So, you all know at this point that I've been heavily invested in editing
OSM and contributing to my maximum activity, less as a need to help a
charity and more of an obligation to the public to do the most good with
the short time I have on this planet. However, I've had a few events come
up
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 6:07 PM Paul Johnson wrote:
> 3) Amazon Logistics and a revolving door team of one-edit-and-done spam
> accounts keeps throwing paid contributions into Oklahoma that are of poorly
> aligned, largely fictional and low quality. I'm stuck cleaning up in a
> ne
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 11:37 AM Jmapb wrote:
> I try to keep an eye on them and fix the errors and the most egregious
> road geometry. When I leave changeset comments, they generally reply,
> but there are so many of them that it feels like trying to cook rice one
> grain at a time.
Very much
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 9:36 AM Dave F wrote:
> In my area, AL are adding legitimate data which helps improve the quality
> of the OSM database. I believe they make the same amount of errors as any
> other contributors, including experienced ones.
>
> Unsure why he thinks OSMF should be keeping
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 3:59 PM Greg Troxel wrote:
> Dave F via talk writes:
>
> > In my area, AL are adding legitimate data which helps improve the
> > quality of the OSM database. I believe they make the same amount of
> > errors as any other contributors, including experienced ones.
> >
> >
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 8:36 PM Clay Smalley wrote:
> For those who aren't following, the DWG recently decided on a two-day ban
> for the person who posted this, for the exact behavior they're exhibiting
> right now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3850
>
> jdd 3, please take a break.
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 9:50 AM 80hnhtv4agou--- via Talk-us <
talk...@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> In ID, on your profile page is, Other nearby users, and the home location,
> map
>
> the point is other locals based on my (our) edits know where we (I) live,
> but come on
>
> don’t edit the
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 1:41 PM Rory McCann wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2020, at 8:21 PM, Clifford Snow wrote:
> > Can you confirm that we can leave the recordings on the server and are
> > able to link to the recordings for other sites, like the wiki?
>
> No, you can't rely on it like that. We only
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:22 AM James wrote:
> and if pedestrians are allowed on it:
>
> highway=path
> segregated=no
>
Maybe. If it clearly has lanes marked out, I tend to consider this a
cycleway even if there's no sidewalk as it was clearly built for bicycles a
forethought with minimal, if
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 11:24 AM Mike Thompson wrote:
> I have come across a number of examples[0] of route relations where all
> the trails in a given park have been put into a single relation. Is this a
> recommended use for route relations?
>
Nope. It's wrong. Each route should have its
On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 1:03 AM Mateusz Konieczny via talk <
talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Before going to vote it would need to demonstrate some sort of clear
> benefit and
> consensus that it is reasonable.
>
For this, as well as my take on this
Yeah, there's plenty that's wrong with Amazon's mapping (like basically
just straight out importing GPX from Amazon trucks and not bothering to
check for completeness or alignment at all, something I routinely see).
But armchair mapping in and of itself isn't the problem.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at
Great. How's this affect those of us who trust Facebook about as far as we
can throw it?
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 5:37 PM Sérgio V. wrote:
>
> https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-deals-mapillary/facebook-acquires-crowdsourced-mapping-company-mapillary-idUKKBN23P3N6
>
>
> - - - - - - - -
Doesn't OpenStreetCam have similar corporate ownership problems, with the
additional problematic aspect that the toolchain's been neglected since
Telenav cut 'em loose?
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 6:23 PM Niels Elgaard Larsen
wrote:
> Paul Johnson:
> > Great. How's this affect those
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:07 AM Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I wonder if it would be feasible or desirable for editors to warn users
> if they are at risk of creating country/world-spanning changesets.
> Something like "you have unsaved edits more than 500km away from where
> you are editing at the
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:31 AM Florian Lohoff wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:45:17PM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 12.06.20 15:22, Dave F via talk wrote:
> > > There is a lot of negativity about large changsets, but assessment of
> > > them should be based on quality, not
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:28 AM Florian Lohoff wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 02:14:15PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Jun 12, 2020, 13:59 by f...@zz.de:
> >
> > > Changeset envelopes which span more than 100s of km² are broken.
