[cross-posted to talk-us@ and tagging@, please choose your follow-ups wisely]
Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
> It seems that we are increasingly doing things to simplify the
> model because certain tooling can't handle the real level of
> complexity that exists in the real world. I'm in favor of
SteveA wrote:
> With both of us in agreement about tag "proposed:route=bicycle"
> (especially as it co-exists with "state=proposed") can we gain
> some more consensus (here, soon?) allowing us to move closer towards
> recommending in our wiki that we tag proposed USBRs with
>
Eric H. Christensen wrote:
> The routing engine should be able to take into account
> the road surface
It can and often does. Your problem there is that only 2% of highway= ways
in the US are explicitly tagged with surface; probably only 30% are
implicitly tagged; and sometimes the implicit
Minh Nguyen wrote:
> As with the network tag on bus routes, what's important for both
> network and cycle_network is that the route is intended to form
> part of a coherent *network* (almost like a brand, but not quite).
It's also useful for those of us writing routers, as it means we can avoid
Kevin Kenny wrote:
> And route relations are important for sites like Waymarked Trails -
> it totally ignores walking and cycling routes that are not indicated
> with relations, which is why I wind up doing routes for even
> relatively trivial stuff like
>
Hi all,
You might remember that back in March I wondered whether we could get
access to the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy's data, which they've given to
Google:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2019-March/019266.html
Helpful people on this list followed that up with RTC
Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will
> not make the edit without a clear support so please comment if
> you think that it is a good idea and if you think that it should
> not be done.
I think it's an excellent idea. I've deleted these
Hi all,
I see that Rails-to-Trails Conservancy donated their GIS data to Google:
https://www.railstotrails.org/our-work/trail-mapping-and-gis/
Anyone in the US fancy asking if they might do the same for OSM? Our
coverage is good on the major trails (Katy Trail, Coeur d'Alenes, etc.),
but
Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Following some discussion about this changeset in OSMUS
> Slack [2], I started a discussion on the wiki about preferring
> more stable population figures over supposition about
> temporary circumstances. [3]
It's roughly analogous to a situation we had a few months ago
Mike N. wrote:
> As one who grew up in a rural area, a country road lined with 4
> houses in a mile would feel "residential" and I would tend to set
> it as residential in OSM. That describes most of the rural parts
> of this county also, except for roads that don't happen to have
> a house.
Mike N. wrote:
> This is a proposed import of road centerlines for Spartanburg County
> SC, based on county GIS data. This will include a systematic review of
> all roads in the county and qualify to remove tiger:reviewed tags.
Looks good!
Browsing through the code and the wiki page, you have:
Clifford Snow wrote:
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going
> to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding
> tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload
> JOSM for the changed to be active.
Just
Jack Burke wrote:
> Keep in mind that OSM apparently uses "compacted" to refer to
> macadamized roads, which is a specific process for building roads.
surface=compacted in OSM, following British English usage, is traditionally
as described on pages 18-20 of this document:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> * you have developed a certain way to map certain objects, that might
> be a little out of touch with what is considered the "right" approach
> elsewhere in the project, but you don't notice or care
Adding to which...
I think half the problem is that the wiki
Great to see so much attention being paid to rural TIGER fixup. The majority
of my editing these days is that, and it's a massive but rewarding job.
I put together a view a while back which superimposes unreviewed rural
residentials onto the Strava heatmap. The idea is that you look for
The previous ESRI imagery has just been restored to the imagery list (by
ESRI, so 100% legit) under the name “Clarity”.
Richard
--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/USA-f5284732.html
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Sean Lindsey wrote:
> I do want to produce something that is useful for
> open source and OSM/its community
Let me join in the thanks for making this available.
Even though it might not be suitable for direct import into OSM (for legal
and/or community reasons), I wonder whether it might be
Bradley White wrote:
> The UK/Canada system and the central Europe system both adopt
> the tag in a way that makes sense for the road network they
> have. We are trying to shoehorn the central European tagging
> system into our country when, to me, it makes more sense to
> use the UK/Canada
Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Do you see any improvements I should make to this query / am I missing
> important features?
Shoulder information is good, especially on rural roads. A simple
shoulder=yes/no suffices. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shoulder
Surface information is good on rural
Marc Gemis wrote:
I wonder whether it is interesting to know the difference between
concrete, asphalt and pervious concrete. All three have different
characteristics whether it be comfort for the cyclist or being
dangerous under icy conditions or durability under heavy loaded
trucks. What do you
Kevin Kenny wrote:
> Fair enough. I will confess that I'm a little lackadaisical about
> tagging the surface on hard-surfaced roads. It appears that
> some sort of hard surface is more or less assumed by default.
> I do tag 'gravel', 'compacted', 'shale', 'sand', 'ground'
> assiduously, and
Bryan Housel wrote:
> We haven’t discussed automatic removal of any other tiger tags.
> (I don’t have a strong opinion for either keeping or removing them.)
I have a really strong opinion _against_ removing tiger:reviewed tags where
the road type and surface have not been manually reviewed!
Kevin Kenny wrote:
> Is there *anyone* that actually can speak to what *is* common
> practice in the US? When I've asked, I've always drawn a lot of
> replies and come away more confused than before.
I've been doing vast amounts of rural TIGER fixup over the past couple of
years and this is
Albert Pundt wrote:
> This seems like a way overboard change.
I've just received a changeset message back from someone else who had made a
few unusual reclassifications, in this case highway=secondary for dirt roads
in Nebraska. The user explained that they had been working from this wiki
page:
Bryan Housel wrote:
> What’s an acceptable amount of time to wait for a response before I
> just start reverting?
I commented on another of granpueblo's changesets on 21st May and have also
not had a response yet. Given that, you probably only need to wait just a
couple of days before embarking
maning sambale wrote:
> While our team is working on Jacksonville, we found unreviewed
> TIGER (v1, tiger:reviewed:=no) in some areas.
I don't want to dismay you too much, but 90%+ of the US is like that...
(...though don't take v1 as an important signifier: it's possible for a way
to be at v3
Spencer Gardner wrote:
> The tool uses OSM for routing and uses information such as speed
> limits, number of vehicle lanes, the presence and type of bicycle
> facilities, and the types of treatments at intersections/crossings
> for determining whether a particular way is acceptable for
Joshua Houston wrote:
> It occurred to me that "man_made" is an outdated term that should be
> phased out from OpenStreetMap language.
FWIW, the lingua franca of OSM tagging is British English: so, colour rather
than color, and so on.
British English does of course have different cultural
Greg Troxel wrote:
> Around me (amusingly as we discuss British influence on tagging)
> is "Minuteman National Historic Park". This is not a "National Park",
> but it has the same kind rangers in the same uniforms, the same
> kinds of rules, and is managed to preserve the historic landscape
voschix wrote:
> The answer is definitely NO.
> You can find detailed PDF maps of all NHS Routes, state-by-state at a
> web page of the Federal Highway Administration [1]. On these maps
> you will find plenty of NHS roads that are definitively not trunk roads.
> Just two examples in Arizona: [2]
Minh Nguyen wrote:
> The entire state of West Virginia -- no exaggeration. The original data
> imported from TIGER is badly misaligned throughout this state
> and rarely resembles the road network at all.
*shudders*
Yes. Genuinely the worst geometry I've encountered anywhere in the US, and
Markus Fischer wrote:
> I am new to this and the area where I live is very well
> mapped (probably due to high density of tech workers).
> Where do I go to start mapping areas that are less well
> mapped (me aimlessly poking at this does not sound
> like a good approach)?
Possibly the biggest
Greg Troxel wrote:
> When converting to garmin format with mkgmap, and I think with osmand,
> I will tend to hear both the name and the ref. That's a big lengthy, but
> there's no real pattern on which to leave out.
For cycle.travel's directions in the US, I've started post-processing the
name
Madeline Steele wrote:
> What do you all think about this?
The sine qua non for me is that the absence of a tiger:reviewed= tag (or one
set to =yes) means that you can trust the value of the highway= tag.
