Re: [talk-au] osmaustralia.org website and Garmin .img files - current status ?
My apologies - fixing that process has been on my list for a long time (years...). The computer it runs on for some reason just shuts down randomly, so I often boot it up at work and let it run, but it doesn't stay up long enough to get through a generation run. I moved most of the scripts off the old computer today onto a newer machine, and rebuilt them, but got side tracked at work and only got some basic testing done. I have upgraded the mkgmap version as well, so hopefully a few of the newer features will appear (I've got to experiment with a few of the settings, and I need to clean up a couple of the tpy files) I'll try and finish it tomorrow hopefully - just got to cleanup the zip and upload process and we will be away. If anyone wants the various scripts I use so they can run the whole thing themselves (it's on Windows not linux, so it's a little bit of batch file fun, although I was going to port them to powershell for fun), email me - the new file/folder layout I put together today makes it a little easier to manage the various files, and easier to add in other areas to generate. Matt On 4/05/2016 11:41 PM, Ian Steer wrote: Does anyone know what’s happening with the osmaustralia.org website, and the regular updates of Garmin .img files ? They used to be updated roughly weekly, but haven’t been updated since February. (I use these files to update my Garmin GPS with the results of my (and everyone else’s) OSM updates.) Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railways
This particular thing really annoys me. Fair enough if the track is still in place - go nuts mapping it - but there are disused rail lines marked up even when the track hasn't been in place for 30 years, and it's only an historical curiosity. See the Inner Circle railway in Melbourne for example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.78015/144.97908 I've been tempted to nuke this disused railway for ages, especially as the current path doesn't actually reflect where it even use to run with any accuracy. Matt On 27/11/2014 7:52 PM, Leon Kernan wrote: Hi all, I've recently noticed a tenancy for people to tag railways as disused, even when all traces have been gone for decades. This is probably because railway=abandoned has been removed from the rendering on openstreetmap.org http://openstreetmap.org (to try and stop people tagging abandoned railways..) Just a reminder to all that railway=abandoned is still the correct tag for a track that doesn't exist anymore. railway=disused is only for tracks that are still in place and able to be used (at least in theory). Has anyone seen a site that renders historical or current railway lines so I can direct people there to see their work rendered? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap in Government
I'm also very interested in 4wd trails - it's what 80% of my mapping consists of I think (that, and house numbers in the inner north of Melbourne) The current 4wd_only tag was one of the tags I proposed a few years ago - there was a massive barney at the time over the smoothness=* and surface=* tags, and all I wanted to do was mark roads that were clearly tagged as 4wd only (proper 4wd as in low range, high clearance). The surface/smoothness debate was interesting, but got in the way of the larger problem. I've come to the conclusion that the Australian mappers pretty much have to go it alone in this area - what the Americans and Europeans call a 4wd track would be a national highway for us (and we actually have a few legitimate highways and primary roads that are 4wd/seasonal closure type roads. I'm not a massive fan of the tracktype=* tag - it's a random number that is too subjective. There was an attempt in Victoria a while ago to class various tracks around the place as 4wd - the DSE/Parks Vic had a program where various 4wd club members were trained in what constituted an green, blue, black and double black road (very ski-trail), and got people out mapping that, but it all went to pot when it turned out that the DSE/Parks Vic guys were taking those results from the 4wd guys, and then either closing the roads to management vehicles only, or grading them so they were rated green. Pretty soon after that, the 4wd clubs got suitably annoyed, and stopped supporting the initiative. To the best of my knowledge, we still don't have a decent subject to seasonal closure tagging schema either - believe that Liz was at one time proposing something, but I think she's given up on OSM post license change. I'd be more than happy to help put together an AU only/AU based 4wd mapping set of rules and tags that we can use - if we can agree on something, I can also mod the hi-res/4wd maps I crank out for the Garmin devices to suit, and possibly even learn the Mapnik rendering stuff to implement the rendering side in Mapnik (seeing as DIY often appears as the only way the renderer gets changed). I wrote up some surface tagging concepts ages ago I thought might fly for handling the surface issue for 4wd tracks, as well as some general rules for tagging roads (eg: when off the beaten track, it's critical to mark the entire stretch of road as 4wd only or similar if there are no turns you can make to get off the road - often once you are on a 4wd road, you tend to be committed to going forwards...) Matt On 1/05/2013 10:28 AM, David Bannon wrote: On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 16:29 +0700, kristy van putten wrote: .. has anyone thought of 4WD trails in OSM? I would also be keen to find out if there are any Ozzy teaching OSM to schools or scout groups etc? Kristy, I have a particular interest in 4wd trails and OSM. I am particularly concerned how 4wd roads are recorded and typically displayed. The difficulty is that we all seem to use a range of standards and generally, the rendering people ignore them all. Perhaps not unreasonably. Just before christmas, I lead a bit of a campaing to get some clear standards in place for defining 4wd tracks, the idea being, consistent with OSM guidelines, that highway= be used to signify the purpose of the road and tags such as tracktype= be used to describe the likely state its in. Tracktype= already has grade1 to grade5 but 4wd tracks, needed, IMHO 6,7 and 8. Sadly, while everyone agreed something needed to be done, I did not see enough support for that idea to get past the OSM voting model. It therefore just a recommendation on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Roads_Tagging 4wd_only is another option, it is at least official. However, it has only one 'level' and apparently the rendering community don't like tags that begin with a numeral, makes postqress column names messy. Trouble is that much of europe and the US don't really understand 4wd tracks/roads, unless there is a widely used stand way of describing them, the renderers will ignore it, mapers won't see any results and won't bother. The poor old motorist will find themselves in serious trouble every now and again ! David Looking forward to talking to you all Cheers -- Kristy Van Putten Spatial Analyst, Data Manager Australia-Indonesia Facility Disaster Reduction Mb: +62 811 987 573 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Abandoned makes it sounds like there are tracks in place for the length of the line, just no trains running on it. But that's not the case - in the 4km the line used to run on there are 11 remaining artifacts, the largest being a station building (old North Carlton station), the smallest being a single 4 metre track section in Edinburgh gardens, or the one remaining concrete pylon base. They are the vestigial traces that need to be mapped. As for the rest, it's a mostly a park now with a bike track along it (the bits that aren't are houses) ... and that's what it should be mapped as. On 30/11/2012 6:23 PM, Mark Rennick wrote: Matt I believe abandoned railway lines should be mapped. If it is necessary to have a current physical feature to justify mapping, then the railway formation (cut and fill earth works) generally remain, particularly if the railway reserve has been retained as a rail trail, road or linear park. *From:*Matt White [mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au] *Sent:* Friday, 30 November 2012 7:31 AM *To:* 'talk-au' *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Matt On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn't historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it's mapping the present. *From:*Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM *To:* Matt White *Cc:* talk-au *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Matt On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn't historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it's mapping the present. *From:*Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM *To:* Matt White *Cc:* talk-au *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park Ditto with historical names. Piera St in East Brunswick was originally named Nicholas St, and Jenkin St was Baden St in 1936. No idea why they were changed - confusion with other more major streets nearby I guess - but there is no sign of the old name on the ground. Yeah - I know there is a fixed historical name tag I can set, but even then I wonder about it. It's not like anyone in the street ever called it that (which is possibly different to something like Whitehorse Road in Nunawading, which I think is technically now Maroondah Highway, but Whitehorse is the historical name that is still in use) What we really need is a better storage model - the simple one we use just isn't up to the task for this kind of data. It barely copes with teh actual on-the-ground info as it is. Remember segments, anyone? Matt On 26/11/2012 1:38 PM, Paul Norman wrote: From: Alex Sims [mailto:a...