> > >
> > Except cases where you
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:32 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13/6/20 1:37 am, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:28 AM Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 02:14:15PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via talk
>> wrote:
>>
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 1:51 PM ipswichmapper--- via talk <
talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> You are right. If updating to mailman 3 will take monrhs of work it is
> probably not worth trying to make any changes right now.
>
Recurring OpenStreetMap theme: If fixing something takes absolutely
On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 5:03 AM Rory McCann wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2020, at 10:04 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > Rory, I am absolutely sure there was no bad intent in the choice of
> > format and platform, but given where this discussion went so fast, I
> > believe the setting should be
Ever been lost someplace where that's the only obvious set of fixed
landmarks?
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 9:16 PM john whelan wrote:
> Perhaps you could expand on the benefits of mapping them?
>
> Thanks John
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 10:09 PM stevea, wrote:
>
>> I'd like to say "oh, please..."
On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 12:18 +0100, Richard Mann wrote:
While I like the idea of marking individual railway tracks as separate ways,
I foresee a problem for the renderers if we don't tell them how many tracks
are adjacent. If a renderer makes a distinction between tracks=1 and
tracks=2, and
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 22:02 -0400, Bill Ricker wrote:
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Frankie
Robertofran...@frankieroberto.com wrote:
Fulfilling a very small niche, I've added a (very short) page for monorails
(in the UK): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_monorails
we
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:56:22 +0200, Heiko Jacobs wrote:
So this words don't satisfy me ...
I'm searching something like traceless, virtual, very, really very
abandoned, ...
Does anybody has an idea?
How about omitting the line entirely? If it's no longer part of the
ground truth, why try
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 20:59:53 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
For tagging the status of rail infrastructure there are in use:
I usually think it's good to look at existing practice by others.
On USGS maps, and in US legal usage:
out of service: rails still exist, but no trains. shown as
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 11:31:53 +0200, Michał Borsuk wrote:
On 28 July 2010 11:26, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Something like http://forum.openstreetmap.org
Definitely. Forum is way better than a mailing list, a threaded forum is
even better.
[citation needed]. There's nothing a
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 11:03:59 +0200, Michał Borsuk wrote:
Just a technical note, we'd need a server with some proper Forum-like
software, so that posts like the one below could be pinned.
Why not just update the wiki? Why needlessly complicate things with a
forum?
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Bryce McKinlay bmckin...@gmail.com wrote:
Secondly, GTFS is already a good, widely used, open format for transit
schedules. Introducing a new set of tags for this stuff in OSM would
be like reinventing the wheel. In many cases GTFS data is provided and
kept
On Wed, 2009-06-24 at 17:46 -0400, Russ Nelson wrote:
Some of the stuff is there because of stupid-ass legislation which
violates various laws (e.g. if the site is going to be used by
underaged children (which of course it will) we would have to treat
them differently (at least
On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 12:18 +0200, Joel wrote:
They do hold the rights to the location of the POIs when based on
Google maps. but not the information embedded in the POI.
i think that if the POIs were placed on Yahoo's photos it would be
legal (seeing as they gave permission to trace photos)
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 23:19 -0500,
tele...@hushmail.com wrote:
My question is what type of attribution is appropriate? I have no
problem informing my end-users where I get the data. More than
happy to do that. However, do I need to attribute while the
application is used on-air? Screen
Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
On 12 Apr 2009, at 9:01 , Adam Schreiber wrote:
Probably because the mapper can easily identify the type of road (i.e.
Interstate, US Hwy, etc.). I'm not sure that the mapper should be
specifying the URL of the sign since it requires extra work to find it
and any
Ben Konrath wrote:
Ok, I did some more poking around and it seems that the land border
with the US is really borked. For BC and Alberta, there are 3 - 4
different border lines with the US. I'm willing to do the work
required to clean this up by deleting the lines that don't make sense.
