date:20090217

Regarding http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/left_name
, Andy Allan wrote:

 And nobody pays attention. 

Probably as a result of there being no software support (because nobody
paid attention...), and because it's historically been a comparatively
rare use case. Though I'm working right now with a group of local
cyclists who might plausibly want to denote which side of a two-way
street a given farcility is on so that they can be more effectively
avoided. At least I think that's the reason...

 except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in
 which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be
 important.

For this it would have to be important. Can people take a look at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Way_Direction_Dependant and
make sure we've caught everything? Thanks.

-- 
Andrew Chadwick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Tim Waters (chippy)

A few points to throw in the mix:

* Do we have people who want to write a blog for the project as a
whole?  - Blogging requires quite a bit of commitment, especially for
such a fast moving project, if things get busy elsewhere, the blogs
tend to suffer.

* Assuming we have enough people interested, should we have some kind
of editorial policy (i.e. no Wee Poo Street notifications, or max
two LOLcat pictures a month)?

* If we create a new blog - can/should we import the relevant tagged
entries from opengeodata?

* Can we simply rename opengeodata or point to blog subdomain? (Where
is it hosted?)

tim

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Dave Stubbs

2009/2/17 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com:
 On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann
 nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote:
 Andy Allan wrote:

And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big
discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up
again a few months later.

 Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the
 aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy
 to understand.

 And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have
 no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the
 right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or
 the left, depending on which way you are facing. The only place that
 right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do*
 have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect).

 Let's say you have a church beside a road. If it's a oneway street, it
 makes some kind of sense to say it's halfway along the road, over on
 the left.

 Let's say you have a church beside a two-way road. If I said it's
 halfway along the road, over on the right, you still wouldn't know
 which side of the road it is on.

 Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are
 tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like
 every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but
 that doesn't mean it's a great idea. Editor support is less important
 - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't
 even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and
 except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in
 which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be
 important.


Of course you expect any decent editor to solve the problem by letting
the user choose which side of the way to apply the feature to. It
really doesn't matter what the tagging is, the editor will have to
solve the UI problem in almost exactly the same way.

The only way of avoiding this issue in some non-confusing way is to
not use tagging as the answer. Some complex relation with a this
side member which still needs editor support. Or just adding another
way to the database for each left/right feature, which becomes hard
when you try to connect things together.

The reason this gets ignored is because it's hard, and most solutions
don't work for normal people without editor support, and our editors
don't support it. Plus every time someone comes up with a solution,
everybody points out the problems with it, which mostly seem to be
worrying about the data being accidentally corrupted (ie: reversing
ways), or not being easy for newbies/non-techies. And that's true for
just about any method of entering data that isn't simple.


Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Dave Stubbs

2009/2/16 Norbert Hoffmann nhoffm...@spamfence.net:
 Andy Allan wrote:

And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big
discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up
again a few months later.

 Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the
 aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy
 to understand.


Umm... all the current editors are key aware.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)

Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project
should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community
announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements. Announcements are
easy as they report fact and it's just a matter of deciding if the
announcement is worthy of publication on a blog or not. News is a little
more subjective so needs a little more care. OSMF stuff is easy because OSMF
can decide internally before an announcement is made.

If the OSM community can establish a small moderator group they could
receive potential blog posts from anyone, the image of the week approach
as suggested by Peter. The group would hopefully also deal with language
issues if a post needs putting up in more than one language (alternative
versions perhaps on the wiki for instance).

It would also be nice for OSM to have a permanent archive of Steve's
personal blog posts to OGD that he and others made about the development and
progress of OSM in the early months/years. Steve, would you be ok with those
entries being copied?

Cheers

Andy

-Original Message-
From: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of 80n
Sent: 17 February 2009 11:02 AM
To: SteveC
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:18 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:



   On 17 Feb 2009, at 00:18, Frederik Ramm wrote:

Hi,
   
SteveC wrote:
As you both know several years of work went in to that blog, and
not  just by me.  Maybe you should both think twice before
dismissing it all.
   
It would help if, instead of
   
* singling out participants (you both),
* making false allegation (that they wanted to dismiss it all),
and
* implying that their postings are thoughtless (think twice)
   
you would simply do your part in answering the valid questions
raised, namely by 80n and, after your posting, Gustav:


   Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics.



NOT politics at all.

In my post, which appears to have been misinterpreted, I asked three
questions.  Two were rhetorical and answered in the following sentence:



   So, what makes opengeodata.org http://opengeodata.org/  the
official OpenStreetMap blog anyway?  It's linked prominently on the OSM
front page.



   Who contributes to it?  I have an account there and most posts
appear
to be from OSMF board members but I don't know if all board members have an
account and in the past there have been posts from non-board members as
well.



The rest of my post was largely informational, sharing my knowledge of the
current situation and this was followed by my third question which was:



   So who's got any ideas or suggestions?



Steve, I don't normally write rhetorical questions, its not my usual
writing style, so I'm sure you misread my post and responded impulsively.
But, perhaps you can provide some ideas or suggestions about how to make it
clearer what each blog represents.


80n


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.25/1956 - Release Date: 02/16/09
18:31:00




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings

2009-02-17 Thread Michael


 I'm trying to render some buildings with holes in and using
 multipolygon relations to do it, but they don't always render. See,
 for example Whitehall[1], where the HMRC/Treasury building is rendered
 with its holes but the Foreign Office building to the north of it
 doesn't have its multiple holes rendered, nor does the smaller
 building to the east of this which only has one inner and one outer
 part.

 Would be grateful for any insight.
 

 Mapnik seems to have trouble with more than one hole.
 if you look closely the HMRC/Treasury is not mapped as one, but two
 buildings, each with one hole.

 As to the building to the east, I don't know.
   
For me also buildings with multiple holes work fine, but only when the
outer part goes clockwise and the inner parts go anticlockwise and are
without any tag. Even with a created_by tag the holes had not been
created for this example
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.139768lon=11.549817zoom=17.
Without any tags in the inner parts the holes appeared.
The created_by tags of the inner parts in example [1] may be the problem.

Cheers,
Michael

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread SteveC

Yes and at the board meeting we should talk about osmf just owning the ogd 
site. Ogd has great traffic and ranking and id suggest not throwing the baby 
out with the bathwater.


Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote:

Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project
should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community
announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements. Announcements are
easy as they report fact and it's just a matter of deciding if the
announcement is worthy of publication on a blog or not. News is a little
more subjective so needs a little more care. OSMF stuff is easy because OSMF
can decide internally before an announcement is made.

If the OSM community can establish a small moderator group they could
receive potential blog posts from anyone, the image of the week approach
as suggested by Peter. The group would hopefully also deal with language
issues if a post needs putting up in more than one language (alternative
versions perhaps on the wiki for instance).

It would also be nice for OSM to have a permanent archive of Steve's
personal blog posts to OGD that he and others made about the development and
progress of OSM in the early months/years. Steve, would you be ok with those
entries being copied?

Cheers

Andy

-Original Message-
From: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of 80n
Sent: 17 February 2009 11:02 AM
To: SteveC
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 8:18 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:



  On 17 Feb 2009, at 00:18, Frederik Ramm wrote:

   Hi,
  
   SteveC wrote:
   As you both know several years of work went in to that blog, and
   not  just by me.  Maybe you should both think twice before
   dismissing it all.
  
   It would help if, instead of
  
   * singling out participants (you both),
   * making false allegation (that they wanted to dismiss it all),
and
   * implying that their postings are thoughtless (think twice)
  
   you would simply do your part in answering the valid questions
   raised, namely by 80n and, after your posting, Gustav:


  Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics.



NOT politics at all.

In my post, which appears to have been misinterpreted, I asked three
questions.  Two were rhetorical and answered in the following sentence:



  So, what makes opengeodata.org http://opengeodata.org/  the
official OpenStreetMap blog anyway?  It's linked prominently on the OSM
front page.



  Who contributes to it?  I have an account there and most posts
appear
to be from OSMF board members but I don't know if all board members have an
account and in the past there have been posts from non-board members as
well.



The rest of my post was largely informational, sharing my knowledge of the
current situation and this was followed by my third question which was:



  So who's got any ideas or suggestions?



Steve, I don't normally write rhetorical questions, its not my usual
writing style, so I'm sure you misread my post and responded impulsively.
But, perhaps you can provide some ideas or suggestions about how to make it
clearer what each blog represents.


80n


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.25/1956 - Release Date: 02/16/09
18:31:00




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings

2009-02-17 Thread Michael


 nor does the smaller building to the east of this which only has one inner 
 and one outer part.  
   
The smaller building has an error in the outer part (double node at the
top left outer corner). This probably causes the error in not displaying
the inner hole.

Cheers,
Michael


 [1] 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.50283lon=-0.12689zoom=17layers=B000FTF
   

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

Dave Stubbs wrote:

 The only way of avoiding this issue in some non-confusing way is to
 not use tagging as the answer. Some complex relation with a this
 side member which still needs editor support. Or just adding another
 way to the database for each left/right feature, which becomes hard
 when you try to connect things together.

Particularly when one of the side things you might want to tag is a
cycleway or a strip of parking between the vehicle carriageway (part of
our concept of a highway) and the foot sidewalk/pavement (also included
in our highways, as a sort of bonus feature). Sticking your fingers in
your ears and humming is a *fine* strategy to adopt when people begin
talking about relations for this sort of thing, particularly when you
can assume that there'd probably be a fairly reasonable, natural spatial
hierarchy to such things.

OSM simply doesn't tag to that degree of detail most of the time. If it
did, it'd be implemented as a full-on GIS system. I personally want a
system where I never need to tag things like
http://realcycling.blogspot.com/2009/02/arrowing-experience-in-tavistock-place.html
in any level of detail other than cycleway=rgh! (on the left)

But saying has some things along the side of it is something we can do
already. It'd be helpful sometimes to add on the left to that.

