Craig Loftus wrote:
Richard can you give the following URLs a go?
Thanks for setting that up - really encouraging. But good news and bad, I'm
afraid.
The good news is that P2 can get the files from the server no problem. The
bad news is that Ordnance Survey appear to have broken it.
When I was
I think it would be simpler to do the reprojection before uploading it.
Only needs doing once that way.
Graham
from my phone
On 14 Jun 2011 04:11, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Richard wrote:
The current Potlatch 2 codebase (not deployed yet) can pull vectors
directly...
OK, I'm
doing once (until the next set of shape files, at least).
Ed
From: Graham Jones [mailto:grahamjones...@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 June 2011 07:05
To: Ed Loach
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org; Richard Fairhurst
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
I think it would be simpler to do
Ed Loach wrote:
I refer mainly to reprojecting from OSGB to WGS84, which
required manual tweaks to every .prj file [1]. Would
this need doing before upload, or is it something that is now
(but not deployed yet) automated within Potlatch 2?
Potlatch 2's improved (not deployed yet) shapefile
On 14/06/2011 10:41, Craig Loftus wrote:
On 14 June 2011 10:26, Richard Fairhurstrich...@systemed.net wrote:
Potlatch 2's improved (not deployed yet) shapefile background layers asks
you for the projection before loading, rather than relying on the .prj file.
Thanks for clarifying.
I'm not
Craig Loftus wrote:
I'm not very familiar with projections so a little more clarity would
be useful for me. As potlatch 'understands' OSGB, is loading an OSBG
shp file any more expensive than loading a WGS84 shp file?
A little. P2 has to reproject each point on first load. But we're using an
Right... I'm perhaps half done, depending on how badly I've cocked up
the first half.
Richard can you give the following URLs a go?
http://craigloftus.vmd.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/TA/TA_Airport.shp
Will Phil's guidance the mirror is now set up in its basic form.
http://vmd.craigloftus.net/*/*
For example:
http://vmd.craigloftus.net/TQ/TQ_Airport.shp
http://vmd.craigloftus.net/NC/NC_AdministrativeBoundary.shp
There still aren't directory listings, so atm you will have to already
know about
I may be showing my ignorance, but isn't S3 a virtual server that you can
run code on etc?
I thought that all this needs is a web (or does it have to be ftp) server?
Cloudnext (http://cloudnext.co.uk) do a web hosting package with 'unlimited'
storage space and bandwidth for £70 pa (+vat I
On Jun 13, 2011 8:32 PM, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:
I may be showing my ignorance, but isn't S3 a virtual server that you can
run code on etc?
I thought that all this needs is a web (or does it have to be ftp) server?
Not quite. S3 is a web storage 'solution'. It can't run
Hi Craig,
Craig Loftus wrote:
If anyone knows about using cloud-hosting as a mirror, particularly if
you think it is a terrible idea, please speak up now.
I use S3 extensively. It does exactly what it says on the tin.
Be sure to create your buckets in the right geographic zone (i.e. EU,
Richard wrote:
The current Potlatch 2 codebase (not deployed yet) can pull
vectors
directly out of VectorMap District shapefiles. Just load the
shapefile
in the background, alt-click, and the road comes through.
If you wanted to do something helpful towards this, a mirror of
the
So the result of all the discussion about a proposal to develop and deploy a
bot which failed to get near to a consensus, let alone agreement is
to develop and deploy a bot. The discussion has ignored the basic
problem of not having enough mappers on the ground collecting data - so we
On 11 June 2011 14:22, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
Fyi we are doing some investigation in ITO into adding OS
VectorDistrict 'road missing' data on the OS Locator tiles or possibly
onto an alternative map layer. The aim being to make tracing of roads
Peter Miller wrote:
ITO are probably not the best people to set up maintain simple mirrors
of existing content. Are there not 100 sites where a mirror could be
set up and maintained? Why is the OS site not sufficient anyway?
The OS site
a) offers download-only access behind an e-mail
On 12 June 2011 20:36, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Peter Miller wrote:
ITO are probably not the best people to set up maintain simple mirrors
of existing content. Are there not 100 sites where a mirror could be
set up and maintained? Why is the OS site not sufficient anyway?
Peter Miller wrote:
If this is what you want then it clearly isn't a simple FTP mirror
Let's not overcomplicate things. :)
All that is needed is that someone
a) downloads all the OS VectorMap District files
b) unzips them
c) places the unzipped shapefiles on an FTP server somewhere
d) copies
Steps (a) to (e) require someone
with FTP space and bandwidth to
spare
Roughly how much bandwidth do you think would make a worth while
contribution?
I'm happy to donate what ever I have remaining on my current package and
upgrade within reason (with ITOs help or not).
Craig
On 12 June 2011 20:53, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Steps (a) to (e) require someone with FTP space and
bandwidth to spare and I don't have either, or I'd have done it by now.
