Re: [talk-au] farm airstrips

On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 7:47 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > Especially with the "runway" apparently going through a tree & 2 fences! > ... and a farm dam. I've had a look at the other runways they've mapped and they almost all look OK. There is another that goes through some fences and one or

Re: [talk-au] farm airstrips

Considering there's also a "hanger" there that doesn't seem to be visible on any aerial imagery I just checked, I'm in favour of deleting it. It just doesn't seem to actually exist, and I question where the name came from. --- Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On 29/04/20

Re: [talk-au] SA House Numbers

way to help out is just going to be going out and surveying house numbers. Tools like Field Papers could be helpful for this to let you print out a map, write down house numbers as you go, and then bring it back into an editor to add as address nodes in OSM. --- Thanks, Andrew Welch m

Re: [talk-au] Mass Edit Proposal - South Australia's Arterial Traffic Network

While the original was closed, a new (and identical) post has been made in the forums: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mass-edit-proposal-south-australias-road-network/110095 Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 at 19:55, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>

Re: [talk-au] Mass Edit Proposal - South Australia's Arterial Traffic Network

oriented output (which I would expect would take DataSA's dataset over us). Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 at 18:52, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > Sigh, here we go again. > > Can't be stuffed registering to add comments on that thread. > > This proposal goes a

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

they're wrong edits by our standards. We want them to edit and contribute in a way that allows them to correctly represent the status of their parks, and ensures that as a collaborative project, we don't go and continue to add in bad data unintentionally. Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

hopefully be enough to at least keep both us and them happy. If we're lucky it might even open some doors for us to work with them further and improve OSM further. Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 21:41, wrote: > Thanks Adam, well put. > > There are t

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

. If they want to help OSM reflect the true status of these tracks, they need to respect how OSM works. We want to work with them, and have been trying to. It's really up to them to come to the table at this point. Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 21:12, Frederik Ramm

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

As much as we want to wait on them and work with them, there’s probably a point at which we should treat their edits like vandalism (and just revert their deletions) until they actually work with us. Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 8:13 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

The user who's edits were revered by Frederik has now tagged those ways as access=no, hopefully that means the message is starting to get across to NPWS. They did set some questionable names on those trails though, and haven't replied to a changeset comment asking about those. Thanks, Andrew

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

that mappers unaware of these discussions won’t go ahead and re-add the trails. Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 3:45 pm, Mark Pulley wrote: > I’ve just had another private message from Stephen Stenberg: > > I had replied privately: > > Prior to reversi

Re: [talk-au] Question about using NSW Speed Zone Data in OSM

rom my last > holidays), so I can go through these and revert them. Any objections? > > Mark P. > > On 9 Feb 2024, at 9:57 am, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > We do have permissions to use this data it's listed in > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources#New_

Re: [talk-au] Question about using NSW Speed Zone Data in OSM

We do have permissions to use this data it's listed in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources#New_South_Wales, however from looking at their changeset history, it looks like 1. They are conducting an import by en-mass blindly adding and replacing existing data with the

Re: [talk-au] Question about using NSW Speed Zone Data in OSM

Bottom of the Speed Zones page has a link to CC-BY 4.0, so it’s okay only if we have a waiver for not being able to directly attribute them. There’s one for DataSA on the wiki as an example. Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 at 9:01 pm, Mark Pulley wrote: > D

[talk-au] Proposed automated edit - note removal in South Australia

/108612, and the Wiki page for the automated edit is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits/Fortera/Note_on_South_Australian_highway%3Dtrunk Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https

Re: [talk-au] New tags for Vic State Forests

I would leave off boundary=protected_area until they have IUCN Categories assigned. It doesn't add any more information than leisure=nature_reserve. On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 11:52 AM Little Maps wrote: > > Hi all, landuse=forest is widely used to denote State Forests in OSM, due to > legislated

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

If there is a general park notice "stay on marked tracks only" combined with the "End of track" I would say that's sufficient to imply you can't continue further and therefore access=no. Without the general park notice but simply "End of track", to me that just means it's the end of

Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison

On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 16:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > Tried a test message from an outside e-mail but doesn't seem to have come > through. > > Do you have to be subscribed to the list to be able to post to it? > Yes ___ Talk-au mailing list

Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison

Due to the structure of OSM, we don't have a single "Liaison Officer", so it's best if they join the list here and join the community discussion. I'm happy to engage directly with them if they prefer a single point of contact, but I'd need to stress that no single person is an authority within OSM

