date:20170109

On 10-Jan-17 12:44 PM, Andy Townsend wrote:

On 10/01/17 01:20, David Groom wrote:

...
Tag info shows 579 ways tagged with crop = beet, of these 572 are in
northern Italy added by 3 users, so its probably quite easy to ask
what exactly they meant by "beet" , and retag these existing ways if
they actually should be beetroot.

In the UK I could hazard a guess as to whether sugarbeet or something
else based on the proximity to one of British Sugar's plants such as
Newark or Peterborough, but in Northern Italy asking the mapper
definitely seems like a good idea.

There are lots of 'beets' ... different kinds of plants that is.
http://www.webcitation.org/6Fu9TOBWl?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.plantnames.unimelb.edu.au%2FSorting%2FBeta.html

Having viewed that ... I think the value can be left as beet... it maybe
viewed as 'generic' for all the different kinds.

I am only familiar with beetroot ... but I have changed the wiki
description to

"Beet field, many different kinds, beetroot and sugarbeet being two. "

It was ""Beet field"

If necessary to identify a particular beet then a further tag could be
added

beet=beetroot, sugarbeet, sea_beat etc...

Another caveat in the UK - crops are often rotated (and planted based
on price expectation) so what is beet one year is barley the next, and
perhaps oil-seed rape after that. Essentially, where this variation
happens it'd be difficult to trust any "crop" tag over a year old.

There is at least one instance of multiple values separated by ; I'd
think that would be one way of mapping crop rotation values? Rendering
is another problem.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] beetroot or beet

2017-01-09 Thread Craig Wallace


On 2017-01-10 01:20, David Groom wrote:

Although "beet" could also refer to "sugar beet"


Or "fodder beet" (aka mangelwurzel).
I think it is rather similar to sugar beet, not sure if you could tell 
the difference in the field.


It seems they are all the same species (Beta vulgaris), but different 
cultivars. Also Swiss chard is the same species, but using the leaves.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] beetroot or beet


On 10/01/17 01:20, David Groom wrote:

...
Tag info shows 579 ways tagged with crop = beet, of these 572 are in 
northern Italy added by 3 users, so its probably quite easy to ask 
what exactly they meant by "beet" , and retag these existing ways if 
they actually should be beetroot.


In the UK I could hazard a guess as to whether sugarbeet or something 
else based on the proximity to one of British Sugar's plants such as 
Newark or Peterborough, but in Northern Italy asking the mapper 
definitely seems like a good idea.


Another caveat in the UK - crops are often rotated (and planted based on 
price expectation) so what is beet one year is barley the next, and 
perhaps oil-seed rape after that.  Essentially, where this variation 
happens it'd be difficult to trust any "crop" tag over a year old.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] tag prow_ref




On 09/01/17 23:56, David Groom wrote:
Has any one got any instances of any providers of OSM data using the 
prow_ref on rendering / routing


A map style rather than a "provider of OSM data", but it seemed like a 
good idea so I added basic support at:


https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L1957

You'll need to render your own tiles though.

Cheers,

Andy

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

Re: [Talk-GB] beetroot or beet


Although "beet" could also refer to "sugar beet"

I think the wiki pages may be confused

The wiki page for crop in Japanese 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Key:crop does seem to have crop = 
beet translating as sugar beet


Whereas the Polish page I think has crop = beet translating a beetroot

There probably needs to be an addition to the English crop page to have 
crop = beet and make this clear it is sugar beet.


Tag info shows 579 ways tagged with crop = beet, of these 572 are in 
northern Italy added by 3 users, so its probably quite easy to ask what 
exactly they meant by "beet" , and retag these existing ways if they 
actually should be beetroot.


David

-- Original Message --
From: "Warin" <61sundow...@gmail.com>
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: 10/01/2017 00:01:24
Subject: [Talk-GB] beetroot or beet


Hi again,

another UK English question.


I use beetroot .. but beet has been used on the wiki.

I think beet comes from American English.


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




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

Re: [Talk-GB] tag prow_ref

The prow:ref tag emerged from a discussion I started on this list about 
the problem of using the ref tag to refer to PROW references.  The 
specific problem was that some highways were also designated footpaths / 
bridleways, and so if the ref tag was used to tag a rights of way 
reference it was given the same rendering priority on these ways as a 
road reference.  There was also no way to distinguish between a ref tag 
which was for a road reference, and a ref tag which was for a prow 
reference on that road.  Thus the prow:ref tag was suggested.


