Re: [Talk-GB] Parallel barriers - unsure about my own edit

On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 20:30, Chris Hodges wrote: > What I've done is to create nodes for the pinch stile and kissing gate, > and connect those with paths (access=foot) to the bridleway. Spacing is > estimated as it all fits within the GPS error I had. But I'm not sure. > It's

Re: [Talk-GB] What is needed for something to be classified as a 'cycle route' (London)

On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 15:09, Simon Still wrote: > Not by any means. 1057’s are the ‘go-to’ way to DO SOMETHING for traffic > engineers. > > - Cyclists getting hit by cars at a junction? Paint some 1057s across it ‘to > alert drivers that there may be cyclists there” (though of course drivers

Re: [Talk-GB] Great North Trail MTB Route

On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 at 13:20, Tony OSM wrote: > So please do not tag as ncn; but please keep as a route. Sustrans are not the only group in the UK that can make signed cycling routes of national-importance, although they are certainly the biggest and most well-known. But if another organisation

Re: [Talk-GB] Great North Trail MTB Route

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 at 11:04, Chris Fleming wrote: > Secondly unsigned routes, these aren't necessarily great as they can't be > verified on the ground, and often tend to be informal however they are > useful, I cycled a day of the Capital trail last year and it was great being > able to pull

Re: [Talk-GB] Public Rights of Way - legal vs reality

On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 20:24, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: > > On Mon, 4 May 2020 at 14:13, nathan case wrote: > > Thanks for your input Robert, the approach taken for routes not following > > the definitive line makes sense - though does this lead to two paths being > > rendered? Or

Re: [Talk-GB] HS2 camden updates

On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 at 14:21, Andy Robinson wrote: > > For those keeping an eye on the HS2 Phase 1 preparatory works changes to the > landscape here is the link to the latest Camden district 12 month look ahead > which covers Euston and its approaches. > > http://tiny.cc/r9skhz For the trivia

Re: [Talk-GB] TfL cycle data published - schema mapping

On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 05:22, Wulf4096 wrote: > Hello, > in Germany we've got "Radfahrstreifen" (solid line) which are > additionally marked by bicycle signs. Only cyclists may use those, and > the sign forbids cyclists to use the main carriageway, unless they've > got a reason to. > > And we've

Re: [Talk-GB] State of the Map 2019, Heidelberg 21-23 Sept

On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 at 15:14, Jez Nicholson wrote: > > That's interestingI'd wanted to go by train before as its more > eco-friendly and more interesting, but struggled with the cost compared to > flights. Do you use Loco2.com to plan? I find it's worth paying a little extra both to avoid

Re: [Talk-GB] Lake District NationalPark

On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 01:54, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > The larger something is the longer it takes of the renders to see it. This is not true. > And if it is a change the renders are slower to see that too. This is not true either. > Something new and small gets rendered fairly

Re: [Talk-GB] account disabled due to bounces

On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 10:10, Jez Nicholson wrote: > > I get the occasional email from Talk-GB telling me that my email address has > excessive bounces. I'm using gmail. Am I the only one with problems? Is there > something I need to change? It happens to me too. I've opened at ticket on the

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

On 3 November 2017 at 17:51, Ilya Zverev wrote: > First, thanks everyone for checking the import. I've made some improvements > regarding addresses, and I removed the "operator" tag. You can see the > improvements on the same map. I'd like to join Richard in a search for a >

Re: [Talk-GB] Public Rights of Way data for Cambridgeshire

On 11 May 2017 at 09:07, Dan S wrote: > Congratulations Robert! The long thread of letters is... educational! To put it mildly! Well done Robert, not only on the outcome but also in keeping calm and civil during the protracted correspondence. My highlight of the saga

Re: [Talk-GB] Import Progress

On 22 March 2017 at 09:24, Gregory wrote: > Besides notification, shall we now focus on actual concerns/comments on the > imports taking place? Please bear in mind that contacting the mailing lists isn't just for the purposes of "notification", but is also supposed

