Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging
It's just a vanilla potlatch instance, by the way. All the merging panels etc are built-in to the standard potlatch, there's no special code or branch or anything in the deployment that we're using here. I wondered if the created_by changeset tag value could be the same as the name that shows in the OAuth settings list (e.g. Potlatch 2 (cnxc)), but that is probably an enhancement request I should put in trac... Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
Longwood Lane when driving a car along it looks pretty much like a normal highway, although it is rather narrow. It has an asphalt surface, and when turning in from the north, or south there is nothing to show there is anything special about this road at all from a vehicles point of view. However at the north end there is a (newly erected) public footpath sign showing a footpath ref of B64, pointing straight down this road, and the definitive map shows this as a footpath. Currently I've tagged this way as follows: highway = unclassified designation = public_footpath ref = B64 name = Longwood Lane The problem is that the map now displays the ref, as if it were a road ref, whilst no other footpath refs get shown http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.664715lon=-1.168427zoom=15layers=M . (see laso B33a and NC45a to the WNW of B64) Is this: a) Not a problem at all; b) simply a problem for the rendering, and no change to the tagging is required; c) a possible problem with the tagging? David ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
David Groom wrote: However at the north end there is a (newly erected) public footpath sign showing a footpath ref of B64, pointing straight down this road, and the definitive map shows this as a footpath. I use admin:ref for refs that are predominantly intended for administrative usage, rather than public-facing usage. (The obvious example of this in the UK is C roads.) That would seem to work here too: granted, the one you mention appears to be signposted but I presume that's more for fault-reporting purposes - dear County Council, the farmer has a bull roaming free in the field crossed by B64, that sort of thing - rather than actually expecting people to say oh, I went for a nice walk on B64 today. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Re-PRoW-Ref-codes-WAS-Hampshire-Rights-of-Way-Data-released-under-OS-OpenData-licence-tp5710929p5713398.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] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
On 19 June 2012 14:07, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: David Groom wrote: However at the north end there is a (newly erected) public footpath sign showing a footpath ref of B64, pointing straight down this road, and the definitive map shows this as a footpath. I use admin:ref for refs that are predominantly intended for administrative usage, rather than public-facing usage. Now that sounds like tagging for the renderer. The problem in the stated case, is that there is potentially a footpath ref and a road ref. I would want to suggest something like footpath:ref=B64 or prow:ref=B64, but I don't think either is used or documented anywhere. -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
Gregory wrote: On 19 June 2012 14:07, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I use admin:ref for refs that are predominantly intended for administrative usage, rather than public-facing usage. Now that sounds like tagging for the renderer. How dare you! :p In road terms, there is a big difference between the C64 and the B2018. The former is of no use to man nor beast, unless man or beast happens to work for the County Council. Tell me, what would you think if your satnav suddenly told you at the next roundabout, take the [unsignposted] C64? cheers Richard ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
On 19 June 2012 14:13, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Gregory wrote: On 19 June 2012 14:07, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I use admin:ref for refs that are predominantly intended for administrative usage, rather than public-facing usage. Now that sounds like tagging for the renderer. How dare you! :p In road terms, there is a big difference between the C64 and the B2018. The former is of no use to man nor beast, unless man or beast happens to work for the County Council. Tell me, what would you think if your satnav suddenly told you at the next roundabout, take the [unsignposted] C64? I would think, wow OSM data is much more complete than TomTom. (and then I'd have to dangerously look at the screen to see which exit it was). But my GPS could be clever and not tell me unless it's a primary or secondary road. The Standard/Mapnik rendering shows the C-road ref in a different style, instead it could decide not to show those refs at all. I think they look a bit messy so I would agree with this style change. If man nor beast works at the County Council, who does(I often wonder this)? -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging
On 17 June 2012 12:44, Martin - CycleStreets list-osm-talk...@cyclestreets.net wrote: This data for each area is now available, converted, and ready for easy merging in with a new Potlatch2 tool Andy has written. The DfT is very keen to see the data more widely used, by OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project I've just uploaded another 41 areas - you can see them now on the wiki page above (scroll down to Ashford and go down from there). That should hopefully be all of them now, but I'll update the list if we add any more. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] National Memorial Arboretum this Saturday
