[talk-au] Tagging beach driving info
Hi, Recently I was 4wding with some people and collected some info to add to OSM. I think that the access tracks to the beach and realted campsites should be tagged with: highway=track surface=sand maxspeed=NN tracktype=grade7 4wd_only=yes access=permit How should I tag the maxspeed and permit information on the beach itself? Should I be using highway=track, even though there is no track as such, just the beach sand? I've tagged it like that at http://osm.org/go/ueH4JoA~ for the moment (ignore the track-water alignment for now), but is there a better way of tagging information about driving on the beach? -- James Doc Livingston ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Coastline and beaches
On 8 January 2013 20:32, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au wrote: Assuming that I am reading OSM instructions correct the beach is suppose to only extend to the high water mark so the coastline and beach should have a one to one relationship on the water side. But then I have been wrong before with OSM. I think there is what the wiki says, what the wiki says elsewhere, what is actually done, and what is a good idea :) The coastline page certainly does say that it should extend to the high water mark, and the early coastlines based on PGS data probably had that. Since people started tracing from imagery, I imagine a lot of traced coastline is actually wherever the water was in the imagery rather than the high water mark. If in future we want to map both the low and high water marks, the obvious thing to do would be to use coastline for the low water mark, water=tidal[0] for the middle area, and beach/whatever for everything that's dry. I gave up debating these kind of changes long ago, since people are never going to agree, regardless of the proposal :-\ [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:water%3Dtidal -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
On 24 September 2011 00:10, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote: * Queensland national parks, state forests and conservation areas That dataset was actually done as two imports by two different people. The first was being done by me, from about 18 month to 15 months ago - manually going through the data since it also contained useful things like roads and rivers embedded in the data. I imported about 25-40% of the dataset, before stopping due to the licensing mess going on, because at the time the data wasn't compatible with the CTs and I didn't see any point continuing if the data was just going to be removed. The second import was done a few months ago IIRC, but I can't remember off the top of my head who was doing it. We did have a chat on #osm-au about it. If the dataset is now acceptable as far as re-licensing is concerned, I can go and flip my account from disagreeing with the CTs to agreeing with them, since data.gov.au things (especially the parks data) were the last of the datasets with issues for me :) -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways
On 11/07/2011, at 8:47 PM, John Smith wrote: Then why was there such a big fuss made over Haiti edits should be PD so that the UN could mix the data with other datasets... Because they were mixing the datasets. If you do something like render tiles within the .au boundaries from one database, and render tiles from outside the boundaries from a different dataset, then it's fine. Most useful things you can do with the data can be split up like this, besides producing a combined database. Routing? There aren't any roads between us and other countries, and so on. One of the advantages of being a island :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 6 July 2011 21:29, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: and also people who ticked the CTs who have used CC-BY/CC-BY-SA sources in the past who may want to keep this data and continue using these sources in the future. Indeed. Number 9 on the list is QldProtectedAreashttp://www.openstreetmap.org/user/QldProtectedAreas, which I'd assume is an account created specifically to upload CC-BY data, is marked as having accepted the CTs. So, active Australian OSM contributors, are you staying with the OSM db? If so how are you going to do edits going forward, because any CC-BY-SA derived data you add may be removed if OSM abandons CC-BY-SA at some point in the future (or may even be conflicting with your agreed CTs now...). Are you moving to the fosm db? If so, great! Less problems with trying to merge your data into fosm, and we can all get back to mapping. Do you have any concerns over the switch? Are you going to stop contributing data altogether? Or are you putting you efforts on hold at the moment. I've not been mapping very much recently, mostly waiting to see how the whole things plays out (apart from a few posts here and on legal-talk). -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Active Australian OSM contributors in light of CT/license changes
On 8 July 2011 13:26, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote: The vast majority of people are happy with where we are at From what I've read on ML posts, and from what was reported about the last SotM meeting (I wasn't there), the vast majority of people don't care and would be happy with the status quo, would be happy with CTs+OdBL, and quite a decent fraction would be happy with PD too. I'm not saying that the anti-ODbL group is larger than the pro-ODbL one, but that most people are neutral and will go with whatever happens. and now it's down to people holding out because of a comma in the wrong place or a moral objection to various aspects of intellectual property law. I don't really see how a group of people complaining about things in the CTs or ODbL (some of which are moral objections, some are technical objection) is really that different from a group of people complaining that CC-BY-SA isn't suitable. I think about all we can say is that not everyone agrees, and people also have different opinions on how many people are in each camp. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...
On 06/04/2011, at 7:31 PM, John Smith wrote: ... the License Working Group intends implementing Phase 3 of the license change implementation plan [1]. This involves blocking edits with HTTP Forbidden messages until the individual contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms by logging in manually via browser at http://www.openstreetmap.org. The text of the message will explain the reason. This will happen Real Soon Now, I hope within the next few days. We will give at least 48 hours notice on the main Talk and other mailing lists of the exact date/time. Time to go read the CTs again... You agree to only add Contents for which You are the copyright holder (to the extent the Contents include any copyrightable elements). ... If You are not the copyright holder of the Contents, You represent and warrant that You have explicit permission from the rights holder to submit the Contents and grant the licence below. Right, so I still can't agree because I have uploaded data from third parties (e.g. CC-BY govt data), which I'm not the copyright holder for. Does anyone know if someone ever sort out a way of moving some changesets into new account(s), for different sources? -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OpenStreetMap] OpenStreetMap is changing the licence
On 7 April 2011 09:42, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 09:17 +1000, Michael Hampson wrote: This came through over night. Is it a standard mailer going out to all? I received the same, so presumably yes. More importantly is it a official OSMF or semi-official LWG email, or just some pro-ODbL people spamming everyone? If it's the latter, then I don't think people should be doing that. Imagine the ruckus caused is some of the anti-ODbL people started spamming those that had accepted saying they should change their choice to Decline. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [Tagging] tagging world heritage (UNESCO) and other protected areas/features
On 12/01/2011, at 2:48 AM, John Smith wrote: Martin, for your information there was a bit of work done on this sort of thing in the past for Aussie parks covered by this, based on data from http://data.australia.gov.au I think. I uploaded the dataset I think you're referring to, after discussing tagging on talk-au. From: M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 3. The most universal feature is IMHO this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area allowing for cultural, natural and other protection types. A problem might arise if a feature is at the same time protected for different reasons. That sort of what I used, though it's changed a bit since then. There's also problem of marking it boundary=protected_area and boundary=national_park at the same time. Some examples: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/46152942 (Fraser Island) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/361693 (Gondwana Rainforests) At the time I don't think I knew about protect_id, but I used that later on National Parks. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Bridges in the ACT
On 15/08/2010, at 1:28 AM, John Smith wrote: On 14 August 2010 18:19, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: This sounds right to me. But if you propose bridge:ref=* then you should probably also use bridge:name=* rather than the already proposed bridge_name=*. I still think it should be just name=*, after all what's the point of the road name being rendered when you expect the bridge name to be? The big problem is that you can't tell what the name=* refers to, and what if the road and bridge name are both important? The unambiguous way to do it is to use a bridge relation - you put the name/ref on the relation, have the road, cycleway, footway on the bridge be a member with a 'across' roles, and the river or other road be a member with the 'under' role. Which also lets you say that the road and cycleway are part of the same bridge, not two separate ones. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Bridges_and_Tunnels ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...
On 30/07/2010, at 3:54 PM, John Smith wrote: I've cc'd Grant on this email, he posted to the #osm-au IRC channel about some proposed changes to the CTs, which I was hoping would have come up in another thread by now: LWG is considering: 3. OSMF agrees to use or sub-license Your Contents as part of a database and only under the terms of one of the following licenses: the Open Database Licence for the database and Database Contents Licence for the individual contents of the database; or the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Licence (version 2.0 or later) I assume that giving the ODbL without a version number there means that it can be released under any version (upgrading to a later ODbL release is AIUI one of main reasons for the CTs). Then it doesn't help at all - what if ODbL 1.1 says that you can freely relicense to CC-Zero? And if you think that can't happen, go look at the GNU Free Documentation Licence 1.3 and Wikipedia. That kind of legal hijinks is the only reason Wikipedia can be under a CC licence now. Not even getting into the argument about who is allowed to define what a later version of the ODbL is. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Over taking sections on highways
On 26/07/2010, at 7:12 PM, John Smith wrote: How do people tag over taking sections on highways where there is no physical separation between oncoming traffic? I've never tagged them before, but there is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:overtaking for marking where overtaking is legal. A fairly obvious extension to that would be overtaking=lane/lane_opposite/lane_both, similar to what cycleway=* uses. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Over taking sections on highways
On 26/07/2010, at 9:05 PM, John Smith wrote: On 26 July 2010 20:56, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: On 26/07/2010, at 7:12 PM, John Smith wrote: I've never tagged them before, but there is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:overtaking for marking where overtaking is legal. A fairly obvious extension to that would be overtaking=lane/lane_opposite/lane_both, similar to what cycleway=* uses. Not exactly what I'm after, that just indicates if you are allowed to overtake (access tagging) where as I'm thinking about a section of (usually) highway that periodically allows over taking without crossing into the lane(s) with oncoming traffics. http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-25.644979,152.637286z=19t=knmd=20100713 I know what an overtaking lane is :) I meant you could tag that as overtaking=lane to indicate there is an overtaking lane, equivalent to how you'd tag it cycleway=lane to indicate there is a cycle lane along side. Either that or tag it as lanes=3 and somehow indicate which direction the extra lane is in. As far as I recall, the rules for an overtaking lane aren't any different to the right hand lanes of a two-each-way road when it's over 80km/hr, they're just signposted so you know when they are coming up. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 12/07/2010, at 9:06 PM, Markus wrote: Also I have noticed in potlatch the coastline seems to render better also when having the coastline separate as it will draw the coatline even if the park goes over it. Yep, sounds like a good plan. I think this can happen a bit because natural=coastline is high-tide, and some of the NPs extends to the low-tide level. On 12/07/2010, at 9:21 PM, Markus wrote: If there are rivers or lakes that are marked as coastline inside the parks you need to close the mouth and convert to a river, lake or river bank to render as water. Yep, I'll keep that in mind - although the river versus coastline thing is always a fun debate :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...