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] [Talk-GB] Import Progress

On 20 March 2017 at 12:34, Rob Nickerson wrote: > I've no idea why Brian didn't follow the rules. I expect he probably didn't > know about them. I have emails from Brian discussing imports as far back as 2009. I find it unlikely that with 8 years of experience he

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] [Talk-GB] Import Progress

On 19 March 2017 at 15:04, Rob Nickerson wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I don't think any of us are members of the import mailing list and I don't > see the point of joining any more mailing lists. They represent an arcane > 20th century solution that allows a few negative

Re: [Talk-GB] Import Progress

On 20 March 2017 at 12:34, Rob Nickerson wrote: > I've no idea why Brian didn't follow the rules. I expect he probably didn't > know about them. I have emails from Brian discussing imports as far back as 2009. I find it unlikely that with 8 years of experience he

Re: [Talk-GB] Import Progress

On 19 March 2017 at 15:04, Rob Nickerson wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I don't think any of us are members of the import mailing list and I don't > see the point of joining any more mailing lists. They represent an arcane > 20th century solution that allows a few negative

Re: [Talk-GB] Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

On 10 January 2017 at 15:55, SK53 wrote: > I was going to say that usually we have the atco code in ref for bus stops > with the more visible stop C in local ref, and thus bus stops aren't the > perfect example. I certainly wouldn't tell someone to wait at bus stop > 3390V1

Re: [Talk-GB] Legible London signs - tagging suggestions

On 10 January 2017 at 07:54, Robert Skedgell wrote: > ref=legible_london I would only use the ref= tag if there is a reference code for each installation, e.g. if the totem has a displayed reference like "A01" designed for users to see. From the pictures I don't

Re: [Talk-GB] Users tagging Farmyard as place=farm (Was Summer quarterly project)

On 14 September 2016 at 13:57, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14-Sep-16 09:08 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> >> Andy Townsend wrote: >>> >>> ** many "names" on OS OpenData aren't names at all (for example, >>> search for "poultry houses" in OSM and you'll get lots of things >>> "named"

Re: [Talk-GB] Schools

On 5 August 2016 at 13:41, Colin Smale wrote: > What I meant was, having established that some (many?) schools will need to > use the MP model, all consumers (for this data) will need to be ready to > process MPs anyway. Our mapping conventions are based on our mappers,

Re: [Talk-GB] Schools

On 4 August 2016 at 19:13, Christian Ledermann wrote: > If the consensus is that schoolgrounds which consist only of a single > polygon (without holes) should be rather mapped as a closed way I can > change this Yes please. Thanks, Andy

Re: [Talk-GB] Schools

On 4 August 2016 at 15:14, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 04/08/2016 14:42, Brian Prangle wrote: >> >> Yesterday approx 150 schools were added as relations according to the >> taginfoscript which is monitoring schools. Does anyone know what's going on? > > > I'd ask Christian

Re: [Talk-GB] Open data (Was: Parliamentary debate mentions OSM)

On 26 March 2016 at 06:30, Rob Nickerson wrote: > How do we ensure the mix continues to contain a lot of OSM data? At the highest level, by making sure the focus of OpenStreetMap is on-the-ground mapping, which best enables us to capture valuable information that's

Re: [Talk-GB] Restoring a usable map service!

On 31 October 2015 at 15:18, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Lester Caine wrote: >> while switch2osm may well produce a working system for >> some ... I have to also support current paying traffic on the >> hardware and that prevents running too many different >> competing web

Re: [Talk-GB] Thrapston viaduct

On 13 July 2015 at 14:34, Mike Evans mi...@saxicola.co.uk wrote: It seems to me that the viaduct and the railway are two separate entities and should mapped as such. Just because an abandoned railway happens to run on the top of the viaduct is irrelevant in my opinion. Exactly. If there was

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

On 22 May 2015 at 14:27, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: Andy, the operator tags are all the same, not the building names. No, they really aren't. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148247775 - Churchill College (University of Cambridge) http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/12861651 -

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

On 22 May 2015 at 14:03, Christopher Baines m...@cbaines.net wrote: On 21/05/15 22:39, Dan S wrote: I don't relish bringing this up since it's a bit of a tangle, but I noticed Cambridge has a lot more universities than I thought! Apparently 1219, judging from the number of amenity=university

Re: [Talk-GB] too many universities in Cambridge

On 22 May 2015 at 11:54, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: 2. What is a University anyway? I'll not explore the concept of a university too far, since very little about groups of people is relevant to OSM! However, if you were to say What is the physical aspect of a university then

Re: [Talk-GB] How to edit the search results ?