At a later stage I noted the prow_ref tag started to be used.  I did not 
follow the discussion / reasoning behind that, but I find it hard to 
believe that we need both a prow_ref  tag and a prow:ref tag.  So I 
assume the prow_ref tag supoerceeded the prow:ref tag, but for the 
reasoning outlined in the first paragraph I would not think it helpful 
to simple use the plain "ref" tag on the Isle of Wight.


I cant follow the logic of  "Visibly signed things go into 'ref'", since 
that would seem to mean we don't need lcn_ref tags as these are visible 
signed.


David




-- Original Message --
From: "Robert Norris" 
To: "Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" ; "David 
Groom" 

Sent: 10/01/2017 00:36:41
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] tag prow_ref

If I remember correctly the use of "prow_ref" tag is normally when the 
reference is taken from the  Council ROW information documents that are 
compatible with OSM.

'ref' is used when the Reference itself is on the signed on the ground.
Thus for the Isle Of Wight, it is probably recommended to use the 'ref' 
field since I believe most if not all ROW on the IOW have the reference 
on the sign posts.
Whereas for most of the rest of England and Wales, only rarely are the 
ROW references put on sign posts (I don't know of anywhere else that 
does it consistently compared to the IOW). The only times I normally 
see ROW references are on permissive notices or temporary route 
diversion notices.
Thus similar to the recommendation for 'C' road references vs A/B 
Roads. Visibly signed things go into 'ref' so used for A/B roads. 
'official_ref' or similar should be used for C roads.


--
Be Seeing You - Rob.
If at first you don't succeed,
then skydiving isn't for you.


From: David Groom 
Sent: 09 January 2017 23:56:51
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] tag prow_ref

Has any one got any instances of any providers of OSM data using the 
prow_ref on rendering / routing


I recently pointed out to a mapper that if the reference numbers he was 
adding to footpaths were official PROW reference numbers it was 
recommended to use the "prow_ref" tag rather than the plain "ref" tag.  
He's now amended his entries to prow_ref but is a little disappointed 
it doesn't show up on the main map, OsmAnd, or Maps.me.


I have pointed out to him that OSM is mainly a provider of data, not 
maps, so not everything is rendered on the man map, but it would be 
nice if I could point him in the direction of where it is being used,  
other than my own web site and custom OsmAnd file.


Thanks

David







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

Re: [Talk-GB] tag prow_ref

2017-01-09 Thread Robert Norris

If I remember correctly the use of "prow_ref" tag is normally when the 
reference is taken from the  Council ROW information documents that are 
compatible with OSM.
'ref' is used when the Reference itself is on the signed on the ground.
Thus for the Isle Of Wight, it is probably recommended to use the 'ref' field 
since I believe most if not all ROW on the IOW have the reference on the sign 
posts.
Whereas for most of the rest of England and Wales, only rarely are the ROW 
references put on sign posts (I don't know of anywhere else that does it 
consistently compared to the IOW). The only times I normally see ROW references 
are on permissive notices or temporary route diversion notices.
Thus similar to the recommendation for 'C' road references vs A/B Roads. 
Visibly signed things go into 'ref' so used for A/B roads. 'official_ref' or 
similar should be used for C roads.

--
Be Seeing You - Rob.
If at first you don't succeed,
then skydiving isn't for you.


From: David Groom 
Sent: 09 January 2017 23:56:51
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] tag prow_ref

Has any one got any instances of any providers of OSM data using the prow_ref 
on rendering / routing

I recently pointed out to a mapper that if the reference numbers he was adding 
to footpaths were official PROW reference numbers it was recommended to use the 
"prow_ref" tag rather than the plain "ref" tag.  He's now amended his entries 
to prow_ref but is a little disappointed it doesn't show up on the main map, 
OsmAnd, or Maps.me.

I have pointed out to him that OSM is mainly a provider of data, not maps, so 
not everything is rendered on the man map, but it would be nice if I could 
point him in the direction of where it is being used,  other than my own web 
site and custom OsmAnd file.

Thanks

David



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

[Talk-GB] beetroot or beet


Hi again,

another UK English question.


I use beetroot .. but beet has been used on the wiki.

