Re: [Talk-us] People For Bikes Connectivity Tool

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: > > Spencer, > What cities have shown interest into updating OSM? There may be local > mappers that would be interested in help the city add to OSM. > > Good question. People for Bikes is planning to run scores for up

Re: [Talk-us] People For Bikes Connectivity Tool

Clifford: I've been in touch with Spencer about updating data in Madison, WI. I'm a longtime OSMer and vice president of a local bike advocacy group, Madison Bikes. In both those capacities I'm really excited about this project. We have a supportive Metropolitan Planning Organization with good

Re: [Talk-us] People For Bikes Connectivity Tool

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Spencer Gardner wrote: > > People for Bikes has been encouraging cities to make sure their bike > networks are up-to-date in OSM so you may see some activity in your > respective cities. We have produced some training materials to

Re: [Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 113, Issue 10

On Apr 6, 2017 12:25 PM, "Mark Bradley" wrote: > Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 15:56:02 -0700 > From: Charlotte Wolter > To: Bill Ricker ,Talk-US@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Response from TIGER about "driveways

[Talk-us] People For Bikes Connectivity Tool

Hi all. I wanted to notify the community about an upcoming website that makes heavy use of OSM for rating the quality of the bicycle network in communities around the USA. The website is being developed by People for Bikes as part of their Places for Bikes

Re: [Talk-us] Dakota County, MN Building Import

writes: > On that page, it states Dakota County encourages public use of this > GIS data. “The County Board of Commissioners adopted a policy of free > and open GIS data, in collaboration with the other six metropolitan > counties in the Twin Cities. More information

Re: [Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 113, Issue 10

> Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 15:56:02 -0700 > From: Charlotte Wolter > To: Bill Ricker ,Talk-US@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Response from TIGER about "driveways [...] > It would be nice if there were a way to pop up some kind of warning

Re: [Talk-us] Dakota County, MN Building Import

On that page, it states Dakota County encourages public use of this GIS data. “The County Board of Commissioners adopted a policy of free and open GIS data, in collaboration with the other six metropolitan counties in the Twin Cities. More information on this initiative is available from

Re: [Talk-us] Osmar and Ways

Erik, Approximately what percentage of the roads are missing? Do the missing road share any common characteristics, such as all being highway=track? What is the specific bounding box you are using, and what are the parameters of the query you are using? Are you saying that Geofabrik is missing

Re: [Talk-us] Dakota County, MN Building Import

writes: > Free and Open. Dakota County encourages the use of its published data > and supports it being added to OSM. They are aware of the project and > do not object. That's great to hear. Can you ask them to update their website to make permission to copy and

Re: [Talk-us] Dakota County, MN Building Import

Free and Open. Dakota County encourages the use of its published data and supports it being added to OSM. They are aware of the project and do not object. Joe From: Rory McCann Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 3:49 AM To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Cc: impo...@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re:

Re: [Talk-us] Dakota County, MN Building Import

Hi, Can I ask about the licence of this data? I don't see anything on the wikipage about the licence, and the page[1] from Dakota County is unclear. It doesn't say what the licence is, and has this condition: If you transmit or provide the GIS Data (or any portion of it) to another user, you