@softgrow.com] Subject: Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On 26/11/2012 10:38 AM, mick wrote: I'm in two minds about removing 'historical' data. Yes, objects no longer visible on the ground shouldn't be rendered on the map. I've been following this discussion with interest. We do mark and should mark administrative boundaries which are not visible on the ground. Can the logic for these boundaries which be usefully extended to historical data? The subject of historical rail lines and historical roads came up on the talk-us@ mailing list relatively recently. As always, there were multiple views. The result of the discussion was that the general view is that historic information only belongs in OSM when there is some trace on the ground. As a practical matter, historic roads are not generally mapped in OSM. Whenever a road is physically realigned and the new alignment mapped in OSM the old alignment is not saved as a separate way. If I survey the area I only look at how it looks now so I don't know if the old alignment in the database is because it was aligned that way in the past or because the data was inaccurate. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Not sure of the original source - the rail line is in old Melways etc. and in some out of copy right maps I have. The existence of the inner circle rail line isn't really a secret. The problem for me is that it just isn't there any more (aside from the handful of things I mentioned below, which I agree can be kept mapped correctly because they exist physically, but it amounts to above 100 metres of track in a dozen small sections, plus a cutting underneath Royak parade and an old station building that is now a community centre). The actual align of the rail line is also out by about 30 meters at least - it's too far south on OSM to be accurate Just because is existed once in a time past doesn't mean we should map it. Parts of the Deepdene rail spur still exist (some cuttings and the like), but there's no rails, and it has been mostly built over. Ditto the Rosstown railway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosstown_Railway (Elsternwick to Oakleigh) It's not a disused railway where the infrastucture is still there. It's a bike path, the lines have been pulled up, the stations torn down, the overhead gantry towers removed... It's just a slippery slope... immediately north of the rail line in the link below is Holden St. It used to have a tram line on it, with a curious little dogleg at the end onto St Georges Road. That was also 40 years ago. There's not much left now, but there are a few traces if you know what you are looking for (old overhead cable mounts etc). But I hardly think it needs to be mapped. Matt On 25/11/2012 9:28 PM, Ian Sergeant wrote: Hi, I'm pretty sure we've reached consensus in the past that if there is absolutely no evidence of it on the ground - no tunnels - no cuttings - no tracks. In other words there was a railway line, but now it is a shopping mall, then it doesn't get mapped. We don't maintain layers of history in OSM right now. If there is evidence still on the ground, then we have tags for that. What is the source for the data that is there, if there is no evidence on the ground? Where was it copied from? Ian. On 25 November 2012 17:15, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au mailto:mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach
I missed most of this discussion - been away on holidays - so I'm getting in a bit late Anyway, some thoughts: * Firstly, David, I appreciate the effort in trying to unify the 4wd/surface/tracktype tag set to make it a little more coherent * The track type and smoothness tags are in my opinion useless tags. What kind of surface do I expect if the smoothness is very bad and the tracktype of grade4? Both are very subjective, and the smoothness tag in particular is a terrible set of options. The track type page even says it is really only for rough classification. * The surface tag I can, in principle, get behind, although I think it is missing a few values that would be useful in Australia. However... * Unpaved roads are difficult to really classify the surface in terms of anything other than dirt/sand/rock. The surface state changes over time from smooth immediately after grading, to possibly deep ruts/corrugations/mud after rain and wear. In this case, my personal opinion would be to use some sort of tag like surface condition (options being something like: maintained | uneven | degraded | corrugated | rocky | rutted | deep_rutted, but even those change immediately after track maintenance), with perhaps a best/worst case tag or similar * One area of 4WD/dirt road tagging not discussed (unless I missed it) was inclines. Some sections of the bush tracks in AU are very steep, and the only way up then is in low range. Knowing that there are particularly steep sections of a road visually on a map is also pretty crucial * Seasonal closures still don't seem to be cleanly supported (there's a dry weather only tag, but that is both subjective, and different to gated public roads that are closed between June and October) * Overall, it seems like Australia has both the special conditions requiring some extensions to the current 4WD/dirt road mapping data and the active mapping community to back it up. I don't see why we shouldn' agree on a handful of tagging rules for the AU conditions on this list and use them (assuming that they are well thought out etc). Document them nicely so the rest of the world can take them up, and make the rendering changes etc ourselves (how hard can a casing change be in the renderer? If we can do it an submit it to the trac system...) On a slightly tangential note, I've even managed to find a paved road with a legal access restriction to 4WD only vehicles... in Italy of all places. Access to the lower part of the town of Torno on Lake Como (just north of Como itself) is restricted to residents with a specific permit, and to 4WD vehicles only. The reason for this is that about 120 metres of the road (which ordinarily is pedestrian only) is steps (not huge steps, but about 150 steps nevertheless). There were also width restrictions - a Fiat Panda 4x4 would just squeeze between some of the buildings provided you folded in the wing mirrors... (here's the road http://maps.google.com.au/maps?f=qsource=s_qhl=engeocode=q=via+Plinio,+Torno,+Como,+Italyaq=sll=45.857214,9.11431sspn=0.003336,0.008256vpsrc=6ie=UTF8hq=hnear=Via+Plinio,+Torno,+Como,+Lombardia,+Italyll=45.857268,9.114404spn=0.006643,0.016512t=mz=17 - there's no street view, but there's a panoramio photo) Matt On 24/11/2012 3:59 PM, David Bannon wrote: OK, time I decided we don't really have any prospect of changing approved tags to address the dirt road situation. So I will push a model, sort of supported by the three votes recorded (! ). It will use existing tags (approved and unapproved) and accept that maps such as OSM's are unlikely to ever show the results. On the other hand, perhaps external projects will make better use of the data ? Li Xia, I believe you have plans to use this sort of data, might be good idea to confirm this works for you. (I have answered your two off list messages but wonder if you got my answers ?) I will push the idea that - * All unsealed roads should have a tracktype tag and a surface=unpaved tag. * 4wd roads should have a 4wd_only tag and a tracktype tag. Maybe even a smoothness tag if you like. * We will ask the mainstream renderers to observe the above tags. * Routers will be advised to note above. I have update the Australian Tagging Guidelines page and add some data to discussion tab. Particularly some numbers about current usage. And why tags starting with a digit are a bad idea. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Historical rail lines
A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] surface tag
On 24/10/2012 10:20 AM, Ian Sergeant wrote: On 24 October 2012 08:05, Andrew Laughton laughton.and...@gmail.com wrote: I my humble opinion, surface=unpaved should not be used. surface=paved should only be used is the surface is literally paved with brick, bluestone, cobblestone, whatever. I think, regardless of the validity of your argument, that this horse has well and truly bolted. Agreed. I had a go at proposing a solution to the surface/smoothness debacle/edit war back in 2008. But that was four years ago, and the horse has now probably dies from old age. Pity really, because the smoothness tag ended up getting accepted with some (in my opinion) pretty useless values. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] dirt roads
