date:20140623

[Talk-hr] DORS/CLUC 2014

2014-06-23 Thread hbogner


Održao sam predavanje na temu Volunteered geographic information

Evo prezentacije:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3220458/osm/20140618-dorscluc-hbogner.pdf


___
Talk-hr mailing list
Talk-hr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-hr

[OSM-talk-be] Taggen van tijdelijke ingang

2014-06-23 Thread Marc Gemis

Binnenkort vindt in De Schorre te Boom het Tomorrowfestival plaats.
Gedurende dit festival krigen bepaalde ingangen een naam, bv. Dienstingang
1

Nu heeft er iemand een aantal van die namen toegevoegd aan OSM (
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22959316).

 De node heeft enkel de tag name=TML 2014 Dienstingang 1
Daar hoort feitelijk ook barrier=entrance bij.

Maar volgens mij heeft zulk een tijdelijke benaming geen bestaansrecht in
OSM.
Wat denken jullie ervan ?

met vriendelijke groeten

m
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Taggen van tijdelijke ingang

2014-06-23 Thread Karel Adams



On 23-06-14 05:59, Marc Gemis wrote:

Binnenkort vindt in De Schorre te Boom het Tomorrowfestival plaats.
Gedurende dit festival krigen bepaalde ingangen een naam, bv. 
Dienstingang 1


Nu heeft er iemand een aantal van die namen toegevoegd aan OSM 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22959316).


De node heeft enkel de tag name=TML 2014 Dienstingang 1
Daar hoort feitelijk ook barrier=entrance bij.

Maar volgens mij heeft zulk een tijdelijke benaming geen bestaansrecht 
in OSM.

Wat denken jullie ervan ?


Ongetwijfeld is dit onderwerp reeds tot in den treure besproken, hier en 
elders?


Toch maar mijn 0,02 € : het zou moeten mogelijk zijn om aan een element 
en/of aan een tag begin- ebn einddatums van geldigheid toe te kennen. 
Daarmee zou het perfect kunnen, en een waardevolle toevoeging zijn (de 
vrachtwagen met de hamburgers moet langs dienstingang 1); als er die 
(nog) niet zijn dan inderdaad niet.


k

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Taggen van tijdelijke ingang

2014-06-23 Thread Ben Abelshausen

Hey,

Ik zou er persoonlijk ook niet teveel woorden aan vuilmaken. Misschien een
klein berichtje naar Steve Marcelis hierover? Meer zou ik er niet aan doen
buiten nog in het oog houden of alles terug weg is ook...

Die begin- en einddatum is trouwens een enorm complexe zaak zeker als we
ook beginnen spreken over ways en relations ;-)

Met vriendelijke groeten,
Best regards,

Ben Abelshausen
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Taggen van tijdelijke ingang

2014-06-23 Thread Marc Gemis

Ik weet dat het inderdaad voor wegenwerken enz. niet echt aangeraden wordt.
In dit geval zal ik wel eens kijken of er een geschikte barrier= tag bij
kan, want nu is het niet echt zinvol imho.



2014-06-23 8:08 GMT+02:00 Karel Adams fa348...@skynet.be:


 On 23-06-14 05:59, Marc Gemis wrote:

 Binnenkort vindt in De Schorre te Boom het Tomorrowfestival plaats.
 Gedurende dit festival krigen bepaalde ingangen een naam, bv.
 Dienstingang 1

 Nu heeft er iemand een aantal van die namen toegevoegd aan OSM (
 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22959316).

 De node heeft enkel de tag name=TML 2014 Dienstingang 1
 Daar hoort feitelijk ook barrier=entrance bij.

 Maar volgens mij heeft zulk een tijdelijke benaming geen bestaansrecht in
 OSM.
 Wat denken jullie ervan ?


 Ongetwijfeld is dit onderwerp reeds tot in den treure besproken, hier en
 elders?

 Toch maar mijn 0,02 € : het zou moeten mogelijk zijn om aan een element
 en/of aan een tag begin- ebn einddatums van geldigheid toe te kennen.
 Daarmee zou het perfect kunnen, en een waardevolle toevoeging zijn (de
 vrachtwagen met de hamburgers moet langs dienstingang 1); als er die (nog)
 niet zijn dan inderdaad niet.

 k

 ___
 Talk-be mailing list
 Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Taggen van tijdelijke ingang

2014-06-23 Thread Jo

Voor wegenwerken van een paar dagen heeft het weinig zin, maar voor werken
die meer dan 3 maanden of meerdere jaren duren, zou ik zelfs zover gaan om
de omgeleide reiswegen van de bussen te mappen.

Jo


Op 23 juni 2014 10:05 schreef Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com:

 Ik weet dat het inderdaad voor wegenwerken enz. niet echt aangeraden wordt.
 In dit geval zal ik wel eens kijken of er een geschikte barrier= tag bij
 kan, want nu is het niet echt zinvol imho.



 2014-06-23 8:08 GMT+02:00 Karel Adams fa348...@skynet.be:


 On 23-06-14 05:59, Marc Gemis wrote:

 Binnenkort vindt in De Schorre te Boom het Tomorrowfestival plaats.
 Gedurende dit festival krigen bepaalde ingangen een naam, bv.
 Dienstingang 1

 Nu heeft er iemand een aantal van die namen toegevoegd aan OSM (
 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22959316).

 De node heeft enkel de tag name=TML 2014 Dienstingang 1
 Daar hoort feitelijk ook barrier=entrance bij.

 Maar volgens mij heeft zulk een tijdelijke benaming geen bestaansrecht
 in OSM.
 Wat denken jullie ervan ?


 Ongetwijfeld is dit onderwerp reeds tot in den treure besproken, hier en
 elders?

 Toch maar mijn 0,02 € : het zou moeten mogelijk zijn om aan een element
 en/of aan een tag begin- ebn einddatums van geldigheid toe te kennen.
 Daarmee zou het perfect kunnen, en een waardevolle toevoeging zijn (de
 vrachtwagen met de hamburgers moet langs dienstingang 1); als er die (nog)
 niet zijn dan inderdaad niet.

 k

 ___
 Talk-be mailing list
 Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be



 ___
 Talk-be mailing list
 Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] TEC Open Data: let's start !

2014-06-23 Thread André Pirard


  
  
On 2014-06-17 09:21, Marc Gemis wrote :


  

  On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:13 PM,
André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com
wrote:

  If you use source=survey
  2014-06  TEC 2014-04 in bus stops as I recommend,
you will both comply with the source requirement and be
sure to find the indication that they contain your
file's data and can be deleted from the
remaining-to-be-updated file.
If an existing element does not contain source=survey
  2014-06  TEC 2014-04 or later, it will be
kept in the remaining-to-be-updated file.  If a mapper
further updates the data, he is kindly requested to use
a new date such as source=survey 2014-07 or source=survey
  2014-06-21
.

  
 
  

  

  
  Sorry, but this is not a survey, this is an import.  IMHO, you
  can only use survey when you go out and check the exact
  position of the bus stop. A survey is not transforming data
  from one database format into another. So please do not use
  source=survey.
  

Sorry but it is an import and a survey.

source=TEC 2014-04 relates to the import of the TEC's data. 
source=TEC 2014-04 must be in TEC.osm.zip bus stops so
that the mapper copies it to OSM. When found in OSM, it means that
the bus stop can be removed from the file TEC.osm.zip which shows
the work that remains to do.  Same process for future versions.

  source=survey 2014-xx  relates to the location, shelter, bench
tags etc. that the mapper will add at the time of the import or
later and it is a survey.  It is the last time that this data was
verified and it helps mappers not to verify what has already been
verified.

There should also be a TEC 2014-04.osm.zip file containing
the original TEC data so that the user can compare that data with
the data he introduces, for example TEC's uppercase name and OSM's
lowercase name.
There will be later files like TEC 2014-10.osm.zip at which
time a new TEC.osm.zip will be created containing the new changes
that must be applied.
The user must also be able to see the lines drawn by TEC in case the
bus stops do not make the itinerary clear.
Here is a file of mine:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/ty49nmfdb2vfz4m/TEC_2014_04-Lignes.2.osm.bz2

What remains to be done before we can make realistic updates:

  publish TEC 2014-04.osm.zip (= present TEC.osm.zip +
following tags)
  
  add source=TEC 2014-04 to TEC 2014-04.osm.zip
  add source=survey 2014-04 to TEC
  2014-04.osm.zip
  add website tag
  
  new TEC.osm.zip = TEC 2014-04.osm.zip
  new TEC 2014-04.lines.osm.zip

Please note that the particular syntax of the tags is moot.
  But, please, make propositions instead of saying what it must not
  be (there are just too many).

I can publish a "how to tag the bus stops" in the wiki page if
  you like.

On 2014-06-17 15:19, Ben Abelshausen
  wrote :


  

  On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Marc
Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com
wrote:

  the
source should a) contain some reference to TEC,
  

  
  Exactly!

  


And (a) is "Exactly!
" what source=TEC 2014-04 was proposing.

b)
  any aerial image you have used (probably Bing).


This is something that everybody knows, or should know. "Bing 2004"
or so, not "Bing".

 you can only use survey when you go out

On 2014-06-17 15:18, Ben Abelshausen
  wrote :


  
"Survey" does mean explicitly that there was an actual
  survey (meaning, going to each and every bus station to check
  if it is there!):
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Survey#How_to_use
  

That article does not define "Survey" explicitly. It says that it is
a survey.

dictionary.reference.com

  to
  view in detail,
  especially to inspect,
  examine, or appraise formally or officially
  in order to ascertain
  condition, value, etc.
  appraise:  to
  estimate
  the nature, quality, importance,
  etc.: 
  

Nothing in that says that the surveyor must travel.  Any means to
ascertain the data is acceptable.

Cordialement,


  

  André.

Re: [OSM-talk-be] TEC Open Data: let's start !

2014-06-23 Thread Jo

Since I would prefer to keep things simple, or at least as simple as
possible, I'd prefer to work with one file.

To indicate that a stop is not in Openstreetmap yet, I tag it with odbl=new
when no stop with its ref is in the file I download from Overpass API.

This tag will be stripped automatically by JOSM before the data gets
uploaded, just like the created_by tag which I use to make street names
available to the person doing the import. They don't make sense in the
Brabant-Wallon file, but they seem to have helpful information in the
Charleroi file.

Since I'm a minimalist who'd prefer to put as few tags possible on stops,
platforms, stop positions, shelters, benches and waste baskets, I'd prefer
not to add source tags on each and every of the 7x? objects we'll be
adding to the DB. OK, I counted the stops of De Lijn in that number.

So I add source information on the changesets, which is the accepted
practice nowadays, at least that's what I read on the imports list.

If you want to add such tags, you can open the file, Ctrl-a to select all
objects. Add the tags you want and save the file.

Jo




2014-06-23 11:58 GMT+02:00 André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com:

  On 2014-06-17 09:21, Marc Gemis wrote :


 On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:13 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 If you use *source=survey 2014-06  TEC 2014-04* in bus stops as I
 recommend, you will both comply with the source requirement and be sure to
 find the indication that they contain your file's data and can be deleted
 from the remaining-to-be-updated file.
 If an existing element does not contain *source=survey 2014-06**  TEC
 2014-04* or later, it will be kept in the remaining-to-be-updated file.
 If a mapper further updates the data, he is kindly requested to use a new
 date such as *source=survey 2014-07* or *source=survey 2014-06-21* .

 Sorry, but this is not a survey, this is an import.  IMHO, you can
 only use survey when you go out and check the exact position of the bus
 stop. A survey is not transforming data from one database format into
 another. So please do not use source=survey.

 Sorry but it is an import *and* a survey.

 *source=TEC 2014-04* relates to the import of the TEC's data*.  **source=TEC
 2014-04* must be in TEC.osm.zip bus stops so that the mapper copies it to
 OSM. When found in OSM, it means that the bus stop can be removed from the
 file TEC.osm.zip which shows the work that remains to do.  Same process for
 future versions.

 * source=survey 2014-xx*  relates to the location, shelter, bench tags
 etc. that the mapper will add at the time of the import or later and it is
 a survey.  It is the last time that this data was verified and it helps
 mappers not to verify what has already been verified.

 There should also be a *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip* file containing the original
 TEC data so that the user can compare that data with the data he
 introduces, for example TEC's uppercase name and OSM's lowercase name.
 There will be later files like *TEC 2014-10.osm.zip* at which time a new
 TEC.osm.zip will be created containing the new changes that must be applied.
 The user must also be able to see the lines drawn by TEC in case the bus
 stops do not make the itinerary clear.
 Here is a file of mine:

 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/ty49nmfdb2vfz4m/TEC_2014_04-Lignes.2.osm.bz2

 What remains to be done before we can make realistic updates:

- publish *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip* (= present TEC.osm.zip + following
tags)
 - add *source=TEC 2014-04* to *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip*
- add *source=survey 2014-04* to *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip*
- add website tag
 - new TEC.osm.zip = *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip*
- new *TEC 2014-04.lines.osm.zip*

 Please note that the particular syntax of the tags is moot.
 But, please, make propositions instead of saying what it must not be
 (there are just too many).

 I can publish a how to tag the bus stops in the wiki page if you like.
  On 2014-06-17 15:19, Ben Abelshausen wrote :


 On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:

 the source should a) contain some reference to TEC,

  Exactly!


 And (a) is Exactly!  what *source=TEC 2014-04* was proposing.


 b) any aerial image you have used (probably Bing).


 This is something that everybody knows, or should know. Bing 2004 or so,
 not Bing.


  you can only use survey when you go out


 On 2014-06-17 15:18, Ben Abelshausen wrote :

  Survey does mean explicitly that there was an actual survey (meaning,
 going to each and every bus station to check if it is there!):
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Survey#How_to_use

 That article does not define Survey explicitly. It says that it is a
 survey.

 dictionary.reference.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/survey

 to view in detail, especially to inspect, examine, or appraise formally or
 officially in order to ascertain condition, value, etc.
 appraise:  to estimate the nature, quality, importance, etc.:

 Nothing

Re: [OSM-talk-be] TEC Open Data: let's start !

2014-06-23 Thread Jo

IN OPENSTREETMAP SURVEY MEANS: go out physically, see something with your
own eyes while standing next to it, add it to the DB.

The dictionary definition is not relevant.

Jo


2014-06-23 11:58 GMT+02:00 André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com:

  On 2014-06-17 09:21, Marc Gemis wrote :


 On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:13 PM, André Pirard a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 If you use *source=survey 2014-06  TEC 2014-04* in bus stops as I
 recommend, you will both comply with the source requirement and be sure to
 find the indication that they contain your file's data and can be deleted
 from the remaining-to-be-updated file.
 If an existing element does not contain *source=survey 2014-06**  TEC
 2014-04* or later, it will be kept in the remaining-to-be-updated file.
 If a mapper further updates the data, he is kindly requested to use a new
 date such as *source=survey 2014-07* or *source=survey 2014-06-21* .

 Sorry, but this is not a survey, this is an import.  IMHO, you can
 only use survey when you go out and check the exact position of the bus
 stop. A survey is not transforming data from one database format into
 another. So please do not use source=survey.

 Sorry but it is an import *and* a survey.

 *source=TEC 2014-04* relates to the import of the TEC's data*.  **source=TEC
 2014-04* must be in TEC.osm.zip bus stops so that the mapper copies it to
 OSM. When found in OSM, it means that the bus stop can be removed from the
 file TEC.osm.zip which shows the work that remains to do.  Same process for
 future versions.

 * source=survey 2014-xx*  relates to the location, shelter, bench tags
 etc. that the mapper will add at the time of the import or later and it is
 a survey.  It is the last time that this data was verified and it helps
 mappers not to verify what has already been verified.

 There should also be a *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip* file containing the original
 TEC data so that the user can compare that data with the data he
 introduces, for example TEC's uppercase name and OSM's lowercase name.
 There will be later files like *TEC 2014-10.osm.zip* at which time a new
 TEC.osm.zip will be created containing the new changes that must be applied.
 The user must also be able to see the lines drawn by TEC in case the bus
 stops do not make the itinerary clear.
 Here is a file of mine:

 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/ty49nmfdb2vfz4m/TEC_2014_04-Lignes.2.osm.bz2

 What remains to be done before we can make realistic updates:

- publish *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip* (= present TEC.osm.zip + following
tags)
 - add *source=TEC 2014-04* to *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip*
- add *source=survey 2014-04* to *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip*
- add website tag
 - new TEC.osm.zip = *TEC 2014-04.osm.zip*
- new *TEC 2014-04.lines.osm.zip*

 Please note that the particular syntax of the tags is moot.
 But, please, make propositions instead of saying what it must not be
 (there are just too many).

 I can publish a how to tag the bus stops in the wiki page if you like.
  On 2014-06-17 15:19, Ben Abelshausen wrote :


 On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote:

 the source should a) contain some reference to TEC,

  Exactly!


 And (a) is Exactly!  what *source=TEC 2014-04* was proposing.


 b) any aerial image you have used (probably Bing).


 This is something that everybody knows, or should know. Bing 2004 or so,
 not Bing.


  you can only use survey when you go out


 On 2014-06-17 15:18, Ben Abelshausen wrote :

  Survey does mean explicitly that there was an actual survey (meaning,
 going to each and every bus station to check if it is there!):
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Survey#How_to_use

 That article does not define Survey explicitly. It says that it is a
 survey.

 dictionary.reference.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/survey

 to view in detail, especially to inspect, examine, or appraise formally or
 officially in order to ascertain condition, value, etc.
 appraise:  to estimate the nature, quality, importance, etc.:

 Nothing in that says that the surveyor must travel.  Any means to
 ascertain the data is acceptable.

 Cordialement,

   André.


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

[OSM-legal-talk] attribution=Permission NOT granted for reuse

2014-06-23 Thread Andreas Goss


Just found this:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3Qw
__
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] attribution=Permission NOT granted for reuse

2014-06-23 Thread Stephan Knauss


On 23.06.2014 09:02, Andreas Goss wrote:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3Qw


likely unintended upload. Should be reverted. Did you contact the user 
already?


note=This data has been extracted from a Western Power database and 
should not be uploaded to the OSM database.



Stephan


___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [NUUG kart] [Imports] N50 imports from Kartverket (The Norwegian Mapping Authority)

2014-06-23 Thread Tor

23. juni 2014 kl. 08:35 skrev Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:

 Hi,
 
 On 06/23/2014 02:30 AM, N/A N/A wrote:
 As far as I can see it ODbL section 4.3 would actually require OSM to
 credit them in one way or another,
 
 Yes, but CC-BY does not say in one way or another, it says:
 
 ... in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor
 
 which means that Kartverket get so say how they want to be attributed.
 CC-BY goes on to say
 
 in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in
 which You Share the Licensed Material.
 
 but saying the context is OSM and therefor the reasonable manner is to
 list them on our copyright page might be far-fetched.
 
 That's why we usually double check with the licensor if our kind of
 attribution is ok with them, instead of just saying I don't see any
 problems and continuing ;)

In the case of Kartverket, the licensing should be OK because:
1. Kartverket has confirmed that we can integrate their data.
2. Kartverket has confirmed that attribution on a single page 
with a list of contributors is sufficient. 
3. Kartverket has been added to the list of contributors:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Kartverket_.
28Norwegian_Mapping_Authority.29.

