Based on some likely Wiki-Fiddling, I'd like to see the Trunk road
comments about the US tagging cleaned up to match reality. (I realize
that is harder than just reverting to a previous point in time).
___
Talk-us mailing list
On 9/27/2020 11:22 PM, Jack Burke wrote:
I'm on Slack, and I originally posted a comment about this editor on
some roads in Florida (that I'm familiar with), but the responses I
saw seemed to be somewhat "meh" so I didn't pursue it.
There are so many small arguments "this is a trunk" "no, a
On 9/27/2020 11:22 PM, Jack Burke wrote:
and he has a diary
entry about what he's doing (in addition to what he has on his profile
page about it). He changed*every single* trunk road in Georgia to
primary, and from what I can tell, in Florida, too. I haven't yet
expanded my examination into
On 9/22/2020 9:26 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
The extra hamlet nodes are import remainders that haven't yet been
converted to landuse areas. The general landuse zones for that area
have been identified, but do not exactly correspond to the named
subdivisions. As I get a
On 9/22/2020 8:56 PM, Karson Sommer wrote:
Looking around the area of the edit, there is a lot of stuff from my
perspective that seems fishy. There are a bunch of place=hamlet nodes? I
certainly don't see anything that should be tagged as a hamlet, they all
look like place=neighborhood to
Thoughts on use of place=neighborhood for subdivisions?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/91255294
Note that there are many thousands already tagged this way (5000 plus
in a section of the southeast alone).
___
Talk-us mailing list
On 2/5/2020 9:49 AM, Eric Christensen via Talk-us wrote:
For the record, my team(s) has many cartographic resources at our
fingertips that we can use for search and rescue including, but not
limited to: USGS 7.5' maps, National Park Service maps, OSM, Google
maps, state and local GIS data, and
On 2/4/2020 9:57 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
. Oddly enough, for the rural firefighters? Osmand with Microsoft
Earth imagery as the background is their most popular pick because it
works brilliantly offline and we have better map data than the state
itself does.
It is useful to learn what
That's a good point, but only if the surrounding areas are well mapped
in OSM. In my district of focus, I still encounter TIGER tangles as
soon as I cross the county border. I try to go a bit further knowing
that they answer partner district calls, and it's hard to stop when
there's so much
Mike,
It is a rather unique set of circumstances that make this project
a good fit:
- The county does not map most driveways
- The degree of rural-ness, hills, and trees
- Most trees are deciduous, making the off-leaf imagery good for
locating hidden driveways.
- The region is
Not an emergency, but still interesting when someone can use OSM data:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/MikeN/diary/392080
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On 1/23/2020 6:51 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
I'm not trying to apply my understanding of medical establishments to
the US - just asking what the general understanding is on your side of
the pond. Does Jmapb's distinction sound more or less ok for others too?
Jmapb's description matches my
On 1/8/2020 9:20 AM, James Mast wrote:
Honest mistakes on his end? Perhaps.� But I'm just seeing way too many
downgrades to be conformable with his 'highway type' changes to be
honest.� There's probably quite a few roads that he retagged as primary
that need to be re-upgraded to trunk and
On 12/17/2019 10:19 PM, Evin Fairchild wrote:
some US routes are more important than others and lumping them all as
primary doesn???t make any sense;
The arguments here about relative importance of parallel routes makes
sense.
Some massive changes such as in
I think many of the trunk VS motorway VS primary conflicts come from
2 points of view: on the one hand, people like to zoom out and see a
coherent network of interconnected roads. On the other side, there is
the group that prefers the road be classed according to its regional
FYI, The State of the map videos are up at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqjPa29lMiE3IqlKQlEwGlodMfJJHz-YV
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On 8/8/2019 5:25 PM, Paul Norman via Talk-us wrote:
Given the low numbers of 7-digit numbers I recommend correcting them
manually rather than writing code to do it.
On this one I'm not sure how introducing an error-prone keyboarding
exercise into the mix is an improvement over a
On 8/5/2019 9:42 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
So is this the tag the lack of which should keep trucks off my street
with tight turn radii?