Can you give a rough estimate for how much bandwidth would make a
worthwhile contribution?
I'm happy
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
Ed Avis wrote:
Richard Fairhurst writes:
But if we were to put as much effort into marketing OSM and
improving our tools as we do into writing and indeed discussing bots,
the 40% areas would be fixed.
If that were true, then it would
@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Friday, 10 June 2011, 20:09
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
Ed Avis wrote:
Richard Fairhurst writes:
But if we were to put as much effort into marketing OSM and
improving our tools as we do into writing and indeed discussing bots,
the 40% areas would
Peter Miller wrote:
Fyi we are doing some investigation in ITO into adding OS
VectorDistrict 'road missing' data on the OS Locator tiles or possibly
onto an alternative map layer. The aim being to make tracing of roads
easier
[...]
At a later stage one might consider extending the bot to also
believe we can both encourage
people to join us and use the a bot on small areas at the same time.
Cheers
bob
From: Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com
To: sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2011, 16:45
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
On Thu
@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
Hi,
On 06/09/11 18:01, SteveC wrote:
I know it's fashionable to claim imports are bad, what I seek is actual
data.
As in, A comparative study of the development of the OSM community in
X in the standard universe where data has been
Richard Fairhurst said:
The problem with these fast-moving mailing lists is that I get
halfway through a reply to Graham's e-mail, go to the pub..
My emails often have that effect :)
That raises the question of why on earth we're still using
cliquey semi-private email lists when we could be
Graham Stewart wrote:
So again you are basically arguing that we should avoid
completing the map because having a patchy incomplete map is
what brings in contributors?
No, I'm not.
I'm arguing that completing the map by survey creates a community who will
go on to improve and maintain the
: Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com
To: sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2011, 16:45
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM
sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
In order to get
I'm arguing that completing the map by survey creates a community who
will go on to improve and maintain the map.
This is no doubt true.
But surely having an area that has been *surveyed* to 100% road name
completion is just as likely to put off any new contributors as one that
was *traced*
Graham Stewart wrote:
This is no doubt true.
But surely having an area that has been *surveyed* to 100% road name
completion is just as likely to put off any new contributors as one that
was *traced* to 100%?
(i.e. not very in my opinion)
I don't think so. Again, the difference is that you're
Great shame. So - recruit some more mappers. Write better tools to help
the people who show up nearby on your user page, yet who haven't edited
yet.
You've got me there.
Of the 30 nearby people on my user page, 20 have never made any edit.
Only 3 have edited in the past 6 months and few of
Or as close to it as possible, yes. I don't care what the result is, it's just
too fashionable to automatically believe the imports are bad thing.
Steve
stevecoast.com
On Jun 10, 2011, at 7:05, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 06/09/11 18:01, SteveC wrote:
I know it's
There are tons of things. People drive in the US so pubs are difficult to
arrange things around. Mapping in the US is boring because of the big gridded
cities. I map much less in the US than the UK. It's not just that there are
roads there already, which by the way is a good thing because I
Richard Fairhurst richard@... writes:
Worcester is nominally complete; yet despite the assurances of
people in this thread that completeness will bring more mappers,
Worcester has just one mapper, Steve, who was active anyway before
OSSV came along.
I would not claim that completing one
Richard Fairhurst richard@... writes:
This is no doubt true.
But surely having an area that has been *surveyed* to 100% road name
completion is just as likely to put off any new contributors as one that
was *traced* to 100%?
I don't think so. Again, the difference is that you're reaching 100%
On 10/06/2011 13:17, Ed Avis wrote:
Richard Fairhurstrichard@... writes:
This is no doubt true.
But surely having an area that has been *surveyed* to 100% road name
completion is just as likely to put off any new contributors as one that
was *traced* to 100%?
...
I think we all agree that
Someone else wrote:
Grr. 100% road name completion has become in this thread 100%
completeness.
Which of course is completely different. Taking just one metric
(.osm file size), I extracted the highways from the current Tendring
district (road and name complete) .osm extract file I have
Ed Avis wrote:
But you are leaving out the third possibility which is an area stuck at
40% completion, which doesn't have a vibrant community either.
Oh, indeed. But if we were to put as much effort into marketing OSM and
improving our tools as we do into writing and indeed discussing bots,
Hi,
SteveC wrote:
Or as close to it as possible, yes. I don't care what the result is,
it's just too fashionable to automatically believe the imports are
bad thing.
Funny that you should use the word fashionable, as if to discount
those who say it as merely following a fashion instead of
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:51, Graham Stewart gra...@dalmuti.net wrote:
Great shame. So - recruit some more mappers. Write better tools to help
the people who show up nearby on your user page, yet who haven't edited
yet.
You've got me there.