On 10/07/2010, at 9:18 AM, John Smith wrote: however due to the absence of requiring such a free license to be cc-by compatible (require some form of attribution) this then means any cc-by data would now have to be expunged from the system. Only if the copyright holder hasn't agreed to the CTs. If you are importing any data into OSM, you either 1) have to be the copyright holder and agree to the CTs, gotten the copyright holder's permission to agree to the CTs on behalf of them, or 3) somehow gotten an exemption from having to agree to the CTs. I'm still trying to find out how you do (3). If you have imported data you got from someone else (other than public domain), you can't legally agree to the CTs. Since I've imported some data into OSM under my main account, I can't strictly click I Agree on that account unless the changesets are moved to a different account. Currently we have a fair bit of cc-by data in the system, things like ABS boundaries and in turn any data derived from such data, but so far there is only assumptions on how much data is this exactly, especially in Europe where the assumption is the majority of data has been relicensed or is clean to begin with, The big one in Europe is AND. Presumably they are going to get an exemption to the CTs, because they're definitely not going to agree to them for the same reason our governments aren't. while this wouldn't be completely devastating, we're not just talking ABS data, there is a lot more to it like points of interest and national parks and other such things. More important than losing data we wouldn't otherwise have, if losing data that has replaced older stuff. Various people have gone around replacing the old PGS coastline with ABS-derived coastline - someone is going to have to go and re-import the PGS stuff if we lose CC-BY data. I know I've replaced a bunch of Yahoo-imagery derived data with stuff based on CC-BY data. Although I'm not sure what the point is of moving to another attribution/share-a-like license, if the TCs undermine this, unless of course the intent is to eventually force everyone to go to PD long term, but doing it on the sly hoping no one notices where things are headed. If OSM does go ODbL, I'm tempted to propose PD re-licensing sometime after it settled down a bit (but not too settled) just to stir things up. From memory, someone has quoted 70% of people at SotM the other year as being happy to have their work PD - we only need a vote of OSMF (presumably 50% majority) and two thirds of active mappers. I'm sure that would go down *really* well, regardless of the outcome. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] cc-by not compatible with ODBL ?
On 08/07/2010, at 5:16 PM, Neil Penman wrote: I have found numerous cases where towns have two police stations marked. One in the correct spot, added by a mapper, and one in some other arbitrary place added by a bulk upload. I'm not totally against this, but ultimately its community contribution that distinguishes OSM from other maps. I agree, which is why when I'm about to start importing the QLD parks data I'm doing it manually and not just throwing the whole dataset at the API. I'll merge the data with anything that already exists in OSM, if a park covers a whole small island, I'll replace the existing coastline if it's better (which it is for PGS and the like, not for other coastline sources). If a parks is named Lake X conservation park and there's a lake in the middle, I'll name the lake. With the police stations, which was there first? If the manual one was, the uploader should have checked whether there was any existing ones with some distance (for a police station, this could be a reasonable distance) and thought about whether it was the same one or not. I don't think importing datasets are a problem (licensing aside), but bulk imports are different. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] cc-by not compatible with ODBL ?
On 08/07/2010, at 7:13 AM, Liz wrote: I don't think that they are compatible. My experience of law is small and it is an opinion only. I thought (and hoped) that the attribution requirements of ODbL would satisfy the requirements of CC-BY, but I'm not a lawyer. Certainly we would have to negotiate with federal and state governments to be sure that the imported stuff (coastline, boundaries, national parks etc) could stay. Which brings up the Contributor Terms. Even if it is compatible, we need to either get them to agree to the CTs (very unlikely) or get an exemption from requiring that. I asked on legal-talk a while ago about who gets those exemptions and how, but got no answer - I'll post again in a few minutes. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM, eat your heart out... :)
On 9 July 2010 10:38, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote: It'd be better like this: http://hello.eboy.com/eboy/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/FTN_CommunicationCity_06t.png So http://opengeodata.org/isometric-osm-maps?c=1 then? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 30/06/2010, at 7:48 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: Is it worth using an additional classification:qld=national_park|conservation_park|state_forest, etc. (or similar), just to make things extra clear? That is, when you use a rule like Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area, I think it would be nice to also record that they are a conservation_park. On 30/06/2010, at 11:55 AM, Stephen Hope wrote: Are you actually going to put the fact that it is a State forest anywhere? Sure, landuse=forest is not a problem, but some sort of tag stating that it is a state forest (as opposed to private land) sounds appropriate. boundary=state_forest, and similar? They all have it in the name as well, although that's obviously not ideal if you actually want to render them differently. I've put a small (~110kb) .osm file up at http://www.sunsetutopia.com/qld_parks_ready.osm.bz2 which contains the results of tagging and merging together the park sections (where they're split in the original data). Magnetic Island is the most complicated one I've done so far. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 28/06/2010, at 11:10 PM, Markus wrote: Sound good to me to leave the GLR number and Ecolink if you put it with a standard osm key. Here's what I've currently got, any more comments? 1) National park get boundary=national_park and leisure=nature_reserve. Should any of the standard, Recovery, Scientific, or Aboriginal NPs or Resource Reserves get marked differently (e.g. nationak_park=scientific)? Reading the QLD Nature Conservation Act '92, I don't think they make a general difference for what we use, but some of them may be more restricted due to regeneration for recovery. 2) Conservation Parks get boundary=protected_area and leisure=nature_reserve. 3) State Forests get landuse=forest. Any leisure activities (e.g camping) get marked as their own thing, like tourism=camp_site, which isn't in this dataset 4) Forest Reserves and Timber Reserve (which are often adjacent to or in State Forests) get landuse=forest as well, I can't see any useful additional tags. 4) If there is a CREEK or ROAD polygon through an park, I'll add a waterway=river/highway=road way and merge that polygon into the surrounding park. I don't think we need the actual road-reserve polygons do we? 5) Everything that has a IUCN code gets that put as protect_id=1-6. 6) Do we want the EcoLink/GLR number data? I think it's just a identifier that the govt department uses, so it's only real use would be to help if we want to do process updates - however it may be easier just to diff the old and new data and do it manually, this stuff shouldn't change to fast. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
On 28/06/2010, at 8:16 PM, Markus wrote: Forests Landuse=forest National Parks boundary=national_park leisure=nature_reserve Sounds good. Protected Areas boundary=protected_area protect_id= Ah, the original data had IUCN codes, so I can put these back in as protect_id 1-6. I would also remove the non standard key names like derm.qld.gov.au:GLR_NUMBER and FEAT_NAME FEAT_NAME definitely won't go into OSM - however it's useful for me because it contains the road name for some of the ROAD polygons :) Should I leave the Ecolink and/or GLR Number tags in as a reference which identifies the area, so we can match with any future updates? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Queensland parks, forests and conservation areas
Hi all, I've been looking at http://data.australia.gov.au/127, which contains all the national parks, state forest, conservation areas and so on in Queensland. If no-one else had been doing anything with this, I'd been thinking about adding it to OSM. Current practice seems to be tagging them all as boundary=national_park, regardless of whether they're National Parks or other things like State Forests. Would adding national_park=state_forest and similar to the tags be a good idea? There's also a bunch of things like resource reserves and timber reserves inside the parks, any good suggestions about how to tag those? This would obviously be a manual piece-by-piece upload, since it would need merging with existing data there's interesting things like river/road names we can pull out (because it has the road reserves marked). A converted file with most of the attributes cleaned up is at http://www.sunsetutopia.com/qld_parks.osm.bz2 if anyone wants to look, but it still needs a lot of merging of polygons and the like -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Hikers on this list?
