Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Glenn Plas]

On 05-10-17 11:10, Marc Gemis wrote:
> Does a tourist information sign indicates any access rights ? Is the
> fact that a place is for rent indicates any access rights to the
> driveway ?  It can still be access=customers (or visitors, but we
> don't have that)

What I am sure about is that when you don't want tourists on your
property, you do not put up a tourist sign showing people where to go.
It's like an invitation to trespass your property.

reasonable doubt is definitely a thing

> 
> m.
> 
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 10:58 AM, joost schouppe
>  wrote:
>> Jakka mapped it as private, based on an anonymous note. However, we now have
>> clear indications this is wrong. We can't use Streetview to define this as
>> access=yes, but I believe we can use this to overrule an anonymous source.
>> So I have removed the tag and left a fixme and a comment at the note. I
>> would suggest we only change this based on a survey or a decent reply from
>> the local government.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
> 
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> 


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[joost schouppe]

I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that if there's reasonable doubt, we
shouldn't map anonymous info without a local survey or some other proof.

2017-10-05 11:10 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> Does a tourist information sign indicates any access rights ? Is the
> fact that a place is for rent indicates any access rights to the
> driveway ?  It can still be access=customers (or visitors, but we
> don't have that).
>
> m.
>
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 10:58 AM, joost schouppe
>  wrote:
> > Jakka mapped it as private, based on an anonymous note. However, we now
> have
> > clear indications this is wrong. We can't use Streetview to define this
> as
> > access=yes, but I believe we can use this to overrule an anonymous
> source.
> > So I have removed the tag and left a fixme and a comment at the note. I
> > would suggest we only change this based on a survey or a decent reply
> from
> > the local government.
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-be mailing list
> > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>



-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Marc Gemis]

Does a tourist information sign indicates any access rights ? Is the
fact that a place is for rent indicates any access rights to the
driveway ?  It can still be access=customers (or visitors, but we
don't have that).

m.

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 10:58 AM, joost schouppe
 wrote:
> Jakka mapped it as private, based on an anonymous note. However, we now have
> clear indications this is wrong. We can't use Streetview to define this as
> access=yes, but I believe we can use this to overrule an anonymous source.
> So I have removed the tag and left a fixme and a comment at the note. I
> would suggest we only change this based on a survey or a decent reply from
> the local government.
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[joost schouppe]

Jakka mapped it as private, based on an anonymous note. However, we now
have clear indications this is wrong. We can't use Streetview to define
this as access=yes, but I believe we can use this to overrule an anonymous
source. So I have removed the tag and left a fixme and a comment at the
note. I would suggest we only change this based on a survey or a decent
reply from the local government.
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Jonathan Beliën]

I think it's indeed Château de Miremont !

It apparently was at some point a place we could rent to organize events ; no 
idea if it's still the case.
https://www.pagesdor.be/entreprise/Seneffe/L11523167/Ch%C3%A2teau+de+Miremont/

Jonathan Beliën
GEO-6

-Message d'origine-
De : Glenn Plas [mailto:gl...@byte-consult.be] 
Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 18:55
À : OpenStreetMap Belgium 
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

It probably is Château de Miremont when checking the map.

On 04-10-17 18:50, Glenn Plas wrote:
> I can also see on the opposing side of the road a touristic sign that 
> points you toward what I think reads "Chateau de miracle" even though 
> it's blurred.
> 
> That hardly looks private.
> 
> https://www.google.be/maps/@50.5623311,4.2435211,3a,21y,117.34h,75.78t
> /data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY7eetCLpKRiHgvO06v-M0Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
> 
> GLenn

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


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Glenn Plas]

It probably is Château de Miremont when checking the map.

On 04-10-17 18:50, Glenn Plas wrote:
> I can also see on the opposing side of the road a touristic sign that
> points you toward what I think reads "Chateau de miracle" even though
> it's blurred.
> 
> That hardly looks private.
> 
> https://www.google.be/maps/@50.5623311,4.2435211,3a,21y,117.34h,75.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY7eetCLpKRiHgvO06v-M0Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
> 
> GLenn

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Glenn Plas]

I can also see on the opposing side of the road a touristic sign that
points you toward what I think reads "Chateau de miracle" even though
it's blurred.

