On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 9:54 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
name=* should be the bridge name, not the road name
Not necessarily, according to the wiki. It seems that this is still ambiguous.
... at the very least I would do bridge:ref=* since you
are referring to some kind
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
How do you use speed limit tags when
only 5% of the roads are tagged with them?
Think longer-term.
Okay. How do you use speed limit tags when only 8% of the roads are tagged
with them?
I don't share your pessimism. I've
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
How do you use speed limit tags when
only 5% of the roads are tagged with them?
Think longer-term.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote:
Should I place a node as usual over the building (place_of_worship= (etc))
with a note that it meets in the school hall?
IMHO, No - I don't like the idea of using separate/duplicate features
(e.g. an extra node) to
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
... I assumed zverik's comment related to osm2pgsql or the like, where
ways (or sets of relations) could be joined.
I don't think you want to join ways, because they belong to
different relations. (E.g. you might render the
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:23 AM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the rules for joining segments by osm2pgsql should be something like:
...
But hang on. Do we actually want to join segments [ways], or do we
want *separate* ways to share a name label?
I believe we want the
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:49 PM, James Livingston
li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote:
Here's what I've currently got, any more comments?
...
Is it worth using an additional
classification:qld=national_park|conservation_park|state_forest, etc.
(or similar), just to make things extra clear?
That is,
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
You could always have highway=link.
But some links ARE motorway rules and some ARE trunk road so just saying link
does not work.
highway=*
link=yes
?
___
talk mailing list
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote:
+1. Please map the cause of the hazard, instead of (or at least as
well as) a vague, subjective meta-description of a conglomeration of
factors. If you are having trouble tagging any of these factors, e.g.
traffic flow,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Personally I don't mind if they add some sort of subjective hazard level tag
as well as these objective tags, but I think the objective tags will be much
more useful in the long term.
+1. Please map the cause of the hazard, instead
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, James Livingston
li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote:
In particular, anything of class 4 and above can vary a lot. There are tracks
which probably aren't rated but if they were would be Class 6 that I'd be
happy to go on for an afternoon walk by myself, and there
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Craig Feuerherdt
craigfeuerhe...@gmail.com wrote:
Thinking from an OSM perspective I'd say move all the attributes from the
point to the polygon and delete the point.
That's what I do.
With my GPS hat on I'd say attribute the polygon as amenity=fuel but leave
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:20 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 June 2010 07:12, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
With my GPS hat on I'd say attribute the polygon as amenity=fuel but leave
the point and all its attributes so it shows up on the GPS as a POI.
IMHO
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:57 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Some of us were discussing making a custom hiking map styles on IRC
earlier so we can print out such maps or use them in presentations to
show bush walkers the potential of what they can get back out of OSM.
In case
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:30 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
- ideally there needs to be more granularity of track difficulty
- track_visibility=* is probably useful
- sac_scale=* is less useful as it is too specific to alpine areas
- however, something
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:07 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 June 2010 10:39, Craig Feuerherdt craigfeuerhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I am facing the same issue in Bendigo. I have been considering suggesting a
landuse=rural_residential tag. AS you state, these blocks are too
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:11 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 June 2010 14:09, Craig Feuerherdt craigfeuerhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't disagree Roy.
I still argue that the land use isn't wholly residential and that these
peri-urban areas are a distinct land use.
The
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Do we have any objective way of deciding what is a major through
route within a local area vs a minor through route within a local
area?
By definition, the definition will be dependent on the context. From
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 7:46 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
XAPI reports only 7 or 8 highway=giveway tags and I was wondering if
there was something used more often.
No idea, but FWIW wouldn't highway=give_way be more consistent with
other OSM tags? i.e. separating words with
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 3:03 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 June 2010 14:26, David Dean dd...@ieee.org wrote:
Looks like NearMap or us need to talk to BrisConnections about attribution.
It might have been better to contact them privately about this before
resorting to
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:47 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
If you can run a script over data it could also be pre-processed in a
similar manner without needing explicit tags on the objects.
