On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 05:21 -0800, Spencer Riddile wrote:
> I am organizing a micro mapping party in Blacksburg, VA. We will be
> targeting biking related features. Is it worth adding a wiki page for
> this event? How do I get in touch with other OSM contributors in my
> area?
Hi Spencer,
You
I don't know if this is where the data set came from, but it looks like it.
http://csat.er.usgs.gov/statewide/downloads.html
Under landuse/landcover It looks like this is probably either the level 1 or
level 2 data.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Theodore Book wrote:
> I think the issue is mor
I think the issue is more that the data is somewhat out of date - I
believe it is tagging the land use, not the presence of trees. In some
areas, however, especially around Atlanta, the land has been developed
since the photography was taken on which the dataset is based. That
will take some
On Feb 25, 2009, at 7:19 AM, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
>
> This is interesting, but makes me feel uneasy: the entire point of OSM
> is to be as Legally Far From Hot Water as possible, and directly
> contradicting something the GIS department *wants*, even if the
> supreme
> court slapped them o
It looks like the use of landuse forest is a quite a bit more than makes
sense or is of use. Yea there are lots of trees where it is shown, but that
includes subdivisions with a lot of trees still.
The USGS data seems to be more the type of trees, not the "state" of the
trees as a forest.
As an ex
Dear Adam,
Trunk roads are major roads which are not necessarily limited access.
Generally, they are divided roads with higher speed limits and some
direct access. They would tend to fall between motorways and primary
roads in importance.
TB
Adam Schreiber wrote:
> Also, what's with the trun
Also, what's with the trunk roads? Trunk is supposed to be
hierarchically above motorway, which is what interstates are tagged
with and trunk is being applied to limited access US Hwy's?
Adam
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Theodore Book wrote:
> Yes, It is USGS Landuse / Land Cover data. It
Yes, It is USGS Landuse / Land Cover data. It is 1:100k or 1:250k
resolution, and also slightly dated. I find it to be pretty good
through zoom 14 or so, (see for example:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=34.4717&lon=-84.4287&zoom=14&layers=B000FTF)
but there is some offset, especially aroun
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 08:42:18AM +, Dale Puch wrote:
> A follow up on the CA case
> http://www.cfac.org/content/index.php/cfac-news/legal_development/
> Specifically:
>The county also claimed that it has a federal copyright in the basemap.
> It argued that copyright protection authorizes
A follow up on the CA case
http://www.cfac.org/content/index.php/cfac-news/legal_development/
Specifically:
The county also claimed that it has a federal copyright in the basemap.
It argued that copyright protection authorizes the county to condition
release of records, under freedom of informat
10 matches
Mail list logo
