[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Grit map featured in local gov social media case study
Our work on the grit map is featured in: http://static.bdo.uk.com/assets/documents/2012/03/BDO_Local_Government_Team_-_Updating_your_status_social_media_report.pdf (where I'm credited in a footnote as co-founder of MappaMercia; that's not a claim I made). -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [Talk-GB] London 2012 tourch relay route
On 19/03/12 08:02, Andy Robinson wrote: You may have seen from news this morning that the torch relay route for the 2012 Olympics has been published. PDF's on the BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17358291 IMO this the type of data that OSM was made for. I couldn't disagree more... It's ephemeral noise. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] London 2012 tourch relay route
Andy Robinson wrote: You may have seen from news this morning that the torch relay route for the 2012 Olympics has been published. PDF's on the BBC website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17358291 IMO this the type of data that OSM was made for. I couldn't disagree more... It's ephemeral noise. Yep, but like gritting routes OSM is one of the few methods that this type of information can usefully held and displayed. The data might only be relevant for a short period in the run-up to the games but it's still in my view relevant and will have a historical context thereafter. Definitely ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
I've been invading Lancashire from Yorkshire and have got as far as Rochdale. I concur with Brian's methodology. My theory is that, at this point, concentrated holes in the centre of towns and cities are not a bad thing, they may encourage new or less active mappers to go out and map their town. I am now focusing on primary route interchanges, (lot's of stray old nodes defining key junctions) and rural roads where there is a low probability of an arm-chair mapper messing up. FYI, Martin's recent yes mentioned later in this thread greatly improves the greater Liverpool area. He got in touch with me to say that he was unaware of the license change until yesterday ... so there is still scope for trying to contact contributors. Mike On 17/03/2012 15:30, bpran...@gmail.com wrote: I've been working away at the trunk and primary routes in Manchester and environs - should be OK by end of month Regards Brian On , Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: We're now down to http://odbl.poole.ch/uk_major_roads.txt Also greatly impressed with Coventry progress - very little red left now! I've started intermittent work on Manchester; any help there would be appreciated. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
I started to work on Hampshire, but got the following request from a decliner: I was wondering if you would mind refraining from 're-mapping' my contributions for the time being? I'm still in discussions with the OSMF regarding re-licensing some of my contributions which come from a 3rd party source not compatible with the new terms. Obviously we hope to have concluded this work before the 1st of April deadline. In the meantime the more of my contributions that are deleted means more work for me to put right once we get the licensing sorted. I think the time's getting close enough that I'll resume that work anyway. __John ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] New, kothic-js version of Freemap
Hi, As from yesterday (March 18th) the default version of Freemap (www.free-map.org.uk; UK OSM-based countryside mapping site) has become the kothic-js based 0.6. As well as client-side rendering using kothic-js, the new version features * Ability to add annotations to the map (as before) e.g. path directions/blockages; * Overhauled and hopefully more user-friendly walking routes system. I intend to build a free and open repository of walking routes on Freemap, which users can share with each other. * A developer API (see www.free-map.org.uk/0.6/about.html) providing access to the underlying data. It is however not a final version, there are still a number of things to do. Frequently anticipated questions: * As rendering is done client side it might take a few seconds for the mpa to appear. Also, the rendered maps are not yet cached (local storage could, up to a point, be a solution here) so performance is not as good as fast server side rendering solutions on powerful servers; however it is better than server side rendering would be on Freemap. * There are some quirks with rendering around tile boundaries in particular. I haven't resolved this just yet. It might be an underlying kothic issue. * Only certain parts of southern and northern England, and all of Wales, are covered, due to server constraints. This is unlikely to change for the moment. * Up-to-date browser required (Firefox 4+; Chrome; IE9) Whilst these issues exist, the fact that kothic-js is included in this year's GSOC is encouraging, and thus there's a good chance the performance issues will be resolved. It is hoped to include printable PDFs of walk routes, using a pure client-side solution on browsers supporting PDF data URLs. Code is on github at https://github.com/nickw1/Freemap/ As Freemap itself now uses vector data, I now plan to update OpenTrail (Android Freemap client) to use vector rendering too, when mapsforge 0.3 (supporting custom styles) is released. Nick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
On 19/03/2012 13:40, John Sturdy wrote: I started to work on Hampshire, but got the following request from a decliner: I was wondering if you would mind refraining from 're-mapping' my contributions for the time being? I'm still in discussions with the OSMF regarding re-licensing some of my contributions which come from a 3rd party source not compatible with the new terms. Obviously we hope to have concluded this work before the 1st of April deadline. In the meantime the more of my contributions that are deleted means more work for me to put right once we get the licensing sorted. I think the time's getting close enough that I'll resume that work anyway. __John This is almost certainly a person I had an amicable phone conversation with a week last Monday who is still concerned that OS open data somehow is not compatible with the new terms. Probability is dropping like a stone given the time that has passed but there is still a chance of a yes. Mike ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
