Re: [OSM-talk] Bridge tagging
Gervase Markham wrote: I'm considering putting together the following proposal. As it's somewhat intrusive, I thought I'd post here first to see if there was significant opposition. Clearly not :-) I'll write up a proposal. Gerv ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Map_Features not loading
Chris Hill schrieb: The Map_Features page has really suffered. Having a single page with a list of all the tags was easy to search, now there are various places to search. Can we put it back to a single page plse. FULL ACK - the current page is a PITA! Regards, ULFL P.S: If the templates are the problem, remove them. It's a lot more important to have a usable map features page than to have an easy way for translations ... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Map_Features not loading
FULL ACK - the current page is a PITA! +1 I restored the single page. P.S: If the templates are the problem, remove them. It's a lot more important to have a usable map features page than to have an easy way for translations ... Agreed, but again, the problem is not the templates but PHP on the server has a limited memory and this page takes about 900Kb size of text and pictures (with or without templates). (the error is a not possible to allocate enough memory in parser.php) So, either the memory allocated for PHP is increased or the page is split or its content is reduced. regards, Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Map_Features not loading
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Pieren Pieren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FULL ACK - the current page is a PITA! +1 I restored the single page. P.S: If the templates are the problem, remove them. It's a lot more important to have a usable map features page than to have an easy way for translations ... Agreed, but again, the problem is not the templates but PHP on the server has a limited memory and this page takes about 900Kb size of text and pictures (with or without templates). (the error is a not possible to allocate enough memory in parser.php) So, either the memory allocated for PHP is increased or the page is split or its content is reduced. regards, Pieren In this case, pictures will have no effect (other than the extra wiki/html markup) This page on enwiki goes into great depth about the template parsing methods and limits, so may be helpful to finding a solution to our map features problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Template_limitsoldid=174802700 -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] generating maps from shapefiles?
www.cgpsmapper.com The program has support for shapefiles, but I'm not sure if the free version does. Otherwise, you could use GPSMapEdit ( www.geopainting.com) and import your shapefiles, then save it as MP format and then use cGPSMapper to compile it to an IMG format. (There are some links set up in GPSMapEdit to send it to cGPSMapper directly, to eliminate a step). Karl On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 11:37 PM, k b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will give the scripts a try. Since it seams like converting shape files into osm is not a as easy as first thought ,is there some way to convert shape files directly into garmin img files? Karl --- Matthew Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since OSM has a quite different data structure than shapefiles (topological vs. simple features) it can be difficult. Plus there is no generic solution for converting the attributes into OSM tags. You'll likely have to script a custom solution. A good place to start would be http://boston.freemap.in/osm/files/mgis_to_osm.py or http://perrygeo.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/gis-bin/nhd_to_osm.py - matt On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 6:19 AM, k b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi. Is it possible to convert the shape files into oms files or directly into garmin img files? If it is possible, where can i read more? Tanks! Karl. Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk -- Matthew T. Perry http://www.perrygeo.net Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] fixing multipolygons
On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 21:16 +0100, Robert Vollmert wrote: 393 relations 235 with non-closed ways 53 with less than two members 32 containing ways with less than two nodes 56 modified relations Examples of non-closed ways are relation 435 and 436. Both these have 2 ways which together could form a closed ring if the direction of one of the ways was reversed. I think these were marked as multipolygons by the 0.4-0.5 conversion script since it could not form a closed ring with the directions as they were. I think we need to fix up these into proper closed ways and remove the multipolygon relation. Given your stats above this might effect about half the existing multipolygon relations. It just so happens that the existing multipolygon handling code in osm2pgsql will convert these ways into a closed area for the Mapnik rendering. I can not remember whether this was by accident or design but it would be nice not to lose these areas. Jon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] fixing multipolygons
