Re: [Talk-it] Utilità cartelli limiti di velocità

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Aproposito, qualcuno ha usato le nuove api mapillary con la segnaletica?

Il 23/ott/2017 14:39, "Alessandro"  ha scritto:

> Il 23/10/2017 11:09, emmexx ha scritto:
>
> ...
>
> A breve probabilmente il routing con realtà aumentata diventerà la norma
> e l'aver mappato anche i cartelli aiuterà nella rappresentazione che
> verrà fatta, esattamente come succede con le corsie.
>
>
> Oltre a questo motivo ricordiamoci degli utenti meno esperti che
> sovrapponendo lo strato Mapillary e attivando l'AI possono riconoscere e
> mappare i cartelli anche senza sapere come spezzare le way e inserire i
> limiti. Quello lo possono fare gli OSMer un poco più esperti.
>
> Alessandro
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Oct 24, 2017 3:08 AM, "Blake Girardot HOT/OSM" 
wrote:


Here is my American, collaborative version of the same issue:


Hi,

I see the new HOT Tasking Manager.

I feel like it does not clearly describe how it it used in the
OpenStreetMap community. It is just a tool for OSM mapping, it is not
the whole of OSM and I think people might be confused possibly.

It also seems like the OpenStreetMap project and community should be
linked to a little more so people can understand and have a path to
becoming good OSM Community folks.

Can we work on improving that in HOT's new Tasking Manager? I have
some ideas that are mostly wording changes or additions and hopefully
would be easy to add.


As a non-American and non European, this (or Mikel's version) is definitely
more pleasant to read but still brings up the same substantive points as
the original email. Because we are an international collaborative
community, I think that we should make the extra effort to be a bit more
polite in how we deal with others and in pointing out problems/points of
improvement especially on written medium where intention/emotion is not
easy to convey (as Mikel pointed out).

~Eugene
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Blake Girardot HOT/OSM]

Hi Christoph,

Thank you for the suggestions.

As the Project Manager for the Tasking Manager 3, I can say most of
them should be no problem all and look like they basically line up
with what we talked about internally to address the issues raised..

Hopefully we will have some changes out in the next week that
incorporate your suggestions, some of them are easy and quick to do,
some might not be, but I'll make sure they are a priority.

And to LearnOSM.

I am glad there is some confusion over who created and maintains it.

That content was mostly generated by HOT members as a project, and
HOT's Training Working Group has maintained and updated it and its
translations for years. Half of it is still in the original google
docs and we have been trying to convert it all to markdown for years
as well.

It is purposely not HOT branded as we consider it an OSM Community
focused resource. We have added some information about the Tasking
Manager and using the Tasking Manager, but I am glad to hear we kept
HOT out of it for the most part really and it put OSM forward, as is
our goal.

The HOT Training Working Group is always looking for more folks who
are interested in joining the working group and helping maintain
LearnOSM. Nick has been heading up LearnOSM and the HOT TWG for the
past 3 years I think and just recently stepped down.

Thanks again and I'll reply when there is something on our staging
site for folks to look at.

Cheers
blake

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> On Monday 23 October 2017, Blake Girardot HOT/OSM wrote:
>>
>> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked
>> to change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
>> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
>> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>
> As i said in the previous discussion about this the name "OSM Tasking
> manager" to me seems perfectly fine as a name for the tool in general.
>
> My critique here is about this instance of the tool running as a public
> service and containing the tasks of the HOT project.
>
> I have no specific suggestion about the heading/catchphrase but there
> were already a few ideas mentioned by others in what direction this
> could go.  Independent of that prominently linking to learnosm.org (or
> a different page explaining OSM and providing relevant links) on the
> starting page (like with a second button next to "Start Mapping") would
> be good.
>
> In addition i would suggest to add
>
> * links to openstreetmap.org (and OSM wiki, communication channels) from
> the About and Learn pages.
> * a disclaimer according to the trademark policy on the About page.
> * adding at least brief verbal credits to OSM - for example like
> Frederik cited from Missing Maps - to the starting page somewhere.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



-- 

Blake Girardot
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Andy, both sr: and sq: languages describe the same CONCEPT - "republic of
Serbia".  Both articles mention Kosovo as a territory with the special
status.  So the content is the same, and both can be used to describe the
ground truth of Republic of Serbia. The articles just choose to show a
slightly different map image -- but that's exactly where OSM comes in - we
are the ones who can draw the ground truth correctly, and simply reference
the object to the Wiki.  Or should we base OSM data on Wikipedia?

If we draw two OSM objects - with Kosovo and without, we ourselves step
into the ground truth debate, and need to decide which object corresponds
to the Wiki article better, or perhaps mark both with the same Wikipedia
article. Again, this debate is mostly about disputed territories and how to
tag them, not the Wiki* links.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote:
>
>> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia
>>
>
> Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable
> at wikipedia.  For example https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> %D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Serbia are allegedly the same article and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
> Q403 lists them both. However, as can be seen by looking at the maps on
> each page, they aren't the same geographic entity - one includes Kosovo,
> one does not.  Neither is "wrong" from the point of view of the authors of
> each page yet they can't both be "correct" at the same time.
>
> Best Regards,
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Calvaires et cadastre

[osm . sanspourriel]

Tu veux dire qu'à cet endroit ou à côté il y a ou il y a eu un objet 
remarquable, potentiellement un calvaire ?


Et qu'un passage sur place est nécessaire pour savoir ce que c'est, et 
où c'est.


Dans ce cas Osmose risque d'inciter les gens à mettre des fausses 
informations. Ajouter un FIXME par défaut ? ;-).


Jean-Yvon

Le 23/10/2017 à 22:52, Frédéric Rodrigo - fred.rodr...@gmail.com a écrit :
Vu la qualité sémantique du cadastre moi je ne supposerais rien. Je 
pense qu'un calvaire du cadastre peut correspondre à un "calvaire 
artistique", une "simple croix"... ou tout autre chose.


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-it] challenge Mapillary e MapTime Milano

[Marco Minghini]

Ciao a tutti,
segnalo che ieri domenica 22 ottobre si è concluso il challenge di
Mapillary per aggiungere immagini a Milano [1]. Hanno contribuito solo in
6: 5 dei nostri studenti di PoliMappers e Alessandro :)
Complimenti anche al vincitore, Francesco (che segue questa lista)!

Al MapTime Milano, che si è svolto giovedì scorso presso OpenDot, dopo una
presentazione su Mapillary abbiamo provato ad utilizzare i file GeoJSON
prodotti dalle API di Mapillary (forniti per l'occasione da Christopher
Beddow) che, rispetto alle funzioni del plugin di Mapillary per JOSM,
forniscono numerose opzioni aggiuntive e permettono di sapere quali
fotografie contengono alcune determinate feature: non si tratta solo di
cartelli stradali, ma ad esempio anche di attraversamenti pedonali,
rastrelliere, panchine, corsie preferenziali ed altro. Abbiamo lavorato
proprio sui dati raccolti a Milano.

La posizione fornita nel GeoJSON è relativa alla foto analizzata, e non
alla posizione stimata della feature come avviene invece per i cartelli,
anche qualora si tratti di feature puntuali e non di aree. La serata si è
quindi focalizzata sul prendere dimestichezza con l'utilizzo combinato dei
file GeoJSON generati con le API e del plugin di Mapillary, al fine di
trovare feature aggiuntive.
La serata del MapTime è stata introdotta da Stefano Saloriani e poi
"guidata" nella parte pratica sempre da Francesco. Grazie pubblicamente ad
entrambi!

Marco

[1] https://mapillary.github.io/mapillary_greenhouse/challenge/milano/


Marco Minghini, Ph.D.
GEOlab, Politecnico di Milano - DICA
Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano (Italy)
+39 02 23996409
marco.mingh...@polimi.it
@MarcoMinghini 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Calvaires et cadastre

[Frédéric Rodrigo]

Le 23/10/2017 à 10:00, Nicolas Moyroud a écrit :

Salut Fred,

Intéressant tout ça, je suis preneur pour une intégration osmose des 
bornes incendies. :-)

Ok. Je vais regarder ce que ça donne.

Pour les calvaires je ne saisis pas bien la différence entre les 
comparaisons mapcontrib et les comparaisons osmose. Dans la zone à 
l'ouest de Montpellier, il a beaucoup de calvaires sur mapcontrib et 
aucun sur osmose. Tu as appliqué un critère de sélection 
supplémentaire avant l'intégration osmose ?

MapContrib affiche les calvaires d'OSM en vert, ceux du cadastre en jaune
Osmose affiche les calvaires du cadastre pour les quel il n'y en a pas à 
proximité dans OSM.



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk] How to create custom online map from OpenStreetMap

[Andy Townsend]

On 22/10/2017 18:47, Carlos Cámara wrote:
I would like to create a custom map for online use that loads OSM data 
but displays it in different ways as the standard, cyclemap, 
transport... layers.


Another couple of resources to look at (if you think you'll go down the 
"Mapnik" route):


To create a tile server with the same stylesheet as OSM's "standard" one:
https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-16-04-2-lts/

Modifying map styles, and much more:
https://ircama.github.io/osm-carto-tutorials/

Best Regards,
Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Jan Dudík]

Pro mě jako projektanta je highway to, co se projektuje podle ČSN 73 6101
nebo 73 6110 a track to, co je podle ČSN 73 6108 nebo 73 6109 :-)
Hlavní polní nebo lesní  cesty jsou leckdy s asfaltovým  povrchem, naopak
některé obytné ulice jsou jen štěrkové případně s recyklátem.

A aby to nebylo ještě tak jednoduché, leckdy si pro různé méně důležité
komunikace v zastavěném území (https://mapy.cz/s/29hBK ) vypůjčujeme
parametry od polních cest

JAnD

---
Ing. Jan Dudík
projekce dopravních staveb
tel. 777082195

Dne 23. října 2017 14:57 Dalibor Jelínek  napsal(a):

> Čau,
>
> > highway=service - asfaltka pro veřejnost obvykle nepřístupná (typicky v
> lese za závorou) případně vede na nějaké neveřejné místo
>
> Tak tenhle příklad prodle mě není highway=service, ale
> highway=track+tracktype=grade1+access=forestry
>
>
>
> highway=service jsou obvykle příjezdové cesty k nějakým zařízením/budovám.
>
>
>
> Dalibor
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Mikoláš Štrajt [mailto:stra...@seznam.cz]
> *Sent:* Monday, October 23, 2017 2:46 PM
> *To:* OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?
>
>
>
> IHMO záleží na tom, zda se mapuje podle procházky v terénu nebo podle
> nějakých podkladů (např. samosprávy).
>
>
>
> Já osobně to (podle terénu) chápu takhle:
>
>
>
> - highway=residential - ulice ve městě/vesnici (nevede do polí)
>
> - highway=unclassified - pro veřejnost dostupná asfaltka neznámé třídy
>
> - highway=service - asfaltka pro veřejnost obvykle nepřístupná (typicky v
> lese za závorou) případně vede na nějaké neveřejné místo
>
> - highway=track - lesní/polní cesta, po které jezdí nějaká vozidla
>
> - highway=path - pěšina, případně lesní cesta která už hooodně dlouho
> neviděla vozidlo
>
> - highway=footway - vyasfaltovaný chodníček
>
> - highway=pedestrian - pěší zóna (ve městě)
>
> - highway=cicleway - vyasfaltovaná cyklostezka
>
>
>
> S tím, že je rozdíl mezi cyklostezkou (vyhrazená cesta pro cyklisty) a
> cyklotrasou (značka která vede po polňačákách/silnicích).
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Severák
>
>
> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Petr Holub 
> Komu: 'OpenStreetMap Czech Republic' 
> Datum: 23. 10. 2017 12:40:58
> Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?
>
> > Neříkám tak nebo tak, já sám v tom nemám občas jasno. Něco značím
> residental, něco service
> > (driveway) a něco track. Vždy dle situace.
>
> Nápodobně.
>
> > Na druhou stranu, k čemu vlastně máme tag surface=*? Polňačka může být
> asfaltová a
> > příjezdovka jen štěrkem vysypaná, nebo dokonce jen hliněná.
> >
> > Taky docela často narážím na bývalé "polňačky" aka příjezdové
> cesty/ulice, které jsou už
> > dlouho asfaltové, ale nikdo je ještě v OSM naktualizoval.
>
> Problém aktualizace dat bych oddělil - ten zůstává problémem, ať se již
> dohodneme na libovolném tagovacím schematu.
>
> Co se týče surface=*, tak se obávám, že ho právě žádná běžná navigace
> nezohledňuje. O tagu smoothness=* už ani nemluvě.
>
> Jedno možné rozlišení: highway=track je komunikace, která má primárně
> sloužit pro obsluhu polí i lesů, nezávisle na tom, jestli jsou
> v rezidenční zástavbě nebo ne. Takže normální auta by na ni měla jezdit
> jen za velmi dobrým účelem (zejm. majitelé nemovitostí). V lese na ně
> bývá typicky úplně zákaz vjezdu motorových vozidel. Takové ty
> příjezdy do chatových oblastí jsou pak hraniční případ - ale často
> se nejedná o běžné rezidenční oblasti, takže tam použití highway=track
> pořád ještě dává smysl.
>
> Petr
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-it-lazio] Incontri / was ...

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 23. Oct 2017, at 17:41, Fra Mauro  wrote:
> 
> Scusate, ma dunque a che ora sarebbe? Che spero di riuscire a venire...


lunedì 30 dalle 19. 

Ciao,
Martin 
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Blake Girardot HOT/OSM]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> This is a honest question; I would really be interested in the, if I
> may, "American version" of what Christoph has written. One that does
> express how you're upset while at the same time *not* being "combative"
> and all those bad things you said about Christoph's post.
>
> Maybe then I can use that to express myself in a more internationally
> compatible way in the future ;)

Here is my American, collaborative version of the same issue:

Hi,

I see the new HOT Tasking Manager.

I feel like it does not clearly describe how it it used in the
OpenStreetMap community. It is just a tool for OSM mapping, it is not
the whole of OSM and I think people might be confused possibly.

It also seems like the OpenStreetMap project and community should be
linked to a little more so people can understand and have a path to
becoming good OSM Community folks.

Can we work on improving that in HOT's new Tasking Manager? I have
some ideas that are mostly wording changes or additions and hopefully
would be easy to add.

Cheers,
Blake

I promise you that will get the exact same results or better, as
accusations of misrepresenting OSM by HOT and making sure I know you
are upset or mad.

