Martijn, It looks great on Chromium and Firefox/Iceweasel.
Cheers, Val On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 20:29 +0000, talk-us-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > Send Talk-us mailing list submissions to > talk-us@openstreetmap.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > talk-us-requ...@openstreetmap.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > talk-us-ow...@openstreetmap.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Talk-us digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Odd road / odd structure (Paul Johnson) > 2. Re: Proposed import cleanup: NYSDEClands (Kevin Kenny) > 3. New MapRoulette now in early public beta (Martijn van Exel) > 4. Re: New MapRoulette now in early public beta (Rihards) > 5. Re: New MapRoulette now in early public beta (Kevin Kenny) > 6. Re: New MapRoulette now in early public beta (Martijn van Exel) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 13:12:57 -0500 > From: Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org> > To: OpenStreetMap talk-us list <talk-us@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Odd road / odd structure > Message-ID: > <CAMPM96qJv2a3ano+hPkDs55F0wpvhOA=skqjbi8ronf10j6...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net> wrote: > > > > The Irvine GIS guy told me that Paisley Place also servers as a utility > > easement, which may have impacted some of the design. These are quite > > pretty little walkways, with a nice gate to enter, it’s just odd that it’s > > a street. > > > > Huh? The only thing I could see that could be remotely construed as a > through walkway is the concrete gutter, which would make a natural break at > the planter that for all practical purposes breaks up the street as a > traffic calming measure, and appears to have barely slowed down the Google > car, much less anyone on foot. > > > > But regarding the big water catchment surface: > > > > > > > > Ø Depending on the cant and the surface, it could actually be some sort > > of French drain or infiltration pad designed as potentially an emergency > > helipad. I, personally, would make no assumption as to what it was without > > at least cursory knowledge of the region's drainage and/or rescue tropes … > > > > > > > > I have some of that cursory knowledge, plus I actually hiked up there and > > checked it out myself – there’s no question that it’s there to collect > > water, drain it into the two cisterns to the southeast, and there’s a water > > tap a little farther to the southwest. > > > > > > > > What you can’t see from the satellite imagery is that it’s at the top of a > > hill, the only water it can possibly collect is rainwater. It’s also clear > > that this isn’t being used any more, but back in the forties I’m certain it > > was a great place to water your horse. > > > > > > > > I think it would serve as a fine helipad, though these were constructed > > before helicopters were in widespread enough use to be considered for > > that. I’m going to ask the local fire agency if they have records of using > > that spot for helo. > > > > Very interesting edge case; I'd honestly be surprised based on aerial > imagery if the cisterns aren't still in use as at least an emergency water > supply, given that particular stretch of hills' propensity for fire. It > has a dry climate, some plants that depend on fire for reproduction, and > eucalyptus, which the AU crowd can testify sets itself on fire for like, no > reason. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160525/16f7566c/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 14:47:48 -0400 > From: Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> > To: "talk-us@openstreetmap.org" <talk-us@openstreetmap.org> > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Proposed import cleanup: NYSDEClands > Message-ID: > <CALREZe9tFuJ=mhbmtazckvdhusxtsd74bdbwq+iucm+npyv...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Oh, another question. Some of the New York state land parcels have > rather complicated topology, and the previous import didn't get them > entirely right: duplicated nodes, crossing ways, nodes close to other > ways, and so on. Moreover, the upstream data are fairly arbitrarily > divided. An example is Burnt-Rossman Hills State Forest (which has > some recent changes from me that consisted of detaching the boundary > from crossing ways and deduplicating nodes). > > >From the upstream system, this arrives as six separate chunks, > corresponding to ways 32035570, 32026630, 32002834, 32047624, 32035988 > and 39186229. Some of the fragmentation appears to be simply to avoid > having holes in any of the polygons (Why this is done is unclear: the > shapefile uses multipolygons to represent the parcels, so they can > support inner rings.) > > My inclination would be to use PostGIS to coalesce all of these using > ST_Union, and then import the simplified multipolygon, which the tools > surely know how to do. I think that would be more in keeping with our > data model, and would keep us from rendering internal borders on the > parcels. It loses the LANDS_UID of the parcels, but I don't think > that's a particularly useful thing to keep around. > > The rule for coalescing would be to group by facility number, so all > the parcels of Burnt-Rossman Hills State Forest would be one relation, > while the ones of adjacent Mallet Pond State Forest would be another. > > With all this said, I'm better at PostGIS programming than at OSM > modeling, so I could be off in the weeds here. Does this idea make > sense? > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 13:01:39 -0600 > From: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> > To: OSM Talk US <talk-us@openstreetmap.org>, OSM Talk > <t...