Are there any disagreements here?


___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread SomeoneElse

There have been lots of changes to the standard style sheet recently 
(e.g. [1]).  The resulting map looks much nicer (farmland and other 
landuse much less glaring, names that really make no sense to be shown 
on a general map aren't).


There have however been some unintended consequences of the changes.  A 
number of abandoned railways near me were edited from abandoned to 
disused; I'm guessing that it might be because of the recent changes.  
Changeset comments along the lines of changed to X so that it renders 
and I know we're not supposed to tag for the renderer but what's the 
point in mapping a feature which then doesn't appear are relatively common.


The question, I suspect is what is the Standard style on the OSM 
website for?  It used to be for mappers, but a nice rendering; one that 
you might actually use as a punter too.  Back when Osmarender [3] 
existed, that was the if you want to see everything render, look at the 
instead option.  The removal of features (see [2]) that people actually 
use means that the Standard style isn't really for mappers any more - 
it's a nice (very nice, actually) generic map style, but not one that 
you can use to make sure that what you've mapped is technically 
correct (e.g. joined polygons up properly).


So, where's the replacement for Osmarender?  I'm sure that someone, 
somewhere, will have created a CartoCSS style file that is much closer 
to show everything than openstreetmap-carto currently is. Currently 
for my own use I'm still using the standard style but at database update 
adding back in some of the recent removals (see [4] - it also does some 
England and Wales rights-of-way stuff). However, as the standard style 
becomes nicer it's becoming increasingly clear that it's not the best 
place to start from.  The question is, what is?


Cheers,

Andy

[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-June/069959.html

[2] https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542

[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Osmarender

[4] 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread Andrew Hain

SomeoneElse lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk writes:

 There have however been some unintended consequences of the changes.  A 
 number of abandoned railways near me were edited from abandoned to 
 disused; I'm guessing that it might be because of the recent changes.  
 Changeset comments along the lines of changed to X so that it renders 
 and I know we're not supposed to tag for the renderer but what's the 
 point in mapping a feature which then doesn't appear are relatively 
common.

Have you talked to them or reverted their edits?

--
Andrew


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread Yves

Or directed them toward Openrailwaymap ?
I don't think a show-them-all map makes sense these days. Everybody should be 
able to find a map that fits his / her needs.
Yves

On 23 juin 2014 18:33:01 UTC+02:00, Andrew Hain andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk 
wrote:
SomeoneElse lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk writes:

 There have however been some unintended consequences of the changes. 
A 
 number of abandoned railways near me were edited from abandoned to 
 disused; I'm guessing that it might be because of the recent
changes.  
 Changeset comments along the lines of changed to X so that it
renders 
 and I know we're not supposed to tag for the renderer but what's the

 point in mapping a feature which then doesn't appear are relatively 
common.

Have you talked to them or reverted their edits?

--
Andrew


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

-- 
Envoyé de mon téléphone Android avec K-9 Mail. Excusez la brièveté.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread SomeoneElse


Andrew Hain wrote:

Have you talked to them or reverted their edits?


Re the disused railway, I did talk to the person who changed it - and 
attached a photo (which showed it to be very much abandoned).


Re the most recent time that I saw I know we shouldn't tag for the 
renderer but in changeset comments no - because what they went with 
(landuse=quarry I think) was IMHO correct - quarries near where I live 
come into and go out of use as demand and prices change.  A quarry is 
still a big hole in the ground even if nothing is currently being extracted.


Cheers,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread SomeoneElse


Yves wrote:

Or directed them toward Openrailwaymap ?


I'd have suggested that (in fact it's the first place I looked), had any 
of the renderings there been at all useful.  There do seem to have been 
some odd choices in terms of what gets rendered and what doesn't.  
Here's an area not far from me that shows the problem:


http://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=enlat=53.18464174858166lon=-1.3017082214355469zoom=13style=standard

That doesn't mean that openrailwaymap is wrong; just that it's not a 
solution to this particular problem.


And of course, my original question was not just about railways; that 
was just an example.


Cheers,

Andy


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

[OSM-talk] reporting OpenRailwayMap bugs (WAS: Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!)

2014-06-23 Thread Michael Reichert

Hi,

Am 23.06.2014 19:13, schrieb SomeoneElse:
 Yves wrote:
 Or directed them toward Openrailwaymap ?
 
 I'd have suggested that (in fact it's the first place I looked), had any
 of the renderings there been at all useful.  There do seem to have been
 some odd choices in terms of what gets rendered and what doesn't. 
 Here's an area not far from me that shows the problem:
 
 http://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=enlat=53.18464174858166lon=-1.3017082214355469zoom=13style=standard
 
 
 That doesn't mean that openrailwaymap is wrong; just that it's not a
 solution to this particular problem.

Although it becomes a kind of off-topic … you can either file an issue
at https://github.com/rurseekatze/OpenRailwayMap or write an email to
the OpenRailwayMap mailing list (the list has two languages, English and
German)
http://lists.openrailwaymap.org/lists/listinfo/openrailwaymap

Best regards

Michael
(Nakaner)

-- 
I prefer GPG encrypted emails.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Overpass API v0.7.50 almost done

2014-06-23 Thread Martijn van Exel

Hi Roland,

Thanks for these great additions. I really enjoyed your workshop at
SOTM EU as well.
I am excited about the attic features. I was playing around with it a
bit and was wondering, is it possible to get the changeset ID in which
an action was performed to an object?

Also, do the attic queries already work fully when I use Overpass
Turbo? When I run

[adiff:2014-06-12T20:00:00Z];
way(11027880);
out;

I do get an old and new section but they don't contain the deletion date.

Martijn

On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Roland Olbricht roland.olbri...@gmx.de wrote:
 Dear all,

 first of all a big thank you to all who have contributed to the SSD funding
 or to the general FOSSGIS funding for Overpass API.

 I will publish before SotM-EU 2014 a new stable Overpass API release, the
 first since about a year. To avoid confusion, I would like to sketch what it
 does and what it doesn't and how this relates to the running service.

 A proper documentation will be written along with the workshop slides for
 the SotM-EU.

 In particular, I ask you to test the attic feature to detect bugs now such
 that they are fixed in the database re-run in during July.


 == Summary for the impatient ==

 For current data, the Overpass API is and will be completely reliable. Most
 new features for current data will be postponed to the next version, because
 they don't affect the urgent database rebuild.

 For Augmented Diffs, I will change the mode of operations, mostly because
 the current approach has intrinsic stability problems. The last bigger
 incident happened on 18th April this year. Currently, the new Augmented Diff
 mode can be tested, and the old one should be continued until end of July.

 Attic data is a completely new feature. The underlying data is basically
 available since the license change in September 2012. But due to two
 detected and possible other undetected bugs, attic data before 02nd June
 2014 might be damaged.


 == Current data ==

 Queries on current data are such well-adopted and in widespread use that I
 will not break backward compatibility. Essentially only two features have
 been added:

 Sparse queries are now faster. An example is
 http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3FS
 That query would have taken hours with such a large bounding box in the
 past. Now it should run in less than 15 seconds. There is still room for
 improvement: It doesn't work yet that fast for regular expressions, but this
 is postponed to the next version.

 And features like ways and relations can expose their geometry directly on
 the feature. This is triggered by adding the word geom to the out
 statement. This currently works only for XML output. For JSON output, the
 final format is discussed on
 https://github.com/drolbr/Overpass-API/issues/93
 They should mimic GeoJSON as close as it makes sense. Once again, the
 feature is very useful, but doesn't affect the database debugging. Thus it
 is postponed.


 == Augmented diffs ==

 The Augmented Diffs are redesigned to be always generated on the fly. This
 is because the Augmented Diffs have been piling up on the server to almost a
 terabyte of data and we are running out of space. A second advantage is that
 their generating does no longer block applying the diffs to the current
 database.

 You can access them via e.g.
 http://overpass-api.de/api_0750/augmented_diff?id=905039
 (by changing the id to the number you actually need).

 There are also advantages to the users:

 Augmented diffs now carry a number that can be straightforward computed from
 the desired date. Number 1 starts at 2012-09-12T06:56:00Z, the effective
 license change date. And the date interval of Augmented Diff n is expressed
 in seconds since the epoch always
 (n - 1347432900 ) / 60
 until one minute later. You can get the current Augmented Diff with the call
 http://overpass-api.de/api_0750/augmented_diff_status
 which is deduced from
 http://overpass-api.de/api_0750/timestamp
 giving the date of the current database state.

 A second advantage is that filtering now makes sense. The full Overpass QL
 language can be used for filtering on Augmented Diffs, and it almost always
 makes the request faster. For that purpose take the request from
 http://overpass-api.de/api_0750/augmented_diff?id=905039debug=yes
 and adapt it to your needs.

 A third advantage is that you can requests arbitrary timeframes, not only
 minutes.

 However, the price to pay is that these changes are not completely backwards
 compatible; I'll take the reservation that the format was experimental. The
 info elements are no longer available, in favour of the geometry features
 of ways and relations. This is the format more widely adopted, and offering
 the info variant would have taken too much time to implement again.


 == Attic data ==

 This is a completely new kind of feature, and complements the Historic
 dumps of OSM data. I'll prefer the notion attic data like in version
 control conventions to avoid confusion with mapping

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread Michael Kugelmann


on 23.06.2014 13:56, SomeoneElse wrote:
A number of abandoned railways near me were edited from abandoned to 
disused; I'm guessing that it might be because of the recent 
changes.  Changeset comments along the lines of changed to X so that 
it renders and I know we're not supposed to tag for the renderer but 
what's the point in mapping a feature which then doesn't appear are 
relatively common.
This reminds me to the good old times in OSM. Can anyybody remember 
that the sand bunkers on some golf courses had beeen tagged as natural 
= beach to get them rendered?   :-(

Not everything was good in good old times...


Cheers,
Michael.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Overpass API v0.7.50 almost done

2014-06-23 Thread Roland Olbricht


Hi Martijn,

thank you for the feedback.


Also, do the attic queries already work fully when I use Overpass
Turbo?


No, that's the reason for almost. With much more intensive testing 
than before I've found a couple of bugs in corner cases, and I'm still 
fixing them.



When I run

[adiff:2014-06-12T20:00:00Z];
way(11027880);
out;

I do get an old and new section but they don't contain the deletion date.


Please use out meta; instead. In the laguage design, out means to not 
provide meta data but only geometry, memberships and tags.


Roland


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread yvecai

However this off-topic illustrates one point: topic map are good to show 
topical features: you can fill bugs that the maintainer will have a 
pleasure to fix :)


Andy, you are well placed to know that rendering a particular topic well 
requires a good understanding of the tagging scheme, but also the habits 
of those contributors mapping this particular interest of them.


I'm not sure a map showing everything is a solution today, and even less 
sure somebody could find a sustained interest in maintaining one.


Also, tools like Overpass or Umap now make things easier.

Yves


On 23.06.2014 19:13, SomeoneElse wrote:

Yves wrote:

Or directed them toward Openrailwaymap ?


I'd have suggested that (in fact it's the first place I looked), had 
any of the renderings there been at all useful.  There do seem to have 
been some odd choices in terms of what gets rendered and what 
doesn't.  Here's an area not far from me that shows the problem:


http://www.openrailwaymap.org/?lang=enlat=53.18464174858166lon=-1.3017082214355469zoom=13style=standard 



That doesn't mean that openrailwaymap is wrong; just that it's not a 
solution to this particular problem.


And of course, my original question was not just about railways; that 
was just an example.


Cheers,

Andy


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




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

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread Russ Nelson

The only complaints I see about the standard map are the ones coming
from railfans who want to see the abandoned railroads put back. Can we
not admit to error? Y'all should try it -- it puts hair on your chest
and makes your boobs bigger (those would be gender-specific
enhancements. I'll let you figure out which gender wants which).
-russ

SomeoneElse writes:
  There have been lots of changes to the standard style sheet recently 
  (e.g. [1]).  The resulting map looks much nicer (farmland and other 
  landuse much less glaring, names that really make no sense to be shown 
  on a general map aren't).
  
  There have however been some unintended consequences of the changes.  A 
  number of abandoned railways near me were edited from abandoned to 
  disused; I'm guessing that it might be because of the recent changes.  
  Changeset comments along the lines of changed to X so that it renders 
  and I know we're not supposed to tag for the renderer but what's the 
  point in mapping a feature which then doesn't appear are relatively common.
  
  The question, I suspect is what is the Standard style on the OSM 
  website for?  It used to be for mappers, but a nice rendering; one that 
  you might actually use as a punter too.  Back when Osmarender [3] 
  existed, that was the if you want to see everything render, look at the 
  instead option.  The removal of features (see [2]) that people actually 
  use means that the Standard style isn't really for mappers any more - 
  it's a nice (very nice, actually) generic map style, but not one that 
  you can use to make sure that what you've mapped is technically 
  correct (e.g. joined polygons up properly).
  
  So, where's the replacement for Osmarender?  I'm sure that someone, 
  somewhere, will have created a CartoCSS style file that is much closer 
  to show everything than openstreetmap-carto currently is. Currently 
  for my own use I'm still using the standard style but at database update 
  adding back in some of the recent removals (see [4] - it also does some 
  England and Wales rights-of-way stuff). However, as the standard style 
  becomes nicer it's becoming increasingly clear that it's not the best 
  place to start from.  The question is, what is?
  
  Cheers,
  
  Andy
  
  [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-June/069959.html
  
  [2] https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542
  
  [3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Osmarender
  
  [4] 
  https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua
  
  
  ___
  talk mailing list
  talk@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Come back Osmarender, all is forgiven!

2014-06-23 Thread Russ Nelson

On the other hand (reaching into my economist's bag of hands), I'm not
friends with too many hydrantfans, churchfans, mountaintopfans,
islandfans, or wetlandfans. So maybe I have a biased view. How many
complaints are we getting from them, now that their favorite feature
is no longer visible?

I take that back. Obviously the islandfans have successfully been able
to put their foot down, and keep them rendered at Z=15 and higher. And
of course it's been years since it was OpenChurchMap.org, so it's
unlikely that the churchanistas are still complaining. Maybe if all
the religionists could cooperate with each other, they could populate
OpenChurchMap.org. I'm not holding my breadth. Or my heighth. How come
breadth ends in an H, but height does not? I blame the English for
English.

Russ Nelson writes:
  The only complaints I see about the standard map are the ones coming
  from railfans who want to see the abandoned railroads put back. Can we
  not admit to error? Y'all should try it -- it puts hair on your chest
  and makes your boobs bigger (those would be gender-specific
  enhancements. I'll let you figure out which gender wants which).
  -russ
  
  SomeoneElse writes:
There have been lots of changes to the standard style sheet recently 
(e.g. [1]).  The resulting map looks much nicer (farmland and other 
landuse much less glaring, names that really make no sense to be shown 
on a general map aren't).

There have however been some unintended consequences of the changes.  A 
number of abandoned railways near me were edited from abandoned to 
disused; I'm guessing that it might be because of the recent changes.  
Changeset comments along the lines of changed to X so that it renders 
and I know we're not supposed to tag for the renderer but what's the 
point in mapping a feature which then doesn't appear are relatively 
  common.

The question, I suspect is what is the Standard style on the OSM 
website for?  It used to be for mappers, but a nice rendering; one that 
you might actually use as a punter too.  Back when Osmarender [3] 
existed, that was the if you want to see everything render, look at the 
instead option.  The removal of features (see [2]) that people actually 
use means that the Standard style isn't really for mappers any more - 
it's a nice (very nice, actually) generic map style, but not one that 
you can use to make sure that what you've mapped is technically 
correct (e.g. joined polygons up properly).

So, where's the replacement for Osmarender?  I'm sure that someone, 
somewhere, will have created a CartoCSS style file that is much closer 
to show everything than openstreetmap-carto currently is. Currently 
for my own use I'm still using the standard style but at database update 
adding back in some of the recent removals (see [4] - it also does some 
England and Wales rights-of-way stuff). However, as the standard style 
becomes nicer it's becoming increasingly clear that it's not the best 
place to start from.  The question is, what is?

Cheers,

Andy

[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-June/069959.html

[2] https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542

[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Osmarender

[4] 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua


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

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed repeated mechanical edit: Empty relations

2014-06-23 Thread Paul Norman

I completed the edit without issues.

https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2270 opened for one source.
JOSM had a few too, but those cover more versions so don't show up at
the top.

I manually handled relations which had other relations parents, and in
ever case it was an error of some kind. Most of the parent relations
themselves had no tags and no other members.

On 2014-06-16 1:17 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
I'm proposing a regular mechanical edit to remove relations over two
days old with no tags, no members, and that are version 1. The reasons
for this are hopefully obvious. They should only exist through editor
bugs, and contain no data from users of any kind. There are currently
1.4k relations like this.

The technical details are at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/pnorman#Repeated_empty_relation_cleanup.
I've done a similar mechanical edit in the past.

In case of a conflict (another user editing them at the same time) the
API will reject the changes and I'll just re-generate the list. I
consider this very unlikely, as the only way you can do anything with
the relations is to know the machine-generated ID.

Before actually conducting the edit, I want to see what editors were
used, and submit bug reports if there's any regular problems.

I'm calling this a regular mechanical edit rather than a bot because
it doesn't have the level of automation to be a bot.

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

[Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread John Packer

Amigos,

Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário criou e
alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal de
Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
memória?

Estou mencionando este assunto, porque me deparei com uma discussão na
Wikipédia sobre este mesmo assunto, onde eles dizem que a Paleorrota
realmente não existe, e que aparentemente é o projeto de uma pessoa que
quer criar esta Paleorrota.

A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para eliminar/Paleorrota
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:P%C3%A1ginas_para_eliminar/Paleorrota
.

Abs,
João
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Paulo Carvalho

Eles concluíram que tal coisa não existe (a Paleorrota).

POR OUTRO LADO, em 2013, participei de um estudo de campo na bacia
sedimentar do Paraná, onde estudei muitas rochas em vários sistemas
deposicionais.  Em muitas delas, particulamente no afloramento dos
folhelhos em São Mateus do Sul, encontramos uma imensa variedade de
fósseis, um deles até surpreendendo o professor.

Acho que é fato mais ou menos conhecido que a região sul do Brasil e
Argentina são fontes prolíficas de fósseis de dinossauros.

Quero dizer com isso, que a ideia de incluir um tipo de roteiro
geoturístico por causa dos fósseis tem fundamento, embora o formato deva
ser discutido na comunidade científica e pautado em publicações e artigos.

Conclusão: por hora não inclui, mas devemos ficar ligados.  Se eu souber de
alguma coisa mais oficial de algum colega eu passo aqui.

[]s

Paulo



Em 23 de junho de 2014 10:04, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com escreveu:

 Amigos,

 Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário criou e
 alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal de
 Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

 Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
 memória?

 Estou mencionando este assunto, porque me deparei com uma discussão na
 Wikipédia sobre este mesmo assunto, onde eles dizem que a Paleorrota
 realmente não existe, e que aparentemente é o projeto de uma pessoa que
 quer criar esta Paleorrota.

 A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para eliminar/Paleorrota
 https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:P%C3%A1ginas_para_eliminar/Paleorrota
 .