I just
James Ewen wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Corey Burger
corey.burger-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
For BC and Alberta, there are 3 - 4 different border lines with the US.
This one is very very easy. It is the 49th parallel from lake of the
woods to the straight of
I'm curious if bicycle boulevards would qualify as living streets, given
that a living street would most closely describe a bicycle boulevard in
OSM terms, though a bicycle boulevard might lack pedestrian facilities.
Frequently, these are not streets you would want to let the kids play
in, as the
I'm curious if bicycle boulevards would qualify as living streets, giv=
en
that a living street would most closely describe a bicycle boulevard i=
n
OSM terms, though a bicycle boulevard might lack pedestrian facilities=
=2E
Frequently, these are not streets you would want to let the kids
Karl Newman wrote:
*Avoid duplicate copies of messages?*
When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a list
message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the mailing list.
Select /Yes/ to avoid receiving copies from the mailing list; select
/No/ to receive copies.
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Mario Salvini wrote:
Even in germany on these roads there are no additional rights-of-way in
comparison to normal cycleways (except that bicycles get the
officially allowance to drive next to each other and not just inline.
buts that's piece of cake ;) ). A
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2009/6/10 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk:
In my eyes, that road would be simply tagged with highway=cycleway.
there are some main differences though: usually they are normal
streets changed in designation. That is cars are allowed but don't
have the
Michael Barabanov wrote:
Can we use relations same way as for more complex cycle routes for this one?
Yes, though you're not limited to just a specific kind of way for relations.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-ca
Ted Percival wrote:
If it's not a through road for vehicles but is for bicycles that could
be a challenge to tag access restrictions on. Perhaps a node with
barrier=* if there is one.
The barriers aren't usually barriers as such, but rather turn
restrictions in place with exceptions for
Karl Newman wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Karl Newman wrote:
*Avoid duplicate copies of messages?*
When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a list
message, you can
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 10:56 -0400, Adam Schreiber wrote:
To make things clear, should the place=state tag be placed on, near
the node for the capital city of the state?
Why not closer to the geographic center like expected?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Richard Welty wrote:
a specific example that's in front of me right now is the Mohawk-Hudson
Bike-Hike Trail (aka the Mohawk-Hudson Bikeway). it spans two counties
and is maintained by the towns it passes through for the most part, sort
of sitting between local and regional. i've dithered
Richard Weait wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Adam Dunn dunna...@gmail.com wrote:
For those wondering what this is about, Vancouver is designating certain
traffic lanes for official Olympic vehicles (public transit buses, athlete
transportation, media transportation, etc). Other lanes
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:39:52 -0500, Colin McGregor wrote:
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 3:26 PM, James Ewen
ve6...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, my last message just got me wondering about other issues...
We all know that it is not appropriate to copy data from Google, or use
their aerial photos to trace
While it tries to be more like an upscale fast-food place, it's core
concept and the way people interact with it is definitely cafe.
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Peter Dobratz pe...@dobratz.us wrote:
I've never been to a Tim Hortons, but it looks like it's very similar to
the Dunkin'
Crud, guess it helps if I include the link:
http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications/eng_publications/electrical/MoST_PM.pdf
Page 115. Not 100% sure on reproducibility of Canadian shields; perhaps a
Canadian could help on this part.
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
Incidentally came across some shield guidance for handling BC routes 1
(Trans-Canada), 3 (Crow's Nest), 5 (Yellowhead) and 16 (TC, though also
Yellowhead in places). Alberta uses a similar 3 sign (albeit on an Alberta
shield cutout) for the Alberta segment of the Crow's Nest.
Chris Lawrence wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Theodore Book
tbook-vggt2q2+t+feowh0uzb...@public.gmane.org wrote:
Despite my taking a local approach, I do think it would be great if we
could do a coordinated national upload of the NHD data, however.