On 17/06/2010, at 1:49 PM, Roy Wallace wrote: Try Australian Standard AS 2156.1-2001 (Walking tracks - Classification and signage) http://infostore.saiglobal.com/store2/Details.aspx?ProductID=260163 (not free, but try e.g. the following page for some details: http://hikingbackpacking.suite101.com/article.cfm/australian_bushwalking_track_classifications) The AS2156 class is useful information, and tagging it would be good if we know it, but it's not exactly a difficulty rating. I haven't actually read the standard, but I believe it has to do with track construction and maintenance. For example a Class 2 track has to be a certain minimum width, have certain signage, be a certain smoothness, have people clear off any debris so often and the like. Obviously higher classes tend to be more difficult, but it's not directly related. In particular, anything of class 4 and above can vary a lot. There are tracks which probably aren't rated but if they were would be Class 6 that I'd be happy to go on for an afternoon walk by myself, and there are Class 4 tracks that I would never consider going on without preparation and other people. I was fixing some of the tracks in the Noosa Headlands park recently, and have a photo of the map board showing their classes. Does anyone have tagging suggestions? I'm thinking something like track:as2156=* or class:as2156=* or something would be good. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] tagging giveway signs
On 11/06/2010, at 12:13 PM, John Smith wrote: On 11 June 2010 11:45, Simon Biber simonbi...@yahoo.com.au wrote: My personal preference would have been to use give_way, since it follows the tradition of using British English as the source of tag names, but the majority of mappers so far have chosen yield. I've already shifted giveway to give_way and wrote a wiki page, since there was none for yield and and doesn't help when I did a search of yield in xapi I came up with nothing because I switched the i and e around... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dgive_way I wouldn't consider ~100 sign indicative of much, other than a lacking of presets, I could easily bump highway=give_way up by marking every intersection in the suburb, which is why I brought this thread up in the first place... :) Ah, this old chestnut - it's been debated a few times before on talk (or maybe later tagging) list. There are several methods people use, which are mostly non-conflicting. Below is a hopefully non-biased summary of the options, then a completely biased argument from me: 1) The original, highway=stop (and =giveway/give_way/yield) on an intersection node. The big problem is that you can't say who has to stop, so it can only really represent all-way-stop situations. 2) highway=stop (and give_way) on nodes just back from the intersection (usually level with the sign or road markings), applies at the closest intersecting way[0]. Solves the main problem of (1), but you can no longer tell what affects a way just by looking at the way and it's nodes. 3) stop=w,e;give_way=ne and similar on the intersection node. Solves problem of (1) unless the roads join close to parallel and you can use nne if necessary. Requires heuristic guesses about what roads it applies to (easily done, some people object on principle). Some inconistency in current use about whether you use ns or n;s, so you can't tell without looking at the way locations whether ne is one road or two. 4) A stop=start/end/both tag on the way. Simple, but break horrible if someone splits the way into two without fixing it. 5) A 'stop' relation which contains the roads that have to stop and the intersection node(s). Can represent extra information such as stop if the traffic lights are out or that it only applies in certain hours, but no-one uses this at present. Arguably an unnecessary relation depending on how you feel about relations 6) A 'traffic_control' relation which is the generalisation of (5), same arguments apply. No more complex than (5) but can represent stop, give way, and other things in a single relation. 7) stop=all or stop=yes on the intersection node And there may be others. Statistics (from XAPI at 8:30 this morning) and links: (1) and (2) 13559 uses, a quick random sample of 30 has most of them being (1), even though some of them aren't all-way-stopswhen yu look at Google Street View :( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dstop (3) 122 uses of stop=*, 0 of give_way=*, not documented AFAIK (4) 768 uses, a mix of stop=yes/both/all/-1, most applying to multiple intersections http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dstop (5) 457 relations for 523 ways http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Relation:type%3Dstop (6) 197 relations for 228 ways http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Relation:type%3Dtraffic_control (7) 19 uses. plus 6 stop=both in four-way intersection nodes, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dstop (1) is easily the most popular (it's been around the longest) but it can't accurately represent a lot of things, and people use it incorrectly. If someone wants to know how many (2)s there are, they can go script up a check whether the highway=stop nodes are on intersecting ways or not. I think everyone agrees (1) isn't good enough, as it can't handle the simple case of one road having to give way to another, and that (6) is obviously better than (5) because it handles more with no additional complexity. The remaining choices depends on what your opinion on relations is, and whether you view these as separate traffic must stop POIs or a single traffic control at the intersection thing. Personally, I think that this is an okay use of relations and tend to see it as a single traffic control at the intersection thing. So wrote the wiki page for (6) after chatting with a few people on IRC a while back and use that. I know John and others favour (2) and there are people who use all the others too. [0] Some debate about whether this means the closest intersecting way, closest intersecting highway=* way or closest intersecting road-type highway=*. If a footpath/cycleway crosses the road, traffic has to give way to them as well as to the vehicular traffic, so can require some heuristic guesses, but it shouldn't be that much of a problem in practice. -- James ___
Re: [talk-au] The nearmap effect
On 09/06/2010, at 1:20 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: Err, and just now I notice that when you press b in Potlatch, instead of creating source=nearmap, it creates a tag like http://www.nearmap.com/kh/zxy=!,!,!;. Wonder when this change happened, and is that a bug? It sure looks like it... Did you select Nearmap from the background-image setting, or use Edit on the Nearmap site? The former will get you source=nearmap as it's a potlatch setting, the latter the url because that's what passed in when launching Potlatch. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] repurcussions of IceTV decision
On 11/02/2010, at 5:33 AM, Liz wrote: Haven't got far through the judgement so far but this sounds quite clear. 7. The Copyright Act does not protect facts, ideas or information contained in a work, to ensure a balance is struck between the interests of authors and those in society: IceTV [2009] HCA 14; 254 ALR 386 at [28] and the cases cited therein. The Copyright Act does not provide protection for skill and labour alone: IceTV [2009] HCA 14; 254 ALR 386 at [49], [52], [54] and [131]. and 8. The Copyright Act protects the particular form of expression of the information: (but not if it is computer generated, it must have an author) The other thing to remember is that in Australia, a database can have inherent copyright rights independent of the copyright rights of the contents. That is in the same way as EU database rights are independent of the copyright right of the contents, but our database copyright stuff is nothing like the EU database rights in how it works. My non-lawyerly understanding of the IceTV case was that most of the argument was around whether the they used a substantial portion of the database (e.g. structure) not the facts themselves. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Boat ramp
On 21/01/2010, at 9:35 AM, Steve Bennett wrote: I would suggest tagging the way leisure=slipway. If you need to break the current specification to do so, then make a note on the wiki page. Tagging it highway=service seems wrong. Service roads do not go underwater... The tagging system is supposed to be flexible and updated to reflect changing requirements, after all. I've tagged about five or six boat ramps about the place, and it wasn't until I read these emails that I even considered putting it on just the a single node. I found the wiki page a while back and started applying it to ways, without realising it said otherwise. Ah consistency. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] access=destination
On 15/01/2010, at 8:45 PM, Liz wrote: so perhaps the signs are actually meaningless in law they appear in council minutes so perhaps its a local council job From my searching, it looks like councils are responsible for putting up these signs and I couldn't find any actual legal definition of what they mean too. I did find a couple of reports of requests by residents to get them applies to their streets, and those weren't about noise. They were about kids playing on the street and almost getting hit by vehicles, both cars and bicycles. On access=private, I'd say that foot traffic shouldn't route through there without foot=*. My understanding of private is that it means no access unless you have explicit permission from the owner, so you shouldn't walk there. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Haitian Earthquake Emphasizes Danger of a Split Geo Community
On 16/01/2010, at 9:32 AM, John Smith wrote: This seems like a spurious argument, ok your suggestion will allow both projects to profit from your data, but any additions can't be shared back with your suggested project, nor will Google share any of it's data back, unless it's in Google's own best interest, any data Google releases won't allow commercial use, so you still wouldn't be able to incorporate it. So Google gets free labour, and you get nothing in return... sounds win-loose to me. If getting something in return is what you want from it, then yes. On the other hand if you just want people to be able to use your data, then it's fine. People have mentioned this many times before but front page of the OSM wiki says The project was started because most maps you think of as free actually have legal or technical restrictions on their use, holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected ways. Share-alike provisions form a legal restriction on what you can use it for, holding you back from combining the data with other datasets under an incompatible licence. It's all a matter of tradeoffs and what is most important to you - being able to use it for whatever you want, or getting the most data in OSM. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Default access restrictions
On 07/01/2010, at 5:25 PM, John Smith wrote: 2010/1/7 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com: I usually interpret designated as signed, which is an attractive interpretation because it's verifiable. To avoid confusion perhaps it should have been bicycle=signed? :) Then we would have confusion around whether a picture on the ground counts as a sign or not :) My dictionary says that designated (in this sense) means denoted, marked or pointed out, which I'd say a sign or marking on the ground does. I seem to recall tagging list arguing about what designated means quite a few times already. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
On 04/01/2010, at 9:57 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: . Ok, there are a few issues. First, natural= just describes what's on the land, like trees or not, so isn't useful. The right tag would be something like landuse=reserve, although this appears to be still under debate: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Nature_reserve I've been using boundary=national_park[0] for these, even if they're not strictly National Parks (e.g. state reserves, forest reserves, etc). I would be less interested in tagging who manages it, and more interested in tagging the legislation that appears to it. Afaik, national park has a specific legal meaning, even if all Victiorion NPs are managed by Parks Victoria etc. My understanding is that National Parks fall under commonwealth legislation and the others under various pieces of state legislation. Coming up with a consistent tagging is going to be all sorts of fun due to the differences between places. Tasmania for example has 7 different types of reserve[1] plus all the other parks and marine areas, and Victoria has 14 in total[2]. Maybe something like park=au.tas:game_reserve? So far I've been tagging them fairly indiscriminately as leisure=park, but giving them the full title in their name, on the basis that it will be fairly easy to mass update them once we work out an appropriate tagging scheme. [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dnational_park [1] http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx?base=5710 [2] http://www.parkweb.vic.gov.au/1parks.cfm ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relations, road names and numbers
On 04/01/2010, at 5:19 PM, Mark Pulley wrote: The question is, should we move highway= onto the relation for all relations? There's probably a fix for Mapnik to save editing every relation we've done, so I've added a ticket to OSM. http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2599 I wouldn't generally add highway=* to the relation for the simple reason that it has to work without it there - there are many routes which consist of various roads of different classifications, so you can't have a single value for the highway tag. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Sports Clubs
On 14/12/2009, at 6:41 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: I think my central argument is this: Your sports_club venue could be - a sports facility with no eating/drinking/gambling facilities for the public - an eating/drinking/gambling venue for the public with no sports facilities - or both. This looks like a case for two distinct tags. I'm sure that there was a tag for the first, although I can't find it now. Something like leisure=club_rooms or similar, which related to a sporting group but wasn't necessarily where the sports themselves were played, which would be leisure=sports_centre/pitch. Possibly I just made it up when I tagged some. The lines are a bit messy, but my understanding is that basically: * if you can only get drinks with a meal, it's amenity=restaurant * if you can't get a meal (only snacks) it's amenity=bar * if you can get either without the other it's amenity=pub These locations sounds like a pub to me, and the bigger ones could have other amenity=bar and amenity=restaurant inside them if needed. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Sports Clubs