A couple of quick comments: There is a 4wd tag already in use - 4wd_only:yes|recommended (with no being a pointless value) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:4wd_only%3Dyes There's about 1000 instances of this tag in use in Australia. There was a proposal kicking around ages ago that was trying to define some improved classification for unpaved roads (as unpaved roads come in all sorts of varieties). I think the discussion got pretty acrimonious and petty, but the thought was there. There are roads I've been on where the surface would be OK for a normal car, but the road is a series of sharp humps that would easily ground a standard clearance vehicle. Seasonal closure is another area where I don't think the tagging is complete/useful. The current tag is dry_weather_only=yes or access=dry_weather_only, which is valid for any road that is impassable in the wet due to surface condition or creek/river crossings, but there are also tracks with explicit closures (usually mid may to the first weekend in September or October) - generally marked as 'SSC' in the VicMap series of maps. Don't have a solution, but it something that might need working on as there are a lot of SSC roads in Victoria and NSW Anyway, I'm all for improved tagging of dirt roads - it's my favourite kind of mapping (usually cos it turns out to involve a couple of days of camping and getting out into the bush Matt On 21/10/2012 12:03 PM, dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Hi Folks, recent I have been going over parts of OSM mapped some time ago, following up on the infamous redaction. One thing that jumps out at me is the inconsistent tagging of dirt roads. Even, I must say, ones I have done myself but over a several year time span. So I started to write some notes for myself and thought that maybe I should add them to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Roads_Tagging I don't think this is inconsistent with whats there now, just more detailed. However, I do suggest that we need consider what the rendering engines do with our data and I know that is a bit naughty. But, in this case, I'd suggest to do otherwise is negligent as it can have quite serious safety issues. So, would people like to comment on what I say here ? If we can reach consensus, I'll graft some of it onto the OSM wiki. Unmade roads These are typically forestry and remote tracks, while they may have been cut initially by a bulldozer they are not regularly maintained and, importantly, are not domed and don't have good run off gutters on the side. Such roads might or might not be single lane, 4x4 only, might be dry weather etc. Be careful about deciding on such restrictions, some people are often surprised at how well a carefully driven conventional vehicle can use these tracks. Highway=track will typically render to a dashed line. highway=track surface=unpaved lanes=[1; 2] 4x4_only=[recommended; yes] source=survey Made but unsealed roads. Many rural roads fit here. There is no asphalt but the roads are 'made' and regularly maintained by, eg, the local council. These roads often have a gravel base, always have dome shape, the middle is somewhat higher than the sides and there is some sort of gutter at the edge. The gutter will usually have run offs to drain water away from the road. Such roads are almost never 4x4_only nor dry weather only. highway=[unclassified; tertiary, secondary] surface=unpaved lanes=[1; 2] source=survey Use of the highway tag on dirt roads. While the selection of tags should not be defined by how current rendering engines display, we cannot ignore the final outcome. In Australia, a lot of dirt roads are quite important and sometimes its necessary to compromise a little to achieve a useful result. So the correct highway tag may be determined by a combination of the purpose of the road and its condition. Tracks are often rendered as dashed lines and most people would understand that means some care may well be needed. Unclassified would indicate a purely local function and is typically rendered as two thin black lines with white between Tertiary roads usually are rendered with two black lines and a coloured fill and many people (incorrectly) interpret that as meaning a sealed road, so maybe mappers should ensure they apply that tag only to dirt roads that are reasonably well maintained. Secondary roads are shown as wider and a different colour than tertiary and are definitely presented as viable routes for people passing through the area. Some care needs be exercised if a dirt road is to be classified as 'secondary'. Discussion Sometimes its hard to balance the description of a road against its purpose. A good example might be the Plenty Highway. This road is probably a track from a road condition perspective, rarely maintained, sections of sand, corrugations and ruts. However, its pretty long and a major link between some (admittedly small) communities. As a
Re: [talk-au] dirt roads
On 21/10/2012 1:35 PM, dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Well said Matt, especially the bit about dirt roads being the fun ones ! I might have made myself a bit clearer about why I posted. Firstly, because I want to ensure people are happy with proposed edits to the wiki. But secondly, I'd like to start a discussion about how our map data ends up being looked at. As you say Matt, 4x4_only is a good tag and well used in Oz. However, I don't know of any rendering engine that uses it, about the only way to find out if it has been applied is to go into edit mode. And you are right, we sure don't need 4x4_only=no anywhere ! In terms of tagging a 4wd-only road, my preference would be to render the name, then the 4wd/SSC info eg: Conroys Gap Road (4WD only) or Conroys Gap Road (4WD/SSC). The Garmin maps I make for rural/bush driving append the '4WD only' to the name, but the standard mapnik/osmarender tiles don't have anything. I think the 4WD only marker on maps is a pretty key piece of information - often times only part of a track would be regarded as 4WD only, but perhaps there is no where to turn around, or the track is navigable in a 2Wd car in one direction (downhill) and not in the reverse, so once you are committed to the track, there really is no going back. In those instances, easily knowing the track is 4WD is an important requirement. Also, if you are looking for example Primary/Secondary roads that are dirt only, try the Peninsula Development Road in Cape York, or the Buntine Highway (route 80) in WA. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] FW: OSM Australia Garmin downloads have gone bung ?
Sorry for the delayed response, and the missed emails people have been sending... I sort of dropped out of the OSM thing for a bit there (the whole license thing gave me the shits, so I walked away for a while), but I'm slowly getting back into it. OK, so hopefully the generation is back on it's feet and working again - there is a full set available at the moment, but they were done semi-manually. The automated generation run kicks off tonight, but it seems that parts of the process are now taking longer than they used to, so the new file from tonight's generation probably won't start appearing until 7am Saturday. It's seems to be taking around 6 hours to generate the various maps, then a fair amount of time to upload the 400 Mb of files on my works poor hammered ADSL internet connection (the whole thing is throttled uploads, as I have to let work backup it's data as well at the same time - bring on the NBN). Also, for the moment, I am no longer uploading the individual australia.osm and newzealand.osm files - they are available as single files from Frederick Ramm's site (http://download.geofabrik.de/openstreetmap/australia-oceania/), so I don't see much point in chewing another 400mb upload as well Cheers Matt www.osmaustralia.org ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Boundary removal.
On 2/02/2012 9:41 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: Does anyone know if there are old (August 2008) Australian OSM extracts available otherwise I'll start the planet download (only 5 gig !!!) I might have them - I've got nearly nightly Australia NZ dumps tucked away somewhere - whether they go back as far a August 2008 though, I'm not sure. I've nuked them at various stages I think, but I may not have nuked all of them. Definitely got the last 14 months or so, but 2008 might be stretching it. A quick sticky shows I've got at least an April 2009 dump. I'll check on my system at work on Monday. My previous workstations power supply died, but if the disk is still good, it might have dumps going back that far. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Irony...
