Re: [OSM-talk] OSM down?
On 24/03/15 09:01, Florian Lohoff wrote: On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 08:44:23AM +0100, Maarten Deen wrote: The only response from www and api I get is Incomplete response received from application. Is it only my or is OSM down? I am occasionally seeing this aswell but not only today but for at least 2-3 days. There was a previous incident on Saturday which I fixed. The update that was running on that server as a test has now been rolled back pending a resolution of https://github.com/phusion/passenger/issues/1447. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-br] Restrição de Manobra em U
Oésley, eu entendo o que é uma proibição de retorno no mundo real e existem aos montes Brasil afora (muitas exatamente como na foto apresentada), mas nos exemplos que você deu no OSM, que são os mais comuns, não há manobras em U, apenas em L. Nesse caso, para se evitar o retorno, coloca-se uma restrições para manobras em L (proibido virar à esquerda) como nesse caso entre as ruas Maxwell e Uruguai: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-22.92246/-43.24763 (observe as relações e restrições entre elas). Assim sendo, eu realmente não entendo a aplicação do u_turn, pelos mesmos motivos expostos Gerald. Manobras em U é (no mundo real) necessariamente uma relação de uma via com ela mesma. Se as ruas e retornos são modelados como no exemplo do Oésley (e na Maxwell), definitivamente não precisamos de um no_u_turn no OSM. Como eu disse antes, coloco para evitar confusões em bifurcações, mas a rigor isso deveria ser aplicado em quase todos os pontos de todas as vias, o que é absolutamente inviável. Seria muito mais fácil indicar onde é permitido fazer essa manobra, não o contrário. - - - · Atenciosamente, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro http://about.me/Doideira http://pt.gravatar.com/marciovinicius Em 23 de março de 2015 22:08, Oéslei Taborda Ribas oesleiri...@gmail.com escreveu: Aqui [1] tem uma foto de proibição de manobra em U, veja que pela foto você não pode fazer um retorno (manobra em U) porém é permitido fazer uma conversão a esquerda. Implemetado no OSM eu achei esses exemplos aqui [2][3], perceba pelas figuras que a restrição forma um U no mapa. Quanto ao OsmAnd, talvez não seja uma boa ferramente para avaliar essas restrições de U-Turn. Encontrei esse ticket aqui [4] do pessoal reclamando que ele não trata corretamente as restrições de manobras em U, esse ticket estava aberto a mais de 2 anos e foi fechado no mês passado. [1] - http://m1.i.pbase.com/u26/orangecones/upload/19577581.Mvc009s.jpg [2] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1806681 [3] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1707089 [4] - https://code.google.com/p/osmand/issues/detail?id=1729 Em 23 de março de 2015 20:32, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro marcioviniciu...@gmail.com escreveu: O Osmand costuma sim sugerir fazer retorno na mesma via, quando mão dupla. Mas entendo que ele faz isso como quem diz cara, vc tem que voltar do jeito que conseguir, porque ir por aí é uma péssima ideia e não vejo outra solução viável pra você. Eu costumo colocar essa restrição em locais onde as mãos de uma via de mão dupla se separam… em muitos casos é possível (e até sinalizado) fazer o retorno, em muitos outros é até perigoso fazer. Acredito que em outros casos ela seja realmente desnecessária. E não sei o que se quer dizer com manobra em U, se não for de uma via para ela mesma… se tem uma via ortogonal a duas paralelas a manobra não seria em U, seriam duas manobras em L, não? Até por isso, não consegui aplicar esse tipo de restrição no Josm, ele reclama de a restrição ser de uma via pra ela mesma (ainda que em U). No ID, ele faz sem nem questionar nada. Talvez eu não tenha entendido o propósito e a aplicação reais do no_u_turn. __ Atenciosamente, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro. http://about.me/Doideira Em 23/03/2015 17:08, Aun Johnsen li...@gimnechiske.org escreveu: Mostrando este erro do mkgmap no meu opinião totalmente matar o argumento do fazer este tipo do no_u_turn. On 3/23/15, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-23 15:15 GMT-03:00 Oéslei Taborda Ribas oesleiri...@gmail.com : Estava pensando em deletar essas restrições, pelos motivos acima expostos, porém antes de fazer isso gostaria de saber se vocês veem algum problema nisso? Não tem cara de que vão mudar isso no iD. Se o nó com função via não for um mini_roundabout ou algum objeto que indica separação de via (como traffic_calming=island), não precisa ter no_u_turn. Teve uma discussão sobre isso no meio desse tópico https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-br/2015-February/thread.html#9447 (erros x relações) também. Por mim pode apagar a relação. ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Comme cadeau de baptême, j'ai 28Go de courbes (à 10m) de niveau qui couvrent l'Europe... calculées à partir de l'EU-DEM. Voilà ce que ça peut donner (avec en plus l'ombrage qu'on peut l'améliorer): https://s3.amazonaws.com/f.cl.ly/items/1W2V2A3A1B2E3M0r1w0m/Capture%20d%E2%80%99%C3%A9cran%202013-12-30%20%C3%A0%2021.28.48.png Le 24/03/2015 13:41, Guilhem Bonnefille a écrit : Le 24 mars 2015 09:24, Eric Marsden eric.mars...@free.fr a écrit : JB == JB jb...@mailoo.org writes: JB l'originalité d'un itinéraire. Elle évoque les dépenses et le JB travail de la FFR. Et elle crache le mot OpenStreetMap JB (maintenant, j'ai découvert ce que c'est que de cracher des mots), JB « il faut pas croire, il y a aussi des contraintes quand on JB utilise leurs données (j'essaye de creuser, j'arrive pas à lui en JB faire dire plus sur ces contraintes). La FFR semble donc définitivement être un dinosaur rentier qui va chercher à protégér ses acquis (postes, subventions…) le plus longtemps possible, sans s'inquiéter de sa mission d'intérêt général. On peut imaginer mobiliser les randonneurs directement ou via d'autres organismes comme la CAF. Mais il me semble qu'il manque pour cela un site web qui expliquerai tout ce qu'il est possible de faire, en tant qu'utilisateur ou contributeur : - préparer son voyage avec http://francetopo.fr/, http://www.hikebikemap.org/, http://waymarkedtrails.org/fr/ - (Garmin) récupérer des cartes - (Android) récupérer des cartes hors ligne pour OsmAnd, avec lignes de niveau, ou sur openandromaps.org - avertissements d'usage concernant confiance en les données - comment contribuer des données sur les parcours (liens vers les pages wiki pertinentes) Je suis motivé pour participer à un groupe qui se lancerai là-dedans, s'il y a des intéressés. Je trouve l'idée tout à fait intéressante : j'ai le sentiment que le passé nous a bien montré que la libération des données fonctionne généralement avec des gens qui militent auprès de ceux qui possèdent la donnée et avec des gens qui démontrent les usages des données libérées. Comme point de départ, il serait sans doute intéressant d'ammorcer ce projet sur le wiki OSM, avec une page du style Randonner librement dans la section Découvrir quelles sont les applications d'OpenStreetmap de la page d'accueil en français. Pour mon implication, cela va être minime, car je n'ai strictement plus de temps libre. Mais je ferai mon possible pour faire avancer ce projet. D'autant que cela va être bientôt la saison de la rando. -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
[OSM-talk-be] allryder - beta test invitation
Did anyone besides me received this invitation in your openstreetmap inbox? Claiming I'm a top contributer in Brussels is not true, I don't do a lot there in relation to all my work, so I suspect this is kind of a bulk message. Feel free to comment , message receive from : http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/gemmaa __ Hi there! I'm Gemma and I'm working for a civic startup that is now building a smart mobility app to help people in cities to get around better (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Allryder). Brussels is one of the first cities we are heading to and I have noticed that you are one of the top contributors in the city, so kudos! Thanks to people like you, innovative solutions like ours can be built :) In our app, we are using some OSM data but we also contribute data back to the community too. We are now building an app which shows you the best routes around cities by all modes of transport (including public transport, bike sharing and taxis too!), all this with real-time reports from other users. I was wondering, would you be interested in becoming a beta tester and have exclusive access to the app before it goes live in April? You can sign up here: http://bit.ly/1AfDItz and I would send you a link to the app via email in the coming days/weeks. Let's make getting around Brussels smarter together :) Gemma -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Le 24 mars 2015 09:24, Eric Marsden eric.mars...@free.fr a écrit : JB == JB jb...@mailoo.org writes: JB l'originalité d'un itinéraire. Elle évoque les dépenses et le JB travail de la FFR. Et elle crache le mot OpenStreetMap JB (maintenant, j'ai découvert ce que c'est que de cracher des mots), JB « il faut pas croire, il y a aussi des contraintes quand on JB utilise leurs données (j'essaye de creuser, j'arrive pas à lui en JB faire dire plus sur ces contraintes). La FFR semble donc définitivement être un dinosaur rentier qui va chercher à protégér ses acquis (postes, subventions…) le plus longtemps possible, sans s'inquiéter de sa mission d'intérêt général. On peut imaginer mobiliser les randonneurs directement ou via d'autres organismes comme la CAF. Mais il me semble qu'il manque pour cela un site web qui expliquerai tout ce qu'il est possible de faire, en tant qu'utilisateur ou contributeur : - préparer son voyage avec http://francetopo.fr/, http://www.hikebikemap.org/, http://waymarkedtrails.org/fr/ - (Garmin) récupérer des cartes - (Android) récupérer des cartes hors ligne pour OsmAnd, avec lignes de niveau, ou sur openandromaps.org - avertissements d'usage concernant confiance en les données - comment contribuer des données sur les parcours (liens vers les pages wiki pertinentes) Je suis motivé pour participer à un groupe qui se lancerai là-dedans, s'il y a des intéressés. Je trouve l'idée tout à fait intéressante : j'ai le sentiment que le passé nous a bien montré que la libération des données fonctionne généralement avec des gens qui militent auprès de ceux qui possèdent la donnée et avec des gens qui démontrent les usages des données libérées. Comme point de départ, il serait sans doute intéressant d'ammorcer ce projet sur le wiki OSM, avec une page du style Randonner librement dans la section Découvrir quelles sont les applications d'OpenStreetmap de la page d'accueil en français. Pour mon implication, cela va être minime, car je n'ai strictement plus de temps libre. Mais je ferai mon possible pour faire avancer ce projet. D'autant que cela va être bientôt la saison de la rando. -- Guilhem BONNEFILLE -=- JID: gu...@im.apinc.org MSN: guilhem_bonnefi...@hotmail.com -=- mailto:guilhem.bonnefi...@gmail.com -=- http://nathguil.free.fr/ ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Salut Nicolas, et les autres : Un moyen de couper l'herbe sous le pied de la FFRP : que les collectivités publient elles-même leurs itinéraires sous licence libre, avec la « vraie » attribution. L'histoire : j'avais rencontré longuement le responsable du PDIPR de l'Aube l'année dernière. OpenData, libération de données ne lui parlait pas vraiment. Par contre, ce qui lui parlait, c'était de voir le topoguide® local avec ses itinéraires créés par lui (et publiés plus tôt avec cette attribution) repris par la FFRP avec leur attribution à eux (propriété de la FFRP) alors qu'aucun contact n'avait été pris. Et maintenant, quelqu'un qui lit le topoguide pense que l'itinéraire est à la FFRP, alors qu'il ne l'est pas. Voilà pourquoi je lui avais proposé de publier sous licence ouverte. Mais c'était encore trop nouveau pour lui. Alors si toutes les collectivités dont les départements libéraient leurs itinéraires, qu'on rentre tout ça dans OSM, que ça apparait sous waymarkedtrails, etc, etc… JB. Le 24/03/2015 10:07, Nicolas Moyroud a écrit : Bonjour, Merci JB pour cette bonne tranche de rire ! Une solution dont j'ai eu l'occasion de discuter avec un responsable SIG de comcom serait de passer directement par les collectivités car ce sont elles qui très souvent mettent au point les itinéraires et fournissent ensuite les informations à la FFRP. Autrement dit à la FFRP il y a nombre d'itinéraires dont ils revendiquent la propriété intellectuelle et dont ils ne sont en fait pas du tout les auteurs, mais juste les baliseurs (et encore ?) et les publieurs. A mon avis rien n'empêche d'aller à la source auprès des collectivités, récupérer les itinéraires qu'ils ont construit et les publier sur OSM. En tout cas le gars avec qui j'ai discuté et tout à fait près à le faire. Autre remarque concernant un site d'aide à l'utilisation d'OSM en randonnée : l'excellente application oruxmaps sous Android qui est relativement simple à prendre en main. Nicolas ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Leo, Mets-toi dans la peau d'un touriste / randonneur / sportif étranger qui prépare ses prochaines vacances en France. L'offre de documentation à sa disposition n'est sans doute pas si pléthorique. La FFRP a une approche très franco-française, j'ai l'impression. Il y a peut-être un créneau de ce point de vue. Bonne continuation Le 24 mars 2015 09:55, Léo Serre l...@lstronic.com a écrit : Salut, J'avais essayé de lancer une plateforme pour les amateurs de sport Outdoor qui reposerais sur OSM pour pas mal de choses. * Partage de traces de rando (à la manière de plein de sites) (activités) * Intégrer les données de refuges.info via leur API (hébergement) * Trouver un partenariat avec covoiturage-libre afin d'offrir des offres de covoiturage pour aller en montagne via une API (déplacements) * Deux fonds OSM pour le projet (un topo et un plus orienté web à la manière du rendu outdooractive) (carto) J'ai abandonné ça car je reçoit en permanence des projets exactement similaires qui ne se lancent pas (trop d'acteurs dans le créneau : VisuRando, Eosya, MyPrivateGIS, la-trace, GeoTrek, ...) Mais si un projet similaire super motivé se lance, je serais de l'aventure. Léo Le 24/03/2015 09:24, Eric Marsden a écrit : JB == JB jb...@mailoo.org jb...@mailoo.org writes: JB l'originalité d'un itinéraire. Elle évoque les dépenses et le JB travail de la FFR. Et elle crache le mot OpenStreetMap JB (maintenant, j'ai découvert ce que c'est que de cracher des mots), JB « il faut pas croire, il y a aussi des contraintes quand on JB utilise leurs données (j'essaye de creuser, j'arrive pas à lui en JB faire dire plus sur ces contraintes). La FFR semble donc définitivement être un dinosaur rentier qui va chercher à protégér ses acquis (postes, subventions…) le plus longtemps possible, sans s'inquiéter de sa mission d'intérêt général. On peut imaginer mobiliser les randonneurs directement ou via d'autres organismes comme la CAF. Mais il me semble qu'il manque pour cela un site web qui expliquerai tout ce qu'il est possible de faire, en tant qu'utilisateur ou contributeur : - préparer son voyage avec http://francetopo.fr/, http://www.hikebikemap.org/, http://waymarkedtrails.org/fr/ - (Garmin) récupérer des cartes - (Android) récupérer des cartes hors ligne pour OsmAnd, avec lignes de niveau, ou sur openandromaps.org - avertissements d'usage concernant confiance en les données - comment contribuer des données sur les parcours (liens vers les pages wiki pertinentes) Je suis motivé pour participer à un groupe qui se lancerai là-dedans, s'il y a des intéressés. -- [image: LSTRONIC logo] Léo SERRE *LSTRONIC Founder* [image: mail] l...@lstronic.com [image: website] lstronic.com ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr -- ab_fab http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ab_fab Il n'y a pas de pas perdus, Nadja ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-at] Openstreetmap Urheberrechtshinweis
ja, bis dato keine Rückmeldung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Dipl.-Ing. Paul Wölfel Email p...@woelfel.at Tel. +43 664 88 533 801 Lindengasse 31/1/11 1070 Wien Austria Am 24. März 2015 um 01:12 schrieb Markus Mayr markus4mayr.li...@gmail.com: Ist diese Mail schon weg? Am 2015-03-21 um 18:52 schrieb Paul Wölfel: Hallo, wie es scheint verwendet ihr Openstreetmap Daten auf eurer Homepage, allerdings ohne Hinweis auf deren Ursprung. Laut der Lizenz von Openstreetmap sind die Daten zwar als Open Data verfügbar, jedoch muss der Hinweis auf die Quelle genannt werden. Bitte dies dementsprechend beachten. Hier die Infos zu der Lizenz von Openstreetmap: http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright/de BTW: sollte auf einer österreichischen Website nicht ein österreichischer Urheberrechtshinweis anstatt eines US Copyrights sein? Mit freundlichen Grüßen Dipl.-Ing. Paul Wölfel Email p...@woelfel.at Tel. +43 664 88 533 801 Lindengasse 31/1/11 1070 Wien Austria ___ Talk-at mailing listTalk-at@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at ___ 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
[Talk-at] OSM in derStandard.at
Sehr schön: http://derstandard.at/213379397/Vectormap-Wien-im-Tron-Look-bestaunen ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk-be] allryder - beta test invitation
