* Nick Whitelegg
*Sent:* 13 May 2020 18:08
*To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* Rights of way mapping - making it easy for newcomers to OSM
(perhaps!)
Hi,
Just to continue with the theme of rights of way mapping, I've been
as part of
Leicestershire and Rutland Rights of Way Committee and we thought,
different but it does make sense.
On the whole I also prefer the use of names in identifiers stored on
OSM. I suspect some of the completely numeric ones represent system
specific keys.
I suppose I am in a slightly
//rowmaps.com
That site is an excellent collection of all the data that's available,
with the added benefit of having it conveniently transformed into a
common format for downstream use. As far as OSM use is concerned are
some licensing issues with some of the datasets there though, so
add an unmapped
> path to OSM, the primary source for the prow_ref is the council’s map.
Unless you've been given permission by the copyright holder to make
use of a map like that, then it's off-limits for use in OSM. The map
at
https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/roads-parking-and-travel/public-ri
case, I think the use of the numerical ID in
place of the parish name should be acceptable. The numerical parish ID
is what is used on the council’s own PROW map – as well as the open
data they released (and thus the easiest to import into OSM). It would
be unrealistic to expect mappers to then cros
I agree with Adam. In the published path orders fixed to lamposts etc
the written description includes parish, type, number. Sometimes in that
order sometimes type, number, parish. There is no consistency.
Parish, type, number is likely to be understood by every user of OSM and
I have used
This may have got lost in the discussion about highway=no, but I'd
like to get some feedback on what prow_ref format is best to use in
Lancashire. See my previous message below:
On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 19:23, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
wrote:
> The format of the Right of Way numbers se
On Tue, 5 May 2020 at 19:33, Mike Baggaley via Talk-GB
wrote:
> >Highway=no seems acceptable to me where a path is permanently physically
> >blocked by a building or such-like. We're not serving anyone by directing
> >people into wals. I do, however, disagree with its use to tag definitive
>
On Tue, 5 May 2020 at 11:54, Adam Snape wrote:
> I'd consider this particular proposed use of highway=no to mean "there is a
> public highway here but there's no visible path on the ground" to be a
> somewhat country-specific and counter-intuitive tagging practice. It's
> certainly being
ights-of-way/public-rights-of-way-map/
is a relatively recent innovation. (By the way, you shouldn't use that
map for OSM mapping, as there's an OS-copyrighted backdrop, which you
might inadvertently take information from, or use relative positioning
information from.) The Council's online map u
Hi
Noticed that the government website uses OSM on which to overlay
coronavirus data.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/#local-authorities
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Hi Nathan
I've done some work on Chorley PROW's recently. Populated using the
style Chorley FP 1; Lancaster area uses the numbering convention in
MapThePaths eg 1-1 23. Fortunately I know the area well having lived in
the vicinity for 30 years so I can do armchair mapping with some knowledge.
As a general principle, I think we should certainly map both (a) any
physical paths on the ground and (b) the legal Definitive Line (though
not necessarily as a highway if it isn't one). These might be separate
ways if the two line differ, though they'd normally be one and the
same. It would also
Found via a search for: site:lists.openstreetmap.org "talk-gb"
"Commonwealth"
Thanks for finding that so quickly
Daniel, what is actually being proposed to be added to OSM? Is it a
list
of CWG cemeteries that could then be checked against the data we
have in
OSM? I remember se
On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 15:34, Nick Whitelegg
wrote:
> I wasn't familiar with the situation in Dorset but MapThePaths uses the 'SE
> 4/22' scheme (actually it appears as 'SE 4 22') so if people want to use MTP
> as a source for prow_refs, then that would be the format to use.
In general, I
a
bit premature but then perhaps not.
Cheers
Andy
*From:*Jez Nicholson [mailto:jez.nichol...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* 16 April 2020 22:15
*To:* Andy Robinson
*Cc:* Talk-GB
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 Phase 1 Construction NTP
Thanks Andy, this is opportunity for OSM to be *the* best source of
HS2 rails
reference is named parish,
status and route number then that should be what is in OSM, using number
references looks to me like an internal workaround for earlier computers
and spreadsheets.
Using named parish, status and route number also makes it easier to use
on maps - eg Andy Townsends
https
of Way Numbers. We really need to just select
one for the county in order to be consistent in OSM.
One format has a parish code followed by a slash and then the route
number within the parish (e.g. "SE4/22" for path number 22 in
Affpuddle and Turnerspuddle parish). The other would be to us
On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 12:27, Peter Neale wrote:
> I tried following the link to your proposed new source of “official” data,
> but none of the 3 links to the data worked very well for me.
>
> Link 1: (API format) led to http 404 error.
> Link 2 (CSV(TSV) format – led to http 404 error
> Link
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 20:40, Peter Neale wrote:
> I looked up my 2 "wholesale" pharmacies on the list. Unfortunately, they are
> both classed as "community", so will continue to be included in your checking
> tool.
>
> So... ...should we:
> a. Continue
;list of
registered pharmacies". As of today, I'm now just keeping those with a
Type (the last column) of either "Community" or "Temporary -
Community/Portacabin". I think doing this corresponds most closely to
what we'd want to tag as amenity=pharmacy in OSM. For internal
h
ction iD wanted (brand=Boots shop=chemist). How should Boots be
> tagged, and does iD need a fix? (I assume all Boots have pharmacies,
> but maybe not.)
As far as my tool at https://osm.mathmos.net/pharmacy/progress/ is
concerned, pharmacies are recognised as OSM objects tagged with
1 - 100 of 510 matches
Mail list logo