This is especially true of rural areas where unreviewed highway=residential
covers a
SteveA wrote:
> [Great Divide Mountain Bike Route]
> where MountainAddict keeps setting this to network=ncn
> when clearly it is network=icn (as it crosses the Canadian
> border in Alberta). A partial compromise/consensus
> solution has emerged: keep a duplicate relation synced as
>
Martijn van Exel wrote:
> The web site has always been about the map primarily,
> not the people. I am curious if there are any ideas out
> there to change that.
Groups!
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Slack-tp5870718p5870933.html
Sent from
Richard Welty wrote:
> the key thing, i think, is that mappers have little motivation to
> work on route relations if they don't actually get used by
> anything.
Don't forget that the issue is not an endemic issue with route relations,
it's just an osm2pgsql issue.
osm2pgsql is the most
Paul Norman wrote:
> The problem is that if you make a discussion group too small, it
> doesn't have enough activity to sustain interest in it.
>
> Larger regions might work, but even a statewide group abandons
> the might meet for a geobeer idea where it takes 6 hours to drive
> across the
On 15/10/2015 14:28, Bryan Housel wrote:
Agree with everything you said about *why* groups are important,
except that: now that it's 2015, Facebook groups is really a better
place for this.
Yeah... but no.
Every time this comes up, someone suggests "use my favoured platform".
Which might be
Elliott Plack wrote:
> I am now leaning towards the shoulder tag, and perhaps
> recommending that the routing tools consider that.
I'd be genuinely delighted to add shoulder support to cycle.travel when
there's more than a trace number of shoulder tags present in the OSM
database - missing
Greg Troxel wrote:
> It's perfectly reasonable to have an unpaved highway=secondary in
> rural areas, if that's one of the major roads around.
...with the proviso that it _must_ be tagged as surface=unpaved (or a more
detailed tag, such as surface=gravel or surface=dirt). Standard tagging in
Richard Welty wrote:
> i could see having an HFCS tag which carries that value for
> informational purposes, but it shouldn't control our own classification.
In the UK we use the designation= tag to record official classifications
which might not be reflected in the highway type - I'd commend
Richie Kennedy wrote:
> As to Mr. Fairhurst’s comment regarding routing, I’ll remind you
> it is frowned upon to tag for a routing engine.
Given that Mr Fairhurst has been involved in OSM since month 4 in 2004, he
is quite aware of what is frowned upon and what isn't, but he thanks you for
your
James Mast wrote:
I mean, would he have to at least verify that the
license for those maps is compatible with OSM first
Yes, and it isn't. The licence has lots of clauses that aren't compatible
with ODbL, the Contributor Terms or indeed any open licence:
Harald Kliems wrote:
Until then you could consider a user setting to avoid/not avoid
unpaved roads.
Unfortunately contraction hierarchies - the routing algorithm used by OSRM -
don't really allow user settings. For each distinct routing profile, you
need to regenerate the routing graph, which
Just as a postscript to this discussion I thought I'd cite an example area.
If you look here, in Georgia:
http://cycle.travel/map?lat=31.9023lon=-84.0398zoom=14
you'll see that most of the roads are unreviewed TIGER residentials. Of
those, these are adjacent to each other:
SteveA wrote:
Richard (Fairhurst), if cycle.travel/map's router logic is not
paying attention to surface= tags, perhaps it should, as
doing so truly can improve selected routes
It very much does - it'll look at surface=, and failing that tracktype= or
smoothness=, as one of the principal
Harald Kliems wrote:
Very nice, Richard! One quick comment: I might not be the only
who doesn't always change the tiger:reviewed tag when fixing
TIGER-imported roads. I don't know if that's technically feasible,
but maybe it would be better to check if a way has been modified
since
Hi all,
At State of the Map US last weekend I was really pleased to unveil
bicycle routing for the US (and Canada) at my site, cycle.travel.
The planner, at http://cycle.travel/map , will plan a bike route for you
between any two points - whether in the same city or on opposite sides
of the
Frederik Ramm wrote:
The problem of OSM editors being confused by a strange line that
cuts through houses in the editor perhaps.
