Re: [talk-au] New tags for Vic State Forests

in.terria.io/#share=s-NWpWstpxTV460Xf5VoZa2BDVN3 is > a great product to look at, however I don't believe we have a waiver for > DELWP datasets that might include non-Vicmap (waivered) products within the > dataset. Please correct me if I'm wrong. > > > On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 at 17:07, Little Maps wrote: &

Re: [talk-au] New tags for Vic State Forests

Thanks folks, I’ll use just leisure=nature_reserve, as suggested. landuse=forest will probably only be needed for plantations now I guess. Ewen, many of the OSM State Forest boundaries in Vic are ‘guesstimate’ boundaries that were first mapped many years ago. Some are really rough and very

[talk-au] New tags for Vic State Forests

Hi all, landuse=forest is widely used to denote State Forests in OSM, due to legislated landuse of timber harvesting. However, from 1 Jan this year, timber harvesting is now banned in all native forests in Victoria, so the problematic landuse=forest tag is no longer appropriate. I’m seeking

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

Thanks for the great analysis Andrew. To clarify that I’ve understood it properly, I think your suggestion boils down to the following. Correct me if I’m wrong… City: > 20,000 population. Based on ABS ‘gravity pull’ centres. Some back and forth on OSM but gives similar numbers of cities to

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

Thanks Graeme, it’ll be great to hear what others think too. Cheers Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

Hope this is useful. Thanks again to everyone for a stimulating conversation. Cheers Ian On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 10:48 AM Little Maps wrote: > I agree with others that setting up a long list of services is probably > unworkable, and would prefer to focus on population cut offs as the key

Re: [talk-au] Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

I agree with others that setting up a long list of services is probably unworkable, and would prefer to focus on population cut offs as the key criterion, with secondary, minor consideration to a very short list of key services. However, can we focus on what the key cut offs are before we

Re: [talk-au] Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size)

Great work again Andrew, many, many thanks. I’m curious what process we could use to move forward on this. As I understand your message, we have and/or can get population data for a small proportion of places in Aus (probably with comprehensive data for most larger places and less data for

Re: [talk-au] Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size)

guidelines to guide future changes. Cheers Ian On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 10:12 AM Little Maps wrote: > Hi all, I’m late to this but, my two bobs worth… I’d prefer it if a > simple, flat rule was used to define towns/villages etc, preferably based > on population alone, but using proxies suc

Re: [talk-au] Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size)

Hi all, I’m late to this but, my two bobs worth… I’d prefer it if a simple, flat rule was used to define towns/villages etc, preferably based on population alone, but using proxies such as area or number of houses where pop data aren’t available. A few reasons… Vector based maps (such as

Re: [talk-au] Dual naming in NSW

On 6 Jun 2023, at 2:29 pm, Ian Sergeant wrote: >  > I think including a "slash" character in a name tag is really ugly. That's > not the way that the GNB record them. Unless someone can find some > information on the ground that records it that way? Ian, I stand corrected. NSW National

Re: [talk-au] Dual naming in NSW

This may depend on the specific place but in many places I believe Phil’s interpretation is correct and Andrew’s is inappropriate. Many places and reserves now have joint management or co-ownership, and dual/joint names. Joint names are not alternative names. John Roberts-Smith is John

Re: [talk-au] Streams and dams

I don’t know if there’s a “correct” method as at least 3 different methods are (or were) common in Vic, where I map. (1) continue named stream through dam, (2) continue stream through dam but with no name tag, and (3) stop stream at dam edge and start again the other side. Method 2 means dam

Re: [talk-au] Murray River relation deletion?

Hi Graeme, that’s a whopper isn’t it. It contains a hotch potch of adjacent waterbodies, but the m/polygon works well to define outer and inner boundaries (islands). Given it’s not all a ‘river’, the multipolygon tags would perhaps be more accurate if the tag water=river was removed, leaving

Re: [talk-au] Murray River relation deletion?

Thanks Warin and Cleary, I’ll remove the lake from the relation and cut the relation back to the river banks. I agree, there’s no need to add name or other tags to the riverbank (natural=water) tags as these details are already on the waterway and the waterway relation. Warin, I’ve never seen a

[talk-au] Murray River relation deletion?