I got it last week and I'm pretty sure I'm not a top contributor in Brussels either. But maybe they see Belgium as the capital of Brussels... Anyway, they are legit, so I did subscribe. Didn't hear anything of it anymore though. Jo 2015-03-24 13:42 GMT+01:00 Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be: Did anyone besides me received this invitation in your openstreetmap inbox? Claiming I'm a top contributer in Brussels is not true, I don't do a lot there in relation to all my work, so I suspect this is kind of a bulk message. Feel free to comment , message receive from : http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/gemmaa __ Hi there! I'm Gemma and I'm working for a civic startup that is now building a smart mobility app to help people in cities to get around better (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Allryder). Brussels is one of the first cities we are heading to and I have noticed that you are one of the top contributors in the city, so kudos! Thanks to people like you, innovative solutions like ours can be built :) In our app, we are using some OSM data but we also contribute data back to the community too. We are now building an app which shows you the best routes around cities by all modes of transport (including public transport, bike sharing and taxis too!), all this with real-time reports from other users. I was wondering, would you be interested in becoming a beta tester and have exclusive access to the app before it goes live in April? You can sign up here: http://bit.ly/1AfDItz and I would send you a link to the app via email in the coming days/weeks. Let's make getting around Brussels smarter together :) Gemma -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ 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: [Talk-us] Boundaries and verifiability (was Re: Retagging hamlets in the US)
On 03/23/2015 12:29 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: The nice thing about mapping a neighborhood name as a point feature is: a) It helps people locate the neighborhood b) it completely sidesteps the question of the exact, possibly fuzzy, boundaries. For 10% of the hassle you map 90% of the benefit. Or follow the obvious rule: Let the local mappers decide. Use point features for indeterminate things. In areas where neighborhoods have borders that are identifiable on the ground, map the borders. Some neighborhoods are gated. Some are signed. Some, all the locals understand, are bounded by major streets. Many subdivisions, even if not signed, have homogeneous enough architecture that the borders are obvious. And some cities try to foster neighborhood identity and specifically identify neighborhoods, even where the neighborhoods are not legal political entities. Don't decide as an armchair mapper that you know better than the locals. This goes double for using a mechanical edit to fix what the locals have done. Fix only what you can see is wrong on the ground (or what you can't see on the ground at all). This sort of fixing requires boots on the ground. (I'm willing to allow an exception for repairing the damage done by ill-advised mechanical edits - but only after consultation with the locals.) -- 73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-at] OSM in derStandard.at
Nett Nur den Satz Realisiert ist das Ganze allerding nicht über Google Maps, wie man zuerst annehmen könnte. finde ich schwachsinnig. ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Adressen via AGIV Crab
Een andere mogelijkheid is de zonegrens, die in AGIV soms zichtbaar is als gemeentegrens, op de juiste plaats te leggen in OSM. Dat werkt ook tal van fouten weg. Het duurt wel een tijdje voor de resultaten weergegeven worden. Hopelijk valt daar niets op te zeggen. Groetjes Sus 2015-03-20 8:33 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com: 2015-03-19 12:57 GMT+01:00 Verhoeven Fr sus...@gmail.com: - De grens die Sander gebruikte is fout ( men heeft die toch ook ergens anders gaan halen, mocht dat ?) ja, want AGIV heeft de expliciete toestemming gegeven. Hoewel het dan natuurlijk weer de vraag is waar hebben zij de data gehaald. En mogen zij die dat wel herverdelen. Is het wel zo dat de post belang heeft bij juiste postcodes ? Of hebben zij een bestand dat ze verkopen aan grote bedrijven waarmee ze geld verdienen. Dan zullen ze liever niet hebben dat je dat ook via een gratis tool kan (die gebaseerd is op hun data). In de UK en Canada lacht de post er dus niet mee. Daar mag je de postcodes niet van hun site halen. mvg m ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée ? de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
M'enfin même si on récupère les itinéraires, il reste le droit sur les marques déposées de la FFRP qui pose problème. Traversée de la Corse par le xx20? Suivez le marquage xx20? Eric ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:47:01AM +0100, Kurt Waldhans wrote: On 24-Mar-15 11:25, Florian Lohoff wrote: On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:15:00AM +0100, Kurt Waldhans wrote: Also die hier so in der Umgebung sind die legen mitten in Wohngebieten und da strömen die Kinder auf das Gelände aus allen Himmelsrichtungen über irgendwelche Fußwege. Damit hat sich deine original Frage erledigt: wenn man von überall rein kommt, kann der Router auch überall hin Routen Falls du als Mapper das nicht besser kennst, vorher soll es die Routing-Software wissen? Das bezog sich auf die original aussage Da wo die Kinder hineinströmen die du in dem Zitat weggeschnitten hast. Mir war schon klar wie du das gemeint hast - Aber so ein-eindeutig ist das eben in den seltensten fällen. Und wie ich ja schon schrieb - Wie die Kinder zur Schule kommen geht am Problem vorbei. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today! signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
Bei Schulen hilft local knowledge: wo um 8Uhr die Kinder reinströmen, *entrance=main* Alles andere würde ich nur bei guter Kenntnis setzten (Verwaltung- / Lehrerzugang / Feuerwehrzufahrt) Das Wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entranceist hier recht gut Für dein Problem (Routing zur Anlage) sollte das ausreichend sein, du kommst zu einem (öffentlichen) Eingang, Das wirkliche Problem liegt aber in der Routing-Software. * Was gibst du als Ziel ein: Koordinate, Adresse oder POI * Und was wertet dann die Routing-Software aus? Da sehe ich noch viele Diskussionen :-) On 24-Mar-15 10:00, Florian Lohoff wrote: Aeh - Wo setzt du denn auf einem amenity polygon ein entrance? Überall da wo Wege oder Straßen dann die Fläche verlassen? Bei einer Schule umfasst ja das amenity polygon alles - d.h. Lehrerparkplatz, Sporthalle, Schulhof etc ... Da sind dann reichlich viele Ein/Ausgänge... Dann sind wir wieder da was ich meinte - Im zweifelsfalle endet man am Hintereingang. Entrance auf einem amenity find ich sowieso gerade spannend. Für mich war das immer für buildings. Die Wiki seite beschreibt das anders aber für Schulen deren Gesamtfläche ja oft nicht umzäunt oder abgetrennt sind passt das irgendwie nicht. Flo ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-TW] SotM TW 2015 籌備
大家好! 用這封信先把大家loop在一起來討論。 SotM TW 2015 本來想在6月舉辦，因個人因素遲遲未有進展先向各位說聲抱歉。 國網中心與洪朝貴老師因科技部計畫，願意提供若干經費讓社群來舉辦StoM，而究心科技在防災與OSM上也貢獻良多且與國際社群交流甚為頻繁，同時也願意找一些資源投入SotM的組織。因為這樣有信心可以起個頭來舉辦這次的SotM。 星期五恰好是科技與社會 (STS) 學會，list上有幾位朋友都會參加，就趁這個來討論一下SotM的舉辦，那個Forum完後，如Steven的建議，大家一起用餐和討論如何? 如果沒有表達不行的人，就算是答應了囉! 東波 ___ Talk-TW mailing list Talk-TW@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:15:00AM +0100, Kurt Waldhans wrote: Bei Schulen hilft local knowledge: wo um 8Uhr die Kinder reinströmen, *entrance=main* Also die hier so in der Umgebung sind die legen mitten in Wohngebieten und da strömen die Kinder auf das Gelände aus allen Himmelsrichtungen über irgendwelche Fußwege. Alles andere würde ich nur bei guter Kenntnis setzten (Verwaltung- / Lehrerzugang / Feuerwehrzufahrt) Das Wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entranceist hier recht gut Das ganze führt vom Problem weg. Für dein Problem (Routing zur Anlage) sollte das ausreichend sein, du kommst zu einem (öffentlichen) Eingang, Das wirkliche Problem liegt aber in der Routing-Software. * Was gibst du als Ziel ein: Koordinate, Adresse oder POI * Und was wertet dann die Routing-Software aus? Da sehe ich noch viele Diskussionen :-) Du gibts IMMER eine Koordinate an - Routing funktioniert so - Man sucht einen POI - Das ist eine seperate Datenbank - Und Ziele für Routing in der Berechnung können nur Punkte sein. Ich sehe aber ein viel breiteres Problem. Wenn man sich im Wiki in der Englischen version der amenity=school die Grafik ansieht wird klar das die das beschreiben wie du sagst mit einem entrance=main auf dem amenity *würg* - Wenn ich dann auf Radfahrrouting umschalte werde ich nie über Fahrradwege und Schulhof dahin geführt. Das Problem wird aber größer wenn wir jetzt die Adressen mit einbeziehen. Da willst du die Adresse auf dem amenity=school haben damit in der Suche die Adresse mit angezeigt werden kann. Eigentlich haben aber die Gebäude die Adresse - amenity=school gehört aber definitiv nicht auf das Gebäude. D.h. wir haben die Adresse auf a) dem Gebäude und zusätzlich b) dem umgebenden Polygon aenity=school. Bei größeren Schulgebilden ist es oft so das Turnhalle oder andere Gebäudeteile eine eigene Adresse haben. Damit haben wir 2 Gebäude und eines hat eine von dem umgebenden Polygon abweichende Adresse. Spätestens das wird das in allen Validatoren Rot werden lassen. Das tagging modell ist hier an diversen stellen komplett broken. Aber das ist mit den POIs in OSM generell so. Das müsste ein komplett seperater layer sein - POIs gehören immer auf Punkte und immer mit Adresse die aber nichts mit der Adresse im Building/Street layer hat. Damit kann ich für Navigation eine ganz anderes Ziel setzen (den POI node) als die Tatsächliche Adresse hat. POIs von Flächen ableiten ist kaputt und wird nie sauber funktionieren weil es eben keinen definitiven Punkt gibt. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today! signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-GB] weeklyOSM 243 now in English
On 22/03/2015 15:54, Andy Mabbett wrote: On 21 March 2015 at 21:18, Manfred A. Reiter ma.rei...@gmail.com wrote: The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 243, is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu This is an excellent serve, thank you. Might I suggest compiling and archiving, it on the OSM Wiki? We could then use a script to distribute it to the talk pages of interested mappers. Well, it's a wiki - if you think that it's valuable to do this, I very much doubt that anyone would complain :) Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-br] Restrição de Manobra em U
Oi Turma acho que é preciso entender melhor a questão. O que estamos tratando aqui é de relações (relations) que é um mecanismo que correlaciona alguma coisa da Via V1 com a Via V2, ou seja uma relação entre duas vias *distintas*. Uma relação de restrição é entre V1 e V2 (onde V1 difere de V2) no ponto P1, um ponto que V1 e V2 tem em comum. Quando você coloca no_u_turn entre V1 e V2 passando pelo ponto P1, esta restrição se aplica somente *naquele* ponto P1. Para ser sincero, nem sei por que precisa especificar no_left_turn, no_right_turn etc, ou é proibido passar ou é obrigatório passar por P1. Se você colocar V1=V2 então já não se deveria usar uma relação pois se trata da mesma via. Além disto a restrição se aplica somente ao ponto P1 e não à via inteira. Portanto se a intenção é restringir o retorno ao longo de* toda* a via você teria que criar N relações de restrição V1=V2 nos pontos P1, P2, P3...PN, o que é claramente inviável. Até por isso, não consegui aplicar esse tipo de restrição no Josm, ele reclama de a restrição ser de uma via pra ela mesma (ainda que em U). No ID, ele faz sem nem questionar nada. Talvez eu não tenha entendido o propósito e a aplicação reais do no_u_turn. O JOSM reclama pelo fato de ser V1=V2 e tem toda razão em reclamar porque está errado mesmo. Já o iD é um projeto muito descuidado nestes pontos, mas explica porque este tipo de coisa tem proliferado por aí. Agora se não dá para usar relações da via nela mesma, usa-se o que? Talvez uma simples tag no_uturn=yes ou algo do gênero, mas não há esta tag documentada no OSM. Se não está documentada significa que ninguém até hoje sentiu necessidade dela. Se ninguém nunca sentiu falta dela é porque deve ter outro jeito de resolver ou é resolvido ao nível do aplicativo de alguma maneira. Penso que a solução mais elegante seria overtaking=no (esta tag existe) pois não se deve retornar na via em locais onde é proibido ultrapassar. Agora se os aplicativos entendem que onde tem overtaking=no não se deve retornar aí já é outra história. abraço Gerald ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-de] Frage zum Mappen von Gemüsefeldern - Praktikabilität bedenken
Am 22. März 2015 um 12:12 schrieb tshrub my-email-confirmat...@online.de: es gibt auch für nur ein Jahr eingesätes Grünland. ja klar, Futterwiesen z.B., wo evtl. danach auch wieder was anderes gepflanzt wird. Es gibt auch weitständige Oliven- oder seltener Apfelkulturen (da in anderem Klima), die ackerähnlich aussehen, da regelmäßig umgebrochen. Die zähle ich auch zu orchard. Bisschen unsicher bin ich mir dabei aber manchmal. vielleicht passt da auch meadow_orchard, aus Sueddeutschland kenne ich das. Olivenbaeume habe ich so noch nicht gesehen, eher, dass sie z.B. nur am Rand stehen, oder wirklich nur einzelne z.T. auch recht alte. Gruss, Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-it] Inserimento nomi vie da tabella
Il 24 marzo 2015 10:11:15 CET, Rallysta74 rallyst...@gmail.com ha scritto: Sul tabellone (pubblico in quanto piazzato in luogo pubblico da ente pubblico) non sono riportati (per quanto vedo) copyright, quindi IMHO è liberamente utilizzabile. Ma il diritto d'autore non è assegnato automaticamente alla creazione di un'opera dell'ingegno? Non è come nel classico era pubblico su internet, possiamo fare quello che vogliamo ? Ciao -- Luigi ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] Numeri civici Ferrara
Dopo un mese di controlli, qui abbiamo visto che basta spostare perpendicolarmente il civico verso la strada con cui è taggato, ed è perfettamente geoposizionato. Possiamo passare all'import, che ne dite? Ci penso io volendo a spostarli uno per uno. Magari potete già creare il dataset, senza farne l'upload su OSM, poi lo metto a posto io georeferenziandolo bene con gli amici del LUG ferrarese, quindi lo carichiamo su OSM. Per la licenza ci confermano che in Italia proprio per direttiva nazionale governativa dell'Agenda Digitale deve essere quella. Quindi o la usiamo incrociando le dita o dobbiamo rinunciare per sempre a qualsiasi import italiano. Per quanto riguarda la Provincia, abbiamo chiesto ai diretti responsabili, che ci hanno detto che i civici sono tornati ai singoli Comuni. Quindi ora ci mettiamo a chiederli a tutti i Comuni del ferrarese, uno per uno. Naturalmente vi tengo informati :-) ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
Am 24. März 2015 um 10:00 schrieb Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de: Dann sind wir wieder da was ich meinte - Im zweifelsfalle endet man am Hintereingang. Im Zweifelsfall gibt es bei einem groesseren Komplex auch mehrere Haupteingaenge, aber wenn Du z.B. suchst nach Feuerstelle bei Adresse xy, dann findest Du alle Feuerstellen innerhalb des Adr.-polygons und kannst dann z.B. eine auswaehlen und Dich da hinrouten lassen (sofern auch Wege innerhalb des Grundstuecks gemappt sind). Bei einem Campingplatz will man normalerweise zur Rezeption wenn man ankommt. Der tag wurde gerade auf tagging besprochen und gevoted: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/amenity%3Dreception_desk Es gibt auch noch ein Spezialtag camp_site=reception, davon wuerde ich aber eher absehen und das generische Modell bevorzugen (evtl. beide tags verwenden). Gruss, Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-it] Incrocio di strada con pista nciclopedonale
Si ma lui dice che è un semaforo per soli ciclisti, e nei preset di josm il semaforo con attraversamento ciclabile usa i tag highway=traffic_signals bicycle=yes inoltre lo stesso schema di tagging viene riconosciuto da opencyclemap, i semafori con bicycle=yes sono renderizzati diversamente (verdi anzichè gialli) ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
Am 24. März 2015 um 08:27 schrieb Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de: mir ist eine camp_site untergekommen deren gesamte Fläche addr: informationen trägt. Erst war ich mir ziemlich sicher das das ja quatsch ist - Wenn ich das zu einer Koordinate wandle zur Navigation kommt da der Mittelpunkt der Fläche bei raus zu der ich navigiere. Führt im zweifelsfalle dazu das ich am Hintereingang vor dem Zaun lande. das kommt ein bisschen darauf an, wie man die Logik implementiert. Man koennte es ja auch so sehen: alle Punkte innerhalb der Addr.-Flaeche haben diese Adresse. Wenn man nun zu der Adresse will, muss man nur den entsprechenden entrance-node (ggf. auch barrier=entrance) am Rand oder evtl. auch innerhalb dieser Flaeche finden, wenn man den Haupteingang sucht z.B. entrance=main. Der sollte normalerweise keine Extra-addr.-tags benoetigen, weil die ja schon auf der Flaeche sind. Gruss, Martin ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
Damit hat sich deine original Frage erledigt: wenn man von überall rein kommt, kann der Router auch überall hin Routen Falls du als Mapper das nicht besser kennst, vorher soll es die Routing-Software wissen? On 24-Mar-15 11:25, Florian Lohoff wrote: On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:15:00AM +0100, Kurt Waldhans wrote: Also die hier so in der Umgebung sind die legen mitten in Wohngebieten und da strömen die Kinder auf das Gelände aus allen Himmelsrichtungen über irgendwelche Fußwege. ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
[Talk-at] Beabsichtige Edit der Defibrillatoren in Wien
Ich beabsichtige in kürze ein Edit der Defibrillatoren in Wien, um description:de=* ins description=* umzuwandeln. Auf dieses Manko wurde ich vor einigen Wochen freundlicherweise aufmerksam gemacht. Es handelt sich dabei ausschließlich um die Nodes, die ich am 2014-10-16 von data.wien.gv.at importiert habe. (Sorry, damals habe ich importiert, ohne das vorher angekündigt zu haben - werde so was nie wieder machen, unabhängig davon, wie trivial mir eine Aufgabe erscheint.) Die Nodes, die editiert werden, haben alle ein ref=* und ein source=Datenquelle: Stadt Wien – data.wien.gv.at. Gestern habe ich probeweise grundsätzlich das ähnliche im Raum Steiermark durchgeführt, wo 23 Nodes involviert waren, die ich früher einmal manuell eingetragen bzw. erweitert habe. Hier das Changeset von gestern: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/29694474 . Diese Nodes haben natürlich kein ref=* und kein source=Datenquelle: Stadt Wien – data.wien.gv.at, wie die in Wien. ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] trying to get a Wheelchair kurb project off the ground
