Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

One possible enhancement: add a border of the same color as the highway (e.g. red for primary). This would make it easier to identify which highway the shield refers to, which isn't always clear. This may of course be very complicated, in which case never mind.

Re: [Talk-us] Excellent progress, u.s.

On 4/16/2012 11:04 PM, James Mast wrote: I just saw this post on the rebuild list, so you guys might want to be a tad careful when you're doing cleaning work by creating a new way and keeping the old "tainted" nodes in it. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/rebuild/2012-April/000206.html

Re: [Talk-us] Excellent progress, u.s.

On 4/16/2012 9:18 PM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-04-16 14:06, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Or you can simply add odbl=clean if there's nothing ungood about the object (e.g. it was split from a TIGER way and the splitting is something you would have done anyway). Is this really sufficient

Re: [Talk-us] Excellent progress, u.s.

On 4/16/2012 8:56 PM, Alan Mintz wrote: So, we're basically duplicating the existing way and then "blessing" it. Is this really sufficient - to verify the "tainted" geometry instead of re-drawing it? Only if the nodes are clean. Another point, at least in SoCal, is that many of our "tainted" w

Re: [Talk-us] tiff, dwg and nad83

On 4/16/2012 7:05 PM, James Umbanhowar wrote: Imported data turns down potential new mappers. Being a reformed importer, I generally agree with the don't import rule. However, I have often heard this nugget and in my experience it is based on either anecdote or one set of simulations that assum

Re: [Talk-us] Excellent progress, u.s.

It's easier to split a way right near the beginning and delete the first bit, creating a new way. But of course make sure that every tag on the new way was either added by a good user or can be verified by you. This keeps all relation memberships and nodes. Or you can simply add odbl=clean if

[Talk-us] Gated communities - access=private or destination?

In the U.S., a gated residential community usually allows anyone in who has a legitimate reason to be there (e.g. visiting a friend, delivering a package, repairing a TV). It seems that this fits access=destination as well as private. Would it be reasonable to tag it as such, and leave access=p

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/14/2012 2:38 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: If you count out all the emails on the subject, there are probably more emails opposing the network-classification-per-banner approach, but if you count the people expressing opinions on the matter, network-classification-per-banner has a strong majority.

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/13/2012 8:42 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: First off, I still feel that there was a consensus last year on using the network tag for distinct network subsets as well as for mainline roads and you, despite being the only dissenter, continue to argue against something the rest of community more or les

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/12/2012 3:52 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: There's also an I-278 Truck in New York City that avoids a piece of the Grand Central Parkway that's closed to large trucks: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2131889 Also I-270 Spur in Maryland, which *is* part of the Intersta

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/12/2012 2:59 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: * Minh Nguyen [2012-04-12 10:06 -0700]: There's an ALT I-75 that needs its own sequence file I had no idea there were alternate Interstates. I added it under network=US:I:Alternate, ref=75. (Right now, it's rendering as regular I-75.) Sounds like a

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/11/2012 7:23 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: We're putting the shield images in the public domain (well, we're putting them under a CC0 waiver, which amounts to the same thing semantically), so I don't think the "Kentucky Unbridled" image would be compatible with that. You might have a problem with

Re: [Talk-us] importing bus stops

On 4/10/2012 7:39 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I was planning to just use what I know which is highway=bus_stop for the bus stops, and railway=tram_stop for the light rail stops. But now I see that using highway=bus_stop is *very controversial*[1]! If it weren't so blatantly untrue I'd think it wa

[Talk-us] Updating of non-Mapnik map options

I've noticed that the only one of the four maps on the OSM main page that has been updating since April Fools has been the 'standard' Mapnik. ITO has also not updated their renderings due to an apparent lack of planet files. Does anyone have information about what's going on here? ___

Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs

On 4/10/2012 2:23 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: If there's an island in the middle, create a circle around the island, set one-way in the direction of rotation (almost always anticlockwise in North America), intersect with outlet way, copy outlet's tags to the ring (think one-exit roundabout minus the

Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs

On 4/10/2012 1:53 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: On 4/10/2012 11:31 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Another case is with a mini_roundabout - supposedly the center must be flat. But many small circles that fit inside intersections are tagged as mini_roundabouts even if they have a raised island. The

Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs

On 4/10/2012 10:39 AM, Peter Dobratz wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle: "There is no central island/reservation to a turning circle—it's simply a wider bit of road." There was a recent discussion on tagging@ in which the 'old guard' refused to accept that i

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Imagery parallax error in high altitude areas