Hi folks, just checking to make sure I'm not missing something here... There's a large relation called 'Murray River' which covers all of Lake Hume, plus an upstream section of the Murray. This is a natural=water 'riverbank' relation, not a waterway relation.

Re: [talk-au] Waterway data check overpass query

Aah, you’re a genius Andrew, there’s no way I could have written that query! Thanks heaps, Ian > On 9 May 2023, at 8:09 pm, Andrew Davidson wrote: > > On 9/5/23 19:51, Andrew Davidson wrote: >> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1uIC >> Which should be this code: >>

Re: [talk-au] Waterway data check overpass query

 Sorry all for dodgy message above, not sure what happened there. Thanks Phil, that works fine but I was hoping for a tool I could use across large areas. I’ve used a series of overpass queries to do things like display all waterways in Vic named river that are in a relation, show those that

Re: [talk-au] Waterway data check overpass query

Thanks Phil, yes, this works fine on individual relations but I was hoping to find a tool that works across much larger areas, statewide preferably. I’ve done a series of overpass queries across Vic for all waterways with river in their name, including things like find all river ways that are in

[talk-au] Waterway data check overpass query

Hi all, does anyone know if it’s possible to use Overpass Turbo or another tool to find waterway ways for which the way has a different name to the relation that the way is a part of? As an example, imagine that the relation for Ovens River includes a way called Castle Creek. Can this be

Re: [talk-au] Why set coast line to nation park or administrative boundaries?

Hi all, this thread has deviated lots from the initial question about high water marks but on a broader level, it’s important to note that statewide maps like the NSW Base Map are not the basis for legal questions. Individual property title plans are. The statewide maps just give a good

Re: [talk-au] Why set coast line to nation park or administrative boundaries?

Slightly different issue… but the accuracy of governmental admin boundaries can vary a lot depending where you are in Aus. In regional NSW, allotment boundaries (and associated park, state forest and local gov boundaries) as shown on the NSW gov base map (and as often used in OSM) are often

Re: [talk-au] Mapping tracks from Strava heatmap

On 27 Feb 2023, at 9:05 am, Tom Brennan wrote: > > Sounds like the general consensus is: > - Strava heatmap is good for aligning *existing* tracks > - Strava shouldn't be used for the creation of new tracks without some ground > truthing. Hi all, nice discussion. I agree but would broaden the

[talk-au] New blog using OSM data: are there more roads in the city or the bush?

Hi all, some summer reading on the question: are there more roads in the city or the bush? More precisely, ‘is the total length of roads inside all cities and towns more or less than the total length of all roads that run between all cities and towns in NSW?’ Based on roads, landuse tags and

[talk-au] Blog post on NSW road surfaces based on OpenStreetMap data

Hi all, I’ve written a new blog post on sealed and unsealed roads in NSW. OpenStreetMap now has comprehensive coverage of road surface tags in NSW and the post provides lots of maps and tables to illustrate the patterns. Hope you enjoy it. Best wishes Ian

Re: [talk-au] Import Telstra Payphones

wow, that’s a big import. Worth noting that that the previous 2 edits by the same user added more of the same, but disguised under the innocuous changeset comments, ‘just adding some street names’. No street names were added. ___ Talk-au mailing list

Re: [talk-au] add boundary=forest tag to Qld State Forests and Timber Reserves

> On 13 Sep 2022, at 8:53 pm, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Usually the type of tree - not a native to oz = Radiata pine and Southern > Pine. > Apparently some are using Hoop Pine .. native to oz ... so not 100% accurate > .. but would get most of them? > There are enormous areas of

Re: [talk-au] add boundary=forest tag to Qld State Forests and Timber Reserves

> On 13 Sep 2022, at 6:01 pm, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > There are some 'private' forestry areas too, at least in NSW ... these are > visible as they are not native and in organized rows, so easy to identify. Heaps in W Vic too. As state govts move from timber harvesting in native