On 31 March 2015 at 23:48, pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: Simple question - how does one edit the rubbish search results ? Mike, you are being unnecessarily rude and confrontational again. If you can't behave in a civil manner - both on this mailing list and in the edits that you

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging U road numbers [was: Search but cannot find]

On 19 March 2015 at 01:39, Pmailkeey . pmailk...@googlemail.com wrote: So all ABCU road numbers need to be consistently placed No they don't. We've had the discussion many times before, and in the UK we don't put C or U refs into the ref tag. This is for good reasons, as other people have

Re: [Talk-GB] Discussion of Mechanical Edits

On 18 December 2014 at 11:30, SK53 sk53@gmail.com wrote: I personally feel the current discussion is now thrashing. I personally feel that the opposition to Matthijs' work is becoming farcical. After setting up dozens of hoops for him to jump through, which he has done, and then because he

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-3 Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

On 18 December 2014 at 12:18, Jonathan Bennett jonobenn...@gmail.com wrote: All your mechanical edit does is correct one tiny part of the mapping, and possibly to no great effect - it's just the text of the name that's getting corrected under a limited set of circumstances. So let's JFDI

Re: [Talk-GB] OSMF Special General Meeting

On 26 November 2014 at 08:23, David Woolley for...@david-woolley.me.uk wrote: When the actual meeting notice is issued, That notice has already been given - see https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2014-November/003079.html Thanks, Andy

[Talk-GB] NCN 279 Exeter to Okehampton

Hi all, I've been alerted that the NCN 279 cycling route from Exeter to Okehampton is currently missing from OpenStreetMap. I've no personal knowledge of the area or even if the route is now signed, so I thought I'd mention it here. If anyone knows more, or if anyone is from that area and fancies

Re: [Talk-GB] C roads again

On 13 August 2014 12:38, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote: I would still maintain that the benefits of having reference numbers shown to users on highway=tertiary roads (in terms of allowing them to cross-reference the map to official documents) outweighs the

Re: [Talk-GB] Getting Highway Agency information into OSM

On 3 July 2014 17:51, John Baker rovas...@hotmail.com wrote: He just said we release the plans and they are public domain. Public Domain (British English, especially Government and in the Courts): Information known by the public, could be under any kind of copyright Public Domain (US

Re: [Talk-GB] Town v City

On 25 February 2014 09:47, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: City status is an honour granted by The Queen, not something that can be claimed by size or population. Like trunk roads, its quirky and like trunk roads I see it as the way we do things here. Is that actually documented

Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding

On 7 February 2014 12:37, John Baker rovas...@hotmail.com wrote: Always to play the devils advocate. We have all heard about mapping for the renderer but are you mapping for the third party data providers that is slow at updating the planet data. Define slow for a printed atlas? Should we

Re: [Talk-GB] FW: OpenStreetBugs PhaseOut: help needed, Mapping party

On 6 January 2014 10:55, Ed Loach edlo...@gmail.com wrote: Forwarded from osm-talk after reading the diary entry: [GB] 2517 Very little progress. (70 Bugs fixed). Can anyone promote it to GB mappers? The bugs are distributed over the whole country. See

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

On 2 December 2013 20:40, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: So, we have an announcements list, but there was no announcement there about the recent change, which people are complaining was inadequately, er, announced? I think they may have a case. And here you are, complaining

[Talk-GB] New OSM Leaflets now available

Hi all, I've sat down and created an updated version of the OpenStreetMap Promotional Leaflets that many of you will have seen at some point or another. They now have the correct licence and logo, for a start, (the old ones date to 2010) but have also been thoroughly updated based on both the old