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023, 11:12 pm Andrew Harvey, wrote: > > >> Do they say that the data is supposed to be >> updated weekly? >> > > That order was set as a weekly recurring order. > I just got the reccuring email for my orders, so this appears

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 at 00:25, Yuchen Pei wrote: > This is the URL > > https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/cl-isd-prd-datashare-s3-delivery/Order_FDBZT5.zip > > Is it from the DELWP? Yes > Do they say that the data is supposed to be > updated weekly? > That order was set as a weekly

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

rather if you can submit a Merge Request on GitLab (or Pull Request on GitHub). On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 20:53, Yuchen Pei wrote: > On Mon 2023-10-16 15:35:13 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 15:16, Yuchen Pei wrote: > > >> On Mon 2023-10-16 14:51:00

Re: [talk-au] Overpass question

On 17/10/23 04:58, Bob Cameron wrote:> Ways only? Because the output data/list format is different. Nodes are arranged by objects per co-ordinate, whereas ways are by an ID that includes a nodes list, with a separate co-ordinate lookup table for those nodes. My entire workflow is co-ordinate

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 at 12:13, Phil Wyatt wrote: > Personally I think it should be suburb and postcode (drop the country) > https://gitlab.com/alantgeo/vicmap2osm#inclusion-of-addrsuburb-addrpostcode-and-addrstate It was noted that there is not a consensus within the community, therefore I

Re: [talk-au] emergency highway airstrips

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Dhighway_strip On Mon, 16 Oct 2023, 20:18 Warin, <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > How do we tag emergency highway airstrips, as used by the RFDS? I > thought this was documented on the Australian tagging guidelines but I > cannot see it.. >

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

That's okay. I created https://github.com/alantgeo/vicmap2osm as a mirror of the GitLab code, happy to collaborate via Issues and Pull Requests there. On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 15:49, Yuchen Pei wrote: > On Mon 2023-10-16 15:35:13 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > [... 86

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 15:16, Yuchen Pei wrote: > On Mon 2023-10-16 14:51:00 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 at 20:40, Yuchen Pei wrote: > > > [... 38 lines elided] > > > mr2osc.mjs is used in Stage 2 (replacing street_number=

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

e file format is some > standard osm change format. > Yes, this is mentioned in the README > You can visualise the tag changes with bin/mrCoopDiff.js and www/mrPreview.html at URL I did this and validated that the changes look as intended. > > To Andrew: what specifically are you worried

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

On 6/10/23 18:14, Little Maps wrote: Thanks Graeme, it’ll be great to hear what others think too. Cheers Ian The first thing to keep in mind is how concentrated the AU population is. Sydney and Melbourne both have 20% of the population living in them. If we add on Brisbane we reach the 50%

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 at 11:08, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > In regard to Strava, it would be very handy if they read OSM access data & > removed traces from their map when tracks are changed to access=no. > And they or anyone else can't do that if we just delete the way completely as some are

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 at 14:19, Ben Ritter wrote: > I agree with all of this. If the track exists on the ground, something > should exist in OSM. > > This situation is not a novel one that requires a new tag prefix, I think > it should be represented with: > >- highway=* because it is clearly a

Re: [talk-au] Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

On 5/10/23 18:01, cleary wrote: the small central district? Or is it the much larger Tamworth LGA? I think it would include the suburbs but not the outlying towns/villages in the LGA. There are also city/suburbs such as "City of Ryde" which is the name of a local government area in the Sydney

Re: [talk-au] Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 3:50 PM David Bannon wrote: > I'd wonder if we are building an impossible to manage rule set. For example, > many small town doctor's clinic only have a doctor there one or two days a > week. So, a full time doctor is worth 40 points, so, a one day a week one is > 8

Re: [talk-au] Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

On 3/10/23 20:40, Warin wrote: The 'government/community services' might be ordered by there total numbers? PO (including local PO agents) Police Doctors (theses seam scarcer than Police?_ Hospitals OK, so there was a maths error in my example. I was suggesting that the population

[talk-au] Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

On 2/10/23 21:53, Little Maps wrote: As I understand your message, we have and/or can get population data for a small proportion of places in Aus (probably with comprehensive data for most larger places and less data for the many smaller ones). There are two classes of problems: 1. Urban

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 at 23:48, Yuchen Pei wrote: > On Mon 2023-10-02 21:42:01 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > [... 15 lines elided] > > > It's been a while since I worked on this, but I believe it was the > > matching of existing OSM addresses to Vicmap, and tha

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 at 00:10, Yuchen Pei wrote: > On Mon 2023-10-02 21:35:10 +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > > While OSM doesn't have layers, https://openaddresses.io/ more or less > > acts as the address layer. The datasets there aren't all ODBL, but > > they are generally open. It includes

[talk-au] Victorian cities (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

On 2/10/23 21:53, Little Maps wrote: differences in what people consider to be towns vs cities. For example, lots of regional centres in Vic have been tagged as cities (and are indeed called ‘cities’ in Victoria), whereas many places of similar size in other states have been tagged as towns.