I think it would definitely help
Spencer Riddile wrote:
Chris,
What would the advantage/disadvantage be of using a different network
name (usbrs vs. ncn) for U.S. bike routes. The author of open cycle
map would have to adjust their symbolization if we started using
usbrs. Is it good to try to keep some international
Minh Nguyen wrote:
On 4/11/09 11:38 PM, Nicholas Vetrovec wrote:
Posted on the US Page to help coordinate US Interstate relations.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Interstate_Highways_Relations
We'll need this kind of coordination for U.S. routes as well.
Probably wouldn't hurt for the
Joseph Jon Booker wrote:
Also, wouldn't it make sense to have the way a route is displayed as
the name? For example, network=I,ref=90 would have name=I 90, and
network=US:IL, ref=58 would have name=IL 58 in the relations.
Not really, no. Many Interstate routes have official names that have
Minh Nguyen wrote:
On 4/11/09 11:38 PM, Nicholas Vetrovec wrote:
Posted on the US Page to help coordinate US Interstate relations.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Interstate_Highways_Relations
We'll need this kind of coordination for U.S. routes as well.
Another thing I just
Joseph Jon Booker wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 04:45:23 -0700
Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Joseph Jon Booker wrote:
Also, wouldn't it make sense to have the way a route is displayed as
the name? For example, network=I,ref=90 would have name=I 90, and
network=US:IL, ref=58 would
Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
On 12 Apr 2009, at 9:01 , Adam Schreiber wrote:
Probably because the mapper can easily identify the type of road (i.e.
Interstate, US Hwy, etc.). I'm not sure that the mapper should be
specifying the URL of the sign since it requires extra work to find it
and any
Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
this is nice, will add what I have done already.
some comments for discussion.
did you change the recommendation for a reason compared to the one here?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
not that this is perfect but it has more
Greg Troxel wrote:
Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org writes:
Why make this more complicated than it has to be? Leave the names on
the underlying way, not the relations; leave the refs on the relations,
not the underlying ways. Then it's a matter of fixing mapnik and t...@h to
do the right
Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
over all this is a complex topic, maybe I should summarize some
obervations
tiger data is that the quality is from excellent to really bad in
accuracy
tiger data is old and contains abandoned roads
tiger has no level info, no direction for oneways, no turn
Ted Mielczarek wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Ian Dees
ian.d...@gmail.com
mailto:ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been working on state highways and interstate relations myself
lately, too. I stopped using Potlatch for exactly this reason...
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at
Andrew Ayre wrote:
Hi! When I load OSM data into my GPS unit using mkgmap for a place in
the UK then it is accurate. When I load OSM data for Tucson, Arizona
then it is off by perhaps 100ft.
I would like to make the maps for Tucson usable, so my questions are:
- how do I tell where
0.5m resolution WMS data is now available for all of Oregon without
dealing with mangling Yahoo tiles or inconveniently placed watermarks,
all from a nice, fast wms server provided by University of Oregon and
Oregon Geospatial Enterprise Office. Here's the license info
Adam Schreiber wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Theodore Book tb...@libero.it wrote:
I have been playing around with the TIGER 2008 data, which, for some of
the counties around Atlanta seems to be much better than the old data.
If I import it for some of the counties, though, I would
Theodore Book wrote:
I have worked the Tiger shapefile converter into a state where I think
the Karlsruhe lines are ready for import into OSM. (The highway lines
probably need some more attention first.) I am uploading the Karlsruhe
ways for Rockdale Co. GA, (Link below) a place where the
Alan Millar wrote:
Can/should this be done with relations instead of separate paths? The
idea is to have it stick to the road. With this it creates a lot more
nodes, and there is no easy way to manually get the spacing right
between the road and the addresses if something is moved. Also the
Dion Dock wrote:
I have a small-picture, big-picture issue.