On 14/12/2009, at 6:58 PM, Stephen Hope wrote: The reason I thought they may be a QLD thing is the state Government here licences them a bit differently from your average pub (or used to, I haven't checked lately). Thus the (official) members only rules, connection to a sport club, etc. It's the same in NSW, the ACT and probably elsewhere. access=members? (and guests, and foreigners if you like more than X km away, outside the ACT, etc). One reason I was wondering about if they have a different tag, is because they have a different vibe to your average restaurant / pub. young_people_getting_stupidly_drunk=no? ;) I agree that they're not really the same as a normal pub, but I don't know how'd you'd really describe the difference other than the tenuous connection to some club and officially members only thing. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Sports Clubs
On 14/12/2009, at 7:10 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:03 PM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote: I'm sure that there was a tag for the first, although I can't find it now. Something like leisure=club_rooms or similar, which related to a sporting group but wasn't necessarily where the sports themselves were played, which would be leisure=sports_centre/pitch. Possibly I just made it up when I tagged some. I like the sound of club_rooms. Or I was going to propose club_house, but yours is better. I'm not fussed on the wording, but I think something for clubs would be good. You could probably use it for things like scout halls and so on too, if there isn't a tag for that already. It would also be nice to have club= for the whole ground including any pitches. So a bowling club might have club=yes, sport=bowls, name=Fobar Bowls club, on the whole area. Then, leisure=pitch, sport=bowls on the bowling green. Then amenity=club_rooms for the building with restaurants etc inside. There is a site relation which might work here, maybe something like relation: type=site, name=Foobar Bowls Club way: leisure=pitch; sport=bowls way: amenity=club_rooms; building=yes The lines are a bit messy, but my understanding is that basically: * if you can only get drinks with a meal, it's amenity=restaurant * if you can't get a meal (only snacks) it's amenity=bar * if you can get either without the other it's amenity=pub Oh, interesting. I had thought the pub/bar distinction was just the usual fuzzy one: bars are more upmarket. Officially it probably is fuzzy, but someone described that distinction to me once (on #osm I think) and it seemed to make sense to me. Of course you get the places which are a restaurant during the day and some nights, and become a bar on Friday/Saturday night, but it mostly works. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Why PD is not better for business
On 11/12/2009, at 8:02 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: so we don't need imported data? In most cases we don't need imported data, but it can be useful. For example rather than painstakingly crafting the entire coastline of Australia from a few GPS traces and a lot of imagery (much is relatively inaccessible), we can import it from someone's dataset and spend that large amount of time doing other things to improve OSM that we can't import data for. There are also some things where importing external datasets is the *only* way to get it into OSM. For example boundaries of areas that have no physical edge, just a (not necessarily straight) line on someone decided on at some point in time. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] [OSM-talk] And the prize for the largest closed way goes to...
On 10/12/2009, at 6:57 PM, Liz wrote: On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote: ... the excellent Philippines mapping team who managed to create one single closed way enclosing an area of roughly 300 thousand square kilometres! http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=32126765 The runner-up is a place in Sarah Palin Land, http://www.openstreetmap.org/?way=24312786 with 80 thousand sq km. Bye Frederik Geez we don't even rate a mention bad showing there The problem is that a lot of our big stuff is broken up into multiple ways due to being too accurate and so having 2000 nodes. The largest thing I can think of with not too complicated edges is the Woomera Prohibited Area, somewhere around 13km iirc. I wonder if it renders military area pink at zoom 0, since it'd be big enough to see... I don't know obviously, but I'd guess that the Philippine maritime area has more than 100 corners in reality. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australia BP service station dataset - suitable for bulk import?
On Wednesday, December 09, 2009, at 03:25PM, Chris Barham cbar...@pobox.com wrote: BP allows free download of GPS data for their Australian service stations. Has anyone asked any of the other companies yet? If not, I'll send some emails about: http://apps.nowwhere.com.au/caltex/austlocator/search.aspx http://www.shell.com.au/home/content/aus/products_services/on_the_road/shell_station_locator/site_locator.html http://apps.exxonmobil.com.au/apps/htm/mn_mobil_products_stations.asp ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Implications of license change on use of Australian data sources (e.g. nearmap)
On 09/12/2009, at 6:38 PM, Roy Wallace wrote: If you derive information from observing our PhotoMaps, and include that information in a work, you will own that work, and may distribute it to others under a Creative Commons licence. Does that not imply that the derived information may only be distributed to others under a Creative Commons licence? Maybe I'm reading this incorrectly? As mentioned by others, the obvious thing to do is ask the NearMap guys (I've explicitly CC'd Alex, in case he isn't reading the list) what they meant - that's more important than what they actually wrote, since we'd obviously want to be nice to them. But just going off what is written there, if the person tracing owns it (in the copyright holder sense), then they can license it however they want. In that case, a CC license is just an option (and it says may not may only or must). With respect to ODbL, I think import CC-BY data into an ODbL database is fine - we'd fulfil the attribution requirement (CC-BY-SA wouldn't be, on the other hand). The problem if OSM goes ahead with the re-license would be the contributor terms, that means you can't import CC-BY data without the copyright holders approval. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australia BP service station dataset - suitable for bulk import?
On 09/12/2009, at 8:26 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: Can we really maintain this? These services come and go fairly frequently. Individual things like whether they have LPG filling for bbqs maybe, but servos don't move that often (usually taken over by another one). In any case, it's probably not going to get out of date any worse than restaurant names/cuisines or a lot of other things. If the BP data has IDs for servos, just put that into OSM too, and match it up if/when they release updated data. Also, if you're doing a bulk import, how do you avoid double tagging existing servos? I'd suggest doing something like import if there is not an existing amenity=fuel within X distance, flag it for manual checking if there is. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australia BP service station dataset - suitable for bulk import?
On 09/12/2009, at 8:41 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:37 PM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote: I'd suggest doing something like import if there is not an existing amenity=fuel within X distance, flag it for manual checking if there is. Ah, didn't know that kind of thing was possible, cool. It's probably not in any of the editor, like JOSM, but if someone was going to write a small script that converts the data it wouldn't be hard to make it check a planet extract (or the main db) as well. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Can't see the facts for the FUD
On 07/12/2009, at 7:29 PM, John Smith wrote: 2009/12/7 Liz ed...@billiau.net: James has been pointing out that the Feds, who can afford good lawyers, find CC-by-Sa and CC-by as quite satisfactory in Australia. As far as I can gather CC-BY-SA most likely won't work in the US, so I can only guess that this whole issue is to fix the US problem and a potential issue with streaming data that has only been shown in theory and not in any court. The US isn't the only place without copyright on data. Indeed Australia doesn't have that, it's just we have copyright on databases of non-copyrightable stuff (which isn't at all the same as EU database rights). Most of what I was trying to point out was that 1) CC-BY-SA isn't broken everywhere, and 2) the High Court's IceTV decision (as I understand it) overturns a lot less of Desktop Marketing than most people think. The HC didn't rule on whether factual data is copyrightable, in fact it explicitly said it wasn't ruling on that due to IceTV's lawyers inadvertently telling the court that the TV guide was copyrightable, so precluding the court from having to decide that. What it ruled on was the definition of substantial in reference to the copyright of a database. I understand that CC-BY-SA doesn't work for databases of factual data in some jurisdictions (e.g. the US), it's just that I'm not too sure about the ODbL, and think the contributor terms will prevent us from using data that gets released under ODbL, or the stuff our government is now releasing under CC-BY(-SA). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Database licence
On 05/12/2009, at 10:29 PM, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir wrote: Certainly we should make this case clear to the OSM community. Database protection always seemed to be a euro-centric ideal and not one that the new licence analysis seemed to respond to adequately. However, I believe that the ODbL constitutes both a licence and a contract (especially in jurisdictions where copyright protection is insufficient). So while you might not have a claim for copyright infringement in protecting OSM data, you would still be able to assert a breach of contract under one of the clauses such as the obligation to Share Alike. Databases in Australia actually have more protection than in somewhere like the US, because they have their own inherent copyright. But that protection is *very* different to what EU database rights are, particularly in light of the High Courts ruling on what is substantial. The biggest problem is that no-one knows exactly how it works any more, and how much of Desktop Marketing was reversed - lawyers are divided and we won't know until we get more court rulings based on the fall-out. Oh dear. I thought it was going to be an active contributor vote (you had to have X edits in the last Y months) but looking at the threads on osmf-talk it looks like that disappeared. No, the vote whether to re-license is only for OSMF members. Future re-licensing done under the powers granted by the proposed contributor terms will require a vote of OSMF members and a vote of active contributors. Non-members do have some say though, you can refuse to agree to the re-licensing and contributor terms - if enough people reject them or can't be contacted, then I believe that the OSMF board might consider keeping CC in use, but that would require a fairly large amount of people to do so. As I understand if you reject the ODbL+terms, then any way/POII/whatever you have ever touched will be removed or reverted to the oldest non-acceptor's edit. I have no idea how they're planning on tracing the history through way merges and splits, but apparently that's how it's going to work. Unless we get close to 100% acceptance (which isn't likely, or maybe even possible) then it's going to severely screw up the data. The biggest problem I see is not with the ODbL itself (although I have reservations about it, particularly around the use of contract law), but the contributor terms. Currently: * We can import data licensed CC-BY or CC-BY-SA, for example most/all of data.australia.gov.au stuff * We may not be able to use data from derived databases, because (arguably) CC-BY-SA isn't enforceable With ODbL+contributor terms: * We won't be able to import CC-BY(-SA) data unless the copyright holder agrees to the terms letting us relicense it without their approval * We may not be able to use data from derived databases, because even though people have to release it, they don't have to agree to the terms. I fail to see how there is any benefit from moving to ODbL, and so will be voting against it too. My 2c. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Database licence
On 05/12/2009, at 11:30 PM, Grant Slater wrote: For clarity... the OSM Foundation is not some evil group... The OSMF is open, anyone from the community can join. The OSMF Board is democratically elected from the OSMF membership. If anyone who isn't a OSMF member wants to read the discussion, it's available in the archives, with two posts at the end of November and everything so far this month: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/ As expected, there is a fair amount of disagreement on whether the ODbL is good, whether the contributor terms are good, whether pro-ODbL people are trying to push it though before things have been sorted out, and whether anti-ODbL people are full of stop-energy and just like to complain. Some of the reasons why we which to move away from CC BY-SA: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Why_CC_BY-SA_is_Unsuitable For reference, the two links that are going to be sent to us, which anyone can edit, are: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Why_You_Should_Vote_Yes http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Why_You_Should_Vote_No ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] natural=land v natural=coastline
On 06/10/2009, at 2:12 PM, John Smith wrote: Lake Eyre etc is so big they used natural=coastline... Although this comes back to the question the other day, where does the coastline start/end, legally speaking it cuts across bays, it doesn't go round them or up rivers... I looked into this a while back and it's somewhat contentious. The best I could figure out (which is quite possibly wrong) is that a coastline ends and a river starts when there are no longer any tidal significant effects. It's easiest to see if you have a slope, such as a sandy beach. Consider the following, where at some point the high and low tide levels get close enough to be negligable 1 sand 2 high tide ---\ 3 sand / water -- 6 4 low tide --- / 5 water (1) is a polygon with natural=beach;surface=sand (2) is the way with natural=coastline (3) is a polygon with water=tidal;surface=sand (6) is waterway=riverbank At the point where it changes from coastline to riverbank, you obviously need to have the coastline run across the river, so as to form closed shape. Whether you're supposed to have the riverbank do the same to form a closed shape, I don't know. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Why not to change coastlines automatically to ABS data.