 Abs,
 João

 ___
 Talk-br mailing list
 Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br


___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Nelson A. de Oliveira

Por (ainda?) não existir, não deve estar mapeada desta forma.
Caso algum dia venha a ser oficialmente reconhecida como Paleorrota, é
fácil atualizar ou corrigir para o novo nome.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Fernando Trebien

Eu viajei para Santa Maria uns dias atrás e passei justamente por essa
rota. Lembro de ter visto essa placa mais de uma vez no caminho:
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6V-xhD5QbuB2eXogjM1Cqeq6sifarfIOcZ8G1X2m7h6zGg2eAO7XuRoj87srnP9pOS4Mi7BZIXw2XlZsQ4Tn3807dPudPD6FALDRNEZWMHfPR8H9

E acho que foi próximo à entrada para a Quarta Colônia (entre Santa
Maria e Cachoeira do Sul). Vou conferir se anotei algo no tracklog que
eu gerei.

2014-06-23 10:04 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
 Amigos,

 Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário criou e
 alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal de
 Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

 Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
 memória?

 Estou mencionando este assunto, porque me deparei com uma discussão na
 Wikipédia sobre este mesmo assunto, onde eles dizem que a Paleorrota
 realmente não existe, e que aparentemente é o projeto de uma pessoa que quer
 criar esta Paleorrota.

 A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para eliminar/Paleorrota.

 Abs,
 João

 ___
 Talk-br mailing list
 Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br




-- 
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Fernando Trebien

Enquanto eu não encontro a confirmação da placa, por que não tentar um
contato diretamente com os envolvidos? Tudo leva a crer que o maior
envolvido é o Sérgio Kaminski. Ele certamente já foi bem longe na
tentativa de legalizar a rota, mas em 12/08/2013 o projeto do
Geoparque ainda não estava aprovado:
https://www.facebook.com/turismosantamaria/posts/606230259416582

Eu não sei de uma forma de descobrir se uma rota turística tem caráter
oficial. Provavelmente um contato com a SETUR
(http://www.turismo.rs.gov.br/inicial) ajudaria. Mas, considerando que
tem até artigo em holandês na Wikipédia sobre a Paleorrota
(http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleorrota), é bem provável que mesmo
uma rota não-oficial seria útil num mapa devido à sua projeção/fama.
Acho bastante provável que alguns serviços de turismo já estejam
usando esse nome, por exemplo:
*
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/turismo-no-rio-grande-do-sul-fonte-wikipedia/1118500024?ean=9781231542538
* https://br.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090925204625AAWEgLG
*
http://www2.turismo.rs.gov.br/portal/index.php?q=destinocod=4opt=20id=133bd=fg=3
* http://www.visitlatin.com.br/porto-alegre_brasil.htm
etc.

Repare também numa informação lá no blog
(http://paleorrota.blogspot.com.br/) logo abaixo do mapa: O nome
Paleorrota é de uso público, sendo livre o uso para divulgar a região.
É vetado o uso do nome para fins privados e comerciais. Esta medida é
necessária pois há empresas fazendo uso indevido do nome Paleorrota.

2014-06-23 11:43 GMT-03:00 Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com:
Eu viajei para Santa Maria uns dias atrás e passei justamente por essa
rota. Lembro de ter visto essa placa mais de uma vez no caminho:
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6V-xhD5QbuB2eXogjM1Cqeq6sifarfIOcZ8G1X2m7h6zGg2eAO7XuRoj87srnP9pOS4Mi7BZIXw2XlZsQ4Tn3807dPudPD6FALDRNEZWMHfPR8H9

E acho que foi próximo à entrada para a Quarta Colônia (entre Santa
Maria e Cachoeira do Sul). Vou conferir se anotei algo no tracklog que
eu gerei.

2014-06-23 10:04 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
Amigos,

Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário criou e
alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal de
Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
memória?

Estou mencionando este assunto, porque me deparei com uma discussão na
Wikipédia sobre este mesmo assunto, onde eles dizem que a Paleorrota
realmente não existe, e que aparentemente é o projeto de uma pessoa que quer
criar esta Paleorrota.

A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para eliminar/Paleorrota.

Abs,
João

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Paulo Carvalho

Se vocês abrirem a vista do satélite, justo ao norte dessas cidades dá para
ver onde termina a Serra Geral, onde a cobertura de basalto erodiu há pouco
tempo revelando os fósseis frescos. No caso de São Mateus do Sul foi na
frente de erosão do outro lado.

Desculpem o off topic. Só para reforçar a ideia de que existem fatos por
trás da infame Paleorrota.

Em 23 de junho de 2014 11:43, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com
escreveu:

Eu viajei para Santa Maria uns dias atrás e passei justamente por essa
rota. Lembro de ter visto essa placa mais de uma vez no caminho:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6V-xhD5QbuB2eXogjM1Cqeq6sifarfIOcZ8G1X2m7h6zGg2eAO7XuRoj87srnP9pOS4Mi7BZIXw2XlZsQ4Tn3807dPudPD6FALDRNEZWMHfPR8H9

E acho que foi próximo à entrada para a Quarta Colônia (entre Santa
Maria e Cachoeira do Sul). Vou conferir se anotei algo no tracklog que
eu gerei.

2014-06-23 10:04 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
Amigos,

Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário criou e
alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal de
Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
memória?

A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para eliminar/Paleorrota.

Abs,
João

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Nelson A. de Oliveira

O caso aqui é só sobre o nome da rodovia, que oficialmente não é
Paleorrota (e por isso não deveria estar no name).

Talvez algum *_name ou então criar uma relação de rota (route=road)
apenas nesse trecho, contendo name=Paleorrota + tourism=attraction

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Nelson A. de Oliveira

Só para complementar, na Alemanha tem bastante rota turística:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Germany/Ferienstra%C3%9Fen
Exemplo: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/87522

Eu mapearia a Paleorrota dessa forma também (uma relação de rota, com
name + tourism)

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread John Packer

Parece que o problema que teve na Wikipédia é que quase todas as
informações sobre a rota vem de uma mesma pessoa. (ele criou o blog
paleorrota.blogspot.com.br, criou a página da wikipédia em português,
espanhol e inglês, etc).

Mas se ela já está sendo conhecida assim, acho que não tem problema
deixarmos, pois o OSM não é tão rígido quanto a Wikipédia.

Acho que lembrei qual foi a comoção no OSM:
Esta Paleorrota (e a Estrada dos dinossauros) foi adicionada de forma
inapropriada no OSM.
Foi colocada no fim do nome de algumas das ruas a qual pertence.
(acho que na época também foi adicionado uma estrada que não existia, mas
foi então removida ou algo assim)

Acho que só isso que teríamos que ver então.
A minha primeira impressão é que essa paleorrota poderia ser colocada como
uma relação com type=route + route=road (eu poderia simplesmente colocar as
estradas que tem (Paleorrota) no nome, pra outra pessoa que se
interessar completar a relação).
Já essa Estrada dos Dinossauros, teríamos que entender melhor do que se
trata (e.g. será que uma etiqueta loc_name=Estrada dos Dinossauros na rua
que representa já não bastaria?)

Em 23 de junho de 2014 12:23, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com
escreveu:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6V-xhD5QbuB2eXogjM1Cqeq6sifarfIOcZ8G1X2m7h6zGg2eAO7XuRoj87srnP9pOS4Mi7BZIXw2XlZsQ4Tn3807dPudPD6FALDRNEZWMHfPR8H9

E acho que foi próximo à entrada para a Quarta Colônia (entre Santa
Maria e Cachoeira do Sul). Vou conferir se anotei algo no tracklog que
eu gerei.

2014-06-23 10:04 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
Amigos,

Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário criou
e
alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal de
Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
memória?

A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para
eliminar/Paleorrota.

Abs,
João

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread John Packer

Acho que não ficou muito claro este último email que mandei.
Basicamente: não acho que seja problema deixar a Paleorrota no OSM, só
precisa estar etiquetada adequadamente (e não do jeito que está no momento
adicionando (Paleorrota) ou Estrada dos Dinossauros no final de algumas
vias que pertencem a ela).
Concordo com colocar route+road e tourism=attraction.

Em 23 de junho de 2014 14:17, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com escreveu:

Mas se ela já está sendo conhecida assim, acho que não tem problema
deixarmos, pois o OSM não é tão rígido quanto a Wikipédia.

Em 23 de junho de 2014 12:23, Fernando Trebien fernando.treb...@gmail.com
escreveu:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6V-xhD5QbuB2eXogjM1Cqeq6sifarfIOcZ8G1X2m7h6zGg2eAO7XuRoj87srnP9pOS4Mi7BZIXw2XlZsQ4Tn3807dPudPD6FALDRNEZWMHfPR8H9

E acho que foi próximo à entrada para a Quarta Colônia (entre Santa
Maria e Cachoeira do Sul). Vou conferir se anotei algo no tracklog que
eu gerei.

2014-06-23 10:04 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
Amigos,

Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário
criou e
alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal
de
Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
memória?

A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para
eliminar/Paleorrota.

Abs,
João

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Paulo Carvalho

Em 23 de junho de 2014 14:23, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com escreveu:

Em 23 de junho de 2014 14:17, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com
escreveu:

Mas se ela já está sendo conhecida assim, acho que não tem problema
deixarmos, pois o OSM não é tão rígido quanto a Wikipédia.

Acho que só isso que teríamos que ver então.
A minha primeira impressão é que essa paleorrota poderia ser colocada
como uma relação com type=route + route=road (eu poderia simplesmente
colocar as estradas que tem (Paleorrota) no nome, pra outra pessoa que
se interessar completar a relação).
Já essa Estrada dos Dinossauros, teríamos que entender melhor do que se
trata (e.g. será que uma etiqueta loc_name=Estrada dos Dinossauros na rua
que representa já não bastaria?)

Em 23 de junho de 2014 12:23, Fernando Trebien
fernando.treb...@gmail.com escreveu:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6V-xhD5QbuB2eXogjM1Cqeq6sifarfIOcZ8G1X2m7h6zGg2eAO7XuRoj87srnP9pOS4Mi7BZIXw2XlZsQ4Tn3807dPudPD6FALDRNEZWMHfPR8H9

E acho que foi próximo à entrada para a Quarta Colônia (entre Santa
Maria e Cachoeira do Sul). Vou conferir se anotei algo no tracklog que
eu gerei.

2014-06-23 10:04 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
Amigos,

Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário
criou e
alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal
de
Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

Não me lembro de como este assunto ficou. Poderiam refrescar a minha
memória?

A discussão se encontra aqui: Wikipédia:Páginas para
eliminar/Paleorrota.

Abs,
João

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

--
Fernando Trebien
+55 (51) 9962-5409

Nullius in verba.

___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Fernando Trebien

Eu estava para adicionar a tag maxspeed em todo o percurso de PoA a
Santa Maria (que eu coletei num tracklog), já poderia consertar isso.

A comoção maior era sobre o nome Rodovia dos Dinossauros, nem tanto
sobre a Paleorrota. Eu não tenho experiência com mapear rodovias, mas
pesquisando (justamente pra revisar o trajeto que eu fiz) eu acabei
concluindo que é melhor colocar na tag name das linhas da rodovia
somente nomes oficiais, e eu acho que a comunidade concorda com
isso. Em relações de rota , até dá pra colocar nomes informais,
desde que o status da rota fique claro pelas tags aplicadas à relação.
Por exemplo: o que me diz que a rota de uma BR tem status oficial é a
presença da tag network=BR. O que me diria que a Paleorrota é uma rota
informal é a ausência dessa tag, ou a presença da tag
attraction=tourism. Outro fator que me diria que o status da rota é
oficial é a presença de uma tag source=Lei .

2014-06-23 14:23 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
Acho que não ficou muito claro este último email que mandei.
Basicamente: não acho que seja problema deixar a Paleorrota no OSM, só
precisa estar etiquetada adequadamente (e não do jeito que está no momento
adicionando (Paleorrota) ou Estrada dos Dinossauros no final de algumas
vias que pertencem a ela).
Concordo com colocar route+road e tourism=attraction.

Em 23 de junho de 2014 14:17, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com escreveu:

Mas se ela já está sendo conhecida assim, acho que não tem problema
deixarmos, pois o OSM não é tão rígido quanto a Wikipédia.

Acho que só isso que teríamos que ver então.
A minha primeira impressão é que essa paleorrota poderia ser colocada como
uma relação com type=route + route=road (eu poderia simplesmente colocar as
estradas que tem (Paleorrota) no nome, pra outra pessoa que se interessar
completar a relação).
Já essa Estrada dos Dinossauros, teríamos que entender melhor do que se
trata (e.g. será que uma etiqueta loc_name=Estrada dos Dinossauros na rua
que representa já não bastaria?)

Em 23 de junho de 2014 12:23, Fernando Trebien
fernando.treb...@gmail.com escreveu:

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/6V-xhD5QbuB2eXogjM1Cqeq6sifarfIOcZ8G1X2m7h6zGg2eAO7XuRoj87srnP9pOS4Mi7BZIXw2XlZsQ4Tn3807dPudPD6FALDRNEZWMHfPR8H9

E acho que foi próximo à entrada para a Quarta Colônia (entre Santa
Maria e Cachoeira do Sul). Vou conferir se anotei algo no tracklog que
eu gerei.

2014-06-23 10:04 GMT-03:00 John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com:
Amigos,

Lembro que um tempo atrás houve uma certa comoção pois um usuário
criou e
alterou algumas estradas no Rio Grande do Sul relacionado com uma tal
de
Paleorrota, e ela parecia não existir.

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Claiton Neisse

Eu sou de Santa Maria - RS.

O que eu sei é que tanto o Geoparque Paleorrota e a Rodovia dos Dinossauros
são projetos. E se vocês procurarem informações na internet sobre esses
dois projetos encontrarão o nome do usuário que fez as as alterações no OSM
e que edita os artigos da Wikipédia (Sérgio Kaminski).

Rodovia dos Dinossauros não é um nome oficial, muito menos conhecido
(informal, popular, etc), da BR-287 (e nem das outras rodovias em que o
usuário o acrescentou). A lei que denomina a BR-287 é essa:
http://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/lei/1980-1987/lei-7003-24-junho-1982-357116-publicacaooriginal-1-pl.html.
Eu não removi o termo das rodovias por falta de tempo. Me limitei a
removê-lo de uma das principais vias de Santa Maria (a ERS-509 ou Avenida
Prefeito Evandro Behr ou faixa velha de camobi e que sobre a qual não
existe nenhuma referencia de que é ou foi conhecida por Rodovia dos
Dinossauros, nem na internet, nem em livros de história nem com pessoas
com amplo conhecimento sobre a história da cidade). Eu acredito ser correto
remover a denominação Rodovia dos Dinossauros assim como as tag note,
website e wikipedia acrescentadas pelo usuário em trechos da BR-287 e
nas outras rodovias. E também não mencionar em nenhuma outra tag o termo
Rodovia dos Dinossauros (eu posso ficar responsável por fazer isso).

Já o termo Pelorrota parece ser mais antigo e um pouco conhecido pelas
pessoas da região e faz referencia aos municípios onde foram encontrados
fosseis e sítios paleontológicos. No entanto, não engloba todos os
municípios onde foram encontrados fosseis. O Unaysaurus tolentinoi foi
encontrado no município de São Martinho da Serra que não faz parte da
rota. Agora, de fato, não existe uma rota turística ou o geoparque
denominado Paleorrota. Não existe nada organizado, por exemplo, não existe
visitação aos sítios paleontológicos de Santa Maria. Existe um nome
(Paleorrota) que é associado a região pelos fosseis e sítios, mas não uma
rota. Além disso, Paleorrota não é denominação oficial, muito menos
popular ou informal de nenhuma das rodovias em que o usuário o acrescentou.
Logo acredito ser correto remover essa denominação dos trechos em que o
usuário acrescentou. E também não mencionar em nenhuma outra tag o termo
Paleorrota. (posso ficar responsável por isso).

Um bom indicativo da não existência é consultar os sites das secretarias de
turismo dos municípios em questão. Por exemplo a de Santa Maria (uma das
secretarias mais empenhadas em fomentar o turismo na região central do RS):
http://www.santamaria.rs.gov.br/turismo/. A única rota conhecida por aqui é
a Rota Turística e Gastronômica Santa Maria - Silveira Martins
https://www.google.com.br/search?client=ubuntuchannel=fsq=rota+turistica+e+gastronomica+santa+mariaie=utf-8oe=utf-8gfe_rd=crei=4GSoU6-aA6ek8wf_44D4Aw
.

Abaixo segue a resposta do Sérgio Kaminski às minhas perguntas sobre a
origem dos termos Rodovia dos Dinossauros e Palerrota e porque
adicioná-los as vias. Ele não apresentou nenhuma fonte para as
denominações, disse apenas que são populares, o que pra mim não é verdade

Sergio Kaminski https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Sergio%20Kaminski
15 de Maio de 2014 às 16:53

On 2014-04-15 05:46:25 UTC portal aventura wrote:

Olá Sérgio, tudo bem? Seja bem vindo ao OSM.

Me chamo Claiton Neisse. Aqui na região central existem algumas pessoas que
editam regularmente no OSM. Eu sou uma delas. E além de editar, de vez em
quando, reviso o mapa e as edições de outros usuários.

Envio essa mensagem para fazer algumas observações e perguntas sobre suas
edições.

Notei que todas as suas edições estão relacionadas a Paleorrota. Acho
interessante inserir no OSM informações sobre os sítios paleontológicos da
região.

A primeira observação é, na verdade, uma sugestão para fazer comentários em
seus conjuntos de alterações. Os comentários facilitam o entendimento das
alterações feitas por outros usuários.

A segunda observação é que não usamos abreviamos nos nomes de ruas. Você
alterou o nome da faixa velha usando Av. para abreviar Avenida.

A terceira, é uma pergunta: gostaria de saber qual a origem da denominação
A Rodovia dos Dinossauros e Paleorrota que você utilizou na faixa
velha, na BR-158, na BR-287 e na BR-153? Pelo que pude perceber trata-se
de um projeto e não de denominação oficial ou popular dessas vias. Você
inseriu esses nomes nas vias porque?

Abraço,

Claiton Neisse

Olá Caliton,

O termo Palerrota é um termo que já é aceito internacionalmente e é popular
a rodovia dos dinossauros também é popular, embora exista um projeto para
tornar estes nomes oficiais através de uma lei estadual.

SERGIO KAMINSKI

Atenciosamente,

Claiton Neisse

Em 23 de junho de 2014 14:25, Paulo Carvalho paulo.r.m.carva...@gmail.com
escreveu:

Em 23 de junho de 2014 14:23, John Packer john.pack...@gmail.com
escreveu:

Acho que não ficou muito claro este último email que mandei.
Basicamente: não acho que seja problema deixar a Paleorrota no OSM, só

Re: [Talk-br] Paleorrota

2014-06-23 Thread Fernando Trebien

Claiton, você que é morador local deve saber mais sobre isso do que
nós. Vou tentar acertar esses detalhes, vai levar algumas horas. Nós
certamente podemos referenciar essa lei na tag source. Ainda, no OSM
podemos mapear coisas propostas usando a tag proposed, então acho que
daria pra usar essa tag para mapear essa rota turística proposta.
Existem coisas com caráter bem menos oficial do que isso que estão
mapeadas com essa tag, e às vezes até estão meio abandonadas (no
sentido de que ninguém sabe direito se elas devem estar no mapa ou
não).

