I'd agree with Mike, banqueting_hall is a tad too specific, but I did like
the other option of function_hall suggested by someone earlier in the
thread. Event_hall is an equivalent which works fine for me too.
Note that there is a cross-over to things tagged village_hall or similar,
and many
Exactly why OS Street View should only be used as a guide, not gospel.
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 10:21 AM, OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.comwrote:
On 28 August 2013 09:50, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
new-fangled expensive wedding licences. Or telling my local vicar and his
wife
Open Historical Map is a sandbox environment and has only been around for a
few months. It's far too early to write it off.
A more reliable link is probably hosm.gwhat.com, but Jeff Meyer has been
having problems with the servers recently, and it doesn't seem to up atm.
Jerry
On Sat, Aug 31,
The entire landcover tag discussion on the wiki is a huge distraction,and
not based on any objective criteria, let alone an attempt to see if what we
have works.
I, on the other hand, gave a paper at SotM-Eu in 2011 which showed that use
of existing tags could provide a level of
The convention exists because the grounds in which a place of worship
exists are rarely places of worship themselves. Try conducting a marriage
in a churchyard (probably the tag you are looking for
landuse=churchyardhttp://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=churchyard,
to heavily used but in
) seems
unusually clunky.
Jerry
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 1:41 PM, OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.comwrote:
On 28 August 2013 09:50, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
churchyard (probably the tag you are looking for landuse=churchyard, to
heavily used but in existence) instead of a church
I don't think these are hedgerows at all. They are really relict river
gallery woodland (usually *Salicion albae,*
NVChttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodland_and_scrub_communities_in_the_British_National_Vegetation_Classification_systemW6)
and I would expect are mainly Willows with the odd Poplar
I doubt if anyone checks the Naptan account: it's an import account largely
to separate personal mapping from imports. Furthermore I don't know how
active the user who co-ordinated the imports is these days: info is
available on the wiki.
I don't think either OSM or NaPTAN ever came up with a
IIRC virtually every round of phone number expansion has not been very
forward looking. I think Ovum did the consultancy on the first
onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhONEday:
just adding a '1' on the front of each STD code, which was obviously a
kludge. I vaguely remember the London 01 = 071,081
I'm awaiting all the bad jokes, but have just noticed that the IGS National
Borehole database is available under OGL:
http://www.bgs.ac.uk/data/boreholescans/
I've used this before for local history stuff, and a friend who has an
amateur interest in hydrology worked out all sorts of things from
databases have a
DATE data type (or one of the many variations like DATETIME or TIMESTAMP).
Why not apply the same principle to phone numbers?
Colin
On 2013-08-22 14:35, sk53.osm wrote:
IIRC virtually every round of phone number expansion has not been very
forward looking. I think Ovum
As the NSA clearly don't process their data according to E.164 (otherwise
how could they confuse Washington DC area code with Egypt), I think we can
skip it too!
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
**
I am not sure what your issue was with highway=path
Just a quick reminder that this is scheduled for tomorrow at 19:30.
Notionally an OSM 9th Birthday event: not sure if there will be cake.
Details on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nottingham/Pub_Meetup
Jerry
___
Talk-GB mailing list
time to time.
Jerry
On Jul 29, 2013 12:20 PM, Phil Endecott spam_from_os...@chezphil.org
wrote:
sk53.osm wrote:
Overview of missing Derbyshire footpaths:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/**sk53_osm/9390856924/http://www.flickr.com/photos/sk53_osm/9390856924/
Interesting.
I think you're
Hmm, I have sitting on my desktop a whole load of QGIS analyses of OSM
designation=* against the DCC rowmap TAB file, but as I'm on my way to SotM
Baltics wont write this up until I get back.
I haven't looked in detail, but basic use of buffers seems to grab most
matching footpaths (buffer OSM
Overview of missing Derbyshire footpaths:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sk53_osm/9390856924/
Jerry
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 5:33 PM, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, I have sitting on my desktop a whole load of QGIS analyses of OSM
designation=* against the DCC rowmap TAB file
Just a reminder that tomorrow is the monthly Nottingham pub meet-up.
Lincolnshire Poacher, 18:30 for mapping; 19:30 for beer / chat etc.
I'm keen to continue mapping in the Carrington area as it is more of a
commercial area than I had expected. Perhaps we could divide up and each do
one of the
at 11:28 AM, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
Given that SotM-US has been running over this weekend, there's probably a
few of the talks which will be of interest to anyone. So far the one's I
think are worth a discussion over a pint are:
- Mikel Maron's talk on community
about OSM in general.
Jerry
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 3:00 PM, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
I've put dates in the wiki for next 3 months of Nottingham pub meetings:
next Tuesday 11th
July 9th
August 13th
All will be at 19:30 at the Lincolnshire Poacher. A mapping activity for
an hour
Hi Nick,
I went out doing a bit of footpath surveying the other day ended up doing
several submissions to the county council website: mainly about missing
signage. Also rather irritating was that a couple of paths marked on (a
recent) OS map do not exist, so one would want to feedback to them.
Hi Nick,
We have Open Data locally for Nottingham ProW (significant because the city
was exempt from maintaining a definitive map until recently). So far all I
have done is added ref information to paths already mapped. Even with open
data the situation is still confusing: for instance a footpath
I've put dates in the wiki for next 3 months of Nottingham pub meetings:
next Tuesday 11th
July 9th
August 13th
All will be at 19:30 at the Lincolnshire Poacher. A mapping activity for an
hour beforehand (which may start from somewhere else) Details on the wiki:
. Do you really need to print this
email?