On 4/9/2012 11:01 PM, Russ Nelson wrote: Nathan Edgars II writes: > It's not as bad as it seems. Imagery is adjusted using an elevation > dataset. Since this data doesn't (and shouldn't) include buildings and > bridges, these appear distorted. You'll a

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

Is there a reason there are no shields or fallback ovals here on Nocatee Parkway? http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=15&lat=30.12344&lon=-81.39063&layers=B0 The way is tagged ref=CR 210 and the relation is network=US:FL:CR:St. Johns ref=210. _

Re: [Talk-us] Network tag Re: Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/8/2012 10:27 AM, Craig Hinners wrote: Chris Lawrence: modifier=* would represent MUTCD-type banners attached to the shield This is the first I've heard of this tag. I don't recall it being discussed when we were hashing ideas around on this last summer. (Not that that is reason to discoun

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

If you have any questions about real-world shields that aren't answered here, you can sign up for http://www.aaroads.com/forum/ and ask. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Network tag Re: Highway Shield Rendering

I think it's clear from this discussion that we *don't* have any consensus on how best to tag relations for bannered routes. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/5/2012 8:14 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: New York's parkways have a similar problem with legibility. One of my plans for dealing with them is to use larger shield images at high zoom levels. The Long Island parkways are nice and legible: http://alpsroads.net/roads/ny/ocean/e3.jpg Most other p

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/4/2012 10:23 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: There seems to be a problem here with US 17-92: http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=12&lat=28.96029&lon=-81.31906&layers=B0 Change over to "sign style" and a bunch of shields appear. Example tiles (to avoid loading

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

There seems to be a problem here with US 17-92: http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=12&lat=28.96029&lon=-81.31906&layers=B0 Change over to "sign style" and a bunch of shields appear. Example tiles (to avoid loading the whole thing): http://elrond.aperiodic.net/mtiles/cutouts/12/1122/1704.pn

Re: [Talk-us] Network tag Re: Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/4/2012 2:43 PM, Chris Lawrence wrote: Renderers can fallback to the longest left-anchored substring they understand for weird things they don't understand. Bad idea. Google Maps does something like this and it results in 'bannered' routes appearing without banners. _

Re: [Talk-us] Network tag Re: Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/4/2012 1:38 PM, Richard Weait wrote: On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: And you'd specify the type of fuel using a different tag, not amenity=fuel:diesel. name= would be a separate tag, so would fuel. Indeed. How this is a valid analogy for cramming non-ne

Re: [Talk-us] Network tag Re: Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/4/2012 1:05 PM, Richard Weait wrote: By analogy, you could map a business by placing a node: amenity=fuel. Or by tracing a building=yes, amenity=fuel. Same thing: you want a generic lozenge shield? ref=123 You want a right, clustered shield? network=US:US:Business:MD, ref=123 And you'd sp

Re: [Talk-us] Network tag Re: Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/4/2012 12:14 PM, Craig Hinners wrote: Nathan Edgars II: It seems that many people see the network tag as not representing a network but a shield design. Does this sound accurate? No, because, where shield designs differ by agency for the same logical network classification, the network

[Talk-us] Network tag Re: Highway Shield Rendering

It seems that many people see the network tag as not representing a network but a shield design. Does this sound accurate? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/4/2012 11:49 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: * Nathan Edgars II [2012-04-04 10:41 -0400]: On 4/2/2012 11:35 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: For things like Florida's toll roads, we currently treat that as a separate network, so a route relation tagged as network=US:FL:Toll, ref=528 would get the toll s

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/2/2012 11:35 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: For things like Florida's toll roads, we currently treat that as a separate network, so a route relation tagged as network=US:FL:Toll, ref=528 would get the toll shield. I've done this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/11177509 _

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 8:49 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Apr 3, 2012 3:15 PM, "Nathan Edgars II" mailto:nerou...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > That tagging is nonsense. There's no "Truck U.S. Highway" network, only a U.S. Highway network that includes truck-bannered routes.

