On 2 February 2012 11:22, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest we get back our old state natrional boundaries
from before ABS and then improve them over the next year
or so, at our leisure.
There is nothing stopping us using the 2011 ABS boundaries, from the areas
where we
LM_1 flukas.robot+...@gmail.com wrote on 31/01/2012 10:41:00 AM:
If API is not changed to serve the cleaned version of data, it would
be good to have at least some editor-side tool to revert selected
object to the clean state and then repair/edit it as it should be.
Every time I see this
Just out of interest, I find bbbike.org gives better results for me. It
uses OSM data for routing, as well as facilities like bike shops.
Ian.
On 25 January 2012 14:32, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes it's a handy site. Bike shops and bike hire seem to be sourced from
somewhere
On 25 January 2012 15:02, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:
I just tried some routes. It doesn't seem to give as much weight to cycle
routes as ridethecity. E.g. Routing me along streets parallel to cycle
routes.
I think this may be why I Iike it. As far as I can tell it ignores cycle
If it is clearly a bicycle lane, then there is a tag for that
(cycleway=lane). Have a look at the bicycle examples on the wiki.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle. However if it really isn't a
usable cycle lane (cars are parked on it) then you may be doing more harm
than good.
My
On 9 January 2012 13:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
I've removed the maxspeed tags from about 1000 roads in Redcliffe
(Brisbane) with changeset
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10338587
Hi,
Can you just explain this a little bit further? My understanding is it is
On 6 January 2012 04:42, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
I looked at doing a revert for the street where I lived but found that
just one Fixed Stuff changeset was affecting 12,576 different ways! So as
I might affect other folks, I abandoned the idea for now. Remapping is
pointless
On 22 December 2011 15:16, Ben Johnson tangarar...@gmail.com wrote:
I just want to add, that I think the original v1 creator of Sydney's
railways (JohnSmith) had done a fantastic job, and I had shown a few people
at RailCorp who were very impressed with the level of detail - so I want it
on
On 19 December 2011 11:50, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
As I said and it's been said many times before other items should not be
attached to boundaries.
If a boundary IS a coastline, sharing a way isn't wrong. Would you really
create two ways that are fully coincident?
There is
On 19 December 2011 22:10, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
The original coastlines were from NASA PGS data and if they have been
deleted and/or merged to the ABS data then the coastline is going to be
deleted as well.
On 19 December 2011 23:17, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote:
. Assuming nobody with db rights comes to our
assistance.
Ian.
On 15 December 2011 18:31, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
Ok.
You made no mention of the V1 object being from a CT accepting user in
your original posting.
Cheers
Ross
On 15/12/11 14:40, Ian Sergeant wrote:
No I'm
No I'm not. I think you may be misunderstanding what I am doing.
If the v1 object author has agreed to the CTs, but the v2 author has not, I
simply delete the object, load the v1 object directly, make my changes,
link the object and attribute the v1 author using the attribution tag.
No
On 6 December 2011 11:40, Ben Johnson tangarar...@gmail.com wrote:
Likewise, I actually (manually) added maxspeed=50 along with
maxspeed:source=default residential etc... (word for word) to many ways i
created in the belief that this was some kind of accepted standard being
used in
On Dec 3, 2011 10:48 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
To play Devil's Advocate here, does anyone actually want the suburb
boundaries retained (or reimported)? To me, they've always been a big
pain in the arse.
I don't think it is being devil's advocate.
OSM shouldn't be a dumping
I started a thread on talk a while ago about how to handle this situation,
but it went nowhere, with the thread (as usual) hijacked to talk about
licencing issues unrelated to the practicality of implementation.
http://www.mail-archive.com/talk@openstreetmap.org/msg39790.html
My suggestion was a
Hi,
Firstly,I think we are overwhelmingly agreed that OSM doesn't copy other
maps or data. Just because someone has a individual view that some data
isn't covered by copyright doesn't make it so. It is frustrating when this
happens, and as you know this isn't the first time that data has been
On 17 October 2011 14:00, Leon Kernan lker...@gmail.com wrote:
I was hoping to get some more opinions and see what the general view is
about this.
My view is remove it, if it was a building that had been demolished and
replaced, we wouldn't still keep the old one in the data.
There have
Am I reading it right, that it is 250m accuracy data, with the trail as at
it was 20 years ago?
If so, we may want to consider the data quality.
Ian.