And have the benefit that everyone who can do something about it, will
be happy to help make it happen.

Cheers
Blake

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Mikel Maron]

Hey Frederik
Really good questions. 
First off, I don't necessarily see this as an American - European thing .. 
there are plenty of people with different approaches to communication 
everywhere. 
What does guide me is experience communicating online, in text, with people 
from a variety of backgrounds. It is *very* easy to misunderstand intent 
online. It is *very* easy to have an limbic reaction to something we read 
online. (There is in fact a lot introspection right now about the effect of 
this dynamic on democracy as a whole). When I feel it's necessary, I go out of 
my way to not only share my issue, or what I want to happen, but also my 
thought process getting there, and my understanding of other points of view.
The start of this thread began in the context trademark policy. I don't mean to 
get into a discussion about the details of trademark policy, though that is an 
important topic. Starting off discussion of the Tasking Manager in this way 
feels pretty aggressive. As HOT, and very importantly the individuals who 
participate in HOT, are well known in the OSM community, you can assume they 
are on this mailing list, are open to discussion, and want to make things 
better.
In fact, I totally agree with Christoph that the new Tasking Manager needs to 
improve how it communicates about OSM, and there have been some constructive 
suggestions in the thread. I think posting on talk@ is one fine way to open 
that discussion. He could also have contacted HOT people directly, posted on 
the hot@ list, opened GitHub issues. The point is, HOT is not a faceless, 
unresponsive entity, but people you run across every day in OSM, with whom you 
can discuss things, and work together constructively.
So here's maybe a turn at rephrasing the original email.
> Subject: How can we better talk about OSM on the new Tasking Manager?>> I 
> recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page  
> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/)> and found the page is now presenting itself as 
> the "OpenStreetMap Collaborative > Mapping"  portal with  no indication 
> except for the small logo on top that this is one of> many projects in the 
> OpenStreetMap community.>> At the same time it seems (at a  first glance) I 
> could not find any links on the site> to OpenStreetMap.  >
> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the 
> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap 
> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>> From past discussions on this topic, I figure HOT does not want to give 
>> this> impression. Here are some ways I think the tasking manager and it's 
>> relationship> to OSM could be better communicated.
Hope this helps clear this up.
Thanks-Mikel

* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

On Monday, October 23, 2017, 11:24:33 AM MDT, Frederik Ramm 
 wrote:  
 
 Hi,

On 10/23/2017 05:06 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  > wrote:
> 
> 
>    However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive
>    to start off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear
>    a lot of distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming
>    ownership", "exactly what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining
>    for me to read things like this, and I don't think I'm alone. There
>    is always more we can learn from each other, about what to do and
>    how to do it. We are all here in OpenStreetMap because we love the
>    map. Can we please use that as a starting point in our interactions,
>    and focus on helping each other to make the map together?
> 
> 
> Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
> assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads
> like this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in
> having a conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of
> threads like this and it hurts our community.

I find it tiring to read these "see that's why nobody does mailing lists
any more" tirades, and it is very difficult for me to separate criticism
of the style in which something is written, from criticism of the actual
message. I feel that there's too much language policing going on, and
too little respect for cultural diversity. Christoph is, like me, from
Europe, and those of you who are quick to cast him (or "threads like
this") off as harmful to the community, seem to be from the USA. Is it
possible that we simply have different ways to express things? Can civil
conversations about OSM only be had by US citizens and those who swallow
their values, and everyone else is a problem? Or do we have the same set
of values but somehow this project manages to attract the more polite
among the North Americans, and the ill-bred of the Europeans?

Now let's try to be constructive about this and see how we can make it
better. Ian and Mikel; try for a second to put 

Wochennotiz Nr. 378 10.10.2017–16.10.2017

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 378 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der 
OpenStreetMap-Welt ist da:

http://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2017/10/wochennotiz-nr-378/

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Wochennotiz Nr. 378 10.10.2017–16.10.2017

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 378 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der 
OpenStreetMap-Welt ist da:

http://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2017/10/wochennotiz-nr-378/

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-dk] Busstoppesteder

[Niels Elgaard Larsen]

Ole Laursen:
> Den 23. oktober 2017 kl. 20.14 skrev :
>> https://help.rejseplanen.dk/hc/da/articles/213633029-Retningslinjer-for-databrug
>>
>>> Ved at oprette en bruger kan du få adgang til Rejseplanens data;
>>> - Stoppestedsdata, stationsdata og planlagte køreplansdata er tilgængelige 
>>> i GTFS format der kan downloades
>>> ...
> 
> Licens er CC BY-ND der ikke umiddelbart er kompatibelt med
> OpenStreetMap, desværre, for man må ikke rette i det.
> 
> Måske kunne man skrive til dem og spørge om de kan gøre en undtagelse?
> 
> Ellers kan det måske bruges til kvalitetskontrol?
> 
> Det er lidt ærgerligt, så tæt på og alligevel så langt fra. BY-ND
> giver mening til kunstprojekter, ikke til brugsting... :(


Ja, derfor er de måske også villige til at gøre en undtagelse eller
udvide licensen.

OSM, http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright nævner fx Wien:

som bruger en udvidet CC-By:

https://www.tirol.gv.at/data/nutzungsbedingungen/




> 
> Ole
> 
> ___
> Talk-dk mailing list
> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
> 

-- 
Niels Elgaard Larsen

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

[Talk-lv] izmaiņas jelgavā

[Rihards]

tā, jelgavnieki, vai šis ir pareizi un vai kartē jāmaina ? :)

http://www.pilsetsaimnieciba.lv/atlautais-brauksanas-atrums-visa-kalnciema-cela-lidz-50-kmh/
-- 
 Rihards

___
Talk-lv mailing list
Talk-lv@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lv

Re: [Talk-dk] Busstoppesteder

[Ole Laursen]

Den 23. oktober 2017 kl. 20.14 skrev :
> https://help.rejseplanen.dk/hc/da/articles/213633029-Retningslinjer-for-databrug
>
> > Ved at oprette en bruger kan du få adgang til Rejseplanens data;
> > - Stoppestedsdata, stationsdata og planlagte køreplansdata er tilgængelige 
> > i GTFS format der kan downloades
> > ...

Licens er CC BY-ND der ikke umiddelbart er kompatibelt med
OpenStreetMap, desværre, for man må ikke rette i det.

Måske kunne man skrive til dem og spørge om de kan gøre en undtagelse?

Ellers kan det måske bruges til kvalitetskontrol?

Det er lidt ærgerligt, så tæt på og alligevel så langt fra. BY-ND
giver mening til kunstprojekter, ikke til brugsting... :(


Ole

___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [Talk-dk] Busstoppesteder

[sfromis]

>  adgang til data for busstoppesteder?

https://help.rejseplanen.dk/hc/da/articles/213633029-Retningslinjer-for-databrug

> Ved at oprette en bruger kan du få adgang til Rejseplanens data;
> - Stoppestedsdata, stationsdata og planlagte køreplansdata er
tilgængelige i GTFS format der kan downloades
> ...


2017-10-23 19:28 GMT+02:00 Niels Elgaard Larsen :

>
>
> Michael Andersen:
> > Hej Troels
> >
> > Der er ingen som helst automatik involveret her. Alle i OSM indførte
> danske
> > stoppesteder er manuelt registreret af en lang række individuelle
> > bidragsydere, der måske kun har indført en eller ganske få hver.
>
>
>
> Ja, men er der nogen, der har prøvet få adgang til data for
> busstoppesteder?
>
> Måske er der trafikselskaber, der gerne vil udlevere dem.
>
>
> > Der har også
> > kun i meget begrænset omfang været tale om nogen organisering af
> arbejdet, så
> > det er kun forventeligt at der mangler stoppesteder (de registrerede er
> > hovedsageligt koncentreret om hovedstadsområdet og nogle få større byer)
> eller
> > ikke er noget udpræget system i de eksisterende (med hensyn til data og
> > præcision mm).
> >
> > Jeg har ikke selv brugt at finde busstoppesteder i OSM (da jeg sjældent
> kører
> > med bus), men det er slet ikke utænkeligt at andre gør det (ikke mindst
> > turister) og at det på sigt kan blive mere almindeligt.
> >
> > Kort sagt, hvis du gerne vil have flere busstoppesteder i OSM, så er det
> bare
> > at gå i gang;-)
> >
> > rejseplanen.dk har benyttet OSM som baggrundskort siden ihvertfald maj
> i år
> > (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-dk/2017-May/004834.html),
> som
> > følge af et skift til en tysk softwareleverandør. Deres
> ruter/stoppesteder
> > tegnes på baggrund af deres egen database.
> >
> > On fredag den 20. oktober 2017 15.53.45 CEST Troels Arvin wrote:
> >> Hej,
> >>
> >> Forleden dag, da jeg stod og ventede ved et busstoppested, undrede det
> >> mig, at det ikke fremgik på min Osmand+. Der var tale om stoppestedet
> >> "Vejlands Allé (Englandsvej)" på Englandsvej:
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/55.64290/12.59871
> >>
> >> Jeg kan se, at der tilsyneladende mangler rigtig mange busstoppesteder,
> >> men omvendt er der også mange, som er registreret.
> >>
> >> Er der noget automatik involveret her, eller kræver det simpelhen at man
> >> går i gang med at få indtegnet busttoppested nodes, hvis man ønsker, at
> >> OSM indeholder sådanne? Spurgt på en anden måde: Er det spild af tid,
> >> hvis man begynder at indtegne busstoppesteder?
> >>
> >> (Sjovt nok kan jeg se, at rejseplanen.dk benytter OSM i kortvisningen
> af
> >> ruter, og dén kender i hvertfald busstoppesteder.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-dk mailing list
> > Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
> >
>
> --
> Niels Elgaard Larsen
>
> ___
> Talk-dk mailing list
> Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
>
___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[john whelan]

HOT and OSM have slightly different aims but HOT does build on OSM.

There are mentions of OpenStreetMap wiki and learnOSM and the O in HOT is
OpenStreetMap.

Having said that adding something along the lines of

"OpenStreetMap is the volunteer-driven open data mapping platform which
makes all of this possible, supported by the not-for-profit
OpenStreetMap Foundation."

even at the bottom of the first page would be helpful.

I accept that HOT has created a number of tools that conventional mappers
use.  LearnOSM has benefited from input from HOT members and I suspect some
of the imagery that is now available to armchair mappers has its roots in
HOT but the quality of mapping from some of its "disposable" high turnover
mappers does leave much to be desired at times so an acknowledgement of
OpenStreetMap's role would not be out of place.

Cheerio John
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/23/2017 05:06 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  > wrote:
> 
> 
> However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive
> to start off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear
> a lot of distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming
> ownership", "exactly what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining
> for me to read things like this, and I don't think I'm alone. There
> is always more we can learn from each other, about what to do and
> how to do it. We are all here in OpenStreetMap because we love the
> map. Can we please use that as a starting point in our interactions,
> and focus on helping each other to make the map together?
> 
> 
> Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
> assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads
> like this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in
> having a conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of
> threads like this and it hurts our community.

I find it tiring to read these "see that's why nobody does mailing lists
any more" tirades, and it is very difficult for me to separate criticism
of the style in which something is written, from criticism of the actual
message. I feel that there's too much language policing going on, and
too little respect for cultural diversity. Christoph is, like me, from
Europe, and those of you who are quick to cast him (or "threads like
this") off as harmful to the community, seem to be from the USA. Is it
possible that we simply have different ways to express things? Can civil
conversations about OSM only be had by US citizens and those who swallow
their values, and everyone else is a problem? Or do we have the same set
of values but somehow this project manages to attract the more polite
among the North Americans, and the ill-bred of the Europeans?

Now let's try to be constructive about this and see how we can make it
better. Ian and Mikel; try for a second to put yourself in Christophs's
shoes. Assume you're a member of the OSM community, and you come across
a web site by a third party that you know but are not involved in, let's
say a web site by a charity called "Reporters without Borders".

Say you open their web page and are greeted with a banner that says
"OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" and a button "Start Mapping", and
a series of Reporters without Borders projects that you can participate
in. They talk about how they partner with other organisations or people
on the ground but don't mention the fact that OpenStreetMap was about
collaborative mapping even before "Reporters without Borders" came along
at all.

Say that - even though you're normally calm and not easily offended -
you're now slightly hurt that here's a charity building something on top
of the project that you are spending half of your spare time, and they
seem to be making it sound as if it was them who have invented
collaborative mapping.

Say that - even though your first impulse might be to do more research
or ask friends on a private communications platform of your choice about
this - you decide to make your fellow OpenStreetMappers aware of this
perceived problem, on the mailing list.

How would you go about it? What would you write? How would you
communicate to your fellow OpenStreetMappers that you feel wronged by
this charity, while at the same time not offending or emotionally
draining those among your fellow OpenStreetMappers who are involved with
that same charity?

The reason you want to share this with your peers is that this sharing
will reduce your hurt; others will (you hope) either say "yep, you are
right to feel offended, they need to change that", or they will say "ah,
it's not so bad, everyone does it anyway" which, while perhaps not as
satisfying, will also help to settle the matter for you. You cannot be
expected to send a quiet email to the makers of the page instead; you
have a right to share joy *and* pain with your fellow mappers on the
mailing list. That's the very core of social, of community.

What would be *your* words to say "Hey everybody, I saw this, and I
think it is bad and needs to change"? What choice of language would
adequately express your being upset about what you have seen, without
being denounced as a poisonous person who harms the community by seeking
support from it?

This is a honest question; I would really be interested in the, if I
may, "American version" of what Christoph has written. One that does
express how you're upset while at the same time *not* being "combative"
and all those bad things you said about Christoph's post.

Maybe then I can use that to express myself in a more internationally
compatible way in the future ;)

Bye
Frederik


-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 23 October 2017, Blake Girardot HOT/OSM wrote:
>
> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked
> to change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.

As i said in the previous discussion about this the name "OSM Tasking 
manager" to me seems perfectly fine as a name for the tool in general. 

My critique here is about this instance of the tool running as a public 
service and containing the tasks of the HOT project.

I have no specific suggestion about the heading/catchphrase but there 
were already a few ideas mentioned by others in what direction this 
could go.  Independent of that prominently linking to learnosm.org (or 
a different page explaining OSM and providing relevant links) on the 
starting page (like with a second button next to "Start Mapping") would 
be good.