On 24 March 2015 at 08:44, Mark Croft mark.croft@gmail.com wrote: [ I accidentally replied to Mark, not to the mailing list (apologies, Mark), so am reposting my reply, and part of his response, below] The main goal at the moment is try to get a record of all the drop kerbs in a small area around kidderminster maybe other parts of worcestershire depending on the volunteers we got at the moment. How are you tagging them? Can you link to some examples, please, and is there a page on the wiki about the tag? Would anyone else like to get involved with this project? I'll help where I can. This could be one of our quarterly projects. #~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~# Mark then replied to the effect that he needs advice on the best way to tag dropped kerbs, and with a link to: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/sloped_curb but I also note: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/kerb Mark also suggests asking Worcestershire County Council for their data; and I agree that this would be a good move. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
Re: [OSM-talk] Proposal - automate rendering examples on OSM wiki
Is there any kind of API enabled for OSM wiki allowing automated uploads of files? 2015-03-20 16:26 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny matkoni...@gmail.com: Some articles about tags have section rendering. Such entries are frequently incomplete or outdated. It simple for me to generate example of rendering for every single tag used in default map style. It is probably possible to automate upload for wiki. Is somebody interested in using such files on wiki? Probably via some clever template that would be added to rendering section or by manual updating all tag pages. What I may do: generate example of rendering for every single tag used in default map style (around 550 files - see list on https://github.com/matkoniecz/CartoCSSHelper/blob/master/style_specific/default_osm_style.rb ) What is necessary to make it useful: script that would upload files to wiki, somebody interested in using such files Note - generation of these images requires some time, it also would be necessary to decide on zoom level of rendering and secondary tag (what should be value of name/ele/ref tag?) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Retagging hamlets in the US
2015-03-22 4:00 GMT+01:00 Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us: At its most basic, OSM is a geospatial database. We have countries, states, counties, and cities. Why not neighborhoods. OSM tells where a feature is located. Points can only tell us how close a feature is to a node. Using nodes to represent neighborhoods doesn't allow with any certainty where a feature is located while a polygon can. +1 Cheers, Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-at] OSM Austria Flyer
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015, Peter Barth wrote: Hi, ich hab mir das jetzt inhaltlich nicht angeschaut, aber vielleicht bist du auch an der Passauer Version interessiert (auch Scribus): Da haben wir den Text modernisiert und imho damit stark verbessert. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Flyers_and_posters/Flyers Und zwar so gut, dass die Wuppertaler den Flyer mehr oder weniger 1:1 uebernommen haben, wie ich gerade gesehen habe ;) A. ___ Talk-at mailing list Talk-at@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
On mardi 24 mars 2015, Eric Marsden wrote: On peut imaginer mobiliser les randonneurs (...) Mais il me semble qu'il manque pour cela un site web Un site web, pourquoi pas, mais dans un premier temps, il manque avant tout des motivés qui ont du temps à passer pour faire bouger les choses. Dans un premier temps on pourrait lister les gens près à s'investir, puis lister tous les contacts qui ont été pris avec la FFRP (ou ces clubs, ou ces membres de clubs), les idées pour sensibiliser qui ont réussi, les exemples d'avantages à avoir les GR dans osm tels que tu viens de les lister. Je suis motivé pour participer à un groupe qui se lancerai là-dedans, s'il y a des intéressés. J'en suis. J'avais commis en 2012: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft:ffrp-lettre-ouverte Mais n'avais pas réussi à fédérer un groupe de rentre un peu dedans Je suggère que le wiki d'osm.org fasse office de première zone de re- groupement, un wikiprojet par exemple ? Et que l'on y groupe tout ce qui tourne autour du thème Libération des GR par la FFRP Que pensez vous d'un truc comme ça (nom à décider ensemble?) : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_France/Chemins_de_petite_et_grande_randonn%C3%A9e_%28GR_PR%29_dans_Openstreetmap Les motivés pourraient alors suivre les initiatives en suivant la page wiki on pourrait faire pareil avec un sujet sur le forum -- sly, direct contact : sylv...@letuffe.org http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Sletuffe ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-it] Source:name attraverso lettera di un comune
2015-03-24 9:06 GMT+01:00 emmexx emm...@tiscalinet.it: C'e' modo di indicare il fatto che non ci sono targhe o cartelli in loco che indichino il nome della via? forse c'è qualcosa di formale, ma io metterei una nota (tag note o se vuoi note:it) dove descrivi sinteticamente il fatto. Ciao, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
[Talk-it] Importazione 843 editori lombardi da BEIC
Ciao a tutti, come wikimediano in residenza a BEIC ho ottenuto la pubblicazione in CC-0 dei dati retrostanti a http://www.beic.it/it/content/gli-editori-lombardi , vedi http://www.beic.it/it/articoli/copyright . BEIC gestisce l'Archivio della produzione editoriale lombarda, che funge da deposito legale per un terzo della produzione editoriale italiana. L'elenco in questione (allegato in CSV) è quindi la fonte piú autorevole possibile sulle case editrici italiane per i rispettivi nomi, indirizzi e dimensioni. Vorrei quindi aggiungere le sedi di tutti questi 843 editori in OSM. Secondo i criteri ISTAT, ce ne sono 65 grandi e 157 medi, gli altri sono piccoli. (I medi e grandi li aggiungerò anche in Wikidata, vedi https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/wikidata:BEIC .) Se la cosa va bene, mi tornerebbe comodo qualche consiglio tecnico. Leggendo https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Import mi sembra che la cosa piú sensata per una piccola importazione cosí sia di farmi artigianalmente un file JOSM e poi caricarlo con JOSM, giusto? Devo però scegliere un modo per tradurre da indirizzi a coordinate. Nemo-BEIC Editore Indirizzo CAP Comune SiglaProvincia Tipologia 01 distribution Piccolo 100 anni di fumetto italiano Piccolo 21mo secolo Piccolo 22 publishing Piccolo 27_9 VIA SCALDASOLE, 6 MILANO MI Piccolo 2esse Piccolo 5 Continents PIAZZA CAIAZZO, 1 MILANO MI Medio A. Car. V. LE RIMEMBRANZE, 43/B LAINATE MI Piccolo A. Manzoni C VIA NERVESA, 21 MILANO MI Piccolo AP Piccolo Abaco VIA NEPI, 15 MANTOVA MN Piccolo Abitare Segesta VIA VENTURA GIOVANNI, 5 MILANO MI Piccolo Aboca Piccolo Abscondita Medio Acacia Piccolo Academia Universa press VIA G. DONIZETTI, 1 MILANO MI Piccolo Accademia di Belle arti di Brera VIA FIORI OSCURI, 7 MILANO MI Piccolo Accademia italiana della cucina VIA NAPO TORRIANI, 31 MILANO MI Piccolo ADC VIA FRA LUCA PACIOLI, 3 MILANO MI Piccolo Adelphi VIA S. GIOVANNI SUL MURO, 14 MILANO MI Grande Adis international Piccolo Admira VIA MERCADANTE SAVERIO, 3 MILANO MI Piccolo Aereostella VIA LOMBARDINI ELIA, 4 MILANO MI Piccolo Agedi Piccolo Agenzia X Piccolo Agepe Piccolo Agone VIA CARLO ZIMA, 1 BRESCIA BS Piccolo AIAF VIA DANTE, 9 MILANO MI Piccolo AICARR VIA MELCHIORRE GIOIA, 168 MILANO MI Piccolo AISLA VIALE ORTLES, 22/4 MILANO MI Piccolo Alacrán Piccolo Alba libri VIA SESTO SAN GIOVANNI MILANO MI Piccolo Albo versorio VIA TORINO, 11 SENAGO MI Medio Alfa print VIA BELLINI, 24 BUSTO ARSIZIO VA Piccolo Alia VIA VITRUVIO, 11 MILANO MI Piccolo Alpha test VIA MERCALLI, 14 MILANO MI Grande Alpine Studio VIA CROLLALANZA, 3 LECCO LC Piccolo Alpinia VIA M. QUADRIO, 7 BORMIO SO Piccolo Altraeconomia VIA CESARE CATTANEO, 6 CANTU' CO Piccolo Altravista VIA EMILIA, 28 TORRAZZA COSTE PV Piccolo Altroconsumo VIA VALASSINA, 22 MILANO MI Piccolo Alvorada VIA DISCIPLINI, 18 MILANO MI Piccolo Ambiente Piccolo Ãncora VIA G. B. NICCOLINI, 8 MILANO MI Grande Anfora VIA DELLE LEGHE, 14 MILANO MI Piccolo Angeli VIALE MONZA, 106 MILANO MI Grande Anima GALLERIA UNIONE, 1 MILANO MI Medio ANPI Piccolo Antroposofica VIA SANGALLO, 34 MILANO MI Medio Ape junior Grande Apogeo VIA NATALE BATTAGLIA, 12 MILANO MI Grande Aquapress VIA G. FALCONE, 11 MIRADOLO TERME PV Piccolo Aragno VIA MASCAGNI, 14 MILANO MI Grande Arcari VIA DOMENICO FERNELLI, 48 MANTOVA MN Piccolo Archideos VIA CASTELFIDARDO, 10 MILANO MI Piccolo Archinto VIA SANTA VALERIA, 3 MILANO MI Medio Archivolto VIA MARSALA, 2 MILANO MI Piccolo Arcipelago VIA G. B. PERGOLESI, 12 TREZZANO SUL NAVIGLIO MI Medio Area qualità VIA COMELICO, 3 MILANO MI Piccolo Ares VIA STRADIVARI, 7 MILANO MI Medio Ariele PIAZZALE MARTINI, 4 MILANO MI Piccolo Ariesdue VIA AIROLDI, 11 CARIMATE CO Piccolo Arka VIA RAFFAELLO SANZIO,7 MILANO MI Piccolo Armenia VIA VALTELLINA, 63 MILANO MI Grande Arpanet VIA STAMPA, 8 MILANO MI Medio Arpeggio libero VIA LAGO D'ISEO, 11 LODI LO Piccolo Artek VIA BELVEDERE, 31 PORTO CERESIO VA Piccolo Artenergy VIA GRAMSCI, 57 CORMANO MI Piccolo Arterigere VIA PIEMONTE, 61 VARESE VA Piccolo Associazione culturale Renzo Cortina VIA MAC MAHON, 14/7 MILANO MI Piccolo Associazione ex alunni del Liceo classico Paolo Sarpi Piccolo Associazione Fabbrica dell'esperienza VIA BRIOSCHI, 60 MILANO MI Piccolo Associazione genitori del Liceo classico Paolo Sarpi Piccolo Associazione italiana biblioteche Piccolo Astoria Piccolo Astorina VIA BOCCACCIO, 32 MILANO MI Piccolo At-TarÄ«q VIA LOMELLINA, 13 MILANO MI Piccolo Atlas VIA G. CRESCENZI, 88 BERGAMO BG Medio Auditorium CORSO XXII MARZO, 49 MILANO MI Piccolo Aurora VIA SPALLANZANI, 6 MILANO MI Piccolo Autodafé VIA GIOBERTI, 1 MILANO MI Piccolo Babalibri VIA S. VALERIA, 3 MILANO MI Medio Bao VIA LEOPARDI, 8 MILANO MI Piccolo BCDe Piccolo BD VIA MONCUCCO, 20/22 MILANO MI Medio BE-MA VIA PRIVATA TEOCRITO, 47 MILANO MI Piccolo Bellavite VIA 1° MAGGIO, 41 MISSAGLIA
Re: [Talk-GB] New OS open data now available
Some more detail in the following article. Includes the assessment that it offers spatial data that is generally much higher in accuracy than most building shapes already on OpenStreetMap http://oobrien.com/2015/03/os-open/ Rob On 24 March 2015 at 17:58, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, So the new OS OpenData that was discussed a few weeks ago is now available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/03/new-os-opendata-products-now-live/ I think there could be many good uses of this including to help validate some of our data. If anyone is using this then let us know so that we don't duplicate work. Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-us] Boundaries and verifiability (was Re: Retagging hamlets in the US)
I would politely disagree that TIGER is an authoritative source for two reasons: 1) The extensive TIGER cleanup that is still being done years after the last import, and 2) While helpful at compiling data, the federal government is not authoritative for any boundaries within a state (and once established, not even for the boundaries of the states themselves). -jack On March 24, 2015 4:57:44 PM EDT, Martijn van Exel mart...@openstreetmap.us wrote: there is an authoritative source for official administrative boundaries that can be easily accessed by anyone: TIGER -- Typos courtesy of fancy auto-spell technology. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hauteur et nombre d'étages des bâtiments
Le 24 mars 2015 20:30, dHuy Pierre dh...@yahoo.fr a écrit : Francescu décrit assez bien le type de situation qui m'effraie. Sur l'île St Louis par exemple, il y avait une Eglise imbriqué dans un batiment, l'église était supérieur au reste mais de surface inférieur. Avec ton logiciel ça ferait disparaitre l'eglise... Autre exemple une coupole isolée (ça aussi ça existe sur le terrain). Etc... Hmm je vois pas dans quel cas ça pourrait faire disparaître un bâtiment.. t'aurais un lieu précis à m'indiquer stp ? Plutôt que de t'attaquer au building, pourquoi ne pas utiliser building:part? Il est parfaitement normé et t'éviteras les approximations. Je ne suis pas sûr de bien comprendre.. mais encore une fois mon programme ne crée pas ou ne découpe pas des bâtiments, ça serait une tâche bien plus compliquée... Actuellement le programme lit les bâtiments importés et essaye de les faire correspondre avec des bâtiment existants d'OSM pour éventuellement rajouter un tag un tags levels=* ou height=* (seulement si le bâtiment n'en possède pas encore donc à priori je ne vais pas saccager le travail des cartographes de l'île de la Cité). D'ailleurs Jếrôme tu as remarqué que j'ai fait plusieurs updates avec différents tags levels. C'est parce que je met à jour l'immeuble dès que je trouve un import qui le match géographiquement. Mais si par la suite je tombe sur un nouvel import qui match encore mieux alors je fais une nouvelle mise à jour (mais si vraiment ça pose problème je pourrais me débrouiller pour ne faire qu'une seule mise à jour, celle du meilleur candidat tant qu'à faire ;p). Et comme tu l'as dis rien n'empêche d'autres contributeurs d'améliorer le travail par la suite. D'ailleurs pour reprendre l'idée de Vincent je pourrais rajouter pour faciliter le travail des contributeurs un tag fixme pour les bâtiments trop tendancieux. Je pourrais par exemple poser ce tag dans le cas où le score du meilleur bâtiment importé ne dépasse pas les 80% (ie. parmi les bâtiments d'ODP le meilleur candidat a une surface dont le ratio avec la surface du bâtiment d'OSM est inférieur à 0.8). Sinon attention delta entre osm et la db de l'opendata, un toit/grenier n'est pas considéré comme level sur osm! Oui je rajoute déjà +1 au nombre d'étage puisque OSM compte les étages à l'américaine ;) ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-it] R: Re: Incrocio di strada con pista nciclopedonale
2015-03-24 23:09 GMT+01:00 flaviano.ghe...@libero.it flaviano.ghe...@libero.it: E' un incrocio che ha il semaforo per le auto e inglobato la luce verde/rossa per le biciclette. Circa una decina di metri a lato c'è il passaggio pedonale pure munito di semaforo apposito. A questo punto direi che il tag più appropriato è quello suggerito da Fabri, cioè aggiungere bicycle=yes al semaforo per le auto (highway=traffic_signals) e mappare separatamente l'attraversamento pedonale coi tag highway=crossing + crossing=traffic_signals. Ciao Federico ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-br] Revisar Limites
Procurei por erros ali e não encontrei nada, nenhum histórico de modificação recente nas atuais linhas de admin_level 2. Tarcisio Oliveira On 24/03/2015 15:03, Blademir Andrade de Lima wrote: Alguém foi mais rápido. Parece que o erro ja foi corrigido. Att BladeTC Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 14:45:48 -0300 From: blademi...@hotmail.com To: talk-br@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-br] Revisar Limites De limites eu entendo. Jaja eu verifico o que esta ocorrendo la. --- Mensagem Original --- De: A. Carlos anorcar...@hotmail.com Enviado: 24 de março de 2015 13:34 Para: talk-br@openstreetmap.org Assunto: [Talk-br] Revisar Limites Pessoal.. Estou tendo problemas pra indexar cidades de Rondônia Vendo no JOSM parece que tem ali dupla relação de limites admistrativos 2 Vejam os anexos, não tem cara de ser cache, seguindo o limite de Leste para Oeste. Alguém que é experte, sabe me dizer se é normal este limites ali sobrepostos? no caso teria que revisar ali todo o limite Rondônia admin 2 _ *Anor C. A. de Souza Co**ncórdia SC * 49-8808-4963 ** ___ 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 ___ 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-us] Boundaries and verifiability (was Re: Retagging hamlets in the US)
On 3/24/15 6:01 PM, Jack Burke wrote: I would politely disagree that TIGER is an authoritative source for two reasons: 1) The extensive TIGER cleanup that is still being done years after the last import, and well, if that data were removed and sourced externally, the problems with TIGER boundary data and OSM would change in character rather substantially. 2) While helpful at compiling data, the federal government is not authoritative for any boundaries within a state (and once established, not even for the boundaries of the states themselves). as part of the ongoing improvements in TIGER, the Census Bureau is increasingly pulling data from County GIS departments rather than maintaining it themselves. the quality is much better. and since it's digital, the game of telephone metaphor does not apply so much any more. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-it] R: Re: Incrocio di strada con pista nciclopedonale
E' un incrocio che ha il semaforo per le auto e inglobato la luce verde/rossa per le biciclette. Circa una decina di metri a lato c'è il passaggio pedonale pure munito di semaforo apposito. Flaviano. Messaggio originale Da: erfab...@gmail.com Data: 23-mar-2015 18.13 A: openstreetmap list - italianotalk-it@openstreetmap.org Ogg: Re: [Talk-it] Incrocio di strada con pista nciclopedonale è una pista ciclopedonale con sedi separate o combinate? strano che il semaforo è solo per bici, e i pedoni attraversano quando gli pare? comunque per ora i tag dovrebbero essere highway=traffic_signals bicycle=yes non scrivo crossing=traffic_signals poichè mi dici che non è un semaforo per pedoni ci sono le strisce per l'attraversamento pedonale? Il 21/03/2015 22:44, flaviano.ghe...@libero.it ha scritto: Sto mappando una pista ciclo-pedonale che ad un incrocio con strada laterale presenta un semaforo per gli utenti ciclisti della pista. Come devo segnalarlo nella mappa? Grazie. (Flaviano Ghedin: ultimo chilometro) ___ 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: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée ? de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