On 05/10/2009, at 3:59 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: So PLEASE look at the sat photos and already entered data before you go removing the coastline and using the ABS data automatically as the coastline. As a +1 comment, I'd also like to note that in many places the ABS follow the sand-grass/tree/dirt line, rather than the high-tide line that natural=coastline is supposed to represent. If there is a place where the ABS data is a consistently a bit inland of the PGS data for a stretch, check if it's a beach. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] natural=land v natural=coastline
On 06/10/2009, at 11:37 PM, Jim Croft wrote: Of course, this won't work for mariners and lawyers... :) No, but there are (proposed) tags to indicate the low-tide mark, and the OpenSeaMap guys might have something for other various maritime boundaries. My favourite estuary is the Fly River in PNG. It just gets gradually wider and wider and wider. Somewhere the river becomes the ocean. And there is no way to tell where it happens... Yep, the problem with saying where the tidal effect are no longer significant or where fresh and sea water meet is that they're continuous, so you need some arbitrary limit. I'd say the only definite boundary would be to take the convex hull of the land mass. Of course, that means the Great Australian Bight would be a river, along with the Gulf of Carpentaria and the similar places and the like. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On 03/10/2009, at 5:21 PM, Evan Sebire wrote: If someone knows a bbq that is clearly visible on the satellite imagery that would help to verify the procedure. There are two at http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=17ll=-35.293,149.093layer=BTT I think I did those from waypoints, but possibly I'm thinking of somewhere else and they were from imagery. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On 02/10/2009, at 8:33 PM, James Livingston wrote: I converted the World Heritage Area file on my machine, and just uploaded one of the areas[1]. Does it look okay to people? If so, I'll go ahead and do the rest of the WHA data. Right, so it turns out that my randomly chosen one was a complete fluke - in most cases the World Heritage Areas and the National Parks don't have the same boundaries. There is however a proposed tagging scheme for UNESCO World Heritage areas/places, which will obviously be useful. So for tagging, how about something like the following, with follow-up work to check if the other WHAs are National Park boundaries too. name=Purnululu National Park (World Heritage Area) source=environment.gov.au boundary=national_park unesco_world_heritage=yes whc:id=1094 whc:inscription_date=2003 whc:criteria=7;8 environment.gov.au:PLACE_ID=105128 and name=Heard and McDonald Islands World Heritage Area source=environment.gov.au unesco_world_heritage=yes whc:id=557 whc:inscription_date=1997 whc:criteria=8;9 environment.gov.au:PLACE_ID=105142 [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/unesco_world_heritage ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On 30/09/2009, at 10:25 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: I really like to see the vegetation cover and the forest!! What are they? Shapefiles? If they are shapefiles, they come with their own projection files and therefore can be easily converted into another coordinate using ST_Transform inside Postgis. At least some of them can be converted with shp2osm[0]. I converted the World Heritage Area file on my machine, and just uploaded one of the areas[1]. Does it look okay to people? If so, I'll go ahead and do the rest of the WHA data. I also added a note to the new data.australia.gov.au wiki page[2] that Hugh created. [0] http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/utils/import/shp2osm/shp2osm.pl [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2709838 [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Data.australia.gov.au_projects ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On 02/10/2009, at 8:42 PM, John Smith wrote: 2009/10/2 James Livingston doc...@mac.com: With the current tags you've used it probably won't render, since it's a national park you're going to get into the whole is it natural=wood, or landuse=forest type debate, I think both get rendered as a green shaded area... The Maria Island NP (http://osm.org/go/uIcw8R7-) seems to render with a boundary=national_park multipolygon. Assuming that it doesn't need to be on a multipolygon relation if it can be done as a closed way, I would imagine it should work. Google's satellite imagery would suggest that that NP had a dearth of trees, so natural=wood or natural=forest wouldn't really be appropriate. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On 02/10/2009, at 8:50 PM, Emilie Laffray wrote: Regarding tags, when we worked on the Corine import in France, we set up a page on the wiki where people were making their suggestions. We then had a small debate on what was better and then we voted. Indeed, hence my I've uploaded a polygon, what do people think post :) Since the WHA data is relatively simple (16 areas, although some are multiolygon) I figured I just upload one and see what people thought. If anyone think there are missing tags, or I've done it wrong, feel free to edit it. And no, I am trying to preach anything here. I am just explaining how we proceeded on the French mailing list. It took us several months to end up completing the upload. And it is still uploading. I imagine we'd be doing much the same for any of the more complicated datasets, like the QLD castradal data ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] New CC-BY datasets due Monday 28 September on Government 2.0 Taskforce website
On 02/10/2009, at 9:01 PM, John Smith wrote: Might have to be a multipolygon, I just can't get it to render at all if I tell mapnik the tiles are dirty. I've just changed it over to be a multipolygon relation - if that works, I'll go file a bug against the renderer. A forest in the UK doesn't have to have trees, it was a hunting area... Arguably that's landuse= not natural= then, but let's not start that argument here. In any case, many of the National Parks don't have significant numbers of trees (e.g. that one, or the Barrier Reef), and for those that do the NP boundary isn't where the trees start and stop. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] new toy found by son
On 01/10/2009, at 8:53 PM, John Smith wrote: I tried to use it to augment GPS data but the math ended up doing my head in so I'm not sure how much use this would be compared to a 4 or 5Hz GPS logger alone unless someone is super duper at velocity math that is. It wouldn't be too hard, just double-integrate the acceleration to produce a plot of your relative position. Attaching it to the stand and end points of the GPS trace should remove the zeroth order accumulation errors, and then you can start to play around with more fancy things using intermediate GPS data to adjust for non-linearities in the accelerometer readings. I did pretty much this in one dimension for a physics prac a few year ago at uni :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
On 27/09/2009, at 8:06 AM, Jim Croft wrote: Given that OSM is a land-based project, the mean high water mark is probably might be the best to use. The water cover page[0] suggests that you use water=tidal;surface=sand for the area between the high and low water marks (assuming it's a sandy beach). There are quite a few places where those lines can be many kilometres apart :) [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_cover ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ABS Data (was Re: More on the survey tag)
On 27/09/2009, at 4:37 PM, John Smith wrote: I came across a perfect example of how good and bad the PGS data can be at the same time and when it makes sense to use both PGS and ABS data to make a better coast line: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=13lat=-23.75251lon=151.26423layers=0BTF I'd been doing exactly that along the Tasmanian coastline, and I know others have as well (I think swampwallaby has done most of the Tasmanian stuff I didn't do). In many places the ABS and PGS weave back and forward across each other, suggesting that the ABS data isn't less accurate in those places than the PGS stuff. In the places where it does diverge, you can hopefully find out why by looking at satellite imagery (if Yahoo has any in the area). A lot of the divergences I found was either things like the above, or where PGS was following the water-sand boundary but ABS was following the sand-tree boundary along a beach. There were a couple of places I couldn't figure out if there was any reason for the divergence so I left it untouched there. I don't know if any of the others have been doing it, but I also took the chance to add river stubs where they were obvious, and use campsites with names like X creek or Y bay to name nearby features :) I assume people have been doing the same along various bits of the mainland too. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] http://maposmatic.org/
On 24/09/2009, at 9:51 PM, John Smith wrote: They didn't seem to have a link to download it and even if they did I only know a limited number of computer languages, I don't know perl or ruby or python which are common languages for stuff done for OSM I know some Python if you need a hand. I don't know Perl though, and Ruby is pretty much what you'd get if Perl and Python shacked up and had a bastard son... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What's the best way to edit on holidays?