On 6 October 2011 13:56, Chris Barham cbar...@pobox.com wrote:
The 5,330 km National Trail known as the Australian Bicentennial
National
On 24 September 2011 00:10, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote:
The Licensing Working Group has obtained explicit special permission
to incorporate geographic datasets from data.gov.au in the
OpenStreetMap project database published under any free and open
license, including ODbL,
Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote on 15/09/2011 03:51:11 PM:
I definitely do NOT want a *diploma* system
with less or more approved users.. N
We don't want OSM to change into Brave New World,
1984 or distinct between users on other characteristics
History is full of such
I said:
Training and skills acquisition before undertaking complex tasks is
a fairly commonplace activity in our society.
Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote on 15/09/2011 04:50:11 PM:
No but the difference between Stalinism and OSM is that we do not
*oblige*
people to follow a
Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote on 15/09/2011 04:43:43 AM:
I am not sure yet on what to do with such edits when
detected yet, but what the heck, we are thousands to find a solution
Sounds like a problem that may be solved by some kind of graduated access
scheme.
Anyone can sign
On 6 September 2011 19:33, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
With the use of source tags you won't have to, you can filter out
anything without source=survey leaving you with a map with just
surveyed data (in theory). You filtering out data you don't like is a
much better option
On 7 September 2011 15:53, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 September 2011 15:49, Ian Sergeant ina...@gmail.com wrote:
I write I just have something against this relation, because it is
arbitrary and confusing
and you write So your entire argument is that we should
I wrote:
This is why route numbers were invented. So routes can be followed across
multiple road names. The route numbers are on the ground, or otherwise
discoverable.
On Sep 6, 2011 3:02 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure if we're disagreeing or not, but: assuming
I wrote:
I'm sure people say they are going to drive the Princes Highway from
Sydney to Melbourne, but you can never pin it down to actual set of
roads. They just mean they are driving down the coast, as opposed to
the Hume. It is a useful turn of phrase, but it is a mapping
anachronism.
On
Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote on 06/09/2011 07:37:05 PM:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote:
It would indeed be great if we could use an arbitrary version of an
object
to continue to build upon. Now, I have to start all over on each
object that
was
On 6 September 2011 19:49, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
That reminds me.. I've just updated the name of the Princess Highway
through Engadine based on the signed name via ground survey. I've made
the change in fosm,
http://api.fosm.org/api/0.6/changeset/102770/download
On 6 September 2011 14:10, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
according to my personal knowledge, it has run between Adelaide and
Sydney via Melbourne for decades.
Hi Liz,
This is fine and good, and common knowledge. However, when you start
looking at the road at the micro-level on the ground,
On 7 September 2011 11:55, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
What I'm talking about here is a route relation. I'm arguing that we
don't need a named route relation called the Princes Highway.
But your argument consists of I can't decide which roads should make
up the relation, so
On 5 September 2011 14:31, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
You need to be explicit about the comparison you're
making. This is volunteer labour, and you can't meaningfully compare
the contribution that people are willing to make against the
contribution you'd prefer they make. And if
Does anyone have a good justification for keeping this road route reln?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/538443
The Princes Highway isn't really a route. I can't get my head around
including roads that are not the Princes Highway (where it deviates, changes
name, etc) in a relation
I wrote:
Personally, I think people shouldn't map areas when they don't have any
knowledge of the topology and layout because I think fixing errors takes
several orders of magnitude longer than the tracing.
On 6 September 2011 10:31, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote:
Who cares?
the route any more than the suburbs it runs through.
Ian.
- Ben.
On Sep 6, 2011 7:04 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone have a good justification for keeping this road route reln?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/538443
The Princes Highway isn't
Hi Richard,
Welcome to OSM.
A few observations.
Nearmap is no longer an acceptable source for OSM, since they do not allow
traces from their imagery to be re-licensed. I notice at least one of your
edits sourced nearmap, and that isn't allowed any more. If you were using
Potlatch, perhaps you
On 6 September 2011 13:21, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
No. The route is still the Princes Highway as per here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/Australian_Tagging_**
Guidelines#Route_Numbershttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Route_Numbers
How
On 6 September 2011 13:44, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
If you look in the history you will see that it's prior to 17 July 2011 and
not added by Richard as a source he has just added more detail.
Oops, sorry, I should have checked the history.
Thanks for picking that up.
Ian.
On 6 September 2011 13:48, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Ian, the world is a complicated place, and the answers to these
questions are not always straightforward to answer. It doesn't mean we
should just delete everything.
Agreed, but not by any stretch what I'm suggesting.
