On 5/28/2010 11:04 AM, Phil! Gold wrote:
> * Nathan Edgars II [2010-05-28 01:31 -0400]:
>> I don't know why there hasn't been any work on rendering U.S. Highway
>> and Interstate shields with a simple pattern match of "US *" and "I *";
>> it doesn't need to be perfect, just a reasonable outline.
>
* Nathan Edgars II [2010-05-28 01:31 -0400]:
> I don't know why there hasn't been any work on rendering U.S. Highway
> and Interstate shields with a simple pattern match of "US *" and "I *";
> it doesn't need to be perfect, just a reasonable outline.
I've figured that this is a good task for usin
> The 'parentheses' idea for tagging county roads would be mine. I used it in
> New Jersey, and then I applied it to county highways when doing fixup in
> Florida. For some strange reason, NE2 liked my system so much that he used
> it to tag county roads wherever he edited (including the whole of F
Except in the case of Bergen County's individual county routes and many of
Camden County's roads (which use the old white square), county highways are
signed using the MUTCD pentagons.
County highways are numbered from 501 to 585 for those going all the way
across the state or through multiple co
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 9:08 PM, CrystalWalrein wrote:
>
> The 'parentheses' idea for tagging county roads would be mine. I used it in
> New Jersey, and then I applied it to county highways when doing fixup in
> Florida. For some strange reason, NE2 liked my system so much that he used
> it to tag
The 'parentheses' idea for tagging county roads would be mine. I used it in
New Jersey, and then I applied it to county highways when doing fixup in
Florida. For some strange reason, NE2 liked my system so much that he used
it to tag county roads wherever he edited (including the whole of Florida)
Hi,
Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
>> 2. Are we in a decline because we are not open enough to non-geeks.
>> My answer is "no, we are not in a decline, we are growing" and this
>> is supported by statistics. I challenge anybody to show me an area
>> of OSM which is actually in decline or even in stagn
On 27 May 2010, at 16:12 , Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Apo,
>
> Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
>> totally disagree. if osm doesn't open itself more to non geeks the
>> project will die as fast as many other open source or crowd source
>> projects.
>
> ""Citation needed"" ;-)
>
this in't a german wikip
> 2. Are we in a decline because we are not open enough to non-geeks. My
> answer is "no, we are not in a decline, we are growing" and this is
> supported by statistics. I challenge anybody to show me an area of OSM
> which is actually in decline or even in stagnation (as opposed to "not
> growing
Apo,
Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
> totally disagree. if osm doesn't open itself more to non geeks the
> project will die as fast as many other open source or crowd source
> projects.
""Citation needed"" ;-)
There are different strands in this argument:
1. Should we use human-readable tags. My an
>osm principle is to use human readable tags and values. it's a system
>designed for mappers not for GIS experts or programmers. the hardcore
>geeks can understand cryptic codes but normal people can't. if we want to
>attract more mappers this is crucial. if we start to make osm a pure geek
>p
On 27 May 2010, at 10:15 , David ``Smith'' wrote:
>>
>> osm principle is to use human readable tags and values. it's a system
>> designed for mappers not for GIS experts or programmers. the hardcore geeks
>> can understand cryptic codes but normal people can't. if we want to attract
>> more m
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
>>> in general the better tag structure and very common approach is to define a
>>> namespace like this
>>>
>>> network=Orange
>>> network:state=CA (or california to make it human readable)
>>> network:country=US, but this is probably ov
On 26 May 2010, at 10:11 , Alan Mintz wrote:
>> what does the S mean in the ref?
>
> It's just a part of the reference numbering. County road references are a
> letter followed by one or more numbers, and this is how it's signed (see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Route_S18_%28California
At 2010-05-25 22:55, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
On 26 May 2010, at 24:25 , Alan
Mintz wrote:
> It seems that the county road number should go in the ref tag, and
this is
> what I've seen in some cases, but where should the county and state
go?
> I've used is_in:county and is_in:state_code in the
On 26 May 2010, at 24:25 , Alan Mintz wrote:
> It seems that the county road number should go in the ref tag, and this is
> what I've seen in some cases, but where should the county and state go?
> I've used is_in:county and is_in:state_code in the past for other things
> (like bridges and mile
On 5/25/10 6:25 PM, Alan Mintz wrote:
> Exactly what tagging are people using for county roads in the US? I tried
> to answer this by reading the wiki, but it focuses only on the highway=*
> categorization, and not on any actual examples. I also tried searching with
> nominatim*, but came up with r
Exactly what tagging are people using for county roads in the US? I tried
to answer this by reading the wiki, but it focuses only on the highway=*
categorization, and not on any actual examples. I also tried searching with
nominatim*, but came up with roads entitled "County Highway *" and "Count
18 matches
Mail list logo