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 at 23:16, Yuchen Pei wrote: > > The preparation and planning is well progressed in my view. There is > > always going to be a long tail of corner cases and I was attempting to > > handle more of these in the code and that never got finished. We > > probably would be better to

Re: [talk-au] Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size)

On 2/10/23 12:52, Little Maps wrote: Hi again, fyi. I was curious to see how variable city/town tags were in relation to population. About 1500 places spread around Aus have a population tag according to an Overpass Turbo search. You were a little too quick for me, I didn't have time to put

Re: [talk-au] How to efficiently improve AU address coverage?

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 at 12:34, Yuchen Pei wrote: > Hello, > > I read in a 6-year old post[1] that the Netherlands had an address > coverage of over 99%. This made me curious what would be the Australian > number. G-NAF boasts 15M addresses[2], whereas according to > metrics.improveosm.org there

Re: [talk-au] What is the license of vicmap2osm?

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023, at 8:25 PM, Yuchen Pei wrote: > The repo for the vicmap importing project, vicmap2osm[1] seems to be > missing a license, could you add one please? Thank you. package.json declares it as under the MIT license, but I've added a dedicated LICENSE file now for clarity. > I

Re: [talk-au] Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size)

On 1/10/23 10:31, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Oh look - Windorah is there, so it must be important after all! :-) Almost as important as Croydon. No, not that Croydon, Croydon Queensland. Just up the road from the metropolis of Forsayth. ___

[talk-au] Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size)

On 29/9/23 20:22, Warin wrote: I did meet some English 4WD world travellers that had a world map. In the north west corner of Australia was Carnegie on that map .. it is a cattle station, has fuel and might do some food if you ask. It is a fair way to the next places with fuel. It was on

Re: [talk-au] Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size

On 28/9/23 20:31, Michael Collinson wrote: Perhaps this apocryphal Ireland solution should be used? :-) A house - building A house and a church - hamlet A house, a church and a pub - village A house, a church and two pubs - town I think your criteria may to strict :-) I've been looking at

Re: [talk-au] Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size

On 29/9/23 08:34, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: I was looking at https://profile.id.com.au/scenic-rim/population?WebID=160 , but I can't figure out what ABS geographic unit that lines up with. Maybe it's their own?

Re: [talk-au] Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size

On 28/9/23 17:04, Michael Collinson wrote: So, I think some sort agreed national level hierarchy of populated place is important in order to jive with cultural, legal, cultural and broad population density criteria. But to vary it locally or regionally is dangerous and I agree with cleary (if

Re: [talk-au] Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size

On 28/9/23 09:08, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: Against what you said, Rathdowney in SEQ, with ~1800 people, Err downtown Rathdowney has a population of 161.I might be OK with village, but it's a bit of a stretch to call it a town. But Maroon, 20k the other way, with only a primary school & a

Re: [talk-au] Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size

On 28/9/23 08:21, cleary wrote: Windorah Qld and Ivanhoe NSW are both currently shown as "town" in OSM but neither has more than rudimentary health service (if any), a hotel, small primary school and service station. I couldn't buy a coffee in either place last time I visited. That is the

Re: [talk-au] Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size

On 27/9/23 16:29, Ian Sergeant wrote: Aren't most places classified by the government authority as cities/villages/towns/localities/suburbs? Not in a way that is useful for using in OSM.They tend to be classified under the state's local government act, which is an administrative arrangement

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 16:37, Phil Wyatt wrote: > Hi Folks, > > > > Personally, I believe if the managing agency requests that the tracks be > removed from the map then as good corporate citizens we should do > everything possible to lower the promotion of such tracks. Track managers > also

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

On 22/9/23 16:37, Phil Wyatt wrote: Hi Folks, Personally, I believe if the managing agency requests that the tracks be removed from the map then as good corporate citizens we should do everything possible to lower the promotion of such tracks. Track managers also have a responsibility to

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 20:57, Mark Pulley wrote: > I know this has been discussed on the list before, but the NSW NPWS has > deleted some informal paths at Apsley Falls (Oxley Wild Rivers National > Park). > > These were deleted in 2022 by a NPWS employee, and after discussion were > reverted.