Of the 30 nearby people on my user page, 20
Graham Stewart graham@... writes:
That raises the question of why on earth we're still using cliquey
semi-private email lists when we could be using nice open public forums with
categories, threaded discussions, formatting and voting - but that is a
discussion for another day. ;)
I use Gmane:
On 10/06/11 10:17, Graham Stewart wrote:
That raises the question of why on earth we're still using cliquey
semi-private email lists when we could be using nice open public forums
with categories, threaded discussions, formatting and voting - but that
is a discussion for another day. ;)
How
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:36 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
There are tons of things. People drive in the US so pubs are difficult to
arrange things around. Mapping in the US is boring because of the big gridded
cities. I map much less in the US than the UK. It's not just that there
-Original Message-
From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org]
Sent: 10 June 2011 3:39 PM
To: SteveC
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
Hi,
SteveC wrote:
Or as close to it as possible, yes. I don't care what the result is,
it's
Nice work Matt
Cheers
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Matt Amos [mailto:zerebub...@gmail.com]
Sent: 10 June 2011 4:20 PM
To: SteveC
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org; Richard Fairhurst
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:36 PM, SteveC st
It would be better if ITO put long-roads-without-names in a separate
layer, because at the moment they dominate the completeness map.
On the whole I prefer to leave it a bit still. Ideally, everything
would be checked by a local, but in reality it won't be. Quite a lot
will be filled in by
On 9 June 2011 09:33, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be better if ITO put long-roads-without-names in a separate
layer, because at the moment they dominate the completeness map.
My strategy has been to deal with the long roads first and then go
back and deal with
On 09/06/2011 10:09, Peter Miller wrote:
Indeed, here is a map showing verified/surveyed+souce:name in dark
red, source:name without verified/surveyed in orange and any instances
of verified/surveyed without source:name as blue (there aren't any at
present!)
On 9 June 2011 10:44, Steve Doerr doerr.step...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/06/2011 10:09, Peter Miller wrote:
Indeed, here is a map showing verified/surveyed+souce:name in dark
red, source:name without verified/surveyed in orange and any instances
of verified/surveyed without source:name as blue
Fyi, here is the full list of content in the source:name field for
Suffolk and bits of Cambs,Norfolk and Essex (ordered by frequency of
occurrence)!
Well that nicely demonstrates what a complete mess the source tags are!
I particularly like source:name=Mrs Sylvia Secker :)
If I can put in my
I'd also like to give my support to using a bot to add names to existing
roads.
My views on this have moved one way then the other over the last few months.
My main issues were based around
1 - It would reduce foot surveys which would mean missing out on POI's
(etc). Now feel this argument
On 9 June 2011 13:30, Graham Stewart gra...@dalmuti.net wrote:
Fyi, here is the full list of content in the source:name field for
Suffolk and bits of Cambs,Norfolk and Essex (ordered by frequency of
occurrence)!
Well that nicely demonstrates what a complete mess the source tags are!
I have
Jason Cunningham jamicuosm@... writes:
I'd also like to give my support to using a bot to add names to existing roads.
1 - It would reduce foot surveys which would mean missing out on POI's
(etc). Now feel this argument is short sighted and we would still have to
deal with how we map POI when
Graham Stewart wrote:
So I've got no objection to the proposed bot. If it can be used
on a restricted area
There is a section of the relevant wiki page where people can request areas:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OS_bot#List_of_requested_places
Note the column for Links to consultation
Since it looks likely that a bot is going to be run to add OS Locator
names to unnamed British roads - something I strongly disagree with, but
I can't stop - I demand that it is tagged with a common-sense, clear tag
to show where this has happened. This should not be the bonkers cock-up
that
Sorry to be posting again, however...
I think the map view is now getting more useful and more stable. I
have reworked the key to allow for more values and to make it more
logical and it is now worth another look.
Royal blue: source:name=survey or similar
Red: source:name= OS or similar
Purple:
Chris Hill osm@... writes:
Since it looks likely that a bot is going to be run to add OS Locator
names to unnamed British roads - something I strongly disagree with, but
I can't stop - I demand that it is tagged with a common-sense, clear tag
to show where this has happened. This should not be
Generally, I am still opposed to a bot. There is a substantial body of
evidence that automated imports damage the ability to recruit and nuture
new mappers. Recent posts about Latvia, Austria and The Netherlands on
talk all substantiate this: in many cases the people recognising the
issue were
On Jun 9, 2011, at 7:42, Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
Generally, I am still opposed to a bot. There is a substantial body of
evidence that automated imports damage the ability to recruit and nuture new
mappers.
Could you cite the evidence? Is it just hand waving
Steve Coast wrote:
Could you cite the evidence?
Have you Merkins sorted out how you're classifying roads and tagging their
numbers yet?