Is it just me, or is there a certain amount of irony in Nearmap not allowing OSM to use their aerials to trace from, but being quite happy to use OSM as their street layer? (Don't get me wrong - I think Nearmap have a very tidy product, but it's just a pity that a compromise couldn't be worked out.) ___ 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
snip A whole lot of angst /snip I don't often email the list, but I've been kicking around OSM for maybe four years, and done a bit of mapping here and there, as well as generating the odd Garmin map for people to use. This email is a bit rambly, so I apologise in advance. To be honest, I'm over it. People have been beating each other over the head with CC-by and ODbL for so long now that we've all been pretty much brain damaged. All the posts degenerate into slanging matches inside of three replies, and the level of discourse as plummeted. So, here's my take on this: Mapping (both creating and using the maps) should be fun. But the fun has gone for me. The license debate has unfortunately slowly destroyed the community feel of the project, pissing off a lot of existing contributors, and no doubt making it less welcoming for new ones. The talk-AU list is dominated by a handful of people with very strong opinions, which is intimidating to any new comers, and off putting to the rest. That's not to say that the opinions expressed are wrong, but they do tend toward the 'fanatic' end of the spectrum. The silent majority who subscribe but don't post must wonder where the fun went. And everything just muddies the water. I've accepted the new CT's, but that's probably a bit moot as I haven't contributed much recently. Personally, I think the license debate is a bit of a furphy - contracts and licenses are important from a moral standpoint, but only practically worthwhile if you are prepared to police and enforce them. It's not really about license enforcement, it's about respect for the project. Any project that expends all its energy trying the control the usage of the project, rather than actually improving the content of the project, will eventually fall of a cliff as people move on. I guess my question is 'what is the goal of OSM?', and also 'what are the goals of the contributors?'. Weren't we trying to make a map that people could use in many and varied ways? Have we now lost sight of that goal - to make OSM accessible to all - and turned on ourselves and started eating our young? I don't care about attribution for my contributions - that's not why I was mapping in the first place. I just wanted a map I could use, and a project that was both enjoyable to contribute, and fun to be a part of. The license has changed, and I'm not sure what that means for the garmin maps I make - do I have to change the attribution, or do different things to meet the license requirements? I don't know, and to be honest I don't care. If I'm doing something wrong or incorrectly, maybe I'll get round to fixing it, maybe I won't. But the problem is I've become disillusioned - the fun and community has gone. And that's the sad part about the whole thing. Matt osmaustralia.org ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] re Coastline rendering in Garmins Mapsource
I sorted the maps today - stoopid downloads not working, and I obviously can't write a decent batch script to save my life Would have fixed it earlier, but not at work to do so - Australia Day for me generally results in a hangover, as it's also my birthday Matt John Kitchener wrote: Matt wrote: Coastlines (and the inverse islands issues) have been ongoing for ages for the Mkgmap produced Garmin files. There's a --generate-sea switch for Mkgmap that sometimes works fine, other times, not so good. It's hit and miss enough that I've never enabled it for the maps I generate. Problem seems to come from a few different things - non-closed coastline polygons, coastline direction changes, points where rivers join sea/coastline etc. There's a lot of chat on the mkg-map dev list over the last 6 months or so regarding this. Matt --- Thanks Matt. Without 'sea polygons' it'll remain a complete mess for Garmin displays. We need OSM to work in the 'real world' to accelerate uptake. Hopefully the --generate-sea- switch comes good in Mkgmap. Until then . John k PS The OsmAustralia downloads appear stuck at the 26/1 at 22b. Happy Australia Day. :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] re Coastline rendering in Garmins Mapsource
Coastlines (and the inverse islands issues) have been onging for ages for the mkgmap produced garmin files. There's a --generate-sea switch for mkgmap that sometimes works fine, other times, not so good. It's hit and miss enough that I've mever enabled it for the maps I generate Problem seems to come from a few different things - non-closed coasline polygons, coastline direction changes, points where rivers join sea/coastline etc. There's a lot of chat on the mkg-map dev list over the last 6 months or so regarding this Matt John Henderson wrote: John Kitchener wrote: Here's how it renders on an Oregon 300 http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/2718/oregon300.jpg Using a different mkgmap style file and TYP file presumably to generate the gmapsupp.img file. They're highly configurable. I've started experimenting with them for the routable cycle maps I'm producing. We've still got that underlying problem with the coastline though. John H ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Routable maps
There are routable versions of garmin maps on the OSMAustralia site, but you've got to scroll down a bit to find them - try this link http://www.osmaustralia.org/garminroute.php It does look like the IMG2GPS setup kit (and site has gone walkabout). I think I've got the setup kit kicking around somewhere - I'll email it to you directly Others programs can push the maps to the Garmin devices - MapSource, M3, cGPSMapper (which is what IMG2GPS actually uses), and some others. Have a look around www.gpsaustralia.net for other links (malsingmaps have some additional links but the site is a pig to navigate around) Matt Richard Colless wrote: I'm new to OSM, having recently replaced my 12 year old Magellan GPS with a Garmin Etrex Legend CX. I've been following with some interest the discussion about roundabouts and how they are mapped. I have downloaded the OSM maps into my Etrex, but as far as I was aware, the OSM maps were not routable. They certainly aren't on my Etrex. Any attempt to GoTo a waypoint or a POI gives an error message No roads near starting point. Now I know that this is not a fault of the Etrex. I have a card which I bought for $45 on eBay, which is routable, and will give turn by turn directions to a location. It's not much of a map, though. Streets aren't accurate, and many streets appear twice. And the nearest ATM to a SW Sydney suburb was the Westpac bank in Ballina. (What would you expect for a $45 card?) But your discussion about roundabouts tells me that OSM maps can be routable, so I must be doing something wrong when I load them. I am downloading the individual .IMG files from the OSM Australia website (http://www.osmaustralia.org/index.php), and I have used a utility called MapsetToolkit to make the OSM maps appear in the Garmin MapSource program. This lets me simply select the tiles that I want, and transfer them to the Etrex via MapSource. It also lets me add Contours Australia maps, so that my OSM maps have contour lines. Works well, but the maps aren't routable. I thought of trying the IMG2GPS program that is recommended on the OSM Australia website, but it doesn't seem to be available any more. All the links go to an expired domain name. Does anyone have any suggestions? Richard C.*_** http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mdipol/img2gps/_* ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Routable maps
Nope, can't find the IMG2GPS setup kit - could be on my machine at work - will look tomorrow. In the mean time, I think SendMap will work - http://www.cgpsmapper.com/download/sendmap20.zip It's written by the same guy that wrote cGPSMapper. I think I might have used it previously on an old machine, but the forgettory isn't what it used to be Bit of a bugger - I reckon that IMG2GPS site only went AWOL in the last week or so - I was there no more than two weeks ago grabbing IMG2GPS, but it looks like I've nuked the setup kit Matt White wrote: There are routable versions of garmin maps on the OSMAustralia site, but you've got to scroll down a bit to find them - try this link http://www.osmaustralia.org/garminroute.php It does look like the IMG2GPS setup kit (and site has gone walkabout). I think I've got the setup kit kicking around somewhere - I'll email it to you directly Others programs can push the maps to the Garmin devices - MapSource, M3, cGPSMapper (which is what IMG2GPS actually uses), and some others. Have a look around www.gpsaustralia.net for other links (malsingmaps have some additional links but the site is a pig to navigate around) Matt Richard Colless wrote: I'm new to OSM, having recently replaced my 12 year old Magellan GPS with a Garmin Etrex Legend CX. I've been following with some interest the discussion about roundabouts and how they are mapped. I have downloaded the OSM maps into my Etrex, but as far as I was aware, the OSM maps were not routable. They certainly aren't on my Etrex. Any attempt to GoTo a waypoint or a POI gives an error message No roads near starting point. Now I know that this is not a fault of the Etrex. I have a card which I bought for $45 on eBay, which is routable, and will give turn by turn directions to a location. It's not much of a map, though. Streets aren't accurate, and many streets appear twice. And the nearest ATM to a SW Sydney suburb was the Westpac bank in Ballina. (What would you expect for a $45 card?) But your discussion about roundabouts tells me that OSM maps can be routable, so I must be doing something wrong when I load them. I am downloading the individual .IMG files from the OSM Australia website (http://www.osmaustralia.org/index.php), and I have used a utility called MapsetToolkit to make the OSM maps appear in the Garmin MapSource program. This lets me simply select the tiles that I want, and transfer them to the Etrex via MapSource. It also lets me add Contours Australia maps, so that my OSM maps have contour lines. Works well, but the maps aren't routable. I thought of trying the IMG2GPS program that is recommended on the OSM Australia website, but it doesn't seem to be available any more. All the links go to an expired domain name. Does anyone have any suggestions? Richard C.*_** http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mdipol/img2gps/_* ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Routable maps