Small picture: I've got a track of I84 in Oregon from Mosier to
Gresham, westbound. The problem is OSM has most of I84 as one two-
directional way. What's the best way to add this track? Most of the
ramps will be messed up
Ian Dees wrote:
Its functions are:
- Strip St suffix from grid-named streets (eg. South 500 West)
- Collapse multiple spaces into a single space (lots of TIGER)
- Expand abbreviated directions (eg. S 500 E to South 500 East)
- Expand abbreviated suffixes (Rd - Road, St -
Adam Schreiber wrote:
Also in Atlanta, there's N St. I got directions from google and
thought I was looking for North St. Man was that a big mistake.
OK, so expand cardinals or not?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us
Ted Percival wrote:
I'm not sure why the logic is inverted. While it is common notation to
abbreviate the cardinal directions, the street signs actually say 300
West, and I would prefer voice navigation software to say Turn on
Three hundred West Rather than Turn on Three Hundred Double-U, for
I'm curious if bicycle boulevards would qualify as living streets, given
that a living street would most closely describe a bicycle boulevard in
OSM terms, though a bicycle boulevard might lack pedestrian facilities.
Frequently, these are not streets you would want to let the kids play
in, as the
Karl Newman wrote:
*Avoid duplicate copies of messages?*
When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a list
message, you can opt to not receive another copy from the mailing list.
Select /Yes/ to avoid receiving copies from the mailing list; select
/No/ to receive copies.
Mario Salvini wrote:
Martin Koppenhoefer schrieb:
2009/6/10 Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk:
In my eyes, that road would be simply tagged with highway=cycleway.
there are some main differences though: usually they are normal
streets changed in designation. That is cars are
Michael Barabanov wrote:
Can we use relations same way as for more complex cycle routes for this one?
Yes, though you're not limited to just a specific kind of way for relations.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-us
Karl Newman wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org
mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Karl Newman wrote:
*Avoid duplicate copies of messages?*
When you are listed explicitly in the To: or Cc: headers of a list
message, you can
On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 15:23 -0500, Stephen Johnson wrote:
Some of the TIGER ways and nodes for Interstates in my area are way out of
alignment. They are all over the map if you'll forgive the pun. I have
several GPS tracks for most of the Interstate lanes.
My question is what should I
On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 09:42 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 09:37 -0700, Barry Parr wrote:
Since most of the US users are so spred out, maybe we can
organize some online mapping parties and knock out some large
areas that are in need of
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 08:19 -0400, Bill Ricker wrote:
The Upper Charles Trail was included in the MASSgis import. It has a
note=under construction. As imported and proposed, it slavishly
followed a passenger and freight line straight to the center of town,
but Milford sensibly added scenic
On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 09:54 -0400, Richard Weait wrote:
Boston is releasing their transit information for the Boston and
surrounding areas.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/08/coming_soon_iph.html
That's interesting. I wonder if we have any tools to make use of Google
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 08:47 -0600, James Ewen wrote:
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:23 AM, Richard
Weaitrichard-gnthur35lhcavxtiumw...@public.gmane.org wrote:
So we USA-ians have a few nodes to move for place=state;
Ooh, yuck... the state name labels end up in the wrong spots... missed
that.
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 10:56 -0400, Adam Schreiber wrote:
To make things clear, should the place=state tag be placed on, near
the node for the capital city of the state?
Why not closer to the geographic center like expected?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 14:10 -0700, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
the wiki has them as proposal on boundary=adminstrative, admin level
1, but this is definitely wrong. they should be either level 3 - 5. as
far as I know they have a pretty special legal status and level 3
seems to be a good
On Sun, 2009-09-06 at 21:12 -0700, Dion Dock wrote:
Hello,
In my neighborhood there are some unpaved residential streets. How
should those be tagged?
highway=track
highway=residential
surface=unpaved
I would tend to go with highway=track unless the street in question
is
On Sun, 2009-09-06 at 21:49 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org writes:
On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 07:30 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
It depends on what the road is like. If it's a decent dirt road that
normal cars routinely drive on, has a street name, is considered
On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 11:40 -0700, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
I think people most
tag according to importance anyway.
this brings us to the topic of tiger import again. there are too many
roads tagged as residential.