Re: [OSM-talk] When two bots go to war

Is there a bot that does this or is someone prepared to write one? -- Andrew From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) Sent: 14 September 2023 10:39 To: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] When two bots go to war Maybe there should be a general good

Re: [OSM-talk] Announcing State of the Map 2024: Join us in Nairobi and online on 6-8 September 2024!

I would like to congratulate the organising team in Nairobi and the SotM Working Group for doing this. Giving the worldwide community a broader understanding of the challenges of mapping Africa and using maps there is positive step for OSM’s inclusiveness as a truly worldwide map. -- Andrew

Re: [OSM-talk] ODbl concerns

Hi Robert, To preface, I'm not a lawyer and your should seek your own independent legal advice, but as I understand: 1. the department has made a decision to adopt OSM as your data source, accepting the terms this data is licensed under 2. you will adapt, modify, enhance, correct or extend OSM

Re: [talk-au] Dual naming in NSW

On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 at 08:11, Tom Brennan wrote: > There are an increasing number of places/features in NSW that are > getting dual (aboriginal) naming. > > For example: > - Booraghee / Bradleys Head > - Cooyoyo / The Castle > - Fort Denison / Muddawahnyuh > > From the point of view of the

Re: [OSM-talk] mapilio? (street-level imagery)

Is there an imagery host that offers an OSM-friendly way to support mapping and is suitable for contributions using a smartphone or tablet? -- Andrew From: Greg Troxel Sent: 24 May 2023 13:31 To: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: [OSM-talk] mapilio? (street-level

Re: [talk-au] Putting streams into OSM

On 27/5/23 08:39, nwastra nwastra wrote: I should add that I have only used the Surface Hydrology Lines from GeoScience Aust dataset for Qld catchments and as the data is drawn for many different sources across the country the perenniality may be not always be included. I admit I've been too

Re: [talk-au] Waterway data check overpass query

I had a read of the wiki page on waterway relations and it seems that you can put in unnamed tributaries (if they have a name they go in a different relation). This version will filter out those https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1uJc On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 8:31 PM Little Maps wrote: >

Re: [talk-au] Waterway data check overpass query

On 9/5/23 19:51, Andrew Davidson wrote: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1uIC Which should be this code: [timeout:900][out:csv(way_id,riv_name,rel_id,rel_name;true;",")]; area["ISO3166-2"="AU-VIC"]->.a; Apologies, I should have used make rather than convert. The

Re: [talk-au] Waterway data check overpass query

On 8/5/23 19:59, Little Maps wrote: Hi all, does anyone know if it’s possible to use Overpass Turbo or another tool to find waterway ways for which the way has a different name to the relation that the way is a part of? As an example, imagine that the relation for Ovens River includes a way

Re: [talk-au] Why set coast line to nation park or, administrative boundaries?

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 at 14:05, OSM via Talk-au wrote: > Since the coastline tag is also supposed to represent the high water mark > then I would say that they should be snapped together (since they then > represent the same feature - that is, the high water mark). This would mean > that the

Re: [talk-au] Why set coast line to nation park or administrative boundaries?

Personally I'd prefer to snap them, it makes it easier for us to maintain, better for data consumers, and overall cleaner data. I speculate these departmental GIS teams are creating the boundaries from their own coastline datasets anyway, so why not just have them match OSM's coastline? I think

Re: [talk-au] VIC Traffic Lights MapRoulette import

There was positive support for the proposal on Discord #oceania and no issues identified here so we've started working through the challenge and invite anyone interested to join in. On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 16:04, Andrew Harvey wrote: > I've prepared an import proposal at >

Re: [talk-au] VIC Traffic Lights MapRoulette import

appear to just be "crossings" for example - > https://maproulette.org/challenge/38490/task/155740397 - no lights/etc. > Worth mapping, but a fair bit different! > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 3:40 PM Andrew Harvey > wrote: > >> I've prepared an import proposal at >&g

[talk-au] VIC Traffic Lights MapRoulette import

I've prepared an import proposal at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/VIC_Traffic_Lights#Import_Data for missing traffic lights from DTP data. The import has been prepared as a MapRoulette challenge at https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/38490. Any feedback or issues