This is true. i.e. Rather than automatically adding layer=whatever to
the DB where
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
Off the top of my head I'm thinking of a line within the area that
defines the direction. it would have to be linked to the boundary by
using relations(?)
Yup that is how I think also. Still no complete solution, but
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
Good to see that nobody cares about the wiki inconsistencies of 'locality'.
I didn't reply because your original email didn't ask a clear
question. Are you proposing something in particular? I'll try to
comment nonetheless:
at
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you should rename your proposal as 'defaults' instead of
'definition' (type=defaults).
Agreed.
And the prefix def: is not really necessary
in your def:key=value tags.
Perhaps not, but it does help to make it clear
Google: This new styling feature gives you full control to display and
customize the parts of the map that lets your data on the map shine.
http://google-latlong.blogspot.com/2010/05/styled-maps-and-wrapping-up-io-in-style.html
___
Talk-au mailing list
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Brendan Morley morb@beagle.com.au wrote:
Yes, I would be *recording* what I *saw* in the field.
FWIW, I think Brendan's got a good point. It comes down to what's
verifiable. I disagree with Ross that an abbreviation mapping can only
work one way. It is
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
Before you all get too carried away with this extra tab idea of Ævar's
I would just like to point out what I've said before about adding more
tabs, namely that we already have too many and that any attempt add more
without
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Zeptomoon zeptom...@gmail.com wrote:
Would this tell you or remind you of something?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:OSM_Logo_World_Green.plain.png
Cool idea. Would need some tweaking to make it easier on the eyes.
The problem is that it looks nasty
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:12 AM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
Easy fix: Remove the GPS Traces and User Diaries tabs and add
links to these near Help Wiki in the left column.
Yes, because we never get any complaints about things in the left column
being pushed too far down the page so
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:46 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Robert Martinez wrote:
Now, could everybody still in doubt please do a simple google
image search for good logo and check for logos that tell a story!
I bet you'll hardly find any.
Robert, I think you have
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:41 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm still after
suggestions on how to tag multiple transponders for the same node, I
don't think tagging multiple nodes on the same spot is a good idea,
using a single node + multiple relations might work I suppose,
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 1:47 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
I would expect from a new logo to be
1 individual and unique
2 meet all the technical and graphical requirements for a logo
3 tell a story / symbolize the idea of OSM
4 possibly maintain some continuity with
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 1:13 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm leaning towards producing metro and non-metro data sets and bulk
importing the non-metro data sets and then offering the metro data
sets on a request basis, or is there a better way to handle this and
other
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure I could change your suggested logo to make it unique to my area
and still retain links back to OSM to identify with the greater cause.
You're missing the point. A good logo isn't one that can be changed
to make it
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:09 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Either the ABS boundaries might be wrong, or the boundary has moved
since 2006, or where you think the boundary is, isn't where the ABS
thinks it is, it's borderlineish though...
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 1:17 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2010 23:40, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, I think I know what might be going on. The property is
clearly within the suburb of Annerley, however, the property's
associatedStreet
Gday,
On osm.org, search for Annerville Place. The Nominatim results suggest the
address is in Yeronga, however, this should be Annerley.
Can someone please check the relevant admin boundaries and let me know why
this happens?
I realise this is an unusual request about a specific example, but
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:37 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
What's the lat/lon?
http://maps.bigtincan.com/?z=7ll=-27.119,152.794layer=000B000TT
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-27.517456lon=153.027702zoom=18layers=B000FTF
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
Doesn't an exit exist independently of the sign? If so, is there a
way to map it independently of a destination_sign?
It does, but I don't see any better relation for it
What about similar to a turn_restriction relation?
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
I think that we need to put our stuff on our own wiki.
I don't see how you reached that conclusion.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Emilie Laffray
emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe that a separate wiki can be useful at cases, if not only for the
case that it can be potentially be easier to search and to work from it.