In addition i would suggest to add

* links to openstreetmap.org (and OSM wiki, communication channels) from 
the About and Learn pages.
* a disclaimer according to the trademark policy on the About page.
* adding at least brief verbal credits to OSM - for example like 
Frederik cited from Missing Maps - to the starting page somewhere.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Mikel Maron]

Christoph
I see that my message wasn't received as intended. My hope is not to amplify 
disagreements, but to help set a constructive and friendly tone. Let's take the 
discussion of how we're communicating "offline" -- I'll connect with you, and I 
hope set up a time to talk directly.
In any case, I don't feel I'm deflecting. As I said, "I think there are some 
very reasonable ideas and discussion on this thread, about how to describe the 
tasking manager, OSM, HOT, etc", and appreciate your work to help frame the 
complexities of OSM appropriately. 
I also think we should have better guidance on the handling of trademark 
policy, the appropriate ways and places to raise issues, and how the OSM 
Foundation and LWG handle these issues. Will bring this up.
Thanks-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

On Monday, October 23, 2017, 10:23:14 AM MDT, Christoph Hormann 
 wrote:  
 
 On Monday 23 October 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
> [...] However ... I hope we can
> also agree that it is counter productive to start off such
> discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of distrust
> in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
> what HOT doesn't do".

This has nothing to do with trust, i looked at the website and describe 
my observations here.  The term "misrepresentation" is from the 
trademark policy:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy#5.3._Misrepresentation

If you think it is inappropriate to use such a term w.r.t. OSM 
trademarks this is probably something you need to discuss with the LWG.

> It's emotionally draining for me to read things 
> like this, and I don't think I'm alone.

Have you considered that it might be "emotionally draining" for OSM 
contributors to see the name of the project being used on a website 
like this without any links to OSM and mentioning of the fact that OSM 
is all about collaborative global mapping even without HOT or the 
tasking manager?

FWIW - i do not feel emotionally drained about this, but i feel rather 
offended by your, Ian's and Clifford's reactions deflecting a 
matter-of-factly critique of that website and the resulting discussion 
about this and possible ways to improve it (and i welcome the 
constructive suggestions so far) into a discussion about what words may 
be used in discussion here.

I would also like to remind you that one of the most important guiding 
principle in communication in OSM is to "assume good faith".  I 
followed this principle here by describing my observations of the 
tasking manager without any interpretation as for why it is designed 
this way - although this is of course a question i did contemplate.

It would be nice to see you doing me the same courtesy by arguing the 
topic at hand without insinuating "an argumentative 
pose", "distrust", "Combative questions" or a lack of respect.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/23/2017 03:57 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Or they could rework the site to properly present OpenStreetMap and HOT 
> and how they relate to the visitor.  learnosm.org (which i think is 
> also mainly built by HOT) shows this is possible to do.

Missing Maps, which is also a very HOT-influenced project, tends to
present itself like this:

"Missing Maps is an open, collaborative project in which you can help to
map areas where humanitarian organisations are trying to meet the needs
of vulnerable people."

Thankfully, at the bottom of their web site, they add:

"OpenStreetMap is the volunteer-driven open data mapping platform which
makes all of this possible, supported by the not-for-profit
OpenStreetMap Foundation."

You can gripe with that a little, since it seems to degrade OSM to being
just the "platform" while the "collaboration" happens on Missing Maps,
but hey, at least they write "OSM makes all of this possible" which is
accurate.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

Hi David,

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 05:15:25PM +0100, David Woolley wrote:

Using postcode centroids is why so many self contributed business POIs 
on Google Maps are almost useless for finding the business.  I hope 
no-one is adding POIs based on such data.


I agree. This is why the comparison tool 
(http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs) doesn't allow users to copy 
the location of FHRS establishments into JOSM, only to copy tags for an 
establishment which is suggested as a match for an existing OSM node/way 
or is already matched using an fhrs:id but has a mismatched postcode.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 23 October 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
> [...] However ... I hope we can
> also agree that it is counter productive to start off such
> discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of distrust
> in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
> what HOT doesn't do".

This has nothing to do with trust, i looked at the website and describe 
my observations here.  The term "misrepresentation" is from the 
trademark policy:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy#5.3._Misrepresentation

If you think it is inappropriate to use such a term w.r.t. OSM 
trademarks this is probably something you need to discuss with the LWG.

> It's emotionally draining for me to read things 
> like this, and I don't think I'm alone.

Have you considered that it might be "emotionally draining" for OSM 
contributors to see the name of the project being used on a website 
like this without any links to OSM and mentioning of the fact that OSM 
is all about collaborative global mapping even without HOT or the 
tasking manager?

FWIW - i do not feel emotionally drained about this, but i feel rather 
offended by your, Ian's and Clifford's reactions deflecting a 
matter-of-factly critique of that website and the resulting discussion 
about this and possible ways to improve it (and i welcome the 
constructive suggestions so far) into a discussion about what words may 
be used in discussion here.

I would also like to remind you that one of the most important guiding 
principle in communication in OSM is to "assume good faith".  I 
followed this principle here by describing my observations of the 
tasking manager without any interpretation as for why it is designed 
this way - although this is of course a question i did contemplate.

It would be nice to see you doing me the same courtesy by arguing the 
topic at hand without insinuating "an argumentative 
pose", "distrust", "Combative questions" or a lack of respect.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[David Woolley]

On 23/10/17 16:23, Gregrs wrote:


I'm not sure; it seems to be reverse-geocoded from postcode centroids 
(which is one reason I wouldn't recommend anyone directly copying FHRS 
data into OSM without some manual processing). I have contacted the FSA 
to see what can be done.


Using postcode centroids is why so many self contributed business POIs 
on Google Maps are almost useless for finding the business.  I hope 
no-one is adding POIs based on such data.


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[paul.bivand]

A lot of authorities exclude up to a third of fhrs records from geocoding.  
These seem to largely be people trading from home and many social care 
establishments e.g. refuges from domestic violence. 
It's quite plausible that authority practice on this can change.
Paulbiv.


Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
 Original message From: Gregrs  Date: 
23/10/2017  16:30  (GMT+00:00) To: "Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)" 
 Cc: talk-gb  
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs 
Hi Robert,

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:22:35PM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
wrote:

>If you still have postcodes for those, you can look up the postcode
>centroid in Code-Point Open and use that as the lat/lon instead. (In
>fact, I think that's what the locations you're currently showing are
>at least in a few local authority areas around me -- establishments
>with the same postcode seem to have coincident marker positions -- so
>presumably that's how many of the  coordinates have been
>computed in the first place.)

Thanks for your email. Yes, I'm pretty sure that's how the locations 
have been derived in most cases and the comparison tool coalesces nearby 
establishments into a single marker position and displays a list in the 
popup for that reason.

If the FSA aren't able to solve the problem, I may add another stage of 
processing to the comparison tool and look up postcode centroids.

Thanks,
Greg

-- 
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it-lazio] Incontri / was ...

[Fra Mauro]

Scusate, ma dunque a che ora sarebbe? Che spero di riuscire a venire...

Il 18 Ottobre 2017 16:56:48 CEST, Martin Koppenhoefer  
ha scritto:
>Allora vediamoci la sera del 30 Ottobre. Grazie all'intervento di
>Ubaldo
>possiamo incontrarci al suo Coworking al Pigneto, Piazza Copernico 10,
>piano terra. Orario da confermare. Ho aggiunto l'evento nel calendario
>del
>wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Main_Page
>
>Ciao,
>Martin

-- 
Inviato dal mio dispositivo Android con K-9 Mail. Perdonate la brevità.___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

Hi Robert,

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:22:35PM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
wrote:



If you still have postcodes for those, you can look up the postcode
centroid in Code-Point Open and use that as the lat/lon instead. (In
fact, I think that's what the locations you're currently showing are
at least in a few local authority areas around me -- establishments
with the same postcode seem to have coincident marker positions -- so
presumably that's how many of the  coordinates have been
computed in the first place.)


Thanks for your email. Yes, I'm pretty sure that's how the locations 
have been derived in most cases and the comparison tool coalesces nearby 
establishments into a single marker position and displays a list in the 
popup for that reason.


If the FSA aren't able to solve the problem, I may add another stage of 
processing to the comparison tool and look up postcode centroids.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-be] LiDAR

[joost schouppe]

Haven't seen it in practice, though I do have an idea whom I could ask. The
"pattern" I mean is that there is a special kind of randomness to the data:
whereas buildings tend to be high or low according to a regular geometric
form, a tree has high points (where the beam touches a high branch or leaf)
and low points (where the beam goes all the way down to the ground or a
lower branch/leaf). If you visualise the raw data, it should be quite
obvious to the human eye.

2017-10-23 15:39 GMT+02:00 Glenn Plas :

> Do you have more information on that algorithm (I assume this is what you
> mean by special pattern) ?
>
> Quite interested in trying to get this from elevation data.
>
> Glenn
>
> An interesting thing about raw lidar data is that it can help identify
> trees, as they have a special kind of pattern in the data. So you could use
> processed data to identify potentially missing landuse=forest / tree rows /
> trees.
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing 
> listTalk-be@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
>


-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

Hi David,

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 04:03:11PM +0100, David Woolley wrote:


Is it possible that they were using NPLG data, that is not open?


I'm not sure; it seems to be reverse-geocoded from postcode centroids 
(which is one reason I wouldn't recommend anyone directly copying FHRS 
data into OSM without some manual processing). I have contacted the FSA 
to see what can be done.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On 23 October 2017 at 15:52, Gregrs  wrote:
> Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth and
> South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of their
> FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff towards the end
> of the first graph on this page:
> http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html. I'm
> planning to contact the FSA regarding this as the comparison tool relies on
> these geocodes in order to place establishments into a specific district and
> show their approximate location.

If you still have postcodes for those, you can look up the postcode
centroid in Code-Point Open and use that as the lat/lon instead. (In
fact, I think that's what the locations you're currently showing are
at least in a few local authority areas around me -- establishments
with the same postcode seem to have coincident marker positions -- so
presumably that's how many of the  coordinates have been
computed in the first place.)

Robert

-- 
Robert Whittaker

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Clifford Snow]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Ian Dees  wrote:

> On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  wrote:
>
>
> However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive to
> start off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of
> distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
> what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining for me to read things like
> this, and I don't think I'm alone. There is always more we can learn from
> each other, about what to do and how to do it. We are all here in
> OpenStreetMap because we love the map. Can we please use that as a starting
> point in our interactions, and focus on helping each other to make the map
> together?
>
>
> Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
> assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads like
> this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in having a
> conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of threads like this
> and it hurts our community.
>
> Thanks Mikel and Ian for your respectful push back. The talk list should
be a place of collaboration with respectful dialog as we all seek to
improve OSM.

Clifford



-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Ian Dees]

On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  wrote:


However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive to start
off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of
distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining for me to read things like
this, and I don't think I'm alone. There is always more we can learn from
each other, about what to do and how to do it. We are all here in
OpenStreetMap because we love the map. Can we please use that as a starting
point in our interactions, and focus on helping each other to make the map
together?


Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads like
this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in having a
conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of threads like this
and it hurts our community.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[David Woolley]

On 23/10/17 15:52, Gregrs wrote:


Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth 
and South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of 
their FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff


Is it possible that they were using NPLG data, that is not open?

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Mikel Maron]

Hello everyone
I think there are some very reasonable ideas and discussion on this thread, 
about how to describe the tasking manager, OSM, HOT, etc. We all can agree it's 
complicated, and explaining this right is worthy of our time and energy. (One 
additional complication to consider is that the tasking manager software is 
used in lots of different scenarios, include every day mapping, so the tag line 
may need to cover non-disaster situations as well.)
However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive to start off 
such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of distrust in 
phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly what HOT 
doesn't do". It's emotionally draining for me to read things like this, and I 
don't think I'm alone. There is always more we can learn from each other, about 
what to do and how to do it. We are all here in OpenStreetMap because we love 
the map. Can we please use that as a starting point in our interactions, and 
focus on helping each other to make the map together?
Thanks-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

On Monday, October 23, 2017, 7:59:41 AM MDT, Christoph Hormann 
 wrote:  
 
 On Monday 23 October 2017, Simon Poole wrote:
> I suspect Christophs issue is more that HOT seems to be claiming
> ownership of "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping".

Yes, this is one of my points.  The other is that it fails to connect 
the visitor to collaboration and communication within the OSM 
community.  The visitor is invited into what is being presented 
as "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping" but this whole concept as it 
is being presented on that site seems to be carefully segregated from 
the rest of the OSM community with its communication channels, wiki, 
local communities etc.

No one can forbid HOT to do that but if they do so they IMO should not 
present this under the name OpenStreetMap as "OpenStreetMap 
collaborative mapping" in general or even as pars pro toto.

Or they could rework the site to properly present OpenStreetMap and HOT 
and how they relate to the visitor.  learnosm.org (which i think is 
also mainly built by HOT) shows this is possible to do.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-GB] FHRS/OSM comparison tool now includes graphs

[Gregrs]

The FHRS/OSM comparison tool (http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs) 
now includes graphs showing progress for each district (e.g. 
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/district-91.html) and for the 
whole of Great Britain 
(http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html). 
Feel free to report bugs or suggest improvements here: 
https://github.com/gregrs-uk/fhrs-osm-stats.


Several authorities (Copeland, Middlesborough, Sedgemeoor, Portsmouth 
and South Tyneside) seem to have removed geocodes for a large number of 
their FHRS establishments recently, as shown by the sharp dropoff 
towards the end of the first graph on this page: 
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs-stats/summary-graphs.html. I'm 
planning to contact the FSA regarding this as the comparison tool relies 
on these geocodes in order to place establishments into a specific 
district and show their approximate location.


Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 23 October 2017, Simon Poole wrote:
> I suspect Christophs issue is more that HOT seems to be claiming
> ownership of "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping".

Yes, this is one of my points.  The other is that it fails to connect 
the visitor to collaboration and communication within the OSM 
community.  The visitor is invited into what is being presented 
as "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping" but this whole concept as it 
is being presented on that site seems to be carefully segregated from 
the rest of the OSM community with its communication channels, wiki, 
local communities etc.

No one can forbid HOT to do that but if they do so they IMO should not 
present this under the name OpenStreetMap as "OpenStreetMap 
collaborative mapping" in general or even as pars pro toto.