Re: [talk-au] DTP Data Wavier Submitted

This is great news! On Thu, 16 Mar 2023, 4:47 pm Robert Potter via Talk-au, < talk-au@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > Hi OSM-AU, > > It is with great pleasure and personal satisfaction that I can today > announce that an appropriately appointed officer has signed the CC BY 4.0 > wavier for DTP

Re: [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

I hope this passes your legal Rob. My takeaway is that your implementation shouldn't rely on the OSMF's APIs or data downloads being available, so your operations and use of OSM data would not be impacted if these services weren't available or were returning unexpected responses. On Tue, 7 Mar

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

t; On 8/2/23 16:07, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > Thanks for the quick responses! > > Andrew Harvey: traffic_sign=AU:R6-22,G9-83 seems better than > traffic_sign=AU:R6-22;AU:G9-83 but I can see why you say both would be > valid. > Q: Let's say there is also an

Re: [talk-au] NSW Bridal Track

On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:46, Josh Marshall wrote: > A tangent, but I'm rather happy that iD _*finally_* fixed their English > description for =track (it included "unmaintained" for a long time; many > were quite annoyed at the original change to include that)... and I can't > find any

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Culverts on Roads

Yes... https://vicroadsopendata-vicroadsmaps.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ef496e07eae049a3bb94351bc496dd6a_0/explore?location=-36.518496%2C145.313781%2C7.55 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ --Andrew On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 at 09:01, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > On Thu,

Re: [talk-au] NSW Fire Station names

Echoing what cleary said about reliance on the DCS Base Map, it's not our goal to recreate their label format. In my opinion it's more important to have branch and ref tagged as it gives more flexibility to data consumers on how they choose to label it, eg. they could choose, {branch} FS

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Culverts on Roads

On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 5:21 PM Andrew Hughes wrote: > For the structure number, I like the look of... > > ref:AU:VIC:DOT:SN=SN12345 > Does it really need to be that complicated? How many different systems of culvert references are there in Victoria. I'd be happy with just ref=* on

Re: [OSM-talk] [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:41 AM rob potter wrote: > > Hi, > > I am representing the state transport department Department of Transport and > Planning (Victoria, Australia) - OpenStreetMap Wiki and we are looking to > consume the OSM road & rail networks for our operations. Sounds interesting.

Re: [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:41 AM rob potter wrote: > > Hi, > > I am representing the state transport department Department of Transport and > Planning (Victoria, Australia) - OpenStreetMap Wiki and we are looking to > consume the OSM road & rail networks for our operations. Sounds interesting.

Re: [OSM-talk] [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 8:57 AM Andrew Harvey wrote: > The terms cover data distribution, ie downloading from > planet.openstreetmap.org so you need to go through those terms to obtain OSM > data regardless of the ODbL. Which can be found here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/

Re: [talk-au] [OSM-talk] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 8:57 AM Andrew Harvey wrote: > The terms cover data distribution, ie downloading from > planet.openstreetmap.org so you need to go through those terms to obtain OSM > data regardless of the ODbL. Which can be found here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/

Re: [talk-au] [OSM-talk] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

On Sat, 11 Feb 2023, 2:09 am Greg Troxel, wrote: > rob potter writes: > > As others pointed out those are website terms. You want to use the > data, not the website, and you should read the Open Database License. > The terms cover data distribution, ie downloading from

Re: [OSM-talk] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

On Sat, 11 Feb 2023, 2:09 am Greg Troxel, wrote: > rob potter writes: > > As others pointed out those are website terms. You want to use the > data, not the website, and you should read the Open Database License. > The terms cover data distribution, ie downloading from

Re: [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

. Surely other emergency services organisations are using OSM data without issue. On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 at 12:24, Andrew Harvey wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Interesting point you raise! > > While on the surface you'd think terms (from the OSMF Terms of Use > https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wik

Re: [OSM-talk] [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

Hi Rob, Interesting point you raise! While on the surface you'd think terms (from the OSMF Terms of Use https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use#III._Unlawful_and_other_unauthorized_uses) only ask you not to use OSMF services like the website, API for those purposes and not the data, it

Re: [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

Hi Rob, Interesting point you raise! While on the surface you'd think terms (from the OSMF Terms of Use https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use#III._Unlawful_and_other_unauthorized_uses) only ask you not to use OSMF services like the website, API for those purposes and not the data, it

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Culverts on Roads

ure number and the "structure type" would this change the convention? Giving something like 1. ref:AU:VIC:DOT:STRUCTURE:N=SN12345 2. ref:AU:VIC:DOT:STRUCTURE:TYPE=Culvert Many thanks, as always! AH On Thu, 9 Feb 2023 at 13:49, Phil Wyatt wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > > >

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Culverts on Roads

tps://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=97560366#map=19/-37.09897/144.29190> I will leave it at that for now and let people respond with a fresh slate. Thanks Everyone, Andrew On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 20:13, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-au < talk-au@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > >

Re: [talk-au] What are the best practices for mass updating cycle paths?

