Since (for the areas it covers) Nearmap is likely to be to most up-to-date
imagery available, we can use it to spot where new roads have sprung up in
towns that do not currently have an active mapper driving around. We can
then schedule a trip to said town to remedy the situation.
For other
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Andrew Harvey
andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a bit late to the game but the one of the LWG minutes talks about
nearmap...
It isn't apparent from the link, but for the information of those
reading them here without checking the original document, the
I'm a bit late to the game but the one of the LWG minutes talks about nearmap...
From part 4 of the LWG minutes
https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_83gvxm3xgdpli=1
- Automated deriving
Nearmap believe that their copyright exists in works derived from their
imagery, so this would
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 20:00 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote:
A nearmapper has decided that badly out-of-date nearmap imagery was
more authorative than my GPS traces (taken last weekend) and has
For anyone interested in the area, NearMap imagery of the new suburbs
(taken the Friday before Nicks
: Saturday, 14 May 2011 14:28
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [talk-au] Nearmap badly out of date
No I didn't though maybe I should have. There have been discussions (on these
lists) for a fer years now and the consensus opinion was that if you upload gps
tracks (and mine are all still
On 14/05/11 16:35, Ben Kelley wrote:
IMHO definitely put source=survey if it is. (e.g. from a gps track) It
can be difficult to determine this later.
E.g. I can see that there is a GPS track log nearby, but did the person
use it?
This brings up a point which I'd like clarification on.
When I
Ben Kelley wrote
E.g. I can see that there is a GPS track log nearby, but did the person use
it?
Yes, that was exactly the arguement If there is no source tag but there
is a public GPS trace uploaded to OSM, then the assumption is that it was
used to plot the way and that the tag
On 14/05/11 14:28, Nick Hocking wrote:
Ross wrote
Did you tag your ways with source=survey so that it would show them
that you had actually surveyed it?
No I didn't though maybe I should have. There have been discussions
(on these lists) for a fer years now and the consensus opinion was
Ross - fixed Liz O'Neill Street...
Thanks for fixing that Ross,
One tiny point though, the grassed over area is just the westbound section.
The bit from the corner to where my tracks end could more accurately be
tagged highway=residential access=no
Also, could you fix my naming error for me
On 11/05/11 20:00, Nick Hocking wrote:
A nearmapper has decided that badly out-of-date nearmap imagery was
more authorative than my GPS traces (taken last weekend) and has
completed a road that is not there any longer. It has been
completely grassed over so that cars can not travel along it, for
Ross wrote
Did you tag your ways with source=survey so that it would show them that
you had actually surveyed it?
No I didn't though maybe I should have. There have been discussions (on
these lists) for a fer years now and the consensus opinion was that if you
upload gps tracks (and mine are all
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote:
A nearmapper has decided that badly out-of-date nearmap imagery was
more authorative than my GPS traces (taken last weekend) and has
completed a road that is not there any longer. It has been
completely grassed over so
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
That's before you consider the resolution, it's so high that railway
lines and switching tracks are mapped so accurately people were
suggesting to those that make train games they could use OSM data as
the basis of
On 13 May 2011 15:38, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
That's before you consider the resolution, it's so high that railway
lines and switching tracks are mapped so accurately people were
suggesting to those
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 3:48 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2011 15:38, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:24 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
That's before you consider the resolution, it's so high that railway
lines
A nearmapper has decided that badly out-of-date nearmap imagery was
more authorative than my GPS traces (taken last weekend) and has
completed a road that is not there any longer. It has been
completely grassed over so that cars can not travel along it, for some
time to come, and barricades have
In other news, someone somewhere did something, and someone somewhere
should deal with it.
Would you care to point out what the problems are, or heaven forbid fix
them yourself? We've got this wonderful interface that anyone (even
you) can use to change data in the database that people have
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Nathan Odgers n.p.odg...@gmail.com wrote:
Apologies if this has been discussed before, but I use JOSM (3966) on OSX
(10.6.7) and the high-resolution Nearmap imagery over Sydney is very poor
quality compared to what I get in Merkaartor. Nearmap in Merkaartor is
On 7 April 2011 15:58, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
If the Australian issue is so important, as others have suggested why
isnt OSMF seeking to make a rapid agreement with NearMap as was done
with Bing?
This really
On 7 April 2011 06:58, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
If the Australian issue is so important, as others have suggested why
isnt OSMF seeking to make a rapid agreement with NearMap as was done
with Bing?
This really
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 08:19:39 +0100
Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
On 7 April 2011 06:58, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
If the Australian issue is so important, as others have suggested
why isnt
On 7 April 2011 12:57, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
If the Australian issue is so important, as others have suggested why
isnt OSMF seeking to make a rapid agreement with NearMap as was done
with Bing?
This really needs to be done.
Is wonder if this is just due to a shortage of
On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 10:49:07 +0800
Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
The nearmap.com twitter feed (or Facebook, if you prefer) is your
friend... we announce flight starts, flight ends and publication of
new surveys.
http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-35.082167,147.302565z=21t=hnmd=20101207
The nearmap.com twitter feed (or Facebook, if you prefer) is your friend...
we announce flight starts, flight ends and publication of new surveys.
http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-35.082167,147.302565z=21t=hnmd=20101207
Cheers
Ben
On 18 December 2010 08:49, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 10:49 +0800, Ben Last wrote:
The nearmap.com twitter feed (or Facebook, if you prefer) is your
friend... we announce flight starts, flight ends and publication of
new surveys.
It appears you missed the URL: http://twitter.com/NearMap
This URL also works as an RSS feed.
Deducing the URL was left as an exercise :)
You might also like to know that we try and hashtag the updates with the
areas that are affected by surveys and flights, if you don't want to have to
read them all.
b
On 20 December 2010 11:11, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Mon,
Has any progress been made on this front at all?
I noticed in the latest minutes[1] that the LWG has no plans to
address the section(s) that Nearmap objected to, and previous
minutes[2] didn't show any resolution either.
[1] https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_87d3bmhxgc
[2]
On 15 September 2010 23:46, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 08:38, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Sure. Aren't there AU gov't sources that would be nice to have
permission to use?
You keep seeming trying to divert attention from the major issue, the
On 16 September 2010 18:35, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
Point 4 of the Contributor Terms provides a guaranteed mechanism for
Attribution.
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Grant Slater
openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote:
On 15 September 2010 23:46, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 08:38, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Sure. Aren't there AU gov't sources that would be nice to have
- Original Message -
From: Richard Weait rich...@weait.com
To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [talk-au] NearMap
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:48 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 16
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:15:11 -0400
Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
And how many years must we wait before they'll be concluded?
It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-)
That will vary by publisher. The permission from the Canadian
government took a couple of
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:11:31 -0400
Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Every time the community is asked,
There are plain Strine expressions for this
The community has not been asked at all
so your statement is meadowdust.
___
Talk-au mailing
Hi All,
Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background or is
there an issue with Potlatch 1.4?
Thanks,
Michael Hampson
Ph: 02 4739 4938
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Thanks Emilie,
Regards,
Michael Hampson
Ph: 02 4739 4938
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Emilie Laffray
emilie.laff...@gmail.comwrote:
On 15 September 2010 14:16, Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background
On 15 September 2010 14:28, Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background or is
there an issue with Potlatch 1.4?
Nearmap withdrew their support for the people using the new contributor
terms. The OpenStreetMap foundation is
Bloody Hell. They have even blocked the custom field. I have a lot of choice
words to say right now but shall refrain until I calm down! All over a bloody
licencing dispute (which I don't like getting involved in unless I have to,
which that time has now come)
On 15/09/2010, at 11:58 PM, Grant
On Wed, 15 September, 2010 11:28:29 PM, Grant Slater
openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
Just to clarify, we have not concluded discussions with NearMap and
discussion
is still positive. The removal of the NearMap option in Potlatch was prompted
a
few weeks by back, but was only actioned
On 15 September 2010 15:14, Simon Biber simonbi...@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Who was it prompted by? Did NearMap themselves request it?
There was a specific question from a AU community member to NearMap if
the option should be removed. They said yes. -- Third hand, I was not
part of the discussion.
On 16 September 2010 00:37, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I believe John Smith initially suggested it to NearMap. Ben Last at NearMap
No, I posted the question publicly to the legal talk list, my concern
wasn't just about Nearmap but any source that may be too easy to
access by
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 00:37, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I believe John Smith initially suggested it to NearMap. Ben Last at NearMap
No, I posted the question publicly to the legal talk list, my
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Luke Woolley lswool...@gmail.com wrote:
Bloody Hell. They have even blocked the custom field. I have a lot of choice
words to say right now but shall refrain until I calm down! All over a bloody
licencing dispute (which I don't like getting involved in unless
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 1:59 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 03:48, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Legal argument aside. Frankly it makes my head hurt. If a vendor
decides to stop allowing OSM use of their resources, we should say
Thanks for what
On 16 September 2010 04:02, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
That said, there is no answer right now for what will happen regarding
NearMap imagery in the future. Currently, OSM users may not use
NearMap imagery for deriving data for OSM.
Only users that have agreed with the new
On 16 September 2010 04:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
bad. This isn't a competition with a winner and loser. The fact is
that NearMap don't want OSM users using their imagery right now. So
we shouldn't.
This isn't true, they don't want to allow their data to be submitted
under
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:16:34 +1000
Michael Hampson mc.hamp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
Does anyone know if we have lost the use of NearMap as a background
or is there an issue with Potlatch 1.4?
There are other editors, assuming that you have not agreed to the new
Contributor Terms.
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 04:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
bad. This isn't a competition with a winner and loser. The fact is
that NearMap don't want OSM users using their imagery right now. So
we
On 16 September 2010 07:31, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of
OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors.
You left off 3, there is going to be a fork as cc-by-sa and any such
contributions from Nearmap will be happily accepted.
Also
On 16 September 2010 07:31, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of
OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors.
Actually how can you or anyone else make this statement in good faith
when most of the contributors have never been asked what
On 16 September 2010 07:58, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Or did you mean CommonMap?
http://commonmap.info
Unlikely, since CommonMap is cc-by, not cc-by-sa...
Or did you mean SharedMap?
http://www.sharedmap.org
At this stage this is run and used by a single person, perhaps this
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:48 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 07:31, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of
OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors.
Actually how can you or anyone else make this
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:05 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 07:58, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
You overlook the obvious, that discussion can lead to additional
rights grants from publishers.
And how many years must we wait before they'll be
On 16 September 2010 08:11, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
This old saw again, JohnSmith? Every time the community is asked,
they support progress in the form of ODbL rather than the
inappropriate CC-By-SA. Here is the latest feedback for you.
Yes and how many said they haven't even
On 16 September 2010 08:15, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-)
I was under the impression the LWG was already talking to Nearmap,
however I don't have a problem with the current license, so I don't
see a point in wasting it to
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:20 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 September 2010 08:15, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-)
I was under the impression the LWG was already talking to Nearmap,
Sure. Aren't there
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:38 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:20 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 16 September 2010 08:15, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
It will take forever if you never start the discussion. ;-)
I was
Some datasets are ok to use, what the CT fails to mention is the fact
that the OSMF can made the decision on weather or not to accept a
dataset.
Specifically because the humble contributor cannot guarantee that they
represent or have the exact 'direct permission' as it could have been
just a
On 16 September 2010 02:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
NearMap have requested that their imagery not be available in
Potlatch, and have changed their license on their web site to remove
explicit permission for OpenStreetMap. That is their right and their
decision.
On Wed, Sep
Hi all
As you may have noticed, if you follow the mailing lists, there's been a
certain amount of discussion about using NearMap aerial imagery (which we
call PhotoMaps) as a source for generating OSM data, in the light of the
current Contributor Terms (CTs, as currently shown at
- Original Message -
From: Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com
To: OpenStreetMap Learned Discussions t...@openstreetmap.org; OSM
Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 9:09 AM
Subject: [talk-au] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:
That said, having had a look at the new coverage in the Hunter Valley, there
is a huge amount of detail you can get from Nearmap that would be
On 17 July 2010 13:02, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
I've also been finding the opposite. It's almost impossible to follow
a signposted walking track from Nearmap. Even when you have a fair
idea where the track goes, there are all kinds of red herrings that
look just as visible
No worries! The new coverage they have set out for Victoria including
the Mornington Peninsula, Phillip Island, Ballarat and the Yarra
Valley is great news for me! All they need to plan to fly now is
Pakenham then i'll be happy! Oh wait, then the Latrobe Valley,
then you all get the idea!
On
While Nearmap for Tamworth and Armidale would be nice, surveyors have been
hard at work in both.
That said, having had a look at the new coverage in the Hunter Valley, there
is a huge amount of detail you can get from Nearmap that would be
practically impossible with surveying.
- Ben.
On 16
On 16 July 2010 15:35, Babstar babsta...@gmail.com wrote:
While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west
If we're on to requests :)
How about some more of North Qld.
I notice Mackay and Cairns are on the plan but what about areas in between,
(Whitsunday's,
On 16 July 2010 16:29, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:
While Nearmap for Tamworth and Armidale would be nice, surveyors have been
hard at work in both.
Aerial imagery can do things like landuse, not just roads, which is a
lot harder to get or even see from ground level...
If you want to make requests, http://forum.Nearmap.com/ :)
Cheers
b
On Friday, July 16, 2010, Babstar babsta...@gmail.com wrote:
While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west south
west to cover Bowral, Moss Vale, Exeter Bundanoon as well as the Hume
Highway.
On 16 July 2010 20:31, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
If you want to make requests, http://forum.Nearmap.com/ :)
I did some time ago :)
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:
That said, having had a look at the new coverage in the Hunter Valley, there
is a huge amount of detail you can get from Nearmap that would be
practically impossible with surveying.
I've also been finding the opposite.
Thanks to Lakeyboy for pointing out Nearmap planned coverage areas PDF:
http://www.nearmap.com/assets/pdf/coverage/NearMap-PhotoMap-Coverage.pdf
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
...which we're going to keep updated...
Cheers
b
On 16 July 2010 10:08, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks to Lakeyboy for pointing out Nearmap planned coverage areas PDF:
http://www.nearmap.com/assets/pdf/coverage/NearMap-PhotoMap-Coverage.pdf
I just wish the area between Ballarat and Bendigo extended a bit
further west. It's a very interesting area of Victoria, full of little
dirt tracks through the old gold digging area. Creswick is half
covered, Clunes is off the map...
But to be honest, no matter how much coverage there was, we'd
While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west
south west to cover Bowral, Moss Vale, Exeter Bundanoon as well as the
Hume Highway. Population approximately 42,000 in this district and a
significant number would be covered in this narrow sweep.
--
Babstar
I'd like a bit more.. Tasmania has NONE :(
Neal
On 16/07/10 2:48 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
I just wish the area between Ballarat and Bendigo extended a bit
further west. It's a very interesting area of Victoria, full of little
dirt tracks through the old gold digging area. Creswick is half
On 16 July 2010 15:35, Babstar babsta...@gmail.com wrote:
While we're on the requests, please an an extension from Mittagong west
If we're on to requests :)
I'd still like Tamworth, NSW the area has 55k+ people according to
wikipedia, and Armidale, NSW isn't far away with another 20k+
people...
Hi Ipswich mappers,
NearMap finally have the imagery up for Ipswich ... and through to Gatton!
Brendan
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Hi all
I thought I'd bounce this topic off the talk-AU list before waking up the
slumbering millions on talk :)
Without giving too much away, I'm letting you know that NearMap are looking
at/working on adding support for some basic OSM editing operations to our
website. We're doing this to more
On 8 June 2010 16:09, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
Without giving too much away, I'm letting you know that NearMap are looking
at/working on adding support for some basic OSM editing operations to our
website. We're doing this to more directly address some of the weaknesses
of OSM; in
On 8 June 2010 14:27, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you know about the mapzen editor cloudmade produced?
http://mapzen.cloudmade.com/
Yes, we do, and whilst it's an interesting piece of work, it's still too
complex for general users (in our humble opinion!). It would also
On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Ben Last wrote:
On 8 June 2010 14:27, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you know about the mapzen editor cloudmade produced?
http://mapzen.cloudmade.com/
Yes, we do, and whilst it's an interesting piece of work, it's still too
complex for general users (in
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 17:13 +1000, Liz wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Ben Last wrote:
Yes, we do, and whilst it's an interesting piece of work, it's still too
complex for general users (in our humble opinion!)...
we had a conversation on one of these lists about what would be wanted in a
we had a conversation on one of these lists about what would be wanted in a
bog_basic editor once
and i think it came down to name and classify a street and add a single point
to be a POI, name and classify it.
Personally I would not like to see much more than this and I don't think being
...@4x4falcon.com
Subject: Re: [talk-au] NearMap support for OSM editing
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Received: Tuesday, 8 June, 2010, 6:40 PM
we had a conversation on one of these lists about what would be wanted in a
bog_basic editor once
and i think it came down to name and classify a street
On 9 June 2010 06:27, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
In particular, how will you
ensure that contributors via Nearmap agree to the OSM/OSMF
contributing terms/license?
Good point. We'll need to include this in TCs that a user must accept
before editing. Since we're going to keep
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
the NearMap site). We do have our own registration system, and we're going
to require that a user be registered with us before we allow them to make
edits.
Because of the above, edits applied to the OSM data would be
On 9 June 2010 09:13, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect this approach will prove controversial. Is there really no
way you can integrate user registrations?
There's no convenient way. We could bounce a user off to the OSM site to
register, but this is complex because they
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
There's no convenient way. We could bounce a user off to the OSM site to
register, but this is complex because they then need to confirm an email,
and after the signup there (appears to be) no convenient way to bring them
On 9 June 2010 11:28, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Oops, could have been clearer. By integration, I meant asking the
OSM developers to make some changes to make it easier, too. But yeah,
if not possible, not possible.
I have and didn't get much of a useful reply... It would be so
On 9 June 2010 11:28, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Some parts of the US are pretty crazy too. My favourite though is a
scheme I saw in Dallas (and I'm sure exists elsewhere) where the
numbers are independent of the street, and uniquely identify a house
within some region. So a tiny
1. It's too hard to get Nearmap users to go through the signup process for
OSM
For a given value of hard :) Yes, right now we think it's too
complex and there's also no easy way for us to tell if they're already
signed up/logged into OSM.
Yep. I guess it would involve asking them to sign up
I am pretty sure they have not flown Ballarat yet. I haven't seen any forum
posts or twitter updates about Ballarat, but it would be nice since the Bacchus
Marsh area imagery (which unfortunately is quite cloudy in places) misses
Ballarat by about 10km. I've been keeping track and updating the
On 3 May 2010 22:46, Luke Woolley lswool...@gmail.com wrote:
I am pretty sure they have not flown Ballarat yet. I haven't seen any forum
I could have sworn I saw them announce Ballarat on their forum, but I
can't find it so I'll remove it...
posts or twitter updates about Ballarat, but it
I was curious how much actual coverage Nearmap currently has, and
since we have boundaries for Nearmap coverage I thought I'd make use
of them. I rounded the area to 2dp, but here is the result...
Sydney = 9054.79km^2
Carnarvon = 2352.25km^2
Perth = 32454.66km^2
Rottness = 34.49km^2
Adelaide =
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:03 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
I was curious how much actual coverage Nearmap currently has, and
since we have boundaries for Nearmap coverage I thought I'd make use
of them. I rounded the area to 2dp, but here is the result...
Sydney = 9054.79km^2
On 3 May 2010 08:23, Peter Ross pe...@emailross.com wrote:
Which is 1.5% of australias total surface area (7 692 024km^2) with
victoria leading the way with 20% of the state having aerial coverage
(237,629km^2). I think it's somewhat less as the melbourne coverage
extends into NSW, but even
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:49 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 May 2010 08:23, Peter Ross pe...@emailross.com wrote:
Which is 1.5% of australias total surface area (7 692 024km^2) with
victoria leading the way with 20% of the state having aerial coverage
(237,629km^2). I
More imagery north of Melbourne is coming online.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/56117394
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
From Nearmap's forum http://forum.nearmap.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6t=334
Stuart, our founder and CEO, was recently interviewed by Desley
Blanch for ABC's Innovations radio show.
An MP3 of the show is here:
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/ra/podcast/innovations/innovations_20100426.mp3
...and a
I'm pretty sure that's the one we used.
On 7 April 2010 09:18, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
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
Actually, it's just the standard mapnik styles from the download as far as
colours are concerned - we've not yet done any serious editing to it (except
for hiding some overlays at some zoom levels). It doesn't look like the
actual style files that the OSM site uses are available (or if they are,
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