I'm not an expert, but I'd guess it only keeps the street from seeing
continuous truck traffic even if it is the best route or turnaround (but
only in
> "a road which can carry
cargo trucks and has an adequate turn-around facility at the end"
Great, that's helpful. So it sounds like this tag is a synonym for
hgv=destination or hgv=yes?
Joseph
On 8/5/19, Mike N wrote:
Hi, "Terminal Access" appears to be unique to Ca
This was part of the iterative road improvement after TIGER as we began
with major highways.I believe it came from the public domain
information for the National Network
https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/national_network.htm .
On 8/4/2019 10:56 AM, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
On 3/21/2019 3:04 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
What is the benefit, during survey, of mapped places that are not
existing anymore?
I encounter many during surveys (usually result of data getting
outdated) and for me it was
always time sink (as I needed to check is it actually gone) and never
On 3/1/2019 12:49 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
One caution - when doing a building/address import a few years ago, we
discovered errors in the counties address database. They had different
street names from address street names. The street names matched the
street signs but the addresses had a
On 3/1/2019 10:09 AM, Aaron Forsythe wrote:
>> 1. Original TIGER had Ruppe Dr at a nearby but incorrect location.
This seems a common enough occurrence that a TIGER data should not be
used as permanent source. It's only there to get the map started and
adjustments from TIGER are required.
There have been some road name challenge projects which do excellent
work - updating the road network for current changes. In some cases,
there are now dueling sources, for example a recent change -
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/666170175/history
(I don't fault any editor involved;
This is a proposed import of Microsoft building footprints and address
points for Spartanburg County SC, based on county GIS data and the
Microsoft Buildings data.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spartanburg_County_Address_And_Building_Import
On 2/12/2019 11:01 AM, Ian Dees wrote:
This is great, Mike! Thanks for sharing.
Did you happen to take any photos? It'd be fun to have you write up
something about how you found this data, set up the Tasking Manager
project, and did the work at the Mapathon for the OSM US blog.
Hi,
We had a mapathon coordinated by
https://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/76 to visually inspect all roads
and update them from GIS data as appropriate. Much of the GIS data was
newer and there were many road name corrections (names or Road ->
Avenue, Drive -> Street, etc). In
On 11/28/2018 10:36 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
Adding the intersection did not change the character of the road south
of the Gilcrease extension or the rights of adjacent landowners, so I
don't see any particular reason to reclassify that segment.
If we're looking for a generalized rule,
On 11/9/2018 5:36 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
As an experiment my colleagues from the Telenav map team churned out
some local MapRoulette challenges for adding missing street names from
TIGER. The tasks were created by comparing TIGER (2017) to existing OSM
data using our conflation tool
On 10/22/2018 2:56 PM, Rory McCann wrote:
Hi Mike.
Thanks for the answers, that clears things up. Bt
On 10/22/2018 5:00 AM, Rory McCann wrote: >> I'm a little unclear
about one big question: What are you doing with
the existing data in OSM? Existing OSM data seems to have nearly
On 10/22/2018 8:46 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Could I suggest that you act cautiously wrt the tiger:reviewed tag in these
two cases?
If it's an "unknown highway type" it should probably remain as
tiger:reviewed=no. Likewise, if the surface isn't clear, then either
tiger:reviewed should
Thank you for your comments. Answers inline.
On 10/22/2018 5:00 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
On 22/10/2018 05:20, Mike N wrote:
This is a proposed import of road centerlines for Spartanburg County
SC, based on county GIS data. This will include a systematic review
of all roads in the county
This is a proposed import of road centerlines for Spartanburg County SC,
based on county GIS data. This will include a systematic review of all
roads in the county and qualify to remove tiger:reviewed tags.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spartanburg_county_road_center_line_import
On 9/7/2018 2:27 AM, Marian Poara wrote:
In many residential areas (but not only), there isn’t any one way sign
inside the small “roundabouts” and it seems that both directions are used.