John, creio que o pessoal da Wikipédia gostaria de ler esta discussão
toda, então sugiro passar o link pra eles. Acho válido que a Wikipédia
caracterize a Paleorrota como projeto com proposta de lei em
andamento, e talvez até citar que é popular num âmbito internacional
(só falta saber qual: público geral ou somente entre paleontólogos?),
mas ainda não como uma entidade oficial. Seria bom atualizar o texto
no WikiVoyage também.

2014-06-23 16:58 GMT-03:00 Claiton Neisse claiton.nei...@gmail.com:
Eu sou de Santa Maria - RS.

O que eu sei é que tanto o Geoparque Paleorrota e a Rodovia dos Dinossauros
são projetos. E se vocês procurarem informações na internet sobre esses dois
projetos encontrarão o nome do usuário que fez as as alterações no OSM e que
edita os artigos da Wikipédia (Sérgio Kaminski).

Rodovia dos Dinossauros não é um nome oficial, muito menos conhecido
(informal, popular, etc), da BR-287 (e nem das outras rodovias em que o
usuário o acrescentou). A lei que denomina a BR-287 é essa:
http://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/lei/1980-1987/lei-7003-24-junho-1982-357116-publicacaooriginal-1-pl.html.
Eu não removi o termo das rodovias por falta de tempo. Me limitei a
removê-lo de uma das principais vias de Santa Maria (a ERS-509 ou Avenida
Prefeito Evandro Behr ou faixa velha de camobi e que sobre a qual não
existe nenhuma referencia de que é ou foi conhecida por Rodovia dos
Dinossauros, nem na internet, nem em livros de história nem com pessoas com
amplo conhecimento sobre a história da cidade). Eu acredito ser correto
remover a denominação Rodovia dos Dinossauros assim como as tag note,
website e wikipedia acrescentadas pelo usuário em trechos da BR-287 e
nas outras rodovias. E também não mencionar em nenhuma outra tag o termo
Rodovia dos Dinossauros (eu posso ficar responsável por fazer isso).

Abaixo segue a resposta do Sérgio Kaminski às minhas perguntas sobre a
origem dos termos Rodovia dos Dinossauros e Palerrota e porque
adicioná-los as vias. Ele não apresentou nenhuma fonte para as denominações,
disse apenas que são populares, o que pra mim não é verdade

Sergio Kaminski
15 de Maio de 2014 às 16:53

On 2014-04-15 05:46:25 UTC portal aventura wrote:

Olá Sérgio, tudo bem? Seja bem vindo ao OSM.

Envio essa mensagem para fazer algumas observações e perguntas sobre suas
edições.

Notei que todas as suas edições estão relacionadas a Paleorrota. Acho
interessante inserir no OSM informações sobre os sítios paleontológicos da
região.

A primeira observação é, na verdade, uma sugestão para fazer comentários em
seus conjuntos de alterações. Os comentários facilitam o entendimento das
alterações feitas por outros usuários.

A segunda observação é que não usamos abreviamos nos nomes de ruas. Você
alterou o nome da faixa velha usando Av. para abreviar Avenida.

A terceira, é uma pergunta:

[Talk-de] Morgen ab 20:15 RadioOSM Live

2014-06-23 Thread mazdermind

Hallo liebe OpenStreetMapper,
morgen Abend ab 20:15 sendet RadioOSM wieder Live.
Ihr könnt mit uns und anderen Hörern im Chat sprechen: 
irc://irc.freenode.net/#Radio-OSM (Webchat: http://ift.tt/17njx3P) und ab kurz 
vor 20:15 live auf http://ift.tt/Zn8aRB hören.
Alle weiteren Infos sowie alle alten Folgen findet ihr auf unserer Webseite 
http://ift.tt/141Nh3t
Liebe Grüße,
euer RadioOSM Team
- Andi, Marc und Michael
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] RadioOSM: OSMDE035 OSM Talk: Die SOTM-EU 2014

2014-06-23 Thread mazdermind

Hallo liebe OpenStreetMapper,
die neuste Folge von RadioOSM - OSMDE035 OSM Talk: Die SOTM-EU 2014 - ist 
verfügbar und sollte in Kürze in euren Podcatchern auftauchen.
Natürlich könnt ihr diese Folge auch in unserem Blog hören: 
http://ift.tt/1pvBrpT
Dort findet ihr auch Links zu allen Themen, über die wir gespochen haben.
Viel Spaß damit und Liebe Grüße,
euer RadioOSM Team
- Andi, Marc und Peter
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

[Talk-de] OpenRailwayMap Mappingwochenende

2014-06-23 Thread Alexander Matheisen

Hallo zusammen,

die Bahnmapper rund um das Projekt OpenRailwayMap veranstalten vom 11.
bis 13. Juli 2014 in Köln das erste OpenRailwayMap-Mappingwochenende.

Eingeladen sind natürlich nicht nur die Bahnexperten unter den Mappern,
sondern auch interessierte Neulinge, die das Thema Bahnmapping einmal
näher kennenlernen möchten.

Weitere Informationen findet ihr im Wiki unter
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:OpenRailwayMap/Mappingwochenende_2014_1 
- tragt euch auch bitte dort ein, falls ihr kommen wollt.

Ich hoffe auf reges Interesse!


Gruß
Alex


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-it] tag name

2014-06-23 Thread dvdzero

Alessandro Barbieri wrote
 Esistono anche casi in cui è erroneamente usato per ripetere
 informazioni di altri tag:
 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/44.3929/11.6633

ecco il mio discorso iniziale riguardava proprio questi casi. Io quei nomi
frutteto, li toglierei tutti.

Invece i casi:
Ristorante da Gigi
Ospedale di Nomepersona
sono ovviamente corretti

ma sarei in dubbio su:
chiesa di Nomepaese (normalmente le chiese hanno nomi di santi o cose
simili)
cimitero di Nomepaese

Su questi andrebbe verificato se effettivamente quello è il nome ufficiale o
il mappatore non voleva lasciare vuoto il campo nome e non sapeva cosa
scriverci.

E' vero anche che però ad esempio nel caso dei cimiteri (penso quasi sempre
senza nome) quandi ti devi riferire a uno di questi si dice cimitero di
Nomepaese per farti capire e magari questo nome aiuta a capire a che paese
fa riferimento un cimitero visto che alcune volte sono fuori dall'abitato.



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/tag-name-tp5809106p5809245.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] tag name

2014-06-23 Thread Gianluca Boero



Il 23/06/2014 09:53, dvdzero ha scritto:

E' vero anche che però ad esempio nel caso dei cimiteri (penso quasi 
sempre senza nome) quandi ti devi riferire a uno di questi si dice 
cimitero di Nomepaese per farti capire e magari questo nome aiuta a 
capire a che paese fa riferimento un cimitero visto che alcune volte 
sono fuori dall'abitato. --


Però approfondendo nel sito del comune potresti trovare Cimitero 
Comunale di . o nomi vari e questi sono ovviamente i nomi ufficiali 
(comprensivo quindi di Comunale).



___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] tag name

2014-06-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer



 Am 23/giu/2014 um 09:53 schrieb dvdzero dvdz...@gmail.com:
 
 ma sarei in dubbio su:
 chiesa di Nomepaese (normalmente le chiese hanno nomi di santi o cose
 simili)


Hanno alle volte anche più nomi (quindi uso alt_name per la variante), per 
esempio Concattedrale di XY e Santa Maria della Montagna...

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] surface (ancora...)

2014-06-23 Thread demon.box

scusate: come taggereste una strada forestale con fondo di base terroso ma
con grandi rocce lisce fisse affioranti?
grazie, ciao
--enrico




--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/surface-ancora-tp5809267.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] surface (ancora...)

2014-06-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer

2014-06-23 14:00 GMT+02:00 demon.box e.rossin...@alice.it:

 scusate: come taggereste una strada forestale con fondo di base terroso ma
 con grandi rocce lisce fisse affioranti?


innanzi tutto

highway=track
tracktype=grade...

access-tags

poi volendo surface=ground / earth / (unpaved)

non userei surface=dirt perché in certi regioni lo usano anche per ghiaia,
ground vuol dire meno che earth perché non è un materiale, mud
dipende dal tempo precendente (se ha piovuto o no) e non lo userei.

Con rocce lisce fisse affioranti intendi questo:
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affioramento_roccioso ?

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Un'altra challenge su Maproulette - numeri civici senza via

2014-06-23 Thread Fabrizio Tambussa

Ho appena caricato su maproulette.org una nuova challenge:
correggere i numeri civici senza via

Sono nodi che hanno addr:housenumber valorizzato ma:
1) non hanno la tag addr:street
oppure
2) non fanno parte di una relation type=street o type=associatedStreet

Per correggere occorre verificare che non esista una relation in cui
includere il civico, mettere la tag addr:street sul nodo oppure creare una
relation.

Prestate particolare attenzione alla posizione del numero civico, poiche' a
volte non e' facile capire a quale via associare il civico.  In questo caso
esiste il tasto I'm not sure / Skip.

Saluti a tutti

Fabrizio Sbiribizio
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Un'altra challenge su Maproulette - numeri civici senza via

2014-06-23 Thread Damjan Gerl

Attenzione che ci sono casi (specialmente in villaggi più piccoli) dove non ci 
sono vie, ma il n. civico va associato al place con addr:place. In questo caso 
da aggiungere alle vie senza nome un noname=yes (e non il nome del place, 
tranne casi nei quali la via ha veramente il nome del place - specificato su 
cartello di via).

Ciao
Damjan


 Ho appena caricato su maproulette.org una nuova challenge:
 correggere i numeri civici senza via

 Sono nodi che hanno 
addr:housenumber valorizzato ma:
 1) non hanno la tag addr:street 
 oppure
 2) non fanno parte 
di una relation type=street o type=associatedStreet

 Per
 correggere occorre verificare che non esista una relation in cui includere
 il civico, mettere la tag addr:street sul nodo oppure creare una relation.

 Prestate particolare attenzione alla posizione del numero civico, poiche' a 
 volte non e' facile capire a quale via associare il civico.  In questo caso 
 esiste il tasto I'm not sure / Skip.


 Saluti a tutti

 Fabrizio Sbiribizio





___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [SOD] Re: Carta tecnica Comune di Lecce

2014-06-23 Thread Federico Cortese

2014-06-22 12:41 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:

  quota piede fabbricato e quota gronda edificio, potrebbero essere
 questi dati utili in fase di import per gestire l'altezza degli edifici?

 si, quota piede in osm è ele, in osm espresso in WGS84 in metri.

 ciao,
 Martin


Interessante, a quello non avevo pensato; io mi riferivo soprattutto al
fatto che per ciascun edificio si potrebbe aggiungere il tag height=(quota
gronda edificio - quota piede fabbricato), in modo da avere una
rappresentazione 3D più verosimile.
N.B. sul dataset rilasciato dal comune di Lecce sul portale Opendata non
esiste il layer puntuale, che invece fa parte della CTR Puglia, ma essendo
i dati provenienti comunque dalla CTR non credo ci dovrebbero essere grossi
problemi.

Federico (OSM:corfede)
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [SOD] Re: Carta tecnica Comune di Lecce

2014-06-23 Thread Leonardo

Infatti, credo sia meglio mettere il tag height (ricavato dalle 
differenze delle due quote) che il tag ele (ovvero l'altitudine, 
riservato soprattutto a picchi montuosi).


Leonardo

Il 23/06/2014 18:13, Federico Cortese ha scritto:
2014-06-22 12:41 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com 
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com:


 quota piede fabbricato e quota gronda edificio, potrebbero
essere questi dati utili in fase di import per gestire l'altezza
degli edifici?

si, quota piede in osm è ele, in osm espresso in WGS84 in metri.

ciao,
Martin


Interessante, a quello non avevo pensato; io mi riferivo soprattutto 
al fatto che per ciascun edificio si potrebbe aggiungere il tag 
height=(quota gronda edificio - quota piede fabbricato), in modo 
da avere una rappresentazione 3D più verosimile.
N.B. sul dataset rilasciato dal comune di Lecce sul portale Opendata 
non esiste il layer puntuale, che invece fa parte della CTR Puglia, ma 
essendo i dati provenienti comunque dalla CTR non credo ci dovrebbero 
essere grossi problemi.


Federico (OSM:corfede)


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [SOD] Re: Carta tecnica Comune di Lecce

2014-06-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer

2014-06-23 18:13 GMT+02:00 Federico Cortese cortese...@gmail.com:

 Interessante, a quello non avevo pensato; io mi riferivo soprattutto al
 fatto che per ciascun edificio si potrebbe aggiungere il tag height=(quota
 gronda edificio - quota piede fabbricato), in modo da avere una
 rappresentazione 3D più verosimile.



per una buona rappresentazione 3D dovresti avere sia ele (la base della
struttura) che height (dalla base al colmo) che anche l'altezza del tetto
ed il punto della grondaia oppure l'inclinazione del tetto (più svariati
altri parametri, ma dipende molto dalla scala che vuoi ottenere).

Credo con solo quota piede fabbricato e quota gronda edificio non puoi
calcolare un height (al meno che non si tratta di tetti piani).

C'è qualche documentazione qui:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings
(Non mi piace come hanno implementato edifici che non partono da terra ma
sopra, ma questo è un altro discorso).

Volendo uno potrebbe anche argomentare che height parte dalle fondazioni e
non da terra, ma questo probabilmente viene visto da pochi così ;-)

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [SOD] Re: Carta tecnica Comune di Lecce

2014-06-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer

2014-06-23 18:32 GMT+02:00 Leonardo kinetocor...@gmail.com:

 che il tag ele (ovvero l'altitudine, riservato soprattutto a picchi
 montuosi).



il tag ele può essere applicato a qualsiasi punto, non è riservato. Il
problema è rilevarlo, e metterlo nel sistema di riferimento giusto...

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Civici FVG

2014-06-23 Thread Leonardo

Ho creato la pagina per il coordinamento dell'import dei numeri civici 
nella wiki del FVG.


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Friuli_Venezia_Giulia/Import_Civici_FVG

Per quanto riguarda i CAP? Abbiamo fonti esterne per integrarli con i 
numeri civici?


Leonardo

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Uso sbagliato di natural=cliff ?

2014-06-23 Thread Paolo Monegato


Il 20/06/2014 12:26, Martin Koppenhoefer ha scritto:


2014-06-19 19:25 GMT+02:00 Paolo Monegato gato.selvad...@gmail.com 
mailto:gato.selvad...@gmail.com:


No. Praticamente c'è un natural=cliff che evidenzia la scarpatina
+ un barrier=wall (su una linea parallela) che rappresenta il
murazzo. Per Volker dovrebbe esserci un'unica linea con un unico
tag, che non può essere cliff perché cliff è una falesia...



Se il muro regge la terra / roccia va usato retaining_wall, se invece 
c'è un vano tra terra e muro va bene wall. Comunque, concordo che un 
cliff è una falesia.


Il murazzo non è stato costruito per contenere la terra per evitare una 
frana, ma per contenere l'erosione marina. Parlassimo dei muri a secco 
dei terrazzamenti direi si senza pensarci all'uso di retaining_wall, ma 
dato che parliamo di qualcosa di costruito con uno scopo totalmente 
differente direi che è necessario pensarci...


ciao
Paolo M
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [SOD] Re: Carta tecnica Comune di Lecce

2014-06-23 Thread Federico Cortese

2014-06-23 19:39 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:


 per una buona rappresentazione 3D dovresti avere sia ele (la base della
 struttura) che height (dalla base al colmo) che anche l'altezza del tetto
 ed il punto della grondaia oppure l'inclinazione del tetto (più svariati
 altri parametri, ma dipende molto dalla scala che vuoi ottenere).

 Credo con solo quota piede fabbricato e quota gronda edificio non puoi
 calcolare un height (al meno che non si tratta di tetti piani)


Parlando di Lecce si tratta proprio di tetti piani, a parte qualche
sporadica eccezione.

C'è qualche documentazione qui:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings
 (Non mi piace come hanno implementato edifici che non partono da terra ma
 sopra, ma questo è un altro discorso).


Si conoscevo la pagina, chiaramente volendo essere precisi bisognerebbe
suddividere i fabbricati più complessi mediante building:part
(orizzontalmente o verticalmente a seconda delle necessità).


 il tag ele può essere applicato a qualsiasi punto, non è riservato. Il
 problema è rilevarlo, e metterlo nel sistema di riferimento giusto...


Nelle CTR italiane il riferimento delle quote è sempre quello s.l.m. (sul
livello medio del mare) ossia riferito al geoide Italgeo2005 (o Italgeo99
per interventi meno recenti). Il parametro ele di OSM invece fa riferimento
al geoide EGM96; le differenze tra i due sistemi comunque dovrebbero essere
minime (inferiori al metro come indicato nello stesso wiki). Se si fa un
rilievo con GPS ovviamente bisogna stare attenti perhè la quota rilevata è
quella ellissoidica molto diversa, qui a Lecce più o meno 40 m al di sotto
del geoide.

Ora sono abbondantemente OT, meglio tornare a parlare dell'import della CTR
per Lecce :)

Federico (OSM:corfede)
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Uso sbagliato di natural=cliff ?

2014-06-23 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer



 Am 23/giu/2014 um 21:39 schrieb Paolo Monegato gato.selvad...@gmail.com:
 
 con uno scopo totalmente differente direi che è necessario pensarci...


forse merita un tag apposito?

ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [SOD] Re: Carta tecnica Comune di Lecce

2014-06-23 Thread Francesco Piero Paolicelli

Opterei di andare per gradi lasciando la parte 3D in seconda battuta di 
affinamento e magari creando qualche evento locale per coinvolgere mappatori

Inviato da iPhone

 Il giorno 23/giu/2014, alle ore 21:59, Federico Cortese 
 cortese...@gmail.com ha scritto:
 
 2014-06-23 19:39 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
 
 per una buona rappresentazione 3D dovresti avere sia ele (la base della 
 struttura) che height (dalla base al colmo) che anche l'altezza del tetto ed 
 il punto della grondaia oppure l'inclinazione del tetto (più svariati altri 
 parametri, ma dipende molto dalla scala che vuoi ottenere).
 
 Credo con solo quota piede fabbricato e quota gronda edificio non puoi 
 calcolare un height (al meno che non si tratta di tetti piani)
 
 Parlando di Lecce si tratta proprio di tetti piani, a parte qualche sporadica 
 eccezione.
 
 C'è qualche documentazione qui: 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings
 (Non mi piace come hanno implementato edifici che non partono da terra ma 
 sopra, ma questo è un altro discorso). 
 
 Si conoscevo la pagina, chiaramente volendo essere precisi bisognerebbe 
 suddividere i fabbricati più complessi mediante building:part 
 (orizzontalmente o verticalmente a seconda delle necessità).
   
 il tag ele può essere applicato a qualsiasi punto, non è riservato. Il 
 problema è rilevarlo, e metterlo nel sistema di riferimento giusto...
  