Sorry I've got the email dribbles Anyway, it looks like the old site is still operational - ish. The direct download link from the old site is still active. Try this link http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mdipol/img2gps/img2gps_281_setup.exe Matt Matt White wrote: Nope, can't find the IMG2GPS setup kit - could be on my machine at work - will look tomorrow. In the mean time, I think SendMap will work - http://www.cgpsmapper.com/download/sendmap20.zip It's written by the same guy that wrote cGPSMapper. I think I might have used it previously on an old machine, but the forgettory isn't what it used to be Bit of a bugger - I reckon that IMG2GPS site only went AWOL in the last week or so - I was there no more than two weeks ago grabbing IMG2GPS, but it looks like I've nuked the setup kit Matt White wrote: There are routable versions of garmin maps on the OSMAustralia site, but you've got to scroll down a bit to find them - try this link http://www.osmaustralia.org/garminroute.php It does look like the IMG2GPS setup kit (and site has gone walkabout). I think I've got the setup kit kicking around somewhere - I'll email it to you directly Others programs can push the maps to the Garmin devices - MapSource, M3, cGPSMapper (which is what IMG2GPS actually uses), and some others. Have a look around www.gpsaustralia.net for other links (malsingmaps have some additional links but the site is a pig to navigate around) Matt Richard Colless wrote: I'm new to OSM, having recently replaced my 12 year old Magellan GPS with a Garmin Etrex Legend CX. I've been following with some interest the discussion about roundabouts and how they are mapped. I have downloaded the OSM maps into my Etrex, but as far as I was aware, the OSM maps were not routable. They certainly aren't on my Etrex. Any attempt to GoTo a waypoint or a POI gives an error message No roads near starting point. Now I know that this is not a fault of the Etrex. I have a card which I bought for $45 on eBay, which is routable, and will give turn by turn directions to a location. It's not much of a map, though. Streets aren't accurate, and many streets appear twice. And the nearest ATM to a SW Sydney suburb was the Westpac bank in Ballina. (What would you expect for a $45 card?) But your discussion about roundabouts tells me that OSM maps can be routable, so I must be doing something wrong when I load them. I am downloading the individual .IMG files from the OSM Australia website (http://www.osmaustralia.org/index.php), and I have used a utility called MapsetToolkit to make the OSM maps appear in the Garmin MapSource program. This lets me simply select the tiles that I want, and transfer them to the Etrex via MapSource. It also lets me add Contours Australia maps, so that my OSM maps have contour lines. Works well, but the maps aren't routable. I thought of trying the IMG2GPS program that is recommended on the OSM Australia website, but it doesn't seem to be available any more. All the links go to an expired domain name. Does anyone have any suggestions? Richard C.*_** http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mdipol/img2gps/_* ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Tagging the little joiner road bits on a dual carriage way
I should probably know how to do this, but's what's the accepted technique for tagging the u-turn points and the like in a dual carriage way? I think they shoud probably be just little links between both ways, probably of the same highway type as the road they are linking, but they are nameless. A little ascii art to illustrate the problem: |b |c | | | a| |---| | | | | | | | | So b and c are the parallel ways, and a is the linker road. Mostly, I think it's done making the linker bit either tagged as primary_link, secondary_link or just tertiary/residential. Now we have some decent hi-res imagery courtesy of nearmap, it's a lot easier to locate these linker ways Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] How to tag a non-existent road
John Smith wrote: 2009/10/12 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com: If it's from the DCDB data then highway=gazetted_road and don't put anything in the renderer to show them. At the moment it's suggested to use highway=road and I was thinking of doing a special style sheet for mapnik to highlight these sorts of roads so they'd be easier to find to verify, your suggestion would be fine too, but we still need some other tag then to know they don't exist, compared to haven't been checked. They will then show up in the editors and people can then map them using gps etc when able. Once we have figured out what we can submit patches so they show up differently if they don't exist, compared to maybe exist. highway=ghost_road I just made that up... so don't actually use :) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distributing Garmin maps
John Henderson wrote: John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: The only requirement is that you attribute the data to OSM. Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: In a manner suited to the medium you need to acknowledge the licence. The stuff I've put onto my Garmin has OSM on the map page of settings so that would be fine. Not exactly sure how it gets there, though. Thanks John and Liz. I'll make sure the acknowledgement is loud and clear. I think I've been popping something like copyright OpenStreetMap.org CC-by-SA on the maps I've been making... or something like that. On the wrong computer at the moment... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Our own satellite imagery?
Liz wrote: On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Liz wrote: In my mailbox today www.aerialimpressions.com.au We are conducting aerial photography in your area over the next 4 weeks Save $200 Now $119 Receive 10 proofs of your home or property for just $119 (incl GST) http://aerialimpressions.com.au/gallery/twnTN010.jpg looks quite usable for our purposes but of course its copyright :-( At least one of their products is marked as copyright free... (Aerial Photography CDROM of Melbourne) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Our own satellite imagery?
Liz wrote: On Sat, 19 Sep 2009, Matt wrote and John Smith copied: Either way, the big issue in Australia is trying to get people invloved in the regional areas, as it's just not feasible for us city folk to leg it 400km on the weekend to map a town. 400km - do you think that's far? but points of interest get further apart so I can drive that far easily and map a place on the other end of the route Seriously I have several times done a more than 1000km round trip for the purpose of mapping, and enjoying Australia too. Not far, but given the first 80km is in traffic, it's time consuming :) I think my best is probably only 650km is a single trip - mostly driven by the need to refuel the beast more than anything else, well, that and the road I tend to map really have a top speed of about 60km given the surface and windy-ness ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Our own satellite imagery?
John Smith wrote: I received a reply about the cost to rent a plane, about 230GBP for one hour and the airport was close to the place they were photographying and it was mostly a PR stunt. Due to the sideways angle they are having difficulty rectifying images and that side of things is being worked on however companies doing this on a professional basis have a custom fit out of a plane with gyro stabalising mounts and super expensive medium format or bigger film sizes. I was pointed to this link, which I've already seen and forgot about, but it seems sat imagery is cheaper than trying to do it by plane: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aerial_photography_funding_appeals#How_much_does_it_cost About 12-17$ per sq km, US$ I'm guessing, although AU$ is up to 87c again. If we could raise the funds needed the only question then is what do we want imagery of? That's for the two metre resolution - a plane would probably give better than 50cm resolution using a decent camera. Need to find some trainee pilots who need the flight time, and split the cost of the plane. Not sure how you'd rig the camera though. I'd vote for getting a selection of regional towns - population 5000, with a reasonable number of smallers towns located close by (well, close in AU terms - within say 100km. Vic examples would be Hamilton/Casterton/Portland area, maybe Naracoorte or Renmark in SA). I think the approach has to be to kick off with the larger town - we do initial tracing to lay down the core road grid and style, and work out a way of getting someone in that town to start tracing and naming (thus no GPSr entry cost for the local mappers), and then work out how to publicise the fact. I'd try and use the local papers to do so - a quick article about how OSM is paying for high res aerial, and now we need to make some decent maps would kick it off. The regional papers would publish that sort of thing no probs (although you might need to target the few remaining independents rather than the Rural/APN papers). There's also the Blokes Shed groups - retired blokes who tinker, who could probably benefit from the exercise walking around the town... although they could probably do most of it from memory. If the satellite is good enough and cheap enough, most of these town might only be 20 sq km, so buying the sat imagery is possibly more viable cost wise. Either way, the big issue in Australia is trying to get people invloved in the regional areas, as it's just not feasible for us city folk to leg it 400km on the weekend to map a town. (That said, I've discovered that jumping onto the V-Line train early morning with the bike, and getting off at an unmapped town is both viable and cheap - a lot cheaper than driving there. You can get through a small town in a day easily on a bike. Just make sure you know when the last train back home is...) Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Our own satellite imagery?
John Smith wrote: 2009/9/14 b.schulz...@scu.edu.au: I'm happy to download a few gig of that imagery and post out DVDs to people. at 250m/pixel it's not worth bothering with. So what does the commercial imagery cost? I don't even know who supplies itor what the licensing is like ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Navteq mapping AU
Probably been looking at the quality of the OSM data... http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/cartech/mapping-australia-one-road-at-a-time-20090825-extj.html ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Newbie intro
John Smith wrote: --- On Sun, 23/8/09, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: They still don't agree with us, they still think it's just another smoothness option, except for those from Iceland maybe. Don't get me started on the absolute uselessness of the smoothness tag... Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=662
James Livingston wrote: 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 393 by my count (20 Jul-20 Aug)... which is actually pretty impressive - that's more than all messages to the AU list between 01 Jan and 31 May 2009 The AU list is certainly more lively as a result, though. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Boundary names...