On 6 September 2011 13:59, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
But your saying what I'm saying map what is on the ground.
All of the above can be included in the relation a route does not have to
be a through route. It may have side branches as in the Sutherland example.
But if the
I wrote:
To address your question specifically, what happens to data placed in
the
public domain by the author on the wiki, who then specifically declines
the CT? Well in the first case, if the edits are just a trivial
modification to a fully CT-compliant version - I'd say just hide
Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de wrote on 01/09/2011 04:19:41 PM:
we should replace the data not delete it! So please remap the
information that needs to be removed.
Of course we should, but we need to gives ourselves the tools which allow
us to do this effectively and well.
Lets think
Павел Фомин pavel...@yandex.ru wrote on 01/09/2011 09:24:30 PM:
What about this case:
v1 is CT-compliant.
v2 adds a new tag and is not CT-compliant.
Then, v3 changes this tag and adds a bunch of other tags.
Will these other tags be considered compliant?
This highlights one of the issues.
On 30 August 2011 16:41, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
1) Roads without names are almost as valuable as roads with names for
certain uses. (Eg, choosing a route to save to a GPS works just as
well without names)
One way streets? Roads with barriers at the end of them? Roads
Hi,
I'm pretty sure mapnik doesn't render highway=ford on a way. It is probably
for the best that it doesn't, IMO.
See
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=7510#p7510 and
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Stylesheet for information on what is
included in the stylesheets.
And
On 2 September 2011 11:26, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote:
On 02/09/11 10:16, Ian Sergeant wrote:
Hi,
I'm pretty sure mapnik doesn't render highway=ford on a way. It is
probably for the best that it doesn't, IMO.
See
http://forum.openstreetmap.**org/viewtopic.php?pid=7510
Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote on 31/08/2011 03:43:28 PM:
What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is in
the public domain?
Hi Russ,
The suggestion here is to streamline a process, more than determine
policy.. That is to..
1. Automatically hide trivial changes
Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote on 31/08/2011 05:29:46 PM:
I wouldn't over exaggerate the issue, in many many countries it's
actually quite difficult to find non-compliant objects and in the
countries where there are widespread issues the mappers are in general
aware of the situation
I think the strategy to remove all non-CT compliant data in one big bang
is flawed. The best result for OSM is going to be obtained if the core
data is nearly clean by the day of the relicencing, so that the removal
of the remainder has the least possible impact. However, to accomplish
Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote on 30/08/2011 11:14:32 AM:
The same mechanism is used for Yahoo, Bing etc coverage. Yes, it's
debatable whether meta-objects should be stored in the OSM database,
but that debate would also extend to meta-tags (note=*, fixme=*)
When I encounter these
Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote on 25/08/2011 05:53:04 PM:
Having an agreement with the mapper along the lines of the CTs is
clearly safe(*), a statement on his wiki page, who knows?
I'd come down on the other side of this line. It would be easier to argue
that some long click-through
Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi wrote on 19/08/2011 06:30:29
PM:
The blue sea is coming from one database, borders from another and red
OSM
motorways from a third. All with one request and end user cannot
separate the
sources from the png image.
This use-case has been
On 6 May 2011 10:47, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
I remember hearing once about someone writing some sort of plugin or
database which kept a track of how offset parts of the bing imagery are,
but never heard if it was successful or how extensive the coverage is.
On 4/05/2011 5:18 PM, David Murn wrote:
Well, I have yet to hear any Australians complain about the freedom of
the data, other than being incompatible with the new one-of-a-kind
licence that OSM is wanting to use.
I'm not objecting to freedom of data. The comment I objected to is
the one that
On 4 May 2011 21:29, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
It doesnt have to match the opinion of all Australians, as long as it
matches the opinions of those who matter and would be deciding on these
things (copyright lawyers, judges, etc).
We seem to have drifted. Of course ultimately
Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
Just remind yourselves that if CC-by and CC-by-SA are good enough for
our government, they are good enough for us...
I wrote:
Who is us, in this case?
Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
This is the Australian list, in case you didn't realise
On 8 April 2011 16:33, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Which was decided in February...
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/336231/court_upholds_right_copy_lucrative_databases/
John - if you are going to argue this, please check your references
more carefully.
You give a
On 7 April 2011 23:03, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
Their reply: It is the property of BP and is intended as a service
for personal use only. (and Shell for the Shell data I assume)
On 7 April 2011 23:27, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Except the data was a
On 8 April 2011 05:47, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote:
It wouldn't be nearly so bad if we could simply agree to the new terms for
objects outside Nearmap coverage (and for future contributions), but have
our contaminated work removed.