 Nelle CTR italiane il riferimento delle quote è sempre quello s.l.m. (sul 
 livello medio del mare) ossia riferito al geoide Italgeo2005 (o Italgeo99 per 
 interventi meno recenti). Il parametro ele di OSM invece fa riferimento al 
 geoide EGM96; le differenze tra i due sistemi comunque dovrebbero essere 
 minime (inferiori al metro come indicato nello stesso wiki). Se si fa un 
 rilievo con GPS ovviamente bisogna stare attenti perhè la quota rilevata è 
 quella ellissoidica molto diversa, qui a Lecce più o meno 40 m al di sotto 
 del geoide.
 
 Ora sono abbondantemente OT, meglio tornare a parlare dell'import della CTR 
 per Lecce :)
  
 Federico (OSM:corfede)
 ___
 Talk-it mailing list
 Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Civici FVG

2014-06-23 Thread Damjan Gerl


23.06.2014 - 19:51 - Leonardo:

Ho creato la pagina per il coordinamento dell'import dei numeri civici
nella wiki del FVG.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Friuli_Venezia_Giulia/Import_Civici_FVG

Per quanto riguarda i CAP? Abbiamo fonti esterne per integrarli con i
numeri civici?

Leonardo



Bene! Ho un paio di riflessioni:

- conviene caricare il file già in wgs84 (=ETRS89) senza convertire il 
datum, cosa già fatta dalla regione. Questo file viene anche 
direttamente aperto da josm con il plugin Opendata:

http://irdat.regione.fvg.it/Distributore/download?idDset=10221idFmt=383type=lcrpath=SIT/Shape/CIVICI_RAFVG_sh.ziprefSys=3045

- serve il addr:country=IT? Oppure e ridondante?

- per i cap i dati ufficiali si trovano su poste.it, ma sono a pagamento 
(ci sono anche gia gli shp):

http://www.poste-impresa.it/online/pmi/postali/accessori/banchedati.shtml

- nel wiki alcuni nomi di comuni sono tagliati

Ciao
Damjan


___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-it] Mappa Regione Basilicata per gli incidenti

2014-06-23 Thread Francesco Piero Paolicelli

è un prototipo su cui stanno lavorando: 
http://rsdi.regione.basilicata.it/geoserver/www/incidenti/index.html

cercherò di avere licenza per i layers che trovate caricate (a parte le 
ortofoto che già sono state concesse per il ricalco, ci sono i toponimi ect)

ho visto spippolando anche i civici ..


Francesco Piero Paolicelli

TW: @piersoft
STORE: GooglePlay/AppStore
WWW: www.apposta.biz
Sorry for typos, sent by mobile.




___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [SOD] Re: Carta tecnica Comune di Lecce

2014-06-23 Thread Francesco Piero Paolicelli

intanto vedete che fa questo amico http://tinyurl.com/kjpkkmk 
Il giorno 23/giu/2014, alle ore 21:59, Federico Cortese cortese...@gmail.com 
ha scritto:

 2014-06-23 19:39 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
 
 per una buona rappresentazione 3D dovresti avere sia ele (la base della 
 struttura) che height (dalla base al colmo) che anche l'altezza del tetto ed 
 il punto della grondaia oppure l'inclinazione del tetto (più svariati altri 
 parametri, ma dipende molto dalla scala che vuoi ottenere).
 
 Credo con solo quota piede fabbricato e quota gronda edificio non puoi 
 calcolare un height (al meno che non si tratta di tetti piani)
 
 Parlando di Lecce si tratta proprio di tetti piani, a parte qualche sporadica 
 eccezione.
 
 C'è qualche documentazione qui: 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings
 (Non mi piace come hanno implementato edifici che non partono da terra ma 
 sopra, ma questo è un altro discorso). 
 
 Si conoscevo la pagina, chiaramente volendo essere precisi bisognerebbe 
 suddividere i fabbricati più complessi mediante building:part 
 (orizzontalmente o verticalmente a seconda delle necessità).
   
 il tag ele può essere applicato a qualsiasi punto, non è riservato. Il 
 problema è rilevarlo, e metterlo nel sistema di riferimento giusto...
  
 Nelle CTR italiane il riferimento delle quote è sempre quello s.l.m. (sul 
 livello medio del mare) ossia riferito al geoide Italgeo2005 (o Italgeo99 per 
 interventi meno recenti). Il parametro ele di OSM invece fa riferimento al 
 geoide EGM96; le differenze tra i due sistemi comunque dovrebbero essere 
 minime (inferiori al metro come indicato nello stesso wiki). Se si fa un 
 rilievo con GPS ovviamente bisogna stare attenti perhè la quota rilevata è 
 quella ellissoidica molto diversa, qui a Lecce più o meno 40 m al di sotto 
 del geoide.
 
 Ora sono abbondantemente OT, meglio tornare a parlare dell'import della CTR 
 per Lecce :)
  
 Federico (OSM:corfede)
 ___
 Talk-it mailing list
 Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Francesco Piero Paolicelli

TW: @piersoft
STORE: GooglePlay/AppStore
WWW: www.apposta.biz
Sorry for typos, sent by mobile.



___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] surface (ancora...)

2014-06-23 Thread demon.box

...non proprio, devo fare una foto per farmi capire meglio.
a presto, grazie, ciao!
--enrico




--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/surface-ancora-tp5809267p5809337.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread Fredrik Ramsberg

Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i
Sverige, utan att skapa några licensproblem?

Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri
att användas efter 15 år:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Dalkvist/ekonomiska_kartan#Ekonomiska_kartan_till_osm
. Det låter ju lovande. Råder det konsensus kring detta?

Mvh,

/Fredrik
___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread bengt bäverman

Hejsan

Det är säkert sant, men kanske inte speciellt intressant för just
gatunamn. På 15 år hinner det hända mycket. Gator tillkommer och byter
namn och en del gator försvinner(!).

Det säkraste sättet är ju förstås att du karterar ett område som man
känner till och alltså redan vet vad gatan heter.

Det näst bästa är att konsultera flera olika källor. Om de är
samstämmiga finns det skäl att tro att uppgiften är korrekt. Alla
kartor är inte korrekta och en del kartor innehåller avsiktliga fel
för att upptäcka eventuella kopior. Därför räcker det inte med att
kontrollera med bara en karta.  Tänk också på att hitta källor som i
sin tur inte använder samma kartor, t ex från Lantmäteriet.

vänligen
   Bengt

Den 23 juni 2014 10:12 skrev Fredrik Ramsberg fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com:
 Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i
 Sverige, utan att skapa några licensproblem?

 Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri
 att användas efter 15 år:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Dalkvist/ekonomiska_kartan#Ekonomiska_kartan_till_osm
 . Det låter ju lovande. Råder det konsensus kring detta?

 Mvh,

 /Fredrik



 ___
 Talk-se mailing list
 Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se


___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread Andreas Vilén

Det bästa är förstås att kolla i fält, dvs på vägskyltarna. Det förekommer
dock fel på vägskyltar (mitt favoritexempel är Bachmans- resp Backmansgatan
på två sidor av samma väg i Kävlinge), och då kan man ju konsultera flera
andra källor för att reda ut vilken stavning som är korrekt.

Att konsultera källor kan aldrig bli upphovsrättsbrott, men att ta flera
vägnamn ifrån samma karta kan nog närma sig det.

Däremot tycker jag inte man ska vara så rädd för gamla kartor. På 15 år har
inte så mycket hänt, men för säkerhets skull bör man nog ändå kontrollera
att vägnamnen fortfarande stämmer mot moderna källor innan man lägger in
dem.

/Andreas


2014-06-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Fredrik Ramsberg fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com:

 Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i
 Sverige, utan att skapa några licensproblem?

 Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri
 att användas efter 15 år:

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Dalkvist/ekonomiska_kartan#Ekonomiska_kartan_till_osm
 . Det låter ju lovande. Råder det konsensus kring detta?

 Mvh,

 /Fredrik



 ___
 Talk-se mailing list
 Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se


___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread Fredrik Ramsberg

Jag har allmänt filosofin när jag karterar, och pratar om kartering, att
eftersom vi aldrig kommer uppnå hundraprocentig datakvalitet ändå, så är
det bättre att man karterar och får det 95% rätt, än att man helt avstår
att kartera för att man har någon liten osäkerhet kring om det blir helt
rätt. Är man alltför rädd för att få någon detalj fel, blir det inte mycket
gjort. Och jag ser mycket hellre att en väg är halvfärdig och har en gissad
typ, än att den inte finns med alls.

På midsommarafton tog jag en promenad i ett område som är nytt för mig, och
fann att en vägbit som fanns på kartan inte fanns och rimligen aldrig kan
ha funnits i verkligheten. Det störde mig inte att det var fel på kartan,
men jag rättade det förstås.

I denna fråga innebär min filosofi att jag hellre lägger in ett gatunamn
från en 15 år gammal källa, än avstår för att det kanske har ändrats. Om
någon senare upptäcker att gatunamnet har ändrats får denna person förstås
gärna uppdatera informationen.

/Fredrik

2014-06-23 10:25 GMT+02:00 Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com:

Det bästa är förstås att kolla i fält, dvs på vägskyltarna. Det förekommer
dock fel på vägskyltar (mitt favoritexempel är Bachmans- resp Backmansgatan
på två sidor av samma väg i Kävlinge), och då kan man ju konsultera flera
andra källor för att reda ut vilken stavning som är korrekt.

Att konsultera källor kan aldrig bli upphovsrättsbrott, men att ta flera
vägnamn ifrån samma karta kan nog närma sig det.

Däremot tycker jag inte man ska vara så rädd för gamla kartor. På 15 år
har inte så mycket hänt, men för säkerhets skull bör man nog ändå
kontrollera att vägnamnen fortfarande stämmer mot moderna källor innan man
lägger in dem.

/Andreas

2014-06-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Fredrik Ramsberg fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com:

Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i
Sverige, utan att skapa några licensproblem?

Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri
att användas efter 15 år:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Dalkvist/ekonomiska_kartan#Ekonomiska_kartan_till_osm
. Det låter ju lovande. Råder det konsensus kring detta?

Mvh,

/Fredrik

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread Jimmy Utterström

Jag håller med Fredrik här. Själv har jag försökt kartlägga lite stigar som 
inte funnits med i de områden jag vistas mest. Jag brukar skapa GPS-spår när 
jag är ute och cyklar MTB eller promenerar. Faktum är ju dock att så fort det 
börjar bli lite tätare med skog så är ju GPS spåren inte speciellt 
tillförlitliga. Men finns absolut inte stigen utmärkt sedan tidigare brukar jag 
ändå välja att lägga in den. För även om stigen ligger 20 meter fel på något 
ställe så är jag övertygad om att jag bidrar med ett större nöje genom att 
lägga till stigen istället för att strunta i det så att ingen vet att den 
finns. Sen kan man ju självklart justera den efter det att man har fått fler 
GPS-spår från samma ställe. 
/JImmy
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:48:53 +0200
From: fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com
To: talk-se@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

Jag har allmänt filosofin när jag karterar, och pratar om kartering, att 
eftersom vi aldrig kommer uppnå hundraprocentig datakvalitet ändå, så är det 
bättre att man karterar och får det 95% rätt, än att man helt avstår att 
kartera för att man har någon liten osäkerhet kring om det blir helt rätt. Är 
man alltför rädd för att få någon detalj fel, blir det inte mycket gjort. Och 
jag ser mycket hellre att en väg är halvfärdig och har en gissad typ, än att 
den inte finns med alls. 

På midsommarafton tog jag en promenad i ett område som är nytt för mig, och 
fann att en vägbit som fanns på kartan inte fanns och rimligen aldrig kan ha 
funnits i verkligheten. Det störde mig inte att det var fel på kartan, men jag 
rättade det förstås.

I denna fråga innebär min filosofi att jag hellre lägger in ett gatunamn från 
en 15 år gammal källa, än avstår för att det kanske har ändrats. Om någon 
senare upptäcker att gatunamnet har ändrats får denna person förstås gärna 
uppdatera informationen.

/Fredrik


2014-06-23 10:25 GMT+02:00 Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com:

Det bästa är förstås att kolla i fält, dvs på vägskyltarna. Det förekommer dock 
fel på vägskyltar (mitt favoritexempel är Bachmans- resp Backmansgatan på två 
sidor av samma väg i Kävlinge), och då kan man ju konsultera flera andra källor 
för att reda ut vilken stavning som är korrekt.


Att konsultera källor kan aldrig bli upphovsrättsbrott, men att ta flera 
vägnamn ifrån samma karta kan nog närma sig det.
Däremot tycker jag inte man ska vara så rädd för gamla kartor. På 15 år har 
inte så mycket hänt, men för säkerhets skull bör man nog ändå kontrollera att 
vägnamnen fortfarande stämmer mot moderna källor innan man lägger in dem.


/Andreas

2014-06-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Fredrik Ramsberg fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com:


Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i Sverige, 
utan att skapa några licensproblem?


Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri att 
användas efter 15 år:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Dalkvist/ekonomiska_kartan#Ekonomiska_kartan_till_osm
 . Det låter ju lovande. Råder det konsensus kring detta?



Mvh,
/Fredrik




___

Talk-se mailing list

Talk-se@openstreetmap.org

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se





___

Talk-se mailing list

Talk-se@openstreetmap.org

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se





___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
  ___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread bengt bäverman

Ja,

det är självklart, tycker jag, att det är bättre att göra den del man
kan än inget alls. Det ligger liksom i open-source-tankarna. Nu
tolkade jag inte frågan som en undran om hur gör ni, utan mer hur
borde man göra.

Ur ett licensperspektiv är man ju centralt från OSM:s håll rätt noga
med att inte använda t ex Google Maps som underlag p g a att det
bryter mot Googles licenser. Bara Bing (tror jag) har givit OSM
tillstånd att använda deras satellit-bilder. Använder man flera källor
är det ju lätt upptäcka om de finns flera stavningar eller
uppfattningar om vägar existerar eller inte.

Gör det du kan. Är du osäker kan du kolla i flera källor eller skriva
en kommentar om att informationen är osäker. Då kan någon annan som
vet bättre komplettera. Open source som bäst!

Den 23 juni 2014 11:48 skrev Jimmy Utterström jim...@outlook.com:
Jag håller med Fredrik här. Själv har jag försökt kartlägga lite stigar som
inte funnits med i de områden jag vistas mest. Jag brukar skapa GPS-spår när
jag är ute och cyklar MTB eller promenerar. Faktum är ju dock att så fort
det börjar bli lite tätare med skog så är ju GPS spåren inte speciellt
tillförlitliga. Men finns absolut inte stigen utmärkt sedan tidigare brukar
jag ändå välja att lägga in den. För även om stigen ligger 20 meter fel på
något ställe så är jag övertygad om att jag bidrar med ett större nöje genom
att lägga till stigen istället för att strunta i det så att ingen vet att
den finns. Sen kan man ju självklart justera den efter det att man har fått
fler GPS-spår från samma ställe.

/JImmy

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:48:53 +0200
From: fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com
To: talk-se@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

Jag har allmänt filosofin när jag karterar, och pratar om kartering, att
eftersom vi aldrig kommer uppnå hundraprocentig datakvalitet ändå, så är det
bättre att man karterar och får det 95% rätt, än att man helt avstår att
kartera för att man har någon liten osäkerhet kring om det blir helt rätt.
Är man alltför rädd för att få någon detalj fel, blir det inte mycket gjort.
Och jag ser mycket hellre att en väg är halvfärdig och har en gissad typ, än
att den inte finns med alls.

På midsommarafton tog jag en promenad i ett område som är nytt för mig, och
fann att en vägbit som fanns på kartan inte fanns och rimligen aldrig kan ha
funnits i verkligheten. Det störde mig inte att det var fel på kartan, men
jag rättade det förstås.

/Fredrik

2014-06-23 10:25 GMT+02:00 Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com:

Att konsultera källor kan aldrig bli upphovsrättsbrott, men att ta flera
vägnamn ifrån samma karta kan nog närma sig det.

Däremot tycker jag inte man ska vara så rädd för gamla kartor. På 15 år har
inte så mycket hänt, men för säkerhets skull bör man nog ändå kontrollera
att vägnamnen fortfarande stämmer mot moderna källor innan man lägger in
dem.

/Andreas

2014-06-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Fredrik Ramsberg fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com:

Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i
Sverige, utan att skapa några licensproblem?

Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri
att användas efter 15 år:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Dalkvist/ekonomiska_kartan#Ekonomiska_kartan_till_osm
. Det låter ju lovande. Råder det konsensus kring detta?

Mvh,

/Fredrik

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

___ Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread Joel Grafström

En källa som jag ibland använder, särskilt i nya områden där det inte 
kommit upp skyltar än, är kommunala handlingar. De är offentliga och får 
användas. Även här är det väl en gråzon angående kartor i handlingarna 
så det säkraste är att hitta gatunamnet i ren textform.


Äldre kommunala handlingar, exempelvis detaljplaner (äldre än 15 år) 
borde vara en guldgruva vad gäller att få ut gatunamn. Problemet är bara 
att de troligtvis inte är publicerade på nätet.


//Joel

bengt bäverman skrev 2014-06-23 13:09:

Ja,

det är självklart, tycker jag, att det är bättre att göra den del man
kan än inget alls. Det ligger liksom i open-source-tankarna. Nu
tolkade jag inte frågan som en undran om hur gör ni, utan mer hur
borde man göra.

Ur ett licensperspektiv är man ju centralt från OSM:s håll rätt noga
med att inte använda t ex Google Maps som underlag p g a att det
bryter mot Googles licenser. Bara Bing (tror jag) har givit OSM
tillstånd att använda deras satellit-bilder. Använder man flera källor
är det ju lätt upptäcka om de finns flera stavningar eller
uppfattningar om vägar existerar eller inte.

Gör det du kan. Är du osäker kan du kolla i flera källor eller skriva
en kommentar om att informationen är osäker. Då kan någon annan som
vet bättre komplettera. Open source som bäst!

/B



Den 23 juni 2014 11:48 skrev Jimmy Utterström jim...@outlook.com:

Jag håller med Fredrik här. Själv har jag försökt kartlägga lite stigar som
inte funnits med i de områden jag vistas mest. Jag brukar skapa GPS-spår när
jag är ute och cyklar MTB eller promenerar. Faktum är ju dock att så fort
det börjar bli lite tätare med skog så är ju GPS spåren inte speciellt
tillförlitliga. Men finns absolut inte stigen utmärkt sedan tidigare brukar
jag ändå välja att lägga in den. För även om stigen ligger 20 meter fel på
något ställe så är jag övertygad om att jag bidrar med ett större nöje genom
att lägga till stigen istället för att strunta i det så att ingen vet att
den finns. Sen kan man ju självklart justera den efter det att man har fått
fler GPS-spår från samma ställe.

/JImmy


Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:48:53 +0200
From: fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com
To: talk-se@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?


Jag har allmänt filosofin när jag karterar, och pratar om kartering, att
eftersom vi aldrig kommer uppnå hundraprocentig datakvalitet ändå, så är det
bättre att man karterar och får det 95% rätt, än att man helt avstår att
kartera för att man har någon liten osäkerhet kring om det blir helt rätt.
Är man alltför rädd för att få någon detalj fel, blir det inte mycket gjort.
Och jag ser mycket hellre att en väg är halvfärdig och har en gissad typ, än
att den inte finns med alls.