Agreed. You'd think after people complaining after the first one, the
On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 14:18 -0400, Paul Fox wrote:
alex wrote:
On 09/06/2009 05:56 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
I would tend to go with highway=track unless the street in question is a
gravelled over macadam or some other semi-paved surface mostly because
I would expect
On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 22:44 -0400, Chris Hunter wrote:
Oops, forgot to link an example -
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.99212lon=-82.14362zoom=16layers=B000FTFTrelation=71023
I wouldn't mark that as a restricted access ramp unless there's signage
to that effect at the scale enterance.
On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 23:10 -0400, Nakor wrote:
Hello,
I am wondering how you can map that when you enter a highway from a
specific ramp you cannot exit at the next one. Please see
http://osm.org/go/ZXCt9WHU-- where it is forbidden driving from I-94
east to M-10 to exit M-10 at exit 4C.
Richard Welty wrote:
On 10/30/09 6:59 PM, Sam Vekemans wrote:
Hi,
how are you tagging state-wide cycle routes?
I know we have
lcn= for local cycle routes (named not named)
rcn=for regional cycle routes (ie metro area)
then there's
ncn=for nation wide
but there's no
scn (state cycle
Chris Hunter wrote:
Tag the first node of the offramp as highway=motorway_junction. As far as
the sign itself goes, there's a proposed relationship for signs in the UK
and EU at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign that
may be of some help.
Note that destination
Dale Puch wrote:
Personally I do not think the signs should be put in OSM, just the actual
POI's are tagged.
Agreed. Another factor is that the US MUTCD only defines a very small
number of specific services nationwide (food, lodging, camping,
telephone, gasoline, diesel), while other states
Thea Clay wrote:
Hi,
I have a random question... does anyone have suggestions for how I would
correctly tag a Super Wal-Mart? I read through the wiki but there didn't
appear to be a tag that fit.
The store in question has a 1.) a full grocery store with
bakery/deli/produce/dry goods,
Randy wrote:
Dale Puch wrote:
Personally I do not think the signs should be put in OSM, just the actual
POI's are tagged.
There may be reasons to put in signs, I just do not think this is one of
them.
Dale
--
Dale Puch
Don't forget the intent of the requester's original question, i.e.,
Alan Mintz wrote:
How should one tag a no-right-turn-on-red-light restriction? Like other
turn restrictions, with restriction=no_right_turn_on_red?
I think this is going too far into depth for any real navigation
purpose, I'd say skip it as the restriction lasts for only seconds at a
time,
Owlman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
I would have to side with not tagging them. This is a timming restriction,
not a navigation one.
Navigation is not the only purpose of OSM
Alan Mintz wrote:
California being one of those more permissive states, I agree with the
annoyance at those who don't know it's legal to turn right on red (or the
other cases) unless specifically prohibited.
Because it is rare to see this prohibition, I believe it is important to
tag and
Alex S. wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
return-to-where-you-came-from [sign] (at
state lines to send you back out of Oregon), etc).
U-Turn Route - there are quite a few signed u-turn routes in
Washington state, too. I have questioned (myself) whether these should
be explicitly defined in OSM
Alex S. wrote:
Nakor wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Five other states, namely Alaska, Idaho, Michigan, Oregon and
Washington, allow left turns on red even from a two-way street.
Thanks. I had always wondered if this is allowed here in MI as only a
few people do it at the one intersection like
Anthony wrote:
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Owlman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
I would have to side with not tagging them
Dave Hansen wrote:
If we can come up with a scheme for getting the addressing imported in a
sane fashion and the consensus is that people want it done that way,
it'll get imported. There are still quite a few squeaky wheels that
like to grumble about TIGER, but I haven't heard a single
Matthias Julius wrote:
I consider numbered tags to be messy. Nodes inside the building is not
better unless you are really producing a map of the building's
internals.
How do you figure? Strip malls typically only have one building but all
ammeneties are accessable from the outside. And
401 - 500 of 1503 matches
Mail list logo