On le crève cet abcès ? Heu... oui mais quand même ;-) J'ai déjà mentionné par le passé que je trouvais les prétentions de la FFRP abusives (surtout sur l'originalité des itinéraires) et j'ai suggéré de passer outre, la base de données* étant localisée à l'étranger. Néanmoins, dans un souci de conciliation, je me suis abstenu. Il est peut-être temps de considérer que la conciliation est caduque? Eric * je fais une distinction entre la base de données et les rendus. --- L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
[Talk-it] R: Re: Incrocio di strada con pista nciclopedonale
Il semaforo per pedoni c'è pure ma si trova una decina di metri più a lato. ti confesso che ogni volta che vedo qualcosa scritto in inglese mi viene una specie di conato ed una istantanea sensazione di repulsione. E' peggio dell'olio di ricino, se proprio devo tradurre seleziono il tutto e mi rivolgo alla applicazione QTranslate, ma comunque è un supplizio. A me sembra che voi vi divertiate con questo inglese. Ciao. Flaviano. Messaggio originale Da: cortese...@gmail.com Data: 23-mar-2015 21.14 A: openstreetmap list - italianotalk-it@openstreetmap.org Ogg: Re: [Talk-it] Incrocio di strada con pista nciclopedonale 2015-03-23 18:13 GMT+01:00 Fabri erfab...@gmail.com: non scrivo crossing=traffic_signals poichè mi dici che non è un semaforo per pedoni Riporto di seguito alcuni estratti della wiki, in particolare della pagina che ho linkato prima. This tag [highway=crossing] is used for more accurately describing specific types of pedestrian crossings across roads, and other types of crossing over road or rail. Crossing infrastructure for the convenience of pedestrians, cyclists etc. should first be tagged with highway=crossing or railway=crossing as appropriate. The specific type of crossing may be further specified with the crossing=* tag and other properties described below. Quindi anche gli attraversamenti ciclabili possono essere mappati con highway=crossing. crossing=traffic_signals Position this tag where the crossing-traffic (pedestrian, bicycles) have their own traffic lights. Quindi il crossing=traffic_signals può essere usato anche per gli attraverssamenti ciclabili e non solo per quelli pedonali. Il tag highway=traffic_signals invece indica espressamente un semaforo per le macchine, non per pedoni o ciclisti. Ciao Federico ___ 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: [OSM-talk-fr] Hauteur et nombre d'étages des bâtiments
Le 24 mars 2015 23:13, Vincent Frison vincent.fri...@gmail.com a écrit : Le 24 mars 2015 20:30, dHuy Pierre dh...@yahoo.fr a écrit : Francescu décrit assez bien le type de situation qui m'effraie. Sur l'île St Louis par exemple, il y avait une Eglise imbriqué dans un batiment, l'église était supérieur au reste mais de surface inférieur. Avec ton logiciel ça ferait disparaitre l'eglise... Autre exemple une coupole isolée (ça aussi ça existe sur le terrain). Etc... Hmm je vois pas dans quel cas ça pourrait faire disparaître un bâtiment.. t'aurais un lieu précis à m'indiquer stp ? Plutôt que de t'attaquer au building, pourquoi ne pas utiliser building:part? Il est parfaitement normé et t'éviteras les approximations. Je ne suis pas sûr de bien comprendre.. mais encore une fois mon programme ne crée pas ou ne découpe pas des bâtiments, ça serait une tâche bien plus compliquée... Actuellement le programme lit les bâtiments importés et essaye de les faire correspondre avec des bâtiment existants d'OSM pour éventuellement rajouter un tag un tags levels=* ou height=* (seulement si le bâtiment n'en possède pas encore donc à priori je ne vais pas saccager le travail des cartographes de l'île de la Cité). D'ailleurs Jếrôme tu as remarqué que j'ai fait plusieurs updates avec différents tags levels. C'est parce que je met à jour l'immeuble dès que je trouve un import qui le match géographiquement. Mais si par la suite je tombe sur un nouvel import qui match encore mieux alors je fais une nouvelle mise à jour (mais si vraiment ça pose problème je pourrais me débrouiller pour ne faire qu'une seule mise à jour, celle du meilleur candidat tant qu'à faire ;p). Je pense qu'un seul changement par bâtiment c'est mieux, plus facile a comprendre pour quelqu'un regardant l'historique par la suite ou voulant revenir à l'ancienne version. Et comme tu l'as dis rien n'empêche d'autres contributeurs d'améliorer le travail par la suite. D'ailleurs pour reprendre l'idée de Vincent je pourrais rajouter pour faciliter le travail des contributeurs un tag fixme pour les bâtiments trop tendancieux. Je pourrais par exemple poser ce tag dans le cas où le score du meilleur bâtiment importé ne dépasse pas les 80% (ie. parmi les bâtiments d'ODP le meilleur candidat a une surface dont le ratio avec la surface du bâtiment d'OSM est inférieur à 0.8). Sinon attention delta entre osm et la db de l'opendata, un toit/grenier n'est pas considéré comme level sur osm! Oui je rajoute déjà +1 au nombre d'étage puisque OSM compte les étages à l'américaine ;) ___ 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] Hauteur et nombre d'étages des bâtiments
Si tu tags le building avec la hauteur la plus faible puis que tu dessine une bloc building:part=yes, building:levels=... Ça permet de dessiner les variétés de hauteur sans créer de nouveaux batiments mais des bouts de batiments.http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings Pour ce qui est de l'exemple, je t'invite à regarder l'historique de la zone https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/330517677 avec une logiciel de rendu 3D Le Mardi 24 mars 2015 23h13, Vincent Frison vincent.fri...@gmail.com a écrit : Le 24 mars 2015 20:30, dHuy Pierre dh...@yahoo.fr a écrit : Francescu décrit assez bien le type de situation qui m'effraie. Sur l'île St Louis par exemple, il y avait une Eglise imbriqué dans un batiment, l'église était supérieur au reste mais de surface inférieur. Avec ton logiciel ça ferait disparaitre l'eglise... Autre exemple une coupole isolée (ça aussi ça existe sur le terrain). Etc... Hmm je vois pas dans quel cas ça pourrait faire disparaître un bâtiment.. t'aurais un lieu précis à m'indiquer stp ? Plutôt que de t'attaquer au building, pourquoi ne pas utiliser building:part? Il est parfaitement normé et t'éviteras les approximations. Je ne suis pas sûr de bien comprendre.. mais encore une fois mon programme ne crée pas ou ne découpe pas des bâtiments, ça serait une tâche bien plus compliquée... Actuellement le programme lit les bâtiments importés et essaye de les faire correspondre avec des bâtiment existants d'OSM pour éventuellement rajouter un tag un tags levels=* ou height=* (seulement si le bâtiment n'en possède pas encore donc à priori je ne vais pas saccager le travail des cartographes de l'île de la Cité). D'ailleurs Jếrôme tu as remarqué que j'ai fait plusieurs updates avec différents tags levels. C'est parce que je met à jour l'immeuble dès que je trouve un import qui le match géographiquement. Mais si par la suite je tombe sur un nouvel import qui match encore mieux alors je fais une nouvelle mise à jour (mais si vraiment ça pose problème je pourrais me débrouiller pour ne faire qu'une seule mise à jour, celle du meilleur candidat tant qu'à faire ;p). Et comme tu l'as dis rien n'empêche d'autres contributeurs d'améliorer le travail par la suite. D'ailleurs pour reprendre l'idée de Vincent je pourrais rajouter pour faciliter le travail des contributeurs un tag fixme pour les bâtiments trop tendancieux. Je pourrais par exemple poser ce tag dans le cas où le score du meilleur bâtiment importé ne dépasse pas les 80% (ie. parmi les bâtiments d'ODP le meilleur candidat a une surface dont le ratio avec la surface du bâtiment d'OSM est inférieur à 0.8). Sinon attention delta entre osm et la db de l'opendata, un toit/grenier n'est pas considéré comme level sur osm! Oui je rajoute déjà +1 au nombre d'étage puisque OSM compte les étages à l'américaine ;) ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Fwd: [OSM-talk] OSM down?
On 2015-03-24 09:03, Glenn Plas wrote : FYI: Before you start slamming the keyboard and blame your ISP: openstreetmap seems to be down now, both API and the map. Glenn Forwarded Message Subject: [OSM-talk] OSM down? Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 08:44:23 +0100 From: Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl To: t...@openstreetmap.org The only response from www and api I get is Incomplete response received from application. Is it only my or is OSM down? Regards, Maarten Remotely related, it's quite a time that I often see pages insisting to be blank, only at zoom 19. Also, yesterday, an update did not show up for more than one hour, only at zoom 18, other zooms OK. All that despite frequent browser refreshes? Any shattered keyboard out there? ;-) André. ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [Talk-br] Restrição de Manobra em U
Márcio, acho que eu entendi o que você quis dizer, que colocar uma restrição de no left turn resolveria a situação, não sendo necessário demais tags. Isso é verdade para a maioria dos casos, como no exemplo em que você deu no qual é proibido virar a esquerda e também fazer retorno. Porém existem situação nas quais é proibido fazer retorno porém é permitido virar a esquerda. Veja essa foto: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzTG_Qb5moDwM2s5bjE3X2JKcVkauthuser=0 Existem duas vias paralelas em sentidos opostos e uma via perpendicular ligando elas. Veja que na via da esquerda é permitido seguir reto e virar a esquerda, porém não é permitido fazer retorno (veja a placa no poste). O movimento que o caminhão azul está fazendo é permitido. Nessa situação não podemos colocar uma restrição de no left turn pois acabaria por proibir um movimento permitido, como o que está sendo realizado pelo caminhão azul. Enfim, de qualquer forma acho que concordamos que restrição de no U_turn na qual a origem e o destino são a mesma via são desnecessárias. Hoje a noite vou começar a deletá-las. Vou anotar os changeset, caso seja necessário podemos reverter isso. Em 24 de março de 2015 09:33, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro marcioviniciu...@gmail.com escreveu: Oésley, eu entendo o que é uma proibição de retorno no mundo real e existem aos montes Brasil afora (muitas exatamente como na foto apresentada), mas nos exemplos que você deu no OSM, que são os mais comuns, não há manobras em U, apenas em L. Nesse caso, para se evitar o retorno, coloca-se uma restrições para manobras em L (proibido virar à esquerda) como nesse caso entre as ruas Maxwell e Uruguai: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-22.92246/-43.24763 (observe as relações e restrições entre elas). Assim sendo, eu realmente não entendo a aplicação do u_turn, pelos mesmos motivos expostos Gerald. Manobras em U é (no mundo real) necessariamente uma relação de uma via com ela mesma. Se as ruas e retornos são modelados como no exemplo do Oésley (e na Maxwell), definitivamente não precisamos de um no_u_turn no OSM. Como eu disse antes, coloco para evitar confusões em bifurcações, mas a rigor isso deveria ser aplicado em quase todos os pontos de todas as vias, o que é absolutamente inviável. Seria muito mais fácil indicar onde é permitido fazer essa manobra, não o contrário. - - - · Atenciosamente, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro http://about.me/Doideira http://pt.gravatar.com/marciovinicius Em 23 de março de 2015 22:08, Oéslei Taborda Ribas oesleiri...@gmail.com escreveu: Aqui [1] tem uma foto de proibição de manobra em U, veja que pela foto você não pode fazer um retorno (manobra em U) porém é permitido fazer uma conversão a esquerda. Implemetado no OSM eu achei esses exemplos aqui [2][3], perceba pelas figuras que a restrição forma um U no mapa. Quanto ao OsmAnd, talvez não seja uma boa ferramente para avaliar essas restrições de U-Turn. Encontrei esse ticket aqui [4] do pessoal reclamando que ele não trata corretamente as restrições de manobras em U, esse ticket estava aberto a mais de 2 anos e foi fechado no mês passado. [1] - http://m1.i.pbase.com/u26/orangecones/upload/19577581.Mvc009s.jpg [2] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1806681 [3] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1707089 [4] - https://code.google.com/p/osmand/issues/detail?id=1729 Em 23 de março de 2015 20:32, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro marcioviniciu...@gmail.com escreveu: O Osmand costuma sim sugerir fazer retorno na mesma via, quando mão dupla. Mas entendo que ele faz isso como quem diz cara, vc tem que voltar do jeito que conseguir, porque ir por aí é uma péssima ideia e não vejo outra solução viável pra você. Eu costumo colocar essa restrição em locais onde as mãos de uma via de mão dupla se separam… em muitos casos é possível (e até sinalizado) fazer o retorno, em muitos outros é até perigoso fazer. Acredito que em outros casos ela seja realmente desnecessária. E não sei o que se quer dizer com manobra em U, se não for de uma via para ela mesma… se tem uma via ortogonal a duas paralelas a manobra não seria em U, seriam duas manobras em L, não? Até por isso, não consegui aplicar esse tipo de restrição no Josm, ele reclama de a restrição ser de uma via pra ela mesma (ainda que em U). No ID, ele faz sem nem questionar nada. Talvez eu não tenha entendido o propósito e a aplicação reais do no_u_turn. __ Atenciosamente, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro. http://about.me/Doideira Em 23/03/2015 17:08, Aun Johnsen li...@gimnechiske.org escreveu: Mostrando este erro do mkgmap no meu opinião totalmente matar o argumento do fazer este tipo do no_u_turn. On 3/23/15, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-23 15:15 GMT-03:00 Oéslei Taborda Ribas oesleiri...@gmail.com: Estava pensando em deletar essas restrições, pelos motivos acima expostos, porém antes de fazer isso gostaria de saber se vocês veem algum
[Talk-us] Maps and the Geospatial Revolution Coursera class
I'm registered to this online class, it is scheduled to start tomorrow. Perhaps it will be of interest to someone on the list. This course brings together core concepts in cartography, geographic information systems, and spatial thinking with real-world examples to provide the fundamentals necessary to engage with Geography beyond the surface-level. We will explore what makes spatial information special, how spatial data is created, how spatial analysis is conducted, and how to design maps so that they’re effective at telling the stories we wish to share. To gain experience using this knowledge, we will work with the latest mapping and analysis software to explore geographic problems. https://www.coursera.org/course/maps http://www.personal.psu.edu/acr181/GR_MOOC_Course_Outline_121313.pdf Yours, -- Max ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Je me suis par contre toujours demandé comment gr-infos a fait. J'ai contacté par mail et Facebook, aucune réponse. Le 2015-03-24 15:06, Ab_fab a écrit : Leo, Mets-toi dans la peau d'un touriste / randonneur / sportif étranger qui prépare ses prochaines vacances en France. L'offre de documentation à sa disposition n'est sans doute pas si pléthorique. La FFRP a une approche très franco-française, j'ai l'impression. Il y a peut-être un créneau de ce point de vue. Bonne continuation Le 24 mars 2015 09:55, Léo Serre l...@lstronic.com a écrit : Salut, J'avais essayé de lancer une plateforme pour les amateurs de sport Outdoor qui reposerais sur OSM pour pas mal de choses. * Partage de traces de rando (à la manière de plein de sites) (activités) * Intégrer les données de refuges.info [1] via leur API (hébergement) * Trouver un partenariat avec covoiturage-libre afin d'offrir des offres de covoiturage pour aller en montagne via une API (déplacements) * Deux fonds OSM pour le projet (un topo et un plus orienté web à la manière du rendu outdooractive) (carto) J'ai abandonné ça car je reçoit en permanence des projets exactement similaires qui ne se lancent pas (trop d'acteurs dans le créneau : VisuRando, Eosya, MyPrivateGIS, la-trace, GeoTrek, ...) Mais si un projet similaire super motivé se lance, je serais de l'aventure. Léo Le 24/03/2015 09:24, Eric Marsden a écrit : JB == JB jb...@mailoo.org writes: JB l'originalité d'un itinéraire. Elle évoque les dépenses et le JB travail de la FFR. Et elle crache le mot OpenStreetMap JB (maintenant, j'ai découvert ce que c'est que de cracher des mots), JB « il faut pas croire, il y a aussi des contraintes quand on JB utilise leurs données (j'essaye de creuser, j'arrive pas à lui en JB faire dire plus sur ces contraintes). La FFR semble donc définitivement être un dinosaur rentier qui va chercher à protégér ses acquis (postes, subventions...) le plus longtemps possible, sans s'inquiéter de sa mission d'intérêt général. On peut imaginer mobiliser les randonneurs directement ou via d'autres organismes comme la CAF. Mais il me semble qu'il manque pour cela un site web qui expliquerai tout ce qu'il est possible de faire, en tant qu'utilisateur ou contributeur : - préparer son voyage avec http://francetopo.fr/ [2], http://www.hikebikemap.org/ [3], http://waymarkedtrails.org/fr/ [4] - (Garmin) récupérer des cartes - (Android) récupérer des cartes hors ligne pour OsmAnd, avec lignes de niveau, ou sur openandromaps.org [5] - avertissements d'usage concernant confiance en les données - comment contribuer des données sur les parcours (liens vers les pages wiki pertinentes) Je suis motivé pour participer à un groupe qui se lancerai là-dedans, s'il y a des intéressés. -- Léo SERRE _LSTRONIC Founder_ l...@lstronic.com lstronic.com [7] ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr [6] -- ab_fab [8] Il n'y a pas de pas perdus, Nadja ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr [6] -- Léo SERRE _LSTRONIC Founder_ l...@lstronic.com lstronic.com [7] Links: -- [1] http://refuges.info [2] http://francetopo.fr/ [3] http://www.hikebikemap.org/ [4] http://waymarkedtrails.org/fr/ [5] http://openandromaps.org [6] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr [7] http://lstronic.com [8] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ab_fab ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] ?
