Re: [Talk-GB] British Waterways

On 07/12/2020 10:33, Richard Fairhurst wrote: TBH there's only 170 operator=British Waterways tags according to taginfo, so it could be polished off pretty quickly with an Overpass query and a manual edit. Agreed. But (correct me if I am wrong) that is still an automated edit.

Re: [Talk-GB] Eat out to help out data

On 20/08/2020 12:28, Andy Townsend wrote: Perhaps "opening_hours:covid19=open"? Even that's a bit tricky - if an establishment is registered with the scheme I guess it doesn't guarantee that it is _currently_ open. This is (IMHO) part of  a bigger problem that opening times are changing

[Talk-GB] Map the path + motorways

*> According to Nick's MapthePaths site* *> (which incidentally also uses newer OS raster data) * *> there are quite a few missing PRoW in the area too.* Ho hum - some paths south of Croydon I thought of mapping but they were a bit too close to the M25 for comfort.

Re: [Talk-GB] Facebook Map Query - Thames rendered as Thanames

I have seen similar but can't recall where or which tile provider. To state obvious, it only occurs at certain zoom levels. Once i realised it was probably transient I lost interest. On Fri, 26 Oct 2018, 01:44 Steve Doerr, wrote: > A user on the Facebook group 'UK Places Editors' has

Re: [Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

There is a very big difference - ceremonial counties exist now and so are in scope for OSM. As you say here are differences between them and admin counties when unitary authorties are involved - traditional counties are an attempt to recreate the past So I don't think these trad counties have

Re: [Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

> > On 26 August 2018 16:27:58 CEST, Andrew Black > wrote: >> >> I agree with Dave F " It's still historic data, irrelevant to OSM. They >> are neither "current or real". That they will "never change" is irrelevant. >> They add no quality to

Re: [Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

I agree with Dave F " It's still historic data, irrelevant to OSM. They are neither "current or real". That they will "never change" is irrelevant. They add no quality to the database.They should be removed." On Sun, 26 Aug 2018 at 12:58, Colin Smale wrote: > I agree, but where do we

[Talk-GB] FHRS Errors was Re: Updates to 'Survey Me!' tool

I did manage to get the council to remove a long closed pub from FHRS. I have cases where both old and businesses are listed. Worried that an armchair mapper will revert an update to OSM. On Tue, 7 Aug 2018, 10:24 Gregrs, wrote: > Hi Colin, > > >Oh and another where the fhrs listing has the

Re: [Talk-GB] Bartholomews, Brighton

And calling city council officers idiots is not the most helpful of changeset comment. On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, 16:39 Martin Wynne, wrote: > > And, since that also matches what's on the ground, > > What's on the ground is that a property in Avenue has a postal address > in East Street, so maybe

Re: [Talk-GB] Documenting prow_ref formats (Was: MapthePaths & Lancashire)

.@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 July 2018 at 19:26, Andrew Black > wrote: > > I am pondering a similar but simpler question. I would like to add a > table > > listing each authority at https://wiki.openstreetmap. > org/wiki/Key:prow_ref > > describing the conventions

Re: [Talk-GB] MapthePaths & Lancashire

I am pondering a similar but simpler question. I would like to add a table listing each authority at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:prow_ref describing the conventions used. With a subpage if there is a lot of info such as Toby's list for Lancashire I have added the first prow_ref for

Re: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths update: live edit of designation and prow_ref

I am getting "your editing session has timed out, please log in again." despite having logged in less than a minute earlier. Chrome if it is relevant Thanks On 7 July 2018 at 19:45, Nick Whitelegg wrote: > > 401 would mean you're not logged in.. when you login it stores your OAuth > token in a

Re: [Talk-GB] House of Fraser

On Sat, 9 Jun 2018, 01:57 Andrew Black, wrote: > If you are going to do it use fixmes, much more likely to get noticed than > notes IMHO. > >> >> Apologies. Might be better stated as "there are advantages both ways". Round me there are LOADS of unresolved notes. So

Re: [Talk-GB] House of Fraser

If you are going to do it use fixmes, much more likely to get noticed than notes IMHO. On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, 21:31 Michael Booth, wrote: > If you are going to do it use the notes feature, much more likely to get > noticed than fixmes. > > On 07/06/2018 20:53, Andrew Hain wrote: > > House of

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

On Sat, 5 May 2018, 12:00 Rob Nickerson, wrote: > And for the balance: I disagree with Frederik on this one. > A crap map could also put people off - "why bother, OSM is so far behind, > I'll contribute to/just use Google maps instead" > > I think i agree with this.