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 5:19 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: If you want to tag your local routes that way, I won't stop you. But I don't want to have to deal with multiple tagging standards and it seems to me that there's a consensus on this list that network=US:US:Truck, ref=17 is the better approach, so that's wha

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 12:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: * Nathan Edgars II [2012-04-03 11:44 -0400]: On 4/3/2012 11:19 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: A lot of those still don't render because they duplicate the subnetwork in the ref tag, so Loop 5 (picking an arbitrary number) might be represented as ne

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 12:06 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: We're looking for US Business routes under a network of US:US:Business. It probably isn't tagged that way. Once it is, it'll show up. Again, you mean "if", not "once". It's not the job of renderers to force a choice between equally-valid existing taggin

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 11:59 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: That just reminded me... Chicago and Tulsa have city routes. I'm not aware of any such routes in Chicago. Are you thinking of the address numbers that are prominently posted on signs? ___ Talk-us mailing li

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 11:57 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: FM and RM should render identically (obviously since they're actually the same network) Er no. On roadside assemblies the text "FARM ROAD" and "RANCH ROAD" appears, and on green guide signs the shields have "FM" or "RM" up top. http://onlinemanuals.tx

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 11:19 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: A lot of those still don't render because they duplicate the subnetwork in the ref tag, so Loop 5 (picking an arbitrary number) might be represented as network=US:TX:LOOP, ref=5 Loop. Once the ref is changed to a plain "5", it would be rendered properly.

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 10:54 AM, James Umbanhowar wrote: I don't know if they use Mapnik, but I like the way Stamen places their shields along concurrencies. e.g. http://maps.stamen.com/terrain/#15/39.7542/-86.0373 The problem with this one is that only one shield shows up when the two shields would be

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/3/2012 10:21 AM, Chris Lawrence wrote: - Secondaries (network US:VA:secondary) don't seem to be rendering at all, and the fallback shields aren't showing up even where there are ref tags (just seems to be using Mapnik style). Simple rule for VA: if the ref>= 600, or it has a letter in it, i

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/2/2012 2:27 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: I'm deliberately leaving county routes for a second phase and focusing on state routes for the moment. (New Jersey is an exception, but it was an experiment and I don't actually believe we're using the proper shields for all of its counties.) As far as I

Re: [Talk-us] Addition of building footprints in selected U.S. and Canadian cities

On 4/2/2012 12:18 PM, Richard Weait wrote: I think imports (taking a large number of objects from an external source and placing them in OSM all at once) is bad for the community. Most of you have heard me say this before. I still have no hard evidence to prove it. There is also no hard counter

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/2/2012 11:40 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 4/2/2012 11:17 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: * Nathan Edgars II [2012-04-02 09:18 -0400]: On 4/2/2012 8:25 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: Business and similar variants are expected to be in the network tag, since that's the closest thing I've

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/2/2012 11:17 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: * Nathan Edgars II [2012-04-02 09:18 -0400]: On 4/2/2012 8:25 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: Business and similar variants are expected to be in the network tag, since that's the closest thing I've seen to a consensus on the topic. You know that

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/2/2012 8:25 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: I'm not an expert on every state, so I'm particularly interested in whether things look good to the natives of each state and, if not, what could make them look better. Florida has special toll shields. These are not represented by relations since, for ex

Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering

On 4/2/2012 8:25 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: Business and similar variants are expected to be in the network tag, since that's the closest thing I've seen to a consensus on the topic. If there's no route relation or the tagging was not understood, we fall back to rendering the ref= tag on the way just

Re: [Talk-us] Changeset: 11154859

On 3/30/2012 5:08 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/11154859 has the comment "proposed bikeways ("primary greenways" as rcn)". I wonder, are these actually state cycleways? If not, then LCN would be the correct network. Yawn. This passive-agressive shit is

Re: [Talk-us] City boundaries on the Canada/US border

On 3/30/2012 3:59 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Yikes, that's complicated. I'm not sure that hatching will help much with a situation like that in general - what if the boundary between two cities is like that? Both would be inside a boundary and have the same shading. It's much less likely that the t

Re: [Talk-us] City boundaries on the Canada/US border

On 3/30/2012 12:55 PM, Paul Norman wrote: From: Jeffrey Ollie [mailto:j...@ocjtech.us] Could this be mitigated somewhat by the use of super relations? IE on relation each for the US-Canada, US-Mexico, US-Pacific, US-Atlantic borders tied together with one super relation? Do any of the tools sup

Re: [Talk-us] Using TIGER to find missing road segments in OSM after license change

On 3/29/2012 11:06 AM, Ian Dees wrote: On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Kristian M Zoerhoff mailto:zoerh...@sdf.org>> wrote: On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:53:55AM -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 3/29/2012 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > >I'm going

Re: [Talk-us] Using TIGER to find missing road segments in OSM after license change

On 3/29/2012 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I'm going to look at this same problem for Salt Lake County just to see if any different issues arise for a different geography, and hope to provide some more input soon. It would be useful to test an area where the TIGER data is rather imprecise