@openstreetmap.org>, maproule...@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette now in early public beta > Message-ID: <ad07b72f-d3c1-4c99-804d-f742460e8...@rtijn.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi all, > > MapRoulette has been completely redone, hopefully keeping the good parts and > improving on some things that were not so great. I’m pretty excited to > announce that I have a public beta up now at http://maproulette.org:8080 > <http://maproulette.org:8080/>. I am very much looking forward to your > feedback. Old MapRoulette will be around for a month or so more, then we will > switch over. Some more details below. Let me know what you think, or if you > want to help out! > > Map on, > Martijn > > Some resources > Mailing List: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/maproulette/ > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/maproulette/> (low volume) > Slack: maproulette.slack.com <http://maproulette.slack.com/> > Code: https://github.com/maproulette/ <https://github.com/maproulette/> > API: https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette2/blob/master/docs/api.md > <https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette2/blob/master/docs/api.md> > > Major changes / improvements are > * Much improved metrics (this part particularly under heavy development and > feedback welcome) > * Challenges now grouped in Projects that can be managed by multiple users > * Project / Challenge administration now fully integrated in the user > interface > * Survey challenges let you ask questions about things with multiple choice > answers > * Tasks can have tags for another layer of organization > * Challenge search and discovery through a one box search (still very early, > more to come here and feedback welcome) > * API is more consistent and more RESTful > * Due to new challenge model, there is no backward compatibility with the old > API > * Switching to API keys, no more tunneling / ease > * Back end now completely written in Scala > * Deployment fully automated through Docker > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20160525/5fb6c94d/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:05:21 +0300 > From: Rihards <ric...@nakts.net> > To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, OSM Talk US > <talk-us@openstreetmap.org>, OSM Talk <t...@openstreetmap.org>, > maproule...@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette now in early public beta > Message-ID: <5745f771.6080...@nakts.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 2016.05.25. 22:01, Martijn van Exel wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > MapRoulette has been completely redone, hopefully keeping the good parts > > and improving on some things that were not so great. I’m pretty excited > > to announce that I have a public beta up now at > > http://maproulette.org:8080. I am very much looking forward to your > > feedback. Old MapRoulette will be around for a month or so more, then we > > will switch over. Some more details below. Let me know what you think, > > or if you want to help out! > > a really minor thing, but you might want to change "why not add hangers" > to "hangars" ;) > > > Map on, > > Martijn > > > > Some resources > > Mailing List: > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/maproulette/ (low volume) > > Slack: maproulette.slack.com <http://maproulette.slack.com> > > Code: https://github.com/maproulette/ > > API: https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette2/blob/master/docs/api.md > > > > Major changes / improvements are > > * Much improved metrics (this part particularly under heavy development > > and feedback welcome) > > * Challenges now grouped in Projects that can be managed by multiple users > > * Project / Challenge administration now fully integrated in the user > > interface > > * Survey challenges let you ask questions about things with multiple > > choice answers > > * Tasks can have tags for another layer of organization > > * Challenge search and discovery through a one box search (still very > > early, more to come here and feedback welcome) > > * API is more consistent and more RESTful > > * Due to new challenge model, there is no backward compatibility with > > the old API > > * Switching to API keys, no more tunneling / ease > > * Back end now completely written in Scala > > * Deployment fully automated through Docker > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-us mailing list > > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