-- 
Andrew Chadwick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Intermittent rendering of multipolygons for buildings

2009-02-17 Thread Dan Karran

2009/2/17 Michael Telgkamp michael.telgk...@gmail.com:

 nor does the smaller building to the east of this which only has one inner 
 and one outer part.

 The smaller building has an error in the outer part (double node at the
 top left outer corner). This probably causes the error in not displaying
 the inner hole.

Ah, I hadn't spotted that in Potlatch.. thanks!


Cheers,
Dan

-- 
Dan Karran
d...@karran.net
www.dankarran.com

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

 Editor support is less
 important
 - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who
 don't
 even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap -
 and
 except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing
 in
 which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has*
 to be
 important.

I don't think people are going to arbitrarily use the :left/:right
tagging, except for cases where they feel it is necessary. It's
certainly not something people new to the project will do as a first
thing, and will only ever need it if they come up against something
they want to map which is more complicated. Hopefully then they'd
ask either here, on OSM-newbies or read the wiki to find a solution.

So left and right relative to the direction of the way in the
database (as displayed bottom left in Potlatch or with arrow heads
in JOSM), is a logical solution for where you have things on only
one side of the road (perhaps something like pavement:left=yes,
pavement:right = no or something). Similarly the :forward/:backward
proposal for where speed limits differ in opposite directions and
other such cases. 

Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1
for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't
work out why that is necessary.

Ed



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Bernd Raichle

On Tuesday, 17 February 2009 10:36:16 +,
Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com writes:
  On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann
  nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote:
   Andy Allan wrote:
  
  And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big
  discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes up
  again a few months later.
  
   Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - and the
   aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant is not so easy
   to understand.
  
  And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have
  no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the
  right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or
  the left, depending on which way you are facing.

Ok, if this is true, what is _your_ solution for the problem of
placing something on the left or right side of a road ... or a
direction-dependent tagging of a way attribute (e.g. oneway for a set
of vehicles, different speed limits for both directions etc.)?

Roads or ways have no ``inherent, real-world, direction'', but they
have a direction within the OSM model.  A way is represented by an
ordered set of nodes, thus the way has something which is called
digitization direction.  If I want to tag attributes/properties
which are true only relative to this digitization direction, I will
use a _simple_ means to specify this ... and after reading all the
current and past discussions about left/right or in direction/
against direction IMHO a direction relative tag _is_ a simple and
normal concept.


The only place that
  right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do*
  have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect).

One-way roads do _not_ have an inherent direction.  I am usually
allowed and I can walk _against_ a one-way road.  And I know a lot of
one-way roads where I can cycle against the direction, or where busses
are allowed to drive against the direction.  This property is
vehicle-dependent.

Additionally the current special handling of oneway and its special
cases (oneway=-1 for a oneway against the digitization direction!)
shows that there is a need for a concept for direction-dependent tags.
Why not use the inherent digitization direction, define and document a
simple tagging concept for direction dependent tags, and add support
for it to all editors and tools as it is already done for the oneway
tag?


[...]
  
  Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are
  tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like
  every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but
  that doesn't mean it's a great idea.

It is not the best idea.  On the other hand I have seen no other idea
which is simpler to understand.

   Editor support is less important
  - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't
  even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and
  except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in
  which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be
  important.

If I want to add a direction- or side-dependent tag/object to the map,
the editors have to show the current (digitization) direction of the
road.  To edit a map we use a lot of mental constructs and
abstractions of the real world (a real world road is not a line with a
few pixel width, a real world intersection consists not only of two
lines connected by a simple node etc.).


-bernd

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Norbert Hoffmann

Andy Allan wrote:

And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have
no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the
right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or
the left, depending on which way you are facing.

And that's why in real-world you would say Look in the direction to the
railstation and then the church is on your left.

If you want to describe objects with a handedness you'll need some concept
of sides. If you call it left/right, green/red or nearer to some related
point at the side/farther from ... doesn't really make a difference.

Perhaps, if always the same proposal is made (Let's use the order stored
in the db to define a /direction/ of a way and then use right and left
to /name/ the sides.) this is the most user friendly method?

Norbert has followed the discussions for only the last 1 1/2 years


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Mike Harris

While sympathetic to the underlying need being discussed in this thread, I
suspect there is a further problem. Although a way has an intrinsic sense in
OSM, this is fairly volatile! All it needs is someone to reverse a way - and
this can happen rather easily, say, when combining two ways with the same
tags but different senses (yes - there is a warning but it's all too easy to
click through). Reversing the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and
'right' descriptors with their differing tags! This leads me to wonder
whether an absolute sense (north, south, etc.) is still better even though
it might require that a way is divided a bit. Most ways do have a 'general'
compass direction for long segments even if this is often more human-obvious
than machine-obvious. The main exceptions are likely to be short residential
streets on housing developments etc. - 'circles' etc. - but these are less
likely to require unilateral tagging.

Btw, I have encountered the same problem with canals. Some mappers describe
towpaths as being 'left' or 'right'. Personally, I prefer to map the towpath
as a separate way alongside the canal - with the added advantage that this
allows me to tag the towpath, e.g. with access rights, surface condition,
barriers, reference numbers, route relations, etc.

Perhaps this would also be a better approach for e.g. cycleways alongside
motor roads? Although, I have to admit that it doesnt solve the problem of
unilateral naming.

Mike Harris

-Original Message-
From: David Earl [mailto:da...@frankieandshadow.com] 
Sent: 17 February 2009 11:10
To: Andy Allan
Cc: Norbert Hoffmann; talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside
features)

On 17/02/2009 10:36, Andy Allan wrote:
 On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Norbert Hoffmann 
 nhoffm...@spamfence.net wrote:
 Andy Allan wrote:

 And every time using :left and :right comes up, we all have a big 
 discussion about it and then nobody pays any attention and it comes 
 up again a few months later.
 Perhaps this is because the concept leftright is so simple - 
 and the aversion against editors, that are not totally key-ignorant 
 is not so easy to understand.
 
 And nobody pays attention. The main problem is that two-way roads have 
 no inherent, real-world, direction - neither side of the road is the 
 right or the left. Or rather, both sides of the road are the right or 
 the left, depending on which way you are facing. The only place that 
 right and left has any intrinsic sense is on one-way roads, which *do* 
 have an inherent direction (and signs to that effect).
 
 Let's say you have a church beside a road. If it's a oneway street, it 
 makes some kind of sense to say it's halfway along the road, over on 
 the left.
 
 Let's say you have a church beside a two-way road. If I said it's 
 halfway along the road, over on the right, you still wouldn't know 
 which side of the road it is on.
 
 Now the problem is that most people at the moment in OpenStreetMap are 
 tech-heads, and are so used to mental constructs and abstractions like 
 every road having a completely arbitrary intrinsic direction - but 
 that doesn't mean it's a great idea. Editor support is less important
 - and far easier to fix - than explaining to all the people who don't 
 even realise that all roads have a direction in openstreetmap - and 
 except for oneway roads, I have no idea which ways are pointing in 
 which directions, and it shouldn't be important unless it *has* to be 
 important.

Real People often talk about the church on the left when you're heading
towards somewhereville, so it's not *that* alien a concept. And in terms of
the other concepts you have to understand to edit the map, it's hardly a big
one. And you do already have to know about it - for one way streets and also
for rivers and also for boundaries where exactly this left/right issue
arises.

So I think you're overstating the problem with this, and the reason it isn't
widely adopted is because there has been no consensus in the past, not
because it is fundamentally hard.

There's only really two ways to deal with this geometrical relationship: 
relative or absolute. left/right is relative and suffers from lack of a
natural direction to base it on; north/south/east/west is absolute, so is
independent of any reversals done in the editor, but suffers badly on roads
which turn more than 90 - 180 degrees - so you'd have to split them, which
is just as arbitrary a rule as using the direction, though probably rarer.

Since for any N people discussing something in OSM there always seem to be
N+1 opinions, the only way this is likely to be resolved is if people just
do it (in their preferred way) and see if one of them wins. It's more likely
to win if the renderers act on it.

Incidentally, :left/:right (or :north, etc) have a problem with languages on
names. So if the name on the left (north) is different, using name:left
(name:north) would have to be

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread OJ W

In my original post, I hadn't realised that blog links tended to be
only official project announcements. I assumed that blog would show
all the stuff which is happening in the OSM project, in a
community-led way that reflects the wiki-like nature of the project.

However, the OSM front page seems already to make this distinction
between News and blogs, since the hyperlinked text is currently
News / blog.

So how about linking the two words separately?  News can be
important changes from approved people that affect the whole world at
once, like new servers etc.  Blogs can be all the interesting stuff
that's happening locally, like new areas being mapped, people testing
new mapping ideas, random photos and mapping stories, announcements
from non-OSM entities like cloudmade, etc.


p.s. how come the OSM front page doesn't contain a link to the
foundation website?

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

Mike Harris wrote:
 While sympathetic to the underlying need being discussed in this thread, I
 suspect there is a further problem. Although a way has an intrinsic sense in
 OSM, this is fairly volatile! All it needs is someone to reverse a way - and
 this can happen rather easily, say, when combining two ways with the same
 tags but different senses (yes - there is a warning but it's all too easy to
 click through). Reversing the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and
 'right' descriptors with their differing tags!

Yes, it'd be nice and simple to implement. Just swap any :left and
:right -suffixed tags. That's why
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left#Consequences_for_software
discusses it in some detail.

If people whine about it enough, I'll make osm2go do something like
this, as a sort of reference implementation :) We're probably being lazy
about oneway, and I'm entirely in favour of building simple smarts like
this into an editor that's as simple and Joe-Consumer-focused as osm2go:
I want to make it difficult for Joe Consumer to do the wrong thing
accidentally without getting in his/her face (no warning dialogs, just
do the right thing given that there's a single, obvious, 99%-of-the-time
right thing to do here)

 This leads me to wonder
 whether an absolute sense (north, south, etc.) is still better even though
 it might require that a way is divided a bit. Most ways do have a 'general'
 compass direction for long segments even if this is often more human-obvious
 than machine-obvious. The main exceptions are likely to be short residential
 streets on housing developments etc. - 'circles' etc. - but these are less
 likely to require unilateral tagging.