(if that's just general incompetence rather than import-related malaise feel
free to correct me ;) )
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011, SteveC wrote:
On Jun 9, 2011, at 7:42, Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk
wrote:
Generally, I am still opposed to a bot. There is a substantial body
of evidence that automated imports damage the ability to recruit and
nuture new mappers.
Could you
Derick Rethans osm@... writes:
When there are no names on a street, it gives a good incentive to go
survey them, and it shows which things *need* to be surveyed.
Quite right. How can we improve OSM coverage for end users (who would like to
find their destination address when navigating, for
I despair that the lazy, armchair mappers are taking over, but as I say,
there's little I can do to stop it.
Personally I think this project needs all the help it can get. The more
data sources and contributors the better.
We're trying to build a map from scratch. It's not a simple task. If
Derick Rethans osm@... writes:
There is a substantial body
of evidence that automated imports damage the ability to recruit and
nuture new mappers.
Could you cite the evidence?
I can. I've a friend in the Netherlands that I'd say is the typical
person that we want as mapper. He had mapped a
On 9 June 2011 15:59, Derick Rethans o...@derickrethans.nl wrote:
I can. I've a friend in the Netherlands that I'd say is the typical
person that we want as mapper. He had mapped a lot of town Which then
got wiped out by the AND import, and he didn't bother with OSM for a
looong time.
There is definite room for arguing that it will reduce active
mapping in some situations.
This keeps getting raised and I'm not sure how true it is.
Go and look at some of the areas that are 95-100% complete
according to the ITO analysis:
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main
On 09/06/2011 15:47, SteveC wrote:
On Jun 9, 2011, at 7:42, Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM
sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk mailto:sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Generally, I am still opposed to a bot. There is a substantial body
of evidence that automated imports damage the ability to recruit and
nuture new
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM
sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
In order to get a better level of completeness in the UK what we need are
more mappers.
Absolutely.
Everything we do should be focussed on helping get more mappers, or
helping the mappers we have get their
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Different sources are complementary to each other and should not be viewed
as alternatives. Even with 'classic OSM' we had Yahoo tracing combined with
foot surveys.
Yahoo!? Classic? Get off my lawn!
:-)
Cheers,
Andy
Just a simple message to say that I support this idea of a bot, for all the
reasons stated by previous posters. Whilst I understand the reservations of
those against the bot, I personally don't believe they are relevant to this
particular bot as it is described on the wiki.
Tim
Graham Stewart wrote:
This keeps getting raised and I'm not sure how true it is.
If you import data into an area that already has an active community, you
likely won't damage the community (though you may piss them off). OTOH, you
probably don't _need_ to import data because there's already an
On 09/06/2011 17:36, Ed Avis wrote:
What stops more people using OSM?
While I agree with your other points, even before you get to the data, I
think the first reason is people don't know about it.
And for most people, why would you not just use Google maps even if you did?
David
If you import data into an area that doesn't already have an active
community, the community will spring up more slowly or not at all.
But that logic suggests that we should actively *discourage* people from
doing any mapping, as an overly complete map discourages community.
In reality there
On 9 June 2011 17:53, Graham Stewart gra...@dalmuti.net wrote:
If you import data into an area that doesn't already have an active
community, the community will spring up more slowly or not at all.
But that logic suggests that we should actively *discourage* people from
doing any mapping, as
Tim François sk1ppy14@... writes:
Just a simple message to say that I support this idea of a bot, for all the
reasons stated by previous posters. Whilst I understand the reservations of
those against the bot, I personally don't believe they are relevant to this
particular bot as it is
On 9 Jun 2011, at 17:47, David Earl wrote:
On 09/06/2011 17:36, Ed Avis wrote:
What stops more people using OSM?
While I agree with your other points, even before you get to the data, I
think the first reason is people don't know about it.
And for most people, why would you not just
Andrew andrewhainosm@... writes:
One other point: there may be parts of the UK where mapping is lost because
someone doesn’t relicense and there are other contributors whose work has had
the rug pulled under it but are willing to rebuild if there’s a way to make it
as easy as possible.
That
Peter Miller wrote:
According to OSM Mapper Worcester has been developing nicely over a
couple of years.
Fyi, the most active mapper is this srbrook. Mapper since: 14 October
2009 at 20:30 (over 1 year ago). Description: I'm Steve and have been
mapping in the south Worcester, UK area since
On 08/06/11 21:20, Brian Prangle wrote:
I'm firmly of the opinion that this is not work for a bot unless a tag
is added such as verified=no so we humans can search for what hasn't
been surveyed.
Wholly agree.
A bot will just replicate the OS errors and then we'll never find them!
Also
On 8 June 2011 21:20, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote:
The Warwick additions are all names in the defunct Stoneleigh Agricultural
Show site. Must get over there and do a survey to see what's happening to
any redevelopment there - unless anyone else wants to volunteer!
I'm firmly of
79 matches
Mail list logo