Or they could rework the site to properly present OpenStreetMap and HOT 
and how they relate to the visitor.  learnosm.org (which i think is 
also mainly built by HOT) shows this is possible to do.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Simon Poole]

Am 23.10.2017 um 15:06 schrieb David Groom:
> How about
> 1) Change "OpenStreetmap Collaborative Mapping" to "OpenStreetmap
> Distaster Mapping"

Use of the trademarks shouldn't imply endorsement  and/or affiliation
and in the end exclusivity in any form. "A tool to support mapping of
disaster areas in OpenStreetMap" would for example be OK (a bit long but
just to get the point across).

Simon

> 2) Link the word "OpenStreetmap"  to the OSM web site
>
> Regards
> David
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Blake Girardot HOT/OSM"  >
> To: "Christoph Hormann" >
> Cc: "OSM Talk" >
> Sent: 23/10/2017 10:37:38
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?
>
>> Hi Christoph,
>>  
>> We can not win if we do or if we do not :)
>>  
>> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
>> change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
>> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
>> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>>  
>> And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
>> exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
>> prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
>> is not right either :)
>>  
>> It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
>> mapping, they are OSM mapping.
>>  
>> But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
>> something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
>> something.
>>  
>> Respectfully,
>> blake
>>  
>>  
>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann > > wrote:
>>>  
>>> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
>>> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
>>> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
>>> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
>>> project with no official character. At the same time it seems (at a
>>> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
>>> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
>>> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
>>> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>>>  
>>> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
>>> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>>>  
>>> --
>>> Christoph Hormann
>>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>>  
>>> ___
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> --
>> 
>> Blake Girardot
>> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team
>>  
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-be] LiDAR

[Glenn Plas]

Do you have more information on that algorithm (I assume this is what
you mean by special pattern) ?

Quite interested in trying to get this from elevation data.

Glenn

> An interesting thing about raw lidar data is that it can help identify
> trees, as they have a special kind of pattern in the data. So you
> could use processed data to identify potentially missing
> landuse=forest / tree rows / trees.
>
> -- 
> Joost Schouppe
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Joseph Reeves]

Hi all,

The previous thread, IIRC:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2015-November/003556.html

Version 2 of the Task Manager had "a perfectly fine choice of name for this
kind of tool" [0], but I can't really see how V3 [1] is much different.

Cheers, Joseph


[0]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2015-November/003558.html
[1] https://github.com/hotosm/tasking-manager


On 23 October 2017 at 10:08, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

>
> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
> project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>
> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] volontari cercasi per organizzazione State of the Map 2018

[Alessandro Palmas]

Il 23/10/2017 14:42, Marco Minghini ha scritto:


Per domande e chiarimenti sono sempre disponibile. Spero
rispondiate numerosi.

Un grosso grazie anticipato da me, da WMI e dallo staff della OSM
Foundation che ogni anno lavora dietro le quinte per organizzare SOTM.


Naturalmente grazie anche da POLIMI.


Ovviamente sì, perdonate la dimenticanza.


Alessandro, come hai detto tu stesso credo potremo contare su almeno 
4-5 volontari tra gli studenti di PoliMappers; io sono disponibile a 
fare un po' da jolly e coordinare le varie attività e la logistica qui 
al POLIMI, ma su questo siamo già allineati.


Marco, ora ti scrivo in privato per avere qualche informazione senza 
dover rompere le scatole ad altri.



Grazie e spero che da comunità italiana renderemo l'evento un bel 
successo!




Già, anche perchè questa volta l'Italian Way potrebbe essere di esempio 
al resto del mondo. Io è già da un mese che ho iniziato a contattare 
comune, città metropolitana e regione.


Al momento la lacuna più grande è il team che segua le scholarship. Se 
qualcuno in lista ha a che fare in qualche modo con burocrazia o se ha 
contatti che potrebbero aiutare per il disbrigo di pratiche ci farebbe 
un grosso piacere se si imbarcasse nella cosa con noi. :-)


Alessandro

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-be] LiDAR

[joost schouppe]

Marc, I think you might be thinking of SK53's work. I think he wrote
several posts about how lidar can help identify buildings, e.g. here:
http://sk53-osm.blogspot.be/2016/05/bristol-new-brighton-buildings-from.html

There is quite a bit of lidar altitude data available for Flanders, both
raw and processed. The 3D GRB for example was based on that data. See:
http://www.geopunt.be/catalogus/search?facet=catalog=lidar

Building heights do have a wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:height#Height_of_buildings
But then a rule of thumb is we don't map that which can easily be
automatically generated, so I don't really see the point of using something
like 3D GRB for OSM.

An interesting thing about raw lidar data is that it can help identify
trees, as they have a special kind of pattern in the data. So you could use
processed data to identify potentially missing landuse=forest / tree rows /
trees.

-- 
Joost Schouppe
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Simon Poole]

I suspect Christophs issue is more that HOT seems to be claiming
ownership of "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping". Though I would argue
that the rest of OSM has always been about collaborative mapping and it
is exactly what HOT doesn't do, but I digress.

In any case HOT is clearly not the only organisation engaging in
"OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping" however you define it and should
not be creating the impression that it is and trying to claim exclusive
ownership of the term.  Outside of that, given that we are discussing
the all shiny and new TM3, it would be a could occasion to follow
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy#2._How_to_use_the_OSM_marks


Thanks

Simon



Am 23.10.2017 um 11:37 schrieb Blake Girardot HOT/OSM:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> We can not win if we do or if we do not :)
>
> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
> change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>
> And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
> exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
> prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
> is not right either :)
>
> It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
> mapping, they are OSM mapping.
>
> But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
> something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
> something.
>
> Respectfully,
> blake
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
>> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
>> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
>> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
>> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
>> project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
>> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
>> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
>> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
>> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>>
>> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
>> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[David Groom]

How about
1) Change "OpenStreetmap Collaborative Mapping" to "OpenStreetmap 
Distaster Mapping"

2) Link the word "OpenStreetmap"  to the OSM web site

Regards
David

-- Original Message --
From: "Blake Girardot HOT/OSM" 
To: "Christoph Hormann" 
Cc: "OSM Talk" 
Sent: 23/10/2017 10:37:38
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?


Hi Christoph,

We can not win if we do or if we do not :)

It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.

And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
is not right either :)

It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
mapping, they are OSM mapping.

But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
something.

Respectfully,
blake


On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  
wrote:


I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
(http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
project with no official character. At the same time it seems (at a
first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate 
the

impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.

In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap 
not

covered by the trademark policy we now have.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




--

Blake Girardot
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Dalibor Jelínek]

Čau,

> highway=service - asfaltka pro veřejnost obvykle nepřístupná (typicky v lese 
> za závorou) případně vede na nějaké neveřejné místo

Tak tenhle příklad prodle mě není highway=service, ale 
highway=track+tracktype=grade1+access=forestry

 

highway=service jsou obvykle příjezdové cesty k nějakým zařízením/budovám.

 

Dalibor

 

 

 

From: Mikoláš Štrajt [mailto:stra...@seznam.cz] 
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 2:46 PM
To: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Subject: Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

 

IHMO záleží na tom, zda se mapuje podle procházky v terénu nebo podle nějakých 
podkladů (např. samosprávy).

 

Já osobně to (podle terénu) chápu takhle:

 

- highway=residential - ulice ve městě/vesnici (nevede do polí)

- highway=unclassified - pro veřejnost dostupná asfaltka neznámé třídy

- highway=service - asfaltka pro veřejnost obvykle nepřístupná (typicky v lese 
za závorou) případně vede na nějaké neveřejné místo

- highway=track - lesní/polní cesta, po které jezdí nějaká vozidla

- highway=path - pěšina, případně lesní cesta která už hooodně dlouho neviděla 
vozidlo

- highway=footway - vyasfaltovaný chodníček

- highway=pedestrian - pěší zóna (ve městě)

- highway=cicleway - vyasfaltovaná cyklostezka 

 

S tím, že je rozdíl mezi cyklostezkou (vyhrazená cesta pro cyklisty) a 
cyklotrasou (značka která vede po polňačákách/silnicích).

 

 

-- 

Severák


-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Petr Holub  >
Komu: 'OpenStreetMap Czech Republic'  >
Datum: 23. 10. 2017 12:40:58
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential? 



> Neříkám tak nebo tak, já sám v tom nemám občas jasno. Něco značím residental, 
> něco service 
> (driveway) a něco track. Vždy dle situace. 

Nápodobně. 

> Na druhou stranu, k čemu vlastně máme tag surface=*? Polňačka může být 
> asfaltová a 
> příjezdovka jen štěrkem vysypaná, nebo dokonce jen hliněná. 
> 
> Taky docela často narážím na bývalé "polňačky" aka příjezdové cesty/ulice, 
> které jsou už 
> dlouho asfaltové, ale nikdo je ještě v OSM naktualizoval. 

Problém aktualizace dat bych oddělil - ten zůstává problémem, ať se již 
dohodneme na libovolném tagovacím schematu. 

Co se týče surface=*, tak se obávám, že ho právě žádná běžná navigace 
nezohledňuje. O tagu smoothness=* už ani nemluvě. 

Jedno možné rozlišení: highway=track je komunikace, která má primárně 
sloužit pro obsluhu polí i lesů, nezávisle na tom, jestli jsou 
v rezidenční zástavbě nebo ne. Takže normální auta by na ni měla jezdit 
jen za velmi dobrým účelem (zejm. majitelé nemovitostí). V lese na ně 
bývá typicky úplně zákaz vjezdu motorových vozidel. Takové ty 
příjezdy do chatových oblastí jsou pak hraniční případ - ale často 
se nejedná o běžné rezidenční oblasti, takže tam použití highway=track 
pořád ještě dává smysl. 

Petr 
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org  
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-es] (sin asunto)

[Iván Hernández Cazorla]

Buenas,
A la pregunta de Miguel: en España el tiempo que tiene que pasar son 70-80 años 
según cuando haya nacido el autor. Cito textualmente una pagina de la 
Biblioteca Nacional Española[1]:

«En el caso de España, los derechos de explotación de una obra subsisten 70 
años después de la muerte del autor y se computan desde el 1 de enero del año 
siguiente al de la muerte o declaración de su fallecimiento. No obstante, el 
plazo es de 80 años para los autores fallecidos antes del 7 de diciembre de 
1987. Una vez transcurrido el citado plazo, las obras pasan a dominio público».

Es decir, las obras de todos aquellos nacidos antes de 1987 y fallecidos en o 
antes de 1937, se encontrarían actualmente en dominio público.

No soy experto en materia legal, pero tras participar bastante en Wikimedia 
Commons, es un tema que me interesa bastante, tanto el dominio público como las 
licencias libres. Por lo que, si puedo, intentaré ayudar con ello.

Saludos, Iván

[1] 


⁣Iván Hernández Cazorla
Miembro de Wikimedia España

Enviado desde Blue ​

En 12:07, 23 oct, 2017, en 12:07, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo  
escribió:
>A priori y sin tener mención explícita de que una fuente sea libre,
>esta, al menos en España, tiene los derechos de copia reservados, por
>lo
>que me atrevería a decirte que no los usaras.
>
>Respecto a la toponimia mira a ver si en las fuentes del IGN no existe
>ya y puedes de allí copiarla (de ella si hay permisos). Me consta que
>hay gente que mira también la información de las minutas cartográficas
>del IGN aunque no se si hay permiso explícito para esto.
>
>Alguno más experto en temas legales y de licencias. ¿Cuanto tiempo ha
>de
>pasar en España para que un recurso pase a ser de dominio público?
>
>Un saludo
>
>Miguel
>
>
>On 23/10/17 11:25, Javier Sánchez Portero wrote:
>> Hola
>>
>> Dispongo de unos pocos ejemplares de mapas del Servicio Geográfico
>del
>> Ejercito de 1959. Respecto a su utilización como fuente de topónimos
>> para incluir en OSM, ¿hay alguna posibilidad de utilización directa
>> (como caducidad de derechos), o habría que solicitar autorización?
>>
>> Un saludo, Javier.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-es mailing list
>> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
>
>
>
>
>___
>Talk-es mailing list
>Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] OSMGeoWeek et francophonie - Dernière ligne droite !

[Violaine Doutreleau]

Bonjour à tous,

Des nouvelles alors qu'on est à 3 semaines du lancement de la OSMGeoWeek !

A ce jour, 9 villes en France seront de la partie pour donner de la 
visibilité et soutenir  les projets des 5 communautés OSM francophones 
(Mali, Burkina, Sénégal, Madagascar, Niger) que nous (CartONG) appuyons 
grâce au soutien de la région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes. Les villes française 
en question : Paris, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Rennes, Lyon, St-Etienne, 
Ambérieu-en-Bugey, Chambéry et Grenoble.


A tous ceux qui ont envie de rejoindre la dynamique, vous l'aurez 
surement compris, 2 solutions s'offrent à vous; participer à un mapathon 
près de chez vous ou organiser le votre (que ce soit en France ou 
ailleurs) ! Si vous songez à organiser un mapathon, il n'est pas encore 
trop tard, nous vous invitons à nous contacter au plus vite pour une 
aide à l'organisation (moi et/ou Colin Giraud en copie).


Et si vous souhaitez plus d'informations sur le projet, vous pouvez 
suivre les nouvelles ici (on ajoutera les liens d'inscriptions aux 
mapathons au fur et à mesure) : http://www.cartong.org/fr/osmgeoweek


Bien à tous,

Violaine pour l'équipe CartONG

Le 08/09/2017 à 16:31, Violaine a écrit :


Bonjour à tous,

La OSMGeoWeek (pour 'OSM geography awareness week') a lieu cette année 
du 12 au 18 novembre 2017. Pour info, l'objectif de cette semaine est 
de sensibiliser le maximum de personnes à OSM (d'ailleurs pour ça que 
l'événement de prédilection est le mapathon).


Cette année, à CartONG, nous avons la chance d'être soutenu 
financièrement pour donner une belle place à la francophonie!


Ainsi depuis quelques mois avec les communautés OSM d'Afrique 
francophone partenaires qui ont répondu à l'appel (c'est à dire Niger, 
Mali, Madagascar, Sénégal, Burkina Faso), nous préparons cet 
événement. Chaque communauté a proposé un projet de carto prioritaire. 
Tout ce qui sera cartographié leur permettra de sensibiliser les 
organisations locales et internationales, acteurs du gouvernement à 
leurs actions (et OSM bien sur), lors de journées plaidoyer ou 
journées scientifiques (qui auront lieu dans le cadre de la OSMGeoWeek 
toujours), et sera donc un moyen de gagner en légitimité et visibilité.