In my opinion, this kind of fragmentation is something to be
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Konrad Skeri kon...@skeri.com wrote:
In your case you would get 3 relations. I-70 to exit 91 (with
destination= according to the sign at I-70), exit 91 to exit 91A, and
exit 91 to exit 91B (with destination= accoring to the sign(s) at exit
91 before the 91A/B
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
I bought a Lonely Planet book of Oz today. I thought that I would use it for
POIs - to try and put things on the map that are in the guidebook, as this
would make OSM more attractive to tourists.
I'm not starting at A and continuing
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
It doesn't look like the actual style files that the OSM site uses are
available (or if they are, they're not easy to find).
I'm guessing it's this one (?):
I am leaving for a 5 month trip through parts of outback Australia in a few
weeks and I want to add to OSM as much additional detail as I reasonably can.
Sounds great :)
should the elements be shown as separate nodes and individually tagged or as
multiple tags to a single node.
In my
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 2:44 AM, Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de wrote:
I never sent an announcement here so i think its time do so. I have built
a maxspeed map - visualizing the max speed for highways.
Nice! Can you please provide a link to a key/legend? It would be nice
to know what green means,
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 6:14 AM, Tirkon tirko...@yahoo.de wrote:
Is it possible to establish an editor, that is easy enough for
beginners without being dangerous for OSM? I think, yes. But excluding
the relations is not the solution.
I have suggested in the past that a new beginner-oriented
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Sam Vekemans
acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com wrote:
... it gets treated in the same way that WMS layers are 'its just
another source of info'
Are you suggesting that someone should create a new
database/website/API to store and serve OSM-formatted data that is
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
.. I'm still unclear how one is supposed to
distinguish between a smooth, wide urban footpath and a hiking trail.
For smoothness, use surface=*
For width, use width=*
(And similarly, how to distinguish between a bike
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
... So far, I haven't seen
much evidence that we have ways of aggregating excess information into
more manageable chunks.
As others have already suggested: we need relations.
There's already proposals semi-underway
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Giacomo Boschi gwil...@email.it wrote:
... I find that the simplest way of tagging an
ice-cream shop is the cuisine tag associated with an amenity like fast
food or cafe, according to circumstances.
Seems reasonable to me. I generally prefer this approach of
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone have any thoughts about what to do about this?
Contact those that made the incorrect changes. Other than that...Is
there a particular wiki page that recommends names be spelt out in
full? If so, you could
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:47 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I think making OSM
files available to anyone and everyone is a bad idea simply because it
only takes a couple of overly zealous mappers or people with malice
and we really will have a problem on our hands.
I
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote:
Another possibility is that we just say - OSM is just a repository for this
data and we don't modify it in any way, or add to it,
and then just do a complete bulk import every time a new version becomes
available.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:26 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
... having bad data is
better than no data
John I agree with your overall position, but this isn't the best way
to phrase it.
Thanks for making the data *available for import*. The method of
importing it will of
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 3:19 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I've moved the previous files and all the rest of the files Mike converted
here:
http://map-data.bigtincan.com/data/data.vic.gov.au/
Can you please explain if/how you would suggest regular mappers help
with the
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Gervase Markham gerv-gm...@gerv.net wrote:
... I suggest that the way to get people involved is to
have them see the map, and use the map for the things they would
otherwise use Google Maps for, and _then_ have the thought process
That's wrong. Hey - I could
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Valent Turkovic
valent.turko...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, please check out this video and then share your opinion it this is
maybe start of 3D OpenEarthMap?
I'd like to know:
1) do they use OSM data, and if so, how
2) do they enable their users to contribute back to
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Randy rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com wrote:
My personal preference would be to provide a little more capability,
I understand your opinion, but I expect this approach would lead to
something no more newbie-friendly than Potlatch 2.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
I would suggest that Potlatch is left alone for its devotees.
I'd start with the following in the design brief for the Newbie Editor
Can add nodes, label them with default tags only (other than name).
Can add ways, again default
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
How about an even bigger step back?
Actually I just realised that, alternatively, perhaps we could be
looking at something like Mapzen POI Collector for the desktop?