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Jon Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It just so happens that the existing multipolygon handling code in osm2pgsql will convert these ways into a closed area for the Mapnik rendering. I can not remember whether this was by accident or design but it would be nice not to lose these areas. FWIW, it was pointed out to me today that osm2pgsql actually creates invalid geometries, presumably via this relation parsing (I havn't had a chance to track it down). If you do: # select count(*) from planet_osm_polygon where not isvalid(way); You get 138 for just the NL portion of the planet dump. The errors are a combination of: NOTICE: Self-intersection NOTICE: Hole lies outside shell NOTICE: Ring Self-intersection The first being the most common. It's probably stupid errors but maybe it's stuff that will be fixed at the same time. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] fixing multipolygons
On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 18:42 +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Jon Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It just so happens that the existing multipolygon handling code in osm2pgsql will convert these ways into a closed area for the Mapnik rendering. I can not remember whether this was by accident or design but it would be nice not to lose these areas. FWIW, it was pointed out to me today that osm2pgsql actually creates invalid geometries, presumably via this relation parsing (I havn't had a chance to track it down). If you do: # select count(*) from planet_osm_polygon where not isvalid(way); You get 138 for just the NL portion of the planet dump. The errors are a combination of: NOTICE: Self-intersection NOTICE: Hole lies outside shell NOTICE: Ring Self-intersection The first being the most common. It's probably stupid errors but maybe it's stuff that will be fixed at the same time. I think many of these are due to bad OSM data. Historically osm2pgsql has just ignored or silently fixed up minor data errors. I'm wondering whether instead it should emit a list of the problems. These could be turned into an HTML file with generated API and map links to view or download the data. I know there are some other tools which perform similar functions but I guess they are not being run on the whole planet dump every week. Jon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] RFC: golf course
Hi everyone, there is a new RFC regarding golf courses. I tried to include a lot of Wikipedia links to make it comprehensible even for non-golfers. Please take a look at it and share your opinion. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Golf_course Greets, Daniel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Stares
Has anyone else noticed the number of stares going up? I had about 5 in my hour or so of mapping. I waved at 3 of them and got one wave back. have fun, SteveC | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.asklater.com/steve/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Stares
SteveC wrote: Has anyone else noticed the number of stares going up? I had about 5 in my hour or so of mapping. I waved at 3 of them and got one wave back. Yes, but that's mainly due to the fact that I've spent the last couple of weekends mapping an area where wandering around with something that looks like a radio clipped to your shoulder while writing notes and sketching a map makes the locals nervous (in a he looks official but I can't quite work out what he's up to kind of way). Jon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Stares
With its right wing? Stephan. Has anyone else noticed the number of stares going up? I had about 5 in my hour or so of mapping. I waved at 3 of them and got one wave back. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Stares
SteveC wrote: Has anyone else noticed the number of stares going up? I had about 5 in my hour or so of mapping. I waved at 3 of them and got one wave back. No, but I'm definitely noticing an increase in the number of agressive dogs :-( Graham SteveC | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.asklater.com/steve/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Stares
I think this might be the cause: http://www.met.police.uk/campaigns/counter_terrorism/ct_camera_2008.pdf More details: http://www.met.police.uk/campaigns/campaign_ct_2008.htm 80n On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 7:52 PM, graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SteveC wrote: Has anyone else noticed the number of stares going up? I had about 5 in my hour or so of mapping. I waved at 3 of them and got one wave back. No, but I'm definitely noticing an increase in the number of agressive dogs :-( Graham SteveC | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.asklater.com/steve/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] generating maps from shapefiles?
k b k_b at yahoo.se writes: I will give the scripts a try. Since it seams like converting shape files into osm is not a as easy as first thought ,is there some way to convert shape files directly into garmin img files? GPS Trackmaker software reads in shapefiles and lists 13 output formats. Img is not on the list, I don't know if Garmin PCX5 or some other supported format could be useful. -Jukka Rahkonen- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Stares
On 9 Mar 2008, at 20:33, 80n wrote: I think this might be the cause: http://www.met.police.uk/campaigns/counter_terrorism/ ct_camera_2008.pdf Fight back with http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/05/remixing-the-london.html More details: http://www.met.police.uk/campaigns/campaign_ct_2008.htm 80n On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 7:52 PM, graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SteveC wrote: Has anyone else noticed the number of stares going up? I had about 5 in my hour or so of mapping. I waved at 3 of them and got one wave back. No, but I'm definitely noticing an increase in the number of agressive dogs :-( Graham SteveC | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.asklater.com/steve/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk have fun, SteveC | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.asklater.com/steve/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Fwd: map question]
I would think you'd go with creating a map removing from the stylesheets things you didn't want. Then if you want specific ones add them in manually. I know at layer 12 informationfreeway can be captionless (press the plus on the right of the map for the option) http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=51.51840711462878lon=-0.10752254127906434zoom=12layers=F00BF On 09/03/2008, Robert (Jamie) Munro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Someone asked this question on another list. I'm wondering what people here would suggest? - Perhaps osmarender to make a map, then edit it in Inkscape to remove things not needed. Does anyone know of software that will allow you to pick and choose the towns and other features that appear in a printed outline map? Suppose, for example, that I was planning a Spurr Pilgrimage Tour: how could I print an outline map of England that would show only Birmingham, Stansted, Evesham and Westminster Abbey (without any other towns or features appearing)? (signed) ?Nick -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH1Gx4z+aYVHdncI0RAs8EAJ9/D4FPChwXQt/soa53r9pik6h8TwCcDRay Yog3u0Qo8ZhZrTU83mT0Pq4= =W3lG -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk -- Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Fwd: map question]
On 10/03/2008, Robert (Jamie) Munro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of software that will allow you to pick and choose the towns and other features that appear in a printed outline map? Suppose, for example, that I was planning a Spurr Pilgrimage Tour: how could I print an outline map of England that would show only Birmingham, Stansted, Evesham and Westminster Abbey (without any other towns or features appearing)? i don't know the status of administrative boundaries in uk, but would it be possible to define a polygonal bounding box, that used whatever parish/city/etc boundaries as it's limits? it should be fairly to extract the corresponding polygon from the db if you know it's name, and then go from there. i imagine several neighbouring ones could be joined together to form a super-polgon bounding box we can use 4 sided bboxes, right? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-in] Stares
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 1:13 AM, Gora Mohanty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: P.P.S. I have had someone claim to me that an Indian citizen is legally required to register any GPS devices. Anyone from India who can cast any light on that? Lol, that was me. Someone claimed that to me and I, in turn, passed it on to you, hoping that you may find out a definite answer. I am unable to digest this and still looking for someone to confirm this. regards, Nishant -- How about some patent on (a+b)2 = a2+2ab+b2. Choose free software! http://www.nishants.net ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] secondary_link
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008, Stuart Robinson wrote: Links are by default oneway, I think that's what the other person is getting at. stuart. so the use of secondary_link was possibly a shorthand to avoid oneway=true ?? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Highway Classification Issues
Darrin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I read one part of the OSM wiki I see it talking about classifying highways purely by their physical characteristics .. The majority of pages talk about classifying roads by their state funding designation and or highway reference which is fine because these are pretty easy to explicitly define. There is little doubt that the original highway definitions corresponded to the classification system in the UK. The primary/secondary/tertiary/unclassified correspond pretty closely to the road classifications there. The arguments over physical or administrative classifications lie around the edges of the discussion in the UK. Some people thinking an 'A' road in certain sections, may be secondary, or some such. Anyway, rest assured this is a live debate. Check out http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Highway_administrative/physical_descriptions discussion of reference definition, vs physical definition In some urban areas in Australia, the reference definition can work quite well. In Sydney, Motorways correspond to motorways, trunk roads correspond to metroads, and residential/unclassified to surburban correspond to streets going nowhere. This only leaves primary/secondary etc to be subjective to a certain extent. However, in rural areas of NSW, the system doesn't work so well. If you use the reference method, you will find that there are a handful of state highways, a couple of auslink roads, and that leaves 99% of all the roads without a reference classification. This would dramatically reduce the usefulness of the resulting map to use a reference classification. Most roads would look the same. Many main routes between towns have no reference classification at all. It would be nice if Australia had a reference system that would work comprehensively. It doesn't, and that leaves us always requiring a certain element of subjectivity. I would say - if there is a workable reference system for a particular area, then it is best to use the reference system, and make a correspondence to the OSM types. Document the area and the reference system on the wiki, and coordinate a discussion to ensure there is a consensus for that area. Where there isn't a workable reference system - where that would leave far to many roads unclassified, or through roads not indicated as through roads, then some subjectivity has to be used. Not just the physical propoerties of the road, but also whether it is the main linking road between centres, etc. The current wiki guidelines for Australian Road Tagging are the result of previous discussions to try and pin this down, and try and standardise as much as possible where no reference system will work. If you can come up with a practical, yet unambiguous and objective, system for all of Australia, that would be great. Short of laying seige to the roads departments and councils, I don't think that is going to happen. I'm sure if you have ideas for improvement, or a workable reference system for Adelaide, then you just need to convince people of the benefits, and update the doco. Ian. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Adelaide Highway Classification (was: Highway Classification Issues)
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:52:00 +1100 Ian Sergeant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway, rest assured this is a live debate. Check out http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Highway_administrative/physical_descriptions That's an interesting page, good to see people are addressing that issue on a global level. Should that proposal go through it automatically eliminates one of the options as 'valid' ... Shall have to keep an eye on it. discussion of reference definition, vs physical definition Ian's comments OK, in a sense it's good to see people as unsure as I am :) However, in rural areas of NSW, the system doesn't work so well. If you use the reference method, you will find that there are a handful of state highways, a couple of auslink roads, and that leaves 99% of all the roads without a reference classification. This would dramatically reduce the usefulness of the resulting map to use a reference classification. Most roads would look the same. Many main routes between towns have no reference classification at all. Perhaps NSW will one day get it's funding to finish the MABC roll-out, that might help a lot, but yes until then I don't envy your position. South Australia is a little better off with a nicely defined set of A B roads to guide things along. It would be nice if Australia had a reference system that would work comprehensively. It doesn't, and that leaves us always requiring a certain element of subjectivity. 3 States have (TAS, VIC, SA), 2 are part way there (NSW QLD), it's a start :) I would say - if there is a workable reference system for a particular area, then it is best to use the reference system, and make a correspondence to the OSM types. Document the area and the reference system on the wiki, and coordinate a discussion to ensure there is a consensus for that area. Right this is where I kind of got to with Adelaide, I guess my first email was a call out to start such a discussion so I'll change the subject to reflect that... If you can come up with a practical, yet unambiguous and objective, system for all of Australia, that would be great. Short of laying seige to the roads departments and councils, I don't think that is going to happen. Yeah, that's a good dream that one :) I'm sure if you have ideas for improvement, or a workable reference system for Adelaide, then you just need to convince people of the benefits, and update the doco. OK, to take this a step further I'll start the ball rolling in Adelaide: (As we get a consensus I'll write a Adelaide/South Australia Wiki page to reflect the decisions, I'm happy to do that) 1) Trunk Roads in City I propose that all A routes in Adelaide and only A Routes are labelled trunk. I can understand some hesitation from people with respect to the A22, parts of the A16 because they are low quality roads, but if we're going to tag to a reference pattern they need to fit. 2) Definition of rural vs city area I propose that the area bounded by lines joining Two Wells, Gawler, Birdwood, Mount Barker, Willunga, Aldinga and the Coast line are defined as City area, and that areas outside these are considered Rural (We can define other city areas around Mount Gambier/Whyalla/Whatever if people have definitions?). I think the current Rural definitions as provided on the Wiki are pretty close to spot on for these areas. 3) Primary Roads in City: There are about 5 B Roads inside the definition of the city area, otherwise there's a whole bunch of roads in the city itself which server the cross-city tasks the road definition suggests these should be. However I think there are currently way too many roads in Adelaide marked as primary which AREN'T serving significant cross-suburb purposes (Prospect Road is one that immediately comes to mind). I would like to suggest we the mappers of Adelaide draw up a list of Primary roads which are the only ones that should be marked primary. 4) Further levels: For later, a few steps at a time :) I'm particularly would like input from those guys mapping lots of Adelaide with me (jackb, justcameron, adhoc?) since you guys and I will tread on each others toes if we're not seeing eye-to-eye. -- =b ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [Talk-de] Potlatch :-) und :-(
Christoph Eckert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Insofern verstehe ich nicht, wo da ein Problem sein soll, zumal Fred Bugs üblicherweise äußerst zügig ausbaut. Jupp! Besser ist es IMO immer die neueeste Version zu haben als alle 6 Monate mal. Ich hab schon darüber nachgedacht mir ein script zu bauen, dass beim start automatisch die jeweils neueste Version runterlädt. Gruss Sven -- Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes itself, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. (John Quincy Adams) /me is [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Ortsname wird erst bei Mappnik-Zoomstufe 14 angezeigt
Daniel Schmidt schrieb: Mapnik besitzt beim Rendern eine Art Kollisionserkennung, d.h. es wird verhindert, dass sich zwei oder mehrere Labels überlagern. In diesem Fall wird dann eben nur ein Element angezeigt. Erst in einer größeren Zoomstufe können dann die weiteren Labels gezeichnet werden, wenn Platz ist. Osmarender pinselt einfach alles hin. Ich weiß nicht, nach welchen Regeln Mapnik entscheidet, welches Element gezeichnet wird und welches nicht -- ich nehme mal an, das hängt an der Reihenfolge der Einträge in der Datenbank. Das führt dann übrigens zu solchen Stilblüten, daß Erlangen und Fürth angezeigt werden, Nürnberg aber nicht: http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.56lon=11.05zoom=8layers=B0FT Nur ist Nürnberg (~50) knapp fünfmal so groß wie Fürth (~115000)! Und ich möchte jetzt keine Kommentare der Art aber man weiß ja, daß Nürnberg ein Vorort von Fürth ist hören ;-) Da in Zoomstufe 6 dann nur noch Fürth auftaucht, schätze ich mal, daß von West nach Ost gerendert wird (oder Ost nach West, je nachdem wie der Überdeckungsalgorithmus genau funktioniert). Das aktuelle Rendering halte ich - in diesem für mich nicht sooo wichtigen Thema - hier zwar für einen groben Schnitzer, aber da werden die Renderer auf die Dauer noch besser werden. Als Entwickler wundert mich sowieso, wie gut das überhaupt automatisiert klappt. Wie auch immer, wichtig ist erstmal, daß die Daten stimmen ... Gruß ULFL P.S.: Beim Osmarender fehlt in einigen Zoomstufen Fürth http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.62lon=11.2zoom=8layers=0BFT - irgendeinen Tod stirbt man also immer ;-) ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Potlatch :-) und :-(
Hi, Sven Geggus schrieb: Ich hab schon darüber nachgedacht mir ein script zu bauen, dass beim start automatisch die jeweils neueste Version runterlädt. Das könnte man noch einfacher per Java Web Start [1] erreichen. Eine jnlp-Datei ist flott gebastelt, das jar-File muß nur signiert sein. Gruss florian [1]: http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/javaws/index.html ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-de] Klebeeffekt in JOSM
Hi, seit einiger Zeit hat JOSM das an sich lobenswerte Verhalten, dass ein Objekt beim Verschieben erst mal an seiner alten Stelle kleben bleibt. Erst wenn man's mit der Maus eine bestimmte Anzahl Pixel weit weg gezogen hat, springt es von seinem alten Platz weg und man kann es nun pixelgenau platzieren. Hier meine Frage: Kann man diese bestimmte Anzahl Pixel irgendwo einstellen? -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Johannes Lempp ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Klebeeffekt in JOSM
Hi, Hier meine Frage: Kann man diese bestimmte Anzahl Pixel irgendwo einstellen? .josm/preferences edit.initial-move-threshold=5 Beste Grüße, ce ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Klebeeffekt in JOSM
.josm/preferences edit.initial-move-threshold=5 Perfekt! Besten Dank. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Johannes Lempp ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Fußgänger-Routing (war: Tele Atl as: Navi-Karten für Fußgänger)
Hallo, Naja, es geht nicht um Dich und mich. Es geht um Leute, die fuer das von Dir beschriebene Verfahren zu unsicher sind, die im Zweifel das Strassenschild auf der anderen Seite nicht entziffern koennen und die auf keinen Fall jemals irgendwo durch einen Grasstreifen oder ueber eine Absperrung gehen und nur im aeussersten Notfall eine Strasse an einer nicht dafuer vorgesehenen Stelle ueberqueren. Und die wollen ein Gerät herumtragen, das Ihnen erzählt, was sie tun sollen? Glaube ich nicht. Nein. Aber die lassen sich vielleicht von dem Geschaeft oder der Bahn- oder Busgesellschaft oder wer immer ihnen etwas verkaufen will vorher eine Wegbeschreibung ausdrucken. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33' ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Featured image proposals
Hallo, Auf der Seite Featured image proposals steht ganz oben: Once consensus is reached here... aber ich sehe nicht, wo und wie dieser Konsens erreicht wird. Wo findet denn die Dikussion statt, welches Bild als nächstes die Ehre bekommt? In der Praxis funktioniert es so, dass Du Dir einfach einen freien Slot nimmst und Dein Bild reintust. Hoechstens, wenn es etwas ganz doofes oder absurdes ist, wo viele sagen: Das wollen wir nun wirklich nicht auf der Startseite, wird es vielleicht jemand wieder entfernen. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33' ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-de