2015-03-24 9:56 GMT+01:00 Romain MEHUT romain.me...@gmail.com: Bonjour, Le 23 mars 2015 18:08, Jérôme Amagat jerome.ama...@gmail.com a écrit : Ce que je veux dire c'est qu'il peut il y avoir des clairières, des zones plus ou moins grandes sans arbre à l'intérieur de l'emprise de la forêt communale. Avec landuse= forest ça voudrait dire qu'il y a des arbres partout. C'est pourquoi il existe les relations de type multipolygone qui permettent de dessiner les représenter les clairières tout en les excluant de l'emprise forestière cf. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Relation:multipolygon#Un_anneau_externe_et_un_anneau_interne Non, non. Ce que Jérôme cherche, c'est à représenter la limite administrative de la forêt domaniale, pas physique, un peu comme les limites parcellaires du privé. Et pour les mêmes raisons que pour les parcelles, ma réponse serait de dire que ça n'a pas sa place dans OSM. Pieren ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Pourquoi vous parlez de moi comme cela. J'ai justement fait une belle randonnée à la montagne en raquette aujourd'hui et tracé mes propres pistes, et sur le terrain et sur GPS. Ici hiver tardif avec soleil de printemps. Autant pour les touristes que les amis français, c'est certain qu'il serait bien d'avoir ces informations dans la base et permettre d'avoir des sites spécialisés qui affichent les randos. Mais bon, ces vieux modèles économiques ont de la difficulté à disparaitre en France comme au Québec. Pierre De : Ab_fab gamma@gmail.com À : Discussions sur OSM en français talk-fr@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Mardi 24 mars 2015 10h06 Objet : Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?) Leo, Mets-toi dans la peau d'un touriste / randonneur / sportif étranger qui prépare ses prochaines vacances en France.L'offre de documentation à sa disposition n'est sans doute pas si pléthorique. La FFRP a une approche très franco-française, j'ai l'impression.Il y a peut-être un créneau de ce point de vue. Bonne continuation Le 24 mars 2015 09:55, Léo Serre l...@lstronic.com a écrit : Salut, J'avais essayé de lancer une plateforme pour les amateurs de sport Outdoor qui reposerais sur OSM pour pas mal de choses. * Partage de traces de rando (à la manière de plein de sites) (activités) * Intégrer les données de refuges.info via leur API (hébergement) * Trouver un partenariat avec covoiturage-libre afin d'offrir des offres de covoiturage pour aller en montagne via une API (déplacements) * Deux fonds OSM pour le projet (un topo et un plus orienté web à la manière du rendu outdooractive) (carto) J'ai abandonné ça car je reçoit en permanence des projets exactement similaires qui ne se lancent pas (trop d'acteurs dans le créneau : VisuRando, Eosya, MyPrivateGIS, la-trace, GeoTrek, ...) Mais si un projet similaire super motivé se lance, je serais de l'aventure. Léo Le 24/03/2015 09:24, Eric Marsden a écrit : JB == JB jb...@mailoo.org writes: JB l'originalité d'un itinéraire. Elle évoque les dépenses et le JB travail de la FFR. Et elle crache le mot OpenStreetMap JB (maintenant, j'ai découvert ce que c'est que de cracher des mots), JB « il faut pas croire, il y a aussi des contraintes quand on JB utilise leurs données (j'essaye de creuser, j'arrive pas à lui en JB faire dire plus sur ces contraintes). La FFR semble donc définitivement être un dinosaur rentier qui va chercher à protégér ses acquis (postes, subventions…) le plus longtemps possible, sans s'inquiéter de sa mission d'intérêt général. On peut imaginer mobiliser les randonneurs directement ou via d'autres organismes comme la CAF. Mais il me semble qu'il manque pour cela un site web qui expliquerai tout ce qu'il est possible de faire, en tant qu'utilisateur ou contributeur : - préparer son voyage avec http://francetopo.fr/, http://www.hikebikemap.org/, http://waymarkedtrails.org/fr/ - (Garmin) récupérer des cartes - (Android) récupérer des cartes hors ligne pour OsmAnd, avec lignes de niveau, ou sur openandromaps.org - avertissements d'usage concernant confiance en les données - comment contribuer des données sur les parcours (liens vers les pages wiki pertinentes) Je suis motivé pour participer à un groupe qui se lancerai là-dedans, s'il y a des intéressés. -- Léo SERRE LSTRONIC Founder l...@lstronic.com lstronic.com ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr -- ab_fab Il n'y a pas de pas perdus, Nadja ___ 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: [Talk-br] Revisar Limites
Anor, que cidade está com problema? Não está indexando ruas com a cidade ou a cidade no estado? ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-br] Revisar Limites
Tarcisio ali tem bug no Mapsource, no meu script, no Mapsource se coloco qualquer cidade e coloco o estado RO, ( já no Resto dos Estados ele busca normal) ele não acha nada. Dai achei que seria algo na minha poly que tivesse comendo vendo ali no JOSM parece dependendo do zoom, que existe 2 linha de limites conforme o zomm, parece que tem um limite por baixo, até no Editor, depende do zomm da pra ver isso.. http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/-13.5033/-60.9957 ___ Anor C. A. de Souza Concórdia SC 49-8808-4963 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:41:31 -0300 From: nao...@gmail.com To: talk-br@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-br] Revisar Limites Anor, que cidade está com problema? Não está indexando ruas com a cidade ou a cidade no estado? ___ 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] Revisar Limites
2015-03-24 22:38 GMT-03:00 A. Carlos anorcar...@hotmail.com: Dai achei que seria algo na minha poly que tivesse comendo vendo ali no JOSM parece dependendo do zoom, que existe 2 linha de limites conforme o zomm, parece que tem um limite por baixo, até no Editor, depende do zomm da pra ver isso.. Pode ser o poly mesmo. Só tem um caminho no local que é um rio usado como limite. ___ Talk-br mailing list Talk-br@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units
I noticed that about other items, but the key:ele wiki page defines this clearly: it’s in meters, and this suggests to me that others using 3643_ft or 3643ft are doing it wrong, or at least inconsistently with advertised expectations. If my goal is to just make local maps look nice, I’ll just set the ele = “3643 feet”, but at what point is it detrimental to the project as a whole to go against specific and explicit guidance, such that it will break software that relies on people playing well in the sandbox [by setting numeric meters]. Put another way: am I being selfish to just do it my own way and screw anybody else who’s counting on me to play by the rules? Seems to me that it *is* reasonable to set elevation to include a number + unit of measure, but doesn’t this kind of thing go for a proposal, get input from others who care about the matter, standardize on formats such that validators can validate and harmonize, and go for some kind of vote? I’m much too new to the project to charge ahead I that way, but I do welcome a discussion. Steve From: Harald Kliems [mailto:kli...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 7:18 PM To: Steve Friedl; talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units Hi Steve: one tag where units are in common use is maxspeed. The default is km/h but you can also use mph or knots. I don't see why this wouldn't be feasible for the ele tag as well. If you look at taginfo, you can also see that ft is used quite a bit -- unfortunately often in an inconsistent way, e.g. ele=3643_ft or 3643ft. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ele#values (you have to search for ft in the search box). Harald. On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:57 PM Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, I appreciated being able to join my first Mappy Hour yesterday, though without mic/camera. I’m quite enamoured with this project and hope to fit in with the goals and the vibe. One thing we talked about, and I’d like to explore more formally, is how to deal with elevation in local units. I lead hikes in the local Santa Ana Mountains, and there is not a single person who hikes here, not even those from Europe or those who personally invented the metric system, who thinks of peak elevations in meters. The guides and the maps are all in feet, the surveying markers are in feet, as are the topo maps. This is just a fact of life even if we all [including me] agree that Americans are foolish for not adopting the metric system. An obvious thought is to enter the elevation including the units, so Sierra Peak would show as “3045 feet” rather than “928”, but this won’t work. The wiki page for the “ele” key defines the tag as meters, so it’s reasonable to expect that some software out there relies on this, and it would have no provisions to convert anything on the fly because it ought to expect numeric meters. But even with this aside, that still doesn’t solve the rendering problem: I believe that page tiles are rendered as images, so it’s got to pick *something* for the text, and I don’t think there’s any way of having a user preference to show these things in local units. My suspicion is that there is no easy fix here, but I think a discussion is in order. I’ve added a section to the key:ele page that touches on this, not so much to propose a solution, but to let others with this same issue know that it’s seen as an issue. Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele#Local_Units Is this kind of thing suitable for the key:ele page? Steve --- Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571 st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy | unixwiz.net ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units
For what it is worth, I’ve become used to looking at distances on topo maps in meters/kilometers as that is what the UTM grid is on USGS topos but I just can’t deal with elevation in meters. Maybe for relative elevations (I’ve got another 500 meters vertical to go is almost okay, but very definitely not for spot elevations. I’ve been using OSM data mashed with DEM data from the USGS to make paper trail maps. DEM data from the USGS is also in meters by the way. What I do is convert the meters to feet in the scripts that pull data the OSM data tables. So my paper maps have contour lines (generated from metric DEM) and spot elevations (from OSM) in feet. It actually is not too hard to do. And it is easiest, at least for me, to just assume that the elevation is in meters rather than having to parse it to find a “ft” suffix. So from my point of view leaving elevation in meters and having the render deal with localization is a reasonable way to go. Cheers, Tod On Mar 24, 2015, at 7:55 PM, Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote: I noticed that about other items, but the key:ele wiki page defines this clearly: it’s in meters, and this suggests to me that others using 3643_ft or 3643ft are doing it wrong, or at least inconsistently with advertised expectations. If my goal is to just make local maps look nice, I’ll just set the ele = “3643 feet”, but at what point is it detrimental to the project as a whole to go against specific and explicit guidance, such that it will break software that relies on people playing well in the sandbox [by setting numeric meters]. Put another way: am I being selfish to just do it my own way and screw anybody else who’s counting on me to play by the rules? Seems to me that it *is* reasonable to set elevation to include a number + unit of measure, but doesn’t this kind of thing go for a proposal, get input from others who care about the matter, standardize on formats such that validators can validate and harmonize, and go for some kind of vote? I’m much too new to the project to charge ahead I that way, but I do welcome a discussion. Steve From: Harald Kliems [mailto:kli...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 7:18 PM To: Steve Friedl; talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units Hi Steve: one tag where units are in common use is maxspeed. The default is km/h but you can also use mph or knots. I don't see why this wouldn't be feasible for the ele tag as well. If you look at taginfo, you can also see that ft is used quite a bit -- unfortunately often in an inconsistent way, e.g. ele=3643_ft or 3643ft. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ele#values http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ele#values (you have to search for ft in the search box). Harald. On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:57 PM Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net mailto:st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, I appreciated being able to join my first Mappy Hour yesterday, though without mic/camera. I’m quite enamoured with this project and hope to fit in with the goals and the vibe. One thing we talked about, and I’d like to explore more formally, is how to deal with elevation in local units. I lead hikes in the local Santa Ana Mountains, and there is not a single person who hikes here, not even those from Europe or those who personally invented the metric system, who thinks of peak elevations in meters. The guides and the maps are all in feet, the surveying markers are in feet, as are the topo maps. This is just a fact of life even if we all [including me] agree that Americans are foolish for not adopting the metric system. An obvious thought is to enter the elevation including the units, so Sierra Peak would show as “3045 feet” rather than “928”, but this won’t work. The wiki page for the “ele” key defines the tag as meters, so it’s reasonable to expect that some software out there relies on this, and it would have no provisions to convert anything on the fly because it ought to expect numeric meters. But even with this aside, that still doesn’t solve the rendering problem: I believe that page tiles are rendered as images, so it’s got to pick *something* for the text, and I don’t think there’s any way of having a user preference to show these things in local units. My suspicion is that there is no easy fix here, but I think a discussion is in order. I’ve added a section to the key:ele page that touches on this, not so much to propose a solution, but to let others with this same issue know that it’s seen as an issue. Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele#Local_Units http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele#Local_Units Is this kind of thing suitable for the key:ele page? Steve --- Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571 st...@unixwiz.net mailto:st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California
[Talk-us] Elevation in local units
Hi all, I appreciated being able to join my first Mappy Hour yesterday, though without mic/camera. I'm quite enamoured with this project and hope to fit in with the goals and the vibe. One thing we talked about, and I'd like to explore more formally, is how to deal with elevation in local units. I lead hikes in the local Santa Ana Mountains, and there is not a single person who hikes here, not even those from Europe or those who personally invented the metric system, who thinks of peak elevations in meters. The guides and the maps are all in feet, the surveying markers are in feet, as are the topo maps. This is just a fact of life even if we all [including me] agree that Americans are foolish for not adopting the metric system. An obvious thought is to enter the elevation including the units, so Sierra Peak would show as 3045 feet rather than 928, but this won't work. The wiki page for the ele key defines the tag as meters, so it's reasonable to expect that some software out there relies on this, and it would have no provisions to convert anything on the fly because it ought to expect numeric meters. But even with this aside, that still doesn't solve the rendering problem: I believe that page tiles are rendered as images, so it's got to pick *something* for the text, and I don't think there's any way of having a user preference to show these things in local units. My suspicion is that there is no easy fix here, but I think a discussion is in order. I've added a section to the key:ele page that touches on this, not so much to propose a solution, but to let others with this same issue know that it's seen as an issue. Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele#Local_Units Is this kind of thing suitable for the key:ele page? Steve --- Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571 mailto:st...@unixwiz.net st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy | unixwiz.net ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units
Hi Steve: one tag where units are in common use is maxspeed. The default is km/h but you can also use mph or knots. I don't see why this wouldn't be feasible for the ele tag as well. If you look at taginfo, you can also see that ft is used quite a bit -- unfortunately often in an inconsistent way, e.g. ele=3643_ft or 3643ft. http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ele#values (you have to search for ft in the search box). Harald. On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:57 PM Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, I appreciated being able to join my first Mappy Hour yesterday, though without mic/camera. I’m quite enamoured with this project and hope to fit in with the goals and the vibe. One thing we talked about, and I’d like to explore more formally, is how to deal with elevation in local units. I lead hikes in the local Santa Ana Mountains, and there is not a single person who hikes here, not even those from Europe or those who personally invented the metric system, who thinks of peak elevations in meters. The guides and the maps are all in feet, the surveying markers are in feet, as are the topo maps. This is just a fact of life even if we all [including me] agree that Americans are foolish for not adopting the metric system. An obvious thought is to enter the elevation including the units, so Sierra Peak would show as “3045 feet” rather than “928”, but this won’t work. The wiki page for the “ele” key defines the tag as meters, so it’s reasonable to expect that some software out there relies on this, and it would have no provisions to convert anything on the fly because it ought to expect numeric meters. But even with this aside, that still doesn’t solve the rendering problem: I believe that page tiles are rendered as images, so it’s got to pick * *something** for the text, and I don’t think there’s any way of having a user preference to show these things in local units. My suspicion is that there is no easy fix here, but I think a discussion is in order. I’ve added a section to the key:ele page that touches on this, not so much to propose a solution, but to let others with this same issue know that it’s seen as an issue. Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele#Local_Units Is this kind of thing suitable for the key:ele page? Steve --- Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571 st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy | unixwiz.net ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk-be] meeting with CIRB
Le Mar 24 mars 2015 17:47, Julien Fastré a écrit : -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ben and I had a meeting with CIRB today. Great news. Thanks for the note. Who have you met ? Eric Auquière ? Who was the highest ranked decision maker ? Who where the technical people ? CIRB is thinking about new projects for the coming years. They are actually brainstorming/thinking/meeting people about what would be interesting to develop. good point They are also interested by OSM. They guess OSM can help them to achieve their missions, but they are quite unclear about concretely what to do. we can provide ideas and suggestions ;-) They also have some admiration for the work done by contributors. good At first, they were thinking about change detection from OSM to URBIS data. They think also about using OSM as background layer for outside of the Brussels Regio (some of their clients (public institutions in Brussels) are working around Brussels). +1 During the meeting, we explained some tools and organization that they didn't know (they were quite well documented). which tools ? We stressed the discussion on one aspect: which interest do you have into investing in OSM ? Our message: if you have some interest, you could invest in differents manners to help improve the tools, the data, or building the community... indeed We discussed some ideas like : - - hosting some data or extracts for OSM on a future data portal. This might help to promote our data, and help to improve them (the better visibility we have, the better data we will have) ; +1 - - the cirb is interested in using OSM for starting cadastre of data (like benches, street furnitures) that their customers (municipalities, ...) could need. This would be great, because by virality our licence will force those customers to redistribute freely the improved data if they want to share it to a third person ; +1 - - hosting tiles with dedicated styles for Brussels/Belgium. (We launched the idea to loan a server from the CIRB data center to the OSM community :-)) +1 - - the routing functionalities has also some interest for them ; indeed. We could also imagine for example importing the weekly calendar of road workds done today by the AED administration and that could be integrated with OSM and helped improve much the routing of OSM ... and give OSM routing some advantages with respect to the competition (road work could be taken into account in the OSM routing and make it more convenient - as free service - than any other) They also asked if osm contributors would be interested in diff of urbis data : what has changed in their data from date X to date Y. This would ease the update operation between urbis and OSM (we also suggest to make a diff between their data and what is imported in OSM). +1 The CIRB is collecting those ideas, will write some internal documents and continue the process internally. We will be kept in touch. We also spoke about the mapping party on 25th of April ! great. Could CIRB support this event ? Participate ? Spread the word about it ? Much thanks, Ben Julien Nicolas -- Nicolas Pettiaux - nico...@pettiaux.be Soutenons april.org , framasoft.org et laquadrature.net ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units
- I feel that osm convention should encourage all mappers to specify units (e.g. 22 m). - That whitespace should be allowed (e.g. 22m, 22 m, or even 22 meters). - And that local units should be encouraged (e.g. 22 feet, or 22' 0). The wiki templates, if spruced up, could define the rules uniformly for all keys that take a measurement unit (e.g. height, width, ele, max_height, etc). -- Parsers are cheap. Any parser worth using can convert 22m, 22 m, 22 feet or a variety of reasonable variants. Humans are messy. Forcing them into boxes generally goes badly. --- Specific to the USA: If I'm mapping a 6000 foot sign I sure don't want to enter 1828.8m or worse yet 1828.8. The same goes for anything that takes a unit. maxspeed=88mph is better than maxspeed=88. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 09:11:34AM +0100, Kurt Waldhans wrote: Habe das gerade in OsmAnd getestet: bei einer amenity=school wird auf den naechstliegenden entrance=yes/main Knoten geroutet, falls dieser auf das ametity-polygon gesetzt ist. Sollte man bei camp_site mal versuchen. Aeh - Wo setzt du denn auf einem amenity polygon ein entrance? Überall da wo Wege oder Straßen dann die Fläche verlassen? Bei einer Schule umfasst ja das amenity polygon alles - d.h. Lehrerparkplatz, Sporthalle, Schulhof etc ... Da sind dann reichlich viele Ein/Ausgänge... Dann sind wir wieder da was ich meinte - Im zweifelsfalle endet man am Hintereingang. Entrance auf einem amenity find ich sowieso gerade spannend. Für mich war das immer für buildings. Die Wiki seite beschreibt das anders aber für Schulen deren Gesamtfläche ja oft nicht umzäunt oder abgetrennt sind passt das irgendwie nicht. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today! signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM down?