John Smith wrote: I think I finally figured out where boundary names are coming from, can others confirm that boundary names are no longer being rendered please. I now only see one 'Curra' on the map compared to 2 or 3 :) http://maps.bigtincan.com/?zoom=14lat=-26.086308194794lon=152.57117074638 Also I can't see postcodes that were previously being rendered: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-26.17674lon=152.5zoom=15 http://maps.bigtincan.com/?lat=-26.17674lon=152.5zoom=15 One thing I noticed is that your coastlines seem out of date (and in return, the main OSM map doesn't handle overflow of residential areas into coastline very well). I do also like the fact that the example for this issue is in Tin Can Bay... seems somehow appropriate http://maps.bigtincan.com/?zoom=13lat=-25.92528274338lon=153.0494625901layer=BTTflat=flon=tlat=tlon= vs http://osm.org/go/ueWmh2l Otherwise, the style sheet is looking pretty good Mat ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Garmin routable (was Re: Cycleway/footway/path)
Ben Kelley wrote: OT, but get a different version of the routable maps. I used to have a version that thought footpaths were great for driving on. Try the ones from here http://www.osmaustralia.org/garminroute.php My current wish list is declaring a street index so you can search for streets, and handling the no-right-turn data. - Ben. 2009/8/11 Liz ed...@billiau.net mailto:ed...@billiau.net My Garmin thing wanted me to use a walking / cycle track alongside Lake Burley Griffin once I think I added the street name as POI option to the Garmin map generation, but perhaps not for the cycle maps... I'll check tomorrow. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Rendering wish list
John Smith wrote: Are there any other things people would like to be rendered differently from the standard OSM tiles? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aussie_Mapnik_Style_Changes I'd be keen for the 4WD bit to appear after the name for all roads tagged as 4wd only. Not sure if you've done this - for some reason everything is timing out for me Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
We had a discussion on local chapters a while ago, and I think there was a bit of to and fro with Etienne in the UK about setting up an LC here (can't remember if that was on or off list). At that stage, the OSMF weren't sure which way was up, but that looks to be changing. I'd be keen to do something local chapter-wise, just not actually sure what. I've never set up a non-profit association type entity before, and no doubt the various applicable laws will provide us with endless joy, but the concept of a formal AU umbrella organisation certainly appeals. But it's a lot of organisation/hassle etc so whoever is taking charge will need a fair bit of time. However, there's nothing stopping us from creating a local OSM organisation with or without the consent of Mum and Dad (OSM/OSMF) As delta foxtrot says, it does make negotiation with local government, business etc far easier, and there are all manner of grants and the like for non-profits available if we had grand plans, especially for rural/regional Australia. Given the size of Australia, and more specifically the low population density, we probably need a more organised approach to mapping the place if we are serious about trying to complete the entire country. I do like the concept of getting schools involved - it's an excellent way to get all the little towns in AU mapped, and it's the kind of thing (locally focused, global benefit) that would appeal to not just schools in small towns but a lot of other entities in those towns. (Ages ago I was looking for anybody in the Naracoorte area to kick off mapping Naracoorte, cos once it's done, the local paper will start using the maps for publication over the ones they are currently buying each week, plus the cost to all the advertisers who run maps in their display ads) Hey, out of interest, how many people on this list are OSMF members? OK, I'll stop talking now... Matt John Smith wrote: Just to let everyone know what's happening, the guy I work for has become interested in both helping the community and to get into selling mapping services. He also has numerous business connections. There has already been some unofficial talks with a company that makes phone handsets with GPS/3G and they seem willing to donate quite a number of these for some kind of schools/education programme. The idea is the phones would be lent out on a per month basis, along with an education pack describing all the ways schools can get involved in various activities, hopefully it can be made fun and exciting. :) For this to happen there needs to be some kind of official presence for these companies to deal with, if they donate goods it has to be owned by some entity, as the company offering phones won't want to deal with schools directly. Most government departments don't like dealing with individuals so there needs to be an official group behind this. I don't know if starting a local chapter would be the best solution, but on the other hand things might be made more difficult, if things default to OSMF in the UK. However before any of this can occur I really need to know if people have a genuine concern with setting up a local chapter or not. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
Liz wrote: On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Matt White wrote: Hey, out of interest, how many people on this list are OSMF members? me I probably should have kicked it off and said I am a member as well ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OSM representation in Australia
John Smith wrote: --- On Wed, 12/8/09, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: But it's a lot of organisation/hassle etc so whoever is taking charge will need a fair bit of time. However, there's nothing Apart from the exact wording on the rules submitted to the DFT or other state body, all it takes is about $110 and about 10-30 minutes in line at the local DFT office. I was more referring to the ongoing requirements - taxation/finance reporting (BAS statements are applicable to non-profits, but not sure about IAS statements), plus the yearly ones (GST, FBT amongst others - perhaps the ASIC registration). Plus potentially public liability and other insurance, and as if the org was to pay anyone for work (and I guess iwe should probably aim have a viable enough operation to require at least part time employees), you get into PAYG, super and the like. It doesn't cost much to start a non-profit, but it does cost money to operate one. Not 100% on this, but for companies, things like the end of finacial year tax stuff has to be signed off by an accountant, plus all the other incidentals. (I'm not trying to be negative here - just speaking from having spent the last decade dealing with all this stuff after registering a company 13 years ago cos it was cheap and seemed like a good idea at the time...) However, any money we donated to the chapter would be a tax deduction, which would be awesome I've always wanted a tax deductible hobby - I can't seem to write off buying guitars as an expense with my current companies... It would be good to have a proper place for the couple of domain names that a few of us own as well - I felt a little sheepish registering osmaustralia.org when I did - it kind of didn't seem right... Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
John Smith wrote: While it's not my proposal I updated it to match the current aussie guidelines. Please vote for it if you are in favour of this tag so we can get 4WD Only tacked on the end of road ways. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/4WD_Only Australian Tagging Guidelines, based on talk-au threads. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#4WD_only_track I started this proposal a while ago (Jan maybe?), but it sort of got lost in the surface=*/smoothness=* barney... (which in all honesty needs to be revisited, seeing as the current surface tag is pretty lacking) Anyway, thanks for kicking it off again, and I was going to say that I give it 6 hours before some dickhead goes but what about my Lamborghini - that's 4WD, but I noticed it's already happened on the main list... mapping by committee at it's finest. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only
Liz wrote: On Thu, 6 Aug 2009, Matt White wrote: Anyway, thanks for kicking it off again, and I was going to say that I give it 6 hours before some dickhead goes but what about my Lamborghini - that's 4WD, but I noticed it's already happened on the main list... mapping by committee at it's finest. the lamborghini is AWD isn't it? Well, I guess Australians probably recognise the difference between high-clearance, diff locking 4WD as actual 4WD, and AWD road cars, but evidently not everybody globally. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Extracting Map data for Australian cities
As a down and dirty command, this sort of thing works a treat (you might need to append -0.6 to each of the commandline options depending on the version of osmosis you are using) Based on extracting a subset of data from an OSM file - the bounding box is a rough cut of NSW java -Xmx512M -jar osmosis.jar --read-xml file=australia.osm --bounding-box left=140.971 right=154.500 top=-28 bottom=-37 --write-xml file=NSW.osm Matt Kamran Shafi wrote: Hi John, Thanks for a quick response. Actually I am trying to build an offline routing application for which I need only one city's map data only. Unfortunately, Osmosis has refused to recognise any commandline options. Unless there is any other tool I am thinking of writing my own to extract this data from Australia.osm. Do I have better options? On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:17 PM, John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com mailto:delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Thu, 30/7/09, Kamran Shafi kamran.sh...@gmail.com mailto:kamran.sh...@gmail.com wrote: This is my first mail to this list. I have been trying to use osmosis to extract map data for different Australian cities, but osmosis is not working for me (I am on a windows machine). Any ideas what other options do I have? I don't use windows but osmosis is a java program so for the most part it's irrelevent what platform. What is relevant is what you are trying to achieve? Splitting the data up for all cities in Australia is almost pointless at this point in time when the whole country can be generated in a 41M navit binary file format. -- Regards Kamran ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.35/2271 - Release Date: 07/29/09 18:07:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Rivers
Ross Scanlon wrote: On Sun, 24 May 2009 08:15:41 +1000 Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sun, 24 May 2009, Delta Foxtrot wrote: Have a read of this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roundabouts there are separate tags for traffic calming devices and no, we don't have mini-roundabouts in australia, they are all roundabouts. Well according to the link you posted we do: English language Wikipedia has a more liberal definition of mini-roundabout [[2]] Mini-roundabouts can be a painted circle, a low dome, or often are small garden beds. The low dome ones are the fun ones. I posted that link and the sentence on that page: After considerable research and discussion at mailing list level, the designation mini-roundabout has no place in Australian mapping. sums up the current position. So don't use mini-roundabout. This is a colabrative effort when it comes to marking up items, not just what each person feels like entering because they think that's correct it has to be consistent Australia wide not just in your little patch. That's why you need to read the full wiki and when the mailing list suggest you are doing something different to current practice then listen to the consensus and accepted practice of what people are doing. It's like the source tags, they need to be there so that others don't redo particularly ways that are tagged survey but know that we need to update ways that are tagged landsat, interpolated, etc. The only wiki that is acceptable definitions for openstreetmap is the openstreetmap wiki There's a current position? I just re-read the roundabout thread, and I couldn't see any actual consensus - plenty of decent argument, which is good as it didn't degenerate into a free for all - but no actual outcome. No real surprise there - only maybe 10 people actually took any active part in the conversation, so it was always going ot be a minority decision, and it looks that the views were basically evenly split... I think people are still mapping mini roundabouts hither and yon - I personally can't really see the issue - but at least they are getting marked... Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Rivers