I think beet comes from American English.


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

[Talk-GB] tag prow_ref

Has any one got any instances of any providers of OSM data using the 
prow_ref on rendering / routing


I recently pointed out to a mapper that if the reference numbers he was 
adding to footpaths were official PROW reference numbers it was 
recommended to use the "prow_ref" tag rather than the plain "ref" tag.  
He's now amended his entries to prow_ref but is a little disappointed it 
doesn't show up on the main map, OsmAnd, or Maps.me.


I have pointed out to him that OSM is mainly a provider of data, not 
maps, so not everything is rendered on the man map, but it would be nice 
if I could point him in the direction of where it is being used,  other 
than my own web site and custom OsmAnd file.


Thanks

David

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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Wolverhampton Railway Station

2017-01-09 Thread Wolves on Wheels Cycle Campaign


Hi Folks,

Just to introduce myself, I'm Steve Young from Wolverhampton ( First 
message, very very recently joined this mailing list )


Have been involved from a cycle campaigning perspective re the 
Interchange project.


The Interchange will be changing pretty much constantly for the next 2 
years, especially when Midland Metro is also introduced to the site.
I note that OSM has the layout roughly as is, Google still showing the 
old entrance, will be checking Google maps every day now to see how long 
it takes them to update as a comparison!



Wolves on Wheels got a last-minute reprieve of using Railway Drive for 
cycle access ( also an increase in the 14 total railway station cycle 
parking spaces which were originally planned for the rebuild ).


At end of the pedestrian-only footbridge is shared use from Railway 
Drive down to Corn Hill on Footpath #43158983.


Hopefully in a month or so I'll be able to sort things like this out for 
myself and edit as appropriate ( Have also got a few contraflow cycle 
lanes to add ).


I've not made an edit yet, though hoping to make the next meeting in 
Birmingham.
If I could bring my laptop and arrive a little earlier with someone to 
"hold my hand" and answer some newbie questions, I'd find it useful.


I've spotted a few cycle stands which aren't mapped at the rail station 
so will try and add these beforehand so I'm not a complete novice!

Lesson 1 - Add my house number? ( Currently missing from map ;-)

I'm also on the Wolverhampton Council mailing list for road closures 
etc. so in a good position as an extra pair of eyes.


While I'm saying hello, I'd also like to thank you all for your hard work.
The quality of mapping for the West Midlands is impressive ( I know 
roads in Brum which are on OSM but not Google M :-)


Steve Young,
Wolverhampton.


--

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 11:15:37 -
From: "Ed Loach" 
To: "'Brian Prangle'" 
Cc: 'OSM Group WM' 
Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Wolverhampton Railway Station
access  from 8th January 2017
Message-ID: <01d269a0$8a1e4890$9e5ad9b0$@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

A GPS trace is in the upload queue. I’ll try and get more details from my 
dashcam though it was fairly misty at 8am this morning.

  


Ed

  


From: Brian Prangle [mailto:br...@mappa-mercia.org]
Sent: 01 December 2016 13:26
To: Ed Loach
Cc: OSM Group WM
Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Wolverhampton Railway Station access from 
8th January 2017

  


Hi Ed

I can do this - might not be exactly on 8th Jan

Regards

Brian

  


On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Ed Loach  wrote:

I've just been reading about the changes that will take place early next year 
at this link

  


http://www.wolverhampton.gov.uk/article/10057/Access-to-railway-station-and-car-park-to-change-in-New-Year

  


and wondered if anyone here will be in the area to get a GPS trace of the new 
short stay car park once it opens?

  


Looking at the area as it is now in OpenStreetMap:

  


http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/52.58648/-2.12107

  


from a routing point of view bicycles will need to push their bicycles across 
the foot bridge, but as that ends on a pedestrian area I suspect very little 
currently will be able to route that way. A survey of that area from a cyclists 
point of view after the changes might also be handy.

  


Looking at the proposed changes the following section of Corn Hill seems to be 
missing, so it is perhaps possible the derelict building mentioned in the note 
has been removed to make the new short stay parking area:

  


http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/294503793

  


but a survey will be needed to check.

  


I'll probably be in Wolverhampton at some point between now and new year, but 
don't know when I'll next be visiting after the 8th January.