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS info when pub has been taken over.

Thanks everyone The pub I was looking at has a FHRS reference under its new name as "awaiting inspection". This is useful confirmation that its old inspection is not valid. On 21 January 2018 at 15:58, Rob Nickerson wrote: > Hi, > > I don't think it has been

[Talk-GB] FHRS info when pub has been taken over.

If a pub has been taken over by a chain (and changed name), should one delete FHRS info. My gut feeling is yes but. ... ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] BT phoneboxes

Do we know what a proportion are going to be left. Is it going to be close to none. On 3 Jan 2018 17:49, "Brian Prangle" wrote: > Happy New Year everyone > > BT are planning to remove thousands of phoneboxes, many of which we will > have mapped.I understand that for every

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

On 17 Nov 2017 04:14, "Andrew Black" <andrewdbl...@googlemail.com> wrote: " I believe we need to be very clear about the licencing. All we have is Ilya's word (and I don't dispute it but it is hardly verifiable) that Shell has instructed a third party to map its petro

[Talk-GB] The OSM UK map - signed walking routes

My request. Signed walking routes such as http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6084014 Can i ask about context. Are we talking abou a layer or a website that could potentially have optional overlays. If the latter could routes be such an overlay. I appreciate they ate not everyones taste. >

Re: [Talk-GB] overpass query involving pubs

I am confused by this. I understood ( x; y; ); to be the union of x and y. Rather than x passing its results onto y. What am i missing. On 25 Oct 2017 11:58, "Roland Olbricht" wrote: While i'm here, can anyone tell me why http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/szG does > not

[Talk-GB] Building that have been replaced

What should one do if there are building that have been knocked down and rebuilt. Loathe just to delete them because an armchair mapper will come back and add them back. The new building is not in current bing imagary. I have added a note #1077006 I am loathe to take photos or roam with a GPS in

Re: [Talk-GB] [Imports] Importing fuel stations in UK and future similar imports

> the "fair use" clause. Which specific legislation are you referring to. On 12 May 2017 17:10, "Ilya Zverev" wrote: > Hi everyone, > > First, I was amazed at the response. Thanks for constructive feedback, > which I answer below, and no thanks for toxic responses, including

Re: [Talk-GB] access:psv

Is there a distinction between PSV and "local buses only". I heard a saga about a heritage bus where driver had PSV Licence in a bus lane. Can't remember details. ( Reply all this time!) On 15 Oct 2016 16:26, "Philip Barnes" wrote: > On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 16:38 +,

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project (Health): Pharmacies and Defibrillators

I notice the list of registered pharmacies includes hospital pharmacies. Not sure these are worth adding as the area should already be marked as a hospital. And i don't believe the process GP prescriptions. On 9 May 2016 7:36 p.m., "Rob Nickerson" wrote: > Nice work

Re: [Talk-GB] Anybody a member of CAMRA?

My concern is the quality of their location data - they suffer from the well known myth that a postcode defines the location. I have helped in a few specific cases but the local branch didn't seem interested in for example checking the locaion of pubs before uploading. This then leads to concerns

Re: [Talk-GB] Allegedly named motorways

There is some evidence of these names being used when the roads were built eg http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C1459443 South Wales Motorway (M4): Chiswick to Langley Special Road; contract for Boston Manor Bridge But I don't think they are useful now. On 18 Nov 2014

Re: [Talk-GB] addressing (was addr:place)

In my local area all addresses within a postcode district share the same post town. .. Which is the norm. Wikipedia says : In a minority of cases a single number can cover two post towns - for example, the WN8 district includes Wigan and Skelmersdale post towns

Re: [Talk-GB] Boundaries for Forestry Commission land

On 29 January 2011 17:40, Steve Chilton s.l.chil...@mdx.ac.uk wrote: Not open, but available at magic.defra.co.uk: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/datadoc/metadata.asp?dataset=24 http://magic.defra.gov.uk/datadoc/metadata.asp?dataset=25 Excuse my ignorance - if the data is not open, how can it be

[Talk-GB] Definitions of regions

Not strictly an OSM question but people here might be able to help me. I have a list of places with outwards postcodes (eg N1). I would like to group them into regions - London, North East, Midlands. Does anyone know a suitable list of regions to use. I suspect the regions and postcode