Re: [talk-au] add boundary=forest tag to Qld State Forests and Timber Reserves

> Nev, great initiative. I’ve been contemplating how the new boundary=forest > could be used in Vic and S NSW. Rather than view it a tag to use in addition > to land use=forest, I saw it as a useful replacement. > By replacing landuse=forest with boundary = forest, we could generate State >

[talk-au] Cycle tags on motorways

Hi folks, is there any consensus on how to tag cycling on motorway shoulders? In some places, the simple tag bicycle=yes (or no) is used. This is straight forward. In others, the left hand shoulder is tagged as a cycle lane, using "cycleway=lane" or "cycleway:left=lane". Others have used

Re: [talk-au] suspicious edits in Victoria need reverting?

I chanced upon the supposed new “Ballan - Corio Motorway (M8)” this morning too. This must be a complete fabrication. It goes straight through the Brisbane Ranges NP and there would have been an outcry if such a road was even proposed, let alone completed. I fully support reverting all of the

Re: [talk-au] OSM Wiki Cleanup Update: 6th Tagging Guidelines Page ready

Thanks heaps for all of your work on the tagging guidelines Dian, it’s really appreciated. Cheers Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Re-naming multi-site conservation reserves

Thanks again, and hats off to everyone for their great work. > On 17 May 2022, at 6:55 pm, Andrew Davidson wrote: > > On 17/5/22 18:19, Little Maps wrote: >> Andrew, of all the options that have been suggested, is cleary’s >> approach the one you’d most recomm

Re: [talk-au] Re-naming multi-site conservation reserves

and I am guessing it was probably > signposted or there was some other local source. Not sure if the names of all > precincts are now available to OSM - if so, I think use of dual relations > works well. > > > > >> On Mon, 16 May 2022, at 8:31 PM, Little Maps wrote:

Re: [talk-au] Re-naming multi-site conservation reserves

On 16 May 2022, at 8:57 pm, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Not quite all with the 'same name'? > > While they are all members of the same relation some carry a name. e.g. > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/225222372 >> Thanks for that example. As I understand it, this puts a name

[talk-au] Re-naming multi-site conservation reserves

Hi folks, some advice please… In the CAPAD import of conservation reserves, multi-site reserves (those that include many patches, often a long way apart ) all seem to be given the generic name of the entire reserve network - e.g. “ South West Woodland Nature Reserve” or “River Murray

[talk-au] Vic gov data request denied

Hi all, some disappointing news. Our request to extend our existing waiver to the Vic Gov Vic Topo datasets to other gov departmental datasets has been denied. See the message below. For background, this request was discussed here late last year:

Re: [talk-au] Path versus Footway

Hi all, thanks for a really informative discussion. I’m puzzled by the comments I’ve copied below. I’m uncertain when legislative defaults apply (and hence explicit access tagging isn’t required) and when tagging is needed. In the instance mentioned below, bicycle = no should not be added to

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

RE: > Are the issues any different for motor vehicles and cyclists? The frequency > and severity are different, the reference photos are different but I would > expect the issues and principles to be the same. Maybe just have a single > page about tracks? Hi Tony, yes, I agree, most issues

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

Hi Andrew, thanks for compiling the walking tracks page, it’s a great resource. It would be good to extend this later on to have separate pages for walking tracks, vehicle tracks and MTB paths, since these issues keep coming up on the forum. I think the section “why shouldn’t closed tracks

Re: [talk-au] New blogs on unsealed roads in Victoria

Thanks everyone for the kind comments, I’m glad you enjoyed it. Many thanks for sharing it on social media Ewen and Graeme, Ewen’s FB post has dominated the traffic to the blog today. :) Two small comments… Re: “I was prompted to think about steep Alpine grades and cyclists... It's an issue I

[talk-au] New blogs on unsealed roads in Victoria

Hi folks, for everyone interested in OpenStreetMap's fantastic road data… I've just posted a series of blogs about unsealed roads in Victoria. I've pitched it at cyclists rather than mappers to widen the audience, but you should still find lots of interest I hope.

Re: [talk-au] US Trails Working Group

On 3 Jan 2022, at 5:06 pm, Phil Wyatt wrote: > > I think lots of their issues will require close cooperation with the map > renderers to be in any way effective. That’s an interesting initiative, and potentially with some ramifications for Aus. Two of the 3 apps they target as key hiking apps

Re: [talk-au] Review of road surface tags in Victoria

Thanks Graeme and David, I’m glad you liked it. Lots of great work to report on. > RE: You obviously have wwwaaayyy too much time on your hands! :-) I thought that was OpenStreetMap’s business model! ;)___ Talk-au mailing list

[talk-au] Review of road surface tags in Victoria

Hi folks, for anyone interested in rural roads, I’ve put together a very nerdy review of the super accuracy of OpenStreetMap’s road surface tags (sealed vs unsealed) in Victoria. Lots of maps and tables. Hope you find it informative. Cheers Ian

Re: [talk-au] admin_level, suburbs and rendering; should the order be updated?

> Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, thanks for all your work Dian > to change the “towns” back to suburbs. I downloaded a copy of the Victorian > place names data a little while ago for a GIS exercise and it was a real pain > to discover that an enormous number of purported towns

Re: [talk-au] Vic State Forest Boundary Files

cense”) for the > purposes of the OpenStreetMap Project, the State of Victoria agrees to the > following: > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 at 08:43, Little Maps wrote: > >> Hi Andrew, yes, happy to take it on. Is there a template for data >> requests online somewhere that explain

Re: [talk-au] Vic State Forest Boundary Files

Hi Tony, DELWP can only give approval to use datasets that they create/control. Lots of the datasets on Data Vic aren’t from DELWP and wouldn’t be covered, but many of the useful ones are theirs. Unless DELWP created the Vic subset of the emergency markers dataset, I don’t imagine that they

Re: [talk-au] Vic State Forest Boundary Files

Hi Andrew, yes, happy to take it on. Is there a template for data requests online somewhere that explains why the waiver is needed, that I can use as an example? Do you think we should try an ambit request for all DELWP CC datasets that are available online, on sites like Data Vic and

Re: [talk-au] Vic State Forest Boundary Files

Hi all, a brief update on Vic State Forest datasets... My suggestion that the VicMap Crown Land Tenure database was "a mess" probably had anyone who knows about GIS data structures rolling their eyes at my ignorance. It didn't make any sense to me either, so I spent a couple more days studying

[talk-au] Vic State Forest boundary files

Hi all, I started a new thread so these links can be easily found in the future. This builds on a recent thread on permissible data sources to answer 3 questions: (1) Which data layers from the Vic gov contain State Forest (SF) boundary data? (2) Which of these layers do we have permission

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

> On 19 Oct 2021, at 9:34 pm, Andrew Davidson wrote: > > I think State Forests can be found in: > > https://www.land.vic.gov.au/maps-and-spatial/spatial-data/vicmap-catalogue/vicmap-crown-land-tenure Thanks Andrew, I checked this dataset and, strangely, it doesn’t contain most state forests

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

Hi Andrew, a query… The Aus data catalog lists 10 Vicmap datasets that we have permission to use (Vicmap address, Vicmap admin, etc). https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue#Victoria All of these link to the same waiver letter which gives permission to use “Vicmap

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

Thanks Thorsten, I’ll spend some time later this week to examine all of the Vic gov datasets that look like they might contain a version of the State Forests boundaries and I’ll post a summary of what all the potentially relevant datasets do and don’t contain. This will (hopefully) help to

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

Brendan, the original (i.e. pre-derived) VMPROP.PARCEL_CROWN_APPROVED file is also available at: http://services.land.vic.gov.au/SpatialDatamart/dataSearchViewMetadata.html?anzlicId=ANZVI0803004688=1 Hence, if there were to be any issues in using the derived file, the original file could still

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

Hi Brendan, there appear to be 2 different versions of the Vic State Forests boundaries - one with “generalised” boundaries without lots of internal boundaries, and the other with the full dataset. I haven’t examined them to see how they differ. See these 2 web pages:

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

Hi all, can I offer a different spin on this - interested to hear feedback. I think the question of whether we have permission to use MapShare is inappropriate. (And hence the original changeset comment is inaccurate). MapShare is just a data portal. We have permission to use a number of Vic

Re: [talk-au] Mapping tree cover

>> RE: Also towards the SA border there are other treed areas that have been >> very carefully traced out. Yet traditionally the whole area is set with the >> fence lines and tracks then marked on top. Not necessarily wrong, but >> tracing the exact line of where the trees finish and the road

Re: [talk-au] Way errors in Quilpie Qld

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

Re: [talk-au] Import vs filtering query

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I suspect I’m being over-cautious so I appreciate everyone’s expertise. Thanks Steve too for the broader thoughts to consider. RE: “How would you match the different map set, the government one to OSM? And how will you validate the matching is correct?” I’m

[talk-au] Import vs filtering query

Hi all, my understanding is that the process described below is a big filtering exercise rather than a data import, but since I’ve never been involved in an import before, I’d like to check before progressing. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Goal: to update road surface tags across

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

Hi again, I’ve dominated this discussion to a painful extent so this will be my last message on the topic unless explicit questions are raised. (Thank god, I hear everyone exclaim!). We’ve moved away from the original topic of this thread so i suggest we start a new thread if there’s interest

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

Andrew, thanks for the super fast reply, and for the overpass query which I'll cut and paste from! A few thoughts… AH: 1.98% of tracks have public vehicle access and 8.7% of tracks have no public vehicle access (of all tracks). So where we know the vehicle access then 18% are public and 81% are

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

Hi Joe and Andrew, thanks again for the feedback. Andrew's post raised lots of points which need to be addressed separately, but can I test your patience by focusing on a key issue that was raised, which is how to interpret access conditions on tracks that do not have an access tag. Namely, these

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

Hi Andrew, you raised lots points so rather than replying with a complex embedded messages, I’ve summarised my key thoughts below. I’ve indicated comments that you made by prefixing them with AH. TL;DR version Tracks are not just for forestry and agriculture, they are for recreation too, and

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

And one final, short post… the 122,886 “unmapped tracks” in the SA tracks map roulette challenge are also predominantly private roads on private land, especially in farming areas. Again, the challenge wrongly assumes that access is public not private. > On 18 Aug 2021, at 6:11 pm, Little M

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

with no notification or discussion from the Australian mapping community until after the fact makes the issue even more problematic in my mind. > On 18 Aug 2021, at 4:40 pm, Little Maps wrote: > >  >> >> I missed the last part where it mentions driveways are included, I'll take >&g

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

> I missed the last part where it mentions driveways are included, I'll take > another look to see what can be improved to filter these out. > Andrew, the 1:25,000 Vic gov topo mps show tracks/driveways on private properties in a different colour to those on public land and the map legend

Re: [talk-au] Tracks flagged as missing from government data

> Thanks for a great series of projects Andrew. One query… is there an error in > the Victorian all tracks challenge? It includes nearly 250,000 tracks to be > reviewed and potentially added to OSM. By contrast, taginfo states that there > are “only” 188,000 tracks (highway=track) in OSM across

Re: [talk-au] Can anyone make sense of this?

My apologies Thorsten and Frederik, I stand humbly corrected. Best wishes Ian > On 30 Jul 2021, at 6:27 pm, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Hi, > >> On 30.07.21 01:43, Little Maps wrote: >> If the edits are accurate, legally acquired, ethical and respectfully >> b

Re: [talk-au] Can anyone make sense of this?

If the edits are accurate, legally acquired, ethical and respectfully build upon the work of previous mappers then, imo, so be it. “Necessary” vs “unnecessary” has never been a criteria for inclusion in OSM. If it were, heaps of edits would be up for challenge. You’ve informed the editor that

Re: [talk-au] Roads in Industrial Estates: Residential, Unclassified or Service?

> For any other non-programmers (like me) looking for good resources on > Overpass code, I’ve found this site to be really useful. It’s got lots of > practical examples and good, simple explanations. I find it simpler to follow > than the overpass wiki pages, although the combination of both is

Re: [talk-au] Australian Road Review by littlemaps

Hi Warren, thanks for your feedback. You sent me back to my computer to re-check some numbers. Remember that the 57,828 kms in the blog post only includes OSM highway tags from highway=motorway to highway=tertiary. Other road types, including highway=unclassified, track, residential etc, are not

Re: [talk-au] Australian road review

Thanks folks! > On 21 Jun 2021, at 2:06 pm, Andrew Davidson wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 1:35 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: >> >> & I meant to ask ... >> >> Is it OK to pass it on to other groups / sites / forums? >> > > Crikey, I hope so. Already put it into weeklyOSM ;-)

[talk-au] Australian road review

Hi folks, I've written an overview of the patterns of major roads across Australia, based on OpenStreetMap data. https://littlemaps692810600.wordpress.com/2021/06/21/australian-roads-in-openstreetmap/ There's lots of colourful maps, charts and tables. It's a deep dive that breaks down the total

Re: [talk-au] highway=track update

Thanks for the detailed history Michael! As you say, most of the ways tagged ‘gravel’ in Australia could probably be re-tagged as ‘fine_gravel’ to more accurately follow the wiki and to accord broadly with common usage of the word gravel. Re compacted vs fine_gravel, personally I can’t tell

Re: [talk-au] highway=track update

Hi Brian and co, in Victoria and southern NSW where I've edited a lot of roads, highway=track is nearly totally confined to dirt roads in forested areas, as described in the Aus tagging guidelines, viz: " highway=track Gravel fire trails, forest drives, 4WD trails and similar roads. Gravel roads

Re: [talk-au] Mapping "off track" hiking routes

encies don't understand the benefits of open licenses? > >> On 25/10/20 5:31 pm, Little Maps wrote: >> MAPPERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PERUSE RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLANS ON THE WEB OR TO >> DISCUSS EDITS WITH AGENCY STAFF WHEN CONSIDERING ADDING TR

Re: [talk-au] Mapping "off track" hiking routes

Hi Phil, thanks for drafting this, it’s great to have a concrete statement to discuss. I agree with the broad sentiment but suggest two changes, one minor and the other more substantive, as follows (deletions in strike through and additions in all caps) 4. Caution should be exercised

Re: [talk-au] Mapping "off track" hiking routes

Hi folks, thanks for a very interesting discussion. It was great to hear from people who don’t often pipe up on the forum. Whilst it started off informative and insightful, it didn’t take long to reach into rhetoric about Russia and guns/maps don’t kill people ... neither of which is

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: vine row tagging

That’s an interesting development in OSM micro-mapping John. Can I put a vote in for using natural=tree_row rather than barrier=fence, if no better options are available. I’m not arguing from the point of rendering, but from the perspective of developing a tagging scheme that will be useful in

Re: [talk-au] Re-tag rural residential roads to unclassified?

d" tag. > > > > > >> On Fri, 2 Oct 2020, at 2:43 PM, Little Maps wrote: >> Hi everyone, I was reviewing highway tags in south-central NSW >> (initially to add in missing paved and unpaved tags) and noted that >> road classification differ greatly bet

[talk-au] Re-tag rural residential roads to unclassified?

Hi everyone, I was reviewing highway tags in south-central NSW (initially to add in missing paved and unpaved tags) and noted that road classification differ greatly between adjacent local gov areas. In central Federation Shire Council, north of Mulwala and Corowa, the bulk of rural roads are

Re: [talk-au] Suburbs & admin boundaries stopping streets being found?

Hi Graeme, I use the Gaia GPS app on an iPhone instead of OSMAND, so I can’t comment on the OSMAND search results, but just to highlight the erratic behaviour of search results in different apps, I got exactly the opposite results to you when I searched all three addresses using Gaia. (Gaia

Re: [talk-au] URL for viewing Vic Gov data layers in JOSM

Thanks for that clarification Andrew, it’s most helpful. Cheers Ian ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] URL for viewing Vic Gov data layers in JOSM

st make sure that all those layers are in fact the same as the VicMap data > products that we have permission to use. > >> On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 17:24, Little Maps wrote: >> Thanks again Andrew. If anyone else is interested in viewing any of a myriad >> of Vic Gov maps as bac

[talk-au] Vic State Forests WMS imagery

Hi folks, apologies for repeated queries... I asked a couple of weeks ago about the preferred tags for mapping production forests (i.e. landuse=forest), in preparation for mapping tree cover across SW Victoria. Thinking about this more, it makes more sense to first map all State Forests in the

Re: [talk-au] How to tag plantations?

Many thanks Warin, that seems much more variable in Vic, esp in Gippsland where natural=wood is a common tag for areas tagged as State Forests. Plantations in SW Vic are quite a mix. I wonder if it’s worth adding a section to the Aus tagging guidelines page to specify a preferred usage for

Re: [talk-au] How to tag plantations?

Thanks Andrew and Mateusz, > > Two comments... > > I learned of the plantation=yes tag on this wiki. However on re-reading it > now, it uses it as a tag under landuse=forest, not natural=wood. Sorry for my > mistake. > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dplantation > > If I

[talk-au] How to tag plantations?

Hi folks, I’m planning on mapping tree cover in an area with lots of pine and eucalypt plantations as well as native forests, and want to check on the preferred way of tagging plantations in Australia before I begin. I realise that plantations don’t render in the standard OSM render and that

Re: [talk-au] What do you prefer for Barmah-Millewa: swamp or wood?

n be rendered much the same as natural=swamp. I too would > appreciate other views on this topic. > > > > >> On Tue, 12 May 2020, at 8:37 AM, Little Maps wrote: >> Hello everyone, I don’t know if there is any right / wrong answer to >> this question, hence I’m

[talk-au] Barmah thanks

Thanks everyone, it’s been useful to hear the wide range of thoughts. I guess I was uncertain to what degree the Aus OSM group followed the strict definitions of the OSM categories or adapted them to suit the way the terms are used locally. The way the OSM wiki page describes a swamp is very

[talk-au] What do you prefer for Barmah-Millewa: swamp or wood?

Hello everyone, I don’t know if there is any right / wrong answer to this question, hence I’m keen to know your preferences... I’m mapping wetlands and vegetation along the Murray River upstream of Yarrawonga, and am now mapping in Millewa forest. Millewa (in NSW) and Barmah forest (in Vic)

Re: [talk-au] Practicality of mapping high-speed motor-traffic routes as cycle routes

Hi everyone, I’m very new to OSM so can’t comment on the technicalities but to add some data to the question of frequency of usage, the Strava heat map shows that the M1 and M2 are among the most frequently ridden roads in Sydney, by those cyclists who log their tracks in Strava. A biased

Re: [talk-au] How to label ill-defined places?

Thanks very much Ewen and Michael, I’ll use those tags where they, and nothing much else, seems to fit best. Ewen, I’ve been admiring your amazing land use mapping around Rutherglen and Mildura! Best wishes Ian > On 13 Apr 2020, at 12:56 pm, Little Maps wrote: > > Hi again every

[talk-au] How to label ill-defined places?

Hi again everyone, hope you’re all enjoying Easter. A simple newbie question... How do you label localities that have no precise boundaries? I’m working on part of the Murray River and adding locality names from Vic Gov data. Many can be placed on mapped features (e.g. campsites and beaches)

[talk-au] Murray River #2. Thanks heaps.

Hello again everyone, many thanks for your fast and informative feedback! It’s great to join such a welcoming group. There’s lots of great advice in everybody’s emails. If I distill it to one key point, I think it is... 1. Don’t touch admin boundaries or you’ll “rip me bloody arms off”, to

[talk-au] Murray River mapping by a newby?

Hello everyone, I’m Ian, I’m new to this group and pretty new to OSM. Being stuck inside for the foreseeable future, I’m keen to do something useful. I live on the Murray River and have noticed that many sections of the river along the NSW-Vic border could benefit from some extra work. In