Re: [Talk-GB] Using store locator as source

On 16 September 2013 14:18, Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote: If there is no license on their website regarding the information, then shouldn't it be considered public domain? Err, no. That's not how the law works - either on copyright or on database rights. Cheers, Andy

Re: [Talk-GB] Wish LIst for Mapnik Stylesheet (overmapping of private features)

On 10 September 2013 12:00, Craig Loftus craigloftus+...@googlemail.com wrote: I would hope that whoever might fix the bugs in the rendering stylesheet would start with those rather than discard all of them and start with a new bug list on github. That is step 3 on the roadmap described on

Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic=rail

On 13 May 2013 11:49, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Would there be any opposition to gradually reverting uses of this tag to railway=dismantled/abandoned, depending on what's on the ground? I don't oppose the change in principle, but we need to be clear what you intend for all

Re: [Talk-GB] Writing a howto wiki page for mapping golf courses

On 30 April 2013 12:21, Bob Kerr openstreetmapcraigmil...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Is there no precedent for HOWTO documents like there are with other opensource projects? Sure, there's loads of pages on the wiki describing how to map particular types of things - they are called Feature pages. These

Re: [Talk-GB] Complaining about refs on roads again!

On 30 April 2013 19:21, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote: I would still maintain that it is appropriate to use the ref key for such reference numbers. Internal or not, it's still the primary official reference number for that stretch of road. I would argue that

[Talk-GB] Messed up buildings in Preston

Hi All, I noticed some weirdness when doing some openstreetmap-carto work. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.763681lon=-2.723075zoom=18layers=M Notice a few things: * Overlapping buildings (e.g. to the south of the junction) * Strange triangular partial-buildings * Incredibly thin buildings

Re: [Talk-GB] Postcode data

On 26 February 2013 22:08, Aidan McGinley aidmcgin+openstreet...@gmail.com wrote: is the actual output that would get loaded onto OSM. Please don't load this data into OpenStreetMap. It's not a good idea. 1) The source data appears to be heavily overprocessed. Users should note that postcodes

Re: [Talk-GB] Alton Towers

On 17 January 2013 01:38, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: Anyone familiar with Alton Towers / rollercoasters in general? This changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/14382319 has merged a number of different-layered sections of Nemesis into one. It's by a

Re: [Talk-GB] Telegraph releases Green Belt data

On 28 November 2012 15:37, Ralph Smyth ral...@cpre.org.uk wrote: The Department for Communities and Local Government released the data for the 2011 green belt to the Telegraph, and it is being made available here to view, explore, share and download. That seems to be the limit of the details

[Talk-GB] Updates to the England Cycling Data project

Hi All, I've made some updates to the software that powers the England Cycling Data[1] project (i.e updates to snapshot-server). * All the capitalisation bugs (e.g. Lane - lane) should be taken care of * Each area now has an overall completion percentage, and these are shown on the list of areas

Re: [Talk-GB] Updates to the England Cycling Data project

On 8 November 2012 14:55, Aidan McGinley aidmc...@gmail.com wrote: Andy, Just looking at this and I’ll be doing some merging for my area as there seems to be a good amount to do. One question, is there any way to quickly create a way where one exists in the background data but not on open

Re: [Talk-GB] DfT Cycling data - cycle lanes

On 9 October 2012 17:34, Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk wrote: Gregory, I thought that cycleway=opposite_lane was the equivalent of cycleway:right=lane. no - opposite_lane is useful in a one-way road to indicate cyclists can go both ways. There's nothing in cycleway:right=lane to

Re: [Talk-GB] Updated GB cycle lanes map

On 2 October 2012 09:55, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote: 1) put the output back in the database, by using existing keys (eg maxspeed=30 mph + maxspeed:source=inferred from presence of residential side streets) 2) put the output back in the database, using new keys (eg

Re: [Talk-GB] railway:historic = rail tags

On 6 July 2012 21:43, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: I've noticed a stack of stations showing up on the map recently labelled VillageName Station which just seams wrong and to have them show up on the default rendering seams even more wrong. They are tagged railway=station;