*N**ous vous invitons donc si le projet vous intéresse, à rejoindre la 
dynamique !* Vos contributions viendront renforcer/soutenir le 
discours des communautés lors des journées plaidoyer, et en sont 
précieuses... De notre côté on s'engage à vous soutenir dans 
l'organisation des mapathons, faire relais com'... et même si on est 
tout plein à organiser des mapathons en France, vous envoyer des 
stickers :p (et oui c'est moins cher quand on est plus nombreux). Du 
coup n'hésitez pas *à me répondre directement (ou pas), et/ou à Colin* 
en copie, si vous êtes partants. Colin est notre nouveau service 
civique qui prend la suite d'Olivia sur l'animation/organisation de 
mapathons en France (c_gir...@cartong.org)


A bientôt j'espère,

Violaine Doutreleau




___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Marián Kyral]

-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Miroslav Suchy 
Komu: talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
Datum: 23. 10. 2017 14:45:21
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential? 
"Dne 23.10.2017 v 12:07 Marián Kyral napsal(a):
> Mapu chcem uzitecnou, ze? Tak necht je asfaltova vec mezi barakama
> znacena jako highway=residential, a bahnita vec mezi barakama jako
> highway=track.

+1
Pokud se nekoho zeptam na cestu a on rekne: "tady touhle polnackou" tak je
to IMHO polnacka.

> Na druhou stranu, k čemu vlastně máme tag surface=*?  Polňačka může být
asfaltová a příjezdovka jen štěrkem vysypaná,
> nebo dokonce jen hliněná.

Tohle se hodi na *lesni* cesty. Coz je taky highway=track. Mnohe lesni cesty
v lese jsou asfaltovane. Tam ten rozdil pak
chapu. Ale pokud je cesta v obci a je to normalne na hline a ma vyjete
koleje, tak to je proste polnacka.
"



Tak pokud vede jen a pouze na stavbu, tak to bude spíše příjezdovka :-D



Marián___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Mikoláš Štrajt]

IHMO záleží na tom, zda se mapuje podle procházky v terénu nebo podle
nějakých podkladů (např. samosprávy).




Já osobně to (podle terénu) chápu takhle:




- highway=residential - ulice ve městě/vesnici (nevede do polí)

- highway=unclassified - pro veřejnost dostupná asfaltka neznámé třídy

- highway=service - asfaltka pro veřejnost obvykle nepřístupná (typicky v
lese za závorou) případně vede na nějaké neveřejné místo

- highway=track - lesní/polní cesta, po které jezdí nějaká vozidla

- highway=path - pěšina, případně lesní cesta která už hooodně dlouho
neviděla vozidlo

- highway=footway - vyasfaltovaný chodníček

- highway=pedestrian - pěší zóna (ve městě)

- highway=cicleway - vyasfaltovaná cyklostezka 




S tím, že je rozdíl mezi cyklostezkou (vyhrazená cesta pro cyklisty) a
cyklotrasou (značka která vede po polňačákách/silnicích).








-- 

Severák


 -- Původní e-mail --
Od: Petr Holub 
Komu: 'OpenStreetMap Czech Republic' 
Datum: 23. 10. 2017 12:40:58
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential? 
"> Neříkám tak nebo tak, já sám v tom nemám občas jasno. Něco značím
residental, něco service
> (driveway) a něco track. Vždy dle situace.

Nápodobně.

> Na druhou stranu, k čemu vlastně máme tag surface=*? Polňačka může být
asfaltová a
> příjezdovka jen štěrkem vysypaná, nebo dokonce jen hliněná.
>
> Taky docela často narážím na bývalé "polňačky" aka příjezdové cesty/ulice,
které jsou už
> dlouho asfaltové, ale nikdo je ještě v OSM naktualizoval.

Problém aktualizace dat bych oddělil - ten zůstává problémem, ať se již
dohodneme na libovolném tagovacím schematu.

Co se týče surface=*, tak se obávám, že ho právě žádná běžná navigace
nezohledňuje. O tagu smoothness=* už ani nemluvě.

Jedno možné rozlišení: highway=track je komunikace, která má primárně
sloužit pro obsluhu polí i lesů, nezávisle na tom, jestli jsou
v rezidenční zástavbě nebo ne. Takže normální auta by na ni měla jezdit
jen za velmi dobrým účelem (zejm. majitelé nemovitostí). V lese na ně
bývá typicky úplně zákaz vjezdu motorových vozidel. Takové ty
příjezdy do chatových oblastí jsou pak hraniční případ - ale často
se nejedná o běžné rezidenční oblasti, takže tam použití highway=track
pořád ještě dává smysl.

Petr
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
"___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Miroslav Suchy]

Dne 23.10.2017 v 12:07 Marián Kyral napsal(a):
> Mapu chcem uzitecnou, ze? Tak necht je asfaltova vec mezi barakama
> znacena jako highway=residential, a bahnita vec mezi barakama jako
> highway=track.

+1
Pokud se nekoho zeptam na cestu a on rekne: "tady touhle polnackou" tak je to 
IMHO polnacka.

> Na druhou stranu, k čemu vlastně máme tag surface=*?  Polňačka může být 
> asfaltová a příjezdovka jen štěrkem vysypaná,
> nebo dokonce jen hliněná.

Tohle se hodi na *lesni* cesty. Coz je taky highway=track. Mnohe lesni cesty v 
lese jsou asfaltovane. Tam ten rozdil pak
chapu. Ale pokud je cesta v obci a je to normalne na hline a ma vyjete koleje, 
tak to je proste polnacka.

Mirek

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-it] volontari cercasi per organizzazione State of the Map 2018

[Marco Minghini]

>
> Per domande e chiarimenti sono sempre disponibile. Spero rispondiate
> numerosi.
>
> Un grosso grazie anticipato da me, da WMI e dallo staff della OSM
> Foundation che ogni anno lavora dietro le quinte per organizzare SOTM.
>

Naturalmente grazie anche da POLIMI.
Alessandro, come hai detto tu stesso credo potremo contare su almeno 4-5
volontari tra gli studenti di PoliMappers; io sono disponibile a fare un
po' da jolly e coordinare le varie attività e la logistica qui al POLIMI,
ma su questo siamo già allineati.
Grazie e spero che da comunità italiana renderemo l'evento un bel successo!

Marco
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Utilità cartelli limiti di velocità

[Alessandro]

  
  
Il 23/10/2017 11:09, emmexx ha scritto:

...
  A breve probabilmente il routing con realtà aumentata diventerà la norma
e l'aver mappato anche i cartelli aiuterà nella rappresentazione che
verrà fatta, esattamente come succede con le corsie.



Oltre a questo motivo ricordiamoci degli utenti meno esperti che
sovrapponendo lo strato Mapillary e attivando l'AI possono
riconoscere e mappare i cartelli anche senza sapere come spezzare le
way e inserire i limiti. Quello lo possono fare gli OSMer un poco
più esperti.

Alessandro
  


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] volontari cercasi per organizzazione State of the Map 2018

[Alessandro Palmas]

  
  
Il 23/10/2017 10:18, Volker Schmidt ha
  scritto:


  

  Alessandro,
  
  in questo momento non so se posso essere all'evento stesso, ma
  sono certamente disponibile nei preparativi a distanza. In
  particolare, se ci sono traduzioni da fare o da controllare
  (proofreading), in particolare inglese e tedesco. 

Volker


  


Grazie Volker,
per il momento c'è ben poco da comunicare e penso si partirà da fine
novembre. Ti farò sapere più avanti.

 
Giusto per sottolinearlo a tutti: se qualcuno si offre non ha
l'impegno dell'intero argomento ma se si è in più persone lo si
divide. Se ci fossero altre 4 - 5 persone che si facessero avanti
potremmo contare su una buona squadra alla quale si uniranno più
avanti alcuni studenti del POLIMI.

Alessandro
  


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all

[Tom Ka]

Tak castecne byl na vine PostGIS, castecne prestalo fungovat stahovani
novych fotek z api.osm.cz. Oboji jsem predelal/upravil a ted se za, ze
funguje. Pokud budete mit nekdo pocit, ze stale neco chybi, dejte
prosim vedet.

Diky

Dne 23. října 2017 11:33 Tom Ka  napsal(a):
> Ahoj, ne opet ale stale, byl jsem mimo pocitac, dneska jsem konecne v
> praci, tak se na to podivam. Byl tam problem s PostGISem, ale ten jsem
> dneska uz vyresil, tak uvidim jestli to samo pomuze, nebo je tam jeste
> neco jineho.
>
> Bye
>
> Dne 23. října 2017 9:32 Zdeněk Pražák  napsal(a):
>> opět nefunguje aktualizace souřadnic fotek rozcestníků (GPX, JSON) -
>> poslední je z 21.10. z 8,21
>> nejsou analyzovány mé fotky rozcestníků s ID mezi 17785 - 18011
>> -- Původní e-mail --
>> Od: Zdeněk Pražák 
>> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
>> Datum: 19. 10. 2017 9:42:50
>> Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
>>
>> no jde o fotky s ID mezi 17840 až 17918
>>
>> případně např o rozcestníky OSM ID 5174422129, 5174422138 a další
>>
>> prý u nich není nahraná fotka
>> -- Původní e-mail --
>> Od: Tom Ka 
>> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
>> Datum: 19. 10. 2017 8:51:08
>> Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
>>
>> Ahoj, nejsem u pocitace ale zkusim se na to odpoledne podivat. Posli mi
>> prosim nazvy fotek nebo ID z PhotoDB nebo OSM id co si myslis ze chybi.
>>
>> Diky.
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2017 08:11, "Zdeněk Pražák"  wrote:
>>
>> nefunguje asi aktualizace databáze rozcestníků na
>> http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
>> nejsou zahrnuty rozcestníky, které jsem nahrál včera
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-cz mailing list
>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-cz mailing list
>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-cz mailing list
>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/10/2017 12:39, Tomas Straupis wrote:



How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

   Have you noticed the title of this thread? ;-)


For completeness, I pointed this out 11 months ago, in English, on 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43836371#map=8/54.872/22.250 .  
The advice was ignored.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Ed Loach]

> At the same time it seems (at a
> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.

At a quick glance the "Learn" page explains the first thing you need is an 
OpenStreetMap account, and when I clicked "Login" it asked me to allow access 
to Tasking Manager 3 (probably as I was already logged in to OSM - otherwise 
I'm guessing you get to login or signup).

Ed


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-es] (sin asunto)

[Javier Sánchez Portero]

Gracias por la referencia al IGN y perdón por olvidarme del asunto.

El 23 de octubre de 2017, 11:04, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo <
msevill...@gmail.com> escribió:

> A priori y sin tener mención explícita de que una fuente sea libre, esta,
> al menos en España, tiene los derechos de copia reservados, por lo que me
> atrevería a decirte que no los usaras.
>
> Respecto a la toponimia mira a ver si en las fuentes del IGN no existe ya
> y puedes de allí copiarla (de ella si hay permisos). Me consta que hay
> gente que mira también la información de las minutas cartográficas del IGN
> aunque no se si hay permiso explícito para esto.
>
> Alguno más experto en temas legales y de licencias. ¿Cuanto tiempo ha de
> pasar en España para que un recurso pase a ser de dominio público?
>
> Un saludo
>
> Miguel
>
>
>
> On 23/10/17 11:25, Javier Sánchez Portero wrote:
>
> Hola
>
> Dispongo de unos pocos ejemplares de mapas del Servicio Geográfico del
> Ejercito de 1959. Respecto a su utilización como fuente de topónimos para
> incluir en OSM, ¿hay alguna posibilidad de utilización directa (como
> caducidad de derechos), o habría que solicitar autorización?
>
> Un saludo, Javier.
>
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing 
> listTalk-es@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

>>   There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
>> other tool which is not using wikidata.
> Could you point me to that tool?

  It is a local Lithuanian tool. But here you can have a look at results:
  http://patrulis.openmap.lt/wikipedia.html

> That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to
> automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human
> attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed
> to decide what is correct.

  And I'm showing you examples of exactly the opposite. Most of the
errors found need fixer to READ, LOOK around and make DECISION. Even
with those "simple" ones as missing wikipedia link on a school object
needs reading, because there could be a wikipedia article about some
former school which currently is something else.
  As far as I know wikipedia has no way to specify object as
"historic" - which does not belong to OSM.

>>   It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
>> page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good
> faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article
> about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be
> the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia, than
> go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I would go
> and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and waited until
> Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In fact, I have
> done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your decision.

  I claim it is better if the person who knows about such stuff is
doing the changes. Not somebody applying auto-guesswork and hoping
somebody else to finish (to do actual work, and usually do MORE work).

> How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
> can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

  Have you noticed the title of this thread? ;-)

> My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's
> needed - see above.

  It looks ridiculous that we now have to put up signs all around to
avoid guessfixers... It is much simpler to just revert and be done
with it.

> You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes".

  Would it be enough to put nowikidata=yes, noautoupdates=yes,
noguesswork=yes on the node for Lithuania as a country? ;-)

> And now, think: how the existence of wikidata-based QA tool would stop
> wikipedia-based tool from detecting the error?

  It will not stop it. Wikidata based tool is also a very good idea. I
have no doubt we will be using it as well.

  But its current implementation is unacceptable to us. We want people
to know and think, not to be dumb commiters of auto-calculated
guesswork. So removing wikidata is currently the only way to avoid
such unwanted fix-hikers. And note, we're not mass-removing wikidata
tags, only on objects which attract attention by this
wikidata-"fixer".

  And again. If you guys were asked a number of times during previous
years to STOP doing updates at least in Lithuania (and also in other
countries), what is a point of continuing doing that? You're not
helping.

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote:

That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia


Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable 
at wikipedia.  For example 
https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and 
https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia are allegedly the same article and 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q403 lists them both. However, as can be 
seen by looking at the maps on each page, they aren't the same 
geographic entity - one includes Kosovo, one does not.  Neither is 
"wrong" from the point of view of the authors of each page yet they 
can't both be "correct" at the same time.


Best Regards,
Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Robert Banick]

HOT will probably never find a formulation of our mission and tools that
satisfies the entire OSM community. However, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t
try.