Hi Brian, Brilliant. And thanks for the heads up on the standing water. Cheers Andy From: Brian Prangle [mailto:br...@mappa-mercia.org] Sent: 19 June 2012 13:46 To: Andy Robinson Cc: Philip John; talk-gb-westmidla...@openstreetmap.org; Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] National Memorial Arboretum this Saturday Hi Andy As you know I won't be able to make it on Saturday. However I feel guilty, having suggested this venue and then ducking out. So I took advantage of the good weather today and spent a couple of hours surveying at NMA so that I have made a contribution to the mapping effort - mostly the Far East memorials and gardens to the NE of the Visitor Centre. I'll try to edit much of the data over the next couple of days. There are still hundreds of memorials left! In fact just about every tree is dedicated to someone or some organisation. The ground in many places is very waterlogged with surface water. Regards Brian On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Andy Robinson ajrli...@gmail.com wrote: Phil, The more the merrier! Cheers Andy From: phil.pe...@gmail.com [mailto:phil.pe...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Philip John Sent: 18 June 2012 13:37 To: Andy Robinson Cc: talk-gb-westmidla...@openstreetmap.org; Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] National Memorial Arboretum this Saturday As I live in Lichfield I was hoping to attend but now can't. However, in the interests of boosting interest in and membership of OSM/Mappa Mercia would it be useful for me to post something on my hyperlocal site, Lichfield Live http://lichfieldlive.co.uk inviting people to join in? Phil On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Andy Robinson ajrli...@gmail.com wrote: We have a micro mapping party proposed for this Saturday to the National Memorial Arboretum [1] at Alrewas, Staffs [2]. I'm now available so will be able to make it and I'll do a little planning this week to smooth the day. It would be handy to get an idea of numbers who are planning to come along so if you can respond to the list that would be great. The NMA is a sobering place to visit so don't be surprised if you spend more time reading the memorial details than mapping if you havent been before. At 150 acres the site is far bigger than you can individually get around in one day and see everything. The NMA has its own map which they sell for £3 together with a detailed guidebook for £6.50. They also have a simple 3D map on their website [3]. Our plan is to improve our own detail and get as many of the memorials on OpenStreetMap as possible (there are hundreds!) Entrance to the NMA is Free (they encourage donation) and car parking is £3 Pay and Display. Alternatively you can cycle to it by taking Route 54 from Lichfield/Burton [4] and looking out for the signs to the Arboretum through Alrewas or Fradley. Suggest you plan the route first as the Sustrans cycle signs are not that easy to spot. The quiet route signed is through Fradley. Note there is no access from Alrewas directly to Croxall Road, you have to use the main Burton Road (A513) instead. There is a visitor café/restaurant on site which is where I suggest we meet at 10am (they open at 9) and also would be the logical place for lunch unless you bring your own sandwiches. Note that the site is quite exposed and can be bracing when windy so be prepared for the weather on the day. Cheers Andy [1] http://www.thenma.org.uk/ [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72855 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72855lon=-1.7266zoom=16layers=M lon=-1.7266zoom=16layers=M [3] http://www.thenma.org.uk/the-nma/map/map-of-the-arboretum/ [4] http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72986 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.72986lon=-1.73671zoom=15layers=C lon=-1.73671zoom=15layers=C ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list talk-gb-westmidla...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list talk-gb-westmidla...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Olympic torch route on Guardian website
Hello all, I just noticed this uses OSM data: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/interactive/2012/may/18/olympic-torch-route-map-london-2012 I quite like the rendering style, though it shows up the patchiness of things like farmland and woodland in rural areas. I wonder if The Guardian did this in house? And yes, OSM is credited appropriately (though not linked). Regards, Ben ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 14:33 +0100, Gregory wrote: On 19 June 2012 14:13, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Gregory wrote: On 19 June 2012 14:07, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I use admin:ref for refs that are predominantly intended for administrative usage, rather than public-facing usage. Now that sounds like tagging for the renderer. How dare you! :p In road terms, there is a big difference between the C64 and the B2018. The former is of no use to man nor beast, unless man or beast happens to work for the County Council. Tell me, what would you think if your satnav suddenly told you at the next roundabout, take the [unsignposted] C64? I would think, wow OSM data is much more complete than TomTom. (and then I'd have to dangerously look at the screen to see which exit it was). But my GPS could be clever and not tell me unless it's a primary or secondary road. The Standard/Mapnik rendering shows the C-road ref in a different style, instead it could decide not to show those refs at all. I think they look a bit messy so I would agree with this style change. If man nor beast works at the County Council, who does(I often wonder this)? A neighbouring mapper to me does work for the Council, and his area is complete with C road numbers. Phil ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Olympic torch route on Guardian website
On 19/06/2012 17:22, Ben Pollinger wrote: Hello all, I just noticed this uses OSM data: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/interactive/2012/may/18/olympic-torch-route-map-london-2012 I quite like the rendering style, though it shows up the patchiness of things like farmland and woodland in rural areas. I wonder if The Guardian did this in house? It looks similar to the render used by First Great Western on their screens in the 'media' carriage. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
On 19 June 2012 12:59, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote: a) Not a problem at all; b) simply a problem for the rendering, and no change to the tagging is required; c) a possible problem with the tagging? I'd say c). It seems to me like the road reference number (e.g. A514) and public right of way reference number (e.g. B442) are not mutually exclusive - i.e. a particular way could have both a road reference number and also a public right of way reference number. If we are using the same tag key (i.e. ref) for non-mutually exclusive tags, then that suggests to me there's a problem with the tagging. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road
On 19 June 2012 14:11, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: I use admin:ref for refs that are predominantly intended for administrative usage, rather than public-facing usage. Now that sounds like tagging for the renderer. No, that's not true. Please see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer , especially: the tags being used are accurate and not misleading - that describes to me the use of admin:ref. If Richard was using, say, source:generator = B234, or landuse = B234 that would be deliberately tag[ging] incorrectly for the renderer. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