In places without much law enforcement presence and no mandatory
driver training, original residents may
On 8/21/2018 11:39 AM, Jmapb wrote:
Don't know how common these sort of predatory tactics are outside NYC,
but fair warning, there may be businesses out there who are no longer
delighted at the thought of someone "from the internet" taking notice of
their publicly-posted information.
On 5/11/2018 12:25 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of
discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this
is a good idea.
I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
tiger:reviewed to the list of
On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often lanes=2
would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting that
was actually the case.
I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane tagging,
but at least
83537551=photo=ozDDkY97ETw_S7WwI9xZqQ>)
If you compare further buildings, you will see that this is applicable
for all others.
I hope you still can fix it, because the managers of the Florida import
didn't.
Thanks,
Leon
2018-03-25 20:36 GMT+02:00 Mike N <nice...@att.net
<
In accordance with Step 6 / item 4 of the imports checklist, the import
and QA is now completed.
Thanks to Microsoft for making building and height data available and
multiplying the efforts of a few local mappers!
On 3/14/2018 10:21 PM, Mike N wrote:
FYI, this is proceeding with 2 people
FYI, this is proceeding with 2 people, on dedicated accounts
Greenville_SC_City_MSImport_1 and Greenville_SC_City_MSImport_2
On 1/24/2018 8:28 PM, Mike N wrote:
The OSM Upstate SC group is planning an import of Microsoft building
shapes for the city of Greenville, SC. The candidate wiki
On 3/5/2018 3:52 PM, Bryan Housel wrote:
*• We've added support for more background imagery from WMS servers. *
Thanks Martin Raifer and Guillaume Rischard for your work on this..
/Press B to open the Background pane and see if new imagery is available
in your area./
Fantastic! Is there
On 3/2/2018 4:11 PM, Dale Puch wrote:
It seems like encouraging SEO firms to operate within OSM guidelines by
providing an easy way to add the OSM appropriate information in bulk
(with data validation) in one step would be a good thing. Easier to
contact, manage and block or revert as needed.
On 3/1/2018 7:36 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
Sent to Bright Valley Marketing via their website Contact text box:
Since there are several SEOs out there doing this, it would also be
interesting to talk to one of them to find out where they got this idea.
If there is some SEO blog that
This is a good time to bring up the subject because the recent
'locksmith' advertising was most bothersome: partly because the
locksmith industry as a whole in the US is as shady as you can get while
being barely legal, and partly because I'm sure the physical locations
had no relevance;
On 2/25/2018 9:14 PM, Nick Hocking wrote:
Paul wrote "Or maybe the unedited original TIGER that's still around
dropped to
highway=road. "
Given that the *vast* majority of these (with no name) are completely
fictional, and even those that aren't, are so out of position and so
wrongly
On 2/12/2018 4:25 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
As I am not familiar with the "things you've read," while also wondering myself whether additional
TIGER tags (tiger:cfcc, tiger:zip, etc.) should remain or be deleted, I also pose this question to the
greater talk-us community. What DO we do
The OSM Upstate SC group is planning an import of Microsoft building
shapes for the city of Greenville, SC. The candidate wiki page is at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Greenville_SC_Building_Import
The actual import won't take place for 1-2 months yet to allow time
to review the
On 1/23/2018 8:29 PM, Albert Pundt wrote:
I certainly don't intend to delete and recreate any relations for no
reason. Links with other boundary types will of course also be kept. The
state boundary itself will likely be redone as well to match the more
accurate newer TIGER data, though along
On 1/9/2018 8:47 PM, Jack Burke wrote:
Someone on the osmus Slack channel pointed out that this would affect
routing for people who are in the town and want to go somewhere else in
town, where that route wouldn't normally involve travelling on the major
through roads.
I haven't thought
On 1/8/2018 2:17 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
I might suggest a solution OSM might consider can be to tag access=destination
and/or residential=living_street.
From the video, they're definitely not living_street, so most likely
access=destination.