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 08:44:23AM +0100, Maarten Deen wrote: The only response from www and api I get is Incomplete response received from application. Is it only my or is OSM down? I am occasionally seeing this aswell but not only today but for at least 2-3 days. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today! signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Bonjour, Merci JB pour cette bonne tranche de rire ! Une solution dont j'ai eu l'occasion de discuter avec un responsable SIG de comcom serait de passer directement par les collectivités car ce sont elles qui très souvent mettent au point les itinéraires et fournissent ensuite les informations à la FFRP. Autrement dit à la FFRP il y a nombre d'itinéraires dont ils revendiquent la propriété intellectuelle et dont ils ne sont en fait pas du tout les auteurs, mais juste les baliseurs (et encore ?) et les publieurs. A mon avis rien n'empêche d'aller à la source auprès des collectivités, récupérer les itinéraires qu'ils ont construit et les publier sur OSM. En tout cas le gars avec qui j'ai discuté et tout à fait près à le faire. Autre remarque concernant un site d'aide à l'utilisation d'OSM en randonnée : l'excellente application oruxmaps sous Android qui est relativement simple à prendre en main. Nicolas ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-it] Inserimento nomi vie da tabella
Sul tabellone (pubblico in quanto piazzato in luogo pubblico da ente pubblico) non sono riportati (per quanto vedo) copyright, quindi IMHO è liberamente utilizzabile. -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Inserimento-nomi-vie-da-tabella-tp5722022p5838396.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
[OSM-talk-fr] Ancestris
Bonsoir, Ne vous fiez pas au titre qui ne vous dira probablement rien. Ancestris est un logiciel de généalogie qui utilise, entre autre et en premier choix, OSM pour géolocaliser ses ancêtres. Ancestris a besoin d'un coup de main pour mettre les pieds dans un salon national de généalogie à Poitiers en octobre prochain. La généalogie est un domaine où le propriétaire règne en maître avec deux logiciels phares en France. Nous avons besoin de financement. Nous n'avons aucune structure. J'ai donc lancé un projet sur Ulume la plateforme de financement participatif. http://fr.ulule.com/ancestrisapoitiers/ Merci d'avance de votre aide Amitiés -- Yannick VOYEAUD Nul n'a droit au superflu tant que chacun n'a pas son nécessaire (Camille JOUFFRAY 1841-1924, maire de Vienne) http://www.voyeaud.org Créateur CimGenWeb: http://www.francegenweb.org/cimgenweb/ Journées du Logiciel Libre: http://jdll.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-us] Retagging hamlets in the US
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-22 4:00 GMT+01:00 Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us: At its most basic, OSM is a geospatial database. We have countries, states, counties, and cities. Why not neighborhoods. OSM tells where a feature is located. Points can only tell us how close a feature is to a node. Using nodes to represent neighborhoods doesn't allow with any certainty where a feature is located while a polygon can. Points are too general. Polygons are too specific. Jeeze. One could invent something in between: an approximate radius point or a fuzzy polygon. Please don't assume because your particular neighborhood has (insert one: fuzzy boundaries, exact legal boundaries, well understood boundaries, an edit war about the boundary, a name used only for a railroad outhouse building in 1850) that there is only One True Solution. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-it] Source:name attraverso lettera di un comune
Il 03/24/2015 10:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer scrisse: forse c'è qualcosa di formale, ma io metterei una nota (tag note o se vuoi note:it) dove descrivi sinteticamente il fatto. Ok. Pero' volevo capire quale valore mettere per source:name Tra i valori standard non c'e' niente di particolarmente adatto. E nemmeno in taginfo. Io metterei official o qualcosa di simile. Il nome e' sicuramente quello perche' la fonte e' il comune ma trattandosi di una specie di track che si inoltra nel bosco, a parte alcune proprieta' il cui giardino vi si affaccia, e' improbabile che vengano messe targhe o altra indicazione. grazie maxx ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-es] OSM y metro
Ah, creía que Osmand era la aplicación oficial de OSM para móviles. De hecho mi idea era aportar mis contribuciones a través de esta aplicación, ya que por lo que he visto permite la edición de datos, puntos de interés, etc; así que estaba convencido de que Osmand era el programa oficial para móviles de OSM. En vista de que no lo es y que ambos proyectos no están directamente relacionados ¿creéis que es un método adecuado para colaborar o debería buscar opciones más adecuadas? En mi mensaje anterior lo decía, aunque no lo expresé muy claramente y creo que por eso se malentendió. Decía que tampoco en la web, la de OSM, quise decir, no la de Osmand, se pueden consultar rutas en transporte público, no? Alguien decía hace unos días que era difícil obtener los datos, pero Gmaps, Here Maps, y supongo que otros también, los obtienen de los consorcios públicos de transporte de cada ciudad. ¿Qué impide a OSM hacer lo mismo? ¿Son dificultades técnicas, burocráticas, o simplemente no ha habido tiempo/gente dispuesta a trabajar en ello? ¿Sabéis cómo se puede colaborar en este aspecto? Una última pregunta, aunque no sé si tal vez debería abrir otro hilo sobre este tema. si así lo creéis decídmelo: No parece haber en OSM nada parecido a la vista de calle que tiene Gmaps. ¿Hay previsto algo parecido en un futuro? Creo que gracias a los móviles y su función de geoetiquetado de fotos sería bastante fácil para cualquier usuario sin conocimientos contribuir con imágenes de sus ciudades y pueblos; y no sólo imágenes, también vídeos y eso que en alguna parte he leído llamar mapas sonoros. Hasta mi abuela podría, un día que vaya paseando sin prisas por su ciudad, ponerse 10 minutos a grabar unos minutos de vídeo y audio, o simplemente ir disparando fotos cada cierto tiempo mientras sigue su camino -tal vez las aplicaciones de edición de OSM podrían incorporar una función de autodisparo cada vez que el usuario se desplace x metros en una dirección u otra, e incluso recomendar al humano tomar la foto con la cámara del móvil apuntando más alto o más bajo, o con más o menos ángulo para facilitar que una foto se pueda encajar mejor con la anterior-, y gracias al geoetiquetado, OSM podría montar todo eso para tener una vista de calle que podría ser incluso mejor que la de Gmaps. No os parece?. Para preservar la intimidad de los transeúntes OSM podría difuminar las caras, las matrículas y otra información privada como hace Gmaps; o en caso de que se usara un aplicación amiga de OSM que permitiera hacer fotos, la propia aplicación podría encargarse de difuminar rostros y matrículas y así aligerar trabajo a los servidores de OSM. No sé nada de programación, pero si desarrollar el código entraña un esfuerzo de cierta importancia en recursos, la aplicación -parece ser que un poco abandonada- del Proyecto Guardián, ObscuraCam*, lo hace y su código es libre, por lo que quizá no hubiera mucho problema en integrarlo en otras aplicaciones. Saludos. * https://info.securityinabox.org/es/obscuracam_principal#2.2 El 22-03-2015 23:27, Roberto geb escribió: Bienvenido. Entiendo que puede resultar confuso por la semejanza de nombres, pero OsmAnd y OSM no son lo mismo: OSM es como una base de datos que recoge datos geográficos mundiales, mientras que Osmand es una aplicación geográfica para Android que utiliza datos de OSM,que efectivamente no planifica rutas de transporte público. Puedes acceder a la lista de discusión de OsmAnd en Google Groups. Esta lista es sobre OSM. El 20/03/2015 19:29, J. Yáñez inf...@openaliasbox.org escribió: Este es mi primer mensaje a esta lista, así que ante todo hola a todos. Estoy empezando a conocer esto de Openstreemap y de momento ando un poco perdido, per oespero contribuír con algo útil al proyecto en cuanto empiece a hacerme con este tinglado. De momento tengo un problema, o más bien una duda. Ni en la web ni en la aplicación Osmand parece haber una forma de calcular rutas en metro y otros transportes públicos, sólo parece poderse hacer para rutas en vehículos a motos, bicicleta y a pie. ¿Estoy en lo cierto o simplemente no he sabido encontrarlo? A mí también me gusta salir en bici, y en absoluto menosprecio la posibilidad de planear rutas en bici, pero sinceramente creo que para el usuario medio es mucho más importante poder buscar rutas en transporte público. ¿Hay que instalar algún complemento o simplemente estoy tonto y no he dado con la opción que permite esto que digo? Otra cosa sobre Osmand. ¿Hay alguna forma de que al buscar una dirección no se nos envíe e esa pantalla en la que hay que introducir por una parte el país, por otra la ciudad, por otra la calle y por otra el número de la calle? La verdad es que me parece de lo más torpe y farragoso. Lo suyo es que funcione como las aplicaciones de Gmaps o Here y que uno si está, por ejemplo, en el mapa de Valencia, ponga Blasco Ibáñez 62 y se le muestre directamente el resultado
[Talk-GB] New OS open data now available
Hi all, So the new OS OpenData that was discussed a few weeks ago is now available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/03/new-os-opendata-products-now-live/ I think there could be many good uses of this including to help validate some of our data. If anyone is using this then let us know so that we don't duplicate work. Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New OS open data now available
Hi All Just had a quick look at the OpenData, in summary: - Buildings are slightly more detailed, basically vector versions of the one on the streetview raster map - All of the rest, forests, rivers, are no different than the current Vector data we already have (AFAIK). Forests,rivers etc are the same size as the older data. - Roads seem to include a few more details, but not enough detail on them for accurate usage in OSM. So basically, it gives us slightly improved buildings, but they are still highly simplified in terms of their pay for products. Tony On 24 March 2015 at 18:58, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, So the new OS OpenData that was discussed a few weeks ago is now available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/03/new-os-opendata-products-now-live/ I think there could be many good uses of this including to help validate some of our data. If anyone is using this then let us know so that we don't duplicate work. Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-gb-london] Mapping Planning Meeting - Tomorrow 7pm - Penderel's Oak
On Wednesday 25th March (That's tomorrow!) we will be holding a Mapping Planning Meeting at The Penderel's Oak pub from 7pm As we enter spring and approach the start of British Summer Time we need to look at the state of London's OpenStreetMap coverage and plan some mapping. What are the data types of focus on? Most interesting data to map? Most in-demand data? Most glaring omissions? Where will we hold mapping events? Which pubs will we go to? All of these are to be discussed in this mapping planning meeting. The Penderel's Oak pub is here: http://osm.org/go/euu4mauUg-?m= It's between Holborn and Chancery Lane tube. We'll be there from 7pm This is a big pub. We'll aim to get a table somewhere near the main entrance. We'll also aim to get organised with an OpenStreetMap sign and / or an orange OSM Surveyors Jacket / Polo shirts. Sign up on lanyrd: http://lanyrd.com/2015/mapping-planning-meeting/ By signing up there, you make the event look more popular (Note: A lot of people don't bother signing up. We expect between 5 and 15 people) As always... London events listed here: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/London#Upcoming_Events And you should follow https://twitter.com/OSMLondon Harry ___ Talk-gb-london mailing list Talk-gb-london@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-london
Re: [Talk-GB] New OS open data now available
My understanding was that the river dataset is now fully connected (and wasn't before). Is this not the case? Are there any attributes on the building vector data? Rob On 24 Mar 2015 18:28, tony wroblewski tony.wroblew...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All Just had a quick look at the OpenData, in summary: - Buildings are slightly more detailed, basically vector versions of the one on the streetview raster map - All of the rest, forests, rivers, are no different than the current Vector data we already have (AFAIK). Forests,rivers etc are the same size as the older data. - Roads seem to include a few more details, but not enough detail on them for accurate usage in OSM. So basically, it gives us slightly improved buildings, but they are still highly simplified in terms of their pay for products. Tony On 24 March 2015 at 18:58, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, So the new OS OpenData that was discussed a few weeks ago is now available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/03/new-os-opendata-products-now-live/ I think there could be many good uses of this including to help validate some of our data. If anyone is using this then let us know so that we don't duplicate work. Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Recherche avec orthographe approximative
Pas mal aussi. Avec un mix des deux (Orthographe souple, base bano + POI OSM, configuration des critères de recherche sur POI en fonction des intérêts...) on pourrais avoir une solution libre qui dépasse google. Le 2015-03-24 06:42, Christian Quest a écrit : Essaye aussi ton orthographe sur: https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/map/ [3] c'est aussi libre et aussi basé sur OSM (BANO) Le projet (python/redis) est ici: https://github.com/etalab/addok [4] Le 23/03/2015 19:37, Simon a écrit : Enfin une recherche d'adresse pour ceux qui on de gros souci d'orthographe comme moi http://jdf.geovelo.fr/ [2] Si je recherche la rue sun onore, pari il me trouve bien la Rue Saint-Honoré, Paris en plus c'est libre et c'est basé sur OSM Simon ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr [1] -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr [1] Links: -- [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr [2] http://jdf.geovelo.fr/ [3] https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/map/ [4] https://github.com/etalab/addok ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-GB] New OS open data now available
I've just checked the buildings shape file, and every single entry has the same feature code unfortunately, the same with woodland. There is however a functional site shape file which gives outlines of where some key buildings are, along with their names, e.g. Schools, Hospitals. So this will be useful. In the download I did (OpenMap), the waterways weren't connected, but there is a separate download of water features which might be better quality. I'll give it a try shortly and see if it's any better. Tony On 24 March 2015 at 19:34, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: My understanding was that the river dataset is now fully connected (and wasn't before). Is this not the case? Are there any attributes on the building vector data? Rob On 24 Mar 2015 18:28, tony wroblewski tony.wroblew...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All Just had a quick look at the OpenData, in summary: - Buildings are slightly more detailed, basically vector versions of the one on the streetview raster map - All of the rest, forests, rivers, are no different than the current Vector data we already have (AFAIK). Forests,rivers etc are the same size as the older data. - Roads seem to include a few more details, but not enough detail on them for accurate usage in OSM. So basically, it gives us slightly improved buildings, but they are still highly simplified in terms of their pay for products. Tony On 24 March 2015 at 18:58, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, So the new OS OpenData that was discussed a few weeks ago is now available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/03/new-os-opendata-products-now-live/ I think there could be many good uses of this including to help validate some of our data. If anyone is using this then let us know so that we don't duplicate work. Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[OSM-talk-be] meeting with CIRB
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ben and I had a meeting with CIRB today. CIRB is thinking about new projects for the coming years. They are actually brainstorming/thinking/meeting people about what would be interesting to develop. They are also interested by OSM. They guess OSM can help them to achieve their missions, but they are quite unclear about concretely what to do. They also have some admiration for the work done by contributors. At first, they were thinking about change detection from OSM to URBIS data. They think also about using OSM as background layer for outside of the Brussels Regio (some of their clients (public institutions in Brussels) are working around Brussels). During the meeting, we explained some tools and organization that they didn't know (they were quite well documented). We stressed the discussion on one aspect: which interest do you have into investing in OSM ? Our message: if you have some interest, you could invest in differents manners to help improve the tools, the data, or building the community... We discussed some ideas like : - - hosting some data or extracts for OSM on a future data portal. This might help to promote our data, and help to improve them (the better visibility we have, the better data we will have) ; - - the cirb is interested in using OSM for starting cadastre of data (like benches, street furnitures) that their customers (municipalities, ...) could need. This would be great, because by virality our licence will force those customers to redistribute freely the improved data if they want to share it to a third person ; - - hosting tiles with dedicated styles for Brussels/Belgium. (We launched the idea to loan a server from the CIRB data center to the OSM community :-)) - - the routing functionalities has also some interest for them ; They also asked if osm contributors would be interested in diff of urbis data : what has changed in their data from date X to date Y. This would ease the update operation between urbis and OSM (we also suggest to make a diff between their data and what is imported in OSM). The CIRB is collecting those ideas, will write some internal documents and continue the process internally. We will be kept in touch. We also spoke about the mapping party on 25th of April ! Ben Julien - -- Julien Fastré clé PGP 0x52577F34 twitter @julienfastre -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVEZUjAAoJEKKy/vHinqaTI2sH/116SHKHaRYaWrareA20ZkiN GHq8gin6lvT51LszucX/ralgM8uD1klxTAm5vsfjlacXVefpRcNu/wcB9sdmKmry XykY5Afs+eyaMPlhak8S95z+kstDYJPJdGAmrg3P0E00x+h1nwlwzN81A2E8uG5l PU8J5tL138zS7QOBVnztIhw7bjexBT0+bUEb9Z6ifJ71B08IopC9qxoepaKdYU/g MneU1/cBE1t9N5C7SpbJlgiCC8b4+J1FhenOBMBe4S6Y5PvQWrlPQKp7XP7WvUR3 yN+T/CoQmcnaNuSAV8vY75hXLPx01bRql6BYExgjsH/JBS+lW6bxRRpN7hF49+A= =UjhA -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [Talk-us] Boundaries and verifiability (was Re: Retagging hamlets in the US)
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Kevin Kenny kken...@nycap.rr.com wrote: Or follow the obvious rule: Let the local mappers decide. Use point features for indeterminate things. In areas where neighborhoods have borders that are identifiable on the ground, map the borders. Some neighborhoods are gated. Some are signed. Some, all the locals understand, are bounded by major streets. Many subdivisions, even if not signed, have homogeneous enough architecture that the borders are obvious. And some cities try to foster neighborhood identity and specifically identify neighborhoods, even where the neighborhoods are not legal political entities. Don't decide as an armchair mapper that you know better than the locals. This goes double for using a mechanical edit to fix what the locals have done. Fix only what you can see is wrong on the ground (or what you can't see on the ground at all). This sort of fixing requires boots on the ground. (I'm willing to allow an exception for repairing the damage done by ill-advised mechanical edits - but only after consultation with the locals.) +1 -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-it] Deletion of relations in Sicily / Di eliminazione delle relazioni in Sicilia