På midsommarafton tog jag en promenad i ett område som är nytt för mig, och
fann att en vägbit som fanns på kartan inte fanns och rimligen aldrig kan ha
funnits i verkligheten. Det störde mig inte att det var fel på kartan, men
jag rättade det förstås.

I denna fråga innebär min filosofi att jag hellre lägger in ett gatunamn
från en 15 år gammal källa, än avstår för att det kanske har ändrats. Om
någon senare upptäcker att gatunamnet har ändrats får denna person förstås
gärna uppdatera informationen.

/Fredrik



2014-06-23 10:25 GMT+02:00 Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com:

Det bästa är förstås att kolla i fält, dvs på vägskyltarna. Det förekommer
dock fel på vägskyltar (mitt favoritexempel är Bachmans- resp Backmansgatan
på två sidor av samma väg i Kävlinge), och då kan man ju konsultera flera
andra källor för att reda ut vilken stavning som är korrekt.

Att konsultera källor kan aldrig bli upphovsrättsbrott, men att ta flera
vägnamn ifrån samma karta kan nog närma sig det.

Däremot tycker jag inte man ska vara så rädd för gamla kartor. På 15 år har
inte så mycket hänt, men för säkerhets skull bör man nog ändå kontrollera
att vägnamnen fortfarande stämmer mot moderna källor innan man lägger in
dem.

/Andreas


2014-06-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Fredrik Ramsberg fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com:

Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i
Sverige, utan att skapa några licensproblem?

Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri
att användas efter 15 år:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Dalkvist/ekonomiska_kartan#Ekonomiska_kartan_till_osm
. Det låter ju lovande. Råder det konsensus kring detta?

Mvh,

/Fredrik



___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se



___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se



___ Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread Erik Johansson

Vill säga två saker, eftersom Openstreetmap helst inte beblandar sig med
grå zoner:

1. Offentligt betyder bara att du får läsa det i pappers form, det är inte
fri data. Kommuners kartdata är ofta samkörd med data från Lantmäteriet
vilket gör att LM lägger sin copyright  på det.

2. Att det står samma sak i Google + Lantmäteriet + Kommunala handlingar
gör det inte till fakta som kan användas hur som helst. Det är fortfarande
inte ok att använda i OSM.

Vandra runt själv eller fri data är det enda som fungerar.


2014-06-23 17:06 GMT+02:00 Joel Grafström j...@torsson.se:

 En källa som jag ibland använder, särskilt i nya områden där det inte
 kommit upp skyltar än, är kommunala handlingar. De är offentliga och får
 användas. Även här är det väl en gråzon angående kartor i handlingarna så
 det säkraste är att hitta gatunamnet i ren textform.

 Äldre kommunala handlingar, exempelvis detaljplaner (äldre än 15 år) borde
 vara en guldgruva vad gäller att få ut gatunamn. Problemet är bara att de
 troligtvis inte är publicerade på nätet.

 //Joel

 bengt bäverman skrev 2014-06-23 13:09:

  Ja,

 det är självklart, tycker jag, att det är bättre att göra den del man
 kan än inget alls. Det ligger liksom i open-source-tankarna. Nu
 tolkade jag inte frågan som en undran om hur gör ni, utan mer hur
 borde man göra.

 Ur ett licensperspektiv är man ju centralt från OSM:s håll rätt noga
 med att inte använda t ex Google Maps som underlag p g a att det
 bryter mot Googles licenser. Bara Bing (tror jag) har givit OSM
 tillstånd att använda deras satellit-bilder. Använder man flera källor
 är det ju lätt upptäcka om de finns flera stavningar eller
 uppfattningar om vägar existerar eller inte.

 Gör det du kan. Är du osäker kan du kolla i flera källor eller skriva
 en kommentar om att informationen är osäker. Då kan någon annan som
 vet bättre komplettera. Open source som bäst!

 /B



 Den 23 juni 2014 11:48 skrev Jimmy Utterström jim...@outlook.com:

 Jag håller med Fredrik här. Själv har jag försökt kartlägga lite stigar
 som
 inte funnits med i de områden jag vistas mest. Jag brukar skapa GPS-spår
 när
 jag är ute och cyklar MTB eller promenerar. Faktum är ju dock att så fort
 det börjar bli lite tätare med skog så är ju GPS spåren inte speciellt
 tillförlitliga. Men finns absolut inte stigen utmärkt sedan tidigare
 brukar
 jag ändå välja att lägga in den. För även om stigen ligger 20 meter fel
 på
 något ställe så är jag övertygad om att jag bidrar med ett större nöje
 genom
 att lägga till stigen istället för att strunta i det så att ingen vet att
 den finns. Sen kan man ju självklart justera den efter det att man har
 fått
 fler GPS-spår från samma ställe.

 /JImmy

 
 Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:48:53 +0200
 From: fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com
 To: talk-se@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?


 Jag har allmänt filosofin när jag karterar, och pratar om kartering, att
 eftersom vi aldrig kommer uppnå hundraprocentig datakvalitet ändå, så är
 det
 bättre att man karterar och får det 95% rätt, än att man helt avstår att
 kartera för att man har någon liten osäkerhet kring om det blir helt
 rätt.
 Är man alltför rädd för att få någon detalj fel, blir det inte mycket
 gjort.
 Och jag ser mycket hellre att en väg är halvfärdig och har en gissad
 typ, än
 att den inte finns med alls.

 På midsommarafton tog jag en promenad i ett område som är nytt för mig,
 och
 fann att en vägbit som fanns på kartan inte fanns och rimligen aldrig
 kan ha
 funnits i verkligheten. Det störde mig inte att det var fel på kartan,
 men
 jag rättade det förstås.

 I denna fråga innebär min filosofi att jag hellre lägger in ett gatunamn
 från en 15 år gammal källa, än avstår för att det kanske har ändrats. Om
 någon senare upptäcker att gatunamnet har ändrats får denna person
 förstås
 gärna uppdatera informationen.

 /Fredrik



 2014-06-23 10:25 GMT+02:00 Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com:

 Det bästa är förstås att kolla i fält, dvs på vägskyltarna. Det
 förekommer
 dock fel på vägskyltar (mitt favoritexempel är Bachmans- resp
 Backmansgatan
 på två sidor av samma väg i Kävlinge), och då kan man ju konsultera flera
 andra källor för att reda ut vilken stavning som är korrekt.

 Att konsultera källor kan aldrig bli upphovsrättsbrott, men att ta flera
 vägnamn ifrån samma karta kan nog närma sig det.

 Däremot tycker jag inte man ska vara så rädd för gamla kartor. På 15 år
 har
 inte så mycket hänt, men för säkerhets skull bör man nog ändå kontrollera
 att vägnamnen fortfarande stämmer mot moderna källor innan man lägger in
 dem.

 /Andreas


 2014-06-23 10:12 GMT+02:00 Fredrik Ramsberg fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com
 :

 Från vilka källor kan man tveklöst hämta gatunamn medan man karterar i
 Sverige, utan att skapa några licensproblem?

 Hittade en not i detta stycke på wikin om att information i kartor är fri
 att användas efter 15 år:

Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?

2014-06-23 Thread Andreas Vilén

Jag håller med Emj om att man ska vara försiktig med allmänna handlingar,
för de är inte öppen data för det. Dock så är det fortfarande inte
upphovsrättsbrott att kolla en källa. Det man inte får göra är att
systematiskt kopiera från en viss källa.

/Andreas


2014-06-23 23:33 GMT+02:00 Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com:

 Vill säga två saker, eftersom Openstreetmap helst inte beblandar sig med
 grå zoner:

 1. Offentligt betyder bara att du får läsa det i pappers form, det är inte
 fri data. Kommuners kartdata är ofta samkörd med data från Lantmäteriet
 vilket gör att LM lägger sin copyright  på det.

 2. Att det står samma sak i Google + Lantmäteriet + Kommunala handlingar
 gör det inte till fakta som kan användas hur som helst. Det är fortfarande
 inte ok att använda i OSM.

 Vandra runt själv eller fri data är det enda som fungerar.


 2014-06-23 17:06 GMT+02:00 Joel Grafström j...@torsson.se:

 En källa som jag ibland använder, särskilt i nya områden där det inte
 kommit upp skyltar än, är kommunala handlingar. De är offentliga och får
 användas. Även här är det väl en gråzon angående kartor i handlingarna så
 det säkraste är att hitta gatunamnet i ren textform.

 Äldre kommunala handlingar, exempelvis detaljplaner (äldre än 15 år)
 borde vara en guldgruva vad gäller att få ut gatunamn. Problemet är bara
 att de troligtvis inte är publicerade på nätet.

 //Joel

 bengt bäverman skrev 2014-06-23 13:09:

  Ja,

 det är självklart, tycker jag, att det är bättre att göra den del man
 kan än inget alls. Det ligger liksom i open-source-tankarna. Nu
 tolkade jag inte frågan som en undran om hur gör ni, utan mer hur
 borde man göra.

 Ur ett licensperspektiv är man ju centralt från OSM:s håll rätt noga
 med att inte använda t ex Google Maps som underlag p g a att det
 bryter mot Googles licenser. Bara Bing (tror jag) har givit OSM
 tillstånd att använda deras satellit-bilder. Använder man flera källor
 är det ju lätt upptäcka om de finns flera stavningar eller
 uppfattningar om vägar existerar eller inte.

 Gör det du kan. Är du osäker kan du kolla i flera källor eller skriva
 en kommentar om att informationen är osäker. Då kan någon annan som
 vet bättre komplettera. Open source som bäst!

 /B



 Den 23 juni 2014 11:48 skrev Jimmy Utterström jim...@outlook.com:

 Jag håller med Fredrik här. Själv har jag försökt kartlägga lite stigar
 som
 inte funnits med i de områden jag vistas mest. Jag brukar skapa
 GPS-spår när
 jag är ute och cyklar MTB eller promenerar. Faktum är ju dock att så
 fort
 det börjar bli lite tätare med skog så är ju GPS spåren inte speciellt
 tillförlitliga. Men finns absolut inte stigen utmärkt sedan tidigare
 brukar
 jag ändå välja att lägga in den. För även om stigen ligger 20 meter fel
 på
 något ställe så är jag övertygad om att jag bidrar med ett större nöje
 genom
 att lägga till stigen istället för att strunta i det så att ingen vet
 att
 den finns. Sen kan man ju självklart justera den efter det att man har
 fått
 fler GPS-spår från samma ställe.

 /JImmy

 
 Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:48:53 +0200
 From: fredrik.ramsb...@gmail.com
 To: talk-se@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: Re: [Talk-se] Var hitta gatunamn?


 Jag har allmänt filosofin när jag karterar, och pratar om kartering, att
 eftersom vi aldrig kommer uppnå hundraprocentig datakvalitet ändå, så
 är det
 bättre att man karterar och får det 95% rätt, än att man helt avstår att
 kartera för att man har någon liten osäkerhet kring om det blir helt
 rätt.
 Är man alltför rädd för att få någon detalj fel, blir det inte mycket
 gjort.
 Och jag ser mycket hellre att en väg är halvfärdig och har en gissad
 typ, än
 att den inte finns med alls.

 På midsommarafton tog jag en promenad i ett område som är nytt för mig,
 och
 fann att en vägbit som fanns på kartan inte fanns och rimligen aldrig
 kan ha
 funnits i verkligheten. Det störde mig inte att det var fel på kartan,
 men
 jag rättade det förstås.

 I denna fråga innebär min filosofi att jag hellre lägger in ett gatunamn
 från en 15 år gammal källa, än avstår för att det kanske har ändrats. Om
 någon senare upptäcker att gatunamnet har ändrats får denna person
 förstås
 gärna uppdatera informationen.

 /Fredrik



 2014-06-23 10:25 GMT+02:00 Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com:

 Det bästa är förstås att kolla i fält, dvs på vägskyltarna. Det
 förekommer
 dock fel på vägskyltar (mitt favoritexempel är Bachmans- resp
 Backmansgatan
 på två sidor av samma väg i Kävlinge), och då kan man ju konsultera
 flera
 andra källor för att reda ut vilken stavning som är korrekt.

 Att konsultera källor kan aldrig bli upphovsrättsbrott, men att ta flera
 vägnamn ifrån samma karta kan nog närma sig det.

 Däremot tycker jag inte man ska vara så rädd för gamla kartor. På 15 år
 har
 inte så mycket hänt, men för säkerhets skull bör man nog ändå
 kontrollera
 att vägnamnen fortfarande stämmer mot moderna källor innan man lägger in
 dem.

 /Andreas


 2014-06-23 10:12

[Talk-at] Fehlerhafte Turning restrictions in Wien

2014-06-23 Thread Friedrich Priewasser

Hallo,

In Wien gibt es wieder mal eine größere Anzahl an fehlerhaften
Abbiegebeschränkungen. Zu sehen ist das Ganze hier:
http://map.comlu.com/?zoom=12lat=48.1833lon=16.39layer=Mapquest%20Openoverlays=FTT
... Rechts unten am Zahnrad bei Starting at zoom level auf 12 stellen und
dann Karte nochmal um ein paar Pixel verschieben.
Achtung: Nicht jede warning ist ein Fehler.

Hab zwar inzwischen ein paar gröbere Schnitzer korrigiert (z.B. garade aus
fahren auf Bundesstraße nicht möglich), hab aber nicht wirklich Lust mich
durch alle Fehler durchzukämpfen. Vor allem könnte bei einigen Fällen auch
lokales Wissen/eine Vorortkontrolle notwendig sein. Falls also jemand da
was korrigiern möchte ...

lg
friedl
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] chardonnay

2014-06-23 Thread Friedrich Priewasser

Hi,

ist erledigt (siehe http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/23090208 ).
[Im JOSM vor dem Änderungssatz umkehren die Relation ausgewählt und dann
im Dialog Nur Auswahl umkehren genommen.]


lg
friedl

PS.: Hab den fehlenden neuen Straßenabschnitt gleich noch hinzugefügt.
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Fehlerhafte Turning restrictions in Wien

2014-06-23 Thread Norbert Wenzel

On 06/23/2014 12:20 AM, Friedrich Priewasser wrote:
 Achtung: Nicht jede warning ist ein Fehler.

Genau darum geht's mir gerade. Gibt's da irgendeine Möglichkeit false
positives auszumisten und/oder fehlerhafte Regeln zu beanstanden? Ich
hab da jetzt auf die schnell nichts gefunden.

Die Regeln sind nämlich nur auf Autos zugeschnitten, es gibt aber auch
turn restrictions für Radfahrer die gegen die Einbahn fahren dürfen.

Norbert

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Fehlerhafte Turning restrictions in Wien

2014-06-23 Thread Martin Raifer

 Genau darum geht's mir gerade. Gibt's da irgendeine Möglichkeit false
 positives auszumisten und/oder fehlerhafte Regeln zu beanstanden? Ich
 hab da jetzt auf die schnell nichts gefunden.

Ich würde mich entweder direkt bei User Zartbitter melden:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Zartbitter und/oder im Forum-Thread
antworten, wo er ursprünglich die Auswertung vorgestellt hat:
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=19834

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Fehlerhafte Turning restrictions in Wien

2014-06-23 Thread Andreas Labres

On 23.06.14 09:35, Norbert Wenzel wrote:
 On 06/23/2014 12:20 AM, Friedrich Priewasser wrote:
 Achtung: Nicht jede warning ist ein Fehler.
 Genau darum geht's mir gerade. Gibt's da irgendeine Möglichkeit false
 positives auszumisten und/oder fehlerhafte Regeln zu beanstanden? Ich
 hab da jetzt auf die schnell nichts gefunden.

Naja, was es auch oft gibt (z.B. hier
http://map.comlu.com/?zoom=16lat=48.22289lon=16.36426layer=Mapquest%20Openoverlays=FTT):
Ein no left turn, wo das Ziel gegen die Einbahn wäre (Beispiel:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3613407). Offenbar war da jemand
übermotiviert.

Leider trifft man beim Reparieren immer wieder ein und denselben User (er
hatte auch - z.B. im Zuge der Fahrplanverdopplung - öfter mal Relations 
kaputtet).

/al

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Fehlerhafte Turning restrictions in Wien

2014-06-23 Thread Norbert Wenzel

On 06/23/2014 09:51 AM, Andreas Labres wrote:
 On 23.06.14 09:35, Norbert Wenzel wrote:
 On 06/23/2014 12:20 AM, Friedrich Priewasser wrote:
 Achtung: Nicht jede warning ist ein Fehler.
 Genau darum geht's mir gerade. Gibt's da irgendeine Möglichkeit false
 positives auszumisten und/oder fehlerhafte Regeln zu beanstanden? Ich
 hab da jetzt auf die schnell nichts gefunden.
 
 Naja, was es auch oft gibt (z.B. hier
 http://map.comlu.com/?zoom=16lat=48.22289lon=16.36426layer=Mapquest%20Openoverlays=FTT):
 Ein no left turn, wo das Ziel gegen die Einbahn wäre (Beispiel:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3613407). Offenbar war da jemand
 übermotiviert.

Das trifft auch in meinem speziellen Fall zu, aber da dieses
Abbiegeverbot explizit ausgeschildert ist, denke ich, dass man es auch
nochmal explizit eintragen kann. Schließlich ist es mit dem Radfahren
gegen die Einbahn ja auch so, dass das Verbot implizit und daher auch in
den OSM Daten nicht von fehlenden Daten zu unterscheiden ist.

Norbert


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] chardonnay

2014-06-23 Thread Rainer Fügenstein

hallo,

FP ist erledigt (siehe http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/23090208 ).

vielen dank!

mfg


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Fehlerhafte Turning restrictions in Wien

2014-06-23 Thread Andreas Labres

On 23.06.14 11:14, Norbert Wenzel wrote:
 Das trifft auch in meinem speziellen Fall zu, aber da dieses Abbiegeverbot
 explizit ausgeschildert ist,

Also die Frage der Beschilderung greift hier zu kurz.

Bei einer Einbahn gibt's immer ein Einfahrt verboten Schild (ggf. mit
ausgenommen Radfahrer). Und wenn da dann noch eine vorgeschriebene
Fahrrichtung oder ein Linksabbiegeverbot zusätztlich steht, ist das kein Anlaß,
zusätzlich eine - unnötige - Abbiegerelation zu machen.

Umgekehrt sind Abbiegerelationen nötig, wenn eben z.B. ein Abbiegen verboten
ist, obwohl es nach der Geometrie möglich wäre. Und dabei ist wieder
unerheblich, wie das Abbiegeverbot jetzt kundgemacht wird, ob jetzt nur eine
Sperrlinie oder wohl zusätzlich meist eine vorgeschriebene Fahrtrichtung oder ob
da eine bauliche Verhinderung (z.B. Jersey Barrier) steht (oder beliebige
Kombination).