But the streets should not "be
On 11/20/2017 2:36 PM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
In the simple way you need to follow
all nodes your predessor had drawn, clicking all the nodes, be it
25 nodes or 100. In the advanced way, you don't. You instantly
reuse his line for your new polygon. This was a most typical example
of benefits that
On 11/19/2017 5:48 PM, Douglas Hembry wrote:
I told glebius that I wanted to find out what the
community thought. Is this just one more valid optional way of mapping?
To be recommended for adoption if possible? Or to be avoided? Thoughts?
I have this situation locally where much of the
The updated NAIP for some states scheduled to update in 2017 is
beginning to roll out (Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas etc). This is
the same as the "USGS Large Scale Imagery", but at times is newer right
after an update.
On 10/12/2017 9:52 AM, Ian Dees wrote:
The vast majority of roads seem to be correctly missing from OSM.
Along that line of thought - for cases where local government data is
not open, I'd find it useful to detect where a name changed in TIGER
from previous year, or a road was added.
I'm not sure about the syntax, but there's
cycleway=shared_lane (for sharrows)
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On 9/6/2017 12:42 AM, Nick Hocking wrote:
A couple of years ago there was a "Tiger missing and misaligned 2015"
layer that I found really usefull for bringing many US cities and towns
up-to-date.
Do you know if there is (or plans for) a more recent version of this,
maybe Tiger 2017???
This
The series of US railway crossing challenges on MapRoulette is now
complete! Thanks to the many people who helped with this project! The
topology of the US rail-road intersection areas is now much more
accurate, since many of the crossings also required a geometric
alignment of roads and
On 7/6/2017 5:42 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Reverting all these edits would probably create a lot of collateral
damage. We could manually go through them and revert all that contain
marketing speak, but even that would probably throw out a few babies
with the bathwater here and there.
In the
On 6/10/2017 10:51 PM, Jason Remillard wrote:
It is my opinion that removing imported non standard tags is
almost always ok.
It has been 10 years since tiger was imported, any effort to maintain it
should be welcomed. We own it now, no script is comming to automatically
update it.
You might
On 4/5/2017 3:10 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2006-November/002561.html
for details.
(I chuckled when I read that message which begins with a complaint about
the mailing lists.)
I chuckled when I read that the first problems involved developing
I have tagged 2 local living_streets that don't quite meet the strict
European definition, but they are blocked by bollards, which are rarely
dropped to allow service vehicles to enter.
On 3/23/2017 9:27 PM, Nathaniel V. Kelso wrote:
The existing OSM wiki documented tags for bicycle needs to
On 3/22/2017 2:02 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
Are small driveways offensive, or is it just the polygonal ones that
don't connect to anything?
To me, it's just the disconnected polygons. Small driveways don't hurt
anything, and can only provide information such as telling self-driving
cars which
On 3/10/2017 4:27 PM, Joshua Houston wrote:
It occurred to me that "man_made" is an outdated term that should be
phased out from OpenStreetMap language.
Changing any long-established tag will have long lasting ripple
effects in the many data consumers. Any such tag migration would need
Hi,
Typically, regional classifications do not map into OSM
classification, and often conflict.
If a freeway / expressway is constructed as an OSM motorway, it
should be motorway.
If a 'local' road serves an industrial area it should be unclassified
because it doesn't serve
On 1/4/2017 10:46 PM, James Mast wrote:
I tested out the new 2016 TN link in JOSM before I sent the original
email and it worked perfectly fine for me.
I looked again and all is working now! It had been unusable for
several weeks around the USGS transition, and I thought the whole NAIP
On 1/4/2017 9:58 PM, James Mast wrote:
So, hopefully some more new imagery that we can use to update highway
projects will be showing up soon
I haven't been able to use NAIP WMS links since the USGS scaled back
on their online services. Do they work for you?
Mike
On 12/9/2016 9:49 PM, Rihards wrote:
definitely. please only tag as miniroundabouts places that you would
pass straight in a normal car :)
similarly, if there is an island, it is better to map a circle way, not
just a node with turning_circle - the latter should be used only for
"full" circles
On 11/12/2016 5:44 PM, Markus Fischer wrote:
I am new to this and the area where I live is very well mapped (probably
due to high density of tech workers). Where do I go to start mapping
areas that are less well mapped (me aimlessly poking at this does not
sound like a good approach)?
I've brought back the MapRoulette US Railway crossings challenge with a
slight difference - the remaining tasks are derived from a topological
look at the OSM data.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/MikeN/diary/39782
[Crossing Ways: Highway-Railway, US] http://maproulette.org/map/980
On 9/7/2016 2:38 PM, Brian Stromberg wrote:
My point was only that applying an automated process nationwide without
any consideration for on-the-ground verification seems likely to make a
less accurate map.
For the ITT case, there is presumably a reference on the web site that
lists all
On 9/7/2016 10:13 AM, Brian Stromberg wrote:
Automated nationwide mapping seems like it would introduce more problems
than it would solve. If maps are intended to represent the truth on the
ground, then the only way to create a useful map is by reporting what is
actually there rather than making
On 9/7/2016 3:45 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Except those humans who could have used that outdated thing as a marker
to tell them that the map is dated.
Yes they could look at the last modification date of things or analyze
how many contributors the area has or myriad other OSM insider things.
But
On 9/6/2016 5:36 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Automatically editing away something
country-wide hides the fact that the map lacks attention in an area.
I'm not sure that hiding lack of attention is such a bad thing. In some
places I only update items of interest instead of taking the time to
On 8/24/2016 9:14 PM, Jack Burke wrote:
Since I'm on e-mail tonight, I thought I'd bring folks up-to-date on
some ongoing road construction north and south of Atlanta that is
rendering some pretty important imagery out-of-date. So before you go
about trying to "fix" something that doesn't match
On 8/24/2016 6:19 PM, Jack Burke wrote:
The problem is, it's breaking the values instead. I found a section of
road that I'd added turn:lanes to in order to provide lane guidance at
an exit. My original value of "none|none|none|none|none;slight_right"
was replaced by "slight_right".
I
On 7/10/2016 3:30 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
It is just not that big of a problem. I am weirdly impressed by the odd combination of
"quite well-formed data tagging, yet I can still (nearly always) determine that the
node is spam." In other words, they are trying hard to fly in under our
On 5/14/2016 12:13 PM, Eric Ladner wrote:
I've converted a lot of "FIXME" single ways into dual one way highways,
but I've never converted one back the other way.
Before I embark on converting it to a single way, just wanted to get the
thoughts of other US mappers.
I ran into this also in
On 5/4/2016 4:18 AM, Greg Morgan wrote:
At one time there was a discussion on the list about moving exit_to
tags as destination tags on the ramp. I moved most of the exit_to tags
that I mapped to the ramps. Here you are proposing something different
by leaving some exit_to tags and adding
On 5/2/2016 11:41 AM, Elliott Plack wrote:
This got me thinking, is there any specific need to have the route
broken up by state? Unlike interstate highways, where maintenance
changes across state lines, at the border, the AT maintenance is handled
by a trifecta of federal agencies and a
This is just a new road configuration (to me). NC Onemap aerials
updated to show the latest road configuration after they expanded 10
miles of dual carriageway on US221 in NC. They used Median U-turn
configurations along the length rather than straight cross traffic for
the crossroads
On 1/10/2016 12:54 AM, Greg Morgan wrote:
I am using the Android version of Maps.ME and there is a IOS version.
Thanks - I took a look at it and it worked for me, including the
voice turn by turn directions!
I have ended up with 13 apps in my "OSM Nav" folder, and they excel at
In the case where a county completely revamps its road network and
addressing scheme for E911 purposes, then authorizes its road and
address data to OSM, and it's properly imported, are there any
Smartphone apps for both Android and IOS that would search those
addresses? And have turn by
On 12/9/2015 9:58 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
Thanks for reporting Mike - I will pass this on to our dev right away so we can
look into it.
Any additional contextual information that may help reproduce is more than
welcome.
Martijn
I checked it again - the problem has cleared up on the
I ran into a small problem with the missing roads plugin in JOSM. When
I have it selected, it goes active when I first download something.