Michael Collinson wrote: On 19/03/2012 13:40, John Sturdy wrote: I think the time's getting close enough that I'll resume that work anyway. This is almost certainly a person I had an amicable phone conversation with a week last Monday who is still concerned that OS open data somehow is not compatible with the new terms. Probability is dropping like a stone given the time that has passed but there is still a chance of a yes. AIUI only a small amount of Andy Street's work (I don't see the point of pussyfooting around, we all know who it is!) is OS-derived. And, with the best will in the world, any monkey like thee or me can trace from OS OpenData, but Andy's footpath surveying work is excellent and it would be a shame to lose it because of an unrelated issue. Would a sensible solution be for LWG and/or any other volunteers to work with him on identifying the affected changesets; for those changesets to be retained; and for the remainder to remain 'declined' and be dropped in early April? After all, at the very least, OS OpenData was only released in April 2010, so it's actually impossible that any of his edits before then are in doubt. ;) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Remapping-update-tp5573600p5577315.html Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
Hi all, I've just managed to track down a contributor ScottDay in Caterham and he has just accepted the license which should greatly help that area. I've also done a fair bit of fixing/enhancing myself in a few places (centred around the areas I know - Wimbledon, Horsham and Seaford), although I did manage to delete the NCN relation (no idea how, sorry about that...) Stephen On 17 March 2012 13:20, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: We're now down to 900 problematic trunk/primary/motorway: http://odbl.poole.ch/uk_major_roads.txt Also greatly impressed with Coventry progress - very little red left now! I've started intermittent work on Manchester; any help there would be appreciated. cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
On 19/03/2012 12:40, John Sturdy wrote: I started to work on Hampshire, but got the following request from a decliner: I was wondering if you would mind refraining from 're-mapping' my contributions for the time being? I'm still in discussions with the OSMF regarding re-licensing some of my contributions which come from a 3rd party source not compatible with the new terms. Obviously we hope to have concluded this work before the 1st of April deadline. In the meantime the more of my contributions that are deleted means more work for me to put right once we get the licensing sorted. I think the time's getting close enough that I'll resume that work anyway. __John I've been working on the main roads in south of England over the past few weeks. I deliberately avoided parts of Hampshire as I'd heard Andy Street was still considering and if possible I'd prefer people accepted than we remap. However, with just two weeks left (possibly less if this continuous rebuild idea is going ahead and a fully ODBL map is due on 1 April) then I think the time has come to remap what we can. We've been at the licence change for a long time and I'm not sure how something will come up in the next few days that will make a difference in this case, unless somebody has more info they can share on this. Mark_S ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update
Michael Collinson wrote: On 19/03/2012 13:40, John Sturdy wrote: I think the time's getting close enough that I'll resume that work anyway. This is almost certainly a person I had an amicable phone conversation with a week last Monday who is still concerned that OS open data somehow is not compatible with the new terms. Probability is dropping like a stone given the time that has passed but there is still a chance of a yes. AIUI only a small amount of Andy Street's work (I don't see the point of pussyfooting around, we all know who it is!) is OS-derived. And, with the best will in the world, any monkey like thee or me can trace from OS OpenData, but Andy's footpath surveying work is excellent and it would be a shame to lose it because of an unrelated issue. Would a sensible solution be for LWG and/or any other volunteers to work with him on identifying the affected changesets; for those changesets to be retained; and for the remainder to remain 'declined' and be dropped in early April? Here's my manual check (taking me about 2 hours) of Andy Streets changes. Everything before 01/04/2010 has been assumed ok, which is around 1100 changesets. Everything after this change has been considered: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4281583 This is about 900 changesets. I've grouped these into a few different categories for which could be considered to have OS 'issues' - amounting to around 37 changesets: // OS Derived changesets // Changesets with OS named in changeset comment: // OS StreetView http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4415489 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4415876 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4416305 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4595934 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4595929 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4595853 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7312608 // OS Locator http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7303315 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7367792 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7362036 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7321053 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7512624 // OS OpenData Locator+Streetview http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7286972 // SDNP (South Downs National Park) Import // OS_OpenData_Strategi (except western edge) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8216155 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8216120 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8216047 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8215988 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8215902 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8215608 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8215522 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8215395 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8215211 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8216603 // // Named in source:name tag // // OS StreetView http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8323516 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7550902 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7499950 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7460982 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7314486 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/6780651 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5844267 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5306397 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5251524 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/4537078 // OS Locator http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7436665 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7362367 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5353674 /// End I'm not sure which one's he's concerned about (I have now asked him explicitly too). I don't see any Code-Point data used, so there should be no worry there. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