Well our first priority should be to try and get an
On 8 April 2011 12:27, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
The Court system has affirmed the original decision.
Copyright (Au) depends on thinking about the input, and cannot be
derived from machine generated data.
The priority is to keep OSM unencumbered, and accordingly in all cases
I'm
On 8 April 2011 13:46, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
In this case it's pretty straight forward and matches the legal
rulings almost identically, computer generated lists aren't covered by
copyright any more, you have to put thought into building such a list
for it to be covered.
On 6 April 2011 21:47, All Blokes speed_13...@yahoo.com.au wrote:
I was very keen and learning ...had done a few edits not many but I
was planning on getting right into it.
I don't agree with the new licensing and have just been sitting on the side
reading.
Just out of interest, I'd
On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
If the Australian issue is so important, as others have suggested why
isnt OSMF seeking to make a rapid agreement with NearMap as was done
with Bing?
This really needs to be done.
Is wonder if this is just due to a shortage of
On 27 January 2011 21:06 pheasant.cou...@gmail.com wrote:
* ABS2006 boundaries don't follow coastlines when coastlines change.
What about when coastlines haven't changed, but when the ABS2006
boundary drifts from the coastline?
The answer here, is we don't know whether they intended to follow
then support option 3?
Special note to Ian Sergeant: Stop arguing with John Smith. You will not
outlast him. You are making a fool of yourself. You are starting to look
like an immature jerk. At least keep a minimum of dignity.
Apologies. I tried to focus the discussion, but obviously failed to do so
On 20 January 2011 09:59, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we're being overly precious about the quality of the ABS
imports. In many cases they're clearly meant to follow a geographical
feature, but don't do it particularly well when overlaid on the OSM
data. That makes it
On 20 January 2011 11:39, I wrote:
I agree, and I'll go one step further.
Unless we intend to amend, edit and correct data then don't put it into
OSM. Use it as a layer, or whatever, but don't clutter a wiki with static,
un-usermodifiable data.
On 20 January 2011 11:43, John Smith
On 20 January 2011 14:58, ed...@billiau.net wrote:
if the AS data is melded with other stuff in OSM then we have great
difficulty in amending / updating / editing it.
you mention another layer but this isn't easily available
I can't really see where the difficulty arises.
We can simply
On 20 January 2011 14:50, I wrote:
Data that just doesn't happen to be modified, due to being
in a remote or rarely accessed area, is obviously distinctly different
from data that we import into OSM explicitly with the knowledge and
intention that it should not be modified to preserve
On 20 January 2011 15:15, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote:
if it is in OSM, then it is fair game to be corrected, aligned and modified.
If
someone is suggesting that data imported into OSM be maintained
pristine, aligned with an external source, then it shouldn't have been
imported
frede...@remote.org wrote:
I am sure that Microsoft
has allowed data to be traced for OSM; I don't believe it is their
intent to allow tracing of data for other purposes
So, the question is, when MegaMap adopt OSM maps, which are generated from
Bing traces, what will Microsoft think then? Do
I wrote :
And even non-artistic photography... [is copyrightable]
However, this case draws a real distinction between the human process
of originality, and an automated process according to a set of rules.
I've no doubt that if I take a photo out of an aeroplane window that
copyright
On 21 December 2010 10:59, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote:
Also I believe that the following actions also entail little or no
independent intellectual effort.
1) walking/riding/driving around with a gps turned on and collecting GPS
traces.
2) Tracing roads from either GPS traces
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote:
Since taking a photo of something entails little or no independent
intellectual effort,
On 21 December 2010 13:08, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
In what context? Obviously artistic photography is
On 21 November 2010 13:18, Andrew Laughton laughton.and...@gmail.comwrote:
In my opinion OSM will never recover to the same point that it is at today
if data is removed for the simple reason that most, if not all government
data will need to be removed, and there is no way that private mappers
As far as street names are concerned, we could just pick up the names for
the streets currently unnamed by survey from the Atlas of SA, and attribute
appropriately.
If someone gets updated names from survey, they can update. Until then the
temptation to just add them from a commercial map is
On 25 October 2010 10:01, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
So effectivly in my view swanilli has deleated the bays I originally
added as nodes, and then put them back in as new nodes with a
different ID, while at the same time removing some of the tags I
originally had without
On 20 October 2010 09:51, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
Also it seems the main boundary for Port Hacking is a way traced from
Yahoo, it is close to the ABS administrative boarder, I was wondering
if we should just place the Port Hacking boarder on the ABS boundary.