___
talk
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Tim McNamara
paperl...@timmcnamara.co.nz wrote:
For future discussion, once scope has been determined: Would it be an idea
to provide a toggle between simple mode complex mode inside of Potlatch,
rather than build a completely new editor?
I think it first
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 7:11 AM, silversurfer silversur...@oleco.net wrote:
There is a similar concept on http://ae.osmsurround.org/. It is called OSM
Amenity Editor.
Wow, that's great! How did I not know about this editor? :S
Liz, how does this compare to what you had in mind? Too simple? I
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:06 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On of the nicest ideas I saw was splitting openstreetmap.com and .org - what
you think of that? Have a nice interface on .com for newbies and then the
community hub etc on .org
Depends what you mean by community hub. The
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Michael spam...@gmx-ist-cool.de wrote:
The footways along Duoro Road and Harbour Street (but not the one
between them!) do not carry any information IMHO
I disagree. They indicate that there is a footway there. If it's a
verifiable fact, IMHO it rightly
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:27 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
The only harm is if there is no way as well, or if people start joing
roads to nature strips and making it a complete PITA to edit them
independently of each other in future.
I think this is important, and hasn't
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:59 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Third sunday of the month, from 9 until 12 can be tagged as:
opening_hours=Su[3] 09:00-12:00
Sunday markets on the 1st, 3rd and 5th Sundays of the month:
opening_hours=Su[1,3,5] 06:00-12:00
These are good.
Last
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
...Way representation is more useful for
...
- anything that has directional information, such as oneway roads
Exactly. Mapping a way as an area is fine as long as you also
represent *the path of travel*.
detailed
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Carsten Gerlach daswaldh...@gmx.de wrote:
Yes, that's right, have a look at http://osm.org/go/0MBdEXMHO- for example.
That looks great, and so simple... highway=* for the way, AND
highway=* + area=yes for the area.
Is this a solved problem, then? Any complaints
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:05 AM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote:
Is this a solved problem, then? Any complaints with this approach
(cause it looks damn pretty on mapnik, at least...)
I remember someone complaining with me that routers not supporting
highway=* + area=yes in the same
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Exactly. Mapping a way as an area is fine as long as you also
represent *the path of travel*.
What path of travel? There are many paths of travel, and generally none of
them are properly represented by a line going through the
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 7:20 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Personally I don't think it's reasonable to map anything on a
residential property
I wonder if any lawyer/privacy expert/etc. has written on this subject before...
___
Talk-au
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
... I don't think it should render on the
default mapnik. If for no other reason than we want *public* tennis
courts to be visible, and all those private ones just create a lot of
noise.
Just add access=private (or
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Niklas Cholmkvist towards...@gmail.com wrote:
I live in a place where I feel the need to map some streets as areas. If
I start a little of such mapping, will routing software get confused?
How were you planning to achieve this?
Mapping streets (and other linear
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Andy Botting a...@andybotting.com wrote:
The Director would however approve the release of the data provided
the usual terms of our licence agreement were in place.
They clearly just don't get it hey...
___
Talk-au
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 7:10 PM, James Stewart j.k.stew...@ed.ac.uk wrote:
Getting back to those walkers, though. Navteq says it's identified four
features requested by large numbers of users when they're on foot. They are:
public transport information including real-time data;
Well, OSM can
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 12:27 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Just use it
But it would be nice to have it listed on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop - and I suspect this is
what Djam is hoping for.
Sounds good to me, I reckon go ahead and move to voting - no one will
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
...Tracing just doesn't cut it.
Cut it? Cut what? I think it's perfectly suitable for what Steve's
suggesting. There's a time and a place for tracing.
___
talk mailing list
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Roy Wallace wrote:
I suspect you will have opponents, though, because having physical
characteristics that can accommodate a bike is not verifiable.
Actually I think it is verifiable as cycleways have design
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
That is 300 times more open to misinterpretation than the cycleway example.
Yet we cope.
So you're arguing that, because you guys are able to cope, these
kind of tags are necessarily a good idea? The only thing they
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure it
wouldn't be better to push for amenity=cafe;bakery;atm style
multi-tagging instead?