Which is perhaps 0.1% of the (largely rural) abandoned railroads mapped in
OSM, so largely immaterial to the discussion. And if you're confused by that
0.1%, heaven
Greg Morgan wrote:
2. To quote Richard Fairhurst, Seriously, OSM in the [England] s still
way beyond broken. You can open it at any random location and the map
is just __fictional__. Here are two random examples bing;OS StreetView
[2] shape is approximate. Needs proper survey as mostly
Minh Nguyen wrote:
I think we should consider a mechanical edit to update these tags
While you're thinking about GNIS mechanical edits, could I suggest one for
GNIS-sourced POIs with (historical) in the name?
There are several gazillion amenity=post_office, name=Fred Creek Post Office
Hi all,
I've encountered two problematic bike route relations in the US and
would appreciate thoughts as to the best way to deal with them.
One is the Great Divide Mountain Bike Route:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3161159
The other is I-5 in Oregon:
Hi all,
I've created a set of tiles from US Forest Service road data for the 155
US National Forests.
This is to help with TIGER fixup in these rural areas, where tracks,
trails and entirely non-existent paths are often tagged with a bare
highway=residential. The US Forest Service data is
On 11/11/2014 20:57, Clifford Snow wrote:
Suggestion - set the tile background to transparent so we can see
underlying image in JOSM.
I can certainly have a look at doing that. Do you/anyone know whether
transparent tiles would still be usable in iD?
cheers
Richard
A friendly thought from across the pond; just something to provoke thoughts,
feel free to disregard.
OSM in the US is without doubt the #1 country at organising conferences. I
was privileged enough to go to Portland and SF and they were both superb
events. (This year's SOTM-EU in Karlsruhe was,
Greg Morgan wrote:
It feels like the discussion is about fixing a routing problem
when in reality you would exclude people that want to make it
to Cleator Arizona or other recreational destinations. The
people at the Cleator Bar and Yacht Club[4] would question
your judgement that this a
Richard Welty wrote:
agreed. i have spent quite a lot of time in Iowa farming
territory where the road grid consists mostly of high
quality, well maintained gravel roads that are in regular,
heavy use by farm equipment. i generally give these
highway=unclassified, surface=gravel.
Great
Russ Nelson wrote:
I fear that the deletionism infection has jumped from Wikipedia
to OpenStreetMap.
...is exactly what I was going to say.
Seriously, OSM in the US, outside a few cities, is still way beyond broken.
You can open it at any random location and the map is just fictional. (I
did,
Mike N. wrote:
Landing on the high plains desert in the west does not make a
good case that OSM in the US is broken. Desert imagery cues
do not match those of conventional climates.
I really wish I could agree with you, Mike, but my experience is that ~75%
of the US landmass is like that.
Martijn van Exel wrote:
I would love to see these routes in OSM, and I think it's a shame
that there is such an ongoing fuss about it.
May I gently offer some experience from n years of both mapping and
developing National Cycle Network routes in the UK. (As well as being an
OSMer I'm a
Richard Welty wrote:
Josh Doe wrote:
I believe I saw SURFACE and CLUB which might be
useful.
i'm not keeping any of it, the source tag points back to
the original data set and that should be sufficient. [...]
i don't know that i see a mapping from the AT surface
attributes to our surface
Clifford Snow wrote:
We need publicity!
Harry Wood is trying to recruit more volunteers for the Communication
Working Group. You can e-mail him on o...@harrywood.co.uk .
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Kerry Irons wrote:
Nathan,
[...]
Please advise when you will remove these tags.
Nathan (NE2) has been given an indefinite ban from OpenStreetMap on
account of his inability to work with others on what is a crowd-sourcing
project: http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/347
It'll therefore
Rick Marshall wrote:
If we use bing imagery for tracing the road geometry, but Google
Maps to discover the name of the road is it incorrect to use
source=google? You are not tracing a road geometry from
Google Maps, but you might be using it for other attribute data.
Ian Dees wrote:
This is what an account block is and it already happens.
For those unaware of account blocks, you can read all those that have been
imposed at http://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks .
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Martijn van Exel wrote:
I think I just wrote half of one of my SOTM US talk.
I think you just wrote half of mine too. ;)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/OSM-Data-Quality-tp5763578p5763648.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at
Kerry Irons wrote:
I would like to get in contact with the mapper(s) who put these routes
into OpenStreetMap/OpenCycleMap and clarify this. We are always
looking for enthusiastic folks who want to work on the USBR system
but in this case putting detailed routes on maps is a source of
Toby Murray wrote:
I think it would be great to make more tools support more
external data sets as opposed to dumping *everything* into OSM.
Yep. Absolutely. To my mind this is one of the really nice things about
TileMill. I'm currently playing with it to render (UK) maps that combine OSM
and
brycenesbitt wrote:
Is there evidence of Google using streetview plus OCR for
addressing data yet?
They've integrated it into ReCaptcha:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/03/29/google-now-using-recaptcha-to-decode-street-view-addresses/
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Jeff Meyer wrote:
Ok... this is sort of an import question, but how do we / should we
credit each imported item with a link or tie to the appropriate use
statement / contributor?
source= is just for showing your working. It is not a means of providing
attribution. That should be done on the
Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
It looks pretty good from what I saw, with the obvious exception
that newer homes aren't tagged. I'm going to clean up my code
a bit and stick it up on github somewhere.
If you chaps are all dead set on doing another massive TIGER import - hey,
it's your funeral - could
On 29/11/2012 22:46, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
None of the Iowa data that I am processing originates with the US
Census or TIGER.
Sure, I should have said big massive ---k-off import rather than
TIGER. They both look the same from several thousand miles away I'm
afraid. :)
As Richard Welty
!i! wrote:
Hi, one last personal note on the mapathon and a big thank you
(literally): http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/!i!/diary/18132
And thank you, too. I've always been sceptical about this sort of event - my
vision for OSM is that we need more contributors with local knowledge, not
more
David ``Smith'' wrote:
The banner at the bottom has some issues. Helpful for new and
maybe intermediate users, but i'd like the option to turn it off.
You can do that from the options dialogue (and it remembers your
preference). I tried to put a little 'x' close box in there but, well, Flex
Charlotte Wolter wrote:
What is the status of the Toolbox? When will it be fixed? It is
difficult to do any editing without those tools. And, whose idea was
that banner? Did they ask anyone before they implemented it? Did
they test to make sure it didn't break anything?
Goodness me,
Peter Dobratz wrote:
Looking at the area in Potlatch 2, I can't figure out a
way to select just one of the overlapping objects
Select the shared node, press / . It'll select the other way. (If there
are several sharing the node, keep pressing / until you get to the one you
want.)
cheers
Martijn van Exel wrote:
Let me know if it's useful / how it can be improved.
Very very nice indeed.
If someone could figure out a JavaScripty way to tell a currently-open
Potlatch instance to jump to this location, rather than firing up a new
instance each time, that'd be great. I'll happily do
Richard Weait wrote:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/expressway
expressway=yes, seems to be a fringe tag at best.
I believe our German friends use motorroad=yes for this.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Not quite. American expressways sometimes, but not always, have
driveways, tracks and service roads connecting, German
motorroads don't.
Oh, sure. But you don't need me to tell you that slight national variations
in the exact meaning of OSM highway tagging are nothing
Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
I rather think the non-responders could have been a separate category,
and their data could have been kept.
Doesn't fly legally, sadly. You can't say I'm ignoring any rights on
this item just because the rights-holder hasn't responded to my e-mails.
That said, I did
Charlotte Wolter wrote:
Got it. Thanks for the explanation.
So, how do I load shapefiles into a separate layer? I need
someone to walk me through it. How would I do that, if I wanted to
get things like street names (and the other TIGER data)?
I'll post a how-to at the start
Current state of affairs:
- North America is mostly complete. The bot is still working in Los
Angeles and Victoria (Canada). There are one or two failed or incomplete
areas which are marked in red on the progress map; these are being
retried individually. Haiti/Dominican Republic has been
Toby Murray wrote:
The good news is that TIGER data is still available to help in
remapping. The TIGER 2011 tiles were recently discussed on
this mailing list:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TIGER_2011
Indeed: and Ian, Andy and I have this afternoon briefly discussed making
this
jerjozwik wrote:
is anyone else noticing some ways have a name, a one way
direction, some other info, but no highway tag. so they dont
actually render in potlatch 2. the only reason i noticed them
way due to the oneway arrows being drawn on top of the
satellite image.
Everything's
Charlotte Wolter wrote:
So, are you volunteering? Anyone else?
I spent a couple of hours this morning reworking the P2 source code so that
it can load the entire TIGER 2011 road files for LA County in one go without
crashing. So yeah, that counts as volunteering to fix it in a way, I think.
:)
On 19/07/2012 23:58, Charlotte Wolter wrote:
Richard,
I spent a couple of hours this morning reworking the P2 source code
so that it can load the entire TIGER 2011 road files for LA County
in one go without crashing.
That's great, but will it overwrite work that we've already done?
Also, is
Peter Dobratz wrote:
I'm trying to get a better understanding of the railway=abandoned
tag and see what the community thinks about it.
FWIW there's been a similar discussion on talk-gb recently.
The consensus seems to be railway=abandoned for railways where there's still
some physical trace
Mike N. wrote:
So they are present, and don't hurt anything. None of the
'standard maps' will bother to render them. A railway
map could use them if it needed to. I delete them if they
go through current buildings or parking lots also.
Yes, that's a sensible attitude.
I think it's also
Frederik Ramm wrote:
I have been informed that I have no clue
Actually the phrase I used was that Frederik clearly knows as much about
Potlatch as I do about JOSM. (But I suspect more.)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Evin Fairchild wrote:
I click the down-arrow next to where it says background,
and then click Vector file.
The http://a.tile.openstreetmap.us/tiger2011_roads/$z/$x/$y.png isn't a
vector background, it's a standard tiled imagery background. You add these
just by clicking 'Add' at the bottom of
Steve All wrote:
Now, when and how will this bot run? Over the entire planet.osm?
In something like one-degree of latitude at a time swaths? (That's
just a guess). Can you sense my frustration when I feel like I
should be able to just go and find these things out (maybe in a
big,
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I'm trying to do something like the European tagging:
http://www.itoworld.com/map/24
But there they have some sort of international treaty that
defines configurations.
(puts day-job hat on)
For users of a waterway, the European (CEMT) waterway classes describe,
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Is it just me, or are there more timeout magnifying glasses than
usual? Is this due to the Osmarender server going down?
AIUI there's some work going on to get local tile mirrors to serve requests.
The London tile mirror (which currently serves the US) has had some
Charlotte Wolter wrote:
I'm having that problem and still having several others in
Potlatch 2. I can't add points. If I try to add a point, I can
no longer highlight any ways. I have to save my work, go
back to View and then return to Edit, which reloads
Potlatch 2.
Charlotte, we are
Have you not checked back at the tickets to see followup comments?
On 7 Mar 2012, at 16:58, Charlotte Wolter techl...@techlady.com wrote:
Richard,
I have posted tickets twice to TRAC in the last two days, and have no
communication about my issues. What requests are you referring
Nathan Edgars II wrote:
What do you mean by red circles with no tag?
I think that's probably dupe nodes in P2.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Adding-Tiger-2011-Data-tp5526409p5526452.html
Sent from the USA mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
And there are real people using OSM in many other fields. What I mean
I think we all know what you _mean_, whether or not we agree with it. What
puzzles me is what you're trying to _achieve_.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Mike N. wrote:
Everyone will certainly enter name=Xyz Rd
for their first edit. The JOSM validator will pick this up, but I
don't remember if Potlatch 2 would notice that.
No, it won't. P2 will get inbuilt QA one day, but only when someone has the
time to do it _properly_. :)
cheers
Grant Humphries wrote:
Can anyone expand on that or point me in the direction to
find more information about this?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quick_History_Service#Changeset_Overrides
should be right. I'm sure Andrzej can supply more details if required.
cheers
Richard
--
View this
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