  


Thanks and best wishes,

  


Ed




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

Re: [Talk-GB] crop=grass or sod


On 10-Jan-17 08:48 AM, Paul Sladen wrote:

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017, SK53 wrote:

Turf has the distinct advantage of being less likely to generate sniggers.

But a risk of turf wars...?






Ok.. add turf to the mix

My dictionary for sources says

turf - Middle English (1100-1500) from Old English (before 1100)

sod - Middle English (1100-1500) from  Middle Dutch or Middle Low German

Maybe with Brexit sod is off.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] crop=grass or sod

2017-01-09 Thread Paul Sladen

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017, SK53 wrote:
> Turf has the distinct advantage of being less likely to generate sniggers.

But a risk of turf wars...?



-Paul.  Ahem.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] crop=grass or sod

2017-01-09 Thread SK53

Turf is more suitable gb-en, sod in this usage AFAIK is mainly us-en. In
British & Irish usage a sod is more often a lump of earth or peat extracted
from the ground rather than the desirable grass on top. Sod off is I
believe distinctly gb-en.

Turf has the distinct advantage of being less likely to generate sniggers.

Jerry

On 9 January 2017 at 21:28, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> There are a number of farms near me (on a flood plain) that are used to
> produce grass.
>
> However when I look it up on wikipedia .. I get sod. And, yes, I will know
> what you mean if you tell me to 'sod off' :-)
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sod
>
>
> I am wondering what is 'best' GB English in this case ... grass? or sod?
>
>
> I am tending towards sod, but this might create language translation
> problems, I'll raise that on a separate forum if necessary.
>
>
> So, what say you? grass? or sod?
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] crop=grass or sod

2017-01-09 Thread Chris Hill

The farms near me that grow grass as a crop to transplant onto, say, a 
pitch sell their product as turf.


I would say this is crop=turf on landuse=farmland, the turf is grown for 
many seasons on the same location.


--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)


On 09/01/2017 21:28, Warin wrote:

Hi,


There are a number of farms near me (on a flood plain) that are used 
to produce grass.


However when I look it up on wikipedia .. I get sod. And, yes, I will 
know what you mean if you tell me to 'sod off' :-)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sod


I am wondering what is 'best' GB English in this case ... grass? or sod?


I am tending towards sod, but this might create language translation 
problems, I'll raise that on a separate forum if necessary.



So, what say you? grass? or sod?


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



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

[Talk-GB] crop=grass or sod


Hi,


There are a number of farms near me (on a flood plain) that are used to 
produce grass.


However when I look it up on wikipedia .. I get sod. And, yes, I will 
know what you mean if you tell me to 'sod off' :-)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sod


I am wondering what is 'best' GB English in this case ... grass? or sod?


I am tending towards sod, but this might create language translation 
problems, I'll raise that on a separate forum if necessary.



So, what say you? grass? or sod?


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

[Talk-GB] Tracker: Waterway with npe/NPE

2017-01-09 Thread Rob Nickerson

All,

I have set up a taginfo script to monitor waterway=* with source=npe or
source=NPE features:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G9KXfp4Ho3fVROO9MxotcYTydl9CEXB_fi5ko2pM5Kc/edit#gid=2116033898

Happy mapping

*Rob*
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Monitoring OSM changes (was Re: natural=heath)

2017-01-09 Thread Dave F



On 09/01/2017 14:55, Adrian McEwen wrote:
Ah.  I probably did fall foul of that.  That's good to know for the 
future.  In the meantime I have reset my login, so can now confirm 
(what everyone else probably already knew :-) that it's OSM Mapper 
that I've been using for that.


Would still be interested to hear about what other tools I 
could/should be using :-)


WhoDidIt returns just the changeset boundary & occasionally misses a few 
edits (unsure why).


I use Overpass Turbo http://overpass-turbo.eu/

With this routine:

[out:json][timeout:25];
(
( node(newer:"{{date:1Day}}")({{bbox}});
 way(newer:"{{date:1Day}}")({{bbox}});
)
-
(
 node(newer:"{{date:1Day}}")(user:"DaveF")({{bbox}});
 way(newer:"{{date:1Day}}")(user:"DaveF")({{bbox}});
)
);
out meta geom;

Change user name & time length to suit:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Overpass_turbo/Extended_Overpass_Turbo_Queries

DaveF


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Monitoring OSM changes (was Re: natural=heath)

2017-01-09 Thread Adrian McEwen


On 09/01/17 14:44, Ed Loach wrote:

Adrian wrote:

I did set up some changes-in-a-given-area RSS feeds from ITOworld
years
ago (I'd explain what they are better, but while the feeds still work
I've forgotten my login to go and get the tool's name :-D)

You might not have forgotten your ITO world login - if you have an RSS feed and 
follow the url the login from that doesn't work.

You have to already have logged in via http://www.itoworld.com in your browser 
before clicking on the url in the email.

Or at least that works for me.

Ed

Ah.  I probably did fall foul of that.  That's good to know for the 
future.  In the meantime I have reset my login, so can now confirm (what 
everyone else probably already knew :-) that it's OSM Mapper that I've 
been using for that.


Would still be interested to hear about what other tools I could/should 
be using :-)


Cheers,

Adrian.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=heath



I have came across a similar issue where areas of mainly grass, but with 
some gorse bushes, on chalk downland had been changed to natural=heath, 
when I contacted the mapper about it he said something along the lines 
of, "well I've seen it done like that elsewhere"


David



-- Original Message --
From: "SK53" 
To: "Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" 
Sent: 09/01/2017 11:53:51
Subject: [Talk-GB] natural=heath

Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of 
polygons tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months 
to OSM.


I only noticed these when looking at old traces on the new GPX trace 
overlay. Specifically I noticed them on the Snowdon range extending 
beyond Moel Eilio.


I have now reviewed my photographs taken in 2010 for the countryside 
extending N of Moel Eilio to the pass between Foel Goch and Moel 
Cynghorion. As it was a beautiful day the photos also provide valuable 
interpretive evidence not only for the rest of the Snowdon range, but 
for the Northern Glyders, Mynydd Mawr and the Nantlle Ridge.


Both in detail and in long view the vast bulk of this countryside is 
unimproved grassland, which is why it is used for sheep farming and not 
grouse moors. There appears to be a small patch of heather moorland 
beyond the forestry to the N of Moel Eiio, and possibly a patch in one 
of the valleys to the E.


In addition to reviewing my own photos I have also checked the same 
areas against the Phase 1 habitat survey carried out by the Countryside 
Commission of Wales roughly between 1980-1995. This also shows the vast 
bulk of the area as being acid grassland, albeit with some small areas 
of mosaic grassland and heath. Unfortunately I cannot show this 
analysis because I obtained the data under an distinctly non-open 
licence and need explicit permission from Natural Resources Wales to 
publish the data.


This is not to say that the use of tag natural=heath is wrong. Many of 
the areas which have recently been mapped as natural=heath can also be 
described as moorland or rough grazing depending on context (upland or 
coastal).


The more usual use of heath, certainly within communities of 
naturalists, conservationists and ecologists, is for habitats dominated 
by ericaceous (members of the heather family) shrubs & sub-shrubs: 
i.e., heather, bell heather, heaths, bilberry, crowberry etc.


The phase 1 habitat manual (phase 1 is the basic ecological survey 
technique developed by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, JNCC) 
states:


"Heathland includes vegetation dominated by ericoids or dwarf gorse 
species, as well as 'heaths' dominated by lichens and bryophytes, dwarf 
forbs, Carex bigelowii or Juncus trifidus." (p. 41, 2010 revision)"


Personally, I would prefer that we stick to a definition similar to 
this one. There is not likely to an entirely straightforward 
correspondence with Phase 1 as some upland heather moorland may get 
mapped in Phase 1 onto other habitats, particularly if underlain by 
large quantities of peat.


The reasons for this are:
Habitats are different. Habitats as different as these should be tagged 
differently. Upland and coastal unimproved grasslands are very 
different habitats to heather moorland and very very different from 
rare lowland heaths. Just the range of birds one encounters will be 
different. On the former I expect to see Meadow Pipits, Wheatears and 
no Red Grouse. Lowland heaths in Southern England are habitats for 
quite rare birds: Nightjars, Woodlarks, Dartford Warblers.
Terrain underfoot is different. There is a massive difference between 
walking though knee-deep heather in places like the Rhinogs or the Mull 
of Kintyre, the lovely turf on the ridges N of Snowdon, or tussocky 
coastal grassland. We should be capturing such things.
Visual differences. The image of the country is different. Most 
apparent when heather is in bloom.Landuse differences. Most obviously 
sheep grazing versus grouse moor, although sheep may still be 
encountered on the latter.
Obscuring rare natural areas. Genuine lowland heath is a rare 
phenomenon in Britain and requires great conservation effort. Extension 
of the natural=heath tag to cover other things means that identifying 
these special areas using OSM will not be possible.
I reviewing the extent of current use of natural=heath I may already be 
too late in preventing an extension of its meaning to cover more or 
less all non-intensively farmed areas which aren't wooded. 
Notwithstanding this I would like to canvas views from other mappers. 
If the current usage of the tag is deemed to be the suitable one then 
we need to develop additional tags which allow the recognition of all 
the features I mention above.


Regards,

Jerry
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Monitoring OSM changes (was Re: natural=heath)

2017-01-09 Thread Ed Loach

Adrian wrote:
> I did set up some changes-in-a-given-area RSS feeds from ITOworld
> years
> ago (I'd explain what they are better, but while the feeds still work
> I've forgotten my login to go and get the tool's name :-D)

You might not have forgotten your ITO world login - if you have an RSS feed and 
follow the url the login from that doesn't work. 

You have to already have logged in via http://www.itoworld.com in your browser 
before clicking on the url in the email.

Or at least that works for me.

Ed

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

[Talk-GB] Monitoring OSM changes (was Re: natural=heath)

2017-01-09 Thread Adrian McEwen


On 09/01/17 12:50, Andy Townsend wrote:
More seriously, edits are public, and feeds such as Pascal Neis's, 
Whodidit and OsmCha allow monitoring of changes in an area, so if you 
see something that "looks wrong" please do investigate and contact the 
user about it.


Is there a good introduction to those sorts of feeds anywhere?

I did set up some changes-in-a-given-area RSS feeds from ITOworld years 
ago (I'd explain what they are better, but while the feeds still work 
I've forgotten my login to go and get the tool's name :-D)


I'm wondering (and there are often hints, like Andy's comment above, 
that such tools exist) if there are better/more tools these days to:

 1) Keep an eye on all changes for a given geographic area
 2) Watch for all changesets that use a given tag (obviously that'd be 
too much of a firehose for some tags, but for others it'd help people 
keep an eye on particular sorts of edits)


Cheers,

Adrian.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=heath

2017-01-09 Thread SK53

No-one has solved conflation in OSM, so there is no mechanism for
re-merging branches (I suspect that it's fundamentally very hard for geo
data).

If there were usable common conflation techniques there would be many fewer
problems with imports.

A more viable approach is a post-processed version of OSM data. A couple of
the firms doing routing apps do various QA routines before pushing out new
releases. The problem is that it's quite easy to do decent post-processing
clean-up on data for specific domains (roads, boundaries, retail etc), but
one gets back to the conflation problem it it's necessary to merge these
together again.

Jerry

On 9 January 2017 at 12:40, Jez Nicholson  wrote:

> has there ever been discussion about code branching in OSM? In git terms,
> we are all making changes direct to master. I'm wondering whether small
> changes could be automatically approved and large changes would require
> peer review first.
>
> I know that this is a huge change to the base infrastructure, so maybe a
> bot that auto-challenges large/sweeping changes?
>
> or is this like in QI when the siren goes off because someone proposes
> something that has is a commonly held fallacy? or been discussed ad nauseam
>
> - Jez
>
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 at 12:29 ael  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:53:51AM +, SK53 wrote:
>> > Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of polygons
>> > tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months to OSM.
>>
>>
>> I too have encountered at least one armchair mapper who (in my view)
>> incorrectly tagged large areas of Bodmin moor with this nonsense.
>> I changed this rubbish in the areas that I have directly surveyed, but
>> did not think that I should override another mapper who clearly had
>> spent a lot of effort in adjacent areas without consultation.
>>
>> I first noticed this problem several months ago: I cannot remember
>> whether I tried to contact the mapper to ask what was happening.
>>
>> I have had other instances of armchair mappers adding what I regard as
>> very dubious landuse tags to areas that I have extensively surveyed.
>> When I contacted one of the main offenders; I didn't get a very helpful
>> response.
>>
>> Anyway, I suspect that this is a problem over large areas.
>>
>> ael
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=heath