On 25/09/2009, at 6:44 AM, Liz wrote: On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Mark Pulley wrote: (I should be able to complete the Antarctica highway system on the trip :-P ) Now to be able to say that I have completed the entire highway for a continent singlehanded surely is better than North Star for completing a town Yes, rather than just giving away a single star, we could award the whole Large Magellanic Cloud or similar :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australian bushwalking tracks
On 22/09/2009, at 5:56 PM, John Smith wrote: If you are bored enough you can also enter the number of steps, and I think it was on the main talk list but you should have the direction of the way from bottom to top of the stairs. Regardless of what the talk list may have said, I think that half of the existing steps in the database are mapped in the ascending direction and half are mapped in the descending direction. So as the wiki page suggests, I'd tag direction=up/down on them. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Gatton, QLD
On 18/09/2009, at 10:03 PM, John Smith wrote: As for roundabouts, they're a bit of hassle and I'd love for JOSM to do it better but any way as things are I either draw a square and then add mid points between the 4 corners to turn it into a roundabout, or I draw a triangle and hit shift+o, neither is perfect but perfection isn't generally achievable anyway. What we really need is a roundabout-ify feature, where you select a node and tell it to make it a roundabout with some default size. I think I filed a bug against Potlatch for it a while ago, but it would probably be more likely to get added to JOSM. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Landgate (WA) - Shared Land Information Platform
On 17/09/2009, at 3:29 PM, John Smith wrote: 2009/9/17 Peter Ross pe...@emailross.com: Interesting datasets available in the west The copyright terms seem unfavourable. From the original mail: On 17/9/2009 Peter Ross pe...@emailross.com wrote: Landgate is presently considering Creative Commons licensing as part of the National Government Information Licensing Framework Project. If they did CC licence the data, that would be pretty awesome. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] bus_stop further details
On 08/09/2009, at 8:57 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: For tagging highway=bus_stop 's, in addition to the existing shelter=yes/no, I'm planning to also use bench=yes/no and waste_basket=yes/no, as these features are often installed as part of the bus stop itself, in Brisbane. Tagging separate nodes with amenity=* is not ideal, as 1) i couldn't really be bothered and, more importantly, 2) they are physically part of the bus stop (e.g. bench built into the bus_stop shelter; waste_basket bolted to the bus_stop sign) and therefore additional nodes are not even semantically more correct. I've been doing that for a while (well, except waste_basket=*), so that's a +1 from me :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Draft association rules + LC page
On 03/09/2009, at 9:02 PM, John Smith wrote: 2009/9/3 James Livingston doc...@mac.com: * What exactly does commercial mapping entity mean for the purposes of 4? It's very clear if something has not for profit status based on their governing rules. While it's quite clear what commercial means, I was more interested in mapping and especially the two together. I think most people would simply tell everyone about who they work for if it was at all questionably, so it wouldn't actually be a problem, but was interested in what people thought it meant. For example, I used to work for a small company which, amongst other things, produced plots of the survival rates of trees in plantations, so the owners would know if trees needed to be replanted and why they were dying. Are they a commercial mapping entity? In any case, treating it as any entity that sells geospatial data or similar is probably good enough. * Not that it would be like likely, but if 8.7 is invoked, how does the secret ballot in 8.8d work with proxy votes allowed by 8.9 and telecommunication/electronic involvement? That's probably a pointless rule given people don't live in a similar geographical region. Yes, I can't see how it would work unless you can have physical General Meetings. * Special Resolution is mentioned several times but not defined, which I assume means it is defined in the various state acts and is for things like changing the association's constitution/articles/ rules/ whatever. If one is proposed the General Meeting can't be held by telecommunication/electronic means, what do we expect to happen in this situation? This needs to be fixed, all meetings should be capable of being held electronically. +1 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Highway page and Aus tagging guidelines page is inconsistent
On 16/08/2009, at 12:17 PM, Liz wrote: While looking at the wiki page describing the highway tag[0] recently, I noticed that the Australian entry in International Equivalence doesn't match what is on the Australian Tagging Guidelines page, and what actually gets mapped. I used to get incredibly confused with primary = b and secondary = c but this list got me better understanding the classification I've fixed the MABC mappings on the Highway page to correspond to the Australian Tagging Guidelines and actual use (I didn't touch any of the other bits). Hopefully it doesn't get reverted in the fallout from the arguments on the main talk list. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Navteq mapping AU
On 26/08/2009, at 7:44 PM, John Smith wrote: One example given was do you search on google to rent a house, generally no one does, they use a specialist search engine that is built for rent listings. That reminds me of something I was wishing for a couple of months ago, trying to find a rental place after moving to Brisbane - one of those web sites that made better use of geodata. Some of the good ones will shop you a map with a house icon for each property that is for rent/ sale, but a lot don't do even that. What I really wanted was a site that would do the above, and also tell me how long it would take to talk to the nearest public transport, catch it, and walk to my work at the other end[0]. Plus where the nearest shops were, if there were any parks or sports facilities nearby and so on. Now, if only I had a freely available source of data for something like that... I guess I should probably shut up and actually do something about it, although it probably wouldn't work to well without decent house number data. [0] Copying and pasting the address into the Translink web site gets tiring after a while. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSMF
On 21/08/2009, at 8:16 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: 1. nominations open. 2. voting opens 3. nominations close (how can anyone vote if nominations aren't closed) 4. last minute registrations to vote 5. last minute call to vote (24 hours notice) Nomination closing after the voting had opened confused the hell out of me too. I think the voting closed 48 hours after the nominations did, which is also a bit odd. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=662
On 21/08/2009, at 8:13 PM, Sam Couter wrote: John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote: I'd like to think things were that active in Australia map wise but I don't think that's an accurate picture :) I have around 800 messages in my mailbox from the past month from this list. That puts us soundly in the 549 - 2648 range (where did those numbers come from?). Depending on which green is which, that map may actually be correct when it comes to mailing list posts. I'm just wondering how many of those 800 are John's Twitter-like updates about the status of things on http://maps.bigtincan.com :P -- James Doc Livingston, who just helped increase the number of pointless messages ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] List of potential datasources
On 17/08/2009, at 11:07 AM, John Smith wrote: --- On Mon, 17/8/09, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote: I guess the problems with this would be: * Duplication with public toilets that are already marked Only import toilets where there is no node=amenity within 250-500m, throw them into an exceptions file for manual inspection/ verification/insertion. +1, that's what I was thinking if we did get access to the data. Assuming no-one has contacted them before, I'll send them an email sometime soon. Thinking about it, if the search was improved for OSM a bit (i.e. faster) maybe OSM could tender to host toilet map. I guess our base street map coverage is a bit thin in rural areas for that, but just a thought. A POI search in general would be good. I'll have a look around to see what's already been done for this, but it shouldn't be too hard to. If the search is of the form 'X near Y' then do a place lookup on Y, and if you find Y, then look for nearby nodes with: * X is of the form some text, then look for name=some text * X is of the form a=b;c=d then look for those (as a power-user thing) * otherwise use a table of mapping, e.g. toilets - amenity=toilet, lakes - natural=water ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] List of potential datasources
On 13/08/2009, at 11:18 PM, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir wrote: If anybody knows any federal government datasources that would be useful, the Government 2.0 taskforce is looking for data sources that the community would find useful but currently aren't available for technical reasons [1]. This will form part of a series of contests to encourage innovation. I already suggested the Postcode boundaries being released with a more open licence, although it's hard to tell if that's due to technical reasons or a risk adverse culture. I've got a couple that I think would be interesting, but I don't know if anyone has talked to these departments yet. http://www.toiletmap.gov.au/ Over 16k toilet POIs http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/ Great Barrier Reef marine park boundaries and reef features. Their spatial data is free for non-commercial/educational use, but they change for commercial use. The various Parks departments, for the boundaries of National Parks, State Forests and so on. I've seen some of them show up around the place, but not everywhere. For example I don't think any are tagged in Tassie apart from the trivial case I added of the Maria Island National Park being Maria Island. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Highway page and Aus tagging guidelines page is inconsistent
Hi all, While looking at the wiki page describing the highway tag[0] recently, I noticed that the Australian entry in International Equivalence doesn't match what is on the Australian Tagging Guidelines page, and what actually gets mapped. For example it says that in states with MABC classifications, A should be primary not trunk, and B should be secondary not primary, and so on. I'm not sure if the other bits in the entry are correct, such as which are state maintained and so on, so I haven't changed anything yet. Does anyone know which of the other bits are correct and which aren't? [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australian_Road_Tagging - unclassified
On 14/08/2009, at 7:26 PM, John Smith wrote: The problem is some/all routing software doesn't treat residential as through roads, but do treat unclassified as through roads. Effectively highway=residential means highway=[residential| unclassified] and access=destination. I realise we're not supposed to tag for the renderer, but this isn't quite the same thing I see it as exactly the same thing, you're tagging it so that it works better with certain pieces of software, due to that making incorrect assumptions. Although it may practically do so in some parts of europe, highway=residential doesn't imply access=destination. as they've coded to a specific definition of residential/ unclassified that they interrupted it as. We can either align ourselves with this definition or have routing go screwy on us. We could fix the routing software, or the conversion from OSM data to whatever format the router uses so that it doesn't treat them as such. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
On 11/08/2009, at 4:51 PM, Liz wrote: On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: If anything I'm trying to figure out the easiest way to achieve an outcome, the outcome needs a legal entity of some sort, a local entity would be one way, another is to go via OSMF although I don't know how much or how willing they would be either. we would be better with a local entity its not easy for a company to deal with something international From what I've read about OSM Local Chapters, we would have a local entity which is federated to the OSM Foundation. Which means that the local entity (e.g. OSM Australia, although it could be an existing mapping/GIS body not exclusive to OSM) can say they officially represent OSM in Australia, use the OSM trademark, have all of our members be voting members of OSMF, and the like. If anyone is familiar with the Linux community, this is basically the same as having the Linux Australia as the peak body to which all the local Linux User Groups are affiliated. Money is an interesting issue. Currently (although there is some discussion right not on osmf-talk) you need to pay £15 a year to be a member of OSMF, and the last I read of Local Chapters the plan was for the LC to pay £10 per member to OSMF to be federated which lets them all be OSMF members too. That could change however. At the current exchange rate, that would mean being a member of OSM Australia would need to cost at least $20 a year, plus anything for the local chapter to run itself. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
On 11/08/2009, at 11:29 PM, John Smith wrote: --- On Tue, 11/8/09, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote: From what I've read about OSM Local Chapters, we would have a local entity which is federated to the OSM Foundation. Which means that the local entity (e.g. OSM Australia, although it could be an existing mapping/GIS body not exclusive to OSM) can say they officially represent OSM in Australia, use the OSM trademark, have all of our members be voting members of OSMF, and the like. That's not what's currently on the wiki, they explicitly state being a member of a local chapter doesn't make you a member of OSMF and vice versa. Also no mention the the chapter itself being a member of OSMF. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters Automatic membership might have been suggested at some point by someone but it doesn't look like it has been continued for various legal/liability reasons etc. Ah, that seems to have been updates two days ago, and a whole bunch of things are now different then they were before (in some cases, saying the complete opposite). I probably should have re-read the page first. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
On 11/08/2009, at 11:35 PM, James Livingston wrote: Ah, that seems to have been updates two days ago, and a whole bunch of things are now different then they were before (in some cases, saying the complete opposite). I probably should have re-read the page first. I mean different/opposite to what was on one of LC working group pages, not that wiki page (which had virtually no info until a few days ago) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Basic search, first attempt
On 08/08/2009, at 11:58 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote: On Sat, 8 Aug 2009 13:39:38 + (GMT) John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote: This case is an exception since there is a place=* node for Perth which is marked as a capital city, does anyone know 2 towns or villiages or ... with the same names in different states? or even same state I guess... Georgetown Qld, SA and NSW. George Town (with a space) is in Tas. I'm sure there are *lots* of places with the same name, a couple more are: Lilydale, Tas and Vic Queenstown, Tas and SA (and NZ) Kingston, Tas and QLD ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Cautionary tale for editing ABS ways
Hi all, As I've just discovered, you need to have some care when editing anything that causes a change to a way with over 2000 nodes (e.g. a lot of the ABS boundaries). NEVER under any circumstances let anything happen to you editor during the upload. You can't let JOSM crash, have network troubles while uploading from Potlatch or similar - pbviously you can't control that, but you're not allowed to let it happen anyway. The problem stems from the fact that you can no longer add or modify ways to have 2k nodes, you need to split them in pieces. In my case I did something that would modify an ABS boundary so split it in half, but then something happened and my upload got stopped half way through splitting the way. The result is that the half staying in the existing way got kept, but the half being put into a new way didn't get added. Unfortunately I can't just revert the way to get it back, because it's too large to re-save. You also can't revert the way and split it before saving because Potlatch doesn't support that, due to the process required being insanely complicated and it only being useful if you want to revert a 2k node way. As far as I can tell, JOSM doesn't support reverting ways and it wouldn't be likely to support this either. So now I get to go and extract the old way from dumps and then re- upload it as a now way. You have been warned. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australian Rendering
On 02/08/2009, at 8:20 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: amenity=bbq being rendered? Does anyone know if how to tag those has been discusses before? Australia seems to contain about an equal number of amenity=bbq and amenity=barbeque, with a handful of amenity=barbecue thrown in. There are a negligible number of them tagged in other countries. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] maxheight/height
On 28/07/2009, at 10:31 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Stephen Hopeslh...@gmail.com wrote: It is the road under the bridge that has the limitation, not the bridge. Divided roads often have different max heights on each side, but it is one level bridge over the top. Good point, though I would suspect this is relatively rare (i.e. I've never seen this). I've seen it quite a bit here in Australia. I've also seen quite a few where each of the two lanes in either direction have (slightly) different limits on the height of vehicles, for example 4.1m, 4.3m, 4.5m and 4.7m. Tagging data specific to each lane is another whole discussion though. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] [OSM-talk] maxheight/height
On 28/07/2009, at 11:28 AM, Roy Wallace wrote: On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Apollinaris Schoellascho...@gmail.com wrote: one bridge can cross multiple roads with different maxheight limtations. And, by the way, on the other hand: one way can pass under multiple bridges with different clearances. I'd actually suggest this scenario is more common. For that I would split the underneath way into multiple ways, the same as if it had changing speed limits (e.g. 100-80-60-40 for entering the edge of a town, with a school shortly after). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] maxheight/height
On 28/07/2009, at 11:04 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote: On Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:34:00 +1000 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: A clearance tag could just as easily be misinterpreted as the maxheight tag. I don't see how. bridge=yes; clearance=2.8... Does this mean the bridge has a clearance of 2.8 or the road under the bridge has a clearance of 2.8. To me this would suggest the bridge has a limit of 2.8 ie vehicles travelling over the bridge can not be above 2.8 high. I'd say that clearance has way too many meanings to different people. A tag called that could also make sense on a road with 4wd_only=yes, having it means the minimum height your vehicle's underbody need to be above the ground. Personally, I think that maxheight being placed on the restricted ways makes the most sense. Doing that means you can tag the facts that each of the two halves of a dual carriageway have different limits, and also tag the maximum height of vehicles going over the bridge. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nambour/Sunshine Coast Mapping Party
On 28/07/2009, at 10:20 PM, John Smith wrote: Are you coming from Brisbane area by any chance, someone else on this mailing list was looking for a car pool. I've live on the south-side of Brisbane, and would be happy to help is someone wants a lift. Probably the easiest thing to do would be for anyone who wants to car pool from down this way to contact me, and I can co-ordinate who is driving and where we need to meet people. On 28/07/2009, at 10:32 PM, John Smith wrote: --- On Tue, 28/7/09, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote: Looking at the TransLink site, the trains from Brisbane (or anywhere South) get in to Nambour at 11:19 and 12:55, and leave on the return journey at 14:37 and 17:51. Second thoughts 11:30 till almost 6pm is a bit long, and the train arriving before 1 is express so that seems to be a better option. Nambour isn't that big, so the couple of hours that are listed there now sounds good. if we have too much time, we can always chat about mapping and other non-OSM things for a while :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Nambour/Sunshine Coast Mapping Party
On Wednesday, 29 July, 2009, at 11:47AM, John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote: Not entirely your fault and it's been an ongoing argument of maillists in general for a decade or more. Just hit reply to all. Reply to list? Unfortunately most non-Unixy/open-source mail clients don't support that, and some of the open-source ones don't as well (e.g. Thunderbird). It doesn't work properly when something is cross-posted to multiple mailing lists, but I'm yet to see something which does apart from reply-to-all which means people end up with several copies. I think that argument has been going on ever since mailing lists were invented, and closely follows the top/bottom posting argument. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] More Goonellabah Mapping + road collapse
On 26/07/2009, at 6:39 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: bridge=no -- You will be run over by a bus. Because you were standing below and the bus ran off the now non- existent bridge? :P ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] I just saw Nambour....
On 20/07/2009, at 10:58 PM, John Smith wrote: Is there enough interest in a mapping party at Nambour and/or surrounding areas at all? From memory there is usually a fair number of trains to/from Brisbane every day to Nambour station I'm guessing but I don't think parking would be too much of an issue most weekends. I've been past Nambour quite a few times, on the way further north, but never actually been to the town itself. I'd be keen for a mapping party up that way, as it'd be useful and give me a chance to look around :) Were you thinking of a Saturday or Sunday in a few weeks time, or something similar? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Coastlines from admin boundaries
On 14/07/2009, at 7:55 PM, Matt White wrote: occurs to me that the ABS data that was imported is probably substantially better quality than we will ever get either with a gps or tracing off yahoo (some areas excepted). I'd been noticing the same thing, in many places the ABS boundaries are fairly close to the PGS and a lot more detailed. Whether it's more accurate I don't know, but definitely more detailed. Also, if you're going to mark something else (e.g. a park) where the coastline is the boundary, it'd be nice to have one to use rather than two ways in slightly different locations. But I wasn't sure if I should re-align the PGS way with the ABS admin boundary way, or nuke the PGS way and tag the existing ABS boundary with the coastline tags, or just dance a jig. I know admin boundaries can change, but (global warming aside) the odds are pretty good those boundaries set against coastlines probably aren't likely to change. I'd actually started re-doing the coastline on some bits of Tasmania, and I have seen instances of other people doing so on the Queensland coast. I would imagine there are other places too, but I haven't looked. For example left of the Brid river is changed, right isn't at http://osm.org/go/uJHmdiSm- What I've done (and also seen elsewhere) is simply deleting the PGS way and tag the ABS boundary with natural=coastline. if you re-align the old coastline ways, you wouldn't be using the old nodes and source=PGS would be wrong, so why not just tag the ABS ways? You'd obviously want to check that the PGS and ABS ways aren't significantly different, and if so find out why. For example, in Bridport the ABS suburb boundary went out around the pier where some commercial fishing boats dock, and the coastline obviously doesn't. If people don't think that's a good idea I can revert my changes, but I think it makes sense. Also if you are going to do this, remember to ensure the ways are correctly oriented with natural=coast - Land on the Left, and natural=coastline must go across river mouths to form closed shapes. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Running stats against GPX files ...
