Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-13 Thread Kevin Kenny
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Kerry Irons wrote: > Yes, but what about when there are two different names on street signs > depending on where you are on the street? It clearly is a mistake on the > part of the sign department, but in this case it probably means you

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-13 Thread Kerry Irons
no matter what the street sign says. -Original Message- From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 11:46 PM To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads. On 10/12/2017 6:54 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: > > Should we (

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-13 Thread Rihards
On 2017.10.13. 05:06, Nick Hocking wrote: > AAAH - all my questions are answered. > > The City of Austin's use of google base map has "fooled" me into > thinking that the map data was theirs rather than googles. If I click on > the "blue line" then I see the actual City of Austin data and indeed

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Paul Norman
On 10/12/2017 6:54 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: Should we (in OSM) put what the user will probably search for, the correect (hypothetically) Redwil or should we put the "ground truth" (REED WILL) which is what the user will see if he acually ever makes it to that location. Although this has

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Nick Hocking
AAAH - all my questions are answered. The City of Austin's use of google base map has "fooled" me into thinking that the map data was theirs rather than googles. If I click on the "blue line" then I see the actual City of Austin data and indeed it is "REED WILL DRIVE". Damm - So I have actually

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Nick Hocking
Clifford wrote "Looking at the data from Austin, the road should be name Reed Will Drive." Hi Clifford. Which site did you find the authoritive data for Austin from? (Tiger has nothing and is not authorative anyway, as far as I can tell) The Cit of Austin site

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Clifford Snow
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: > Nathan wrote > > > has the road listed as REED WILL and with a type of DR. I've been told > that this is an acceptable source or road names, > > > Maybe somebody could drive past this road and report back what the

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Rihards
On 2017.10.13. 01:15, Nick Hocking wrote: > Nathan wrote > "Best to stay well on the correct side of the line "**//___^ > **//___^ > Ok - point taken. yes, google so far has not flat out denied permission, but their terms of service would make data not usable in some countries. it's safer to do a

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Nick Hocking
Nathan wrote "Best to stay well on the correct side of the line " Ok - point taken. Did I mention that at the location I posted (using OSM) the CAPCOG website (roads dataset) http://regional-open-data-capcog.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/roads-2015 has the road listed as REED WILL and with a

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Nathan Mills
The problem as I understand it is less copyright violation (in the US, so long as what you see in Google isn't ever put into the OSM database), and more database licensing difficulty in the rest of the world where the law is less permissive and even using Google to identify possible errors in

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Nick Hocking
richlv wrote "just a quick reminder that we should try not to use google maps or streetview, the legal status of "just looking" is also fuzzy :)" Ok, so I if want to find out what a road is called, I'm not allowed to use a street directory to do this? This would be extremely weird. If I am

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-12 Thread Rihards
On 2017.10.11. 13:37, Nick Hocking wrote: > Andrew wrote "I would check out the City of Austin's OpenData portal: > https://data.austintexas.gov/Locations-and-Maps/Street-Segment/t4fe-kr8c > > The license is the same (PD) as when the initial building import was > completed, so you are good to

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-11 Thread Nick Hocking
Andrew wrote "I would check out the City of Austin's OpenData portal: https://data.austintexas.gov/Locations-and-Maps/Street-Segment/t4fe-kr8c The license is the same (PD) as when the initial building import was completed, so you are good to go." Thanks Andrew, I'm now replacing some names

Re: [Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-10 Thread Andrew Matheny
Nick- I would check out the City of Austin's OpenData portal: https://data.austintexas.gov/Locations-and-Maps/Street-Segment/t4fe-kr8c The license is the same (PD) as when the initial building import was completed, so you are good to go. -Andrew OSM: Andrew Matheny On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at

[Talk-us] Texas - redacted roads.

2017-10-10 Thread Nick Hocking
at http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/30.23990/-97.57717 Openstreetmap has three missing roads, that Bing and Google have as, Joe Lane, Cleto Street and Fifnella way. Tiger 2017 does not have these. Is there any usable source for these Texas roads or, if not, does anyone have local knowledge