--
*From:* sk53.osm [sk53@gmail.com]
*Sent:* 31 May 2013 22:38
*To:* Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* [Talk-GB] Ffordd Llundain incorrectly named in many places in
Lloegr
I notice that many highways
I had this problem in
Carmarthenshirehttp://sk53-osm.blogspot.com/2011/07/footpaths-in-carmarthenshire-whats-point.htmla
couple of years ago. I chose not to mark this on OSM because in
practice
the footpaths are non-existent. Also at least one ran through the front
garden of one of my sister's
I don't think Richard's original post was an invitation to discuss arcane
quirks of Britain's historical railway system.
I have raised the issue of wholesale tag changing several times recently,
and as this tagging is clearly not with the consensus of mappers either in
the UK or elsewhere, I
the parking relates
(actually business may do perfectly well!)
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 3:41 PM, John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 2:31 PM, sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
The only thing I'm not sure about is having the role of the owning entity
blank. Any
Like others I agree that split roads must have some absolute barrier
between them. If there is a traffic jam and it is possible to do a U-turn
then the road should not be split.
There are however a number of cases which might be a bit harder to call. I
notice a revised road layout yesterday where
I propose to tidy up some shop=* tag values. I am not certain of the full
scope, but here are ones I do know about:
- to shop=bookmaker from bookmakers, bookies, Bookmaker, Bookmakers,
bookmarkers,turf_accountant [shop=betting has nearly as many uses as
shop=bookmaker, and shop=gambling
This is a follow-up to my recent postings on refs on tertiaries and
unclassified roads. This is not a whinge it is about a potentially serious
issue.
I have been looking at websites for a number of Local Authorities to see if
their statutory register of Highways has been licensed with a suitable
The license terms seem fairly straightforward despite them adding Natural
England in front of the name of each license. Virtually all the data of
interest has been compiled from OSGB data (not maps, but probably using
vector data) and therefore under current terms is released under the OSGB
Well I'm definitely in favour of mapping the boundary ways: hedges, fences,
walls.
I do not see any general value in mapping fields one by one, unless there
are particular cultural reasons (for instance the Cheshire Cheese in Hope,
Derbyshire, has maps showing all the historical field names on
This adding of refs on roads is getting ridiculous. I just was geotagging
some photos and I noticed this: http://osm.org/go/eu1a7D4X.
A number of unclassified residential roads have been tagged in Cheshire
(can't remember which one it is because this is on the border) with
obviously internal
Have you seen Richard Weait's page on this subject :
http://weait.com/node/21.
And fewer of those named ways to make the hole names look nice :-)
Jerry
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Bob Kerr
openstreetmapcraigmil...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
I have been spending a lot of time looking at
This is quite reasonable, although as I use farmland for all agriculture
(but not viticulture or orchards) I had never appreciated that it seems to
have become synonymous with arable.
I still think landuse=farmland, farmland=arable is a better way of tagging
( a tad friendlier to data consumers).
This is one of the calcareous grasslands; downland sounds good, although
chalk_downland might be more precise.
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, David Fisher djfishe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
This feels like an appropriate thread to butt into and ask: is there an
accepted tag for grassy
-- Forwarded message --
From: sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com
Date: Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Using rights of way data
To: Will Phillips wp4...@gmail.com
Will,
The OSGB license is the one we have been using for StreetView, Locator etc.
AFAIK the main issue
Why do you assume that landuse=grass is more correct than natural=grass.
This is precisely the problem I have with your edits. If I use natural=*
for something someone comes and changes it to landuse=* which is not what I
meant.
I ONLY use landuse=grass for amenity grassland (mainly in cities)
I think JonathanB is spot on here: if the original landuse tags had been
landuse=forestry, landuse=farming;
landuse=selling_things;landuse=office_drudgery and so on, the widespread
confusion between landuse (usually can be denoted by an abstract noun), and
natural or landcover (which can usually
I've added the Ladies (Pans) Course at
Machrihanishhttp://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?q=machrihanishzoom=16lat=55.42622lon=-5.72159layers=B0Fand
the 1st 18th of the Championship course. I can't remember where all
the tees are, and as for many links courses, fairways are often shared
between holes.
I notice that there have been a large number of mass edits of tags
associated with either land cover or land use recently. Some may indeed be
useful corrections, but altering all natural=meadow to landuse=meadow
probably interferes with the intentions of the original mapper: meadows can
be created
OSGB has just tweeted it's 10 fascinating facts. I thought it would be fun
to compare with OSM
1. Pylons: 80,517 ; 58,487
(OSMhttp://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=tower#values
)
2. Post Boxes: 93.728 (OSGB); 42,742
(OSMhttp://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=post_box#values
I've noticed that many minor roads in the Highland Region of Scotland have
been tagged with ref=[CU] based on a PDF document from the regions
transport department. I've altered a few of these where I've encountered
them to official:ref=* as I don't believe that these are verifiable on the
:
sk53.osm sk53@gmail.com wrote:
I've noticed that many minor roads in the Highland Region of Scotland
have
been tagged with ref=[CU] based on a PDF document from the regions
transport department. I've altered a few of these where I've
encountered
them to official:ref=* as I
I've been paying a bit more attention to OSM-GB because I caught one of
their recent blog posts which indicated that a road name nearby was
incorrectly named (Gregory Street in Lenton), see
http://www.osmgb.org.uk/blog/?p=338.
Accordingly I've spent a bit of time checking my original sources for
44 matches
Mail list logo