My two cents: How about a simple blurb describing and linking to OSM on the
About page? And perhaps the title banner could be rephrased to
“Collaborative Mapping of OpenStreetMap”?

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:28 PM Blake Girardot HOT/OSM <
blake.girar...@hotosm.org> wrote:

> Hi Christoph,
>
> We can not win if we do or if we do not :)
>
> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
> change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>
> And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
> exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
> prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
> is not right either :)
>
> It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
> mapping, they are OSM mapping.
>
> But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
> something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
> something.
>
> Respectfully,
> blake
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> >
> > I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
> > (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
> > tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
> > no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
> > project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
> > first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
> > To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
> > impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
> > Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
> >
> > In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
> > covered by the trademark policy we now have.
> >
> > --
> > Christoph Hormann
> > http://www.imagico.de/
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> --
> 
> Blake Girardot
> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[majka]

Otevřená provokace:
Jmenovitě "celý svět" mimo celé Afriky, minimálně...

Koukněte na HOT-OSM, případně na debaty k mapniku ohledně zobrazení
highway=cokoli, surface=unpaved.

2017-10-23 12:36 GMT+02:00 Karel Volný :
> c) jak píše Pavel, "celý svět to tak značí",

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Karel Volný]

čus,

> Mapu chcem uzitecnou, ze? Tak necht je asfaltova vec mezi barakama
> znacena jako highway=residential, a bahnita vec mezi barakama jako
> highway=track.
> 
> Cely svet to tak znaci, jestli wiki tvrdi neco jineho, necht je
> opravena wiki.

+1

plně souhlasím, a historicky to tak bylo

já jsem se toto rozlišení highway naučil, když jsem do OSM přišel, takže 
zjevně muselo dojít k nějaké změně pravidel, tak jsem koukal a zjistil, že 
teprve v listopadu 2014 bylo do popisu track přidáno[1], že se to nemá 
používat v zastavěných oblastech, že prý by to bylo mapování pro renderer

jenomže toto pseudovysvětlení koliduje s jiným principem, a to že mapujeme 
realitu, a ne nějaké zbožné přání, že tady vede v územním plánu hranice 
rezidenčních pozemků a tudíž vše uvnitř je residential bez ohledu na fyzický 
stav věcí

jestliže residential[2] říká "This tag is used for roads ...", tak když se 
podívám na Wikipedii[3], co si anglicky mluvící má představit jako 'road', 
dočtu se: "A road is a thoroughfare, route, or way on land between two places 
that has been paved or otherwise improved"

hm, tak to mám brát tak, že vede-li rozježděný bláto mezi barákama, a někdo 
tam do těch největších děr občas nasype cihlovou drť, tak už to je "otherwise 
improved" a splňuje to představu "road"? - to asi ne ...

na druhou stranu, dá se argumentovat, že definice "track" nesedí kvůli tomu 
"mostly agricultural use", ale posuzovat tento případ podle využití mi přijde 
naprd, protože
a) jako člověka čtoucího mapu mě moc nezajímá, a jako mapper asi ani nemám k 
dispozici informaci, jestli 51% ("mostly") jízd po dané cestě jsou traktory na 
pole a 49% osobáky do sousední vsi nebo jestli to je naopak 49 vs 51
b) stejně tak je docela jedno, jestli je cesta rozježděná do neprůjezdna 
zemědělskou technikou nebo něčím jiným
c) jak píše Pavel, "celý svět to tak značí", tagování track/tracktype je 
zažrané (cca 40% track má tracktype, jenom 15% highway má surface) - a navíc 
podstatně jednoduší, fláknout nějaký přibližný stav cesty je trivka, řešit pro 
každý segment surface je občas na palici (na louce tráva, v lese jehličí)

K.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway
%3Dtrack=prev=816

[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dresidential

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 23 October 2017 at 07:17, Tomas Straupis  wrote:

> 2017-10-22 23:20 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> > So, to sum up:
> > 1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected
> until
> > it was detected by Yuri's tool.
>
>   There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
> other tool which is not using wikidata.


Could you point me to that tool?


> That other tool gives more
> than 2500(!) items to fix in osm/wikipedia (Lithuania only). So there
> is enough work to be done until this particular problem is fixed. It
> could take two weeks, it could also take two years.
>

That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to
automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human
attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed
to decide what is correct.


> > 2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės
> II
> > piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
> > 3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag
> > even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big
> > information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names
> "Žagarės
> > piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.
>
>   It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
> page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
>

That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good
faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article
about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be
the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia,
than go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I
would go and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and
waited until Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In
fact, I have done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your
decision.


>   And people were asked NOT to do automatic changes without local
> knowledge.
>

How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's
needed - see above.

You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes".

> Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here?
>
>   It would not have been a problem if Yuri would not have created a
> tool which attracts people and fools them into believing such things
> could be fixed automatically.
>

I still think that correct linking to wikipedia is a good idea in this
case. For the reasons above.

  I can give another real world example where wikidata usage WOULD be a
> problem:
>
>   Say we have a church named "St. Brewers church". It has an object in
> OSM with corresponding name tag, a link to wikipedia page "St. Brewers
> church" and wikidata ref 12345.
>
>   Now this church is upgraded to basilica: it's name (in the real
> world) changes to "St. Brewers basilica".
>
>   OSMers do not notice this change (name tag is not changed),
> wikipedians do (wikipedia page title is renamed, leaving old 'church'
> page as a redirect only).
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikipedia link, it finds that "St.
> Brewers church" does not exist anymore (redirect pages do not get into
> geotagged dumps). As soon as I try going to that page I'm redirected
> to "...basilica" page. Now I know that a name has changed and I change
> it in name and name:xx tags in OSM.
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikidata, it will find NOTHING wrong
> here. wikidata 12345 will be pointing to "St. Brewers basilica" page.
> Nothing wrong. No noticing of a change of name. Which leaves OSM with
> outdated name and no way to notice (names in wikipedia and OSM do not
> always match, comparing wikidata and OSM name is not always possible,
> we need to find the fact of CHANGE of wikipedia article name).
>

On the contrary, AFAIK redirection pages don't have wikidata item, so the
wikidata-based tool would detect them. It is even possible to automatically
detect such cases (i.e. Wikidata article's title has changed, and there is
a redirect under old title) and correct wikipedia link in OSM to the new
title in Wikipedia. It would leave the name, but hey, it's easier to detect
name change manually if there is an obvious difference between name=* and
wikipedia=* tags, than to compare wikipedia=* tag with the current
Wikipedia article.

BTW such automatic correction is also possible even if the redirect would
have it's own wikidata item, or if there is no redirection at all.

And now, think: how the existence of wikidata-based QA tool would stop
wikipedia-based tool from detecting the error?
-- 
--
http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Petr Holub]

> Neříkám tak nebo tak, já sám v tom nemám občas jasno. Něco značím residental, 
> něco service
> (driveway) a něco track. Vždy dle situace.

Nápodobně.

> Na druhou stranu, k čemu vlastně máme tag surface=*?  Polňačka může být 
> asfaltová a
> příjezdovka jen štěrkem vysypaná, nebo dokonce jen hliněná.
> 
> Taky docela často narážím na bývalé "polňačky" aka příjezdové cesty/ulice, 
> které jsou už
> dlouho asfaltové, ale nikdo je ještě v OSM naktualizoval.

Problém aktualizace dat bych oddělil - ten zůstává problémem, ať se již
dohodneme na libovolném tagovacím schematu.

Co se týče surface=*, tak se obávám, že ho právě žádná běžná navigace
nezohledňuje. O tagu smoothness=* už ani nemluvě.

Jedno možné rozlišení: highway=track je komunikace, která má primárně
sloužit pro obsluhu polí i lesů, nezávisle na tom, jestli jsou
v rezidenční zástavbě nebo ne. Takže normální auta by na ni měla jezdit
jen za velmi dobrým účelem (zejm. majitelé nemovitostí). V lese na ně
bývá typicky úplně zákaz vjezdu motorových vozidel. Takové ty 
příjezdy do chatových oblastí jsou pak hraniční případ - ale často
se nejedná o běžné rezidenční oblasti, takže tam použití highway=track
pořád ještě dává smysl.

Petr
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Marián Kyral]

-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Pavel Machek 
Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Datum: 23. 10. 2017 11:29:42
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential? 
"Ahoj!

On Fri 2017-10-20 09:50:28, majka wrote:
> 2017-10-20 9:22 GMT+02:00 Mikoláš Štrajt :
> >
> > V praxi se za koncem vesnice setkávám se smíšeným účelem, např. lesní/
polní cesty, které jsou zároveň příjezdovky k chatovým oblastem.
>
> To přece nepopírám a o tyhle cesty nejde. Mě ale zajímá cesta ve
> vesnici či městě, nadto v území zdůrazněném jako obytná zóna (tenhle
> výklad "landuse=residential" je samozřejmě můj a nepřesný), průmyslová
> či obchodní zóna. A v katastru to může být klidně jako užitková
> komunikace, ostatní komunikace nebo rovnou jen ostatní plocha.
>
> @jzvc:
> Ať wiki zkoumám jak zkoumám, česky nebo anglicky, "Tuto značku
> nepoužívejte pro zakreslování veřejných nezpevněných cest v
> zastavěných oblastech" z toho jednoznačně čtu. Fakt jsem NIKDE nenašla
> nic jiného, a hledala jsem poctivě co to dalo. V Pravidlech pro Česko
> "track" řešený není. Zcela upřímně by mě odkaz správným směrem
> potěšil.
>
> A prosím Tě, kde bydlíš a pohybuješ se, že očekáváš, že ulice
> (residential) nebude kvalitou polňačka mezi barákama, o chodnících
> nemluvě? Sice se hodně změnilo a mění, ale tohle opravdu není všude
> ani vzdáleně pravda. A opravdu nemusíš daleko na venkov - vím o dost
> takových v místech dosažitelných MHD krajského města, stačí kousek
> popojít mimo hlavní silnici.

Mapu chcem uzitecnou, ze? Tak necht je asfaltova vec mezi barakama
znacena jako highway=residential, a bahnita vec mezi barakama jako
highway=track.

Cely svet to tak znaci, jestli wiki tvrdi neco jineho, necht je
opravena wiki.
Pavel
"



Na druhou stranu, k čemu vlastně máme tag surface=*?  Polňačka může být
asfaltová a příjezdovka jen štěrkem vysypaná, nebo dokonce jen hliněná.


Taky docela často narážím na bývalé "polňačky" aka příjezdové cesty/ulice,
které jsou už dlouho asfaltové, ale nikdo je ještě v OSM naktualizoval.


Neříkám tak nebo tak, já sám v tom nemám občas jasno. Něco značím
residental, něco service (driveway) a něco track. Vždy dle situace.

Marián

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-es] (sin asunto)

[Miguel Sevilla-Callejo]

A priori y sin tener mención explícita de que una fuente sea libre, 
esta, al menos en España, tiene los derechos de copia reservados, por lo 
que me atrevería a decirte que no los usaras.


Respecto a la toponimia mira a ver si en las fuentes del IGN no existe 
ya y puedes de allí copiarla (de ella si hay permisos). Me consta que 
hay gente que mira también la información de las minutas cartográficas 
del IGN aunque no se si hay permiso explícito para esto.


Alguno más experto en temas legales y de licencias. ¿Cuanto tiempo ha de 
pasar en España para que un recurso pase a ser de dominio público?


Un saludo

Miguel


On 23/10/17 11:25, Javier Sánchez Portero wrote:

Hola

Dispongo de unos pocos ejemplares de mapas del Servicio Geográfico del 
Ejercito de 1959. Respecto a su utilización como fuente de topónimos 
para incluir en OSM, ¿hay alguna posibilidad de utilización directa 
(como caducidad de derechos), o habría que solicitar autorización?


Un saludo, Javier.


___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es


___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Blake Girardot HOT/OSM]

Hi Christoph,

We can not win if we do or if we do not :)

It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.

And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
is not right either :)

It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
mapping, they are OSM mapping.

But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
something.

Respectfully,
blake


On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
>
> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
> project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>
> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



-- 

Blake Girardot
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-es] Reunión virtual sobre accesibilidad

[Miguel Sevilla-Callejo]

Hola,

Gracias Carlos y José Luis por mover el asunto!

Yo acabo de rellenar el Doodle, lo siento, espero llegar a timepo o, en su
defecto, me intento amoldar al día que decidáis.

Quizá sería bueno charlar invitar a gente que está haciendo cosas de
accesibilidad en la "periferia" de OSM y creo que no es está en la lista.
En concreto me refiero a http://adappgeo.net/ que han estado trabajando
desde Geoinquietos Madrid en este tema y no se si está en la lista de
correos.

También, se me ocurre hacer una entrada en la wiki de OSM con el tema de
accesibilidad, sin ir más lejos, con el tema de esta reunión y qué usuarios
estamos trabajando en ello, al menos para que quede registro. Ahí podemos
editar todos y añadir las iniciativas que conozcamos y datos a incluir.

Gracias de nuevo, estamos en contacto.