Re: [Talk-GB] Stations and platforms=*

On 28 June 2012 12:02, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote: There are two pages on the wiki, each giving slightly different advice, each containing confused, ambiguous and conflicting suggestions: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railway_stations

Re: [Talk-GB] Stations and platforms=*

On 28 June 2012 14:14, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: I thought the railway=station node should be attached to the railway line. But that get's confusing over which line to attach it to, so I like using it as an area. I think if it's got the point where you have more than one way

Re: [Talk-GB] Stations and platforms=*

On 28 June 2012 14:42, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: Wikipedia has a handy map - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Preston_railway_station_2008.png 7 is the right most one (numbered as such in the station itself) and 0 is the right hand side of the blue platform) To me the correct

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 20 June 2012 15:11, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote: The people who collected the data tell me that the cycle lane widths were recorded in 3 categories: 1) 1.5m 2) 1.5=x2 3) =2 So the values in the data (1.25 and 1.75 mostly) are spuriously accurate and quite often

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 20 June 2012 15:21, Graham Stewart (GrahamS) gra...@dalmuti.net wrote: David Earl wrote I don't know about elsewhere in the country, but in Cambridgeshire the council has used the parenthesis convention on such signs I guess that ways signed as leading to an NCN could still use

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 18 June 2012 12:05, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote: One last comment for now. When looking at a project page, such as: http://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/cnxc-snapshot/projects/78/ tagged_ways It would be good to have a link to edit a relevant area, or failing that at least a

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 18 June 2012 10:11, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote: Are there any notes I'm missing about how to access and deal with nodes in the DfT data? e.g. http://www.flickr.com/photos/edloach/7392860104/in/photostream Nope, you're not missing anything - it simply appears to be broken. I'm

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 17 June 2012 12:44, Martin - CycleStreets list-osm-talk...@cyclestreets.net wrote: This data for each area is now available, converted, and ready for easy merging in with a new Potlatch2 tool Andy has written. The DfT is very keen to see the data more widely used, by OSM.

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road

On 19 June 2012 12:59, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote: a) Not a problem at all; b) simply a problem for the rendering, and no change to the tagging is required; c) a possible problem with the tagging? I'd say c). It seems to me like the road reference number (e.g. A514) and public

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW Ref tagging when ROW is also a road

On 19 June 2012 14:11, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: I use admin:ref for refs that are predominantly intended for administrative usage, rather than public-facing usage. Now that sounds like tagging for the renderer. No, that's not true. Please see

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 18 June 2012 14:37, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: 'Left'/'Right' is then based on the direction of the way, therefore you will need to make sure that OSM's and DfT's ways are drawn in the SAME DIRECTION before merging! They should be. In some cases you'll find the DfT data

Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging

On 18 June 2012 10:58, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote: Also, I'm not up on cycleway lane tagging, and on a section where there are lanes both sides, is cycleway:left=lane and cycleway:right=lane correct, as per merge tool suggestions? Also, the merge tool is showing a suggest of Lane with a

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycling, the law and traffic signs

On 16 May 2012 01:05, Jason Cunningham jamicu...@googlemail.com wrote: Unless it's been recently changed. the Cycle Only sign could never prohibit 'pedestrian access' because use of the sign is defined by the Department for Transports Traffic Signs Manual (chapter 3) [1]. The DFT

Re: [Talk-GB] routing on the road network

On 16 May 2012 12:42, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: On 05/16/2012 11:56 AM, Tim Pigden wrote: that there are no one-way streets leading to dead ends, This is not common in OSM but I am not aware of anyone doing a network analysis that would fix such a problem. Keepright has this

Re: [Talk-GB] routing on the road network

I don't think the email below made it to the list: On , Tim Pigden tim.pig...@optrak.com wrote: Error reporting would definitely be a challenge.Are there existing facilities to add suspect type tags to enable OSM itself to be the primary reporting medium? I haven't looked into the details of

Re: [Talk-GB] Micronations

On 10 May 2012 08:23, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote: If you look at zoom level 3 for the UK you will see the Kingdom of Ivania rendered. A google search throws up http://micronations.wikia.com/wiki/Kingdom_of_Ivania which is a vanity nation consisting of someone's bedroom in