Re: [Talk-us] South Carolina & North Carolina border shifting to the South

On 3/24/2012 1:37 AM, Toby Murray wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:35 PM, James Mast wrote: I just saw this mentioned on MSNBC and thought I would let everybody know about this since we would have to adjust the border in the future when it becomes official. It seems that North Carolina will ga

Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey

On 3/15/2012 6:43 PM, Nathan Mills wrote: On 3/15/2012 4:59 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: lots of driving and all you get is street names, since everything else is single-family houses. And address points How does this work? Do you stop at every house and write down the address

Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey

On 3/15/2012 8:52 AM, Hillsman, Edward wrote: On 3/14/2012 21:18:57 -0400 Nathan Edgars II wrote: Depending on the state or local government, you may be able to verify names against an official dataset. Otherwise subdivision plats work for the endless suburban superblocks that nobody wants to

Re: [Talk-us] More TIGER importing

On 3/14/2012 8:37 PM, Mike N wrote: The tiger:reviewed=no tag usage varies with each person, but generally anything validated by a human against local knowledge or an aerial image doesn't need the tiger:reviewed tag at all. I would disagree with this - reviewing should include verifying the st

Re: [Talk-us] Changeset needs to be reverted

On 3/13/2012 5:14 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 03/13/2012 08:20 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: If that is desirable, I can undelete the nodes and revert the ways thereafter. I'm willing to clean up if you do this. Thanks. Done, all ways in Montana and Idaho reverted clean. Hmmm

Re: [Talk-us] Changeset needs to be reverted

On 3/13/2012 9:33 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/problems.html (The "what nodes" column lists the nodes missing for a revert.) If that is desirable, I can undelete the nodes and revert the ways thereafter. I'm willing to clean up if you do this. Thanks. _

Re: [Talk-us] Changeset needs to be reverted

On 3/12/2012 5:28 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: I will probably undelete all deleted ways and then revert the relations to re-add them, except where the stray nodes were already cleaned up (assuming that in these areas, a human mapper has evaluated the situation and fixed it). We'll see how that goes

Re: [Talk-us] Changeset needs to be reverted

On 3/12/2012 3:45 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: The changeset in question is problematic for two reasons; one is that it deletes a (small number of) objects in the US instead of just things in Canada, and the other is that even in Canada it deleted more than Canadians had decided to delete right now.

[Talk-us] Changeset needs to be reverted

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10842511 is labeled "remove non-relicensable imports in Canada by request of Canadian community", yet includes a number of deletions in the U.S. The changeset is too large for JOSM's reverter plugin, and I can't download the osmChange XML. Frederik

Re: [Talk-us] [Tagging] Route Relations and Special (Bannered) Routes

It's obvious to me that the "banner" is not part of the network. US 1 Alternate is part of the U.S. Highway system (US:US), not some mythical "U.S. Highway Alternate" system. It also makes the most sense to put it in the ref tag. Otherwise there's inconsistency between an alternate signed as U

Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun

Can someone please revert changeset 10842511? It's too big for JOSM's reverter plugin. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun

On 3/11/2012 6:35 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 03/11/2012 10:58 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Even before April Fools: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10842511 I love how portions of US 2, US 83, and US 95 are now in Canada. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.562&lon=-112

[Talk-us] The vandalism has begun

Even before April Fools: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10842511 I love how portions of US 2, US 83, and US 95 are now in Canada. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.562&lon=-112.387&zoom=11&layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.812&lon=-101.089&zoom=11&layers=M http://ww

Re: [Talk-us] MapQuest Open Maps

On 3/8/2012 3:03 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Yes, but when a local insists on tagging it one way, what's one to do? Let 'em know about consistency. Whenever practical, we should try to be as globally consistent as possible,

Re: [Talk-us] MapQuest Open Maps

On 3/8/2012 2:53 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Still needs fixing: C-* is a county road (in Ohio at least; it may be used for state highways in Colorado) I believe in the OSM scheme, CR is county road. Colorado and Kansas typically stylize their state roads as C and K roads, though the preferable wa

Re: [Talk-us] MapQuest Open Maps

On 2/29/2012 1:15 AM, James Mast wrote: Just wanted to let you guys know and give kudos to MapQuest for doing something that Google hasn't done with their maps EVER. MapQuest is either fully reading the "ref" tag or using the tags from relations, but they are now properly showing Business Inters

[Talk-us] Mapnik slower than usual?