2017-01-09 Thread Dan S

2017-01-09 12:40 GMT+00:00 Jez Nicholson :
> has there ever been discussion about code branching in OSM? In git terms, we
> are all making changes direct to master. I'm wondering whether small changes
> could be automatically approved and large changes would require peer review
> first. I know that this is a huge change to the base infrastructure

Yes there has been discussion of this, but not on talk-gb because
talk-gb isn't really the place for it ;)
It's a very difficult idea to convert osm to a "branching" data model,
because of some awkward issues such as universal identifiers for
objects and versions.
But! There has been some work on an interesting project which sort-of
enables branching-and-merging, in the HOT world:
https://hi.stamen.com/merging-offline-edits-with-the-posm-replay-tool-2f39a4410d2a

> so maybe a bot
> that auto-challenges large/sweeping changes?

I think we pretty much already have this, thanks to various monitoring
tools (recently, OSMCHA - very helpful), except that the "bot" is the
community.


> or is this like in QI when the siren goes off because someone proposes
> something that has is a commonly held fallacy? or been discussed ad nauseam

Best not to discourage people who are coming "new to old ideas" imho,
though talk-gb's not the ideal venue so I'd suggest using a dev
forum...

Dan


> - Jez
>
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 at 12:29 ael  wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:53:51AM +, SK53 wrote:
>> > Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of polygons
>> > tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months to OSM.
>>
>>
>> I too have encountered at least one armchair mapper who (in my view)
>> incorrectly tagged large areas of Bodmin moor with this nonsense.
>> I changed this rubbish in the areas that I have directly surveyed, but
>> did not think that I should override another mapper who clearly had
>> spent a lot of effort in adjacent areas without consultation.
>>
>> I first noticed this problem several months ago: I cannot remember
>> whether I tried to contact the mapper to ask what was happening.
>>
>> I have had other instances of armchair mappers adding what I regard as
>> very dubious landuse tags to areas that I have extensively surveyed.
>> When I contacted one of the main offenders; I didn't get a very helpful
>> response.
>>
>> Anyway, I suspect that this is a problem over large areas.
>>
>> ael
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=heath


On 09/01/2017 12:40, Jez Nicholson wrote:

...  so maybe a bot that auto-challenges large/sweeping changes?


I can just see it - "Clippy for OSM" - "It looks as if you are crayoning 
in some landuse?  May I suggest you leave your chair and map what is 
outside your door?"  :)


More seriously, edits are public, and feeds such as Pascal Neis's, 
Whodidit and OsmCha allow monitoring of changes in an area, so if you 
see something that "looks wrong" please do investigate and contact the 
user about it.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=heath

2017-01-09 Thread Jez Nicholson

has there ever been discussion about code branching in OSM? In git terms,
we are all making changes direct to master. I'm wondering whether small
changes could be automatically approved and large changes would require
peer review first.

I know that this is a huge change to the base infrastructure, so maybe a
bot that auto-challenges large/sweeping changes?

or is this like in QI when the siren goes off because someone proposes
something that has is a commonly held fallacy? or been discussed ad nauseam

- Jez

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 at 12:29 ael  wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 11:53:51AM +, SK53 wrote:
> > Somehow I have been oblivious to the fact that large numbers of polygons
> > tagged natural=heath have been added over the past few months to OSM.
>
>
> I too have encountered at least one armchair mapper who (in my view)
> incorrectly tagged large areas of Bodmin moor with this nonsense.
> I changed this rubbish in the areas that I have directly surveyed, but
> did not think that I should override another mapper who clearly had
> spent a lot of effort in adjacent areas without consultation.
>
> I first noticed this problem several months ago: I cannot remember
> whether I tried to contact the mapper to ask what was happening.
>
> I have had other instances of armchair mappers adding what I regard as
> very dubious landuse tags to areas that I have extensively surveyed.
> When I contacted one of the main offenders; I didn't get a very helpful
> response.
>
> Anyway, I suspect that this is a problem over large areas.
>
> ael
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=heath


On 09/01/2017 12:28, ael wrote:
When I contacted one of the main offenders; I didn't get a very 
helpful response. 


It's a shame that this happens, but please do keep trying to contact 
other mappers where there's a problem like this.  If for no other 
reason, it exposes the problem on 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussions?c=United%20Kingdom#4/54.16/-1.98 
.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=heath