Un saludo

Miguel


--
*Miguel Sevilla-Callejo*
Doctor en Geografía

2017-10-22 23:15 GMT+02:00 Esther Mingot :

> Hola a todos,
>
>
> mi experiencia en temas de accesibilidad es nula, pero estoy interesada en
> ver qué se está haciendo en otros lugares, para tomar nota e intentar
> ponerlo en práctica en mi zona.
>
>
> He estado unos días liada con otros temas y hasta hoy no entré a ver si
> había algo nuevo en la lista. Intentaré estar más pendiente para cuando
> concretéis la fecha de la reunión, en cuanto a horarios me puedo unir
> cualquier día a partir de las 21-21:30h.
>
>
> Saludos!
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *De:* Carlos Cámara 
> *Enviado:* martes, 17 de octubre de 2017 18:20
> *Para:* Mikel Gomez
> *Cc:* jlinfa...@llefia.org; Discusión en Español de OpenStreetMap
> *Asunto:* Re: [Talk-es] Reunión virtual sobre accesibilidad
>
> Hola a todos,
>
> Retomo el asunto para informar de que me he tomado la libertad de hacer la
> siguiente propuesta (a modo de brainstorming y para tener algo con lo que
> empezar):
>
> Propongo una reunión virtual orientada a conocer a todas las personas que
> traten temas de accesibilidad en OSM, saber qué hacen y cómo lo hacen. Me
> imagino que con eso ya tendremos tela para rato (en función de los
> asistentes), y supongo que dejará abierto el tema a discutir otros asuntos
> como propuestas de mejora, realización de actividades o lo que surja
> (¿colaboraciones? ¿iniciativas conjuntas?)... que podrían tener lugar en
> otro momento si ya nos hemos alargado. y dejar el final abierto.
>
> Tenéis la propuesta de orden del día aquí: https://public.etherpad-
> mozilla.org/p/Accesibilidad_OSM
>
> Por otra parte también me he tomado la libertad de hacer un doodle, algo
> que siempre es difícil cuando no se tiene idea de qué franjas horarias
> compartimos. Como no tenía ni idea he usado dos criterios: 1) basarme en el
> horario en el que, si no recuerdo mal, tenían lugar las reuniones de OSM
> (22:30-23:30), y 2) he propuesto horas que, por lo general me van bien a mi
> (siento la egolatría).
>
> El resultado está en el siguiente doodle: https://doodle.com/poll/
> vwzr7bptbm2zpsfn
> 
> Doodle: Reunión Accesibilidad OSM
> 
> doodle.com
> Objetivos y orden del día en https://public.etherpad-
> mozilla.org/p/Accesibilidad_OSM Votaciones abiertas hasta el sábado 21.
> El domingo 22 se comunicará la fecha final.
>
>
>
> Como veréis, empiezan las propuestas a partir de la semana que viene. Mi
> intención es dejar hasta el sábado para rellenar propuestas y elegir día el
> domingo.
>
> Si os parece bien a los que habéis estado más interesados en el asunto en
> este hilo, lo tiramos adelante también por el grupo de telegram.
>
> Saludos,
>
> Carlos Cámara
> http://carloscamara.es
> Carlos Cámara Menoyo 
> carloscamara.es
> Web de un apasionado de la arquitectura, las TIC y la tecnología, drupal,
> la divulgación y la docencia
>
>
>
> 2017-10-10 10:54 GMT+02:00 Mikel Gomez :
>
>> Buenas,
>>
>> Yo veo bien lo de hacer el doodle, lo único, en que margenes de horas nos
>> deberíamos mover, y a partir de cuando pongo comienzo el doodle (¿semana
>> que viene?).
>>
>> Saludos,
>>
>> El 10 de octubre de 2017, 9:38, Carlos Cámara 
>> escribió:
>>
>>> Gracias Jose Luis por iniciar este hilo.
>>>
>>> Secundo la moción de hacer una quedada virtual para compartir
>>> experiencias. Yo buscaré un hueco para hacerlo fuera del horario laboral.
>>>
>>> ¿Cómo lo hacemos? ¿Creamos un doodle con varias opciones para el mes de
>>> noviembre y cerramos fecha a finales de octubre? (así damos tiempo a quien
>>> quiera apuntarse, porque además de Cristina -por cierto, encantado- y los
>>> sospechososo habituales como Miguel y Jose Luis, me consta que hay más
>>> personas que trabajan estos temas, como Mikel Gómez y sus compañeros de la
>>> Universidad de Deusto y DeustoTech)
>>>
>>> Por otra parte también creo que molaría tener cierto orden del día u
>>> objetivo general y fijar una duración de 

Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj, ne opet ale stale, byl jsem mimo pocitac, dneska jsem konecne v
praci, tak se na to podivam. Byl tam problem s PostGISem, ale ten jsem
dneska uz vyresil, tak uvidim jestli to samo pomuze, nebo je tam jeste
neco jineho.

Bye

Dne 23. října 2017 9:32 Zdeněk Pražák  napsal(a):
> opět nefunguje aktualizace souřadnic fotek rozcestníků (GPX, JSON) -
> poslední je z 21.10. z 8,21
> nejsou analyzovány mé fotky rozcestníků s ID mezi 17785 - 18011
> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Zdeněk Pražák 
> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
> Datum: 19. 10. 2017 9:42:50
> Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
>
> no jde o fotky s ID mezi 17840 až 17918
>
> případně např o rozcestníky OSM ID 5174422129, 5174422138 a další
>
> prý u nich není nahraná fotka
> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Tom Ka 
> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
> Datum: 19. 10. 2017 8:51:08
> Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
>
> Ahoj, nejsem u pocitace ale zkusim se na to odpoledne podivat. Posli mi
> prosim nazvy fotek nebo ID z PhotoDB nebo OSM id co si myslis ze chybi.
>
> Diky.
>
> On Oct 19, 2017 08:11, "Zdeněk Pražák"  wrote:
>
> nefunguje asi aktualizace databáze rozcestníků na
> http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
> nejsou zahrnuty rozcestníky, které jsem nahrál včera
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Pavel Machek]

Ahoj!

On Fri 2017-10-20 09:50:28, majka wrote:
> 2017-10-20 9:22 GMT+02:00 Mikoláš Štrajt :
> >
> > V praxi se za koncem vesnice setkávám se smíšeným účelem, např. lesní/polní 
> > cesty, které jsou zároveň příjezdovky k chatovým oblastem.
> 
> To přece nepopírám a o tyhle cesty nejde. Mě ale zajímá cesta ve
> vesnici či městě, nadto v území zdůrazněném jako obytná zóna (tenhle
> výklad "landuse=residential" je samozřejmě můj a nepřesný), průmyslová
> či obchodní zóna. A v katastru to může být klidně jako užitková
> komunikace, ostatní komunikace nebo rovnou jen ostatní plocha.
> 
> @jzvc:
> Ať wiki zkoumám jak zkoumám, česky nebo anglicky, "Tuto značku
> nepoužívejte pro zakreslování veřejných nezpevněných cest v
> zastavěných oblastech" z toho jednoznačně čtu. Fakt jsem NIKDE nenašla
> nic jiného, a hledala jsem poctivě co to dalo. V Pravidlech pro Česko
> "track" řešený není. Zcela upřímně by mě odkaz správným směrem
> potěšil.
> 
> A prosím Tě, kde bydlíš a pohybuješ se, že očekáváš, že ulice
> (residential) nebude kvalitou polňačka mezi barákama, o chodnících
> nemluvě? Sice se hodně změnilo a mění, ale tohle opravdu není všude
> ani vzdáleně pravda. A opravdu nemusíš daleko na venkov - vím o dost
> takových v místech dosažitelných MHD krajského města, stačí kousek
> popojít mimo hlavní silnici.

Mapu chcem uzitecnou, ze? Tak necht je asfaltova vec mezi barakama
znacena jako highway=residential, a bahnita vec mezi barakama jako
highway=track.

Cely svet to tak znaci, jestli wiki tvrdi neco jineho, necht je
opravena wiki.
Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] mapovat existenci wifi v metru?

[Pavel Machek]

Ahoj!

> včera na mě v metru vyskočil hotspot "Metro - Wifi"; podle tohoto článku je
> pokryto 6 stanic.
> https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/ekonomika/v-metru-chytnete-wi-fi-dopravni-podnik-spustil-pripojeni-na/r~4ef74a5cb33511e79090002590604f2e/
> 
> Má smysl to uvádět u stanice ("stanice s wifi" podle vzoru "kavárna s
> wifi"), nebo je to zbytečný?
> (A pokud, kam zmapovat, na railway=station?
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4805705140
> Pokryty jsou zjevně všechny prostory pro cestující)

Ano, prosim. WIFI je uzitecna; rozhodne je to prijemnejsi reseni nez
ty "vyhledavaci terminaly".. protoze clovek aspon nemusi opisovat
spojeni na papir.

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

[Talk-es] (sin asunto)

[Javier Sánchez Portero]

Hola

Dispongo de unos pocos ejemplares de mapas del Servicio Geográfico del
Ejercito de 1959. Respecto a su utilización como fuente de topónimos para
incluir en OSM, ¿hay alguna posibilidad de utilización directa (como
caducidad de derechos), o habría que solicitar autorización?

Un saludo, Javier.
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[majka]

Jsem jednoznačně pro domluvu a vyjasnění mapování.

Taky se přidám s kacířským dotazem - co v případě, kdy v místě opravdu
není nic jiného, než cesta, na které riskujeme proražení vany nebo
utržení kola při jízdě rychleji než krokem, a přitom je to v obytné
oblasti a jediná možnost příjezdu k domům.
Asi bydlím ve špatném místě, ale opravdu znám dost míst, kde stále
ještě situace vypadá tak jak popisuji.

Kacířská poznámka:
Pokud si někdo vybaví silnici z Nepomuku na Plzeň před cca 10 lety, dá
mi za pravdu, že označení polňačka na ní bylo vzhledem k stavu více
než oprávněné. A pochybuji o tom, že by to bylo někdy takhle tagované.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Mikoláš Štrajt]

> - V rezidenční oblasti na vesnicích jsou poměrně často "polňačky", které
které vedou na pole.

To bych viděl označit jako residential k poslednímu domu ve vsi. Případně k
poslednímu domu kam někdo pravidelně jezdí autem.

> - Co s těmi příjezdy do chatových oblastí, které často navazují plynule
na dědiny, bývají tagované ještě jako součást landuse=residential ale
minimálně některé přijezdové polňačky už u nich bývají dost nebezpečné
(typicky tam existuje nějaká slušná cesta a pak nějaké polňačky)?

Mimo ves bych to značil jako highway=track pokud je to polňačka, případně
highway=unclassified pokud je to s asfaltem.

* * *

Jinak problém trochu vidím v tom, že chalupáři/místní obyvatelé si občas
troufnou autem do celkem divokejch cest. :-)

Příklad ze života: Tuhle se mě u nás ve Hvozdnici nějaký řidič ptal, zda
existuje nějaká bližší cesta do sousedního Bojova než silnice přes Čisovice
(čti asi 10km zajížďka).

Ano, existuje, ale je to vymlácená lesní silnička navíc zakončená brodem
přes potok. Místní si tam troufaj, ale jemu se tam moc nechtělo. :-) Viz -
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/36796160
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Petr Holub 
Komu: 'OpenStreetMap Czech Republic' , jzvc@
tpfree.net
Datum: 23. 10. 2017 10:52:42
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential? 
"> > V praxi se za koncem vesnice setkávám se smíšeným účelem, např. lesní/
polní cesty, které
> jsou zároveň příjezdovky k chatovým oblastem.
>
> To přece nepopírám a o tyhle cesty nejde. Mě ale zajímá cesta ve
> vesnici či městě, nadto v území zdůrazněném jako obytná zóna (tenhle
> výklad "landuse=residential" je samozřejmě můj a nepřesný), průmyslová
> či obchodní zóna. A v katastru to může být klidně jako užitková
> komunikace, ostatní komunikace nebo rovnou jen ostatní plocha.
>
> @jzvc:
> Ať wiki zkoumám jak zkoumám, česky nebo anglicky, "Tuto značku
> nepoužívejte pro zakreslování veřejných nezpevněných cest v
> zastavěných oblastech" z toho jednoznačně čtu. Fakt jsem NIKDE nenašla
> nic jiného, a hledala jsem poctivě co to dalo. V Pravidlech pro Česko
> "track" řešený není. Zcela upřímně by mě odkaz správným směrem
> potěšil.

Možná bychom si ta pravidla pro ČR měli doplnit. Za mne bych doporučoval
se zamyslet nad následujícím:

- V rezidenční oblasti na vesnicích jsou poměrně často "polňačky", které
které vedou na pole.

- Co s těmi příjezdy do chatových oblastí, které často navazují plynule
na dědiny, bývají tagované ještě jako součást landuse=residential ale
minimálně některé přijezdové polňačky už u nich bývají dost nebezpečné
(typicky tam existuje nějaká slušná cesta a pak nějaké polňačky)?

- Existuje aspoň nějaký navigační
SW používající OSM data, který umí zohlednit surface a/nebo smoothness?
Kolem
smoothness je navíc ve wiki kontroverze kolem principu Verifiability...

Na jednu stranu chápu princip a píšu ten heretic tag, ale na druhou stranu
bych nerad, aby mne začaly navigace tahat cestami, kde si můžu vybrat mezi
proražením olejové vany a couváním do kopce po blátě do pravého úhlu, když
je na dědině vyježděná zkratka od traktorů... obecně bych highway=service
bral jako něco, co by minimálně mělo být sjízdné pro normální auto na
asfalt.


Petr


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
"___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

[OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page 
(http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself 
tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with 
no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate 
project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a 
first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.  
To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the 
impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap 
Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.

In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not 
covered by the trademark policy we now have.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] Utilità cartelli limiti di velocità

[emmexx]

On 10/22/2017 08:37 PM, carlo folini wrote:
> Guardando su OSM ho trovato (andando a caso) questo cartello che è
> completamente scollegato dalla strada per cui è stato messo.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3324840295 (spero che l'utente emmexx
> che è su osm da quasi 10 anni sia un buon riferimento!)
> 
> Guardando su 
> http://product.itoworld.com/map/124?lon=9.22461=45.54213=16_sidebar=share_menu
> vedo che effettivamente c'è il cambio di velocità in quel punto.
> Indagando sulla highway=trunk vedo che è stata splittata proprio in quel
> punto. Nel tratto a 70 km/h c'è un tag in più (lit=yes), potrebbe essere
> quello il motivo dello split.

Troppo buono! :-)

Confermo che cio' che ho mappato corrisponde alla realtà, sono passato
da lì anche ieri sera.
Ho mappato il cartello (i cartelli in realtà, ce ne sono un paio a breve
distanza) in quel modo perché così dice il wiki ed anche a seguito di
discussioni qui in lista.

L'apparente non utilità di mappare questi cartelli la valuterei più
approfonditamente.
A breve probabilmente il routing con realtà aumentata diventerà la norma
e l'aver mappato anche i cartelli aiuterà nella rappresentazione che
verrà fatta, esattamente come succede con le corsie.
Nelle settimane scorse ho letto anche vari articoli che parlano di
società che hanno iniziato il lavoro di mappatura delle strade in
funzione dei veicoli a guida autonoma, veicoli che leggono i cartelli
stradali e si regolano di conseguenza.

ciao
maxx

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-be] LiDAR

[Julien Minet]

Indeed, no elevation data in OSM except the ele=* tag. However, I'm using a
lot this hillshade layer from the Région Wallonne

in JOSM, which is very nice to map streams, tracks and other features in
forested areas. I think this layer is derived from LIDAR. To me, that's a
way to use LIDAR data in OSM.