On 24/06/2009, at 12:59 PM, John Smith wrote: Also with my previous answer, you can get away with only 14 bytes per point rather than 17, 3 bytes for time, 4 for lat, 4 for lon, 2 for time, 1 for hdop. Although if reset tracks that go over 65,000 seconds back to zero you could get away with only 13 bytes. No idea if this would compress well or not. However 9000 points uncompressed with 13 bytes per point would give you about 115kBytes, the 9000 point gpx file I compressed came out at 35kBytes. I'd say that unless you're *really* concerned about space, I'd just stick with gzip/bzip2-ing the GPX files. If you are that concerned about space, you'd definitely want to use some form of delta encoding, and probably variable-length encoding too. Why spend a whole four bytes storing the latitude? Presumably it's going to be fairly close to the previous point in the track, not 1km away. Same for time, it'll definitely be after the previous timestamp and not by much. If you want to get really fancy, you can start compressing straight- ish sections with something similar to video I an B/P frame, storing it as a fraction of the way between the two key points, and an offset from the line joining them. But you're probably not that keen :) -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Hi all ...
Resent, because I accidently only sent it to David On 21/06/2009, at 4:56 PM, David Dean wrote: Of course, if the number of kilometres is always the same you could easily work out where the location is anyway by looking at the blank hole in all their traces, helpfully centred on their house. It's a matter of who you're trying to stop from finding out where you live, and how close you're willing to have then get from OSM. Are we trying to stop someone who doesn't really care from noticing exactly where you live, or are you trying to stop someone hell-bent on knowing where you live from even knowing which suburb you are in? If it's just to stop people casually seeing where you live, then cutting out a polygon will probably be enough. For the second case, not uploading GPS tracks may not be enough. I would guess that there are plenty of clues as to where you live just in your edit locations and patterns - like someone's early edits are probably going to be streets near where they live. While I'd prefer that you can't tell exactly where I live, I reckon it would be pretty difficult to stop someone from finding out which suburb I live in. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Running stats against GPX files ...
On 25/06/2009, at 8:02 PM, John Smith wrote: --- On Thu, 25/6/09, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote: * the DOP has changed Why would this matter, DOP usually varies, although it is usually pointless recording over 4 or 5, and if you want to 1dp multiple it by ten, so you only really need +/-60 so plenty of room to move in a single byte. That was mostly so that you don't ever record the DOP unless it's changed, because it's not really going to do much over the course of a couple of second. There you go, most points now take up 4 bytes :) in which case you can start doing nibbles instead of bytes, and you might be able to get it down to 2 bytes if you really try. Yep, and there are a heap other things you can do too. It all comes down to what you want to use the data for. Are you constantly access it? Occasional access? Archival purposes? Read-only or are you writing too? If you're doing geospatial processing, then fixed size records (like the 13 byte one mentioned) is good, because you can retrieve any node by it's index. If you're archiving the data, what you care about is how small you can get the collection of tracks (not just individual ones). While I agree with your sentiments about GPX, I think some variation of JSON would be more efficient from a programming point of view and potentially just as human readable. I made a post to this effect on the GeoJSON list, they have a basic spec nutted out, but it's lacking when it comes to most of the valuable information stored in GPX files like time stamps, elevation and hdop. I quite like XML, but *way* too many people use it when they really shouldn't be. You need to ask yourself, do I need the eXtensible bit of XML? I think anyone who blindly uses XML without thinking why is a bit daft, but I also think that of people who will never use it under any circumstances, even if it solves their problems. Anyway... -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Hi all ...
On 25/06/2009, at 8:38 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote: Yes, and I've tried to be a bit obscure about my location, but if you know my name, everyone in town knows which is my house. One person well known to me put his marker in the local cemetery. Yeah, small country towns are a whole different matter. If you have a crazy stalker, I don't think they really need to extrapolate GPX traces uploaded to OSM to figure out where you live. There's a fair chance it'd be someone who knows where you live anyway :) -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to map out streets the most efficently
On 16/06/2009, at 1:08 AM, Delta Foxtrot wrote: Now does anyone have suggestions on how to basically drive the entire town the most efficiently with the minimal amount of overlap, or how does one plan such a feat. There's a nice mathematical algorithm for figuring out that. All you need for it is a complete map of the area ;) -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to map out streets the most efficently
On 16/06/2009, at 1:52 PM, Liz wrote: On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: Most likely I'll be returning via a different direction, I don't particularlly like going out west, there is whole lots of nothing inbetween a few somethings. OSM makes you look for somethings out there between the nothings. Sometimes it does that a bit too much. Since I started mapping, every time I drive somewhere that's a reasonable distance away I keep thinking to myself Mark, bridge over XYZ creek., Mark, four-way junction with ABC road. I should probably buy an audio recorder, and think aloud instead. -- James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL License + Outline Procedure
On 28/02/2009, at 3:38 PM, Jim Croft wrote: Putting words into their mouths, I think the argument would be that the decision-making involved in selection, storage, management and display of these fact is indeed a creative act, even though the facts themselves aren't. A blank screen magically comes alive - a map with dots, lines, symbols, colours and most importantly, communicated meaning. Sure smells like creativity to me... I wonder if the Renaissance cartographers, or any cartographers for that matter, would regard their work as not creative? A well rendered informative and accurate map is a beautiful thing. They don't just happen; someone must have created them. I definitely agree with that - as an interpretation of the underlying data, they are a creative work and so copyright-able. I'm not a lawyer (which is a good thing, because all this legal stuff makes my head hurt), but I think the main issue is whether the collection data that underlies the map is copyright-able. I've been reading up on it a bit recently (trying to understand the ODbL) but obviously don't have the deep knowledge a copyright lawyer will. Copying someone's beautifully drawn map of Sydney is obviously not allowed. However the location of the Sydney Opera House is a fact and so not copyrightable, and the location and name of Paramatta Road, and so on. While I can't copy the map as-is, can I create my own map getting the location and name of everything from the original map? Some countries (including Australia, I think) have something calls a database right which means that a collection of facts can be copyright-able even though individually they can't. The usual example where this is used (and I believe what the first Australian court case related to this is about) is phone books. The fact that person X lives at a certain address and has a certain phone number is an un- copyrightable fact, but are you allowed to produce a copy of the phone book? Back to OSM, what we have is pretty much just a collection of geospatial facts (locations, names, etc). In countries that don't have a database copyright, what stops someone from just copying the whole database? As I understand it, that is the kind of thing ODbL is meant to prevent, in addition to some other quirks of having a Creative Commons licence used for something that isn't really creative. I'm not certain whether any of that is actually correct, but it's what I've managed to gather from reading some discussions on it. James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL License + Outline Procedure
On 28/02/2009, at 12:17 PM, Jim Croft wrote: Out of curiosity, would one of the Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org/) licenses be able to provide thefunctionality and the flexibility we might need? Basically, no - what is why the Open Database Licence is being worked on. Essentially the problem is that while Creative Commons is fine for creative works, OSM pretty much a collection of facts rather than a creative work. I haven't looked into all the details, but I believe that ODbL tries to use database copyright when such a concept exists in a particular countries legal system and other mechanisms when it doesn't. Cheers, James Livingston ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Any folks off to LCA09 next week?
On 12/01/2009, at 11:48 AM, Kim Hawtin wrote: Any folks off to LCA09 next week? http://linux.conf.au/ Feed like a catchup? Perhaps we could do a BoF? I'm unfortunately not going to make it down there, but I reckon there should be some interested people around. What would probably be a good idea for next year, would be to get the university grounds and surrounding POIs mapped well - particularly with coffee shops, pubs, restaurants and other things LCA attendees will be interested in. I think that if we could show people some decent maps with useful-at-LCA places on it, people might keep them around and maybe become more interested in OSM. I've been doing bits and pieces of the area recently - but while I know the area well, the Yahoo imagery is quite old. Not living in Tassie any more makes it harder. I did one of the residential colleges where LCA attendees might be staying, but the imagery doesn't have the University Apartments, the new dining hall or admin buildings (all from 2003). Not that Christ College seems to have worked out well once rendered, all the building names are in weird places. James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag clubs
On 05/01/2009, at 12:51 PM, Roy Rankin wrote: This has raised in my mind the question of how should registered clubs such as RSL and sports clubs be tagged. They tend to be very similar to pubs in that they usually serve alcohol, have gambling, and serve food. They differ from pubs by having restricted access to members and out of area people. They also do not normally have accommodation. I've been thinking about this recently too, and the vagueness of what a pub is. The only thing I can think of that all things called a pub have in common is that you can get a beer there (excluding Slim Dusty songs). Some of the features that pubs can have include at least: * meals, from over the counter to a named restaurant in the same building * accommodation (particularly the pub in a country town) * purchasing alcohol to take away, either a separate section or over the counter * gambling facilities, ranging from horse/dog/etc racing, to Keno and the like, to poker machines * games like darts or a pool table * miscellaneous facilities for the country town, such as being the post office or bank There are probably a whole heap more too. Personally I think that a place that you can't get a meal is a bar not a pub, but I haven't seen a tag for that. As clubs are a good travellers resource they clearly need to be tagged, but what is the consensus on how to tag clubs? I'd say that the important things for travellers would be accommodation, and food/beer. Helpfully you can have both amenity=pub and tourism=hotel on the same node, but I don't know if doing that is good or how to tag other information (being fairly new to OSM). Cheers, James ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