Is it just me, or are there more timeout magnifying glasses than usual? Is this due to the Osmarender server going down? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Adding Tiger 2011 Data

On 2/29/2012 10:55 PM, Josh Doe wrote: If you run the JOSM validation tool, then it catches the dupe nodes and missing intersections. Unfortunately it's impossible to batch-fix a bunch of dupes in roads, thanks to an overreaction to the idiots who were auto-dupe-eliminating. http://josm.opens

Re: [Talk-us] Adding Tiger 2011 Data

On 2/29/2012 6:55 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: Using JOSM to copy the tiger data to OSM I end up with red circles with no tag. What do you mean by "red circles with no tag"? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.or

Re: [Talk-us] MapQuest Open Maps

On 2/29/2012 12:17 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Nathan Edgars II mailto:nerou...@gmail.com>> wrote: Another update: they now color motorway_links with toll=yes green (and display toll booths at high zooms - not sure if this is new). The overlap w

Re: [Talk-us] MapQuest Open Maps

Oops - bad pattern matching finding "I " in "RI " :) http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=41.8193&lon=-71.4737&zoom=13&layers=Q ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] MapQuest Open Maps

Another update: they now color motorway_links with toll=yes green (and display toll booths at high zooms - not sure if this is new). The overlap where a toll motorway becomes a free motorway is a bit messy though. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.45095&lon=-81.28962&zoom=16&layers=Q ___

Re: [Talk-us] MapQuest Open Maps

On 2/29/2012 1:15 AM, James Mast wrote: Just wanted to let you guys know and give kudos to MapQuest for doing something that Google hasn't done with their maps EVER. MapQuest is either fully reading the "ref" tag or using the tags from relations, but they are now properly showing Business Inters

[Talk-us] undesignated bike lanes (Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:cycleway=buffered_lane)

On 2/20/2012 8:23 AM, Hillsman, Edward wrote: While we are discussing this, we should also agree on how to tag bicycle lanes that are unmarked. We have a surprising number of these in my area of the world. They have no signs (I know, they are no longer required to) and no markings within the lane

Re: [Talk-us] Rendering not happening at lower zooms

On 2/20/2012 4:11 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: I've been doing some work here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=35.7216&lon=-117.3273&zoom=12&layers=M , which is being rendered in zooms 13 and higher, but not at 12 or below. Most of the water feature shown by this link was removed a few days ago. When

Re: [Talk-us] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:cycleway=buffered_lane

On 2/19/2012 5:34 PM, Humphries, Grant wrote: I've proposed a tag for buffered bicycle lanes, see the proposal here . Any feedback is appreciated. It seems like it would be better as an additional tag like cycleway:buffer=yes, keepin

Re: [Talk-us] name expansion bot (Re: Imports information on the wiki)

On 2/17/2012 5:44 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Nathan Edgars II mailto:nerou...@gmail.com>> wrote: If the directional prefixes are not generally used as part of the name, they should probably not be in the name tag, but instead as an address tag

Re: [Talk-us] name expansion bot (Re: Imports information on the wiki)

On 2/17/2012 4:41 PM, TC Haddad wrote: For example: in Portland all the expanded quadrant names (NE,NW, SE, SW) really detract from the experience of using osm extracts on handheld GPS. All the streets in an area of interest end up looking like they have the same name because all that fits on the

Re: [Talk-us] National Bridge Inventory

On 2/16/2012 8:50 PM, Steven Johnson wrote: I also think that USDOT probably has only a subset of bridges (say, those in the US highway system) and probably lacks a number of state- and locally-maintained bridges. Nope - at least in Florida, they have all road bridges except maybe those on pri

Re: [Talk-us] Finding untagged dead-ends

On 2/15/2012 6:46 AM, Mike N wrote: On 2/15/2012 12:41 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: (nodes contained in only one highway way) ... and first or last node of the way? Yes, that's what I meant to say. But even that's not perfect for a P-shaped road. Essentially it's a node wit

Re: [Talk-us] Fresno has no primary roads

On 2/15/2012 4:09 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: At 2012-02-13 15:21, you wrote: I've never been to Fresno, but I can't believe there would not be a single primary road there. Still, that is the Truth According To OSM[1] I find that most areas where there has been little manual editing of the TIGER imp

[Talk-us] Finding untagged dead-ends

Is there a way (in JOSM or otherwise) to find all dead-ends (nodes contained in only one highway way) without highway=turning_circle or noexit=yes in an area? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/t