Hmm. An argument from plausible estate design; innovative! :)

For the reasons you stated, :north, :south etc would break down for some
ways. Also, if an editor rotates the way, it'd also have to rotate
some of the tags. Some of the time. It's really quite a bit more
complicated than a :left/:right scheme for coding, and it doesn't buy
you much more expressiveness.

For points, it makes more sense. But pub:heading=degrees and
pub:distance=metres would be finer-grained for those XD

 Btw, I have encountered the same problem with canals. Some mappers describe
 towpaths as being 'left' or 'right'. Personally, I prefer to map the towpath
 as a separate way alongside the canal - with the added advantage that this
 allows me to tag the towpath, e.g. with access rights, surface condition,
 barriers, reference numbers, route relations, etc.

For towpaths, I'd agree. They're 'sufficiently segregated' from the
waterway in my head (you have to change mode fairly significantly to go
from one to the other!)

 Perhaps this would also be a better approach for e.g. cycleways alongside
 motor roads? Although, I have to admit that it doesn’t solve the problem of
 unilateral naming.

Sometimes, sometimes not. Cycleways where you can/sometimes have to
rejoin the ordinary carriageway should not be, :left and :right (or
cycleway=opposite_*, broken though it is) do that more plausibly because
then you're dealing with the same road. Cycleways that are long,
continuous, separated by a grass verge, or go along the sides of 70MPH
roads get the separate treatment when I tag them (often they need things
like lit=yes/no too, those ones).



-- 
Andrew Chadwick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Tom Hughes

OJ W wrote:

 p.s. how come the OSM front page doesn't contain a link to the
 foundation website?

Hysterical Raisins.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://www.compton.nu/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread OJ W

and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by:

* clicking on one of the external links (map key)
* selecting a map layer (data viewer)
* selecting a tab (export)
* submitting a form (search)

it seems we like to give people a nice surprise when they use certain
UI elements, different to what they're expecting, given that:

* all the other hyperlinks go to a different webpage
* selecting any of the other map layers changes the map layer
* selecting any of the other tabs changes the tab being displayed




On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
 OJ W wrote:

 p.s. how come the OSM front page doesn't contain a link to the
 foundation website?

 Hysterical Raisins.

 Tom

 --
 Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
 http://www.compton.nu/


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Tom Hughes

OJ W wrote:
 and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by:
 
 * clicking on one of the external links (map key)
 * selecting a map layer (data viewer)
 * selecting a tab (export)
 * submitting a form (search)

Because those are the things which need them?

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://www.compton.nu/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymme trical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Jukka Rahkonen

Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists andrewc-email-lists at piffle.org writes:

 
 Further to Tobias's raising of :mode, :wet, :direction etc. for 
 pseudovoting, I'd like to raise a general method for tagging properties 
 of the two sides of the road:
 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left
 
 The proposal suggests an interpretation of suffixes like
 
property:left=value
property:right=value


I see one big trouble.  If not so clever editor (program or human being) is
changing the direction of the road withour swapping left/right keys, nobody can
correct the situation without local knowlegde of the area mapped.  Left or right
are not enough by themselves but there must be some additional information.
Left is in the west tag would give more exact information as well as Left, as
user xx saw it on January, 29th 2009.  


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Mike Harris

Much encouraged that there is a coder (?) view that it's pretty simple to 
implement automated left /right tag reversal if a way is reversed (and I assume 
the main renderers are sense-aware where ways are concerned?). This was my main 
concern and if this is generally agreed to be the case I'll switch from the 
'not sure' camp into the 'left / right' camp.


Mike Harris

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Chadwick [mailto:a.t.chadw...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Andrew 
Chadwick (email lists)
Sent: 17 February 2009 13:25
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Cc: Mike Harris; 'David Earl'; 'Andy Allan'; 'Norbert Hoffmann'
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside 
features)

Mike Harris wrote:
 While sympathetic to the underlying need being discussed in this 
 thread, I suspect there is a further problem. Although a way has an 
 intrinsic sense in OSM, this is fairly volatile! All it needs is 
 someone to reverse a way - and this can happen rather easily, say, 
 when combining two ways with the same tags but different senses (yes - 
 there is a warning but it's all too easy to click through). Reversing 
 the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and 'right' descriptors with 
 their differing tags!

Yes, it'd be nice and simple to implement. Just swap any :left and :right 
-suffixed tags. That's why 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left#Consequences_for_software
discusses it in some detail.

If people whine about it enough, I'll make osm2go do something like this, as a 
sort of reference implementation :) We're probably being lazy about oneway, and 
I'm entirely in favour of building simple smarts like this into an editor 
that's as simple and Joe-Consumer-focused as osm2go:
I want to make it difficult for Joe Consumer to do the wrong thing accidentally 
without getting in his/her face (no warning dialogs, just do the right thing 
given that there's a single, obvious, 99%-of-the-time right thing to do here)

 This leads me to wonder
 whether an absolute sense (north, south, etc.) is still better even 
 though it might require that a way is divided a bit. Most ways do have a 
 'general'
 compass direction for long segments even if this is often more 
 human-obvious than machine-obvious. The main exceptions are likely to 
 be short residential streets on housing developments etc. - 'circles' 
 etc. - but these are less likely to require unilateral tagging.

Hmm. An argument from plausible estate design; innovative! :)

For the reasons you stated, :north, :south etc would break down for some ways. 
Also, if an editor rotates the way, it'd also have to rotate
some of the tags. Some of the time. It's really quite a bit more complicated 
than a :left/:right scheme for coding, and it doesn't buy you much more 
expressiveness.

For points, it makes more sense. But pub:heading=degrees and 
pub:distance=metres would be finer-grained for those XD

 Btw, I have encountered the same problem with canals. Some mappers 
 describe towpaths as being 'left' or 'right'. Personally, I prefer to 
 map the towpath as a separate way alongside the canal - with the added 
 advantage that this allows me to tag the towpath, e.g. with access 
 rights, surface condition, barriers, reference numbers, route relations, etc.

For towpaths, I'd agree. They're 'sufficiently segregated' from the waterway in 
my head (you have to change mode fairly significantly to go from one to the 
other!)

 Perhaps this would also be a better approach for e.g. cycleways 
 alongside motor roads? Although, I have to admit that it doesn’t solve 
 the problem of unilateral naming.

Sometimes, sometimes not. Cycleways where you can/sometimes have to rejoin the 
ordinary carriageway should not be, :left and :right (or cycleway=opposite_*, 
broken though it is) do that more plausibly because then you're dealing with 
the same road. Cycleways that are long, continuous, separated by a grass verge, 
or go along the sides of 70MPH roads get the separate treatment when I tag them 
(often they need things like lit=yes/no too, those ones).



--
Andrew Chadwick


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
 Andrew Chadwick (mailing lists andrewc-email-lists at piffle.org writes:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left

 The proposal suggests an interpretation of suffixes like

property:left=value
property:right=value

 I see one big trouble.  If not so clever editor (program or human being) is
 changing the direction of the road withour swapping left/right keys, nobody 
 can
 correct the situation without local knowlegde of the area mapped.  Left or 
 right
 are not enough by themselves but there must be some additional information.
 Left is in the west tag would give more exact information as well as Left, 
 as
 user xx saw it on January, 29th 2009.  

Also true of oneway, of course, yet people seem to cope with that :)

Corner case I just though of: oneway:left and oneway:right. Arguably a
bit contrived and pointless, but presumably you'd have to flip twice...

I'd say that the software aspect covered under
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left#Consequences_for_software
, but if you think we're missing anything, do comment on the wiki page.

-- 
Andrew Chadwick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreet map.or g?

2009-02-17 Thread Tom Chance


On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:50:04 +, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
 OJ W wrote:
 and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by:
 
 * clicking on one of the external links (map key)
 * selecting a map layer (data viewer)
 * selecting a tab (export)
 * submitting a form (search)
 
 Because those are the things which need them?

Well that's fine, but it's coming at the home page from a coder's point of
view rather than a user's. I think it's fair to say that, from a usability
standpoint, the OSM home page is pretty terrible. There's very little
consistency, and language/graphics are often far from obvious.

Clicking on the 'view' tab or the slightly cryptic 'permalink' text at the
bottom right to get a URL to share with friends? Couldn't be more obvious!

We can learn a lot from CloudMade's map homepage -
http://maps.cloudmade.com

Not that I have the time to do much about this, and I'm terrible with JS,
but it's not enough to dismiss OJW's and others' concerns as though they're
unfounded!

Regards,
Tom

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Tom Hughes

Tom Chance wrote:
 On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:50:04 +, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:
 OJ W wrote:
 and how come sidebars on the map can be opened by:

 * clicking on one of the external links (map key)
 * selecting a map layer (data viewer)
 * selecting a tab (export)
 * submitting a form (search)
 Because those are the things which need them?
 
 Well that's fine, but it's coming at the home page from a coder's point of
 view rather than a user's. I think it's fair to say that, from a usability
 standpoint, the OSM home page is pretty terrible. There's very little
 consistency, and language/graphics are often far from obvious.
 
 Clicking on the 'view' tab or the slightly cryptic 'permalink' text at the
 bottom right to get a URL to share with friends? Couldn't be more obvious!
 
 We can learn a lot from CloudMade's map homepage -
 http://maps.cloudmade.com
 
 Not that I have the time to do much about this, and I'm terrible with JS,
 but it's not enough to dismiss OJW's and others' concerns as though they're
 unfounded!

Tell me where I dismissed anything. I bet you can't, can you? There's a 
reason for that - I didn't dismiss anything.

All I did was answer his question.

I never said it was a good reason, though I personally don't think that 
the sidebar is a particularly major problem compared to many other 
things on the home page. Than again I'm just a programmer so what would 
I know about all these high falutin design things.

Equally permalink is a fairly standard name for that concept now, even 
though (originally at least) it clearly wasn't something that most 
people could be expected to know.

I would also point out that the site was never intended as a do 
everything end user mapping site like google maps, as that was never the 
aim of the project. The aim of the project was to create and provide 
data for other people to use to create flash end user sites.

All of which is besides the point as I will be the first person to admit 
that I am completely and utterly useless designer, so if we have anybody 
that wants to help out with improving such things then I'm sure we'd all 
be very glad to hear from them.

The only thing I ask is that any media/marketing types try to avoid 
overloading my buzzword filter too much. I really don't need to have any 
more synergies leveraged thank you.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://www.compton.nu/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Matthias Julius

Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk writes:

 Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:

 So, we have a pile of good intentioned legacy here. OGD carries posts on all
 sorts of open geo data stuff in the early days (Aug 2004) including the most
 important one http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=2 relating to OSM. Over time
 Steve and the others he handed out access to have posted principally about
 OSM but I'd argue it's never been the official OSM blog, it was just that it
 was the only blog where official stuff re OSM ended up.
 
 Should OSM have a separate blog, probably
 Blog or announcements list?

I'd vote for the latter.

Or both and a gateway in between.

Matthias

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Andy Allan

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote:

 Equally permalink is a fairly standard name for that concept now, even
 though (originally at least) it clearly wasn't something that most
 people could be expected to know.

I get complaints about the lack of permalink on opencyclemap.org ,
even though there is one but with plain-english text instead of
jargon. Ho hum.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

 I see one big trouble.  If not so clever editor (program or
 human being) is
 changing the direction of the road withour swapping left/right
 keys, nobody can
 correct the situation without local knowlegde of the area
 mapped.  Left or right
 are not enough by themselves but there must be some additional
 information.
 Left is in the west tag would give more exact information as
 well as Left, as
 user xx saw it on January, 29th 2009.

As I understand it (from last time this discussion cropped up here)
JOSM and Potlatch already handle the reversals of :left and :right
tags, which covers most users. You could just as well say that any
way with no matching public GPS trace or alternate source tag should
be removed as there is insufficient information without local
knowledge to know if it is correct or not.

Ed



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Jonas Krückel (John07)

Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) schrieb:
 Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project
 should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community
 announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements. Announcements are
 easy as they report fact and it's just a matter of deciding if the
 announcement is worthy of publication on a blog or not. News is a little
 more subjective so needs a little more care. OSMF stuff is easy because OSMF
 can decide internally before an announcement is made.

 If the OSM community can establish a small moderator group they could
 receive potential blog posts from anyone, the image of the week approach
 as suggested by Peter. The group would hopefully also deal with language
 issues if a post needs putting up in more than one language (alternative
 versions perhaps on the wiki for instance).

 It would also be nice for OSM to have a permanent archive of Steve's
 personal blog posts to OGD that he and others made about the development and
 progress of OSM in the early months/years.
+1
A OSM specific blog would also help to inform people on one place about 
important news. A lot of people can´t read the mailinglists, forums and 
all the wiki sites, thus it is hard for them to stay informed about 
important issues.

Jonas


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Russ Nelson


On Feb 17, 2009, at 6:02 AM, 80n wrote:

 Steve, I don't normally write rhetorical questions, its not my usual  
 writing style, so I'm sure you misread my post and responded  
 impulsively.  But, perhaps you can provide some ideas or suggestions  
 about how to make it clearer what each blog represents.


This seems like the essence of the discussion: some people seem  
concerned that OSMF has no news outlet which represents only the  
board's collective or individual voice, and SteveC seems concerned  
that the board not lose the value of his work in promoting  
Opengeodata.org.

I suggest that SteveC create, and the board use, an special user named  
OpenStreetMapFoundation, so that people will recognize that all OGD  
blog entries from that user are official OSM announcements.  Does that  
leave anyone unsatisfied?

--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

Regarding http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/right_left ,
Ed Loach wrote:

 As I understand it (from last time this discussion cropped up here)
 JOSM and Potlatch already handle the reversals of :left and :right
 tags, which covers most users.

This is not the case with either JOSM 1318 or JOSM 1418 (the current
josm-latest.jar). I've tested with cycleway:left=track as well as
foo:left=42. Probably this would need to be raised as a separate bug if
people express general satisfaction.

Can't speak for Potla(t)ch, not tried.

-- 
Andrew Chadwick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] NHD Dataset

2009-02-17 Thread Andy Allan

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:

 There really is not much other choice, as areas grow larger and the old
 idea of simply drawing touching polygons relies on a rendering style
 without a casing around the polygon.

Yep, please avoid making one polygon by using two or more touching
polygons. The cyclemap already renders forests with translucent fill
and an edge symbolizer, which nicely shows up this problem. Frederik's
advanced multipolygon concept is the best approach.

Cheers,
Andy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

Mike Harris wrote:
 Much encouraged that there is a coder (?)

Well, coder of a sort. It certainly would help if the suffixes were
generally well known, documented and consistent so that if something has
a :left on the end of it, software doing reversals knows that it should
flip it to a :right every time without having to care about the part
before the colon.

 view that it's pretty
 simple to implement automated left /right tag reversal if a way is
 reversed (and I assume the main renderers are sense-aware where ways
 are concerned?).

Sense-aware? Yes, given that they all render oneway just fine. Ways are
defined as an ordered set of nodes too, so the bit in the middle should
be OK.

(Whether something *should* be rendered is a different issue, of course,
and always should be. There'd be a case for rendering side-specific
names or parking in the default view, and bike lanes for the cycle
layer, IMO. But that's just MO.)

-- 
Andrew Chadwick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

 This is not the case with either JOSM 1318 or JOSM 1418 (the
 current
 josm-latest.jar). I've tested with cycleway:left=track as well
 as
 foo:left=42. Probably this would need to be raised as a
 separate bug if
 people express general satisfaction.
 
 Can't speak for Potla(t)ch, not tried.

I guess I should have tested, rather than relying on my memory. This post:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2008-October/030389.html
does suggest that JOSM supported it. 

I also think I tried it in Potlatch recently when I reversed a boundary way 
with district:left/district:right tags (or maybe county:left/county:right 
tags), though haven’t gone back to remember whether I've remembered the tagging 
correctly. I do know I used the Potlatch button to copy tags from one boundary 
way section to another and then (using local knowledge) ended up having to swap 
all the left and right values in one case.

Ed



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

 This is not the case with either JOSM 1318 or JOSM 1418 (the
 current
 josm-latest.jar). I've tested with cycleway:left=track as well
 as
 foo:left=42. Probably this would need to be raised as a
 separate bug if
 people express general satisfaction.

Actually, I've now checked the source, and it looks like whether it supports it 
or not is set through user preferences:

if (Main.pref.getBoolean(tag-correction.reverse-way, true)) {

And I don't think tag-correction.reverse-way exists under advanced preferences 
by default.

Ed



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Russ Nelson


On Feb 17, 2009, at 7:50 AM, Mike Harris wrote:

  Reversing the ways then, of course, reverses the 'left' and
 'right' descriptors with their differing tags!

Well, of course.  I would expect that all editors would rename right - 
  left and left - right when a way is reversed.  Don't they do that  
already?

--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] [tagging] Maritime borders - Voting - (boundary=maritime)

2009-02-17 Thread Gustav Foseid

After discussions on both the mailing list and the wiki we (that is myself
and Skippern) have opened the proposed boundary=maritime for voting at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders

We think this is the best way suggested to tag the whole hiearchy of
maritime borders, in a way that is useful for both renderers, other data
consumers and taggers. The proposal takes into account various claims of
sovereignty, ranging from the baseline to the EEZ.

Please be aware that this is a tag that is closely related to core map
features (national borders), and the result of this vote is likely to
influence most maps made using OSM data.


Regards

Gustav and Skippern (aka Aun)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging of maritime borders

2009-02-17 Thread Gustav Foseid

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:

 I would suggest that maritime borders are not tagged the same way as land
 borders. Should we have a new tag for maritime borders? Stop tagging them?
 Ignore the problem?


The proposal authored by Aun (Skippern) is now open for voting at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders

 - Gustav
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OSM wiki local copy

2009-02-17 Thread Igor Shubovych

Hello all,

My friend asked me this question:

Does anybody know how to download the local copy of OSM wiki? For instance,
Wikipedia guys do provide DB dumps (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_database) but i've found no such
thing on wiki.openstreetmap.org . I've failed with Wget - robots.txt says
wget is a frequent problem so disallowed. Are there ways to have my very
own copy of OSM wiki?

Could you please help?

Best regards,
Igor Shubovych
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Dave Stubbs


 Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1
 for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't
 work out why that is necessary.



Because none of the editors had a reverse way tool :-). I think JOSM
could reverse a segment, but that's was about it. Figuring out the
direction of a way was generally somewhat challenging.
It's still useful if you happen to have another direction dependent
tag which would otherwise conflict, but I can't actually think of one
right now.

Dave

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Oxford/Cotswolds mailing list

2009-02-17 Thread Richard Fairhurst

Oxford, Oxfordshire and the Cotswolds have as many mappers as anywhere  
in Britain, and such things as Mapnik, Potlatch and npemap.org.uk hail  
from our county - but we didn't have a mailing list.

Now Mike Collinson has kindly set one up. The address is
talk-gb-oxoncotswo...@openstreetmap.org

and you can subscribe at
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-oxoncotswolds

Topics of discussion will include, but are not limited to, Shall we  
go to the pub?.

cheers
Richard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Marketplace

2009-02-17 Thread Aun Johnsen (via Webmail)

Hi

I have written a proposal for Marketplace, a regulated area outdoor (or
indoor) for trade of various commodities. I have used a couple of days in
Draft, but have decided to push the proposal forward to RFC, and if there
are few suggestions to improvements I will open it for vote in a couple of
weeks.

The proposal is found on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Marketplace

I am on purpose omitting any subtags, as these have little to do with the
marketplace tag itself. Many subkeys can be used to describe a marketplace,
but I feel introducing them might result in long arguments, and long delays
before this tag can be approved. 

-- 
Brgds
Aun Johnsen
aka Skippern
via Webmail

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Stephen Gower

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:45:00PM -, Ed Loach wrote:

 Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1
 for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't
 work out why that is necessary.

It used to be the case that the renderers wrote the name of the street in
the direction the segments were drawn, so you'd always try to draw a street
starting from the west and heading east.  If the same street was one-way
from east to west, we needed a way to indicate this without having the
street label upside-down.

s

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] News blog link - to blogs.openstreetmap.org?

2009-02-17 Thread Simon Ward

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:48:17AM -, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) 
wrote:
 Having thought about this a bit overnight I personally feel that the project
 should have an OSM specific blog that gets used for OSM community
 announcements, worthy news items and OSMF announcements.

This could easily be an announce mailing list as well as a blog, and
accessible to even more people.  Personally I am ok with a blog as
long as it provides ATOM or RSS (pick a version) feeds, but I know
others feel differently (and no, apparently rss2email doesn't cut it).

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Translator

2009-02-17 Thread osmtransla...@polygongis.com


Hi All,

The latest beta version of OpenStreetMap Translator is now available 
from http://www http://www.polygongis.com.polygongis.com 
http://www.polygongis.com. This version includes shp file export and 
data filtering. We would appreciate it if you could try this application 
out and let us know of any problems you have or enhancements that you 
would like to see in the future


OpenStreetMap Translator allows you to 'cookie cut' data from 
OpenStreetMap and extract it into MapInfo and ESRI formats


Thanks,
Polygon GIS
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] RFC :left/:right (asymmetrical roadside features)

2009-02-17 Thread Simon Ward

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 07:51:12PM +, Dave Stubbs wrote:
  Oneway is strange in that as well as yes/no you can have oneway=-1
  for one way in the opposite direction of the way, and I still can't
  work out why that is necessary.
 
 Because none of the editors had a reverse way tool :-). I think JOSM
 could reverse a segment, but that's was about it. Figuring out the
 direction of a way was generally somewhat challenging.

Fortunately they do now, unless I'm misinterpreting.  JOSM even handles
oneway and *:left and *:right by swappng them.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Cycle Map layer

2009-02-17 Thread Matt Toups

Dave Stubbs wrote:
 2009/2/9 Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk:
   
 Where does the Cycle Map get it's coastlines from? I happened to notice that
 some of the paths I mapped along the sea front near here, which required
 some adjustment to the coastline, have let to Mapnik and Osmarender layers
 having the revised coastline, but not the Cycle Map layer:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.93742lon=1.28818zoom=17layers=00B0FTF



 Or does it just refresh those less frequently than the other information
 portrayed?
 

 Yes, it only updates when I prod it.

 Prodding it now... may take a while though.

 Dave
   
The coastlines for the cycle map in North America seem quite old, will
those also be updated?

I made many adjustments to the Mississippi River (and other bodies of
water) in New Orleans some months ago which are currently not showing on
the cycle layer.  (In fact, the other style layers on opencyclemap.org
-- CloudMade style, Mobile style, NoNames style -- also have out of date
coastlines.)

thanks,
Matt

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Large OSM globe style images

Hi,

this is probably a niche application but I have just played around a 
bit with the aim to create large (as in 5000x5000 pixel or bigger) 
globe-shaped images with ti...@home tiles.

On a whole-world level, ti...@home tiles give a better impression of 
where we have something than the Mapnik ones. But Marble, which 
creates nice globe pictures, uses Mapnik, so I modified Marble's tile 
source and after that tricked Marble into running on a virtual 5000x5000 
desktop so I could grab a nice image off of it.

Here is an example:

http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/marble.jpg

And here is how to do it (needs Linux):

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Frederik_Ramm/Creating_Very_Large_Marble_Images

I would be interested in hearing other techniques for creating similar 
images with other tools. I'm sure it must be possible with Mapnik but 
you will have to import the whole planet and it will take ages to render 
that level of detail, and you would not have the interactivity that 
comes with Marble.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Adding architect names to buildings

2009-02-17 Thread Frankie Roberto

Hi all,

I've started adding architects names to buildings in Manchester (based on a
combination of local history sources and Wikipedia), and so thought I'd
better document the tag I'm using in case others want to do the same:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:architect

The only problem I could think of was whether the key should be singular or
plural. I got the feeling that the singular would match existing tags
better.

Looking through Tagwatch I noticed that both artist=* and artist_name=* have
been used (presumably for public sculptures and art installation), and I did
wonder whether architect_name=* would be better. It seems that
artist_name=*  matches old_name=*  better, but on the other hand it's not
particularly ambiguous having artist=* or architect=*.

Any thoughts?

Frankie

-- 
Frankie Roberto
Experience Designer, Rattle
0114 2706977
http://www.rattlecentral.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?

2009-02-17 Thread Christopher Schmidt

Hi,

Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data
for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. This data is
appropriately licensed for re-use in OSM, and is informative -- in most
cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding.

I'm curious as to whether people believe that this data of this type is
appropriate for upload into OSM.

There are clear technical reasons why this data might not belong in OSM
-- the quantity of data is significant, and you can imagine that it
could create a much larger database. At the moment, I'd rather address
the social aspect of whether this data is appropriate to upload to OSM.

A description of the data in question with regard to MassGIS is
available at:

 http://www.mass.gov/mgis/parcels.htm

Looking forward to hearing any and all opinions on this matter.

Best Regards,
-- 
Christopher Schmidt
MetaCarta

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?

2009-02-17 Thread Ian Dees

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt 
crschm...@metacarta.com wrote:

 Hi,

 Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data
 for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS.


In my quest to find free data to import in the US, I discovered that parcel
data is almost universally available for free for almost every local
jurisdiction I checked (released for tax purposes). Point is that this could
potentially be a *lot* of data. It certainly would be very interesting to
see, though!
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?

2009-02-17 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

Property boundaries are definitely something that belongs in OSM, it's
just boundary=administrative at a different level.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?

2009-02-17 Thread Adam Schreiber

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt
crschm...@metacarta.com wrote:
 Hi,

 Many city governments in Massachusetts publish their parcel (lot) data
 for free reuse, either individually or through MassGIS. This data is
 appropriately licensed for re-use in OSM, and is informative -- in most
 cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding.

 I'm curious as to whether people believe that this data of this type is
 appropriate for upload into OSM.

 There are clear technical reasons why this data might not belong in OSM
 -- the quantity of data is significant, and you can imagine that it
 could create a much larger database. At the moment, I'd rather address
 the social aspect of whether this data is appropriate to upload to OSM.

 A description of the data in question with regard to MassGIS is
 available at:

  http://www.mass.gov/mgis/parcels.htm

 Looking forward to hearing any and all opinions on this matter.

I'd say the address data definitely while the parcel data might be too
micro at this junction.  However, the parcel is closely bound to the
address and it may be very difficult to associate an area currently in
OSM with the address without the parcels.  It seems like it comes down
to whether or not the parcels are acceptable.

Cheers,

Adam

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Parcel Data in OSM?

2009-02-17 Thread Russ Nelson


On Feb 17, 2009, at 7:00 PM, Christopher Schmidt wrote:

 cases, it has addresses which can be used for geocoding

For completely unrelated reasons (I was searching for an unfinished  
railroad and was looking to see if it existed in any property lines)  
(no, it didn't) (sigh) I had a copy of the parcel data for Oneida  
County, New York.  It has the address in a fixed field, along with the  
name of the road.  It would be trivially easy to set addr:housenumber  
and addr:street for the parcel.

The trouble is that I don't know where in that parcel the building is  
to be found.  And some parcels are quite strangely shaped, e.g. two  
squares overlapping only at a corner.  And then the street name and  
the TIGER street name vary wildly, e.g. tiger:name_base=State Highway  
13 and ocgov:loc_st_nam=Nys Rt 13 (or in another record, State  
Route 13 N).  The latter only matters if the property is on a corner.

I've noticed that the road is considered to be unowned, so there's  
only one way connecting those nodes.  Thus, I'll look for the nodes  
with only one way, and tag the center of those nodes with the  
address.  Might employ some heuristic to guess which road if multiple  
roads are found.

--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Large OSM globe style images

Hi,

Maarten Deen wrote:
 That's nice! And now 360 pictures, all one degree rotated and a nice java
 application that you can rotate the globe.
 Oh, you need images for rotation around the poles too. I guess this is not
 something that can be rendered realtime?

Well, the ti...@home tile creation process is probably as far away from 
realtime as it gets ;-) but Marble projects these tiles onto the globe 
quite quickly, indeed if you have a fast machine and a normal screen 
size then you get a real-time effect while turning the globe with your 
mouse.

The very-large-Xvfb-through-VNC method that I discussed here of course 
does not lend itself to very high graphics performance though ;-)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] parcel data in OSM

2009-02-17 Thread Sam Vekemans

Hi,
ya, its certainly worth creating a tag proposal page for it.
I would (imo) would like to see it only rendered when zooming in real close.
Some other renderer might want to see it at  a different zoom.
When buying a house, you should know what land your getting :)
p.s. I think a variation of that is available on Geobase for Canada :-)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] 3dShapes voor OpenStreetMaps-NL

2009-02-17 Thread Stefan de Konink

Stefan de Konink wrote:
 Als NC hebben we er als OSM helaas niets aan. Dus denk er eens over
 na of BY-SA genoeg juridische en promotionele waarde kan bieden :)


Maarten Hilferink wrote:
 Nav je opmerking over NC voorwaarden, heb ik besloten per 01-03-2009
 de 3dShapes databank onder CC-BY-SA/3.0/NL beschikbaar te gaan
 stellen, behoudens juridische actie van het Kadaster.

Dat betekent dat we tot die tijd een import kunnen voorbereiden :) En we 
  *WEER* een geweldige Creative Commons bron hebben die echt leuk is :)


Stefan

___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] 3dShapes voor OpenStreetMaps-NL

2009-02-17 Thread Frank Steggink

Dat zou inderdaad geweldig zijn, als vaststaat dat 3D shapes niet als een 
afgeleid werk wordt gezien van Top10NL en het AHN. Ik kijk liever eerst de kat 
uit de boom...

Frank

Stefan de Konink wrote:
 Stefan de Konink wrote:
 Als NC hebben we er als OSM helaas niets aan. Dus denk er eens over
 na of BY-SA genoeg juridische en promotionele waarde kan bieden :)
 
 
 Maarten Hilferink wrote:
 Nav je opmerking over NC voorwaarden, heb ik besloten per 01-03-2009
 de 3dShapes databank onder CC-BY-SA/3.0/NL beschikbaar te gaan
 stellen, behoudens juridische actie van het Kadaster.
 
 Dat betekent dat we tot die tijd een import kunnen voorbereiden :) En we 
   *WEER* een geweldige Creative Commons bron hebben die echt leuk is :)
 
 
 Stefan
 
 ___
 Talk-nl mailing list
 Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
 

___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

Re: [talk-au] Suburb boundaries - getting close

2009-02-17 Thread Sam Couter

BlueMM bluemm1975-...@yahoo.com wrote:
 I also like Jack's suggestion on name  old_name, plus the is_in tag.

+1 for the is_in tag from me, definitely with , Australia appended.

My reasons are pretty selfish - My choice of GPS software is Navit and
it requires the is_in tag to search for towns. I'd be happy enough to
try to modify the software to not require is_in but I haven't seen a
better solution.
-- 
Sam Couter |  mailto:s...@couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-de] Welche Straßen fehlen noch in Erfurt ?

2009-02-17 Thread Michael Buchberger

Hallo Holger,
 ich würde gern mal wissen welche Straßen in Erfurt noch fehlen. Dazu 
 gibt es ja irgendwie eine Möglichkeit das herauszubekommen. Ich habe 
 aber absolut keine Ahnung wie das geht.

Im Netz gibt es ein Tool mit dem man eine Liste der vorhandenen
OSM Straßen generieren kann:

http://albspotter.org/osm/getstreets.php?minlat=50.93maxlat=51.06minlon=10.9maxlon=11.10

(Hmmm, bringt gerade eine Fehlermeldung. Probleme mit der API?)

Diese Straßenliste dann einfach markieren und kopieren
und in einer Textdatei (*.txt) speichern.

Aus deiner anderen Quelle dann auch die Straßennamen i
n ein andere Textdatei kopieren.

Beide Textdateien erstmal sortieren lassen.
(kann z.B. der Texteditor den ich verwende (EditplusWindows))

Vergleichen der beiden Textdateien mit einem Diff-Tool
(z.B. DiffMerge (gibts für Windows, Linux, Mac)

Das ganze ist natürlich nur für Dich zum Abgleichen der
Daten gedacht. Wie die anderen schon sagten gibt es
rechtliche Probleme wenn Du das veröffentlichen willst.

Tschuess
 Michael



___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Fahrradkarte für Garmin?

2009-02-17 Thread Sven Geggus

Frank Huebner hf...@arcormail.de wrote:

 Habt ihr andere Ideen?

Ich hätte gerne was routingfähiges um ehrlich zu sein. Für kurze Touren und
wenns anfängt zu regnen. Routing zum nächsten amenity=shelter :)

Am besten von ganz Deutschland und einige Kilometer ins benachbarte Ausland
rein. Keine Ahnung ob das OSM Schneideprogramm vom mkgmap Author routing
über Kachelgrenzen unterstützt.

Längere Touren plane ich im Voraus und spiele sie als GPX auf den Garmin.
Die Anzeige von Relationen auf dem Garmin ist mir daher nicht wirklich
wichtig.

Derzeit benutze ich die Karten von Computerteddy mit Typfile und Höhenlinien
da kann man die relevanten Tracktypes (1,2 =3) auch erkennen.

Gruss

Sven

-- 
.. this message has been created using an outdated OS (UNIX-like) with an 
outdated mail- or newsreader (text-only) :-P

/me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] NSG - NP - NLP

2009-02-17 Thread Alexander Schulze

Hallo,

ich hätte mal ne Frage zu Naturschutzgebiet, Naturpark, Nationalpark.

Laut MapFeatures kann man ja das NSG als leisure=nature_reserve bzw. als 
boundary=national_park (gleichzeitig für Nationalpark) rendern.
Warum ist der boundary-tag für beide, sind doch ziemlich verschiedene 
Sachen?

Wenn ich für NSG's das leisure-tag nutze, wird die Fläche teilweise von 
anderen (Wasser, Siedlung) überdeckt und man sieht den Verlauf nicht 
mehr. Soll das so sein?

Wenn zu dem NSG ein Stück eines größeren Waldgebietes gehört, ist es 
dann ratsam dieses Stück Wald zu entfernen, da es sonst ja doppelt wäre?

Gibt es eventuell auch ein tag für Naturpark oder sollen diese gar nicht 
dargestellt werden?

in den tagwatch taucht boundary=natural_park einmal auf, das wäre doch 
was, oder?

schönen Gruß
Alex

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Luftbilder aus Bayern - Halbzeit

2009-02-17 Thread Sven Geggus

Hermann Kraus h...@scribus.info wrote:

 Wandinger: 'Bei weiteren Kooperationen würden wir natürlich
 Lizenz-Gebühren verlangen.'

ROTFL! Das Projekt wäre natürlich ganz bestimmt bereit diese zu bezahlen.

 OpenStreetMap aber verspricht auf seiner Homepage: 'Unsere Daten sind frei
 und werden es auch bleiben.' (MZ, 26.01.09, Teil 1)

Lizenzgebühren für die Nutzung der Luftbilder, so hab ich das jetzt
zumindest verstanden.

 Ich glaub ja fast an ein Missverständniss, weil es unwahrscheinlich
 klingt, dass das LVA mit Lizenzeinnahmen durch OSM gerechnet hat. Was
 meint ihr?

Ich glaube ja eher, dass da die eine Hand des Amtes nicht weiss was die
andere tut!

Die Daten, die hier auf DVD angekommen sind IMO eines Amtes, dass diese
Dinge professionell macht nicht würdig!

Erstens wurden sie dilletantisch skaliert und sind dadurch real deutlich
unterhalb der versprochenen Auflösung (3.5m statt 2m!) und zweitens steht im
TIFF-Header der Name eines anderen Kunden drin:

TIFFTAG_SOFTWARE=Geodaten Bestellung von M*** S

Was uns natürlich überhaupt nichts angeht!

Ich frage mich warum die Daten überhaupt künstlich runterskaliert wurden.
In der Originalauflösung wäre das abzeichnen von Häusern möglich gewesen!

Gruss

Sven

-- 
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety (Benjamin Franklin)

/me is gig...@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Fahrradkarte für Garmin?

2009-02-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer

Am 17. Februar 2009 10:28 schrieb Sven Geggus li...@fuchsschwanzdomain.de:
 Frank Huebner hf...@arcormail.de wrote:

 Habt ihr andere Ideen?

 Ich hätte gerne was routingfähiges um ehrlich zu sein. Für kurze Touren und
 wenns anfängt zu regnen. Routing zum nächsten amenity=shelter :)

ja, das waere sehr cool, mit Beruecksichtigung der Oberflaechenbeschaffenheit

 Am besten von ganz Deutschland und einige Kilometer ins benachbarte Ausland
 rein. Keine Ahnung ob das OSM Schneideprogramm vom mkgmap Author routing
 über Kachelgrenzen unterstützt.


nee, besser gleich von ganz Europa.

Gruss Martin

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Gebäude durchsichtig rendern

2009-02-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer

Am 16. Februar 2009 02:16 schrieb Johann H. Addicks addi...@gmx.net:
 Die einen zählen reale Stockwerke (Straße über Tunnel, unter Brücke),

das ist ja auch, wie es gedacht ist, sind topologische Stockwerke,
also ist ueber/unter

 für andere reicht ein Belang (Tennisplatz auf Freizeitgelände) und für
 die dritten es es nur ein Attribut um Renderern etwas aufzuzwingen.

2 und 3 sind m.E. das gleiche, da es ja nicht um reale
(kreuzungsfreie) Hoehenunterschiede geht. Also so nicht machen.

Gruss Martin

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Luftbilder aus Bayern - Halbzeit

2009-02-17 Thread Andreas Fritsche

Hi,

From: Sven Geggus li...@fuchsschwanzdomain.de
 [..]
 Ich frage mich warum die Daten ?berhaupt k?nstlich runterskaliert wurden.
 In der Originalaufl?sung w?re das abzeichnen von H?usern m?glich gewesen!
 [..]

vielleicht darum!?

/Andreas

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] NSG - NP - NLP

2009-02-17 Thread Johann H. Addicks

Kleine Frage zum Betreff: Was tut der Notlandeplatz in der Aufstellung von  
Naturreservaten?
Ich vermute mal, dass diese inzwischen zumindest in Deutschland nicht nur  
abandonned sind, sondern auch sämtlicherweise rückgebaut wurden und daher  
auch das Rendering der Autobahnen nicht dadurch verändert werden sollte.

Bei Ersatzübergangsstellen (vulgo: Nato-Rampen) sieht es anders aus, die  
werden auch in 20 Jahren noch in der Landschaft herumliegen.

-jha-



___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] NSG - NP - NLP

2009-02-17 Thread Alexander Schulze


Hi,

 Kleine Frage zum Betreff: Was tut der Notlandeplatz in der Aufstellung von  
 Naturreservaten?

naja, laut meiner Karte ist das die Abkürzung für Nationalpark. Im 
ersten Satz meiner mail hab ich die 4 Abkürzungen ja auch ausgeschrieben ;-)

schönen Gruß
Alex

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank

2009-02-17 Thread Dr. Franz-Josef Behr

Tobias,

danke für Deine Klarstellung!

Es ging mir darum, ob man die Erdoberfläche *oder* die Erdoberfläche
inklusive aller auf der Erdoberfläche befindlichen Objekte haben möchte.

Ich denke, Kunstobjekte (Bauwerke...) sollten eher vermieden werden.

OpenDEM.org wäre dann sicher besser.

Gruß

Franz-Josef

Tobias Wendorff schrieb:

Dr. Franz-Josef Behr schrieb:

Tja. DTM oder DEM?

Was wollen wir?

Die Triangulation kommt aber später...erst nach den Punkten

Huch, nach meinem Wissen sind DTM und DEM das Gleiche?
Lass uns doch mal auf Deutsch reden :-)

DGM = Digitales Geländemodell, die natürliche Geländeform der
Erdoberfläche ohne Bebauung und Bepflanzung

DOM = Digitales Oberflächenmodell, die Geländeform aller auf
der Erdoberfläche befindlichen Objekte

DHM = Digitales Höhenmodell, Oberbegriff für die regelmäßig oder
dunregelmäßig erhobenen Daten. Ein primäres DHM beschreibt die
Originalmessdaten, ein sekundäres DHM die daraus abgeleiteten Daten.

DEM wäre daher ein Allgemeinbegriff, was DGM und DEM beinhaltet.

DEM = Digital Elevation Model.

Daher würde ich mich für OpenDEM aussprechen. Die Domain kann
man ja sicher ummelden :-)

Grüße
Tobias

Achja, habe ich schon erwähnt, dass aus der DGK5 bald die ABK
(Amtliche Basiskarte) wird?

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards / Cordialement

Dr. Franz-Josef Behr

Participate in http://www.opengeocoding.org!

We live at the start of the information age and not enough
people care that someone else gains rights to their personal things,
their information, friends, images, photos, music...
People really need to read the licenses they sign up to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/users/ivanidea

Prof. Dr. Franz-Josef Behr - Home Office
Author of: Strategisches GIS-Management - http://www.gis-management.de
eMail: franz-josef.b...@hft-stuttgart.de
http://www.gis-news.de
Tel: +49 (0)721 / 453980-1 sowie 45 33 35
Fax: +49 (0)721 / 453980-7 sowie via web.de: +49 (0)1212-5-12048213
begin:vcard
fn:Dr. Franz-Josef^Behr
n:Behr;Franz-Josef
org:Stuttgart University of Applied Sciences (SUAS);Faculty of Geomatics, Computer Science and Mathematics
adr;quoted-printable:;;Schellingstra=C3=9Fe 24, ;Stuttgart;;D-70174;Germany
title:Prof.
tel;work:+49) 711/8926-2606
tel;home:+49 (0)721 / 453980-1
url:http://www.hft-stuttgart.de/
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

Johann H. Addicks schrieb:
 Was der Autor einfordert ist jedoch eine Generalisierung. Und das wird
 nicht einfach. Neben Entwicklungsaufwand für einen zweiten Pass wird
 es vermutlich riesige Regelsetze brauchen, um Kriterien für zuträgliche
 Element-Dichten im Umkreis von zu bestimmen und zudem noch zusätzliche
 Minimalabstände zu definieren.

Davon rede ich, seit ich bei OpenStreetMap aktiv bin. Allerdings
ist es natürlich nur ein Folgeproblem, welches aus OpenStreetMap
abgeleitet ist.

Die OpenStreetMap-Mitglieder bezeichnen sich als Mapper, was
im Endeffekt jedoch falsch ist. Ein Mapper ist der Kartograph.

Was wir eher sind, sind Collectors (Sammler) oder Surveyors
(Vermesser / Erhebende). Wir sammeln POIs und erheben die Welt
um uns rum.

Die Kartographie ist ja nur eine Anwendung, ein jahrhundertealtes
Handwerk, was bei uns der komplett durch Osmarender, Mapnik und
Kosmos abgedeckt wird.

Der Mapnik-Oberfritz ist zwar ein Kartograph, aber er Mapnik ist
einfach zu beschränkt. Die Rendering-Engine ist zwar schön, aber
die Kartographie-Engine ist kacke.

Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was
das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde, dafür haben wir
dann aber Probleme an angrenzen Flächen und an Objekten, die
neben der Straße liegen.

Die verschiedenen Regelsätze könnte man vielleicht hinbekommen,
dazu braucht es aber Leute, die das konstant weiterführen. Wir
haben ja keinen festen Kartographieschlüssel - dieser ist
aufgrund des Freiheitsgedanken von OSM ja leider nicht gewünscht.

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Bitmap-Karte offline kalibrieren?

Frederik Ramm schrieb:
 Mir faellt ein, dass die aktuellste (eventuell Beta-) Version von QGIS 
 einen OSM-Editor als Plugin haben soll. Dann kannst Du Dir sogar den 
 JOSM sparen ,-)

Ach, ehrlich? *runterlad*

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Luftbilder aus Bayern - Halbzeit

2009-02-17 Thread Markus

Hallo Sven,

 Lizenzgebühren für die Nutzung der Luftbilder

Luftbilder wurden bisher nur gegen Lizenzgebühr zur Nutzung abgegeben.
Im Pilotprojekt soll geprüft werden, ob die freie Nutzung von DOP-2m 
künftig ermöglicht werden soll.

Die (ungeschickte) Formulierung der Presseabteilung wird gerade geprüft.
Ich werde berichten.

 Die Daten, die hier auf DVD angekommen sind
 wurden dilletantisch skaliert
 sind deutlich unterhalb der versprochenen Auflösung (3.5m statt 2m!)

Kannst Du mir das (per PM?) etwas detaillierter beschreiben?
auch was Du daran ggf. noch korrigieren konntest.
Bzw. konkrete Wünsche formulieren?
Dann kann ich es in meinen Bericht aufnehmen.

 Ich frage mich warum die Daten überhaupt künstlich runterskaliert wurden.
 In der Originalauflösung wäre das abzeichnen von Häusern möglich gewesen!

Ja, das wäre wirklich ein Qualitätsvorteil!

Gruss, Markus

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank

Hallo DrFrJoBe,

Dr. Franz-Josef Behr schrieb:
 Es ging mir darum, ob man die Erdoberfläche *oder* die Erdoberfläche 
 inklusive aller auf der Erdoberfläche befindlichen Objekte haben möchte.
 
 Ich denke, Kunstobjekte (Bauwerke...) sollten eher vermieden werden.
 
 OpenDEM.org wäre dann sicher besser.

Das sehe ich genauso, denn die Kunstobjekte haben wir ja schon in
OSM.

Um eine DOM oder ein DGM zu erzeugen, können wir die Daten aus
OSM ableiten, so wie es die Vermessungsämter auch machen. Dort
werden die Laserscanning-Daten anhand der Liegenschaftskarten
korrigiert.

Grüße
Tobias

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

Hallo,

Tobias Wendorff wrote:
 Was der Autor einfordert ist jedoch eine Generalisierung. Und das wird
 nicht einfach. Neben Entwicklungsaufwand für einen zweiten Pass wird
 es vermutlich riesige Regelsetze brauchen, um Kriterien für zuträgliche
 Element-Dichten im Umkreis von zu bestimmen und zudem noch zusätzliche
 Minimalabstände zu definieren.

[...]

 Die Kartographie ist ja nur eine Anwendung, ein jahrhundertealtes
 Handwerk, was bei uns der komplett durch Osmarender, Mapnik und
 Kosmos abgedeckt wird.

Tobias hat recht; Kartographie ist nicht das Kerngeschaeft von OSM, 
sondern eine von vielen moeglichen Anwendungen. Die Kartographie hat bei 
  OSM sehr stark Mittel-zum-Zweck-Charakter; die Leute wollen ihre 
Arbeit bestaetigt sehen.

Wuerde man jetzt beginnen, in dichter besiedelten Gebieten z.B. 
vereinzelte Kneipen nicht mehr einzuzeichnen, waehrend die weit und 
breit einzige Kneipe in einem Dorf sehr wohl verzeichnet ist - eine aus 
kartographischer Sicht durchaus vernuenftige Ueberlegung - so wuerde 
dies zu Verwirrungen bei den Mappern fuehren (ich hab doch da was 
eingetgragen, wieso ist das nicht da).

 Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was
 das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde,

Wuerde ich so nicht unterschreiben; erstens ganz gewiss nicht 
problemlos, zweitens vermute ich, dass eine gute Generalisierung 
niemals vollautomatisch machbar ist.

 Die verschiedenen Regelsätze könnte man vielleicht hinbekommen,

Ich denke nicht, dass es eine Frage von Regelsaetzen ist.

Bye
Frederik


___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

Frederik Ramm schrieb:
 Tobias hat recht;
   ^
Dööt Dööt Dööt Dööt.

 Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was
 das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde,
 
 Wuerde ich so nicht unterschreiben; erstens ganz gewiss nicht 
 problemlos, zweitens vermute ich, dass eine gute Generalisierung 
 niemals vollautomatisch machbar ist.

Die Frage ist: Was ist gut? Guck' Dir doch die DTKs oder das
Digitale Stadtplanwerk Ruhrgebiet an - ich finde das ziemlich gut.

Der aktuelle Mapnik (damit meine ich die Kartographie auf der
Hauptseite) macht komplett Unsinn. In Zoomstufe 13 werden
noch einzelne Häuser und Wege angezeigt - schrecklich.

 Die verschiedenen Regelsätze könnte man vielleicht hinbekommen,
 
 Ich denke nicht, dass es eine Frage von Regelsaetzen ist.

Ich sagte auch nur, dass man es hinbekommen würde, aber nicht
dass es die Problemlösung wäre. Es würde jedoch das Kartenbild
entspannter und die Zeichenschlüsselentwicklung einfacher machen.

Grüße
Tobias

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] Access: Unbefugter Aufenthalt nicht erlaubt

2009-02-17 Thread Johann H. Addicks

Wer eine inzwischen etwas längere Diskussion um die Beschilderung von Straßen  
durch nicht umfriedete Hafenbereiche nachlesen möchte:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/
index.php?title=Wikipedia:Auskunft#Unbefugter_Aufenthalt_nicht_erlaubt.

(kurz:  http://tinyurl.com/bfs967 )

Frage hier: access=private für die Schmickstraße zwischen Franziusplatz und  
Intzestraße?

-jha-




___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Höhennetz/Höhendatenbank

Tobias Wendorff schrieb:
 OpenDEM.org wäre dann sicher besser.
 
 Das sehe ich genauso, denn die Kunstobjekte haben wir ja schon in
 OSM.

Nein, moment ... dann wäre es ja doch DTM, also openDTM.org?!

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] Tiny Wiki URL?

Hallo Community,

wäre es möglich, unserem Wiki einen URL-Service beizubringen?

eine Art: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/?id=1234 mit Weiterleitung zum
richtigen Artikel, z.B. .../index.php/Georeferenzierung

So könnte man an bestimmten Nodes einfach etwas kurzes drantaggen:

note:wiki_id = 1234 oder wiki_id = 1234

statt

note:wiki = http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Georeferenzierung

Dürfte die Datenbank stark entspannen.

Grüße
Tobias

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

Dirk Stöcker schrieb:
 Das wird aber nicht automatisiert erstellt. Wenn ich die Vorgehensweise 
 richtig verstanden habe basiert die Erstellung der Karten auf zwei 
 Datensätzen. Einmal der reinen Geometrie und einmal den Render-Hints.

Diese Render-Hints wollen wir ja nicht in der Datenbank... als müsste
man vielleicht auch hier ein Parallelprojekt laufen lassen, welches sich
ausschließlich mit der Kartographie beschäftigt. Interessiert aber
sicher nur die wenigsten. Bei mir stößt aber immer noch das MAP bei
OSM böse auf.

 Und wenn nicht alles falsch ist, was ich im Studium gelernt habe oder 
 die künstliche Intelligenz irgendwann mal richtig gut ist, werden wir 
 wohl ohne Render-Hints keine Vernünftigen Karten erstellen können.

Demnach wäre der Typ mit seiner Seminararbeit durchgefallen, weil die
Kritik nicht gerechtfertig ist? :-)

Grüße
Tobias

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

2009-02-17 Thread Dirk Stöcker


On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Tobias Wendorff wrote:


Dirk Stöcker schrieb:

Das wird aber nicht automatisiert erstellt. Wenn ich die Vorgehensweise
richtig verstanden habe basiert die Erstellung der Karten auf zwei
Datensätzen. Einmal der reinen Geometrie und einmal den Render-Hints.


Diese Render-Hints wollen wir ja nicht in der Datenbank... als müsste
man vielleicht auch hier ein Parallelprojekt laufen lassen, welches sich
ausschließlich mit der Kartographie beschäftigt. Interessiert aber
sicher nur die wenigsten. Bei mir stößt aber immer noch das MAP bei
OSM böse auf.


Warum wollen wir die nicht? Die Render-Fixes wollen wir nicht. Aber Hints 
halte ich schon für sinnvoll.


Statt osmarender:noname ein [no]display=masstab[|]x ist eine 
sinnvolle Sache. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal sollten 
wir die Grunddaten erfassen.


Und die automatische Algorithmen müssen auch erstmal so gut sein, dass die 
Basis korrekt ist. Hints sollen ja nur Sachen lösen die prinzipiell 
maschinell kaum lösbar sind. Nicht wie momentan die Unzulänglichkeiten der 
Kartenerstellung ausbügeln.


Ciao
--
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

2009-02-17 Thread Dirk Stöcker


On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Tobias Wendorff wrote:


Man kann PostGIS die problemlos Generalisierung rauslocken, was
das Kartographiebild massiv verschönern würde,


Wuerde ich so nicht unterschreiben; erstens ganz gewiss nicht
problemlos, zweitens vermute ich, dass eine gute Generalisierung
niemals vollautomatisch machbar ist.


Die Frage ist: Was ist gut? Guck' Dir doch die DTKs oder das
Digitale Stadtplanwerk Ruhrgebiet an - ich finde das ziemlich gut.


Das wird aber nicht automatisiert erstellt. Wenn ich die Vorgehensweise 
richtig verstanden habe basiert die Erstellung der Karten auf zwei 
Datensätzen. Einmal der reinen Geometrie und einmal den Render-Hints.


Und wenn nicht alles falsch ist, was ich im Studium gelernt habe oder die 
künstliche Intelligenz irgendwann mal richtig gut ist, werden wir wohl 
ohne Render-Hints keine Vernünftigen Karten erstellen können.


Ciao
--
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

Dirk Stöcker schrieb:
 Warum wollen wir die nicht? Die Render-Fixes wollen wir nicht. Aber 
 Hints halte ich schon für sinnvoll.

Ich bin mir ganz sicher, dass ich für sowas in meinen OSM-Anfängen
häufig kritisiert wurde, weil ein Hint nichts mit den eigentlichen
Geodaten zu tun hat.

 Statt osmarender:noname ein [no]display=masstab[|]x ist eine 
 sinnvolle Sache. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal 
 sollten wir die Grunddaten erfassen.

Salami-Taktik also? Erste Welle zeichnet die Straßen ein, zweite
Welle die Hausnummern, dritte Welle die Rendering-Hints?

Wenn ich rausgehe, versuche ich das alles parallel zu tun, weil
die Chance sehr gering sein kann, dass jemandem auffällt, dass etwas
fehlt.

 Und die automatische Algorithmen müssen auch erstmal so gut sein, dass 
 die Basis korrekt ist. Hints sollen ja nur Sachen lösen die prinzipiell 
 maschinell kaum lösbar sind. Nicht wie momentan die Unzulänglichkeiten 
 der Kartenerstellung ausbügeln.

Leider habe ich keinen Zugang zu Mapnik und habe nach Basis-Python und
JAVA nicht noch Lust, C oder vertieftes Python zu lernen. Dinge, wie die
Generalisierung von Gebäuden sind in den Anfängen recht simpel und es
gibt viele freie Texte dazu ... nur die Integration dieser Texte ist
wieder eine andere Baustelle.

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

2009-02-17 Thread Michael Buege

Zitat Tobias Wendorff:

 Dirk Stöcker schrieb:
 [...]. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal
 sollten wir die Grunddaten erfassen.
 
 Salami-Taktik also? Erste Welle zeichnet die Straßen ein, zweite
 Welle die Hausnummern, dritte Welle die Rendering-Hints?

Genau so. Anders wird es nicht funktionieren.

 Wenn ich rausgehe, versuche ich das alles parallel zu tun, 

Es wird immer beim Versuch bleiben.

 weil die Chance sehr gering sein kann, dass jemandem auffällt, dass etwas
 fehlt.

-v bitte

-- 
Michael


___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

2009-02-17 Thread Dirk Stöcker


On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Tobias Wendorff wrote:


Dirk Stöcker schrieb:

Warum wollen wir die nicht? Die Render-Fixes wollen wir nicht. Aber
Hints halte ich schon für sinnvoll.


Ich bin mir ganz sicher, dass ich für sowas in meinen OSM-Anfängen
häufig kritisiert wurde, weil ein Hint nichts mit den eigentlichen
Geodaten zu tun hat.


Tja. Nicht jeder vertritt meine Meinung. Aber vielleicht braucht man für 
gewisse Erkenntnisse einfach das zugehörige Fachwissen.


Ich versuche auch selten jemanden der nicht will von meiner Meinung zu 
überzeugen. Ich mache einfach und beobachte die Ergebnisse. Wenn es sich 
in meine Richtung entwickelt ist das schön, wenn etwas anderes 
vernünftiges rauskommt habe ich auch nichts dagegen. Hauptsache es 
entwickelt sich.



Statt osmarender:noname ein [no]display=masstab[|]x ist eine
sinnvolle Sache. Nur muss auch dafür OSM noch viel lernen. Erstmal
sollten wir die Grunddaten erfassen.


Salami-Taktik also? Erste Welle zeichnet die Straßen ein, zweite
Welle die Hausnummern, dritte Welle die Rendering-Hints?


OSM durchläuft einen evolutionären Prozess. Das was morgen richtig ist 
kann heute noch falsch sein. Man kann Entwicklungen anstossen aber keine 
Revolutionen machen. Jeder der versucht OSM zu revolutionieren (wie Du 
manchmal) wird verlieren. Die Taktik der kleinen Schritte funktioniert 
hingegen meistens :-)



Leider habe ich keinen Zugang zu Mapnik und habe nach Basis-Python und
JAVA nicht noch Lust, C oder vertieftes Python zu lernen. Dinge, wie die
Generalisierung von Gebäuden sind in den Anfängen recht simpel und es
gibt viele freie Texte dazu ... nur die Integration dieser Texte ist
wieder eine andere Baustelle.


Hier hoffe ich, dass die Wissenschaft einspringt. Ist gibt so viele 
Studenten, die Diplomarbeiten und Studienarbeiten schreiben müssen. Statt 
diese auf rein theoretische Arbeiten loszulassen bietet OSM die Chance die 
Erkenntnisse an einem riesigen Datenbestand zu testen. Und am einfachsten 
geht dass, wenn man die Tools direkt anpasst. Ich denke die Entwicklungen 
in dieser Richtung werden zunehmen. Du darfst nicht vergessen, das man OSM 
eigentlich erst ab letztem Jahr richtig ernst nehmen kann.


Ciao
--
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz

Michael Buege schrieb:
 weil die Chance sehr gering sein kann, dass jemandem auffällt, dass etwas
 fehlt.
 
 -v bitte

Ach, die Straße ist bei OSM ja schon drin; da muss ich nicht mehr hin.


___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-de] Kartenkritik an OpenStreetMap mit Fokus auf die Schweiz