There is some sort of problem with the missing roads search web service at
http://missingroads.skobbler.net/missingGeoService
Wireshark shows that
On 12/7/2015 8:39 PM, Steve Friedl wrote:
Most of them are by bots – OSMF Redaction Account, woodpeck_fixbot – and
they appear to be spurious, but I’m not sure if they are there for a
reason.
Is there ever any benefit in a standalone node with no tags, especially
if it doesn’t appear to be in
I've never noticed this sort of oval railyard in the US before. At
first glance, I was thinking railway=racetrack, but of course it isn't.
It seems to be some sort of grain depot, but that's the fanciest rail
network I've ever seen for a grain depot.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/36.2834/-89.1455
It seems to be the Green Plains ethanol production plant in Obion, TN.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On 10/14/2015 1:33 PM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote:
One idea would be to have a mapping party doing TIGER fixup for one
rural county, then contact the local newspaper, write an article what
has been done and ask for help regarding wrong/incomplete road names,
wrong data caused by outdated imagery,
On 10/4/2015 3:32 PM, Greg Morgan wrote:
3.) It would be helpful to put in a count of tiles in the red dot. I
was surprised to see some large red dots contain only three tiles
while others contained many. It did not feel like the intuitive dot
size matched the actual size of the effort.
On 9/30/2015 2:40 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
I do find two things remarkable about this plugin's
output:
1. It seems to have picked out an incomplete set based on the paths
relative to imagery.
2. I have no way of being able to survey the exact location of the GPS
output from the plugin
On 9/28/2015 1:33 AM, Tom Bloom wrote:
TIGER drew thousands of driveways that are often simply wrong. They are
tagged private and in my opinion spoil the map appearance with little
red squiggles all over the place. No other map I've found includes them.
Looking around the country, I notice some
There have been analysis and strategy about fixing TIGER 'Deserts'[1],
but what is the best way to manage regions that have been thoroughly
updated to match TIGER, and possibly enhanced beyond that with local
knowledge?
Background - An essential task in keeping OSM updated and relevant in
On 8/4/2015 4:59 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
Also, please even if you see the crossing rendered, do go in and
check, because I have seen more than once that the crossing node is
not a shared node between way and rail. (Hint, use 'j' to join node to
way and 'm' to merge nodes that are (almost) on
On 8/18/2015 10:27 AM, Tod Fitch wrote:
Some other mapper has updated the area to remove the old buildings and streets
and marked the area as under construction. All of that seems correct from what
I’ve read in the paper and what little I can see on the ground.
But it means the area differs
.
Is that something you're interested in?
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net
mailto:nice...@att.net wrote:
Does anyone know about current NAIP aerial imagery? SC 2015 imagery
has been acquired and can be viewed, but the page no longer lists
WMS as a format -
http
On 8/12/2015 5:51 PM, TC Haddad wrote:
Just to comment on this one point: As a federal agency, the USDA is
*required* to support the open standard option of the WMS service type,
so it *should* be available.
In looking at all the different state NAIP imagery sets listed in their
directory here:
Does anyone know about current NAIP aerial imagery? SC 2015 imagery has
been acquired and can be viewed, but the page no longer lists WMS as a
format -
http://gis.apfo.usda.gov/arcgis/rest/services/NAIP/South_Carolina_2015_1m/ImageServer
SC 2013 WMS imagery has already been removed. Does
On 8/4/2015 5:21 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
I didn't want to make the instructions too convoluted. We can always
go back in and manually check for these 'unjoined crossings'. I am
just mentioning
Yes - this should be relatively easy to detect afterwards: duplicate
node where one or more are
It was a pleasant dive into the latest MapRoulette challenge - my
impression now is that most road-rail intersections in the US have
previously been touched. The stats for the fix railway challenge seem
to confirm this: 75% are skipped or have been previously completed.
A far cry from the
Fantastic! One question - it recommends to skip the task if you can
see the X already. But doesn't this place that challenge back on the
queue where it will stay forever as long as people keep using 'skip'?
On 7/31/2015 6:42 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
Hi all,
Partly inspired by Google
1 - 100 of 479 matches
Mail list logo