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Tagging Guideline - wiki page proposals

On 30 April 2012 10:23, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote: Which (yawn) is not a bad thing: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote: IMHO it's either a track on the main highway

Re: [Talk-GB] People wanting to remove the route of the HS2 from openstreetmap

On 26 March 2012 14:51, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote: I'm trying to explain it all to the group members, it might help if the route were named 'Proposed HS2 route' or similar. Well, it would help if the standard layer only showed names for thing that it was otherwise drawing. But in

Re: [Talk-GB] Un-relicensable roads - now with secondary roads included

On 23 March 2012 08:51, e...@loach.me.uk wrote: b) if it does need remapping, use the remote control link to open the way in JOSM Out of interest (and I'm not 'having a go') - why did you put a remote control link there? I see lots of different QA websites and they have a mixture of links to

Re: [Talk-GB] Un-relicensable roads - now with secondary roads included

On 23 March 2012 12:59, Craig Loftus craigloftus+...@googlemail.com wrote: I just tried 2 options with my default editor set to remote. The default edit URL [1] from browse/way/32795934 does work, but throws an error: Editing failed - make sure JOSM or Merkaartor is loaded and the remote

Re: [Talk-GB] Remapping update

On 23 March 2012 12:58, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote: Incidentally, is just knowing the footpaths evidence enough to tag with odbl=clean? Or is there the risk that the footpath was created with iffy sources? Use odbl=clean to clear features which contain historic

Re: [Talk-GB] Vandalism changeset

On 14 March 2012 13:40, Oliver O'Brien m...@oliverobrien.co.uk wrote: I think we are being too nice if we assume that edits like this might be someone new that doesn't realise they aren't in a sandbox, especially when they go through the trouble of pressing the save button and adding a

Re: [Talk-GB] Beta test of cycling date merge-tool

On 9 March 2012 23:00, Robert Norris rw_nor...@hotmail.com wrote: I don't want to steal Andy's thunder, but I thought I'd check the progress and what good timing! . My reported geometry issues are solved. . Many more areas have been processed (~ 1/3 of DfT areas including my local area*)

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle route 20 / Wandle Trail fragmented

On 11 March 2012 14:23, MT_Payne trevy...@fastmail.co.uk wrote: NCN route 20 used to be continuous on the OSM, as it is on the ground and on Sustrans site, checked from Wandsworth to Carshalton and on to Oaks Park. Several sections appear to be missing on OSM:

Re: [Talk-GB] Cycle route 20 / Wandle Trail fragmented

On 12 March 2012 13:37, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 11 March 2012 14:23, MT_Payne trevy...@fastmail.co.uk wrote: NCN route 20 used to be continuous on the OSM, as it is on the ground and on Sustrans site, checked from Wandsworth to Carshalton and on to Oaks Park. Several

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapquest routing

On 8 March 2012 20:55, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote: Its not an OSM problem, but anyone any idea why they have done it like this? I'll bet it's to do with the US. I think that in the US we are mapping freeways as either highway=motorway (for freeways that cross state lines, i.e.

Re: [Talk-GB] Subjective value of adding FIXMEs by a bot?

On 3 March 2012 16:45, Robert Norris rw_nor...@hotmail.com wrote: I can't say I'm convinced about the value of adding FIXMEs to 7000+ postboxes in the UK in changeset: ... As such I'm thinking the changeset should probably be reverted/removed. Wholeheartedly agree. Automated QA shouldn't

Re: [Talk-GB] Backwards Areas

On 14 February 2012 19:34, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote: but I made the way run clockwise rather than anticlockwise. Just for clarity, there's no difference between clockwise and anticlockwise polygons in OSM. Either direction works fine. There are, of course, one or two

Re: [Talk-GB] Beta test of cycling date merge-tool

On 24 January 2012 03:09, Robert Norris rw_nor...@hotmail.com wrote: The Taunton Sedgemoor import data seems pretty messed up. Eg Mansuel Road, seems have picked out wrong points (over 5+ miles away) to generate crazily wrong geometry. Thanks Robert - I'll have a look at that and find out