IIRC, there is opposition to multi-tagging - (I can't remember
exactly who said that or why, though...I suspect it's
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Ian Mc Shane ianmcsh...@live.co.za wrote:
From what I understand the openstreetmap.org map is purely for show and not
meant to be THE place to view all the data... its up to other groups to show
what they want e.g. cloudmade, cyclemap, etc...
Yup, this is
@ http://apcmag.com/google-maps-bug-forces-melburnians-down-toll-roads.htm
A bug in Google Maps Australia is forcing people down costly toll
roads whether they like it or not.
Just a thought - might be a nice reminder to check how we are doing on
this front in OSM?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 9:37 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
It might be useful to clarify things when it comes to Coles Express
and Woolworths locations as to what the operator/naming should be
I use name=Woolworths for Woolworths petrol stations. Have never used
the operator=*
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 7:29 AM, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote:
I use name=Woolworths for Woolworths petrol stations. Have never used
the operator=* tag - should I?
I haven't seen any difference to the rendering with or without the
operator tag.
Thanks for the response, but I'm not
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I will confess to being very disappointed that JOSM has now adopted the
retarded why-use-one-tag-when-eighty-three-will-do cycleway scheme.
So you seriously think highway=cycleway is all that's needed to
describe
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
If you want to help newcomers, then make a list of features that are
rendered on the map, and write a nice tutorial explaining them,
...
What is so hard about this?
Forgive me for jumping in...but I think the hard part
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Ian Mc Shane ianmcsh...@live.co.za wrote:
1) Do you want all that detail?
Yes please :)
For example a town/suburb website using OSM data for geo-location of
businesses in the area would have their own database of what each business
provides in terms of
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Ian Mc Shane ianmcsh...@live.co.za wrote:
private banking services
private_banking_services=yes
foreign exchange
foreign_exchange=yes
tanning
tanning=yes
massage?
massage=yes
Note I'm just thinking aloud - but they would do the job, would they not...?
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
- Prune:
I'm in the same boat, and this is what I continue to use (on Ubuntu -
so Windows-only options are excluded for me).
very flakey on large numbers of traces,
pretty tedious having to work in terms of ranges,
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Lulu-Ann lulu-...@gmx.de wrote:
For instance you can inform deaf people about subtitles in cinemas,
How about also using subtitles=yes (etc.)...
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote:
A Local Traffic sign is a recommendation, not a law. As such, it is
sort of the opposite of access=designated, which is designed to show
places we would prefer certain vehicles to go, this is designed to
show places we
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
... I've emailed QLD gov and Brisbane CC about what the signs mean,
though I'm not holding my breath for a response...
An email response from the Road Safety System Management Division,
Department of Transport and Main
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
Great work Roy
Cheers :)
(not providing any suggestions)
Alright how's this
It is an advisory sign to all road users advising the street is not
intended to be used by through traffic, however vehicles are the
primary
On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
I would suggest tagging the way leisure=slipway. If you need to
break the current specification to do so, then make a note on the wiki
page.
Yeah, how strange that a slipWAY can supposedly only apply to a NODE.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
I think Google and others will quickly rape the PD server
This assumes that they can find a means to import and check the data.
This is Google - it's what they do best.
___
talk mailing
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 9:10 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/1/19 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com:
It isn't working for Google and/or TomTom - it's working for the
public, i.e. everyone and everything (including Google and TomTom).
If the public gives back they could
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I've added a 1994 US military map as one of the background layers in
Potlatch. You can use this to add street names easily.
Cool. Suggestions for a source:name=* value? source:name=1994_US_military_map?
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:36 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
...
and warning PD advocates if they edit CC-BY-SA/ODBL information and
that the changes won't be public domain.
Nice idea, but the main difficulty I see is that contributing to
openstreetmap is a collaborative
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you legally ride a bike
through a Local Traffic Only area?
The closest I could find, for Queensland is from:
http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/T/TrantOpRURR09.pdf
97 (1) Road access signs: A driver
1 - 100 of 465 matches
Mail list logo