That hardly looks private.

https://www.google.be/maps/@50.5623311,4.2435211,3a,21y,117.34h,75.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY7eetCLpKRiHgvO06v-M0Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

GLenn


On 04-10-17 15:46, Gerard Vanderveken wrote:
> On second view, on the left tree, seems to be a little C1 sign and on
> the right tree there seems some text on a panel behind the leaves.
> I believe it is private, unless a visit at the place proves otherwise.
> 
> Regards,
> Gerard.
> 
> mgwebm...@fastmail.fm wrote:
>> Strange. That’s the link that is provided by their app. Could you try
>> again with this one or go to http://www.ngi.be/topomapviewer/ and then
>> search for Feluy : the path is just nest to the pointer.
>>
>> PS : I know it’s evil but still, have a look of the place on street
>> view
>> 
>>  :-)
>> There is absolutely nothing stating that this way is private.
>>
>> Matthieu
>>
>>> On 4 Oct 2017, at 13:55, Glenn Plas >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This link gives a bad request response for me:
>>>
>>> Bad Request
>>>
>>> Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.
>>>
 FYI, the path is mapped by the NGI, with driving restriction. See this
 link
 
>>>
>>> Could you doublecheck this, I'm quite interested in this data.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Glenn
>>
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>   
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> 


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[mgwebmail]

You’re right, I didn’t noticed.

> On 4 Oct 2017, at 15:46, Gerard Vanderveken  wrote:
> 
> On second view, on the left tree, seems to be a little C1 sign and on the 
> right tree there seems some text on a panel behind the leaves.
> I believe it is private, unless a visit at the place proves otherwise.
> 
> Regards,
> Gerard.
> 
> mgwebm...@fastmail.fm  wrote:
>> Strange. That’s the link that is provided by their app. Could you try again 
>> with this one or go to http://www.ngi.be/topomapviewer/ 
>>  and then search for Feluy : the path is 
>> just nest to the pointer.
>> 
>> PS : I know it’s evil but still, have a look of the place on street view 
>> 
>>  :-) There is absolutely nothing stating that this way is private.
>> 
>> Matthieu
>> 
>>> On 4 Oct 2017, at 13:55, Glenn Plas >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> This link gives a bad request response for me:
>>> 
>>> Bad Request
>>> 
>>> Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.
>>> 
 FYI, the path is mapped by the NGI, with driving restriction. See this
 link
 >
>>> 
>>> Could you doublecheck this, I'm quite interested in this data.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Glenn
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be 
>> 
>>   
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Gerard Vanderveken]

On second view, on the left tree, seems to be a little C1 sign and on 
the right tree there seems some text on a panel behind the leaves.

I believe it is private, unless a visit at the place proves otherwise.

Regards,
Gerard.

mgwebm...@fastmail.fm wrote:

Strange. That’s the link that is provided by their app. Could you try 
again with this one or go to http://www.ngi.be/topomapviewer/ and then 
search for Feluy : the path is just nest to the pointer.


PS : I know it’s evil but still, have a look of the place on street 
view 
 :-) 
There is absolutely nothing stating that this way is private.


Matthieu

On 4 Oct 2017, at 13:55, Glenn Plas > wrote:


Hi,

This link gives a bad request response for me:

Bad Request

Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.


FYI, the path is mapped by the NGI, with driving restriction. See this
link
>



Could you doublecheck this, I'm quite interested in this data.

Cheers,

Glenn





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

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[mgwebmail]

Strange. That’s the link that is provided by their app. Could you try again 
with this one or go to http://www.ngi.be/topomapviewer/ 
 and then search for Feluy : the path is just 
nest to the pointer.

PS : I know it’s evil but still, have a look of the place on street view 

 :-) There is absolutely nothing stating that this way is private.

Matthieu

> On 4 Oct 2017, at 13:55, Glenn Plas  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This link gives a bad request response for me:
> 
> Bad Request
> 
> Your browser sent a request that this server could not understand.
> 
>> FYI, the path is mapped by the NGI, with driving restriction. See this
>> link
>> 
> 
> Could you doublecheck this, I'm quite interested in this data.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Glenn

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Pieter Brusselman]

In this case I would agree with setting 'access=private' (cfr: 
https://www.balnam.be/localite/feluy)


But every one can claim that a road/path/track is private...  I would 
check 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads 
for more info on that.  Both, Flanders and Wallonie, have a platform 
that shows the juridicial state of slow roads.