Ross Scanlon wrote: On Sun, 24 May 2009 09:42:07 +1000 Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: There's a current position? I just re-read the roundabout thread, and I couldn't see any actual consensus - plenty of decent argument, which is good as it didn't degenerate into a free for all - but no actual outcome. No real surprise there - only maybe 10 people actually took any active part in the conversation, so it was always going ot be a minority decision, and it looks that the views were basically evenly split... I think people are still mapping mini roundabouts hither and yon - I personally can't really see the issue - but at least they are getting marked... Matt The consensus was what was written into the wiki. My point is that I can't find the consensus just cos it's in the wiki doesn't make it a consensus. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] suburb boundary adds confusion
Except if you look at the Brunswick/East Brunswick boundary that runs along Lygon Street - it gets very wonky as it effectively the rear of the buildings that front Lygon Street Peter Ross wrote: elbourne certainly has suburb boundries the run down the centre line of the road. See for example http://www.land.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B628/0/B95B8619BDEC796BCA2574BB000A2049/$File/Moreland+V42a.pdf for the suburb boundries in Moreland. For example those on the northern side of moreland road are in Coburg and those in the south in Brunswick. So I'm sure you have the same case here. Pete On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, I know many suburb boundaries which are defined as the center line of a given road. This is not at all unusual around here - whether it applies in Victoria I don't know. Stephen 2009/3/21 Andrew Harris and...@woowoowoo.com: I was about to map a street I'd been down a few times, but when I loaded up potlatch to view my gps traces, I found a suburb boundary right on the trace line. OK, so the road is a boundary, but usually a road is 'in' one suburb or another, so where do I go for a definitive reference on which side of the boundary to put the road? I'm talking about this area: http://tinyurl.com/cozyey -- Andrew Harris and...@woowoowoo.com http://www.woowoowoo.com ~~~ * ~~~ ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.24/2017 - Release Date: 03/22/09 17:51:00 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Adelaide out of copyright street directory
I also think that there's different rules or anything published prior to the 1967 Copyright act... I remeber having the discussion with the copyright person at the State Library of Vic a while ago, but the finer points escape me... I can't remeber if it meant 1955-56 was the cut off point or it was later in the 60's... Matt Liz wrote: On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Jack Burton wrote: On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 16:23 +1100, Patrick Jordan wrote: This is fairly definitive: http://www.copyright.org.au/pdf/acc/infosheets_pdf/G090.pdf/view?searchte rm=maps maps remain in copyright until 70 years after the creator's death. Umm, doesn't that mean that the 1940 vintage street directory that originally started this thread is still under copyright? (unless of course, it was published at least one year (given that it's 2009 now) after the death of the last surviving contributing author/cartographer/editor/guy who designed the cover/...) (or unless a street directory is not classed as a map - but that would seem rather odd, although stranger things have happened) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ahh but next paragraph the information in maps and charts (for example, names and distances between geographical features depicted), which is NOT protected by copyright expression of information in a particular map or chart (for example, selection of what to include, the colour schemes, symbols, labels, keys and contour lines), which IS protected by copyright. so it is even more complicated this whole page is worth reading and referencing on the main wiki = Ideas, information, and styles are NOT protected Copyright does not protect ideas, information, styles or techniques in copyright works. Maps and charts relating to the same geographical area will usually resemble each other. However, there is an important distinction between the information in maps and charts (for example, names and distances between geographical features depicted), which is not protected by copyright, and the expression of information in a particular map or chart (for example, selection of what to include, the colour schemes, symbols, labels, keys and contour lines), which is protected by copyright. As noted above, compilations of information (for example, lists of places of interest) are also protected by copyright. If you are creating a map or chart and wish to minimise your risk of infringing copyright in existing works, see below under the heading Substantial part. === ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.9/1900 - Release Date: 1/18/2009 12:11 PM ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] A couple of routing issues (NSW)
Ben Kelley wrote: Hi. I have been trying out the Garmin routable maps from http://osmaustralia.org/garminroute.php and I'm impressed. e.g. The roundabout tagging is good compared to Radomir's ones. In travelling to the Blue Mountains this week (west of Sydney) I noticed a couple of routing issues. One is travelling west along the M4 motorway. There seems to be a disconnect somewhere, as my eTrex Legend Cx keeps trying to recalculate the route until you get to the lower mountains (e.g. Springwood). There's also an issue going east on Parramatta Road (in Sydney) as it wants me to turn left at Great North Road (Five Dock/Haberfield) and go back onto Parramatta Road only a couple of blocks later. Does anyone know how to load up the IMG file into MapSource? - Ben Kelley. PS I have decided I don't like the crossing icon for pedestrian crossings (probably better to save that for railway level crossings), but I'm still undecided on the white circle for traffic lights. Back from holidays now (got about 25 hours of 1 second straces to upload - been a busy little lad on the break, but my partner is a little sick of going around roundabouts twice...). I'm planning on sitting down over the next couple of weeks and rejigging the icons/layout/general feel of the styles used in the Garmin maps to see what needs improving. The white dot for traffic lights I'm sort of getting used to - don't really like it yet though, and I'm still getting some strange marine nav icons for certain things on the 60CSx. Open to suggestions regarding what kind of roads at what zoom, icon usage, and anything else that can be styled. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Routable OSM Garmin maps
Cameron wrote: Matt, I'm using the South Australian ones on my Colorado 300 and it's great. There are some problems, but it's far more up-to-date than the maps at http://emexes.powweb.com/osm/ Some problems: Can't search for addresses or intersections. I can pan and select places on the map to go to though. Traffic lights are shown as lighted navaid POIs (maybe this is intentional, but it is rather distracting on the colorado.) Roundabouts are shown as a higher road classification level than they actually are. The nav aid one is interesting - that's what shows up in MapSource, but my 60CSx is showing litle white dots for traffic lights at the moment, not the nav aids (at least I don't think they are). I noticed the roundabouts are slightly dodgy - I think that's an issue of the OSM to MP coverter, but I'll do some digging. See attached screenshots. It'd be great if you could generate these regularly (weekly would be good, nightly if you have the processing power/time.) Really appreciate them :) The maps should be generating each night (I set it up a couple of weeks ago). I'll dial in to work later on and see check to make sure that it's all playing nicely. Thanks, ~Cameron Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] National Park Marine Park boundaries
Hugh Barnes wrote: On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:41:59 +1100 Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: I have a sneaking suspicion that National Parks and State Forests are defined by acts of Parliament at the federal and state levels respectively, so the co-ord are probably in Hansard somewhere... Well, Hansard is just the transcriptions of parliament. I guess you mean the legislation. And you'd be right, but … Too true. Guilty of emailing when pissed, your honour... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] National Park Marine Park boundaries
How are people mapping National Park (or state forest or other government mandated areas)? It seems that in a lot of cases, there is no way of actually doing an on the ground survey - a lot of the boundaries aren't marked, the areas can be massively inaccessible etc. Add to that things like marine park boundaries, or no fishing areas which are often defined on marine maps as just a set of GPS locations (and there is obviously no way of physically mapping those areas), and it seems there are a lot of things that we have to rely on getting the data from other sources for.(I include marine park/no fishing areas as my partners father asked about it - I see no good reason why such features couldn't be added to OSM) Question is: is it legit to use park/forest boundaries taken from government sources? If not, how on earth are we going to solve this little problem? Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] National Park Marine Park boundaries
b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: As it stands this hasn't really been addressed. Generally I just mark what's on the ground, ie the natural=wood boundary as this tends to give a reasonable indication of the national park boundary anyway. Obviously this has limits, but unless some government authority grants us use of their maps there's nothing we can really do about it. It's worth noting that I don't believe that anyone's actually tried approaching a government body about it. As for marine boundaries go, why isn't a set of GPS co-ordinates sufficient to map out various zones? Unless there's some form of copyright on the location of the zone itself it should be ok just to draw onto the map purely based on these numbers. I guess the issue is similar to using street names off a government provided source - we would have to copy factual information, rather than get out on the ground. I've found a few goverment agencies that provide the polygons of national parks etc, but they seem to want to charge for it An example - Marine park list from DSE: http://www.google.com/url?sa=tsource=webct=rescd=1url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parkweb.vic.gov.au%2Fresources%2F17_1990.pdfei=r-FISbr6FKWsswK39MHyDQusg=AFQjCNEVG5JGEpjq8PJHhy4WjcDiUBi9Cgsig2=qzkD4ifwSoyvytO9n3P_sw On a similar note, does anyone have polygons of the Oz states. Would like them to use to extract the OSM data for the garmin map creation prcoess, rather than the oversized square approach I'm using at the moment. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] What gives with roundabouts?