I really
On 18 October 2010 20:52, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote:
On the wiki, it suggests using highway=footway for urban footpaths and
highway=path for hiking trails.
Which is best to use for asphalt footways in national parks (e.g.
wheelchair-friendly paths to lookouts) - should I use
Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote on 03/08/2009 03:06:38 PM:
Calling a bush walking track a designated footpath doesn't sound
exactly right, nor does calling a bushwalker a pedestrian.
Thoughts?
We should focus on the properties of the track, rather than its use.
Plenty of people use
Maarten Deenmd...@xs4all.nl wrote:
I recently came across this example where the way with the
maxheight is a lot
longer than strictly necessary. For every day uses this does not
really pose a problem.
Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of potential problems with this: What
Maarten Deenmd...@xs4all.nl wrote:
I recently came across this example where the way with the
maxheight is a lot
longer than strictly necessary. For every day uses this does not
really pose a problem.
Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
A couple of potential problems with this: What
Delta Foxtrot delta_foxt...@yahoo.com
I recently started adding data to OSM,
Welcome.
but one thing that caused me
a little confusion was the fact that one of the towns I was mapping
round has a river running through it, but there is no river plotted
on the map, and now that I think about
Delta Foxtrot delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote:
What's the url for landsat or how do I make use of it, yahoo images
are pretty course in rural areas from what I've seen so far.
They are. I guess this is one of the reasons why your waterway hasn't been
mapped.
If you are using potlatch, then the
Delta Foxtrot delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm curious as to why yahoo sat images can be used and google ones can't?
Yahoo have sent an OSM contributor an email, confirming that their imagery
is okay for use in the way OSM uses it.
Google have not given their permission, and have given
Delta Foxtrot delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote on 20/05/2009 03:36:26 PM:
Just looking at, I think, the Clarence river near Grafton:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-29.6174
lon=152.9053zoom=14layers=B000FTF
The river banks are listed as natural=coastline
Which is the better/correct way to
Thanks for the comments on this.
It appears that the practice is that when it is apparent to a knowledgeable
mapper that the ABS data should align with another OSM way, we apply the
relation to the OSM way and alter the OSM way if required, after giving due
consideration to the accuracy of the
James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote on 03/03/2009 12:46:58 PM:
Copying someone's beautifully drawn map of Sydney is obviously not
allowed. However the location of the Sydney Opera House is a fact and
so not copyrightable, and the location and name of Paramatta Road, and
so on. While I can't
Darrin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know of at least 5 roundabouts in Adelaide alone
that DO qualify for the global OSM definition of a mini-roundabout so I
don't see why we should be copping out and changing a definition here
just out of sheer lazyness.
Its not laziness. It is the best
Joseph Gentle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thats not true. I don't think the US Government has waived their moral
rights regarding the TIGER data. As I understand it, placing work in
the public domain does not automatically waive your moral rights on
the work.
Moral rights are a very murky,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are there any good tools for reducing the trails down into individual
trips?
or cut them up into smaller easier to label chunks?
i don't have street label records or other meta data to go with, yet.
I'd use gpsbabel.
Split by date, polygon, etc..
Ian.
Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
until there is some UNIQUE way of tagging high level relationships
consistently, then there seems little point trying to fix fine detail at
the
lower level. It brings back up the simple problem of producing a unique
list
of objects in the data. How DO we
toryn forrest [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/03/2008 09:09:59 AM:
I've had some contact with VicRoads on the matter, I've requested
the contact details for someone else higher up the food chain in the
legal dept. who can clear up some issues.
Thanks Toryn.
I've updated the wiki, until you
Darrin Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I read one part of the OSM wiki I see it talking about classifying
highways purely by their physical characteristics
..
The majority of pages talk about classifying roads by their state
funding designation and or highway reference which is fine
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 13/02/2008
10:05:26 AM:
The Australian situation seems to be unique - a combination of some
unique, potentially restrictive, copyright rulings, coupled with
massive area and large numbers of seldom travelled tracks with no
street signs leaves those
Brent Easton wrote:
Interesting.
If there are votes both for and against, then it requires 14 Yes
votes to get something through, but only 1 No vote to can it.
In fact, the No voters are more likely to prevent a proposal by
NOT voting against a proposal once the first No vote is
201 - 295 of 295 matches
Mail list logo