/al

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

[Talk-at] Tennengebirge

2014-06-23 Thread Rainer Krammer

Hallo Leute,
Im Rahmen meiner Masterarbeit an der TUWien mache ich eine Qualitätsanalyse
von OSM-Daten im alpinen Raum. Zur Zeit untersuche ich die Vollständigkeit
des Datensatzes innerhalb meiner Testregionen. Dabei ist mir folgendes
aufgefallen: Im Tennengebirge fehlen extrem viele Gipfel und Pfade.
Markierte Wanderwege findet man in dieser Region auch fast keinen und auf
das Raucheck (höchsten Punkt im Gebirge und das Ziel vieler Bergsteiger)
führt nichteinmal ein Weg .. In den anderen Testregionen ist das nicht so.
Hat jemand vielleicht eine Idee warum das so ist? Musste eventuell mal
einiges gelöscht werden?
Danke und LG
Rainer
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Tennengebirge

2014-06-23 Thread martin ringer

Zwei Möglichkeiten:
1) Wenig begangen (mit GPS Gerät), daher auch wenige Daten.
2) Bei der Umstellung der Lizenz wurden Daten verloren, glaube ich aber eher 
nicht.

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 17:17:01 +0200
From: rainer.kram...@gmail.com
To: talk-at@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-at] Tennengebirge

Hallo Leute,Im Rahmen meiner Masterarbeit an der TUWien mache ich eine 
Qualitätsanalyse von OSM-Daten im alpinen Raum. Zur Zeit untersuche ich die 
Vollständigkeit des Datensatzes innerhalb meiner Testregionen. Dabei ist mir 
folgendes aufgefallen: Im Tennengebirge fehlen extrem viele Gipfel und Pfade. 
Markierte Wanderwege findet man in dieser Region auch fast keinen und auf das 
Raucheck (höchsten Punkt im Gebirge und das Ziel vieler Bergsteiger) führt 
nichteinmal ein Weg .. In den anderen Testregionen ist das nicht so. 
Hat jemand vielleicht eine Idee warum das so ist? Musste eventuell mal einiges 
gelöscht werden? Danke und LGRainer

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
  ___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Tennengebirge

2014-06-23 Thread Friedrich Volkmann

On 23.06.2014 18:44, martin ringer wrote:
 Zwei Möglichkeiten:
 1) Wenig begangen (mit GPS Gerät), daher auch wenige Daten.
 2) Bei der Umstellung der Lizenz wurden Daten verloren, glaube ich aber eher
 nicht.

Daten gingen überall verloren, aber seither war genug Zeit um sie wieder zu
erfassen. Ich glaube, das Problem ist, dass es in Salzburg wenige aktive
Mapper gibt. Die Stadt Salzburg hat weniger Einwohner als Favoriten, und von
den wenigen interessiert sich anscheinend niemand für OSM und Berge
zugleich. Aber man kann das Thema ja mal am Salzburger Stammtisch
ansprechen. Ach so, es gibt keinen. :-)

-- 
Friedrich K. Volkmann   http://www.volki.at/
Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria

___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Tennengebirge

2014-06-23 Thread Norbert Wenzel

On 06/23/2014 05:17 PM, Rainer Krammer wrote:
 Im Tennengebirge fehlen extrem viele Gipfel und Pfade.
 Markierte Wanderwege findet man in dieser Region auch fast keinen und auf
 das Raucheck (höchsten Punkt im Gebirge und das Ziel vieler Bergsteiger)
 führt nichteinmal ein Weg .. In den anderen Testregionen ist das nicht so.

Es gab allerdings in Sbg mal den Versuch einer Zusammenarbeit mit OSM
und dem Alpenverein, wobei zumindest teilweise etwas importiert wurde.
Das ganze ist schon einige Jahre her und ich kann mich an die
beteiligten Personen nicht mehr erinnern, aber ev. finden sich im Wiki
oder im Archiv der Mailingliste dazu noch Daten und du könntest dort mal
fragen ob die eine Erklärung haben.

Norbert


___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-at] Tennengebirge

2014-06-23 Thread Markus Mayr

Etwas Einfluss auf das OSM Mapping sollte das Z_GIS schon haben? 
Immerhin stünde die Uni Salzburg OSM ja ganz positiv gegenüber.



Am 2014-06-23 19:57, schrieb Friedrich Volkmann:

On 23.06.2014 18:44, martin ringer wrote:

Zwei Möglichkeiten:
1) Wenig begangen (mit GPS Gerät), daher auch wenige Daten.
2) Bei der Umstellung der Lizenz wurden Daten verloren, glaube ich aber eher
nicht.

Daten gingen überall verloren, aber seither war genug Zeit um sie wieder zu
erfassen. Ich glaube, das Problem ist, dass es in Salzburg wenige aktive
Mapper gibt. Die Stadt Salzburg hat weniger Einwohner als Favoriten, und von
den wenigen interessiert sich anscheinend niemand für OSM und Berge
zugleich. Aber man kann das Thema ja mal am Salzburger Stammtisch
ansprechen. Ach so, es gibt keinen. :-)




___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [Talk-ro] Harta de tramvai

2014-06-23 Thread Alex Morega

I would love to get permission to use data from ratb.ro. Does anybody here have 
experience talking with Romanian institutions? Maybe we can draft a letter to 
them.

Cheers,
-- Alex

On 22 Jun 2014, at 21:21, Jean-Baptiste Holcroft jb.holcr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Yes it is pollution.
 For same reason we don't use google street view for mapping, it's copyright 
 enfrigthment, and it's bad for everyone.
 We have to make sure our datas are legit, because we fight agains those who 
 don't respect ours.
 
 An other solution is to ask for official and explicit permission and save a 
 acceptance on osm wiki.
 
 Anyway, thanks for the direct link, I couldn't find the good one.
 Overpass Turbo can help to answer this question : is there railway=tram 
 without any relation ? http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3Q2 we can see there is not 
 so much missing parts.
 What Overpass cannot answer : are every lines available and completes ...
 
 --
 Jean-Baptiste Holcroft
 
 
 2014-06-22 19:29 GMT+02:00 Alex Morega a...@grep.ro:
 
 On 22 Jun 2014, at 20:15, Jean-Baptiste Holcroft jb.holcr...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 
   - Dynamic (I love it) : 
  http://demo.3liz.com/osmtransport/index.php?country=1location=2
 
 This URL goes straight to Bucharest: 
 http://demo.3liz.com/osmtransport/index.php?country=25location=352
 
  About RATB, unless there is a particular rule in Romania, it's not 
  possible, the website doesn't allow anything else than personnal use : 
  http://ratb.ro/termeni-si-conditii-de-utilizare.php
 
 Right, what I'm proposing disagrees with RATB's terms of use, but it wouldn't 
 pollute the OSM database, since any editing would still be done by hand.
 
 -- Alex
 
 
 ___
 Talk-ro mailing list
 Talk-ro@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro
 
 ___
 Talk-ro mailing list
 Talk-ro@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro


___
Talk-ro mailing list
Talk-ro@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro

Re: [Talk-ro] Harta de tramvai

2014-06-23 Thread Jean-Baptiste Holcroft

It looks good indeed ! Congratulation for this good start ! But you'll have
to write © Openstreetmap next to your © 2013, transporturban.ro,
something like what mapbox does : https://www.mapbox.com/tour/#overview

--
Jean-Baptiste Holcroft


2014-06-22 23:40 GMT+02:00 dancescuemil...@gmail.com:

  We are bound by certain terms and agreements, that’s why at the moment
 we can’t share our datasets with OSM. Currently we only use a small extract
 of OSM (Romania) to render our custom map. A legal info link is present in
 the bottom right corner, however adjustments should be made in order to
 include all the info you suggested.

 PS: just to be clear, the transit information on Transport Urban is
 completely proprietary, nothing was imported from OSM.


 Thx,
 Emil

 Sent from Windows Mail

 *From:* Filip Chirita Rares Cristian chirita.ra...@gmail.com
 *Sent:* ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎23‎, ‎2014 ‎12‎:‎14‎ ‎AM
 *To:* OSM Romania talk-ro@openstreetmap.org

 Nice initiative. Still, if you guys have improved the OSM data why not
 share it back with OSM? Also have you included the OSM disclaimer on your
 website? I can't see it anywhere (the All data is here thanks to OSM and
 it's contributors, distributed over the ODBL or something like that
 statement).

 Rares


 On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 11:38 PM, dancescuemil...@gmail.com wrote:

  Hi,

 What do you think about the work we have done at Transport Urban (
 beta.transporturban.ro is the latest version), regarding public
 transport route planning and maps?

 You can view the full transit network map by enabling the “harta retea
 transport” option, in the layers menu (top-right corner of the screen).
 This is a custom layer built by us (using our datasets), served by our own
 OSM map server.



 Thank you for your feedback.

 Emil

 Sent from Windows Mail

 *From:* Jean-Baptiste Holcroft jb.holcr...@gmail.com
 *Sent:* ‎Sunday‎, ‎June‎ ‎22‎, ‎2014 ‎9‎:‎21‎ ‎PM
 *To:* OSM Romania talk-ro@openstreetmap.org

 Yes it is pollution.
 For same reason we don't use google street view for mapping, it's
 copyright enfrigthment, and it's bad for everyone.
 We have to make sure our datas are legit, because we fight agains those
 who don't respect ours.

 An other solution is to ask for official and explicit permission and save
 a acceptance on osm wiki.

 Anyway, thanks for the direct link, I couldn't find the good one.
 Overpass Turbo can help to answer this question : is there railway=tram
 without any relation ? http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/3Q2 we can see there
 is not so much missing parts.
 What Overpass cannot answer : are every lines available and completes ...

 --
 Jean-Baptiste Holcroft


 2014-06-22 19:29 GMT+02:00 Alex Morega a...@grep.ro:


 On 22 Jun 2014, at 20:15, Jean-Baptiste Holcroft jb.holcr...@gmail.com
 wrote:

   - Dynamic (I love it) :
 http://demo.3liz.com/osmtransport/index.php?country=1location=2

 This URL goes straight to Bucharest:
 http://demo.3liz.com/osmtransport/index.php?country=25location=352

  About RATB, unless there is a particular rule in Romania, it's not
 possible, the website doesn't allow anything else than personnal use :
 http://ratb.ro/termeni-si-conditii-de-utilizare.php

 Right, what I'm proposing disagrees with RATB's terms of use, but it
 wouldn't pollute the OSM database, since any editing would still be done by
 hand.

 -- Alex


 ___
 Talk-ro mailing list
 Talk-ro@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro



 ___
 Talk-ro mailing list
 Talk-ro@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro




 --
 Life is not the amount of times you breathe, is the moments that take your
 breath away.

 To all things comes an end. And to all things comes a beginning.

 Cred in inspirat, nu in expirat. in vise, nu in somn. In trait, nu in
 existat.

 ___
 Talk-ro mailing list
 Talk-ro@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro


___
Talk-ro mailing list
Talk-ro@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro

Re: [Talk-cz] pLPIS a WFS - jak na to?

2014-06-23 Thread Jachym Cepicky

S převodem souřadnic můžu pomoct, ale asi to vyhoří na platformě (funguju na
python/c, ne java)

popis pro jst je popsán tady: 
http://docs.geotools.org/stable/userguide/library/api/jts.html#transform

Nevím, jestli máte ve vaší verzi správně zadefinovanýho Křováka - EPSG:102067
nebo EPSG:5514 (podle verze geotools)

Na http://epsg.io/102067 a http://epsg.io/5514 se dají sehnat definice pro
GeoServer (který by měl být s geotools kompatibilní. Zejména 5514 vypadá
nadějně:


5514=PROJCS[S-JTSK / Krovak East 
North,GEOGCS[S-JTSK,DATUM[System_Jednotne_Trigonometricke_Site_Katastralni,SPHEROID[Bessel
 
1841,6377397.155,299.1528128,AUTHORITY[EPSG,7004]],TOWGS84[589,76,480,0,0,0,0],AUTHORITY[EPSG,6156]],PRIMEM[Greenwich,0,AUTHORITY[EPSG,8901]],UNIT[degree,0.0174532925199433,AUTHORITY[EPSG,9122]],AUTHORITY[EPSG,4156]],PROJECTION[Krovak],PARAMETER[latitude_of_center,49.5],PARAMETER[longitude_of_center,24.83],PARAMETER[azimuth,30.2881397222],PARAMETER[pseudo_standard_parallel_1,78.5],PARAMETER[scale_factor,0.],PARAMETER[false_easting,0],PARAMETER[false_northing,0],UNIT[metre,1,AUTHORITY[EPSG,9001]],AXIS[X,EAST],AXIS[Y,NORTH],AUTHORITY[EPSG,5514]]


Doporučuju použít tam jiný parametr TOWGS84, a to
[570.8,85.7,462.8,4.998,1.587,5.261,3.56] 

převod bude přesnější



Co to znamená ověřit licenci ? Zavolat na ministerstvo?

J


On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 09:26:16PM +0200, Marián Kyral wrote:
Takže jedna dobrá zpráva.
Odepsali mi z helpdesku mze, že WFS opravili. Dále jsem se dověděl, že pro
BBOX dotazy se musí používat LPIS_FB4_BBOX. Vrstva LPIS_FB4 je zase určena
na dotazy dle ID půdního bloku.
 
Takže jsou potřeba dva dotazy:
 
Jeden pro získání geometrie ID půdního bloku.
 

 [1]http://eagri.cz/public/app/wms/plpis_wfs.fcgi?VERSION=1.1.0SERVICE=WFSREQUEST=GetFeatureTYPENAME=LPIS_FB4_BBOXbbox=-471162.327712,-1120637.409667,-471161.327712,-1120636.409667SRSNAME=EPSG:102067
A druhý pro doplňující detaily:
 

 [2]http://eagri.cz/public/app/wms/plpis_wfs.fcgi?VERSION=1.1.0SERVICE=WFSREQUEST=GetFeatureTYPENAME=LPIS_FB4featureID=LPIS_FB4.9630656SRSNAME=EPSG:102067
 
Takže teď už jen trochu času, vyřešit převod souřadnic a ověřit licenci
(nechce se toho někdo ujmout, ať tam nepíši jen já? :-D ) a můžu to
zaintegrovat do Traceru.
 
Marián
 
Dne 30.5.2014 14:26, Marián Kyral napsal(a):
 
  Souřadnice mi teď těžkou hlavu nedělají. Když už jsem si ujasnil, co je
  co, tak se to nějak udělá. Spíše potřebuji nějak rozjet ten dotaz přes
  bbox. Co jsem našel, tak by měl bohatě stačit nějaký miniaturní bbox.
  Ale prostě to nefunguje. Buď dělám něco blbě, nebo je problém u nich.
 
  Marián
 
  -- Původní zpráva --
  Od: Jachym Cepicky [3]jachym.cepi...@gmail.com
  Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic [4]talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
  Datum: 30. 5. 2014 13:59:41
  Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] pLPIS a WFS - jak na to?
 
Zkuil jsem nakopnout tu proxy,
 
[5]https://gist.github.com/jachym/8c33b98a794679bc5de3
 
Ale tedy že by to nějak zvlášť fungovalo, to nefunguje :-( myslím, že
jim tam
něco hnije, ale jistě to říct si netroufám
 
ještě se tomu zkusím pověnovat
 
j
 
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 09:11:18AM +0200, Marián Kyral wrote:
 Ahoj,

 Netušíte někdo, jaký je rozdíl mezi LPIS_FB4 a LPIS_FB4_BBOX? S
LPIS_FB4
 mi to vždy vrátí missing. Teď jsem objevil LPIS_FB4_BBOX a to zase
končí
 na krásné ORA chybě níže :-(

 FeatureType
   NameLPIS_FB4/Name
   TitleUcinneFB-obrys/Title
   AbstractPůdní bloky - účinné (max. 200 záznamů)/Abstract
   DefaultSRSEPSG:102067/DefaultSRS
   OutputFormats
     Formattext/xml; subtype=gml/3.1.1/Format
   /OutputFormats
   ows:WGS84BoundingBox dimensions=2
     ows:LowerCorner11.6287033481963
47.8921430739317/ows:LowerCorner
     ows:UpperCorner19.2039743450146
51.5189483888239/ows:UpperCorner
   /ows:WGS84BoundingBox
 /FeatureType
 FeatureType
   NameLPIS_FB4_BBOX/Name
   TitleUcinneFB-obrys/Title
   AbstractPůdní bloky - účinné (max. 200 záznamů)/Abstract
   DefaultSRSEPSG:102067/DefaultSRS
   OutputFormats
     Formattext/xml; subtype=gml/3.1.1/Format
   /OutputFormats
   ows:WGS84BoundingBox dimensions=2
     ows:LowerCorner11.6287033481963
47.8921430739317/ows:LowerCorner
     ows:UpperCorner19.2039743450146
51.5189483888239/ows:UpperCorner
   /ows:WGS84BoundingBox
 /FeatureType

 $ BBOX=bbox=-470952.15,-1121084.54,-471309.44,-1120790.40
 $ wget -O -

Re: [Talk-cz] Aktualizace již importovaných adres

2014-06-23 Thread Libor Pechacek

On Fri 20-06-14 23:08:04, Petr Vejsada wrote:
 Co rada starších ;-) na variantu smazat/nahrát?

Pro adresní body, které jsem nahrál já, dávám souhlas.  V oblastech, kde znovu
dělám RÚIAN import vidím, že opravy jsou v podstatě jen za dobu od poslední
editace bylo AM změněno, smazáno nebo byla upřesněna jeho poloha, je chyba v
RÚIAN, či falešný poplach.  Ruční revize podle mě nepřidává velkou hodnotu.

Pro ostatní AM hlasuji pro smazat/nahrát,

Libor

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] pLPIS a WFS - jak na to?

2014-06-23 Thread Marián Kyral

Dne 23.6.2014 09:25, Jachym Cepicky napsal(a):
 S převodem souřadnic můžu pomoct, ale asi to vyhoří na platformě (funguju na
 python/c, ne java)

No já umím s pythonem zhruba stejně jako s javou. Něco jsem v tom
napsal, ale ani jeden jazyk nepoužívám denně. Ale to není problém,
většina jazyků si je podobná. Všude jsou proměnné a cykly ;-)

 popis pro jst je popsán tady: 
 http://docs.geotools.org/stable/userguide/library/api/jts.html#transform

 Nevím, jestli máte ve vaší verzi správně zadefinovanýho Křováka - EPSG:102067
 nebo EPSG:5514 (podle verze geotools)

 Na http://epsg.io/102067 a http://epsg.io/5514 se dají sehnat definice pro
 GeoServer (který by měl být s geotools kompatibilní. Zejména 5514 vypadá
 nadějně:


 5514=PROJCS[S-JTSK / Krovak East 
 North,GEOGCS[S-JTSK,DATUM[System_Jednotne_Trigonometricke_Site_Katastralni,SPHEROID[Bessel
  
 1841,6377397.155,299.1528128,AUTHORITY[EPSG,7004]],TOWGS84[589,76,480,0,0,0,0],AUTHORITY[EPSG,6156]],PRIMEM[Greenwich,0,AUTHORITY[EPSG,8901]],UNIT[degree,0.0174532925199433,AUTHORITY[EPSG,9122]],AUTHORITY[EPSG,4156]],PROJECTION[Krovak],PARAMETER[latitude_of_center,49.5],PARAMETER[longitude_of_center,24.83],PARAMETER[azimuth,30.2881397222],PARAMETER[pseudo_standard_parallel_1,78.5],PARAMETER[scale_factor,0.],PARAMETER[false_easting,0],PARAMETER[false_northing,0],UNIT[metre,1,AUTHORITY[EPSG,9001]],AXIS[X,EAST],AXIS[Y,NORTH],AUTHORITY[EPSG,5514]]


 Doporučuju použít tam jiný parametr TOWGS84, a to
 [570.8,85.7,462.8,4.998,1.587,5.261,3.56] 

 převod bude přesnější

Díky za popis. Pokusím se to pochopit. Ale možná bych ještě počkal,
třeba to nebude potřeba. Nevím jak to je s tou žádostí o přidání WGS84
transformace (jestli teda nějaká žádost byla odeslána). Na tu žádost
ohledně nefunkční WFS jsem dostal první odpověď až po cca třech týdnech
s tím, že to bylo vyřešeno. Takže jistá možnost tu je. Jen neznám
podrobnosti.

 

 Co to znamená ověřit licenci ? Zavolat na ministerstvo?

Jestli tam někoho znáš ;-)

Pokud se shodneme, že toto:

 ... Podle příručky pro ovládání
 http://eagri.cz/public/web/file/2091/_120420_PZ_2012_03_UG_pLPIS.pdf
 se jedná o veřejný seznam z evidence využití půdy - str. 4. A
 pokud jde o stažení dat pře email, tak na str. 17 je následující text
 Export je volně přístupný z prostředí internetu. Aplikace
 exportují veřejná data, právo použít tento export má každý
 uživatel aplikace
 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.region.cz/9331


se vztahuje i na WFS a není to v rozporu s licencí OSM, tak mi to stačí.
Ovšem v příručce k WMS a WFS službám [1] se mluví pouze o prohlížení:

 Ministerstvo zemědělství poskytuje bezplatný přístup ke svým
 vybraným prostorovým datům přes
 WMS a WFS služby. Data jsou poskytována pro území celé České
 republiky a jsou dostupná zdarma.
 Uživatelé mají takto přístup k datům MZE a mohou si je zobrazit
 přes URL adresu, či v GIS prohlížeči
 (např. Quantum GIS).

[1]
http://eagri.cz/public/web/mze/farmar/LPIS/uzivatelske-prirucky/wms-sluzby/prirucka-pro-pouziti-wms-a-wfs-sluzeb.html

Marián

 J


 On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 09:26:16PM +0200, Marián Kyral wrote:
Takže jedna dobrá zpráva.
Odepsali mi z helpdesku mze, že WFS opravili. Dále jsem se dověděl, že pro
BBOX dotazy se musí používat LPIS_FB4_BBOX. Vrstva LPIS_FB4 je zase určena
na dotazy dle ID půdního bloku.

Takže jsou potřeba dva dotazy:

Jeden pro získání geometrie ID půdního bloku.


 [1]http://eagri.cz/public/app/wms/plpis_wfs.fcgi?VERSION=1.1.0SERVICE=WFSREQUEST=GetFeatureTYPENAME=LPIS_FB4_BBOXbbox=-471162.327712,-1120637.409667,-471161.327712,-1120636.409667SRSNAME=EPSG:102067
A druhý pro doplňující detaily:


 [2]http://eagri.cz/public/app/wms/plpis_wfs.fcgi?VERSION=1.1.0SERVICE=WFSREQUEST=GetFeatureTYPENAME=LPIS_FB4featureID=LPIS_FB4.9630656SRSNAME=EPSG:102067

Takže teď už jen trochu času, vyřešit převod souřadnic a ověřit licenci
(nechce se toho někdo ujmout, ať tam nepíši jen já? :-D ) a můžu to
zaintegrovat do Traceru.

Marián

Dne 30.5.2014 14:26, Marián Kyral napsal(a):

  Souřadnice mi teď těžkou hlavu nedělají. Když už jsem si ujasnil, co je
  co, tak se to nějak udělá. Spíše potřebuji nějak rozjet ten dotaz přes
  bbox. Co jsem našel, tak by měl bohatě stačit nějaký miniaturní bbox.
  Ale prostě to nefunguje. Buď dělám něco blbě, nebo je problém u nich.

  Marián

  -- Původní zpráva --
  Od: Jachym Cepicky [3]jachym.cepi...@gmail.com
  Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic [4]talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
  Datum: 30. 5. 2014 13:59:41
  Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] pLPIS a WFS - jak na to?

Zkuil jsem nakopnout tu proxy,

[5]https://gist.github.com/jachym/8c33b98a794679bc5de3

Ale tedy že by to nějak zvlášť fungovalo, to nefunguje :-( myslím, že
jim tam
něco hnije, ale jistě to říct si netroufám

Re: [Talk-cz] Aktualizace již importovaných adres

2014-06-23 Thread Marián Kyral

Dne 22.6.2014 21:25, Jakub Sykora napsal(a):
 smazat a nahrát - souhlas. V případě nějakých výrazných problémů je
 vždy možné se podívat do historie a případně některá data revertnout -
 to v případě, že by se ukázalo, že importovaná data jsou opravdu velmi
 velmi nekvalitní nebo nekompletní. Nicméně do budoucna by i díky práci
 OSM mohl být RUIAN docela kvalitním zdrojem.

 Díky za investovaný čas - fascinující!

 K


Taky jsem pro smazání a opětovné nahrání. Když je to teď tak špatné, tak
po importu dat z RUIANu to určitě nebude horší :-D

Marián


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] Aktualizace již importovaných adres

2014-06-23 Thread Petr Vejsada

Ahoj,

díky všem za schválení :). Zatím jsem se do toho nepustil. Myslel jsem, že to 
použiji na Zlín, ale tam, zdá se, jsem objevil podstatu toho šíleného množství 
varování. Ve Zlíně je cca 2000 dvojdomků. Každý dvojdomek má v realitě 2 
adresy. I v OSM má 2 adresy, jenže tak, že je tam vlastně vždy jen jedna a ta 
druhá tam není, respektive je zduplikovaná ta první.

Příklad:

V realitě je dvojdomek s čísly 350 a 400.

V OSM je s čísly 350 a 350. Bot tedy spáruje 350 z RUIAN s 350 v OSM, 400 
nikde nevidí a tak ho nově vytvoří. Výsledek je, že dvojdomek má adresy 350, 
350 a 400 plus výhrůžný řádek v data.csv.

Zkouším Zlín udělat na 2 kola. V prvním kole jsem jen promazal těch 2000 
duplicit, lehce zkoukl a nahrál do OSM. Až to budu mít zpátky v DB, tak toho 
bota na to poštvu ještě jednou, jakoby to ještě nebylo zpracované, a doufám, 
že už toho nebude k opravování takové kvantum.

U metody smazání/znovunahrání jsem narazil na problém, že neumím poznat, co 
mám vlastně v OSM smazat. Asi to půjde vybírat jen podle polygonu, jenže 
jakého? Části obcí polygony nemají, tak jedině katastrální území 

Nu, budu řešit až pokud na to dojde.

Dne Po 23. června 2014 22:10:04, Marián Kyral napsal(a):

 Dne 22.6.2014 21:25, Jakub Sykora napsal(a):
  smazat a nahrát - souhlas. V případě nějakých výrazných problémů je
  vždy možné se podívat do historie a případně některá data revertnout -
  to v případě, že by se ukázalo, že importovaná data jsou opravdu velmi
  velmi nekvalitní nebo nekompletní. Nicméně do budoucna by i díky práci
  OSM mohl být RUIAN docela kvalitním zdrojem.
  
  Díky za investovaný čas - fascinující!
  
  K
 
 Taky jsem pro smazání a opětovné nahrání. Když je to teď tak špatné, tak
 po importu dat z RUIANu to určitě nebude horší :-D
 
 Marián
 
 
 ___
 Talk-cz mailing list
 Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] etat-commune est de retour !

2014-06-23 Thread Jean-Baptiste Holcroft

Tu as bien compris le principe, mais pas que Christian était en train de
regarder pour réparer l'outil 762 d'osm-fr qui est très cool mais qui ne se
maintient pas magiquement ;)

--
Jean-Baptiste Holcroft


Le 22 juin 2014 21:33, Jean-Francois Nifenecker 
jean-francois.nifenec...@laposte.net a écrit :

 Le 22/06/2014 20:58, Christian Quest a écrit :
  Je regarde ce qui manque pour qu'il refonctionne normalement...
 

 j'ai entré 90029 (Cravanche, Territoire-de-Belfort)

 ce que je trouve couillon c'est que je tape un numéro insee et l'outil
 ne me confirme nulle part de quelle commune il s'agit. Ou alors j'ai pas
 bien regardé, ce qui serait couillon aussi.

 Aussi :
 -- la position est à 0° partout. Snif.
 -- les contributeurs actifs de la zone sont à... Londres :(
 -- les dernières contributions ? Area too large. Re- :(
 -- l'appel à OsmOse me centre sur... Bordeaux. Re-re :(
 -- l'appel à OsmInspector : dans le vide. Re-re-re :(
 -- avec le lien vers KeepRight, je suis à Vienne (Autriche) :((

 C'est moi qu'ai pas compris ou bien ?
 --
 Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux

 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Correction de noms de voie pour jointure BANO [was: Trouver les noeuds non rapportés à un bâtiment avec JOSM]

2014-06-23 Thread jean navarro


Bonjour
un quatrième cas :
http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=9lat=48.94104lon=2.10869layers=00B00FFT


henri Dunant est l'inventeur de la croix-rouge... il n'existe pas de 
Dunand avec un D  ni sur le terrain, ni dans le cadastre.

donc le nom du code Fantoir ne correspond ni à osm ni au cadastre.
comment fait-on ?

cordialement
jean navarro

FANTOIR :
0100040370GRUE HENRI DUNAND   R 0 00 
0001987001   003651   DUNAND



Le 19/05/2014 10:59, Christian Quest a écrit :

C'est parfait.

Tu as un troisième cas... quand il y a un libellé sans correspondance
FANTOIR !

Dans ce cas, je pense que ref:FR:FANTOIR=no pourrait être exploité par
le scripts.



Le 19 mai 2014 10:51, Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
mailto:j...@liotier.org a écrit :

On 19/05/2014 10:39, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:

Ayant bleui quelques points rouges de la BANO dans mon quartier
hier soir, je confirme qu'il est loin d'être rare que le nom
originaire du cadastre soit erroné... Le terrain d'abord !


La procédure que j'ai adoptée est:
- Si le name est incorrect et que sa correction correspond à la
valeur donnée par le cadastre, alors je corrige le name
- Si le name est correct mais différent de la valeur donnée par le
cadastre, alors je rajoute ref:FR:FANTOIR pour que le script BANO de
Christian puisse quand même faire la jointure

Ca vous paraît correct ?

_
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-fr
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




--
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr



___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Futuna - chemin en bord de côte - limite administrative

2014-06-23 Thread Pieren

2014-06-21 14:35 GMT+02:00 David Crochet david.croc...@free.fr:
 Bonjour

 Que vient faire le chemin 22383430 là où il se trouve [1] ?

Malgré la présence de nuages sur l'imagerie, on voit quand même les
vagues et rien n'indique la présence de terre à cet endroit, encore
moins avec cette forme de porte-avion qui s'est pris un mur dans la
face. Suppression effectuée.

Pieren

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Correction de noms de voie pour jointure BANO [was: Trouver les noeuds non rapportés à un bâtiment avec JOSM]

2014-06-23 Thread Paul Mallet

Garde name=Rue Henri Dunant et rajoute ref:FR:FANTOIR=010040370G ?

Paul MALLET


Le 23 juin 2014 11:28, jean navarro jean.nava...@laposte.net a écrit :


 Bonjour
 un quatrième cas :
 http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=9lat=48.94104lon=2.10869layers=
 00B00FFT


 henri Dunant est l'inventeur de la croix-rouge... il n'existe pas de
 Dunand avec un D  ni sur le terrain, ni dans le cadastre.
 donc le nom du code Fantoir ne correspond ni à osm ni au cadastre.
 comment fait-on ?

 cordialement
 jean navarro

 FANTOIR :
 0100040370GRUE HENRI DUNAND   R 0 00
 0001987001   003651   DUNAND


 Le 19/05/2014 10:59, Christian Quest a écrit :

 C'est parfait.

 Tu as un troisième cas... quand il y a un libellé sans correspondance
 FANTOIR !

 Dans ce cas, je pense que ref:FR:FANTOIR=no pourrait être exploité par
 le scripts.



 Le 19 mai 2014 10:51, Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
 mailto:j...@liotier.org a écrit :


 On 19/05/2014 10:39, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:

 Ayant bleui quelques points rouges de la BANO dans mon quartier
 hier soir, je confirme qu'il est loin d'être rare que le nom
 originaire du cadastre soit erroné... Le terrain d'abord !


 La procédure que j'ai adoptée est:
 - Si le name est incorrect et que sa correction correspond à la
 valeur donnée par le cadastre, alors je corrige le name
 - Si le name est correct mais différent de la valeur donnée par le
 cadastre, alors je rajoute ref:FR:FANTOIR pour que le script BANO de
 Christian puisse quand même faire la jointure

 Ca vous paraît correct ?

 _
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-fr

 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




 --
 Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France


 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr


 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Plaque Routière

2014-06-23 Thread Pieren

2014-06-22 12:44 GMT+02:00 Etienne Trimaille etienne.trimai...@gmail.com:
 highway=milestone
 distance=*
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmilestone

Euh, il faudrait peut-être distinger les plaques officielles et les
anciennes plaques Michelin. Outre la différence d'opérateur (et
l'intérêt historique), j'ai trouvé une photo avec des kilométrages
différents:
http://routes.wikia.com/wiki/Fichier:Plaque_Michelin_60D072_-_Pr%C3%A9villers.JPG

Pieren

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Correction de noms de voie pour jointure BANO [was: Trouver les noeuds non rapportés à un bâtiment avec JOSM]

2014-06-23 Thread Christian Quest

Oui, avec éventuellement une note pour signaler à un autre contributeur
l'erreur de la DGFiP.


Le 23 juin 2014 11:36, Paul Mallet cont...@paulmallet.net a écrit :

 Garde name=Rue Henri Dunant et rajoute ref:FR:FANTOIR=010040370G ?

 Paul MALLET


 Le 23 juin 2014 11:28, jean navarro jean.nava...@laposte.net a écrit :


 Bonjour
 un quatrième cas :
 http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=9lat=48.94104lon=2.10869layers=
 00B00FFT


 henri Dunant est l'inventeur de la croix-rouge... il n'existe pas de
 Dunand avec un D  ni sur le terrain, ni dans le cadastre.
 donc le nom du code Fantoir ne correspond ni à osm ni au cadastre.
 comment fait-on ?

 cordialement
 jean navarro

 FANTOIR :
 0100040370GRUE HENRI DUNAND   R 0 00
 0001987001   003651   DUNAND


 Le 19/05/2014 10:59, Christian Quest a écrit :

 C'est parfait.

 Tu as un troisième cas... quand il y a un libellé sans correspondance
 FANTOIR !

 Dans ce cas, je pense que ref:FR:FANTOIR=no pourrait être exploité par
 le scripts.



 Le 19 mai 2014 10:51, Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org
 mailto:j...@liotier.org a écrit :


 On 19/05/2014 10:39, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:

 Ayant bleui quelques points rouges de la BANO dans mon quartier
 hier soir, je confirme qu'il est loin d'être rare que le nom
 originaire du cadastre soit erroné... Le terrain d'abord !


 La procédure que j'ai adoptée est:
 - Si le name est incorrect et que sa correction correspond à la
 valeur donnée par le cadastre, alors je corrige le name
 - Si le name est correct mais différent de la valeur donnée par le
 cadastre, alors je rajoute ref:FR:FANTOIR pour que le script BANO de
 Christian puisse quand même faire la jointure

 Ca vous paraît correct ?

 _
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-fr

 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




 --
 Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France


 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr


 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr



 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Plaque Routière

2014-06-23 Thread Christian Quest

A force de faire des virages à grand rayons de courbure, ça raccourci les
routes... mais est-ce que ça compense les déviations pour éviter les
villages ?


Le 23 juin 2014 11:40, Pieren pier...@gmail.com a écrit :

 2014-06-22 12:44 GMT+02:00 Etienne Trimaille etienne.trimai...@gmail.com
 :
  highway=milestone
  distance=*
  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmilestone

 Euh, il faudrait peut-être distinger les plaques officielles et les
 anciennes plaques Michelin. Outre la différence d'opérateur (et
 l'intérêt historique), j'ai trouvé une photo avec des kilométrages
 différents:

 http://routes.wikia.com/wiki/Fichier:Plaque_Michelin_60D072_-_Pr%C3%A9villers.JPG

 Pieren

 ___
 Talk-fr mailing list
 Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr




-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk-fr] Les communes associées

2014-06-23 Thread Aurélien FILEZ

Bonjour à tous,

J'exploite informatiquement les données OSM pour des adresses de la ville
de Dieppe et alentours, en Haute Normandie (76) et j'éprouve quelques
difficultés.

Par exemple, j'ai des adresses se situant à Neuville-Lès-Dieppe, mais
aucune trace de cette ville dans OSM alors qu'elle est présente dans
google maps.

Je ne sais pas comment appeler ça, un arrondissement ? Une commune ? Un
quartier ? Un hameau ? Je sais pas.

Toujours est-il qu'administrativement c'est ce terme qui doit être utilisé
pour les correspondances postales, donc on peut pas remplacer par Dieppe.

Est-ce qu'il y a des travaux en cours pour gérer ce genre de zone ?
data.gouv.fr donne-t-il accès à ce genre de cas pour être intégré sans trop
d'effort ?

Merci par avance et bonne journée,

kin
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Les communes associées

2014-06-23 Thread HELFER Denis

Bonjour,

Neuville-lès-Dieppe est une commune associée 
(http://www.insee.fr/fr/methodes/nomenclatures/cog/recherche.asp?nivgeo=communesearch=Neuville-l%E8s-Dieppe+%2876466%29)
à Dieppe. Dès lors, elle n’apparaitra pas dans le jeu de données sur les 
communes. Idem au niveau adresses.
C’est une vraie question pour l’équipe BANO.

Denis

De : Aurélien FILEZ [mailto:kinj...@gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 23 juin 2014 13:24
À : Discussions sur OSM en français
Objet : [OSM-talk-fr] Les communes associées

Bonjour à tous,

J'exploite informatiquement les données OSM pour des adresses de la ville de 
Dieppe et alentours, en Haute Normandie (76) et j'éprouve quelques difficultés.

Par exemple, j'ai des adresses se situant à Neuville-Lès-Dieppe, mais aucune 
trace de cette ville dans OSM alors qu'elle est présente dans google maps.

Je ne sais pas comment appeler ça, un arrondissement ? Une commune ? Un 
quartier ? Un hameau ? Je sais pas.

Toujours est-il qu'administrativement c'est ce terme qui doit être utilisé pour 
les correspondances postales, donc on peut pas remplacer par Dieppe.

Est-ce qu'il y a des travaux en cours pour gérer ce genre de zone ? 
data.gouv.frhttp://data.gouv.fr donne-t-il accès à ce genre de cas pour être 
intégré sans trop d'effort ?

Merci par avance et bonne journée,

kin
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

1 2 >

1 - 100 of 130 matches

Mail list logo