Julien

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> AFAIK we hardly have any elevation data, i.e. building heights. OSM
> does not store elevation data for landscape features (contour lines),
> although we can put ele on mountain tops.
> I've seen a few blog posts on using LiDAR for OSM, but can't remember
> where. There was a presentation at a SOTM: https://vimeo.com/115361043
>
> Another issue is that even buildings not available in many areas in
> Belgium.
>
> I am not aware of ele-data for communication towers and the like.
>
> m.
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Karel Adams  wrote:
> > LiDAR is apparently a technique for gathering precise elevation data.
> Such
> > data is (AFAIU) collected for most of Western Europe, and other places
> > besides; and there is a tendency to make the data publicly available,
> too.
> >
> > How relevant is this for OSM? How accurate is our elevation data at
> present,
> > for Belgium in especial? Would LiDAR data for Belgium (or parts thereof
> :)
> > be collected, and could we get it to be publicly available? Mass import
> into
> > OSM?
> >
> > Check https://rapidlasso.com/2017/01/03/first-open-lidar-in-germany/ as
> a
> > starter, more info easily found on the www
> >
> > Karel (found this mentioned on an aviation forum)
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-be mailing list
> > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [Talk-cz] highway=track v landuse=residential?

[Petr Holub]

> > V praxi se za koncem vesnice setkávám se smíšeným účelem, např. lesní/polní 
> > cesty, které
> jsou zároveň příjezdovky k chatovým oblastem.
> 
> To přece nepopírám a o tyhle cesty nejde. Mě ale zajímá cesta ve
> vesnici či městě, nadto v území zdůrazněném jako obytná zóna (tenhle
> výklad "landuse=residential" je samozřejmě můj a nepřesný), průmyslová
> či obchodní zóna. A v katastru to může být klidně jako užitková
> komunikace, ostatní komunikace nebo rovnou jen ostatní plocha.
> 
> @jzvc:
> Ať wiki zkoumám jak zkoumám, česky nebo anglicky, "Tuto značku
> nepoužívejte pro zakreslování veřejných nezpevněných cest v
> zastavěných oblastech" z toho jednoznačně čtu. Fakt jsem NIKDE nenašla
> nic jiného, a hledala jsem poctivě co to dalo. V Pravidlech pro Česko
> "track" řešený není. Zcela upřímně by mě odkaz správným směrem
> potěšil.

Možná bychom si ta pravidla pro ČR měli doplnit. Za mne bych doporučoval
se zamyslet nad následujícím:

- V rezidenční oblasti na vesnicích jsou poměrně často "polňačky", které
  které vedou na pole.

- Co s těmi příjezdy do chatových oblastí, které často navazují plynule
  na dědiny, bývají tagované ještě jako součást landuse=residential ale
  minimálně některé přijezdové polňačky už u nich bývají dost nebezpečné
  (typicky tam existuje nějaká slušná cesta a pak nějaké polňačky)?

- Existuje aspoň nějaký navigační
  SW používající OSM data, který umí zohlednit surface a/nebo smoothness? Kolem
  smoothness je navíc ve wiki kontroverze kolem principu 
Verifiability...

  Na jednu stranu chápu princip a píšu ten heretic tag, ale na druhou stranu
  bych nerad, aby mne začaly navigace tahat cestami, kde si můžu vybrat mezi
  proražením olejové vany a couváním do kopce po blátě do pravého úhlu, když
  je na dědině vyježděná zkratka od traktorů... obecně bych highway=service
  bral jako něco, co by minimálně mělo být sjízdné pro normální auto na asfalt.


Petr


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-it] Utilità cartelli limiti di velocità

[Max1234Ita]

Alessandro wrote
> Se la regola è mappare ciò che si vede io non lo considero un 
> abbellimento, anche se personalmente spezzo la via e inserisco maxspeed 
> o qualsiasi altra limitazione nel tratto in cui vige quel divieto.
> 
> Alessandro


+1

Ricordiamoci che i cartelli stradali sono oggetti della realtà che possono
venire mappati come traffic_sign
(http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=reply=5905163),
che li descrivono.
Però, per il routing, quello che conta sono le informazioni date dai tag
/maxspeed///maxheight///maxwidth/, ecc. , nonché dalla "famiglia" /highway/
(che comprende anche crossing, ad indicare gli attraversamenti pedonali)

Per quanto riguarda assegnare tag del genere alla relazione, secondo me si
può fare, ma in quel caso si dichiara che quel valore è valido per tutti gli
elementi che la compongono... Nel caso di un  limite di velocità su una
strada Statale/Provinciale questo sarebbe un caso piuttosto particolare,
credo!

Max



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] volontari cercasi per organizzazione State of the Map 2018

[Volker Schmidt]

Alessandro,
in questo momento non so se posso essere all'evento stesso, ma sono
certamente disponibile nei preparativi a distanza. In particolare, se ci
sono traduzioni da fare o da controllare (proofreading), in particolare
inglese e tedesco.
Volker


2017-10-20 22:38 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Palmas :

> Ciao lista,
> la macchina organizzativa di SOTM (come quella di FOSS4G-it) è già in
> moto. Iniziare 10 mesi prima dall'appuntamento la dice lunga sull'impegno
> che occorrerà impiegarci.
> E' per questo che sono a chiedere alla comunità se qualcuno di voi può
> dedicare poche ore la settimana per permetterci di organizzare il più bel
> State of the Map possibile.
>
> Le figure ancora mancanti sono:
>
> - Assistant (to take minutes of meetings, to support the chairperson on
> keeping on top of record keeping).
> In questo periodo ci aggiorniamo via skype una volta al mese. Man mano che
> ci si avvicinerà la data la call avverranno con maggiore frequenza.
> Ovviamente è richiesta una buona conoscenza dell'inglese.
>
> - Communications (email newsletter, blog).
> Qualcuno/a che dia supporto alla nostra communication manager Francesca
> nel gestire i vari canali di comunicazione (twitter, Facebook, il blog e la
> newsletter); anche un lavoro di traduzione è molto utile. Anche in questo
> caso nei primi mesi ci sarà un blando impegno che aumenterà un poco
> all'approssimarsi e durante l'evento. Chi se la cava bene con la
> comunicazione è ultrabenvenuta/o.
>
> - Sponsorship (organise a team of 3 people to send out sponsorship emails,
> payment via Dorothea).
> Anche questa è un'attività che porta via poco tempo: principalmente sarà
> da rispondere e inoltrare mail da e verso gli sponsor.
>
> - Ticket sales system (help set-up and answer email queries related to
> sales).
> Per la vendita dei biglietti viene utilizzata una piattaforma on line;
> diverse persone avranno però domande o richieste di assistenza a cui dare
> risposta o nel caso in cui non si sappia cosa rispondere girare la palla a
> qualcun altro (qui c'è almeno una persona della Foundation che ci lavora
> dietro).
>
> - Local services (find companies to provide catering, social event, hotel,
> etc).
> Qui servirebbe una persona di Milano. Il catering dovrebbe già essere
> organizzato; per gli hotel abbiamo già una lista di una trentina di posti,
> servirebbe trovarne alcuni non troppo distante da Piola a prezzi
> relativamente economici; per la serata social io sto già lavorando per
> avere una bella sede, occorre però organizzare un minimo la serata.
>
> - Scholarship (assist scholarship process)
> Solitamente si invitano una ventina di persone da paesi in via di sviluppo
> offrendo loro tutto il pacchetto viaggio, alloggio, biglietto gratuito. Nel
> 99% dei casi sono persone che necessitano di un ingresso VISA. Qui
> cerchiamo due/tre persone che abbiano un minimo di dimestichezza con
> disbrighi burocratici. Sarebbe poi il massimo se parlassero anche (ma non è
> indispensabile) una lingua tra inglese, francese o spagnolo. Questo è
> probabilmente il punto in cui abbiamo più bisogno di aiuto.
>
> - Aiuto per la stampa dei materiali: dovremo stampare e a volte creare
> (per le cose più semplici) banner, adesivi, badge personali, rollup,
> libretti col programma, minilibretti di aiuto per le scholarship (info su
> Milano per non perdersi e altre info di base in inglese, francese,
> spagnolo), ecc... Si tratta di lavori di grafica, richiesta di preventivi
> e, se c'è qualcuno di Milano, qualche ritiro di adesivi, badge e cordini,
> nelle settimane e giorni precedenti SOTM.
>
> - Aiuto nei tre giorni precedenti SOTM, dal 25 al 27 luglio, durante i
> quali un pò di braccia e un'auto tra Porta Genova e Piola sarebbero un
> grande aiuto. Anche qualche persona in ufficio in Via Tortona per gestire
> telefonata, check-list, chiudere e marcare scatole. Il 27 luglio dovremo
> portare il materiale rimanente al POLIMI e al pomeriggio iniziare a
> disporre tavoli per reception e altre attività.
>
> Anche se pensate di avere la metà della disponibilità di una delle figure
> indicate va bene lo stesso, quasi tutte le attività possono essere gestite
> da più persone col coordinamento di WMI.
>
> Per domande e chiarimenti sono sempre disponibile. Spero rispondiate
> numerosi.
>
> Un grosso grazie anticipato da me, da WMI e dallo staff della OSM
> Foundation che ogni anno lavora dietro le quinte per organizzare SOTM.
>
>   Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Calvaires et cadastre

[Nicolas Moyroud]

Salut Fred,

Intéressant tout ça, je suis preneur pour une intégration osmose des 
bornes incendies. :-)


Pour les calvaires je ne saisis pas bien la différence entre les 
comparaisons mapcontrib et les comparaisons osmose. Dans la zone à 
l'ouest de Montpellier, il a beaucoup de calvaires sur mapcontrib et 
aucun sur osmose. Tu as appliqué un critère de sélection supplémentaire 
avant l'intégration osmose ?


Nicolas



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] Leicester A

[Philip Barnes]

Hi Gerv
Sorry you had problems, mapping hospital departments is one thing that has been 
puzzling other mappers and myself. Some mappers have used multiple hospitals, 
which breaks the one real life object to one osm object. There is only one LRI.

I have not lived in Leicestershire for six years and was not aware of any 
changes to the location of A Are you saying it is no longer close to the 
main entrance and accessed from Infirmary Close?

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 23 October 2017 06:34:09 BST, Gervase Markham  wrote:
>I had cause to go to Leicester A on Saturday. It was renewed in April
>(Google Earth suggests there was a big building project), and the map
>has not been updated, and so it's not clear on OSM where the drop-off
>is, or which is the associated multi-storey. The road I think it is, is
>part not-marked-as-such and part non-existent. There's also a separate
>Children's A entrance. Given the nature of these facilities, and the
>terrible Leicester 1-way system, it would be very good to have the map
>be extremely clear on these points!
>
>Can someone local look into the issue, please?
>
>Thanks :-)
>
>Gerv
>
>
>___
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it] volontari cercasi per organizzazione State of the Map 2018

[Alessandro Palmas]

Il 22/10/2017 12:46, mbranco2 ha scritto:

Io ci sono, mettimi in lista e contattami pure quando vuoi.

Ciao,
Marco


Marco,
grazie, grazie come sempre dovrei iniziare a dire, per la tua costante 
disponibilità.


Dimmi tu per quale ruolo ti sentiresti più tagliato. Io ti proporrei 
'sponsorship' nel quale ci sarà un picco relativo di attività verso fine 
anno e un'attività blanda ma costante sino a luglio.
In aggiunta o alternativa dare una mano al 'Ticket sales system' assieme 
ad altre persone.


Alessandro

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all

[Zdeněk Pražák]

opět nefunguje aktualizace souřadnic fotek rozcestníků (GPX, JSON) -
poslední je z 21.10. z 8,21
nejsou analyzovány mé fotky rozcestníků s ID mezi 17785 - 18011
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Zdeněk Pražák 
Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Datum: 19. 10. 2017 9:42:50
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
"no jde o fotky s ID mezi 17840 až 17918

případně např o rozcestníky OSM ID 5174422129, 5174422138 a další

prý u nich není nahraná fotka
-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Tom Ka 
Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Datum: 19. 10. 2017 8:51:08
Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] nefunguje http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all
"
Ahoj, nejsem u pocitace ale zkusim se na to odpoledne podivat. Posli mi 
prosim nazvy fotek nebo ID z PhotoDB nebo OSM id co si myslis ze chybi. 



Diky.




On Oct 19, 2017 08:11, "Zdeněk Pražák"  wrote:
"
nefunguje asi aktualizace databáze rozcestníků na http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/
OsmHiCheck/gp/?all(http://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?all)
nejsou zahrnuty rozcestníky, které jsem nahrál včera


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org(mailto:Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org)
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz)

"

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
""___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

[talk-ph] Marawi City: post war mapping

[Leonard Soriano]

Hi,

The war in Marawi City, Lanao DelNorte started on May 23, 2017 between 
terrorist groups and Government troops.After 5 months of fighting, the 
Government has officially announced today theend of all military operations.  
This warhas displaced more than thousands of people and has left the city 
heavily damaged and destroyed particularly inside the main battle area.  

As OSM volunteers we have seen how our effortshave been useful and helpful 
during a crisis. In the case of the case of the war Marawi, wecould help out in 
digiziting satellite imagery and provide maps that will supportGovernment, 
NGO’s, Aid organizations and other related groups in their workthat is focused 
on the assistance of its residents and in the recovery,reconstruction and 
rehabilitation of Marawi City.
Ihave initially talked to OSM members like Ervin, Erwin and Manning about this 
and I am also sharing it here to OSMmembers for us to discuss what we can do. I 
am looking forward to hearing yourvaluable inputs.  

Maraming salamat!  

--bunny___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Roland Olbricht]

So, to sum up:
1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected 
until it was detected by Yuri's tool.
2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės 
II piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* 
tag even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big 
information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names 
"Žagarės piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.


No, that is plain wrong.
I sum it up more correctly:

Up to version #4 of http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1717783246/history
that object had a useful wikipedia link for a human being.
An average humans can cope with a disambiguation page like this.

Version #5 broke that wikipedia link. Given the changeset comment, this 
was apparently due to a faulty wikidata link.


Version #6 reinstated a useful wikipedia link for a human being. Linking 
to the currently matching Wikipedia page might have been even better, 
but it is up to a local mapper to decide whether the page title of the 
Wikipedia page title reasonably matches the OSM object.


To avoid having the same problem again, the wikidata tag has been 
dropped in that version.


Best regards,

Roland

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk