On 3/10/21 9:13 am, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au wrote:
In my view, some of the data in OSM is incorrect as a footpath will
some times have permission bicycle=yes which is incorrect. The
majority of the time allowed access will have bicycle=unspecified (not
defined)which I think is fine.
The
Ah, I now see there are subtle differences in the definition of “road related
area” in Victoria and NSW…
While the NSW rules, as written, expand the definition of “road related area”
to any public space which has as it’s primary purpose use by pedestrians, the
Victoria rules do not seem to
Sharing reply to list.
Sebastian, when you reply to messages, please "Reply To All" as that will
also send it to the list.
If you only "Reply", your message will only go to the person who sent it
(in this case, me), NOT the list, so nobody else will see it.
Thanks
Graeme
-- Forwarded
>>>
In addition there is Karl Cheng's opinion (Mon Sep 20 talk-au) that "this
whole "Road Rules" regulation only applies to "roads" and "road related
areas".
Only footpaths adjacent to a "road", or any path explicitly designated for
cyclists are considered to be "road related areas". See rules
Hi Tony
Advice from Vic Police has only been verbal. They won’t go into writing.
I verified this with a friend of mine who is a cop.
They referred me to the penalties listed on the Vic Roads websites that carries
a $545 fine for riding on a footpath.
This information is freely available.
bicycle=designated implies the presence of one of these signs:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/558999688670609448/894078435264196668
/unknown.png
bicycle=no implies the presence of this sign:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/558999688670609448/894078611248807946
/unknown.png
The
Hi Sebastian
Thanks for splitting off [talk-au] Cycling on Victorian paths. I have
grouped together a number of remaining issues here lest they get
overlooked.
There are a few other issues that have been raised at
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=11210886
It
Hi Sebastian
The full version of the Victorian Road rules can be found here (or via the link
from the VicRoads website)
https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-force/statutory-rules/road-safety-road-rules-2017/014H
As noted in an earlier comment on this forum the Vic road rules apply in roads
Hi Sebastian
Welcome to talk-au
A NOTE FOR NON-AUSTRALIANS reading this
a UK pavement or a US sidewalk is an Australian footpath
I agree with Graeme Fitzpatrick's opinion
On Sun, 3 Oct 2021 at 08:17, Sebastian Azagra via Talk-au <
talk-au@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> the strict rules the cyclists must follow and not ride on footpaths due to
> Victorian Road Rules. Victorian cyclists know that we are not permitted to
> ride of footpaths.
>
Not arguing with you but:
>> Bing is almost right: -0.15; 1.79
> I get -0.10;1.50 which, considering...
I only eyeballed it by trying to move the imagery such that fence lines matched
up with DCDB parcel boundaries... so I would say that's well within margin of
error.
___
The correct offset for imagery can change very quickly from one place to
another (alignment could be right at one place and off 100m down the road if
the imagery is distorted).
JOSM has an “imagery offset database” if you install the right plugin:
Is there any way for all of the various sets of imagery to be automatically
corrected to each other to get around this problem?
Thanks
Graeme
On Sun, 3 Oct 2021 at 12:02, Andrew Davidson wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 10:46 PM Thorsten Engler via Talk-au
> wrote:
> > I would assume that
On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 10:46 PM Thorsten Engler via Talk-au
wrote:
> I would assume that the lot boundaries recorded in DCDB are "exact" and any
> discrepancy between them and the physical world come down to the margin of
> errors the surveyors did when placing boundary pegs at some point.
I
Hi there,
I’m starting a new thread in relation to recent discussion regarding access on
footpaths which have bicycle=No
In the Melbourne Bikepath cycling community there has been vigorous discussion
relating to the strict rules the cyclists must follow and not ride on footpaths
due to
The data in OSM right now does not get anywhere close to being aligned with
currently available Esri, Bing, or Maxar Premium.
I would assume that the lot boundaries recorded in DCDB are "exact" and any
discrepancy between them and the physical world come down to the margin of
errors the surveyors
Bob, Quilpie seems to have a good coverage on the Strava Heatmap. I can only
see the low res version atm. I’ll have a look at the high res version next time
I’m on the computer. It’s quite likely that the high res heatmap has a much
higher density of gps traces than do the OSM gps tracks. If
Wow, what a changeset!
Bing was 2010-2012. The Maxar Premium seems the most recent.
Whatever the case with the buildings, the roads tend to be used as
anchors for many features. I guess the opinion I am looking for is that
if a formal source can't be found/used, will my GPS run tomorrow (plus
On 2/10/21 5:27 pm, Bob Cameron wrote:
I am currently near this nice quiet place and am leaving shortly.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-26.6176/144.2666
I note that there is a fairly large discrepancy between some of the
roads and the public GPS traces. The main E-W highway is also
I am currently near this nice quiet place and am leaving shortly.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-26.6176/144.2666
I note that there is a fairly large discrepancy between some of the
roads and the public GPS traces. The main E-W highway is also split, but
not in OSM. Imagery and GPS
20 matches
Mail list logo