2015-03-23 22:46 GMT+01:00 Luca Delucchi lucadel...@gmail.com: for me seems really strange to remove more than 600 relation... maybe a revert could be useful? +1, it seems a clear violation of the semi-automatic edit guidelines, as it is hard to believe these deletions are anything else than a semi-automatic edit. I have written to the user in Italian (because if he performs mass edits in Sicily, it would not be bad if he understood some Italian), and he replied in a kind of Spanish that he doesn't understand and pointed to his changeset comment. Frankly, I do not see that he is very interested in communication, he seems to believe that he has done some good by cleaning up a mess (i.e. deleting relations of a type he doesn't like). FWIW, I don't like this kind of relation either, but I agree, you should discuss deletions in that scale rather than hope to pass unnoticed. Cheers, Martin ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
Am 24.03.2015 um 11:39 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Am 24. März 2015 um 08:27 schrieb Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de: mir ist eine camp_site untergekommen deren gesamte Fläche addr: informationen trägt. Erst war ich mir ziemlich sicher das das ja quatsch ist - Wenn ich das zu einer Koordinate wandle zur Navigation kommt da der Mittelpunkt der Fläche bei raus zu der ich navigiere. Führt im zweifelsfalle dazu das ich am Hintereingang vor dem Zaun lande. das kommt ein bisschen darauf an, wie man die Logik implementiert. Man koennte es ja auch so sehen: alle Punkte innerhalb der Addr.-Flaeche haben diese Adresse. Wenn man nun zu der Adresse will, muss man nur den entsprechenden entrance-node (ggf. auch barrier=entrance) am Rand oder evtl. auch innerhalb dieser Flaeche finden, wenn man den Haupteingang sucht z.B. entrance=main. Der sollte normalerweise keine Extra-addr.-tags benoetigen, weil die ja schon auf der Flaeche sind. +1 Bei größeren Flächen braucht es halt auch eher ein besseres Ziel als nur die Adresse. Willst Du zum Direktorat, zu der Bibliothek zu den Sportanlagen oder zum Hausmeister, zudem ist es ja wohl auch noch entscheidend mit welchem Verkehrsmittel Du unterwegs bist, da ja zB. Parkplätze das Zwischenziel sein können. Kenne durchaus Schulgebäude mit mehreren Haupteingängen, welche in dem einzigen Gebäude mehrere unabhängige Schulen beherbergen. Alle mit der selben Adresse. cu fly ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [Talk-br] Restrição de Manobra em U
Sim, tem essas situações, de poder virar à esquerda mas não retornar, mas nesses casos temos soluções para mapear corretamente? A aplicação desses no_u_turn é pra ser feita em três vias? Ou é só em um ponto mesmo? Eu vinha tentando entender, até que simplesmente passei a usar no ID e só nos casos que já descrevi. Aliás, cabe ressaltar aqui o comentário do Gerald sobre o ID, é preocupante esse projeto ser descuidado no que quer que seja, já que ele é a porta de entrada pra qualquer pessoa que resolva ajudar no mapeamento do OSM… mais preocupante ainda se é descuidado nesse caso, pois lembro que a implementação da interface para inclusão dessas restrições foi anunciada com certa pompa. Atenciosamente, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro. http://about.me/Doideira Em 24/03/2015 12:54, Oéslei Taborda Ribas oesleiri...@gmail.com escreveu: Márcio, acho que eu entendi o que você quis dizer, que colocar uma restrição de no left turn resolveria a situação, não sendo necessário demais tags. Isso é verdade para a maioria dos casos, como no exemplo em que você deu no qual é proibido virar a esquerda e também fazer retorno. Porém existem situação nas quais é proibido fazer retorno porém é permitido virar a esquerda. Veja essa foto: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzTG_Qb5moDwM2s5bjE3X2JKcVkauthuser=0 Existem duas vias paralelas em sentidos opostos e uma via perpendicular ligando elas. Veja que na via da esquerda é permitido seguir reto e virar a esquerda, porém não é permitido fazer retorno (veja a placa no poste). O movimento que o caminhão azul está fazendo é permitido. Nessa situação não podemos colocar uma restrição de no left turn pois acabaria por proibir um movimento permitido, como o que está sendo realizado pelo caminhão azul. Enfim, de qualquer forma acho que concordamos que restrição de no U_turn na qual a origem e o destino são a mesma via são desnecessárias. Hoje a noite vou começar a deletá-las. Vou anotar os changeset, caso seja necessário podemos reverter isso. Em 24 de março de 2015 09:33, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro marcioviniciu...@gmail.com escreveu: Oésley, eu entendo o que é uma proibição de retorno no mundo real e existem aos montes Brasil afora (muitas exatamente como na foto apresentada), mas nos exemplos que você deu no OSM, que são os mais comuns, não há manobras em U, apenas em L. Nesse caso, para se evitar o retorno, coloca-se uma restrições para manobras em L (proibido virar à esquerda) como nesse caso entre as ruas Maxwell e Uruguai: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-22.92246/-43.24763 (observe as relações e restrições entre elas). Assim sendo, eu realmente não entendo a aplicação do u_turn, pelos mesmos motivos expostos Gerald. Manobras em U é (no mundo real) necessariamente uma relação de uma via com ela mesma. Se as ruas e retornos são modelados como no exemplo do Oésley (e na Maxwell), definitivamente não precisamos de um no_u_turn no OSM. Como eu disse antes, coloco para evitar confusões em bifurcações, mas a rigor isso deveria ser aplicado em quase todos os pontos de todas as vias, o que é absolutamente inviável. Seria muito mais fácil indicar onde é permitido fazer essa manobra, não o contrário. - - - · Atenciosamente, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro http://about.me/Doideira http://pt.gravatar.com/marciovinicius Em 23 de março de 2015 22:08, Oéslei Taborda Ribas oesleiri...@gmail.com escreveu: Aqui [1] tem uma foto de proibição de manobra em U, veja que pela foto você não pode fazer um retorno (manobra em U) porém é permitido fazer uma conversão a esquerda. Implemetado no OSM eu achei esses exemplos aqui [2][3], perceba pelas figuras que a restrição forma um U no mapa. Quanto ao OsmAnd, talvez não seja uma boa ferramente para avaliar essas restrições de U-Turn. Encontrei esse ticket aqui [4] do pessoal reclamando que ele não trata corretamente as restrições de manobras em U, esse ticket estava aberto a mais de 2 anos e foi fechado no mês passado. [1] - http://m1.i.pbase.com/u26/orangecones/upload/19577581.Mvc009s.jpg [2] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1806681 [3] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1707089 [4] - https://code.google.com/p/osmand/issues/detail?id=1729 Em 23 de março de 2015 20:32, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro marcioviniciu...@gmail.com escreveu: O Osmand costuma sim sugerir fazer retorno na mesma via, quando mão dupla. Mas entendo que ele faz isso como quem diz cara, vc tem que voltar do jeito que conseguir, porque ir por aí é uma péssima ideia e não vejo outra solução viável pra você. Eu costumo colocar essa restrição em locais onde as mãos de uma via de mão dupla se separam… em muitos casos é possível (e até sinalizado) fazer o retorno, em muitos outros é até perigoso fazer. Acredito que em outros casos ela seja realmente desnecessária. E não sei o que se quer dizer com manobra em U, se não for de uma via para ela mesma… se tem uma via ortogonal a duas paralelas a manobra não
Re: [Talk-GB] New OS open data now available
Hi All The river network download is country wide, and does include connecting node information, along with the names. The data is much better quality and more accurate than some of the older imported stuff in OSM. It only includes major rivers and streams and is simplified, it does not include drains, etc.. The road download is also country wide, it includes connecting node information and also the names of the roads. It also seems to include residential roads. Tony On 24 March 2015 at 19:34, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: My understanding was that the river dataset is now fully connected (and wasn't before). Is this not the case? Are there any attributes on the building vector data? Rob On 24 Mar 2015 18:28, tony wroblewski tony.wroblew...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All Just had a quick look at the OpenData, in summary: - Buildings are slightly more detailed, basically vector versions of the one on the streetview raster map - All of the rest, forests, rivers, are no different than the current Vector data we already have (AFAIK). Forests,rivers etc are the same size as the older data. - Roads seem to include a few more details, but not enough detail on them for accurate usage in OSM. So basically, it gives us slightly improved buildings, but they are still highly simplified in terms of their pay for products. Tony On 24 March 2015 at 18:58, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, So the new OS OpenData that was discussed a few weeks ago is now available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/03/new-os-opendata-products-now-live/ I think there could be many good uses of this including to help validate some of our data. If anyone is using this then let us know so that we don't duplicate work. Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] New OS open data now available
I have had an initial look at the three new open data products that contain road names: OS Open Map, OS Open Names and OS Open Roads. I was hoping they might provide new information for improving the accuracy and completeness of road naming, but my preliminary conclusion is that they offer very little for this purpose. They all contain the same misspellings as OS Locator. It has been noted that some OS paid-for products (MasterMap in particular) don't contain most of the misspellings, so I thought there was a small chance that one of these products might not as well. I was also hoping that OS Open Names might have included named residential paths (those where the names function as a 'street' in an address), but that isn't the case. I suspect OS Open Names includes exactly the same street names as OS Locator. Secondly, I looked at whether OS Open Map or OS Open Roads could be used to check whether segments of streets in OSM have the correct name - for example whether names start and end in the correct position - but I have found the naming of the streets in these data sets has been simplified in a way that makes them unreliable for this purpose. For example, I immediately noticed the name of the street on which I live is missing. The street is present but is combined with an adjoining street and only given the name of the other street. This simplification seems to have been done everywhere. Therefore, please don't assume part of a street is wrongly named based solely on this data, because it is unsuitable for that purpose. Will On 24/03/2015 17:58, Rob Nickerson wrote: Hi all, So the new OS OpenData that was discussed a few weeks ago is now available: https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/03/new-os-opendata-products-now-live/ I think there could be many good uses of this including to help validate some of our data. If anyone is using this then let us know so that we don't duplicate work. Rob ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Hauteur et nombre d'étages des bâtiments
Francescu décrit assez bien le type de situation qui m'effraie. Sur l'île St Louis par exemple, il y avait une Eglise imbriqué dans un batiment, l'église était supérieur au reste mais de surface inférieur. Avec ton logiciel ça ferait disparaitre l'eglise... Autre exemple une coupole isolée (ça aussi ça existe sur le terrain). Etc...Plutôt que de t'attaquer au building, pourquoi ne pas utiliser building:part? Il est parfaitement normé et t'éviteras les approximations.Sinon attention delta entre osm et la db de l'opendata, un toit/grenier n'est pas considéré comme level sur osm! Le Mardi 24 mars 2015 8h39, Francescu GAROBY windu...@gmail.com a écrit : Bonjour,Pour ton exemple de 2 immeubles, l'un de 8 et l'autre de 5 étages, représentés comme un seul bâtiment dans OSM : ne pourrait-on pas imaginer que ton script propose de découper cet immeuble en 2, de façon à ce que la superficie de chacun colle avec ce qu'ODP connaît ?En écrivant ça, je réalise que cela signifierait alors que la coupure ne suivrait pas forcément la réalité (un mur de séparation qui zigzaguerait, par exemple). Mais cela aurait au moins le mérite d'éviter d'avoir 2 immeubles dont l'un est trop haut (si c'est le 8 étages qui est retenu par ton script actuel) ou trop bas (si c'est le 5 étages). Francescu Le 23 mars 2015 21:27, Vincent Frison vincent.fri...@gmail.com a écrit : Le 23 mars 2015 16:21, dHuy Pierre dh...@yahoo.fr a écrit : Inclus-tu les batiments pouvant avoir plusieurs étages? Parce qu'après avoir regarder cette base c'est souvent le cas! Tout dépend ce qu'il y a déjà dans OSM. Mon programme ne rajoute pas ou ne découpe de bâtiment, il rajoute juste des tags sur des bâtiments déjà existants dans OSM. Si un bâtiment a plusieurs étages il y aura à coup sûr plusieurs bâtiments dans la base d'OpenDataParis (ODP) car effectivement cette dernière possède un découpage extrêmement précis des bâtiments (plus de 300 000 volumes bâtis !!), bien plus que le découpage des bâtiments d'OSM. Imaginons un bâtiment de 8 étages collé à un autre de 5 étages. Si il y a déjà un découpage en 2 bâtiments dans OSM, ça va coller nickel. Sinon ça sera une simplification : si OSM n'a qu'a seul bâtiment pour représenter ces 2 immeubles alors il faudra choisir, 5 ou 8 étages. Mais comme je regarde les surfaces et ça sera le bâtiment d'ODP qui aura la surface la plus proche du bâtiment d'OSM qui sera pris en compte. C'est donc une simplification et dans l'idéal il faudrait découper le bâtiment d'OSM en 2 bâtiments mais c'est pas ce que fait mon programme. N'hésitez pas à regarder le résultat sur la zone de test entre Bastille et Nation pour vérifier des cas concrets. ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr -- Francescu ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-it] Mapillary app in Italiano
Ciao Volker. Qui c'è il repository di github con un po' di traduzione già fatta: https://github.com/osmItalia/mapillary_localization Puoi clonarlo e terminare il lavoro se ti va. Saluti Fabrizio Il 24/Mar/2015 19:12 Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com ha scritto: Esiste una versione italiana della app per Mapillary? ___ 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-es] OSM y metro
Hola, Perdón por el top posting desde el móvil. Contestando a lo del street view para osm, hay un proyecto llamado Mapillary que permite eso, y tiene app para móvil, y ya se encarga de juntar las fotos, de dar una idea de qué zonas tienen más y menos fotos para que uno vaya a hacer donde faltan, etc. También se encarga de difuminar caras y matrículas, y ya de paso hacer reconocimiento de señales de tráfico y quizá de números de calle. Creo que la capa de señales se podía luego usar en JOSM (ver más abajo) para añadir las etiquetas correspondientes a las vías (calles, carreteras, etc). Yo uso Osmand en general, y a veces para añadir algún punto de interés a OSM o notas sobre errores o cosas que hay que añadir pero es necesario hacerlo con un editor en condiciones. Osmand no es tal, pero permite añadir puntos como POIs o notas. Como editor, el más completo y extendido es JOSM, y está muy bien documentado en la wiki de OSM y en su web. Perdón por no incluir referencias y URLs, pero desde (este) móvil es algo incómodo. Para Android tienes también Vespucci, que es más potente como editor que Osmand, y lo he usado para añadir números de casa a calles, registrar comercios y añadir bastantes detalles, etc. Eso sí, creo que deberías estar ya familiarizado con las etiquetas y cómo mapear para usarlo, porque se está tocando la base de datos directamente y puedes romper lo de otros (con OSMand como mucho, añadir sitios duplicados). Había otra app, cuyo nombre no recuerdo bien (¿osmtracker?) que te permitía marcar algunos elementos (bancos, farmacias, restaurantes, límites de velocidad,etc), y hacer fotos, notas de audio y de texto. Estos datos se guardaban en un fichero .osm que después se abría ya en casa con JOSM para incluir los datos en el mapa de OSM en sí, y subirlos. Espero que esto te ayude algo más. Un saludo, Jonás On Tuesday, March 24, 2015, J. Yáñez inf...@openaliasbox.org wrote: Ah, creía que Osmand era la aplicación oficial de OSM para móviles. De hecho mi idea era aportar mis contribuciones a través de esta aplicación, ya que por lo que he visto permite la edición de datos, puntos de interés, etc; así que estaba convencido de que Osmand era el programa oficial para móviles de OSM. En vista de que no lo es y que ambos proyectos no están directamente relacionados ¿creéis que es un método adecuado para colaborar o debería buscar opciones más adecuadas? En mi mensaje anterior lo decía, aunque no lo expresé muy claramente y creo que por eso se malentendió. Decía que tampoco en la web, la de OSM, quise decir, no la de Osmand, se pueden consultar rutas en transporte público, no? Alguien decía hace unos días que era difícil obtener los datos, pero Gmaps, Here Maps, y supongo que otros también, los obtienen de los consorcios públicos de transporte de cada ciudad. ¿Qué impide a OSM hacer lo mismo? ¿Son dificultades técnicas, burocráticas, o simplemente no ha habido tiempo/gente dispuesta a trabajar en ello? ¿Sabéis cómo se puede colaborar en este aspecto? Una última pregunta, aunque no sé si tal vez debería abrir otro hilo sobre este tema. si así lo creéis decídmelo: No parece haber en OSM nada parecido a la vista de calle que tiene Gmaps. ¿Hay previsto algo parecido en un futuro? Creo que gracias a los móviles y su función de geoetiquetado de fotos sería bastante fácil para cualquier usuario sin conocimientos contribuir con imágenes de sus ciudades y pueblos; y no sólo imágenes, también vídeos y eso que en alguna parte he leído llamar mapas sonoros. Hasta mi abuela podría, un día que vaya paseando sin prisas por su ciudad, ponerse 10 minutos a grabar unos minutos de vídeo y audio, o simplemente ir disparando fotos cada cierto tiempo mientras sigue su camino -tal vez las aplicaciones de edición de OSM podrían incorporar una función de autodisparo cada vez que el usuario se desplace x metros en una dirección u otra, e incluso recomendar al humano tomar la foto con la cámara del móvil apuntando más alto o más bajo, o con más o menos ángulo para facilitar que una foto se pueda encajar mejor con la anterior-, y gracias al geoetiquetado, OSM podría montar todo eso para tener una vista de calle que podría ser incluso mejor que la de Gmaps. No os parece?. Para preservar la intimidad de los transeúntes OSM podría difuminar las caras, las matrículas y otra información privada como hace Gmaps; o en caso de que se usara un aplicación amiga de OSM que permitiera hacer fotos, la propia aplicación podría encargarse de difuminar rostros y matrículas y así aligerar trabajo a los servidores de OSM. No sé nada de programación, pero si desarrollar el código entraña un esfuerzo de cierta importancia en recursos, la aplicación -parece ser que un poco abandonada- del Proyecto Guardián, ObscuraCam*, lo hace y su código es libre, por lo que quizá no hubiera mucho problema en integrarlo en otras aplicaciones. Saludos. *
Re: [Talk-pe] ¿Qué hacemos con las rejas?
2015-03-24 13:45 GMT-04:00 Arnold Fernádez R. arnoldfi...@openmailbox.org: Ante esta situación me di cuenta que no hay forma de incluir las famosas rejas en OSM, las cuales en varios caso permanecen abandonadas y han cerrado calles enteras ¿alguien tiene idea de qué hacer? Si hay. Debes utilizar barrier=fence + fence_type=* en un nodo de la calle (centro de la reja) o una línea (si la reja ocupa toda la calle). fence_type= (malla olimpica, reja metalica, baranda, etc) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fence_type Si la reja tiene puerta en esa sección añadir barrier=gate y según lo permitido añadir access=* Abrazos, Marco Antonio twitter: @51114u9 wikipedia: bit.ly/Wiki51114u9 google+: gplus.to/51114u9 osm: bit.ly/OSM_51114u9 ___ Talk-pe mailing list Talk-pe@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe
[OSM-talk-be] Atlas de buurtwegen (laatste keer)
Allen, Het is in orde! De atlas der buurtwegen is ok voor hergebruik binnen OSM en is beschikbaar onder de 'Gratis Open Data Licentie Vlaanderen'. Ik heb het nodige op wiki gedaan. Dit wil dus zeggen dat alle data die in het verleden overgenomen is nu ook zeker in orde is. Met dank aan Marc Gemis en andere voor de hulp met alle nodige emails! 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] Atlas de buurtwegen (laatste keer)
Prachtig! Bedankt voor alle inspanningen hieromtrent! Jo Op 24 maart 2015 20:42 schreef Ben Abelshausen ben.abelshau...@gmail.com: Allen, Het is in orde! De atlas der buurtwegen is ok voor hergebruik binnen OSM en is beschikbaar onder de 'Gratis Open Data Licentie Vlaanderen'. Ik heb het nodige op wiki gedaan. Dit wil dus zeggen dat alle data die in het verleden overgenomen is nu ook zeker in orde is. Met dank aan Marc Gemis en andere voor de hulp met alle nodige emails! Met vriendelijke groeten, Best regards, Ben Abelshausen ___ 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: [Talk-it] Deletion of relations in Sicily / Di eliminazione delle relazioni in Sicilia
Il 23/mar/2015 23:35 SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk ha scritto: On 23/03/2015 21:46, Luca Delucchi wrote: At the very least, an edit that deleted 683 relations should have been discussed with the community first, if for no other reason because it was rude not to do so. I've added another comment to the discussion Yes sure, http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/29645361 trying to get that across. If (after checking with people on the ground locally) the Italian OSM community wants to see this changeset reverted and someone from within the community is happy to do that then please go ahead. If you'd like help with the revert, then please ask and I'm sure that we'll be able to sort something out. I would like to know the opinions from so sicilian guys... Best Regards, Andy Townsend (SomeoneElse), on behalf of the OSM Data Working Group Cheers Luca ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
Re: [Talk-br] Restrição de Manobra em U
Entendi, então realmente a abordagem do ID parece totalmente equivocada. E realmente deveria haver um jeito de avisar aos aplicativos de navegação onde pode e onde não pode fazer o retorno na própria via (se é que isso é relevante). Atenciosamente, Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro. http://about.me/Doideira Em 24/03/2015 14:58, Nelson A. de Oliveira nao...@gmail.com escreveu: 2015-03-24 14:14 GMT-03:00 Márcio Vinícius Pinheiro marcioviniciu...@gmail.com: Sim, tem essas situações, de poder virar à esquerda mas não retornar, mas nesses casos temos soluções para mapear corretamente? A aplicação desses no_u_turn é pra ser feita em três vias? Ou é só em um ponto mesmo? Eu vinha tentando entender, até que simplesmente passei a usar no ID e só nos casos que já descrevi. As restrições podem ter um ou mais caminhos com a função via. Os casos onde é proibido retornar mas permitido virar são feitos assim. O mkgmap (pro Garmin) suporta isso. ___ 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: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée ? de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
Le 24/03/2015 14:42, Eric Sibert a écrit : M'enfin même si on récupère les itinéraires, il reste le droit sur les marques déposées de la FFRP qui pose problème. Traversée de la Corse par le xx20? Suivez le marquage xx20? Il n'y a pas de problème à ce niveau. La marque GR appartient bien à la FFRP, et seule la FFRP peut décider que tel ou tel itinéraire est un GR. C'est comme n'importe quelle marque, exemple Décathlon... seul le propriétaire de la marque peut décider qu'un magasin s'appelle comme ça, mais toi tu peux citer la marque (en plus en général elle est contente). La question c'est la propriété intellectuelle sur l'itinéraire, son originalité, etc... le côté oeuvre de l'esprit, et là c'est très limite... mais bon on en a discuté moulte fois. La FFRP (par la voix de son vice-président) ne tenant pas ses engagements de nous fournir une réponse fin 2014, une lettre du genre n'ayant pas de réponse depuis des années, nous considérons donc qu'il n'y a pas de problème à faire figurer les GR dans nos données et leurs réutilisations. On le crève cet abcès ? -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Recherche avec orthographe approximative
C'est l'objectif: world class geocoder ;) Le 24/03/2015 19:36, Simon a écrit : Pas mal aussi. Avec un mix des deux (Orthographe souple, base bano + POI OSM, configuration des critères de recherche sur POI en fonction des intérêts...) on pourrais avoir une solution libre qui dépasse google. Le 2015-03-24 06:42, Christian Quest a écrit : Essaye aussi ton orthographe sur: https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/map/ c'est aussi libre et aussi basé sur OSM (BANO) Le projet (python/redis) est ici: https://github.com/etalab/addok Le 23/03/2015 19:37, Simon a écrit : Enfin une recherche d'adresse pour ceux qui on de gros souci d'orthographe comme moi http://jdf.geovelo.fr/ Si je recherche la rue sun onore, pari il me trouve bien la Rue Saint-Honoré, Paris en plus c'est libre et c'est basé sur OSM Simon ___ 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 mailto: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: [Talk-us] Boundaries and verifiability (was Re: Retagging hamlets in the US)
I have long been on the fence about boundaries in OSM, and while I don't feel as strongly about it any longer, it still feels wrong to make this sweeping exception to one of the fundamental conventions of OSM mapping: verifiability. For many types of land use, anyone would be able to verify boundaries on the ground: a forest, a corn field, even a retail zone in most cases. But administrative boundaries can only be observed in a limited number of places: wherever there is a sign or a physical boundary in place, and rare other cases. More importantly though, there is an authoritative source for official administrative boundaries that can be easily accessed by anyone: TIGER[1] All of this has little to do with neighborhoods, which are mostly (?) vernacular in naming and delineation, and even when there are official neighborhood designations, in my own experience they do not always match the vernacular names. I support point mapping of vernacular neighborhoods. If you really want to have shapes for vernacular neighborhoods, you can look at the now-ancient-but-still-cool flickr Alpha Shapes[2], last updated in 2011 but still available for download[3]. But please don't upload 'em to OSM :) [1] https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-cart-boundary.html [2] http://code.flickr.net/2008/10/30/the-shape-of-alpha/ [3] http://code.flickr.net/2011/01/08/flickr-shapefiles-public-dataset-2-0/ Martijn van Exel Secretary, US Chapter OpenStreetMap http://openstreetmap.us/ http://osm.org/ skype: mvexel On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: The nice thing about mapping a neighborhood name as a point feature is: a) It helps people locate the neighborhood b) it completely sidesteps the question of the exact, possibly fuzzy, boundaries. For 10% of the hassle you map 90% of the benefit. Except when it reports you are in a different neighborhood than you actually are. When neighborhoods are not clearly defined then yes, a point is the best choice. But when neighborhoods have defined boundaries then they should be added. Just going up the admin level to city level, points work until it says you are in a different city. We can not see city boundaries but OSM has thousands of city boundaries. The simple solution is if the neighborhood boundaries are clearly defined they belong in OSM as polygons. If neighborhood boundaries are not clearly defined then they should be represented by points. For the supporters of no admin boundaries in OSM, build the case on the mailing lists instead of just saying there is a growing support for no boundaries. In some parts of the US there is a growing support that climate change is a hoax. That doesn't make it true. Build a case for removing admin boundaries (and please include landuse.) Ideally in the future we can have a fuzzy boundary. But until then I think what I proposed is an acceptable solution. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM down?
Maarten wrote: The only response from www and api I get is Incomplete response received from application. Is it only my or is OSM down? Not just you. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM down?
On 2015-03-24 08:44, Maarten Deen wrote: The only response from www and api I get is Incomplete response received from application. Is it only my or is OSM down? Admins seem to have corrected the problem because it's working again. Thanks guys! Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM down?
De : Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be Same here. There is indeed an issue on www.openstreetmap.org According to this site http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.openstreetmap.org www.openstreetmap.org is up Cheers Julien ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FFRandonnée − de quoi rire encore un moment (jaune ?)
JB == JB jb...@mailoo.org writes: JB l'originalité d'un itinéraire. Elle évoque les dépenses et le JB travail de la FFR. Et elle crache le mot OpenStreetMap JB (maintenant, j'ai découvert ce que c'est que de cracher des mots), JB « il faut pas croire, il y a aussi des contraintes quand on JB utilise leurs données (j'essaye de creuser, j'arrive pas à lui en JB faire dire plus sur ces contraintes). La FFR semble donc définitivement être un dinosaur rentier qui va chercher à protégér ses acquis (postes, subventions…) le plus longtemps possible, sans s'inquiéter de sa mission d'intérêt général. On peut imaginer mobiliser les randonneurs directement ou via d'autres organismes comme la CAF. Mais il me semble qu'il manque pour cela un site web qui expliquerai tout ce qu'il est possible de faire, en tant qu'utilisateur ou contributeur : - préparer son voyage avec http://francetopo.fr/, http://www.hikebikemap.org/, http://waymarkedtrails.org/fr/ - (Garmin) récupérer des cartes - (Android) récupérer des cartes hors ligne pour OsmAnd, avec lignes de niveau, ou sur openandromaps.org - avertissements d'usage concernant confiance en les données - comment contribuer des données sur les parcours (liens vers les pages wiki pertinentes) Je suis motivé pour participer à un groupe qui se lancerai là-dedans, s'il y a des intéressés. -- Eric Marsden ___ Talk-fr mailing list Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
Re: [Talk-de] Adressen auf amenitys= / tourism= flächen
Habe das gerade in OsmAnd getestet: bei einer amenity=school wird auf den naechstliegenden entrance=yes/main Knoten geroutet, falls dieser auf das ametity-polygon gesetzt ist. Sollte man bei camp_site mal versuchen. On 24-Mar-15 08:27, Florian Lohoff wrote: Hi, mir ist eine camp_site untergekommen deren gesamte Fläche addr: informationen trägt. Erst war ich mir ziemlich sicher das das ja quatsch ist - Wenn ich das zu einer Koordinate wandle zur Navigation kommt da der Mittelpunkt der Fläche bei raus zu der ich navigiere. Führt im zweifelsfalle dazu das ich am Hintereingang vor dem Zaun lande. Aber irgendwie fehlt mir gerade der Griff das richtig zu modellieren. Schön wäre ja schon a) Das Empfangsgebäude mit addr: tags b) Die Fläche mit Namen der Campsite c) Im preprozessor d.h. wenn ich nach namen der Campsite suche auch die Adresse finde. Ähnliches Problem gäbe es ja bei amenity=school etc wobei die ja nicht so extrem Großflächig werden. Flo ___ Talk-de mailing list Talk-de@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Local chapter OSMF
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I fully support the creation of a local chapter ! Julien Le 23/03/15 12:31, Nicolas Pettiaux a écrit : Le Lun 23 mars 2015 12:15, Ben Abelshausen a écrit : Hi, On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Sander Deryckere sander...@gmail.com wrote: Will OFKN as a VZW be the local chapter? Will it be a part of OFKN, or a new VZW? I guess it needs to be some sort of organisation. Thanks for an actual question! :-) The plan is that nothing will change, we will still be a working group in Open Knowledge Belgium but also a local chapter. As I read the new requirements of a local chapter this is perfectly ok. It used to be the case that we would have to be a seperate VZW focused on only OSM but that has changed. +1 I am completely in favor of such a work and I am ready to contribute as much as I can Thanks, Nicolas -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVERyqAAoJEL1vXvG/EII//80IALCLDtGze9q3MFn0AlS8wIWs vKaXwnGyCR3qYMMRVjm195HUBqzKC4iQnOzgfq8hCeL0Hgh3+KQcS6QfrZJT/dve Q/t5Y/7sBG4rf1SPL7coNGGj4J+Lg49S9CPzmzQP6a0WlZ57HHI/6nRQgvyTJdch 5CgPv11ODAYqZz06w3+iWi3shiW5/3fEusYypOoqhmBQH+Bz6/KjEHZ43/a3cNY+ cUCdZAfMMS1hSLI86qxcrvIuthNPDYMOZw+0QIaBXWW540VqC2555hh/ey+Bfb4T 9lyFLiGTiDZiXo8fdW3TtSOi459BAo8dHv3cSJYtzBqM4dFblNepti3hammRcJs= =p7j7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] OSM down?
According to my own eyes it was down with the messages Martin mentioned. So, it is up _NOW_ I can confirm that too. On 24-03-15 09:26, THEVENON Julien wrote: * De :* Glenn Plas gl...@byte-consult.be * *Same here. There is indeed an issue on www.openstreetmap.org http://www.openstreetmap.org/ According to this site http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.openstreetmap.org www.openstreetmap.org http://www.openstreetmap.org/ is up Cheers Julien -- Everything is going to be 200 OK. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