Re: [Talk-GB] Beta test of cycling date merge-tool

On 16 November 2011 09:20, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I previously discussed[1] what our plans were with regards to the cycling data that is coming out of the DfT. Hi again, I've now received lots more data on this project, again for soliciting feedback. Current areas

Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping

On 15 January 2012 19:27, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: If you reposition the new node in same place as the old one, this hasn't really achieved anything.  At best, it has obscured the history a bit so it's no longer quite so clear that the node was originally added by a CT-decliner.

Re: [Talk-GB] Misguided user kane123

On 13 January 2012 16:36, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote: On 13 January 2012 13:41, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone fancy dealing with http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kane123 ? All of their changesets so far are bogus, and need reverting. I have reverted

Re: [Talk-GB] Misguided user kane123

On 16 January 2012 10:34, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: The user is back, and has spent the early hours of this morning deleting lots of things - major roads etc. I'm going to upgrade my assessment to deliberate vandal, and ask again if someone can revert the changesets

Re: [Talk-GB] How to get a Relation History?

On 15 January 2012 09:28, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I am trying to find the history of the relation covering the Weardale Way ( 86561 ).   I can view the relation itself ok at http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/86561, but when I try to view the history of it

Re: [Talk-GB] The state of Bristol in OSM

On 14 January 2012 20:34, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Q's Does anyone have a template letter along the lines of 'please can you sign the agreement as it would mean a lot of hard work replacing your data' to send to those that are undecided or, more likely, unaware of the change?

Re: [Talk-GB] The state of Bristol in OSM

On 13 January 2012 16:36, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote: I'd rather not find big chunks of south east London and little segments of major roads disappear overnight if I can help it. I've started work in SW London (Putney / Wimbledon / Streatham) areas, concentrating on the major roads.

Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping

On 14 January 2012 15:35, Eike Ritter osm...@rittere.co.uk wrote: I'm trying to do some remapping, and would be grateful for some help in situations I've encountered. 1.) Assume you need to replace a node which is in the intersection of several ways. If I simply delete the node and re-create

[Talk-GB] Misguided user kane123

Anyone fancy dealing with http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kane123 ? All of their changesets so far are bogus, and need reverting. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Pigging potlach ...

On 11 January 2012 00:21, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: Well I'm on SUSE11.3 64bit into an AMD quad core with 8Gb RAM and Seamonkey 2.6.1 Rock stable with everything else I run. I'll switch to Firefox on another machine when I have a little more time tomorrow night. Just pissed me

Re: [Talk-GB] Pigging potlach ...

On 11 January 2012 11:21, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: It's the usual problem of no time ... 15 mins tidying up an area while I'm waiting for something else to finish is time usefully spent, but fire-fighting why something random is happening takes a lot longer :( Sure, I

Re: [Talk-GB] OS VectorMap water feature import

On 12 December 2011 11:51, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: The main practical obstacle, as I see it, is that OS in their infinite wisdom have started supplying the shapefiles in 100km x 100km squares... which are certainly far too large to wrangle within a browser-based editor

Re: [Talk-GB] Revert my changeset please

On 4 December 2011 18:12, Pawel Stankiewicz sta...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Chances are something very different from a ban. There are also chances that a satellite will fall on my head but there is no chances to predict every consequence of any action and only 1 way to verify predictions. That's

Re: [Talk-GB] LCN - Local Cycle Network

This sounds a bit like yes it is/oh no it isn't tags. If it's not an actual cycle route, then it shouldn't be otherwise identically tagged but just with additional official=no or operator=Some Wishful Thinkers. I think your earlier suggestion of tagging them separately to lcn/ncn/rcn would be

Re: [Talk-GB] LCN - Local Cycle Network

On 29 November 2011 09:17, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote: In London there's also the problem that the Cycle SuperHighways and LCN are both tagged the same, despite being rather different beasts. In what way? They are both signed cycle routes covering a reasonably local

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >