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: source:name=some other value Light blue: source=survey or similar Orange: source= OS or similar Light purple: source=something other value grey: no source:name or source provided Regards, Peter On 9 June 2011 14:39, Peter Miller <peter.mil...@itoworld.com> wrote: > 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 updated the highway source map view to also colour code ways > with source=[OS streetvew/locator...] in purplel. Any that also have > source:name are shown in the previously described colours. > >> I particularly like source:name="Mrs Sylvia Secker" :) > > I thought that was great. Is that not what crowd-sources is all about? > >> If I can put in my 2p-worth: I've done a fair bit of armchair-mapping* >> (yeah yeah, boo-hiss, I know) >> >> Generally I use the OS StreetView or Locator backgrounds in Potlatch to >> spot missing roads, then I trace the roads from the Bing imagery and >> name them from the Locator. >> I attribute it as source=Bing source:name=OS_OpenData_Locator (as >> recommended at >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ordnance_Survey_Opendata#Attributing_OS >> and provided by the 'B' shortcut in Potlatch). I've never used a >> verified/surveyed tag. >> >> So I've got no objection to the proposed bot. If it can be used on a >> restricted area and sets the appropriate source tags then it would >> simply be automating something I'm doing already and I'd be delighted to >> use it. >> >> Cheers, >> Graham >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/GrahamS >> >> * While it would be nice if every single road was properly surveyed (and >> I do survey when I can), but I just don't think that is a practical way >> to make progress with the map. >> My local areas (Tynedale, Newcastle, Gateshead, South Shields, Alnwick) >> were all pretty blank and there didn't seem to be a much editing going >> on at all. >> So I take a more pragmatic approach of surveying where I can, recording >> GPS routes when I'm out in the car, but also armchair mapping to fill in >> big blanks. Judging by Peter's breakdown of "source" tags I'm not alone. >> Apologies if this goes against the spirit of OSM, but I'd rather get >> the basic road geometry and names out of the way. All maps have those >> and they are nothing special. Once they are done with we can concentrate >> on the finer details that seem to be the real unique strength of OSM. >> > > Agreed. > > > Peter > >> > _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