Re: [Talk-us] National Bridge Inventory

On 2/14/2012 6:37 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Hi, Has anyone ever looked into using the National Bridge Inventory (NBI)[1] for adding missing bridges to OSM in the US? I'm pretty sure TIGER does not have (most) bridges and I'm very sure the community has not added all the 600k bridges that are i

Re: [Talk-us] Fresno has no primary roads

On 2/14/2012 1:23 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: So only TIGER CFCC A2* were mapped to highway=primary in the import? I guess that makes sense -- TIGER has a clear distinction between primary (A2), secondary (A3) and local roads (A4). But in that classification, where do the tertiary and trunk roads

Re: [Talk-us] Fresno has no primary roads

On 2/13/2012 6:21 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Hi all, I've never been to Fresno, but I can't believe there would not be a single primary road there. Still, that is the Truth According To OSM[1] Who knows more about this situation? Are there any local mappers on this list who can shed their ligh

Re: [Talk-us] Contacting high-impact undecided users in the US

On 2/9/2012 11:43 PM, Skye Book wrote: Has anyone had any luck with http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/tommischneider? The contact log has him as being contacted in the middle of January but nothing else is available. He seems to have split his time between Europe and the northeastern coast of the

Re: [Talk-us] Will tainted history be kept in the database?

On 2/9/2012 3:00 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-February/007382.html There seems to be some confusion over whether we'll be able to go into the history and retrieve any tags added by good mappers to a tainted way after the April Fools wipe.

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping tips

On 2/6/2012 11:47 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: For the OSM data to become unroutable when that is so easily avoided would be unthinkable. Yet the OSMF is planning to do just that on April Fools. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://li

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping tips

On 2/6/2012 7:30 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 2/6/2012 7:06 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote: Any remapping after April Fools will not be able to use tags added by good users to ungood objects. Any loss will be on the hands of the OSMF. Why not? They'll be in the history same as they ar

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping tips

On 2/6/2012 7:06 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote: Any remapping after April Fools will not be able to use tags added by good users to ungood objects. Any loss will be on the hands of the OSMF. Why not? They'll be in the history same as they are now. I thought the OSMF was going to delete all tain

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping tips

On 2/6/2012 6:27 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Any remapping after April Fools will not be able to use tags added by good users to ungood objects. Any loss will be on the hands of the OSMF. You know, it would be useful if we could filter out ways that have been edited since becoming ungood, so

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping tips

On 2/6/2012 6:19 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote: So, you are implying that nothing further can be done after April 1st? If the remapping can't be completed by then, OSM is doomed? I agree that you are being overly pessimistic. Any remapping after April Fools will not be able to use tags added by

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping tips

On 2/6/2012 6:06 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: Firstly - don't listen to those who see blobs of red on OSMI and say "we're all doomed" - This is a very overly pessimistic view. Prove me wrong. Those of you who support the license change, get every street in LA cleaned by April Fools without losing

Re: [Talk-us] Finding new roads

On 1/16/2012 7:48 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: I believe that OSm's most usefull attribute is to be up to date. The only real way to do this is with a local mapper but bringing the USA up to Tiger 2011 up-to-datedness would be a great start. I've recently been using another way of finding new roads

Re: [Talk-us] LA and other license changeover challenged areas.

So I did some looking at LA in the OSM Inspector WTFE view, and I don't see how we're going to keep the OSMF from totally wrecking it on April Fools. So go for it. Just kill the whole damn thing. This wouldn't have happened, by the way, if the TIGER import had been more forceful. But no, we ha

Re: [Talk-us] LA and other license changeover challenged areas.

On 1/30/2012 10:22 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: On 1/29/2012 5:27 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: New Haven CT, http://cleanmap.poole.ch/?zoom=13&lat=41.31231&lon=-72.92162&layers=00B Much of the taint here (though probably not much on the cleanmap, which only deals with newly-created

Re: [Talk-us] LA and other license changeover challenged areas.

On 1/29/2012 5:27 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Hi, Someone mentioned this earlier, but LA looks to be in big, big trouble for the license changeover. A lot of what ungood mapper blars did seems to be adding nodes to improve geometry and removing tiger:reviewed tags (e.g. http://osm.mapki.com/

Re: [Talk-us] Remapping is good

On 2/1/2012 5:04 PM, David Fawcett wrote: I have seen more frequent reference to confirming street names using Google Maps or Google Streetview lately. Is this practice compatible with producing clean ODBL and TOC data? Is is compatible with Google TOS? Google Maps, no. Street View photos, ye

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >