On 09/11/2013 13:14, Rob Nickerson wrote:
We are mixing up two issues here. One is as to whether historic layers
should be removed from the default menus
What exactly do you mean by "the default menus" here? There are no
"default menus" in OSM, only menus in different instances of different
>>Are there any *non*-historical uses for NLS - Bartholomew Half Inch,
1897-1907; NLS - OS 1-inch 7th Series 1955-61; or OS New Popular Edition
historic.
Of course there are. Historical maps are a huge source of meta data for the
landscape, much of which cannot be obtained in any other way. The w
Hi Andy,
We are mixing up two issues here. One is as to whether historic layers
should be removed from the default menus (and determining what counts as
"historic" of "no value" to current mapping) and the second issue of how iD
presents the list.
Please do not let an iD bug direct the future dir
On 09/11/13 11:58, Rob Nickerson wrote:
As you have seen my responses at [1] and [2], it will come as no
surprise that I oppose this move. I have set out my reasoning below:
Hi Rob, hi Paul,
I'll not venture into the "how" of this only the "what"...
Let's think about it from the perspectiv
Hi Paul,
I hope you are well.
As you have seen my responses at [1] and [2], it will come as no surprise
that I oppose this move. I have set out my reasoning below:
== Reason 1: Open Historical Maps (OHM) is not an entirely separate project
to OSM ==
I will start by providing a bit of background
> From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 3:03 PM
> To: 'SomeoneElse'; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Editor backbground layers in iD
>
> It's worth pointing out that iD doesn't actually have an im
Paul Norman wrote:
Paul Norman wrote:
> >It's worth pointing out that iD doesn't actually have an imagery list.
> >It inherits its from the editor-imagery-index project at
> >http://osmlab.github.io/editor-imagery-index/, which is for
> >OpenStreetMap editing, not historical mapping or a general
> From: SomeoneElse [mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk]
> Sent: Friday, November 01, 2013 4:44 AM
> To: Paul Norman; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Editor backbground layers in iD
>
> Paul Norman wrote:
> > It's worth pointing out that iD doesn&#x
Paul Norman wrote:
It's worth pointing out that iD doesn't actually have an imagery list.
It inherits its from the editor-imagery-index project at
http://osmlab.github.io/editor-imagery-index/, which is for
OpenStreetMap editing, not historical mapping or a general list of all
possible imagery
>Dealing with it from a UI perspective is difficult, and I get the
>impression that's the main issue, not the coding once the UI is figured
>out.
I'm not a UI designer, but I'll have a go at sketching a few ideas over the
next 7 days. It would be a shame to drop background layers where they are
us
> From: SomeoneElse [mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk]
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Editor backbground layers in iD
>
> Rob Nickerson wrote:
> >
> > 2). iD is a general purpose editor. It can be used for
> > OpenHistoricalMap too.
>
> Indeed - perhaps I shoul
Hi Andy,
I get all of your points on this one, but just as we generally don't go and
remove other peoples custom tags, I think it would be a shame if we remove
available layers. Having historical background layers can attract people to
other projects (Open Historical Map). I've even used historic
On 28/10/2013 19:28, SomeoneElse wrote:
series, Mapbox Satellite or Mapquest Open Aerial, and if anyone's
using NPE, Bartholomew 1/2 inch or OS 1 inch as backgrounds they
probably shouldn't be using iD to do it (if for no other reason due to
alignment issues). Am I maligning these sources and
Rob Nickerson wrote:
2). iD is a general purpose editor. It can be used for
OpenHistoricalMap too.
Indeed - perhaps I should have been clearer that I'm talking about the
instance in use on the OSM site used to edit the OSM map, not any other
instance which presumably could feature any layer
Andrew Hain wrote:
Is there a useful distinction between the two 1:25000 layers?
In the area that I was looking at (just south of Kirk Ireton in
Derbyshire) they appear to be different original maps, and it appears
that coverage of each layer is slightly different.
On the subject of the oth
>Is there a useful distinction between the two 1:25000 layers?
>
>--
>Andrew
>
At face value, no. They both show map sheets from the Ordnance Survey 1:25k
series (although the dates may differ slightly).
However if we look at the hosting of these tiles we find that one of these
is provided by the
SomeoneElse writes:
>
>
> I logged a bug with iD regarding the non-visibility of some items in
> the background layer
menu:https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/1929#issuecomment-27236976
> The issue that I actually logged is actually being addressed as part
> of a different bug
Hi Andy,
I would like to see as many layers as possible in iD and other editors. The
issue, in my opinion, is one of how best to present the available layers
(more on that later). So why more layers:
1). More layers = more choice and more potential sources for confirming the
presence or absence o
18 matches
Mail list logo