bluemm1975-...@yahoo.com wrote: I thought the same when I first started mapping, as I wanted to show centre pedestrian islands like in the Melways. But the wiki is very specific http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:junction%3Droundabout It says that normal pedestrian islands aren't meant to be drawn as two separate ways (flares). The lack of ability to draw the little pedestrian islands has always bugged me - I think it should be marked somehow (on roundabouts and on normal t-intersections). It's one of the things I really like about the Melways (I reckon they are probably the best street maps I've ever come across in terms of layout and detail). On the subject of roundabouts, there's a certain irony in using four nodes to create a square, and calling it round... Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Time to grow up...
I bet you thought I was about to wade into the roundabouts discussion... Nope. Sorry. Basically, I've been potlatching to my hearts content for the last 18 months, and it's served me well. But the time has come to learn how to use JOSM... I'm a big boy now, and this will be like the move from writing in pencil to getting my pen license when I was in grade 2... Anyway, I've been playing around in JOSM, and I've made some changes, and uploaded them, but it was giving me warnings or something about overlapped areas. I couldn't see anything I'd screwed up too badly, but was wondering if anyone with more JOSM experience than myself (so you'd need at least 43 mins of JOSM expererience to fulfull the requirement), could cast a quick eye over what I just did, and make sure I haven't cocked it up too bad. I've added a bunch of beaches to Great Keppel Island, and tried to attach them to the costal boundaries correctly (the first potlatch attempt wasn't great). Anyway, all the carnage is approximately here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-23.1755lon=150.9613zoom=14layers=B000FTF Ta Matt (as a complete aside, and I don't know if he (or she) is on the AU mailing list, but there's a mapper in Brisbane who has been keeping me very much amused with his/her diary entries - awesm is the handle: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/awesm/diary ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Routable OSM Garmin maps
I have rebuilt them off last nights OSM file, using newer versions of the various packages to generate them. Hopefully, they will be slightly improved... Let me know how it turns out - I'm about to give them a go on the 60CSx. Matt Nick Hocking wrote: Matt, I've just tried out freshly dowloaded versions of your NSW and VIC maps (dec 09) The VIC map loads just fine and looks great but like the NSW one it is unroutable on the Nuvi 260. Also like the NSW ones, I can search for POIs but not for street names. Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Major road cleanup
Recently, for lack of any new GPS traces to work on, I've been wandering around various parts of the country looking at the state of the major roads (eg: Western Highway in Vic, Stuart Highway in NT etc.) A lot of these roads look like they were either traced off Yahoo, or from a single GPS trace about a year and a half ago. In the time since then, many more traces have been uploaded, and suddenly there is substantially better data to work off. I was just thinking that it might be a good time to revisit some of these roads and just clean them up a bit. They kind of get ignored once they are in place (and I don't think the newer users tend to touch the major roads - I didn't for a while when I started). So if you are bored, or want some mindless work on OSM, feel free to re-align some roads... It's funny - I was just re-aligning a section of the western highway in potlatch, and flipping between all traces and only my traces for that road (I've got 3 traces each way). Either there's some widly varying accuracy on the general traces uploaded, or I always drive in the right hand lane going from Melbourne - Ballarat, and in the left hand lane going from Ballarat - Melbourne. Given I've got a slow diesel fourby, I doubt I was driving in hte fast line going up those hills towards Ballarat. Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Traces of Naracoorte, SA
Does anyone have any traces of Naracoorte is SA lurking around that haven't been uploaded? One of my clients regularly buy maps of Naracoorte (and other towns in the area) from a commercial map supplier for publication in the local newspapers, and it costs them ~$400 a time. I spent a while giving them the bible according to OSM, without knowing how well Naracoorte had been mapped. Sadly, it hasn't even been started. In my real job, I have a number of clients around australia who regualry publish maps in the local newspapers and the like, and all of them pay similar amounts each time for commercial maps. Most of these clients require rural town maps, and I reckon I could easily convice the majority to use OSM maps if the data was there (which I reckon would be a bit of a coup - having OSM visible in a lot of these papers just gets the word out on the street, so to speak). I wanted to use Naracoorte as an example, as this client would publish the maps immediately, and would provide a nice demonstration for the rest of my clients. So, if you've got either Naracoorte traces, or local Naracoorte knowledge in terms of streetnames etc, I'd really appreciate some help :-) Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Mapnik rendering of AU cities
Roy Rankin wrote: With the discussion of places, I noticed that on the slippy map with the mapnik renderer, only the names of Sydney and Canberra appear on the 500km and 200km scales. Does anyone understand why Melbourne is not shown on the whole of Australia view? Probably cos it's the only way Sydney-siders can make themselves feel superior :-) Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Dual Named Roads
Neil Penman wrote: Hi, I was wondering if there was a standard approach to roads that have two names. That is the street name in a town and the name of the highway that runs through the town. I found an example in Yass that seems to work well. Yass Valley Highway:Comur Street. Is this a recognised standard approach to this problem? I think it's a semi colon to separate... but I might be mistaken Matt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] boxes around cities
I think it was to make it easy to work out where the imaging ended when using Potlatch (well, that's the only reason I can see for said boxes). Saves you zooming in and out in hte vain hope that there is some images to trace off Matt Liz wrote: On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Stephen Hope wrote: Yeah - look to see if they have a notes tag. Are these the Yahoo coverage boxes you are talking about? I noticed the one for Adelaide appeared a few months ago and confused me until I realised that's what it was for. -- well what use is it on a map? (remember I'm not a city dweller) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.14/1646 - Release Date: 9/1/2008 6:03 PM ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