Pieter Brusselman
/Cartografie ~ Projectmedewerker/

(logo boompja) 

*A* Kasteellaan 349 A, 9000 Gent
*T* 09 / 331 59 27
*W *www.tragewegen.be

logo facebook 

ter info: ik werk niet op vrijdag

Op 4/10/2017 om 11:39 schreef Gerard Vanderveken:

Private driveways are also mapped in the GIS of Vlaanderen.
They are part of the mapping of every soil hardening.
Don't know the case for Wallonia.

The road itself is not in the Atlas, so the claim that it is private 
seems just.
(the crossing path Sentier Miremont is in the Atlas and thus probably 
public.)


Regards,
Gerard

Jonathan Beliën wrote:

I would say to put that road (from the main road to the house) as 
`access=private` and reply to the note saying the road is now marked 
as private and even if it's displayed on the map, no one will use 
that road (including GPS using OpenStreetMap data).


Wish you a pleasant day !

Jonathan Beliën
GEO-6

-Message d'origine-
De : Jakka [mailto:vdmfrank...@gmail.com] Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 
2017 11:10

À : talk-be@openstreetmap.org
Objet : [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

Hi,
http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1161734#map=17/50.56332/4.24592=N 


highway=service

"Ce chemin est un chemin privé, il n'a pas a être sur la carte."
door anoniem


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


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





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


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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Gerard Vanderveken]

Private driveways are also mapped in the GIS of Vlaanderen.
They are part of the mapping of every soil hardening.
Don't know the case for Wallonia.

The road itself is not in the Atlas, so the claim that it is private 
seems just.
(the crossing path Sentier Miremont is in the Atlas and thus probably 
public.)


Regards,
Gerard

Jonathan Beliën wrote:


I would say to put that road (from the main road to the house) as 
`access=private` and reply to the note saying the road is now marked as private 
and even if it's displayed on the map, no one will use that road (including GPS 
using OpenStreetMap data).

Wish you a pleasant day !

Jonathan Beliën
GEO-6

-Message d'origine-
De : Jakka [mailto:vdmfrank...@gmail.com] 
Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 11:10

À : talk-be@openstreetmap.org
Objet : [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

Hi,
http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1161734#map=17/50.56332/4.24592=N
highway=service

"Ce chemin est un chemin privé, il n'a pas a être sur la carte."
door anoniem


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


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




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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[joost schouppe]

Agreed. Extra argument is that if we remove it, someone else will just add
it again. The best way to make sure everyone knows the road is private, is
by mapping it as a private road. Not by not mapping it.

I would leave the note open, and ask someone to verify locally. I can
understand the northern part of this driveway is private, but I would be
surprised the connection to the road is private too. Maybe the local
government can clarify.

2017-10-04 11:14 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Beliën :

> I would say to put that road (from the main road to the house) as
> `access=private` and reply to the note saying the road is now marked as
> private and even if it's displayed on the map, no one will use that road
> (including GPS using OpenStreetMap data).
>
> Wish you a pleasant day !
>
> Jonathan Beliën
> GEO-6
>
> -Message d'origine-
> De : Jakka [mailto:vdmfrank...@gmail.com]
> Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 11:10
> À : talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> Objet : [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note
>
> Hi,
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1161734#map=17/50.56332/4.24592=N
> highway=service
>
> "Ce chemin est un chemin privé, il n'a pas a être sur la carte."
> door anoniem
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>



-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

[Jonathan Beliën]

I would say to put that road (from the main road to the house) as 
`access=private` and reply to the note saying the road is now marked as private 
and even if it's displayed on the map, no one will use that road (including GPS 
using OpenStreetMap data).

Wish you a pleasant day !

Jonathan Beliën
GEO-6

-Message d'origine-
De : Jakka [mailto:vdmfrank...@gmail.com] 
Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 11:10
À : talk-be@openstreetmap.org
Objet : [OSM-talk-be] How we deal with this kind of note

Hi,
http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1161734#map=17/50.56332/4.24592=N
highway=service

"Ce chemin est un chemin privé, il n'a pas a être sur la carte."
door anoniem


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


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