Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

Don't use landuse=grass. Use surface=grass and/or landcover=grass to state the land cover, I'd use these with the power=plant tag. (For those that don't know .. I hate the tag landuse=grass) On 05/04/19 02:38, SK53 wrote: Yup, I don't think industrial is appropriate in many circumstances,

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

The interactive map on the plusbus site, e.g. http://www.plusbus.info/clacton-on-s perhaps has a better display as it shows the individual stops and perhaps rather than having the area mapped we should add a naptan tag to the stop nodes (for signposted stops I tend to just add naptancode and

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

Yup, I don't think industrial is appropriate in many circumstances, any more than it would be for an area of wind turbines on moorland. For instance I've seen sheep grazing in between the panels (which IIRC are mounted on heliostats) on this solar farm:

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 16:18, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Why not? If area is covered by solar panels then it is used for power > generation. > And power generation seems clear case of industrial use I guess it is. I just think "industrial" carries a number of connotations which solar power

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

Apr 4, 2019, 5:09 PM by r...@garrett.co.uk: > I would argue landuse=industrial is not appropriate in this case, > notwithstanding what the wiki says > Why not? If area is covered by solar panels then it is used for power generation. And power generation seems clear case of industrial use

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

Like Andy I can find these useful, particularly as the ones on local PTE websites are very difficult to interpret. However, they suffer from the deficiencies of being a) unmaintained on OSM; b) not necessarily reflecting multiple bus pass zones; c) being fairly crude hulls of bus stops in the

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

Hi Dave, On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 14:11, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote: > This would be a great project, however I think there's some confusion in > the tagging which requires agreeing/clarifying. Solar farms should have a power=plant covering the whole perimeter as an area or multipolygon. I agree

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

You are indeed right. Tagging for ground-based solar farms is varied. I am currently collecting them at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_United_Kingdom#List_of_under_construction_and_operational_UK_Ground_Mounted_Solar_Farms without reforming the tagging and building up

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

Stuart asked: > What do you mean by “pay scale”? Are you meaning the definition of a stop as > a fare stage, or as part of a zone? The pay_scale_area ways were the PlusBus zones as they were in 2009 according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Import e.g. this one for

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

On 03/04/2019 17:23, Dan S wrote: * The tagging is already pretty well-defined. This would be a great project, however I think there's some confusion in the tagging which requires agreeing/clarifying. Most solar rural solar farms are on arable land. There's usually a boundary fence around

Re: [Talk-GB] New Bridge Gunnislake

Of course, that was one of my concerns. We really need some sort of lifetime tagging with an end-date. You can use opening hours to indicate a period in which something is closed. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-GB] New Bridge Gunnislake

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:49:04PM +0100, Neil Matthews wrote: > Add a note on the main OSM site - maybe with expected finish date of > road works -- might help as a reminder. Oh yes. I ought to do that. I seldom generate notes, so I forget about them. ael

Re: [Talk-GB] New Bridge Gunnislake

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 08:38:25PM +0100, Edward Catmur via Talk-GB wrote: > There is also the temporary affix: > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposed_features/temporary_(conditional)#Example_4:_Temporary_highway_bridge Oh. I missed that. It would be perfect. Except, as

Re: [Talk-GB] New Bridge Gunnislake

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 09:33:22PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > It is closed for repairs, so maybe highway=construction construction=primary > would be better? I thought about that. But changing from primary seemed more problematical if it was forgotten. > It seems that it will be

Re: [Talk-GB] New Bridge Gunnislake

Apr 4, 2019, 12:30 PM by talk-gb@openstreetmap.org: > Of course, that was one of my concerns. We really need some sort of > lifetime tagging with an end-date. > There is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_date that allows to

Re: [Talk-GB] New Bridge Gunnislake

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 02:59:12PM -0400, Devonshire wrote: > Saw this on the local news last night. A 30+ mile diversion is going to cause > a few problems over Easter if they can't get it sorted. I am not that close > but have mapped this area a bit in the past. Personally. I like the

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

On 04/04/2019 11:05, Philip Barnes wrote: I believe they were the zones covered by plusbus tickets. I believe (and Stuart will know far more about this than me!) they predate the widescale adoption of PlusBus in the UK. Certainly when PlusBus was introduced in Chesterfield it didn't match the

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

I believe they were the zones covered by plusbus tickets. Although the Telford one is certainly unlikely as it has not been maintained since the import and Telford has expanded beyond it. Phil (trigpoint) On Thursday, 4 April 2019, Stuart Reynolds wrote: > What do you mean by “pay scale”? Are

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

On 04/04/2019 10:48, Stuart Reynolds wrote: What do you mean by “pay scale”? Are you meaning the definition of a stop as a fare stage, or as part of a zone? Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38387740 (that's one that I haven't deleted yet) Best Regards, Andy

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

When I come across them I always delete them. To map them as polygons was nonsense. A few years ago the person who added them confessed he couldn't remember why he'd done it. If there is a desire to to be added they should be on the bus stops, similar to the fare_zones I recently added to

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

What do you mean by “pay scale”? Are you meaning the definition of a stop as a fare stage, or as part of a zone? If so, then this data needs to be deleted, forthwith, as it will never be right. Outside of the regulated market that is London, different stops can be fare stages for different

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

On 04/04/2019 09:38, Brian Prangle wrote: Hi everyone Back in the day of the original NapPTAN import we imported pay scale areas - tagged as public_transport=pay_scale_area. I don't know why we ever did this - there's no evidence on the ground and it's highly unlikely that any OSM data

[Talk-GB] multiple GB lists

Demonstrating my ignorance, I did not know until recently that there are other GB lists, shown here with their last used date: talk-gb-london/ 2019-03-14 14:35 talk-gb-midanglia/ 2016-06-17 15:15 talk-gb-oxoncotswolds/ 2018-11-21 18:43 talk-gb-thenorth/ 2017-06-22 11:44 talk-gb-westmidlands/

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

The Telford one certainly looks highly dubious cutting residential areas and bus routes. I agree these and public transport routes are best left to organisations such as traveline. After all a bus route without timetable information is pretty useless. Phil (trigpoint) On Thursday, 4 April

Re: [Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

Brian, Sounds like a good idea. Nick (Tallguy) On Thu, 2019-04-04 at 09:38 +0100, Brian Prangle wrote: > Hi everyone > > Back in the day of the original NapPTAN import we imported pay scale > areas - tagged as public_transport=pay_scale_area. I don't know why > we ever did this - there's no

[Talk-GB] Removal of redundant NaPTAN data

Hi everyone Back in the day of the original NapPTAN import we imported pay scale areas - tagged as public_transport=pay_scale_area. I don't know why we ever did this - there's no evidence on the ground and it's highly unlikely that any OSM data consumer makes use of them ( if indeed they are