Exactly. It looks like the website might also show "cycle friendly" streets which on the ground may have no infrastructure or signage, so not something we would map. On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 at 10:52, Ben Kelley wrote: > Practically, using this data would be difficult I think. > > Partly because

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 at 12:44, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > Looking good. Given... > > Node: traffic_sign=AU:R6-22 > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3227568911 > > Way: low_gears:hgv=designated > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/245284221 > > Question: > &

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

097 Many thanks, Andrew On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 at 11:41, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > Looking good. Given... > > Node: traffic_sign=AU:R6-22 > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3227568911 > > Way: low_gears:hgv=designated > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/245284221 > &

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

e locations. (ie for > checking/testing sign recognition) > > - Dorrigo mountain - Waterfall Way. (Just west/north of Thora) NSW > - Bendemeer to Moonbi - New England Hwy NSW > - Black Mountain south - New England Hwy NSW > > On 22/1/23 15:01, Andrew Harvey wrote: > >

Re: [Talk-transit] [OSM-talk] Automated Populate/Update Problem

Yep you'll reach Victorian and Australian mappers better on talk-au as some might not join the global talk list -> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au. I'll echo other's comments here, if you are planning or have done the conflation I'd suggest sharing those results so the community

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 at 18:25, Andrew Hughes wrote: > Hi Ben, Andrew, Graeme, > > Agree 100%, the hazard is the "steep descent" (or similar), which most > likely (but not always) coincides with the include/gradient sign such as > "15%" (and we might

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

agged on a node, or maybe a node (member) of a way, but definitely not an area that can't be defined and is not suitable to the way itself in my mind. Thoughts are definitely welcome. --AH On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 at 11:30, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > > On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 at 10:40, And

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

Hi Ben, Andrew, Graeme, Agree 100%, the hazard is the "steep descent" (or similar), which most likely (but not always) coincides with the include/gradient sign such as "15%" (and we might see "incline=-15" tag used as well). possible tags are: hazard=Descent

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

t itself the hazard. It is the steep hill that is > the hazard (where the mitigation strategy for HGVs is to use low gears. > Same for rollover/sharp bend. > > - Ben > > > On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 at 10:38, Andrew Hughes wrote: > >> Thank You Greame, >> >> The h

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_Australia > > > > Cheers - Phil > > > > *From:* Graeme Fitzpatrick > *Sent:* Tuesday, 17 January 2023 12:30 PM > *To:* Andrew Hughes > *Cc:* OSM Australian Talk List > *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears" > &

Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

hazard:hgv=Use low gears;Long Steep Descent Another example I would appreciate feedback are QLD "Tilting Truck signs": https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/signs/warning hazard:hgv=Tilting hazard:hgv=High Risk Rollover hazard:hgv= ? Kind regards, Andrew On Tue, 1

[talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

Hi All, Can anyone suggest the most appropriate way to take ways where the road is signed with "Use Low Gears"? Bonus questions... 1. In the case of SA, there's online reference material and even an Act to enforce this legally. How/Should that be tagged ref::: and how so, that this is the SA

Re: [OSM-talk] Jhulto Pul/ Morbi bridge

And you can put a comment on the changeset that deleted it. -- Andrew From: Marc_marc Sent: 07 November 2022 13:48 To: talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Jhulto Pul/ Morbi bridge Le 06.11.22 à 20:25, Andy Mabbett a écrit : > Someone has dele

Re: [talk-au] Melbourne - Suburban Rail Loop - Too early to mark as under construction?

On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 8:37 PM Dian Ågesson wrote: > Just seeking views from others here: is this a bit premature? Should only a > section of the loop be marked as under construction, or any parts of it at > all? Normally I would have said that construction would only apply to the bits that

Re: [Talk-bd] MapRoulette challenges for fixing road issues in Bangladesh

Hi everyone, I updated the challenges again with new data. If you haven’t tried before, crossing roads is a good place to start and also often helps identify other data issues: https://maproulette.org/browse/projects/40656 <https://maproulette.org/browse/projects/40656> Thanks,

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >