[Talk-lt] Dronai

[Ramas]

Sveiki,
gal kas nors bandėte su dronais daryti vietinius
ortofoto(aerokartografiją)? Kaip pvz.:
https://www.geomanai.lt/aerokartografavimo-paslaugos

Gal žinote kokios įmonės tuo užsiima?
___
Talk-lt mailing list
Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt

Re: [Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

[jc...@mail.com]

On 30/01/2019 15:08, Gregory Marler wrote:
> In a lot of cases the towns nicely relate to parish wards (admin_level=10).

I understood admin_level=10 was for whole parishes, not parish wards. Surely 
parish wards should be boundary=political just like district and county 
electoral wards/divisions?

I also agree with Colin, admin_centre should only be associated with 
administrative boundaries not political ones.

Jez C

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

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Martijn van Exel]

The note content (a bit obfuscated by the Javascript..) is at 
https://github.com/osmlab/onosm.org/blob/gh-pages/js/site.js#L121-L141 
 

Graeme’s point is a good one though — someone will still need to go in and see 
the note and act on it. So it’s not a complete ‘pipeline’ where a business is 
guaranteed to be added to OSM. 

Still I think it’s reasonable to point folks to that. In the US we have dealt 
with a lot of SEO spam as well, Clifford Snow (cc) has spent a lot of time on 
this topic and may be able to share some insights..

Martijn

> On Jan 30, 2019, at 10:33 PM, Daniel O'Connor  
> wrote:
> 
> Onosm.org generates a structured note.
> 
> Source code at https://github.com/osmlab/onosm.org 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 3:41 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick  > wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 06:51, Martijn van Exel  > wrote:
> You can point businesses to https://www.onosm.org/  
> which gives businesses an easy way to add themselves. It generates a note on 
> OSM, that mappers can then turn into an actual node or whatever OSM type is 
> relevant to add the information to the map in a responsible way.
> Martijn
> 
> Martijn
> 
> With things like that site, & I know Osmand has a similar "report a problem" 
> setting, do you have any idea as to where do they actually get reported to?
> 
> Does this one just generate an OSM Note? & with what explanation?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Graeme
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au 
> 

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

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Daniel O'Connor]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 6:53 AM  wrote:

> Hi, I'm thinking  it might be worth emailing the businesses being
> advertised and telling them that the SEO company that they engaged is
> making edits that they might not want their business associates.
> Tony
>
> > Concur. Be ruthless. These people are akin to nuisance callers and
> > should be publicly flogged.
>

I know its really annoying for us to deal with low quality spammy notes;
but it might be of more value to extend an olive branch to the business -
they've indicated they'd like their business mapped (mistakenly going with
a spammy company); that's practically an invitation to ask them for all of
the details that would be otherwise difficult to get via survey.

If they get pushed towards a novice friendly approach to sharing their
data, that's a better outcome IMO
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Daniel O'Connor]

Onosm.org generates a structured note.

Source code at https://github.com/osmlab/onosm.org

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 3:41 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

>
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 06:51, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>
>> You can point businesses to https://www.onosm.org/ which gives
>> businesses an easy way to add themselves. It generates a note on OSM, that
>> mappers can then turn into an actual node or whatever OSM type is relevant
>> to add the information to the map in a responsible way.
>> Martijn
>>
>
> Martijn
>
> With things like that site, & I know Osmand has a similar "report a
> problem" setting, do you have any idea as to where do they actually get
> reported to?
>
> Does this one just generate an OSM Note? & with what explanation?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 06:51, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> You can point businesses to https://www.onosm.org/ which gives businesses
> an easy way to add themselves. It generates a note on OSM, that mappers can
> then turn into an actual node or whatever OSM type is relevant to add the
> information to the map in a responsible way.
> Martijn
>

Martijn

With things like that site, & I know Osmand has a similar "report a
problem" setting, do you have any idea as to where do they actually get
reported to?

Does this one just generate an OSM Note? & with what explanation?

Thanks

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Idées rendu des mers

[Jérôme Amagat]

Le mer. 30 janv. 2019 à 18:22, Adrien Grellier  a écrit :

> Bonjour,
>
> En ce moment je m'intéresse pas mal aux mers et océans, et OpenStreetMap
> me semble plutôt mauvais sur les rendus à faible zoom.
>
> Voici par exemple 3 rendus différents de l'Atlantique Nord :
>
> – OpenStreetMap : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=4/57.40/-17.58
> – Rendu OSM-FR :
>
> http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=4=59.05751=-18.29251=BFF
> – carte du SHOM :
>
> https://data.shom.fr/#001=eyJjIjpbLTE4NTczMjMuMTUyMjg4MDcwNCw3NzE1Njc2LjEyNDE1OTkxNV0sInoiOjQsInIiOjAsImwiOlt7InR5cGUiOiJJTlRFUk5BTF9MQVlFUiIsImlkZW50aWZpZXIiOiJSQVNURVJfTUFSSU5FXzM4NTdfV01UUyIsIm9wYWNpdHkiOjEsInZpc2liaWxpdHkiOnRydWV9LHsidHlwZSI6IklOVEVSTkFMX0xBWUVSIiwiaWRlbnRpZmllciI6IkZEQ19HRUJDT19QWVItUE5HXzM4NTdfV01UUyIsIm9wYWNpdHkiOjEsInZpc2liaWxpdHkiOnRydWV9XX0=
> (désolé pour le lien…)
>
> La carte OpenStreetMap est totalement indigente : Aucune mers
> n'apparaît, les principales îles n'ont plus (Féroé, Orcades,
> Terre-Neuves, etc.), seuls les pays apparaissent, mais dans la langue du
> pays. Une petite exception : le golfe de Gascogne, qui apparaît
> bizarrement sous deux noms. Impossible en l'état de se servir de ce
> rendu comme planisphère !
>

pour ce rendu c'est le tag name qui est utiliser et doit etre en langue
local donc pour le golf de Gascogne la langue des 2 pays limitrophes.
pour faire changer des chose sur ce rendu je crois que c'est ici qu'il faut
demandé : https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues
le rendu assez souvent, on a vu apparaître les parc naturel régional il y a
peu de temps.
j'ai pas regardé mais je pense que ça a déjà été demander d’améliorer le
rendu des mer et je pense que le problème c'est que c'est difficile de
connaître la taille d'un truc juste en ayant un node.
 Pour les île, je sais pas ?

>
> Le rendu français est nettement mieux : les îles apparaissent
> clairement, les noms sont traduits en français, mais les mers n'y sont
> pas. Bizarrement la situation s'inverse dans le nord du Canada : OSM est
> à mon sens nettement plus lisible que OSM-FR, les grosses îles
> apparaissant de manière immédiate.
>

Là il faut demander à cquest c'est lui qui s'en occupe. Je crois que le
rendu au faible zoom n'est calculé que très rarement et j'ai pas
l'impression que des tag comme natural=bay (pour le golf de gascogne qui
est comme ça dans osm depuis un moment il me semble contrairement à la
manche et la mer d’Irlande qui sont assez nouvelles) soit géré par le rendu.
Il faut lui demander gentiment que la prochaine fois qu'il modifiera le
rendu il fasse quelque chose pour ces tag :)

>
> Enfin la carte du SHOM est nettement plus avancée, puisque tout apparaît
> clairement : détroit du Danemark, Mer Celtique, etc.
>
>
> Comment faire pour améliorer le rendu des mers ? Est-ce un problème de
> données ? Par exemple la mer Celtique est présente dans OSM avec un seul
> point. Un multi-polygone serait-il plus adapté ? Ou bien est-ce un
> problème du système de rendu dans les faibles zoom ?
>
> J'aimerais bien pouvoir améliore la situation, mais je ne sais pas
> vraiment quoi faire… si vous avez des suggestions ça m'intéresse !!
>

Pour les océans peut être pas mais pour des mers pas trop grande il
faudrait qu'elles soit présentent sous forme de surface. elles pourrait
apparaître sur le rendu international comme le golfe de Gascogne ou la mer
d’Irlande et peut être dans d'autres rendu dans quelques temps.
le golf de Gascogne https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7156290 c'est un
grand multipolygon (2285 membres !) avec comme tag natural=bay.
la manche https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9280887 c'est un chemin
pas très précis (je viens de le changer en multipolygon avec comme inner
les îles anglo normande pour essayé de faire remonter un peu le nom et
qu'il apparaisse plus tôt :) ) avec natural=strait pour un détroit.
Il peut aussi y avoir le tag place=sea.
Si tu te sens capable tu peut créer des multipolygons ou des ways pour
d'autres mer, bay, detroit...

>
>
> Bonne journée
>
> Adrien
>
>
> ___
> 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-au] Question on how to fix this intersection

[Michael Collinson]

+1 to that. Looking at the eastern side imagery again, I'd make a 
general comment that will help elsewhere: There really should be a node 
about where the pedestrian crossing is and pushing the road slightly 
north. This would bring it closer the traffic engineer's intention, 
which is that the Liverpool Road meets the Burwood Road at right angles. 
And in this case, lessen the angle with with the western extension.


Digressing but when playing around with routing software, I noticed that 
a lot of us map in slight oblique side roads and tracks meeting the main 
road at the same angle, whereas if we look closely the actual junction 
is actually at or a closer to a right angle. This has quite an impact 
for the routing algo to work out what instruction to give.


Mike


On 2019-01-31 10:02, Ian Sergeant wrote:

I agree there should be a better way, but I would solve this problem
by bring the road split to the east of the the intersection in this
case.  The road divides on the eastern side of the intersection
anyway.

Then there will be no option but to continue straight.

Ian.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 09:55, Dion Moult  wrote:

G'day all!

In the intersection of Liverpool road and Burwood road in Burwood, Sydney (see 
attached), if I am travelling in the direction shown by the red arrow, then my 
GPS device should tell me to continue and drive straight at the intersection. 
However, because at that junction, the map splits up Liverpool Road into two 
roads, OSMAnd tells me to turn left there, which is quite confusing.

What is the appropriate way to fix this mapping? Or is it a problem with OSMAnd?


Dion Moult


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

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


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

Re: [talk-au] Question on how to fix this intersection

[Michael Collinson]

Hi Dion,

I'd say a bit of both.

The junction is topologically correct but looking at the aerial imagery 
and the node that you circled, 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1691043684 , then it could be moved 
very slightly north and a bit more aggressively west to lessen the 
change of direction and better fit the actual physical situation. You 
could also map in the pedestrian crossing and close the gap further.


OSMAnd may also need some tweaking. I helped test a commercial routing 
product and know that these situations are difficult to get right. At 
the most simple, OSMAnd should measure the deviation from directly 
straight on (0 degrees) and assign anything up to, say 8 as "straight 
on", to around 45 degrees as "bear left" and anything more as "turn 
left". The may still not get it right. There are a couple more 
sophisticated things it could do: 1) Note that you are going from/to the 
same road name/classification and dynamically broaden the "straight on" 
angle test or even drop the navigation instruction entirely; 2) look 
ahead to the next node or two and create some kind of smoothed average 
angle, which will again help push the instruction to "straight on".


Mike

On 2019-01-31 09:54, Dion Moult wrote:

G'day all!

In the intersection of Liverpool road and Burwood road in Burwood, Sydney (see 
attached), if I am travelling in the direction shown by the red arrow, then my 
GPS device should tell me to continue and drive straight at the intersection. 
However, because at that junction, the map splits up Liverpool Road into two 
roads, OSMAnd tells me to turn left there, which is quite confusing.

What is the appropriate way to fix this mapping? Or is it a problem with OSMAnd?


Dion Moult



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

Re: [Talk-it] marciapiedi e strisce pedonali

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 30. Jan 2019, at 00:23, Simone Saviolo  wrote:
> 
> Così facendo però perdi l'informazione sul tipo di attraversamento (pedonale 
> o ciclopedonale). 


non ci sono attraversamenti ciclopedonali, forse 1 c’è, ma generalmente non ci 
sono.

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

Re: [talk-au] Question on how to fix this intersection

[Martijn van Exel]

Especially if the street name does not change AND  the road splits into two 
oneway segments of the same name AND the angle of the ’turn’ is very slight, 
the software should figure this out, and I would say this is indeed an OSMAnd 
problem. In any case, the mapping looks correct to me.

Sort of related, we (Telenav map team) have seen cases in other countries where 
the road ‘flip-flops’ between single and divided mapping within a short 
distance[0]. In these cases we often decide to straighten that stretch out, 
making the single segments divided. If you object to this practice, please do 
let me know. We can also make a MapRoulette challenge to identify these cases 
if they exist here, and let you review them.

[0] looking a lot like 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p3uzr05drc54vw6/Screen%20Shot%202019-01-30%20at%204.22.23%20PM.png?dl=0
 

 

> On Jan 30, 2019, at 3:54 PM, Dion Moult  wrote:
> 
> G'day all!
> 
> In the intersection of Liverpool road and Burwood road in Burwood, Sydney 
> (see attached), if I am travelling in the direction shown by the red arrow, 
> then my GPS device should tell me to continue and drive straight at the 
> intersection. However, because at that junction, the map splits up Liverpool 
> Road into two roads, OSMAnd tells me to turn left there, which is quite 
> confusing.
> 
> What is the appropriate way to fix this mapping? Or is it a problem with 
> OSMAnd?
> 
> 
> Dion Moult
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging post towns and other addressing issues in the UK

[Will Phillips]

Hi Andrzej,

I feel a bit conflicted here. Having the choice of several tags does 
make things easier when adding complicated addresses, but for less 
experienced mappers it does also help if things are kept simple. For 
example, if better guidance regarding UK address mapping was added to 
the wiki, it would definitely be clearer to recommend one main tag for 
places below city.


I've noticed that iD varies the address fields shown depending on which 
country is being edited. Some countries have a field labelled 'Suburb', 
while for the UK the only level above street is 'City'. It would 
definitely improve things if another field could be added, but it would 
be difficult to argue for adding several fields. Therefore, it would 
probably be better to agree on one main locality tag. Whatever happens 
tags such as addr:suburb and addr:village are already in use and will 
most probably continue to be used.


Cheers,
Will

On 30/01/2019 22:24, Andrzej wrote:
Thank you for the discussion so far. I've been thinking about a 
solution for tagging localities that would work for both mappers who 
want to tag locality types and those who don't. Current proposals 
(addr:town|village and addr:locality|sublocality) are two distinct and 
incompatible tagging schemes so reaching a consensus may be impossible.


How about tagging localities as addr:locality|sublocality _and_ 
addr:locality|sublocality:type=city|town|suburb|village|hamlet|campus, 
so they can be added separately and at different times?


Best regards,
Andrzej

On 28 January 2019 04:40:26 GMT+08:00, Andrzej  
wrote:


Hi,

When working on post codes in East Anglia I realised the current
address tagging scheme is insufficient for even fairly basic
scenarios. I have already discussed the issues with some of the
most experienced mappers and like to bring these issues to your
attention. Robert has summarised his ideas in
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/UK_Address_Mapping

The bottom line is, I would like to be tag commonly used addresses
without losing information and without resorting to addr:full.

Issues:
1. Post towns (most pressing one because there is a lot of
confusion around it). The UK is fairly unique in that not every
town is a post town. This makes it impossible to tag e.g. Station
Road, Histon, Cambridge CB24 9LF.
Wiki recommends addr:city to be used for tagging post towns
(Cambridge) but then how do we tag Histon?
- Robert recommends sticking to the current meaning of addr:city
and using addr:town and addr:village for town and village names,
which, although not in wiki, are already being used in the UK. I
like this solution because it is very explicit in what each addr:
key means and it doesn't redefine addr:city.
- SK53 prefers using addr:city for everything (towns, even
villages) and either not tagging post towns (they can be seen as a
an internal detail of a closed Royal Mail database) or using a new
tag for it, like addr:post_town. It is a simple solution, results
in Histon being called Histon and not Cambridge (without
introducing new tags for town and village names) and is commonly
used. It is also a bit confusing (what exactly is a city?) and I
think we we should at least support tagging post towns.

Key questions:
a) addr:city for post towns or towns and villages?
b) how to rag remaining information (respectively, towns and
villages or post towns,)

2. Tagging addresses within campuses, business parks etc. There is
addr:place but it is supposed to be used instead of addr:street.
Again, Robert has a fairly decent proposal for that using
addr:place or addr:locality and addr:parentstreet. Please comment.

2a. should buildings in campuses be tagged with
addr:buildingnumber/name or addr:unit? I would prefer
buildingname/number (as they are often subdivided) but these seem
to be associated with addr:street.

3. Similar to (2) but for buildings. Tagging buildings that have
e.g. a single name but multiple house numbers?

Best regards,
ndrw6


___
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-au] Question on how to fix this intersection

[Ian Sergeant]

I agree there should be a better way, but I would solve this problem
by bring the road split to the east of the the intersection in this
case.  The road divides on the eastern side of the intersection
anyway.

Then there will be no option but to continue straight.

Ian.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 09:55, Dion Moult  wrote:
>
> G'day all!
>
> In the intersection of Liverpool road and Burwood road in Burwood, Sydney 
> (see attached), if I am travelling in the direction shown by the red arrow, 
> then my GPS device should tell me to continue and drive straight at the 
> intersection. However, because at that junction, the map splits up Liverpool 
> Road into two roads, OSMAnd tells me to turn left there, which is quite 
> confusing.
>
> What is the appropriate way to fix this mapping? Or is it a problem with 
> OSMAnd?
>
>
> Dion Moult
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

[talk-au] Question on how to fix this intersection

[Dion Moult]

G'day all!

In the intersection of Liverpool road and Burwood road in Burwood, Sydney (see 
attached), if I am travelling in the direction shown by the red arrow, then my 
GPS device should tell me to continue and drive straight at the intersection. 
However, because at that junction, the map splits up Liverpool Road into two 
roads, OSMAnd tells me to turn left there, which is quite confusing.

What is the appropriate way to fix this mapping? Or is it a problem with OSMAnd?


Dion Moult


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

Re: [OSM-Talk-ZA] Road network improvements in South Africa

[Kieron Thwaites]

Oh, I only noticed now that you also asked about road classification:
OSM-ZA has its own road classification guidelines that you can find here
.

That said, it's not always possible to follow them strictly: especially in
KZN where quite a few roads aren't numbered at all, and it quite often
becomes a bit of a judgement call in some cases.

--K

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 11:08, Kieron Thwaites 
wrote:

> The biggest issues that I've encountered are:
>
>- As Gerhardus mentioned, lack of speed restrictions and lane
>information on bigger roads.  This is where the bulk of my edits happens
>(and I use OSM data for routing out in the field purely to pick up areas
>where things could be improved), but like all of us, there's only so much
>time that we can spend mapping!
>- Lack of destination tags, which I've found invaluable for people
>using OSM data in GPS applications.  I think the main reason why these tend
>to be absent is that it requires a lot of effort to go out and physically
>survey (it's impossible to get that information via satellite imagery) and
>sometimes just as much effort to tag properly (especially once you start
>adding information about different destinations per lane, the various
>symbols that one can encounter on road signs, etc).  Plus, you don't see
>this information on map renders, it's only when you're navigating using OSM
>data that it becomes useful (but like I mentioned, extremely useful!).  For
>those interested in helping out here, this guide
>
>is pretty much my reference on how to do destination tagging (and even
>then, I still get it wrong some of the time!)
>- Curve resolution.  Some early traces from low resolution imagery
>have pretty terrible curve resolution.  Again, it's something that I've
>spent a lot of effort improving in places (see: N2 between Caledon and
>Swellendam, the entire Western Cape section of the N9, N12 through
>Meiringspoort).  Again, low-resolution curves are very noticeable when
>using OSM data for GPS navigation.
>- Also, I've noticed (particularly in KZN) that some administrative
>road references that aren't signed on the ground (e.g. the Pxxx route
>numbers) appear either in name=* or ref=* tags, where official_ref=* is
>probably a more appropriate place for them.
>- Finally, lack of road surface data.  I've lost count of how often
>routers believe that the quickest route between two places is along a dodgy
>unpaved road simply because the road surface in question hasn't been tagged
>at all...
>
> --K
>
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 10:42, Gerhardus Geldenhuis <
> gerhardus.geldenh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The CD:NGI imagery is the official imagery but currently a bit out of
>> date. In places Bing should be more up to date and for some locations like
>> Cape Town I believe more detailed imagery is available.
>>
>> The biggest "missing" thing that I have personally experienced is lack of
>> speed restrictions and lane information on bigger roads ( highways ) not
>> being properly mapped. So it would be tagged as a high way but would not
>> contain information about 2 lanes or 3 lanes and offramps/onramps can
>> sometimes be inaccurate.
>>
>> In cities the speed limit is 60km/h unless indicated otherwise as being
>> 40 or 50km/h. On highways the speed restriction is 120km/h and on rural
>> roads 80km/h unless indicated to be 100km/h
>>
>> There is also a lot of missing road names.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 21:24, Andrew Wiseman via Talk-ZA <
>> talk-za@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello OSM Turkey,
>>>
>>> My name is Andrew Wiseman, I work for Apple on the Maps team. My team is
>>> interested in doing some work on the road network in South Africa on
>>> OpenStreetMap, things like adding missing roads, making sure roads
>>> connect properly, fixing incorrect alignments with GPS traces, ensuring
>>> road classifications are consistent, and other similar issues.
>>>
>>> Are there places you know of that need improvement or types of problems
>>> you see frequently? And are there any imagery sources you'd recommend, any
>>> specific highway classification guidelines you recommend such as the
>>> general OSM guidelines or maybe the Highway Tag Africa guidelines, or
>>> anything else that might help?
>>>
>>> We have a Github page here about the project:
>>> https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/142
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> Apple, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | iPhone: +1.202.270.4464 |
>>> andrew_wise...@apple.com
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-ZA mailing list
>>> Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Gerhardus Geldenhuis
>> 

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging post towns and other addressing issues in the UK

[Andrzej]

Thank you for the discussion so far. I've been thinking about a solution for 
tagging localities that would work for both mappers who want to tag locality 
types and those who don't. Current proposals (addr:town|village and 
addr:locality|sublocality) are two distinct and incompatible tagging schemes so 
reaching a consensus may be impossible. 

How about tagging localities as addr:locality|sublocality _and_ 
addr:locality|sublocality:type=city|town|suburb|village|hamlet|campus, so they 
can be added separately and at different times? 

Best regards,
Andrzej 

On 28 January 2019 04:40:26 GMT+08:00, Andrzej  wrote:
>Hi,
>
>When working on post codes in East Anglia I realised the current
>address tagging scheme is insufficient for even fairly basic scenarios.
>I have already discussed the issues with some of the most experienced
>mappers and like to bring these issues to your attention. Robert has
>summarised his ideas in
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/UK_Address_Mapping
>
>The bottom line is, I would like to be tag commonly used addresses
>without losing information and without resorting to addr:full. 
>
>Issues:
>1. Post towns (most pressing one because there is a lot of confusion
>around it). The UK is fairly unique in that not every town is a post
>town. This makes it impossible to tag e.g. Station Road, Histon,
>Cambridge CB24 9LF. 
>Wiki recommends addr:city to be used for tagging post towns (Cambridge)
>but then how do we tag Histon? 
>- Robert recommends sticking to the current meaning of addr:city and
>using addr:town and addr:village for town and village names, which,
>although not in wiki, are already being used in the UK. I like this
>solution because it is very explicit in what each addr: key means and
>it doesn't redefine addr:city. 
>- SK53 prefers using addr:city for everything (towns, even villages)
>and either not tagging post towns (they can be seen as a an internal
>detail of a closed Royal Mail database) or using a new tag for it, like
>addr:post_town. It is a simple solution, results in Histon being called
>Histon and not Cambridge (without introducing new tags for town and
>village names) and is commonly used. It is also a bit confusing (what
>exactly is a city?) and I think we we should at least support tagging
>post towns. 
>
>Key questions:
>a) addr:city for post towns or towns and villages? 
>b) how to rag remaining information (respectively, towns and villages
>or post towns,) 
>
>2. Tagging addresses within campuses, business parks etc. There is
>addr:place but it is supposed to be used instead of addr:street. Again,
>Robert has a fairly decent proposal for that using addr:place or
>addr:locality and addr:parentstreet. Please comment. 
>
>2a. should buildings in campuses be tagged with
>addr:buildingnumber/name or addr:unit? I would prefer
>buildingname/number (as they are often subdivided) but these seem to be
>associated with addr:street. 
>
>3. Similar to (2) but for buildings. Tagging buildings that have e.g. a
>single name but multiple house numbers? 
>
>Best regards, 
>ndrw6
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-Talk-ZA] Road network improvements in South Africa

[Kieron Thwaites]

The biggest issues that I've encountered are:

   - As Gerhardus mentioned, lack of speed restrictions and lane
   information on bigger roads.  This is where the bulk of my edits happens
   (and I use OSM data for routing out in the field purely to pick up areas
   where things could be improved), but like all of us, there's only so much
   time that we can spend mapping!
   - Lack of destination tags, which I've found invaluable for people using
   OSM data in GPS applications.  I think the main reason why these tend to be
   absent is that it requires a lot of effort to go out and physically survey
   (it's impossible to get that information via satellite imagery) and
   sometimes just as much effort to tag properly (especially once you start
   adding information about different destinations per lane, the various
   symbols that one can encounter on road signs, etc).  Plus, you don't see
   this information on map renders, it's only when you're navigating using OSM
   data that it becomes useful (but like I mentioned, extremely useful!).  For
   those interested in helping out here, this guide
   
   is pretty much my reference on how to do destination tagging (and even
   then, I still get it wrong some of the time!)
   - Curve resolution.  Some early traces from low resolution imagery have
   pretty terrible curve resolution.  Again, it's something that I've spent a
   lot of effort improving in places (see: N2 between Caledon and Swellendam,
   the entire Western Cape section of the N9, N12 through Meiringspoort).
   Again, low-resolution curves are very noticeable when using OSM data for
   GPS navigation.
   - Also, I've noticed (particularly in KZN) that some administrative road
   references that aren't signed on the ground (e.g. the Pxxx route numbers)
   appear either in name=* or ref=* tags, where official_ref=* is probably a
   more appropriate place for them.
   - Finally, lack of road surface data.  I've lost count of how often
   routers believe that the quickest route between two places is along a dodgy
   unpaved road simply because the road surface in question hasn't been tagged
   at all...

--K

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 10:42, Gerhardus Geldenhuis <
gerhardus.geldenh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The CD:NGI imagery is the official imagery but currently a bit out of
> date. In places Bing should be more up to date and for some locations like
> Cape Town I believe more detailed imagery is available.
>
> The biggest "missing" thing that I have personally experienced is lack of
> speed restrictions and lane information on bigger roads ( highways ) not
> being properly mapped. So it would be tagged as a high way but would not
> contain information about 2 lanes or 3 lanes and offramps/onramps can
> sometimes be inaccurate.
>
> In cities the speed limit is 60km/h unless indicated otherwise as being 40
> or 50km/h. On highways the speed restriction is 120km/h and on rural roads
> 80km/h unless indicated to be 100km/h
>
> There is also a lot of missing road names.
>
> Regards
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 21:24, Andrew Wiseman via Talk-ZA <
> talk-za@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello OSM Turkey,
>>
>> My name is Andrew Wiseman, I work for Apple on the Maps team. My team is
>> interested in doing some work on the road network in South Africa on
>> OpenStreetMap, things like adding missing roads, making sure roads
>> connect properly, fixing incorrect alignments with GPS traces, ensuring
>> road classifications are consistent, and other similar issues.
>>
>> Are there places you know of that need improvement or types of problems
>> you see frequently? And are there any imagery sources you'd recommend, any
>> specific highway classification guidelines you recommend such as the
>> general OSM guidelines or maybe the Highway Tag Africa guidelines, or
>> anything else that might help?
>>
>> We have a Github page here about the project:
>> https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/142
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> Apple, Inc.
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | iPhone: +1.202.270.4464 |
>> andrew_wise...@apple.com
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ZA mailing list
>> Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za
>>
>
>
> --
> Gerhardus Geldenhuis
> ___
> Talk-ZA mailing list
> Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za
>
___
Talk-ZA mailing list
Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za

Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

[Alexandre Oliveira]

Opa, esqueci de mandar o link. Aqui vai:

[1] https://geodadosbh.pbh.gov.br/

Em 30/01/2019, Alexandre Oliveira escreveu:
> Eu baixei as camadas que foram atualizadas em 2018 no portal da
> PBH[1]. Tem sim um shapefile chamado ENDERECO_BH_SHAPE que contém as
> numerações de cada imóvel de BH.
>
> Eu comparei alguns imóveis do bairro Pampulha e parece estar alinhado,
> porém acredito que esteja alinhado com as camadas de circulação
> (vias), portanto pode haver algum desalinhamento com os dados que o
> OSM já possui.
>
>
> Em 30/01/2019, Vítor Rodrigo Dias escreveu:
>> Prezados,
>>
>> Há um tempo, vi que a PBH também disponibiliza um arquivo com numerações
>> de
>> porta, mas não tive tempo ou conhecimento suficiente para trabalhar
>> nesses
>> arquivos e importá-los. Alguém se habilita a tal?
>>
>> Vítor Rodrigo Dias
>> Revisor de textos
>> Tradutor de inglês e espanhol
>> Telefones: 31 99916-1719
>>
>>
>> Em qua, 30 de jan de 2019 às 14:27, Thierry Jean
>> 
>> escreveu:
>>
>>> Alexandre,
>>>
>>> Que legal que você identificou isto e está na própria cidade de Belo
>>> Horizonte.
>>>
>>> Gostaria de apresentar você para Karla Borges, Superintendente da área
>>> de
>>> Geo da Prodabel (Prefeitura de BH). Encontrei a Karla uma primeira vez
>>> no
>>> evento MundoGeo, em Maio, e em Novembro, no evento sobre os 10 anos da
>>> INDE
>>> que aconteceu no RJ (SBIDE). Eles estão interessados em se envolver mais
>>> com o OSM. Até troquei um WhatsApp com Karla, esta segunda-feira.
>>>
>>> Passe-me seu celular. Vamos conversar e alinhar.
>>>
>>> Abs,
>>>
>>> Thierry Jean
>>> M. +55 11 99607 1319
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *De:* Sérgio V. 
>>> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 09:20
>>> *Para:* Alexandre Oliveira; OpenStreetMap no Brasil
>>> *Assunto:* Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>>>
>>> Bom dia Alexandre.
>>> Algumas considerações que creio podem ajudar:
>>> 1- nas fotos seria útil manter a escala gráfica do JOSM, para poder
>>> avaliar o quanto é a diferença; não me pareceu muito mais desalinhadas
>>> do
>>> que o comumente observado em outros materiais de OSM e prefeituras;
>>> sempre
>>> existe algum desalinhamento entre materiais de fontes diversas, feitos
>>> sobre imagens diversas;
>>> 2-o fato de ser WGS84 no OSM e SIRGAS2000 na prefeitura não deve ser em
>>> si
>>> causa de alguma diferença, pois ambos são praticamente idênticos, o
>>> SIRGAS2000 foi uma padronização para ajustar ao padrão WGS84; a causa
>>> principal de diferenças costuma ser o fato de que o que é mapeado no OSM
>>> é sobretudo sobre imagens (como BING principalmente), estas sim podem
>>> ter
>>> desalinhamentos, sobretudo no passado;
>>> 3-para saber qual dos 2 está mais alinhado, a melhor forma é comparar
>>> com
>>> traçados de GPS, ou com elementos de coordenadas exatas, como marcos
>>> geodésicos que possam ser visíveis em imagens. Com os GPS do OSM pode
>>> fazer
>>> no JOSM mesmo.
>>> 4-como exemplo, em Porto Alegre quando importei os prédios da prefeitura
>>> em 2016, verifiquei um deslocamento médio de 6m para NE, um pouco
>>> variável
>>> em regiões diversas do município; confirmou comparando com os marcos
>>> geodésicos visíveis de coordenadas exatas oficiais; aí procedi com um
>>> realinhamento manual da cidade, rua por rua, onde mais necessário; sem
>>> ainda importar os prédios; deslocamentos menores que 50% da largura da
>>> rua
>>> não são muito significativos (se a rua tem 8m, 4m de deslocamento do
>>> eixo
>>> permanece dentro);
>>> 5-importante é não ter vias cortando outras coisas, como prédios.
>>> Att.,
>>>
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>
>>> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
>>>
>>> --
>>> *De:* Alexandre Oliveira 
>>> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 02:31
>>> *Para:* talk-br
>>> *Assunto:* [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>>>
>>> Bom dia (ou boa noite?),
>>>
>>> Estava fuçando o site da prefeitura de Belo Horizonte procurando mapas
>>> e outras coisas que poderiam auxiliar no mapeamento da cidade e
>>> descobri que existem camadas georreferenciadas disponíveis no site
>>> deles.
>>>
>>> Baixei as camadas e abri no JOSM. Percebi, comparando a região do
>>> bairro Pampulha, que há um desalinhamento entre os dados do OSM e da
>>> PBH, conforme escrito na wiki[1].
>>>
>>> Procurei e achei um link[2] de uma discussão na lista em inglês do OSM
>>> de alguém com o mesmo problema de desalinhamento, e o que o pessoal
>>> recomendou pra ele foi uma linha de código para ser passada ao ogr2osm
>>> para fazer a correção necessária.
>>>
>>> Porém, ao consultar a wiki[3], descobri que o formato utilizado pelo
>>> OSM (WGS84) é praticamente o mesmo utilizado nas camadas da PBH, que
>>> são SIRGAS2000. Só que não é o que eu vi ao importar as camadas no
>>> JOSM([4] e [5]).
>>>
>>> Alguém tem alguma ideia do que pode ser feito? Até agora percebi que
>>> tem algumas delimitações de bairros desalinhadas e as 

Re: [OSM-Talk-ZA] Road network improvements in South Africa

[Gerhardus Geldenhuis]

The other worthwhile thing to double check is alignment. I have seen that
it can sometimes be of especially for roads mapped very early on in OSMs
existence. The resolution of curves can sometimes be a bit low which does
not make for the smoothest of curves and would be another useful bit to
improve.

Regards

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 21:24, Andrew Wiseman via Talk-ZA <
talk-za@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Hello OSM Turkey,
>
> My name is Andrew Wiseman, I work for Apple on the Maps team. My team is
> interested in doing some work on the road network in South Africa on
> OpenStreetMap, things like adding missing roads, making sure roads
> connect properly, fixing incorrect alignments with GPS traces, ensuring
> road classifications are consistent, and other similar issues.
>
> Are there places you know of that need improvement or types of problems
> you see frequently? And are there any imagery sources you'd recommend, any
> specific highway classification guidelines you recommend such as the
> general OSM guidelines or maybe the Highway Tag Africa guidelines, or
> anything else that might help?
>
> We have a Github page here about the project:
> https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/142
>
> Thank you,
>
> Andrew
>
> Apple, Inc.
>
>
>
> Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | iPhone: +1.202.270.4464 |
> andrew_wise...@apple.com
>
> ___
> Talk-ZA mailing list
> Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za
>


-- 
Gerhardus Geldenhuis
___
Talk-ZA mailing list
Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za

Re: [OSM-Talk-ZA] Road network improvements in South Africa

[Gerhardus Geldenhuis]

The CD:NGI imagery is the official imagery but currently a bit out of date.
In places Bing should be more up to date and for some locations like Cape
Town I believe more detailed imagery is available.

The biggest "missing" thing that I have personally experienced is lack of
speed restrictions and lane information on bigger roads ( highways ) not
being properly mapped. So it would be tagged as a high way but would not
contain information about 2 lanes or 3 lanes and offramps/onramps can
sometimes be inaccurate.

In cities the speed limit is 60km/h unless indicated otherwise as being 40
or 50km/h. On highways the speed restriction is 120km/h and on rural roads
80km/h unless indicated to be 100km/h

There is also a lot of missing road names.

Regards

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 21:24, Andrew Wiseman via Talk-ZA <
talk-za@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Hello OSM Turkey,
>
> My name is Andrew Wiseman, I work for Apple on the Maps team. My team is
> interested in doing some work on the road network in South Africa on
> OpenStreetMap, things like adding missing roads, making sure roads
> connect properly, fixing incorrect alignments with GPS traces, ensuring
> road classifications are consistent, and other similar issues.
>
> Are there places you know of that need improvement or types of problems
> you see frequently? And are there any imagery sources you'd recommend, any
> specific highway classification guidelines you recommend such as the
> general OSM guidelines or maybe the Highway Tag Africa guidelines, or
> anything else that might help?
>
> We have a Github page here about the project:
> https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/142
>
> Thank you,
>
> Andrew
>
> Apple, Inc.
>
>
>
> Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | iPhone: +1.202.270.4464 |
> andrew_wise...@apple.com
>
> ___
> Talk-ZA mailing list
> Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za
>


-- 
Gerhardus Geldenhuis
___
Talk-ZA mailing list
Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za

Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

[Alexandre Oliveira]

Eu baixei as camadas que foram atualizadas em 2018 no portal da
PBH[1]. Tem sim um shapefile chamado ENDERECO_BH_SHAPE que contém as
numerações de cada imóvel de BH.

Eu comparei alguns imóveis do bairro Pampulha e parece estar alinhado,
porém acredito que esteja alinhado com as camadas de circulação
(vias), portanto pode haver algum desalinhamento com os dados que o
OSM já possui.


Em 30/01/2019, Vítor Rodrigo Dias escreveu:
> Prezados,
>
> Há um tempo, vi que a PBH também disponibiliza um arquivo com numerações de
> porta, mas não tive tempo ou conhecimento suficiente para trabalhar nesses
> arquivos e importá-los. Alguém se habilita a tal?
>
> Vítor Rodrigo Dias
> Revisor de textos
> Tradutor de inglês e espanhol
> Telefones: 31 99916-1719
>
>
> Em qua, 30 de jan de 2019 às 14:27, Thierry Jean 
> escreveu:
>
>> Alexandre,
>>
>> Que legal que você identificou isto e está na própria cidade de Belo
>> Horizonte.
>>
>> Gostaria de apresentar você para Karla Borges, Superintendente da área de
>> Geo da Prodabel (Prefeitura de BH). Encontrei a Karla uma primeira vez no
>> evento MundoGeo, em Maio, e em Novembro, no evento sobre os 10 anos da
>> INDE
>> que aconteceu no RJ (SBIDE). Eles estão interessados em se envolver mais
>> com o OSM. Até troquei um WhatsApp com Karla, esta segunda-feira.
>>
>> Passe-me seu celular. Vamos conversar e alinhar.
>>
>> Abs,
>>
>> Thierry Jean
>> M. +55 11 99607 1319
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *De:* Sérgio V. 
>> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 09:20
>> *Para:* Alexandre Oliveira; OpenStreetMap no Brasil
>> *Assunto:* Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>>
>> Bom dia Alexandre.
>> Algumas considerações que creio podem ajudar:
>> 1- nas fotos seria útil manter a escala gráfica do JOSM, para poder
>> avaliar o quanto é a diferença; não me pareceu muito mais desalinhadas do
>> que o comumente observado em outros materiais de OSM e prefeituras;
>> sempre
>> existe algum desalinhamento entre materiais de fontes diversas, feitos
>> sobre imagens diversas;
>> 2-o fato de ser WGS84 no OSM e SIRGAS2000 na prefeitura não deve ser em
>> si
>> causa de alguma diferença, pois ambos são praticamente idênticos, o
>> SIRGAS2000 foi uma padronização para ajustar ao padrão WGS84; a causa
>> principal de diferenças costuma ser o fato de que o que é mapeado no OSM
>> é sobretudo sobre imagens (como BING principalmente), estas sim podem ter
>> desalinhamentos, sobretudo no passado;
>> 3-para saber qual dos 2 está mais alinhado, a melhor forma é comparar com
>> traçados de GPS, ou com elementos de coordenadas exatas, como marcos
>> geodésicos que possam ser visíveis em imagens. Com os GPS do OSM pode
>> fazer
>> no JOSM mesmo.
>> 4-como exemplo, em Porto Alegre quando importei os prédios da prefeitura
>> em 2016, verifiquei um deslocamento médio de 6m para NE, um pouco
>> variável
>> em regiões diversas do município; confirmou comparando com os marcos
>> geodésicos visíveis de coordenadas exatas oficiais; aí procedi com um
>> realinhamento manual da cidade, rua por rua, onde mais necessário; sem
>> ainda importar os prédios; deslocamentos menores que 50% da largura da
>> rua
>> não são muito significativos (se a rua tem 8m, 4m de deslocamento do eixo
>> permanece dentro);
>> 5-importante é não ter vias cortando outras coisas, como prédios.
>> Att.,
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
>>
>> --
>> *De:* Alexandre Oliveira 
>> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 02:31
>> *Para:* talk-br
>> *Assunto:* [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>>
>> Bom dia (ou boa noite?),
>>
>> Estava fuçando o site da prefeitura de Belo Horizonte procurando mapas
>> e outras coisas que poderiam auxiliar no mapeamento da cidade e
>> descobri que existem camadas georreferenciadas disponíveis no site
>> deles.
>>
>> Baixei as camadas e abri no JOSM. Percebi, comparando a região do
>> bairro Pampulha, que há um desalinhamento entre os dados do OSM e da
>> PBH, conforme escrito na wiki[1].
>>
>> Procurei e achei um link[2] de uma discussão na lista em inglês do OSM
>> de alguém com o mesmo problema de desalinhamento, e o que o pessoal
>> recomendou pra ele foi uma linha de código para ser passada ao ogr2osm
>> para fazer a correção necessária.
>>
>> Porém, ao consultar a wiki[3], descobri que o formato utilizado pelo
>> OSM (WGS84) é praticamente o mesmo utilizado nas camadas da PBH, que
>> são SIRGAS2000. Só que não é o que eu vi ao importar as camadas no
>> JOSM([4] e [5]).
>>
>> Alguém tem alguma ideia do que pode ser feito? Até agora percebi que
>> tem algumas delimitações de bairros desalinhadas e as vias estão
>> desalinhadas também.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_endere%C3%A7os_do_Brasil
>> [2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-May/050065.html
>> [3]
>> 

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Idées rendu des mers

[osm . sanspourriel]

> seuls les pays apparaissent, mais dans la langue du pays.

seuls les pays apparaissent *et* dans la langue du pays.

(je suis d'accord avec Marc)

>> Est-ce un problème de données ? Par exemple la mer Celtique est 
présente dans OSM avec un seul point. Un multi-polygone serait-il plus 
adapté ?



c'est un problème de source/unanimité.
si cette mer a une limite précise, un multipolygone conviendra mieux.
mais je ne pense pas que c'est le cas. c'est vaguement là

> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305639697

sans pouvoir décrire où cela s'arrête par exemple à l'ouest


À l'est c'est plus simple pais avec le changement climatique ça a 
tendance à aller plus à l'est...


Il y a des définitions précises même si elles sont arbitraires, gérées 
par l'OHI :
IHO 23-3rd: Limits of Oceans and Seas, Special Publication 23, 3rd 
Edition 1953, published by the International Hydrographic Organization.

C'est ici la limite du plateau continental taillé à la hache :
http://www.marineregions.org/gazetteer.php?p=details=2351
Précision 416 km ;-). Ça doit être une typo.

Je sais que Vliz avait pensé à mettre les données dans OSM, je parle des 
zones de pêches appelées ZEE (c'est à dire ZEE + eau intérieures) mais 
pour le Gazetteer c'est pareil à mon avis ; il faudrait contacter 
Nathalie De Hauwere.


Je vois que les îles Féroé sur le rendu international apparaissent dès 
le niveau 5, ça me semble largement suffisant : 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=5/55.129/-5.229


Sur la carte du SHOM elles apparaissent plus tôt mais le nom n'est pas 
vraiment lisible. Et en étranger ;-)


La Manche apparaît seulement au niveau 7 car le placement est "bête" il 
essaye de le placer trop près des îles anglo-normandes or les états 
confettis sont représentés très tôt.


Non OpenSeaMap ne peut être la solution a priori car certains noms sont 
déjà sur OpenStreetMap.


Ça ne marche que si on veut ceux affichés affichés pareils et d'autres 
en plus (OpenSeaMap est une surcouche d'OpenStreetMap, pas un rendu 
complet).


Le bon niveau de rendu n'est pas un truc simple, car il faut tenir 
compte de l'importance en plus du type de donnée à représenter : le Rail 
d'Ouessant 
 
n'apparait qu'au niveau 9 ce qui fait tard pour la séparation de trafic 
de la mer la plus fréquentée au monde.


Là on voit la surface et ça peut servir pour estimer l'importance par 
contre si  on modélise la Mer d'Iroise comme un point on n'a aucune idée 
de son importance relative...


En résumé : pas assez de données et données pas assez ou mal valorisées. 
Qui de la poule et de l’œuf ?


Jean-Yvon

Le 30/01/2019 à 18:21, Adrien Grellier - pe...@adrieng.fr a écrit :

Bonjour,

En ce moment je m'intéresse pas mal aux mers et océans, et OpenStreetMap
me semble plutôt mauvais sur les rendus à faible zoom.

Voici par exemple 3 rendus différents de l'Atlantique Nord :

– OpenStreetMap : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=4/57.40/-17.58
– Rendu OSM-FR :
http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=4=59.05751=-18.29251=BFF
– carte du SHOM :
https://data.shom.fr/#001=eyJjIjpbLTE4NTczMjMuMTUyMjg4MDcwNCw3NzE1Njc2LjEyNDE1OTkxNV0sInoiOjQsInIiOjAsImwiOlt7InR5cGUiOiJJTlRFUk5BTF9MQVlFUiIsImlkZW50aWZpZXIiOiJSQVNURVJfTUFSSU5FXzM4NTdfV01UUyIsIm9wYWNpdHkiOjEsInZpc2liaWxpdHkiOnRydWV9LHsidHlwZSI6IklOVEVSTkFMX0xBWUVSIiwiaWRlbnRpZmllciI6IkZEQ19HRUJDT19QWVItUE5HXzM4NTdfV01UUyIsIm9wYWNpdHkiOjEsInZpc2liaWxpdHkiOnRydWV9XX0=
(désolé pour le lien…)

La carte OpenStreetMap est totalement indigente : Aucune mers
n'apparaît, les principales îles n'ont plus (Féroé, Orcades,
Terre-Neuves, etc.), seuls les pays apparaissent, mais dans la langue du
pays. Une petite exception : le golfe de Gascogne, qui apparaît
bizarrement sous deux noms. Impossible en l'état de se servir de ce
rendu comme planisphère !

Le rendu français est nettement mieux : les îles apparaissent
clairement, les noms sont traduits en français, mais les mers n'y sont
pas. Bizarrement la situation s'inverse dans le nord du Canada : OSM est
à mon sens nettement plus lisible que OSM-FR, les grosses îles
apparaissant de manière immédiate.

Enfin la carte du SHOM est nettement plus avancée, puisque tout apparaît
clairement : détroit du Danemark, Mer Celtique, etc.


Comment faire pour améliorer le rendu des mers ? Est-ce un problème de
données ? Par exemple la mer Celtique est présente dans OSM avec un seul
point. Un multi-polygone serait-il plus adapté ? Ou bien est-ce un
problème du système de rendu dans les faibles zoom ?

J'aimerais bien pouvoir améliore la situation, mais je ne sais pas
vraiment quoi faire… si vous avez des suggestions ça m'intéresse !!


Bonne journée

Adrien



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

[Talk-us] Map roulette challenges - Missing named roads [VA, NJ, NY, MN, SC]

[Oisin Herriott (Insight Global Inc) via Talk-us]

Hi all,

In an effort to make the roads data in OSM more complete in names and coverage, 
the Open Maps team at Microsoft is going through some available open data sets 
published by some of the US State agencies, and analyzing these to find gaps 
where named roads are published in the government data, but absent from OSM.

We're publishing these on Map roulette for the mapping community to investigate 
and edit accordingly. The map roulette challenges focus on the rural areas 
where less attention may be paid rather than the urban areas. The coverage is 
state wide but the published date, and quality differs from place to place. 
Below are the first few out there, so feel free to jump in - the water is fine!

  *   Minnesota: https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3486
  *   New York: https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3489
  *   New Jersey: https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3470
  *   Virginia: https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3490
  *   South Carolina: 
https://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/2346/challenge/3487

Each challenge has some more information in the description, and links to the 
data sources being used.

Please give us a shout with any comments, feedback, questions, or concerns!

Thanks all,
Oisin
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-Talk-ZA] Road network improvements in South Africa

[Andrew Wiseman via Talk-ZA]

Oops, that’s OSM South Africa of course.

Andrew

> On Jan 30, 2019, at 4:23 PM, Andrew Wiseman via Talk-ZA 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hello OSM Turkey,
> 
> My name is Andrew Wiseman, I work for Apple on the Maps team. My team is 
> interested in doing some work on the road network in South Africa on 
> OpenStreetMap, things like adding missing roads, making sure roads connect 
> properly, fixing incorrect alignments with GPS traces, ensuring road 
> classifications are consistent, and other similar issues.
> 
> Are there places you know of that need improvement or types of problems you 
> see frequently? And are there any imagery sources you'd recommend, any 
> specific highway classification guidelines you recommend such as the general 
> OSM guidelines or maybe the Highway Tag Africa guidelines, or anything else 
> that might help? 
> 
> We have a Github page here about the project: 
> https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/142 
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Andrew
> 
> Apple, Inc.
> 
> 
> 
> Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | iPhone: +1.202.270.4464 | andrew_wise...@apple.com 
> 
> ___
> Talk-ZA mailing list
> Talk-ZA@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-za

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

[OSM-Talk-ZA] Road network improvements in South Africa

[Andrew Wiseman via Talk-ZA]

Hello OSM Turkey,

My name is Andrew Wiseman, I work for Apple on the Maps team. My team is 
interested in doing some work on the road network in South Africa on 
OpenStreetMap, things like adding missing roads, making sure roads connect 
properly, fixing incorrect alignments with GPS traces, ensuring road 
classifications are consistent, and other similar issues.

Are there places you know of that need improvement or types of problems you see 
frequently? And are there any imagery sources you'd recommend, any specific 
highway classification guidelines you recommend such as the general OSM 
guidelines or maybe the Highway Tag Africa guidelines, or anything else that 
might help? 

We have a Github page here about the project: 
https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/142

Thank you,

Andrew

Apple, Inc.



Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | iPhone: +1.202.270.4464 | andrew_wise...@apple.com 

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

[Talk-tr] Road network improvements in Turkey

[Andrew Wiseman via Talk-tr]

Hello OSM Turkey,

My name is Andrew Wiseman, I work for Apple on the maps team. My team is 
interested in doing some work on the road network in Turkey on OpenStreetMap, 
things like adding missing roads, making sure roads connect properly, fixing 
incorrect alignments with GPS traces, ensuring road classifications are 
consistent, and other similar issues.

Are there places you know of that need improvement or types of problems you see 
frequently? And are there any imagery sources you'd recommend, any specific 
highway classification guidelines you recommend, or anything else that might 
help? I've seen https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tr:Turkey_roads_tagging and 
it says it’s a proposal, has that been adopted widely?

We have a Github page here about the project: 
https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/141

An automated translation of this message is below.

Thank you,

Andrew

Apple, Inc.

///

Merhaba OSM Türkiye

Benim adım Andrew Wiseman, haritalar ekibinde Apple için çalışıyorum. Ekibim 
Türkiye'de OpenStreetMap’te yol ağı üzerinde bazı çalışmalar yapmak, eksik yol 
eklemek, yolların doğru şekilde bağlanmasını sağlamak, GPS izleriyle yanlış 
hizalamaları düzeltmek, yol sınıflandırmalarının tutarlı olmasını sağlamak ve 
benzeri konularla ilgileniyor.

İyileştirmeye ihtiyaç duyduğunuz veya sıkça gördüğünüz sorun türlerini 
bildiğiniz yerler var mı? Ve önereceğiniz herhangi bir görüntü kaynağı, 
önerdiğiniz herhangi bir otoyol sınıflandırma rehberi veya yardımcı olabilecek 
başka bir şey var mı? 
Https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tr:Turkey_roads_tagging'i gördüm ve bunun 
bir öneri olduğunu, bunun yaygın olarak kabul edildiğini mi söylüyor?

Proje hakkında burada bir Github sayfamız var: 
https://github.com/osmlab/appledata/issues/141

Teşekkür ederim,

Andrew

Apple, Inc.



Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | andrew_wise...@apple.com 

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

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Martijn van Exel]

You can point businesses to https://www.onosm.org/  
which gives businesses an easy way to add themselves. It generates a note on 
OSM, that mappers can then turn into an actual node or whatever OSM type is 
relevant to add the information to the map in a responsible way.
Martijn

> On Jan 30, 2019, at 1:22 PM, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
> 
> Hi, I'm thinking  it might be worth emailing the businesses being advertised 
> and telling them that the SEO company that they engaged is making edits that 
> they might not want their business associates.
> Tony
> 
>> Concur. Be ruthless. These people are akin to nuisance callers and
>> should be publicly flogged.
>> 
>> Ian
>> 
>> 
>> On 30/1/19 7:22 pm, nwastra wrote:
>>> We seem to be getting a lot of business edits in this form lately  with 
>>> only a name and description tag, often with address details or  just spam 
>>> in the description tag.
>>> As is usual with spam like business edits, they use a throw away  email to 
>>> make the edit and you never get a response from any query.
>>> https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372
>>> I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>> 
>> _
>> This mail has been virus scanned by Australia On Line
>> see http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[forster]

Hi, I'm thinking  it might be worth emailing the businesses being  
advertised and telling them that the SEO company that they engaged is  
making edits that they might not want their business associates.

Tony


Concur. Be ruthless. These people are akin to nuisance callers and
should be publicly flogged.

Ian


On 30/1/19 7:22 pm, nwastra wrote:
We seem to be getting a lot of business edits in this form lately   
with only a name and description tag, often with address details or  
 just spam in the description tag.
As is usual with spam like business edits, they use a throw away   
email to make the edit and you never get a response from any query.

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372
I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.


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



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

_
This mail has been virus scanned by Australia On Line
see http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning






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

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[Milan Cerny]

Ještě jsem vyšťoural jeden
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738526

Trochu mě znepokojuje fakt, že většina changesetů má stejné chyby.
Budovy mapují jako "landuse=residential + residential=apartments.
Tady to bude spíš chyba nového iD, nebo českého překladu jako "obytný dům"

__
> Od: "majka" 
> Komu: "OpenStreetMap Czech Republic" 
> Datum: 30.01.2019 13:19
> Předmět: Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
>
>Další z tohohle ranku, opravdu editovali pod heslem "hlavně daleko":
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738476
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738598
>
>Momentálně str. 9 dotazu na osmcha
>
>___
>talk-cz mailing list
>talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
>

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

Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

[Vítor Rodrigo Dias]

Prezados,

Há um tempo, vi que a PBH também disponibiliza um arquivo com numerações de
porta, mas não tive tempo ou conhecimento suficiente para trabalhar nesses
arquivos e importá-los. Alguém se habilita a tal?

Vítor Rodrigo Dias
Revisor de textos
Tradutor de inglês e espanhol
Telefones: 31 99916-1719


Em qua, 30 de jan de 2019 às 14:27, Thierry Jean 
escreveu:

> Alexandre,
>
> Que legal que você identificou isto e está na própria cidade de Belo
> Horizonte.
>
> Gostaria de apresentar você para Karla Borges, Superintendente da área de
> Geo da Prodabel (Prefeitura de BH). Encontrei a Karla uma primeira vez no
> evento MundoGeo, em Maio, e em Novembro, no evento sobre os 10 anos da INDE
> que aconteceu no RJ (SBIDE). Eles estão interessados em se envolver mais
> com o OSM. Até troquei um WhatsApp com Karla, esta segunda-feira.
>
> Passe-me seu celular. Vamos conversar e alinhar.
>
> Abs,
>
> Thierry Jean
> M. +55 11 99607 1319
>
>
>
> --
> *De:* Sérgio V. 
> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 09:20
> *Para:* Alexandre Oliveira; OpenStreetMap no Brasil
> *Assunto:* Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>
> Bom dia Alexandre.
> Algumas considerações que creio podem ajudar:
> 1- nas fotos seria útil manter a escala gráfica do JOSM, para poder
> avaliar o quanto é a diferença; não me pareceu muito mais desalinhadas do
> que o comumente observado em outros materiais de OSM e prefeituras; sempre
> existe algum desalinhamento entre materiais de fontes diversas, feitos
> sobre imagens diversas;
> 2-o fato de ser WGS84 no OSM e SIRGAS2000 na prefeitura não deve ser em si
> causa de alguma diferença, pois ambos são praticamente idênticos, o
> SIRGAS2000 foi uma padronização para ajustar ao padrão WGS84; a causa
> principal de diferenças costuma ser o fato de que o que é mapeado no OSM
> é sobretudo sobre imagens (como BING principalmente), estas sim podem ter
> desalinhamentos, sobretudo no passado;
> 3-para saber qual dos 2 está mais alinhado, a melhor forma é comparar com
> traçados de GPS, ou com elementos de coordenadas exatas, como marcos
> geodésicos que possam ser visíveis em imagens. Com os GPS do OSM pode fazer
> no JOSM mesmo.
> 4-como exemplo, em Porto Alegre quando importei os prédios da prefeitura
> em 2016, verifiquei um deslocamento médio de 6m para NE, um pouco variável
> em regiões diversas do município; confirmou comparando com os marcos
> geodésicos visíveis de coordenadas exatas oficiais; aí procedi com um
> realinhamento manual da cidade, rua por rua, onde mais necessário; sem
> ainda importar os prédios; deslocamentos menores que 50% da largura da rua
> não são muito significativos (se a rua tem 8m, 4m de deslocamento do eixo
> permanece dentro);
> 5-importante é não ter vias cortando outras coisas, como prédios.
> Att.,
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
>
> --
> *De:* Alexandre Oliveira 
> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 02:31
> *Para:* talk-br
> *Assunto:* [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>
> Bom dia (ou boa noite?),
>
> Estava fuçando o site da prefeitura de Belo Horizonte procurando mapas
> e outras coisas que poderiam auxiliar no mapeamento da cidade e
> descobri que existem camadas georreferenciadas disponíveis no site
> deles.
>
> Baixei as camadas e abri no JOSM. Percebi, comparando a região do
> bairro Pampulha, que há um desalinhamento entre os dados do OSM e da
> PBH, conforme escrito na wiki[1].
>
> Procurei e achei um link[2] de uma discussão na lista em inglês do OSM
> de alguém com o mesmo problema de desalinhamento, e o que o pessoal
> recomendou pra ele foi uma linha de código para ser passada ao ogr2osm
> para fazer a correção necessária.
>
> Porém, ao consultar a wiki[3], descobri que o formato utilizado pelo
> OSM (WGS84) é praticamente o mesmo utilizado nas camadas da PBH, que
> são SIRGAS2000. Só que não é o que eu vi ao importar as camadas no
> JOSM([4] e [5]).
>
> Alguém tem alguma ideia do que pode ser feito? Até agora percebi que
> tem algumas delimitações de bairros desalinhadas e as vias estão
> desalinhadas também.
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_endere%C3%A7os_do_Brasil
> [2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-May/050065.html
> [3]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_Redes_Geod%C3%A9sicas_do_IBGE
> "Sobre as referências (CRS) dos dados do IBGE"
> [4] https://i.imgur.com/XoSqalT.png
> [5] https://i.imgur.com/bOYGN8G.png (o traço cinza é o da camada da PBH)
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Idées rendu des mers

[marc marc]

Le 30.01.19 à 18:21, Adrien Grellier a écrit :
> OpenStreetMap <...> Aucune mers n'apparaît, 

la raison principale c'est que les mers dans un océan n'ont pas de 
limite précise. hors osm étant une base géographique avant d'être une 
carte de rendu de cette donnée, certains trouvent que cela n'a pas de 
sens d'encoder une géographie pour une mer si personne n'a une source 
valide pour dire où cette mer commence et où elle finit.

Dans le même genre d'idée, on avait parlé ici même de la "bretagne 
géographique" qui côté continent a le même problème.
du coup certaines de ces régions sont renseigné avec un point
pour dire "c'est là... mais la géométrie est inconnue/indéterminée"
et ces points sur le rendu standard d'osm.org sont souvent rendu qu'à 
des niveau de zoom beaucoup plus élevé voir parfois pas du tout.
il y a bien sur des contre-exemple (dont justement la Bretagne 
géographique) où des étendues sans limite précise ont été renseignée
avec des centaines de point de manière totalement inventée.
c'est pas l'idéal pour une base géographique.

> les principales îles n'ont plus (Féroé,

pour ne prendre cette exemple, je la vois
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=5/61.856/-5.537
le niveau de zoom à partir de laquelle le nom apparaît dépend
parfois de la taille de l’objet concerné.

> dans la langue du pays.

c'est un choix du rendu osm.org d'avoir décidé de toujours utiliser
la langue locale et non pas de faire une carte "suprématie de tel 
langue". donc sur ce point là, c'est une fonctionnalité et non un bug
(ce qui changera peut être le jour oü le rendu vectoriel permettra de 
s'adapter à la langue déclaré par len avigateur de l'utilisateur).
c'est un choix du rendu osm-fr d'avoir décidé de toujours utiliser le 
name:fr lorsqu'il existe, et de n'utiliser la langue locale qu'en 
l'absence du name:fr

> Une petite exception : le golfe de Gascogne, qui apparaît
> bizarrement sous deux noms.

c'est un bricolage du tag name pour dire que l'objet a 2 langues
de même... hum.. quel est le bon mot... légitimité ?
Christian R pardonne moi de ne pas avoir trouvé le bon mot j'espère :)
name en fr car il touche la France et en es car il touche l'Espagne.
c'est à mon avis un bricolage vu que l'article wikipedia
lui pointe vers la page anglaise (ha si seulement on souvenait
que l’espéranto existait, on aurait pas besoin de recourir à l'anglais 
pour "faire neutre"...)

> la situation s'inverse dans le nord du Canada : OSM est
> à mon sens nettement plus lisible que OSM-FR, les grosses îles
> apparaissant de manière immédiate.

parles-tu du contraste eau-terre ?

> Enfin la carte du SHOM est nettement plus avancée, puisque tout apparaît
> clairement : détroit du Danemark, Mer Celtique, etc.

c'est évidement plus facile de faire quelque chose lisible
quand la carte n'affiche quasi rien (limite eau-terre, nom des pays/eau, 
et qlq villes majeurs)
la carte osm.org affiche par exemple les frontières administratives,
l'occupation des sols, les routes principales, etc

> Comment faire pour améliorer le rendu des mers ?

si c'est le problème de contraste pour le nord canada, faut voir ce que 
Christian et d'autres en pense.

> Est-ce un problème de données ? Par exemple la mer Celtique est présente dans 
> OSM 
> avec un seul point. Un multi-polygone serait-il plus adapté ?

c'est un problème de source/unanimité.
si cette mer a une limite précise, un multipolygone conviendra mieux.
mais je ne pense pas que c'est le cas. c'est vaguement là
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305639697
sans pouvoir décrire où cela s'arrête par exemple à l'ouest

s'il y avait une demande, un rendu "marin" pourrait avoir du sens.
mais je pense que cela fait double emplois avec openseamap

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

[Mark Goodge]

On 30/01/2019 16:00, Tom Hughes wrote:


The fundamental problem with this, as Jerry has just said, is that
many towns in the UK have no defined boundary.

Even where there is an administrative entity there is no guarantee
that it's boundary equates to what most people would view as the
boundary of the town - it may under or overstate things.


One useful thing here is the ONS concept of a "Built Up Area". That aims 
to give the normal human name of a defined place - for example, 
Mansfield and Maidenhead are both in the list, and mean what someone 
living there would expect them to mean. And it has subdivisions for 
major settlements - for example, the BUA of Greater London includes 
BUASDs of Bromley and Camden.


Shapefiles are available from the ONS Geography website, and are OGL, so 
they're compatible with OSM.


The downside of ONS BUA data is that it's only updated once per census, 
so the current dataset is now a bit out of date - it doesn't take 
account of new developments on the edge of existing settlements, for 
example. But, as a simple source of names, it's very valuable. And 
alterations to boundaries can be mapped on the ground, provided you've 
got an existing boundary to work with.



Equally there is no clear way of even determining what is, or is
not, a town. Just a variety of rules-of-thumb...


As far as local government is concerned, there is a defined meaning of a 
town. That is, any settlement which has a town council (eg, Evesham, 
Newmarket). And, for larger settlements, the word "town" is what most 
people would call what is, officially, a non-metropolitan borough (eg, 
Bromsgrove, Ipswich).


More generally, while there's no single definition of a town, it can be 
reasonably assumed to be the default terminology for any built-up area 
unless you know for certain that it isn't a town (eg, because it's a 
city, or it has a parish council, or is too small to have a council at 
all).


Mark

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

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[majka]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 18:30, Ladislav Láska  wrote:
>
> Ahoj,
>
> taky můžeme podat pomocnou ruku a nabídnout vlastní síly k verifikaci.
> Já bych si asi nějaký večer našel na to prohlédnout pár changesetů a
> zverifikovat je. Pokud jsou vyloženě mimo, nejspíš se to pozná rychle,
> pokud jsou k věci, stojí za to se tomu pověnovat.
>
> Teda očekávám, že na to HOT má nějaký verifikační nástroj, který změny
> commitne nebo rejectne? Nikdy jsem s ním nepracoval :-)

Ty Prušánky jsou průser v tom, že ty děcka pouští naprosto
nekontrolovatelně. Tj. nikdo netuší, jací noví uživatelé editují a co
a kde dělají. "Review requested", tj. explicitní požadavek verifikace
z toho má jen jediný changeset, přitom zrovna tohle by alespoň pomohlo
to najít.
To co jsem přidávala, se muselo přes osmcha prohledat stylem nový
mapper > použvá iD konkrétní verze > editace v tom podezřelém časovém
rozmezí, které osmcha umí jen podle dnů. Pokud bych dokázala dohledat
ještě i nastavení iD, tj. locale: cs, dalo by se to vyfiltrovat
poměrně přesně, takhle jsem otevírala jedno po druhém to, co mi to
našlo. To ale přece není způsob, jak by se ten problém měl řešit.
Prvotní zodpovědnost to chce od toho učitele. Já ho chválím, že jim
nabízí "něco nového", ale ten způsob je na bednu.

K verifikaci se klidně připojím, jen v konkrétním případě to znamená
jednoznačně poměrně pokročilou práci přes JOSM - tj. stáhnout si ten
changeset, nacpat ty objekty do TODO pluginu a jednotlivě je
zkontrolovat. Vzhledem k "územní" velikosti některých těch změn se to
asi jinak rozumně udělat nedá, pokud to nechceme revertnout rovnou,
pochybuji že přes iD by to nějak rozumně šlo.
Otázka je, jestli se dostaneme ke všem těm changesetům - tj. jestli je
možné získat jména všech uživatelů z téhle třídy, abychom to
dohledali. To co tady padlo je na školní třídu málo - to by z nich
většina nesměla nic uložit. Až co bude jasné, kdo všechno to je, by
bylo třeba si ty changesety mezi sebou rozdělit pro verifikaci.
Případně se můžeme vybodnout na dohledávání, a můžeme si mezi sebe
rozdělit těch cca 6 uživatelů, o kterých si myslím(e), že se jich to
týká.

Pro budoucnost, pokud s nimi bude rozumná dohoda:
Výhodou HOTOSM je hotový taskman, a nastavená kontrolu předchozích
editací - tj. jeden uživatel si mapuje v přiděleném území, a druhý
uživatel to po něm ručně, pěkně jeden objekt po druhém kontroluje.
Tenhle "validátor" může maximálně přemapovat drobné problémy, nebo ten
úkol vrátit do oběhu - tj. prohlásí to za neplatné, a někdo další to
samé území znovu zmapuje. Žádné nástroje na commit nebo reject změn to
nemá, jen poctivou ruční práci. Nad tím ještě sedí / může sedět
validátor celého projektu. Výhodou ale je, že se tady zkrátka počítá s
tím, že to budou mapovat začátečníci, mají konkrétně označené úkoly
(tj. čtverce na mapě) a je vidět, co kde mapovali. A taky se počítá s
tím, že to někdo bude po nich opravovat (bez přechozí debaty na
changesetech), v extrémním případě to i smaže, pokud to opravdu není k
tomu. Má to i svojí možnost komunikace. Vcelku bych pochybovala o její
úspěšnosti, pokud to nebude rovnou v té hodině - tj. učitel je
nasměruje na konkrétní projekt, nechá je pracovat na jednotlivých
úkolech, nechá je to "commitnout", tj. ukládat častěji a hned je
kontroluje, co, kde a jak dělají.
Zkrátka by tak dostali "ohrádku" kde by si mohli něco mapovat, a
ideálně jejich učitel by to po nich zkontroloval. Ale klidně se jim dá
nabídnout i to, že dají vědět sem, a někteří z nás se jako validátoři
zúčastní. Stejně to pár z nás dělá.


Majka

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

Re: [talk-cz] Hromadná editace/úkol pro všechny? Bylo: Seznam vodních ploch se špatnou kategoriií

[Michal Poupa]

jinak u některých rybníků jsem našel toto:

pridani tagů natural=water; water=pond k některým rybníkům...
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_details

Edited over 7 years ago by Karry
Version #3 · Changeset #8153327

toto přidalo natural=water; water=pond ale už bohužel neodebralo tag
landuse=reservoir

ten skript tedy také nadělal paseku ale šlo by to opravit skripetem ,,,

st 30. 1. 2019 v 9:45 odesílatel Michal Poupa  napsal:
>
> Jak kde se to renderuje dobře ...
>
> út 29. 1. 2019 v 23:21 odesílatel Pavel Machek  napsal:
> >
> > Ahoj!
> >
> > > Ty největší rybníky a přehrady jsem opravil je toho dohně na ty malé
> > > je třeba udělt pomoci robota - ano to landuse=reservoir vzniklo to
> > > nějakým importem.
> >
> > Tak robot znamena debatu na imports@ listu...
> >
> > ...kterou by nebylo spatny udelat (idealne jeste pred tim nez se
> > udelali zmeny na tech velkejch). landuse=reservoir je sice deprecated,
> > ale ted se to renderuje dobre, a bylo by dobry to nerozbit...
> > 
> > Pavel
> > --
> > (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> > (cesky, pictures) 
> > http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
> > ___
> > talk-cz mailing list
> > talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> > https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging post towns and other addressing issues in the UK

[talk-gb]

Hi,

 

There are some interesting views on this topic.

 

Looking at Roberts ideas in the link at the start of the thread, it’s not 
perfect but makes sense.

 

At the moment we seem to be just putting in the bare minimum as an address, it 
might be enough to get things delivered to somewhere but lacks something.

 

What it lacks is what I would call the second line of the address, the bit that 
describes which High Street it refers too, there are several in some towns e.g. 
Northampton or Milton Keynes.

 

I don’t mind the tag addr:locality it does the job but is a bit bland.

 

Some comments to some addresses I have entered have made it clear that there 
are people who really hate the idea of putting the name of the town that would 
appear in what PAF calls Post Town in the addr:city tag and others who see it 
as part of the address.

 

Looking at the web sites of a few of the town councils around me, some do 
include the post town in their published address and some don’t.

I would rather say the town name that is not the post town goes into addr:town 
because it’s a town in itself.

Although it should be possible to work out that the address is in a small to 
medium town from it’s location, looking for an address in a town using a 
addr:town tag sound logical.

The same with villages and smaller settlements.

 

We might get disagreement where a large town has swallowed up a smaller 
settlement but that should be down to local mappers who understand the history 
of the area.

 

Regards 

 

RAC_UK

 

 

From: Andrzej [mailto:nd...@redhazel.co.uk] 
Sent: 28 January 2019 15:06
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging post towns and other addressing issues in the UK

 

Is it possible to use addr:locality for both towns and villages? That could 
simplify things quite a bit and I have yet to see an address that needs a post 
town and two levels of localities below.

Having said that, I still don't understand the objections to addr:town and 
addr:village. Can anyone come up with an example of an address where they 
wouldn't work? I normally don't care about names but locality sounds almost 
offensive. 

Business parks and other campuses are not localities - their names are written 
before street names, not after them. They're IMO what RM calls "dependent 
thoroughfares". For these I would simply use addr:place, which can already be 
combined with addr:housename and addr:housenumber. Alternatively we could make 
a new tag like addr:campus.

Best regards, 
Andrzej 



On 28 January 2019 20:36:24 GMT+08:00, Colin Smale  
wrote:

Hi Will,

On 2019-01-28 13:19, Will Phillips wrote:

Hi,

I agree we need another tag below addr:city for localities. For this I have 
usually used addr:suburb when mapping in urban areas and addr:locality 
elsewhere. Ideally I think it would be best to have just one recommended tag, 
perhaps addr:locality, because having addr:town addr:village and addr:suburb 
seems too complicated. Eventually it would be good if editing software, in 
particular iD, could provide an extra field to enter the locality, and it would 
perhaps be easier for that to happen if there was only one tag. New mappers 
often seem to have difficulty entering addresses to the form that they wish and 
I think the lack of a locality field is part of the reason.


For what Royal Mail calls 'Double Dependent Localities' using addr:sublocality 
is a possibility, although I wonder whether just sticking with addr:village for 
this less common situation would be easier. It depends a bit on whether this 
tag is only likely to be used for villages and hamlets, or whether it might be 
useful in other cases. For example, sometimes names of industrial estates 
appear in addresses in a similar way to sublocalities.

 

I don't see any advantage in "addr:village" and "addr:suburb" just because they 
sound familiar or are existing tags. What we are discussing here is a 
UK-specific solution. The (Double) Dependent Localities may or may not 
correspond to what people perceive as a "village" or "suburb". In the quoted 
example, "Cambridge Science Park" is IMHO neither.


I only use addr:city for post towns, although I recognise not all mappers agree 
with this, and I appreciate there are arguments both ways. I was thinking about 
this recently when adding addresses in Lees near Derby. The post town is 
Ashbourne, but this seems slightly incongruous because the village is much 
nearer to Derby. I chose not to include addr:city and only used addr:locality 
for the village name.

 

I feel the main argument in favour of using post towns for addr:city is that it 
helps to keep the data consistent because what to use often becomes confusing 
otherwise. To use the example of Lees I mentioned above, it would be easy to 
end up with a situation where addr:city contained perhaps four values if the 
data was entered by different people without any guide as to what to use (the 
most likely possibilities being Lees, 

[Talk-pe] Calles sin nombres y con etiquetas noname=yes

[Omar Vega Ramos]

Hola a todos

Revisando el mapa he notado que tenemos todavía mas de 2 elementos
con la etiqueta noname=yes , muchas de las cuales fueron añadidas en
vías que sufrieron la redacción. Muchas de estas calles realmente si
poseen un nombre y según entiendo de la wiki de esta etiqueta[0],
mientras tengan esta etiqueta tampoco aparece un aviso en StreetComplete
y tampoco aparece el aviso en JOSM de que la falta un nombre. Así que
agregar el nombre de estas calles es una tarea pendiente.

Saludos

[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:noname
-- 
Omar Vega

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

Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

[Vitor George]

Oi Caio,

No link abaixo insira seu e-mail na última caixa para editar opções ou
deinscrever-se:

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

Abraços,
Vitor

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:28 PM Caio Dias  wrote:

> Por favor, gostaria de sair da lista do osm. Alguém pode me ajudar?
>
>
> Em qua, 30 de jan de 2019 às 15:27, Thierry Jean 
> escreveu:
>
>> Alexandre,
>>
>> Que legal que você identificou isto e está na própria cidade de Belo
>> Horizonte.
>>
>> Gostaria de apresentar você para Karla Borges, Superintendente da área de
>> Geo da Prodabel (Prefeitura de BH). Encontrei a Karla uma primeira vez no
>> evento MundoGeo, em Maio, e em Novembro, no evento sobre os 10 anos da INDE
>> que aconteceu no RJ (SBIDE). Eles estão interessados em se envolver mais
>> com o OSM. Até troquei um WhatsApp com Karla, esta segunda-feira.
>>
>> Passe-me seu celular. Vamos conversar e alinhar.
>>
>> Abs,
>>
>> Thierry Jean
>> M. +55 11 99607 1319
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *De:* Sérgio V. 
>> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 09:20
>> *Para:* Alexandre Oliveira; OpenStreetMap no Brasil
>> *Assunto:* Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>>
>> Bom dia Alexandre.
>> Algumas considerações que creio podem ajudar:
>> 1- nas fotos seria útil manter a escala gráfica do JOSM, para poder
>> avaliar o quanto é a diferença; não me pareceu muito mais desalinhadas
>> do que o comumente observado em outros materiais de OSM e prefeituras;
>> sempre existe algum desalinhamento entre materiais de fontes diversas,
>> feitos sobre imagens diversas;
>> 2-o fato de ser WGS84 no OSM e SIRGAS2000 na prefeitura não deve ser em
>> si causa de alguma diferença, pois ambos são praticamente idênticos, o
>> SIRGAS2000 foi uma padronização para ajustar ao padrão WGS84; a causa
>> principal de diferenças costuma ser o fato de que o que é mapeado no OSM
>> é sobretudo sobre imagens (como BING principalmente), estas sim podem ter
>> desalinhamentos, sobretudo no passado;
>> 3-para saber qual dos 2 está mais alinhado, a melhor forma é comparar
>> com traçados de GPS, ou com elementos de coordenadas exatas, como marcos
>> geodésicos que possam ser visíveis em imagens. Com os GPS do OSM pode fazer
>> no JOSM mesmo.
>> 4-como exemplo, em Porto Alegre quando importei os prédios da prefeitura
>> em 2016, verifiquei um deslocamento médio de 6m para NE, um pouco variável
>> em regiões diversas do município; confirmou comparando com os marcos
>> geodésicos visíveis de coordenadas exatas oficiais; aí procedi com um
>> realinhamento manual da cidade, rua por rua, onde mais necessário; sem
>> ainda importar os prédios; deslocamentos menores que 50% da largura da rua
>> não são muito significativos (se a rua tem 8m, 4m de deslocamento do eixo
>> permanece dentro);
>> 5-importante é não ter vias cortando outras coisas, como prédios.
>> Att.,
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
>>
>> --
>> *De:* Alexandre Oliveira 
>> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 02:31
>> *Para:* talk-br
>> *Assunto:* [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>>
>> Bom dia (ou boa noite?),
>>
>> Estava fuçando o site da prefeitura de Belo Horizonte procurando mapas
>> e outras coisas que poderiam auxiliar no mapeamento da cidade e
>> descobri que existem camadas georreferenciadas disponíveis no site
>> deles.
>>
>> Baixei as camadas e abri no JOSM. Percebi, comparando a região do
>> bairro Pampulha, que há um desalinhamento entre os dados do OSM e da
>> PBH, conforme escrito na wiki[1].
>>
>> Procurei e achei um link[2] de uma discussão na lista em inglês do OSM
>> de alguém com o mesmo problema de desalinhamento, e o que o pessoal
>> recomendou pra ele foi uma linha de código para ser passada ao ogr2osm
>> para fazer a correção necessária.
>>
>> Porém, ao consultar a wiki[3], descobri que o formato utilizado pelo
>> OSM (WGS84) é praticamente o mesmo utilizado nas camadas da PBH, que
>> são SIRGAS2000. Só que não é o que eu vi ao importar as camadas no
>> JOSM([4] e [5]).
>>
>> Alguém tem alguma ideia do que pode ser feito? Até agora percebi que
>> tem algumas delimitações de bairros desalinhadas e as vias estão
>> desalinhadas também.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_endere%C3%A7os_do_Brasil
>> [2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-May/050065.html
>> [3]
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_Redes_Geod%C3%A9sicas_do_IBGE
>> "Sobre as referências (CRS) dos dados do IBGE"
>> [4] https://i.imgur.com/XoSqalT.png
>> [5] https://i.imgur.com/bOYGN8G.png (o traço cinza é o da camada da PBH)
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-br mailing list
>> Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
>> ___
>> Talk-br mailing list
>> Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
>> 

Re: [Talk-es] Proyecto importación catastro Sant Boi de Llobregat (08199)

[Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso]

Ya te he dado permisos en el gestor de tareas.

Léete antes toda la documentación y mira cómo se esta haciendo en otros
sitios.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Catastro_espa%C3%B1ol/Importaci%C3%B3n_de_edificios/Gu%C3%ADa_de_importaci%C3%B3n/Gesti%C3%B3n_de_proyectos#Revisi.C3.B3n
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Catastro_espa%C3%B1ol/Importaci%C3%B3n_de_edificios/Gu%C3%ADa_de_importaci%C3%B3n

Un saludo.

El mié., 30 ene. 2019 a las 16:53, Raul Vidal ()
escribió:

> El usuario es Raulvior.
>
>
> Sent from ProtonMail mobile
>
>
>
>  Original Message 
> On 30 gen. 2019, 10:44, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso < sanc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hola Raúl.
>
> Necesitas permiso para crear proyectos en el gestor de tareas. Dime tú
> usuario y te doy el permiso.
>
> Un saludo.
>
> El mié., 30 ene. 2019 2:03, Raul Vidal via Talk-es <
> talk-es@openstreetmap.org> escribió:
>
>> Hola,
>> He estado importando edificios de catastro así como direcciones de dicho
>> municipio y añadiendo contenido mediante exploración en in-situ.
>>
>> He visto que recientemente se ha creado un nuevo programa escrito en
>> Python que utiliza otros archivos de catastro (catatom2osm) y que se debe
>> registrar un proyecto para cada municipio y/o barrio en el Gestor de Tareas.
>>
>> El caso es que en la página del Gestor de Tareas no me aparece la opción
>> de crear un proyecto. ¿Me falta algo para activar dicha opción?
>>
>> Gracias.
>>
>>
>> Sent with ProtonMail  Secure Email.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-es mailing list
>> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>>
> --
> Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso - Sanchi
> Blog http://jorgesanz.es/
>
> --
Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso - Sanchi
Blog http://jorgesanz.es/
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

[Colin Smale]

I also have a couple of observations about these changes. 

1) Sometimes an admin_centre is being added to a boundary=political
(e.g. parliamentary constituencies, electoral wards). I am not sure this
is appropriate. 

2) There are multiple definitions of "town", and I don't know which
definition Gregory is using here for place=town. A parish council can
simply call itself a town council if it so resolves. This is independent
of other definitions of "town" based on population, market charter,
letters patent etc. 

3) Unparished areas are recorded and numbered in the governments GSS
coding system (codes start with E43). Maybe we should follow their level
of (dis)aggregation w.r.t. multiple contiguous parishes? Do they
possibly qualify as statistical areas?

Colin 

On 2019-01-30 18:01, Will Phillips wrote:

> I've already raised concerns I have in a changeset comment about these edits 
> adding admin_level=10 administrative boundary relations for voids between 
> civil parishes. They are tagged with designation=non-civil_parish. This has 
> been discussed on this list previously. My main objection is that these areas 
> aren't really administrative entities at all. Gregory correctly points out 
> they are sometimes used for statistical purposes, but I don't think that 
> justifies tagging them as administrative.
> 
> Another concern is that these admin_level=10 voids often include several 
> former civil parishes, so they cover a wider area than the name given to them 
> suggests. An example is Beeston: 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9246079
> This new relation covers five former civil parishes (Attenborough, Beeston, 
> Bramcote, Chilwell and Toton) and so includes a wider area than what is 
> usually considered to be Beeston. If Beeston is mapped as an area I think it 
> would be better to use something closer to the area of the former civil 
> parish.
> 
> Gregory has already agreed to think about alternative tagging for this, but I 
> thought it was worth raising here, in case other people have any thoughts.
> 
> Cheers,
> Will
> 
> ___
> 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-cz] opět Prušánky

[Ladislav Láska]

Ahoj,

taky můžeme podat pomocnou ruku a nabídnout vlastní síly k verifikaci.
Já bych si asi nějaký večer našel na to prohlédnout pár changesetů a
zverifikovat je. Pokud jsou vyloženě mimo, nejspíš se to pozná rychle,
pokud jsou k věci, stojí za to se tomu pověnovat.

Teda očekávám, že na to HOT má nějaký verifikační nástroj, který změny
commitne nebo rejectne? Nikdy jsem s ním nepracoval :-)

On 1/30/2019 11:37, majka wrote:
> Já bych je místo na sandbox navedla na hotosm
> . Editovat by mohli “živá” data, má to ale
> výhodu toho, že - i když občas až někdy za rok či dva - ty editace bude
> kontrolovat nějaký validátor.
> Naprosto klidně by to mohl být ten jejich učitel, jen by se mu muselo
> chtít. Mělo by to i tu výhodu, že jedničku dotyčný nedostane za
> takovéhle zvěrstvo.
> 
> Majka
> 
> 
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 11:10, Jan Cibulka  > wrote:
> 
> Loni jsem mluvil přímo s tim odpovědnym učitelem a zástupkyní
> ředitele. Slíbili nápravu, nestalo se nic. Vzpomínam si, že jsme je
> odkazovali i na nějakej mapovací sandbox. Možná by pomohlo je
> důrazně odkázat znova a zároveň jim zabanovat IP školy pro editaci.
> Ani by to nebylo třeba na celej rok, jen na ty dny, kdy se to tam
> obvykle dle osnov (já vim, RVP) učí ;)
> 
> On 30.01.2019 10:55, Tom Ka wrote:
>> Byla vlastně někdy z Prusanek ze skoly nejaka reakce, nebo jsou to
>> mrtvi brouci? Vzhledem k tomu, ze je to porad dokola, mozna by zase
>> stalo za to, se tomu nejak venovat. Muzeme jim napsat (vyhruzny :-D)
>> mail/dopis za spolek.
>>
>> tom.k
>>
>> st 30. 1. 2019 v 10:50 odesílatel Marián Kyral  
>>  napsal:
>>> -- Původní e-mail --
>>> Od: Milan Cerny  
>>> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic  
>>> 
>>> Datum: 29. 1. 2019 14:50:58
>>> Předmět: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
>>>
>>> V Prušánkách se dnes opět vyučovalo mapování. Tentokrát bylo asi 
>>> součástí zadání "mapujte raději někde dál" :-)
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738378
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738494
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738537
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nebyl jsem si jistý, ale zřejmě máš pravdu. terezameclova se na tamní 
>>> škole nachází 
>>> https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-rok-201819/.
>>>  Navíc v Prušánkách začala.
>>>
>>>
>>> Blbé je, že achavi nemá na ty jejich changesety dostatek paměti :-(
>>>
>>> Marián
>>> ___
>>> talk-cz mailing list
>>> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>> ___
>> talk-cz mailing list
>> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
> -- 
> S pozdravem
> 
> Jan Cibulka
> tel.: +420 776 307 158
> datastory.cz 
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
> 
> 
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
> 

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

Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

[Caio Dias]

Por favor, gostaria de sair da lista do osm. Alguém pode me ajudar?


Em qua, 30 de jan de 2019 às 15:27, Thierry Jean 
escreveu:

> Alexandre,
>
> Que legal que você identificou isto e está na própria cidade de Belo
> Horizonte.
>
> Gostaria de apresentar você para Karla Borges, Superintendente da área de
> Geo da Prodabel (Prefeitura de BH). Encontrei a Karla uma primeira vez no
> evento MundoGeo, em Maio, e em Novembro, no evento sobre os 10 anos da INDE
> que aconteceu no RJ (SBIDE). Eles estão interessados em se envolver mais
> com o OSM. Até troquei um WhatsApp com Karla, esta segunda-feira.
>
> Passe-me seu celular. Vamos conversar e alinhar.
>
> Abs,
>
> Thierry Jean
> M. +55 11 99607 1319
>
>
>
> --
> *De:* Sérgio V. 
> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 09:20
> *Para:* Alexandre Oliveira; OpenStreetMap no Brasil
> *Assunto:* Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>
> Bom dia Alexandre.
> Algumas considerações que creio podem ajudar:
> 1- nas fotos seria útil manter a escala gráfica do JOSM, para poder
> avaliar o quanto é a diferença; não me pareceu muito mais desalinhadas do
> que o comumente observado em outros materiais de OSM e prefeituras; sempre
> existe algum desalinhamento entre materiais de fontes diversas, feitos
> sobre imagens diversas;
> 2-o fato de ser WGS84 no OSM e SIRGAS2000 na prefeitura não deve ser em si
> causa de alguma diferença, pois ambos são praticamente idênticos, o
> SIRGAS2000 foi uma padronização para ajustar ao padrão WGS84; a causa
> principal de diferenças costuma ser o fato de que o que é mapeado no OSM
> é sobretudo sobre imagens (como BING principalmente), estas sim podem ter
> desalinhamentos, sobretudo no passado;
> 3-para saber qual dos 2 está mais alinhado, a melhor forma é comparar com
> traçados de GPS, ou com elementos de coordenadas exatas, como marcos
> geodésicos que possam ser visíveis em imagens. Com os GPS do OSM pode fazer
> no JOSM mesmo.
> 4-como exemplo, em Porto Alegre quando importei os prédios da prefeitura
> em 2016, verifiquei um deslocamento médio de 6m para NE, um pouco variável
> em regiões diversas do município; confirmou comparando com os marcos
> geodésicos visíveis de coordenadas exatas oficiais; aí procedi com um
> realinhamento manual da cidade, rua por rua, onde mais necessário; sem
> ainda importar os prédios; deslocamentos menores que 50% da largura da rua
> não são muito significativos (se a rua tem 8m, 4m de deslocamento do eixo
> permanece dentro);
> 5-importante é não ter vias cortando outras coisas, como prédios.
> Att.,
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
>
> --
> *De:* Alexandre Oliveira 
> *Enviado:* quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 02:31
> *Para:* talk-br
> *Assunto:* [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH
>
> Bom dia (ou boa noite?),
>
> Estava fuçando o site da prefeitura de Belo Horizonte procurando mapas
> e outras coisas que poderiam auxiliar no mapeamento da cidade e
> descobri que existem camadas georreferenciadas disponíveis no site
> deles.
>
> Baixei as camadas e abri no JOSM. Percebi, comparando a região do
> bairro Pampulha, que há um desalinhamento entre os dados do OSM e da
> PBH, conforme escrito na wiki[1].
>
> Procurei e achei um link[2] de uma discussão na lista em inglês do OSM
> de alguém com o mesmo problema de desalinhamento, e o que o pessoal
> recomendou pra ele foi uma linha de código para ser passada ao ogr2osm
> para fazer a correção necessária.
>
> Porém, ao consultar a wiki[3], descobri que o formato utilizado pelo
> OSM (WGS84) é praticamente o mesmo utilizado nas camadas da PBH, que
> são SIRGAS2000. Só que não é o que eu vi ao importar as camadas no
> JOSM([4] e [5]).
>
> Alguém tem alguma ideia do que pode ser feito? Até agora percebi que
> tem algumas delimitações de bairros desalinhadas e as vias estão
> desalinhadas também.
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_endere%C3%A7os_do_Brasil
> [2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-May/050065.html
> [3]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_Redes_Geod%C3%A9sicas_do_IBGE
> "Sobre as referências (CRS) dos dados do IBGE"
> [4] https://i.imgur.com/XoSqalT.png
> [5] https://i.imgur.com/bOYGN8G.png (o traço cinza é o da camada da PBH)
>
> ___
> 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
>


-- 
Caio Nunes de Albuquerque Dias
Geógrafo
Crea - 159749 D/MG
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

[Thierry Jean]

Alexandre,

Que legal que você identificou isto e está na própria cidade de Belo Horizonte.

Gostaria de apresentar você para Karla Borges, Superintendente da área de Geo 
da Prodabel (Prefeitura de BH). Encontrei a Karla uma primeira vez no evento 
MundoGeo, em Maio, e em Novembro, no evento sobre os 10 anos da INDE que 
aconteceu no RJ (SBIDE). Eles estão interessados em se envolver mais com o OSM. 
Até troquei um WhatsApp com Karla, esta segunda-feira.

Passe-me seu celular. Vamos conversar e alinhar.

Abs,

Thierry Jean
M. +55 11 99607 1319




De: Sérgio V. 
Enviado: quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 09:20
Para: Alexandre Oliveira; OpenStreetMap no Brasil
Assunto: Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

Bom dia Alexandre.
Algumas considerações que creio podem ajudar:
1- nas fotos seria útil manter a escala gráfica do JOSM, para poder avaliar o 
quanto é a diferença; não me pareceu muito mais desalinhadas do que o comumente 
observado em outros materiais de OSM e prefeituras; sempre existe algum 
desalinhamento entre materiais de fontes diversas, feitos sobre imagens 
diversas;
2-o fato de ser WGS84 no OSM e SIRGAS2000 na prefeitura não deve ser em si 
causa de alguma diferença, pois ambos são praticamente idênticos, o SIRGAS2000 
foi uma padronização para ajustar ao padrão WGS84; a causa principal de 
diferenças costuma ser o fato de que o que é mapeado no OSM é sobretudo sobre 
imagens (como BING principalmente), estas sim podem ter desalinhamentos, 
sobretudo no passado;
3-para saber qual dos 2 está mais alinhado, a melhor forma é comparar com 
traçados de GPS, ou com elementos de coordenadas exatas, como marcos geodésicos 
que possam ser visíveis em imagens. Com os GPS do OSM pode fazer no JOSM mesmo.
4-como exemplo, em Porto Alegre quando importei os prédios da prefeitura em 
2016, verifiquei um deslocamento médio de 6m para NE, um pouco variável em 
regiões diversas do município; confirmou comparando com os marcos geodésicos 
visíveis de coordenadas exatas oficiais; aí procedi com um realinhamento manual 
da cidade, rua por rua, onde mais necessário; sem ainda importar os prédios; 
deslocamentos menores que 50% da largura da rua não são muito significativos 
(se a rua tem 8m, 4m de deslocamento do eixo permanece dentro);
5-importante é não ter vias cortando outras coisas, como prédios.
Att.,


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs


De: Alexandre Oliveira 
Enviado: quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 02:31
Para: talk-br
Assunto: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

Bom dia (ou boa noite?),

Estava fuçando o site da prefeitura de Belo Horizonte procurando mapas
e outras coisas que poderiam auxiliar no mapeamento da cidade e
descobri que existem camadas georreferenciadas disponíveis no site
deles.

Baixei as camadas e abri no JOSM. Percebi, comparando a região do
bairro Pampulha, que há um desalinhamento entre os dados do OSM e da
PBH, conforme escrito na wiki[1].

Procurei e achei um link[2] de uma discussão na lista em inglês do OSM
de alguém com o mesmo problema de desalinhamento, e o que o pessoal
recomendou pra ele foi uma linha de código para ser passada ao ogr2osm
para fazer a correção necessária.

Porém, ao consultar a wiki[3], descobri que o formato utilizado pelo
OSM (WGS84) é praticamente o mesmo utilizado nas camadas da PBH, que
são SIRGAS2000. Só que não é o que eu vi ao importar as camadas no
JOSM([4] e [5]).

Alguém tem alguma ideia do que pode ser feito? Até agora percebi que
tem algumas delimitações de bairros desalinhadas e as vias estão
desalinhadas também.

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_endere%C3%A7os_do_Brasil
[2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-May/050065.html
[3] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_Redes_Geod%C3%A9sicas_do_IBGE
"Sobre as referências (CRS) dos dados do IBGE"
[4] https://i.imgur.com/XoSqalT.png
[5] https://i.imgur.com/bOYGN8G.png (o traço cinza é o da camada da PBH)

___
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

[OSM-talk-fr] Idées rendu des mers

[Adrien Grellier]

Bonjour,

En ce moment je m'intéresse pas mal aux mers et océans, et OpenStreetMap
me semble plutôt mauvais sur les rendus à faible zoom.

Voici par exemple 3 rendus différents de l'Atlantique Nord :

– OpenStreetMap : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=4/57.40/-17.58
– Rendu OSM-FR :
http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=4=59.05751=-18.29251=BFF
– carte du SHOM :
https://data.shom.fr/#001=eyJjIjpbLTE4NTczMjMuMTUyMjg4MDcwNCw3NzE1Njc2LjEyNDE1OTkxNV0sInoiOjQsInIiOjAsImwiOlt7InR5cGUiOiJJTlRFUk5BTF9MQVlFUiIsImlkZW50aWZpZXIiOiJSQVNURVJfTUFSSU5FXzM4NTdfV01UUyIsIm9wYWNpdHkiOjEsInZpc2liaWxpdHkiOnRydWV9LHsidHlwZSI6IklOVEVSTkFMX0xBWUVSIiwiaWRlbnRpZmllciI6IkZEQ19HRUJDT19QWVItUE5HXzM4NTdfV01UUyIsIm9wYWNpdHkiOjEsInZpc2liaWxpdHkiOnRydWV9XX0=
(désolé pour le lien…)

La carte OpenStreetMap est totalement indigente : Aucune mers
n'apparaît, les principales îles n'ont plus (Féroé, Orcades,
Terre-Neuves, etc.), seuls les pays apparaissent, mais dans la langue du
pays. Une petite exception : le golfe de Gascogne, qui apparaît
bizarrement sous deux noms. Impossible en l'état de se servir de ce
rendu comme planisphère !

Le rendu français est nettement mieux : les îles apparaissent
clairement, les noms sont traduits en français, mais les mers n'y sont
pas. Bizarrement la situation s'inverse dans le nord du Canada : OSM est
à mon sens nettement plus lisible que OSM-FR, les grosses îles
apparaissant de manière immédiate.

Enfin la carte du SHOM est nettement plus avancée, puisque tout apparaît
clairement : détroit du Danemark, Mer Celtique, etc.


Comment faire pour améliorer le rendu des mers ? Est-ce un problème de
données ? Par exemple la mer Celtique est présente dans OSM avec un seul
point. Un multi-polygone serait-il plus adapté ? Ou bien est-ce un
problème du système de rendu dans les faibles zoom ?

J'aimerais bien pouvoir améliore la situation, mais je ne sais pas
vraiment quoi faire… si vous avez des suggestions ça m'intéresse !!


Bonne journée

Adrien




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

Re: [Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

[Will Phillips]

I've already raised concerns I have in a changeset comment about these 
edits adding admin_level=10 administrative boundary relations for voids 
between civil parishes. They are tagged with 
designation=non-civil_parish. This has been discussed on this list 
previously. My main objection is that these areas aren't really 
administrative entities at all. Gregory correctly points out they are 
sometimes used for statistical purposes, but I don't think that 
justifies tagging them as administrative.


Another concern is that these admin_level=10 voids often include several 
former civil parishes, so they cover a wider area than the name given to 
them suggests. An example is Beeston: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9246079
This new relation covers five former civil parishes (Attenborough, 
Beeston, Bramcote, Chilwell and Toton) and so includes a wider area than 
what is usually considered to be Beeston. If Beeston is mapped as an 
area I think it would be better to use something closer to the area of 
the former civil parish.


Gregory has already agreed to think about alternative tagging for this, 
but I thought it was worth raising here, in case other people have any 
thoughts.


Cheers,
Will

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Strang (non-)rendering issue

[Tom Hughes]

On 30/01/2019 16:22, Maarten Deen wrote:

Are there different rendering servers for those regions? I know that 
there are different tileservers, but I didn't know the rendering was 
also different. Is that not really inefficient to have two servers 
render the same tiles?


There are currently five render servers.

Tom

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

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

[OSM-talk] Strang (non-)rendering issue

[Maarten Deen]

Yesterday I made some changes around the railway station in Drauffelt: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.01668/6.00843
I added some roads in the parking lot and a pick-nick site between the 
Clerve and the Irbich.


This morning at work I checked how it looked and it was rendered. Now 
when I look at home it is not rendered, at any zoom level. Not with 
refreshing, not with using a different browser.


The biggest difference between home and work is that home is connected 
to a dutch provider and work is connected to a UK provider on a US 
IP-address.
Are there different rendering servers for those regions? I know that 
there are different tileservers, but I didn't know the rendering was 
also different. Is that not really inefficient to have two servers 
render the same tiles?


Regards,
Maarten

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

[Tom Hughes]

On 30/01/2019 15:08, Gregory Marler wrote:

A small amount of my time has been funded by Open Cage Data to check 
towns in the UK. Ideally it should be possible to get a town as both a 
node and a relation.


The fundamental problem with this, as Jerry has just said, is that
many towns in the UK have no defined boundary.

Even where there is an administrative entity there is no guarantee
that it's boundary equates to what most people would view as the
boundary of the town - it may under or overstate things.

Equally there is no clear way of even determining what is, or is
not, a town. Just a variety of rules-of-thumb...

This has all been discussed a number of times before ;-)

If you want a challenge look at my local area - it's unparished
so the smallest administrative unit is the district council:

  https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2677978

Looking at the builtup area on the right hand side along the Lea
Valley how many places are there, what are their boundaries, and
what type is each of them ;-)

Hilariously in doing that I've just noticed a town (well that's
what wikipedia says it is anyway) that is completely missing
from OpenStreetMap... Waltham Cross should be somewhere below
Cheshunt and west of Waltham Abbey.

Tom

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

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

Re: [Talk-es] Proyecto importación catastro Sant Boi de Llobregat (08199)

[Raul Vidal via Talk-es]

El usuario es Raulvior.

Sent from ProtonMail mobile

 Original Message 
On 30 gen. 2019, 10:44, Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso wrote:

> Hola Raúl.
>
> Necesitas permiso para crear proyectos en el gestor de tareas. Dime tú 
> usuario y te doy el permiso.
>
> Un saludo.
>
> El mié., 30 ene. 2019 2:03, Raul Vidal via Talk-es 
>  escribió:
>
>> Hola,
>> He estado importando edificios de catastro así como direcciones de dicho 
>> municipio y añadiendo contenido mediante exploración en in-situ.
>>
>> He visto que recientemente se ha creado un nuevo programa escrito en Python 
>> que utiliza otros archivos de catastro (catatom2osm) y que se debe registrar 
>> un proyecto para cada municipio y/o barrio en el Gestor de Tareas.
>>
>> El caso es que en la página del Gestor de Tareas no me aparece la opción de 
>> crear un proyecto. ¿Me falta algo para activar dicha opción?
>>
>> Gracias.
>>
>> Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-es mailing list
>> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
> --
>
> Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso - SanchiBlog http://jorgesanz.es/___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

[SK53]

A few points:

* I believe you should complete the relevant

organised edit page on the wiki.
* I think any use of admin_level=11 or indeed any use of admin_level at all
for un-parished areas needed to be discussed up front. Places like
Mansfield, Maidenhead etc  simply do not exist as administrative entities.
To represent them as such is erroneous.
* In the case of the two Ashfields and Mablethorpe/Sutton-on-the-Sea there
is a single unparished area so how can someone verify the boundary?
* Saxilby ought to be a village
* Sutton-on-the-Sea probably ought to be a village; not sure about
Mablethorpe.
* Banstead as a town is rather marginal. Unlike Epsom and Ewell which were
towns before London grew, Banstead is more a London exurb. I'd guess
village or suburb may be just as appropriate.
* I'd have anticipated Dorking's W boundary to be pretty much follow the
line of the former Urban District which wiggles about more than the one you
mapped.
* I don't think place=town should be duplicated on the node and the
relation, one or the other (it makes for awkward processing for what should
be very simple queries: how many towns in East Anglia?). I do realise that
associating a town with a boundary is the objective, but I believe there
should be a way which doesn't break "one feature one element".

Regards,

Jerry

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 15:09, Gregory Marler  wrote:

> You might spot my recent map edits with a changeset such as...
> "*Checking data and relations for towns in Lincolnshire. This changeset
> forms part of paid work to improve OpenStreetMap data. #UKTownCheck
> #OrganisedEditing*"
>
> A small amount of my time has been funded by Open Cage Data to check towns
> in the UK. Ideally it should be possible to get a town as both a node and a
> relation.
> I've been going through a list of towns where this isn't the case. I've
> been doing a single county per changeset to avoid it being a mess to follow.
>
>
> In a lot of cases the towns nicely relate to parish wards
> (admin_level=10). Sometimes I just need to add the town node as an
> admin_centre member of the relation. Other times the "outer" parts of the
> relation are not in order.
> In some cases, the town has a distinct area but not a simple parish ward
> (the previous parish might have ceased to be). I have created some
> relations with boundary=place, place=town, admin_level=11.
> I've even found some town nodes that are complete tagging for the
> renderer. They should have been something like place=suburb.
>
>
> So far it's been very insightful to do this for several areas around the
> UK. I don't think I'll manage the whole country within the funded time. I
> intended to properly report on what i've done and what I've found.
>
> Gregory.
>
>
> --
> Gregory Marler
> ___
> 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] Checking UK Towns

[Gregory Marler]

You might spot my recent map edits with a changeset such as...
"*Checking data and relations for towns in Lincolnshire. This changeset
forms part of paid work to improve OpenStreetMap data. #UKTownCheck
#OrganisedEditing*"

A small amount of my time has been funded by Open Cage Data to check towns
in the UK. Ideally it should be possible to get a town as both a node and a
relation.
I've been going through a list of towns where this isn't the case. I've
been doing a single county per changeset to avoid it being a mess to follow.


In a lot of cases the towns nicely relate to parish wards (admin_level=10).
Sometimes I just need to add the town node as an admin_centre member of the
relation. Other times the "outer" parts of the relation are not in order.
In some cases, the town has a distinct area but not a simple parish ward
(the previous parish might have ceased to be). I have created some
relations with boundary=place, place=town, admin_level=11.
I've even found some town nodes that are complete tagging for the renderer.
They should have been something like place=suburb.


So far it's been very insightful to do this for several areas around the
UK. I don't think I'll manage the whole country within the funded time. I
intended to properly report on what i've done and what I've found.

Gregory.


-- 
Gregory Marler
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Status GRB-import tool ?

[Glenn Plas]

Goeie suggesties ivm discardable tags.

De fout zal zeker niet in JOSM zitten, die tags worden geexporteerd. 
Het is een kwestie van :  wil je ze zien of niet bij export ?

De status gegeven door Marc is de juiste, idd aan het kijken hoe we het
gebouwenregister als enige adres referentie kunnen nemen zonder het
verliezen van de link naar GRB objecten, daar zit de moeilijkheid erin

Glenn

On 24-01-19 20:37, Marc Gemis wrote:
> dat is inderdaad een van de workarounds, maar voor de een of andere
> reden bleef JOSM bij mij toch nog die tags doorsturen. Ik zal wel iets
> verkeerd gedaan hebben.
>
> m.
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 8:33 PM Jo  wrote:
>> Ik voel me ook niet geroepen om die rol op me te nemen, maar ik heb wel een 
>> suggestie voor tags die niet mogen worden doorgestuurd.
>>
>> JOSM heeft daar ondersteuning voor.
>>
>> Wat ik gewoonlijk doe is zulke tags created_by of odbl noemen, aangezien die 
>> al in de lijst staan.
>>
>> De andere mogelijkheid is een key (tags.discardable) in de instellingen 
>> aanpassen en dan worden ze vanzelf weggegooid voordat er data naar de server 
>> gaat.
>>
>> mvg,
>>
>> Jo
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 8:13 PM Marc Gemis  wrote:
>>> Hallo Denis,
>>>
>>> Ik had gehoopt dat iemand die dichter betrokken is bij de ontwikkeling
>>> tijd zou hebben om je te beantwoorden, maar ze hebben het misschien te
>>> druk momenteel.
>>> Ik zal dan maar proberen te de situatie te schetsen:
>>>
>>> - de import mailing list had niet echt bezwaren, dus die hindernis is 
>>> genomen
>>> - de documentatie is volgens mij zo goed als af. De laatste beetjes
>>> zouden tijdens een soort van kick-off meeting kunnen aangevuld worden
>>> - de tool heeft nog 2 problem (voor zover ik weet)
>>> * er komen nog extra tags mee die je niet mag uploaden. Daar bestaat
>>> wel een eenvoudige workaround voor.
>>> * niet alle adressen zijn correct. Vooral bij appartementsgebouwen met
>>> meerdere huisnummers, zou het beter kunnen. Stel je hebt een gebouw
>>> met 3 ingangen en huisnummers 15, 16 en 17.
>>> Nu zal je 3 gebouwen met nummer 15-17 krijgen. Er is een mogelijkheid
>>> om dit te verbeteren door een extra databank te laden in de tool. Dit
>>> vraagt natuurlijk ontwikkelingstijd.
>>>
>>> Ik begrijp Glenn wel dat die wijziging echt noodzakelijk is voordat de
>>> tool beschikbaar kan gemaakt worden. Als iemand die altijd klaagt over
>>> foutieve data van externe bronnen, juich ik dat alleen maar toe.
>>>
>>> Ik weet echter niet of het enkel aan ons is om daarover te beslissen.
>>>
>>> Momenteel werkt ook Lodde1949 rustig verder aan het intekenen van
>>> gebouwen adhv de GRB achtergrond en met de oude adres import tool. Dus
>>> in een groot deel van de provincie Antwerpen is de tool al niet meer
>>> zo relevant.
>>>
>>> Misschien moet er gewoon iemand een datum prikken, een zaal met
>>> internet verbinding voorzien, iemand uitnodigen die de nodige
>>> toelichtingen kan geven en de "import" officieel starten.
>>> Het is duidelijk dat iemand de "projectleiderrol" op zich zal moeten
>>> nemen om alles naast de ontwikkeling van de tool te organiseren en
>>> daar dan ook voldoende tijd in stoppen.
>>>
>>> mvg
>>>
>>> m.
>>>
>>> p.s. Ik wil hier niemand met de vinger wijzen, we zijn allemaal
>>> vrijwillers met beperkte tijd. Ikzelf heb ook geen tijd noch interesse
>>> om deze rol op te nemen.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 6:02 PM Denis Verheyden  wrote:
 Dag iedereen,

 Graag wou ik nog eens polsen wat de status is van de GRB-import tool. 
 Ergens in 2017 is de publieke versie uitgezet omdat veel mensen hiermee 
 onbedoelde of verkeerde wijzigingen hebben gedaan.

 Voor mij is deze tool echter het middel waarop ik wacht om nieuwe of 
 aangepaste gebouwen toe te voegen/wijzigen in OSM. Het heeft geen zin nu 
 gebouwen te tracen als we ze later opnieuw moeten vervangen door de 
 "officiële" geometrie van A(G)IV. Tot dan beperk ik mij enkel tot 
 toevoegen van nodes of features niet gerelateerd aan gebouwen.

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



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

[Talk-br] Obtida numeração predial da Prefeitura de Porto Alegre

[Sérgio V .]

Prezados/as,

Agradecendo inicialmente sobretudo ao Thierry Jean, que pelos contatos em 
eventos conseguiu indicar as pessoas responsáveis nos órgãos públicos, aqui no 
caso no setor de Coordenação de Geoprocessamento, da Secretaria Municipal da 
Fazenda / Prefeitura Municipal de Porto Alegre.
Ajudam muito estes contatos para auxiliar aos respectivos organismos conhecerem 
a utilidade e importância de disponibilizarem os dados ao OSM, bem como 
auxiliar a nós demais membros da comunidade no caminho dos processos para 
obtê-los efetivamente, nas variadas dimensões de colaboração ao OSM.

Sendo assim, conforme indicado, protocolei em 09/01/2019 abertura de Processo 
Administrativo comum, como pessoa física, na Prefeitura Municipal de Porto 
Alegre.
Em despacho final hoje 30/01/2019 (20 dias ao todo), a Prefeitura autorizou o 
uso do material nas condições requeridas do OSM, e liberou o material para 
download com link temporário no processo.
Baixado o material. Veio compactado em .7z 88,0MB.
Descompactado, são 515 MB em 01 arquivo .mdb, contendo 16 planilhas.
Pelo que vi inicialmente, georreferenciadas em coordenadas UTM metros (deve 
estar em CRS TMPOA, padrão da Prefeitura de Porto Alegre dentro do sistema 
SIRGAS2000).
A examinar mais.

Próximos passos são, a princípio:
-examinar e organizar o material, preparando em proposta de importação segundo 
padrões do OSM;
-realizar os testes necessários e examinar compatibilização com o existente no 
OSM;
-abrir uma página wiki própria (sugestão de nome e indexação?) contendo a 
documentação com comprovação de liberação da Prefeitura, e demais descrições 
técnicas do material e da proposta de importação, pubicando assim para 
apreciação da comunidade OSM no Brasil;
-obter aprovação formal da comunidade OSM no Brasil;
-proceder à execução da importação;
-eventuais outras etapas que se mostrarem necessárias.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [talk-cz] WeeklyOSM CZ 444

[majka]

Díky za Weekly.

"zákaz mapování lesů" v části OSM v médiích byl zajímavý.
Hledala jsem, jestli jsou ta vyjádření jen nějakou novinářskou zkratkou
nebo zkreslením. Bohužel to vypadá, že dotyčný západní Němec co ho ty
noviny citují to myslí vážně. Našla jsem vyjádření z konce roku 2015,
kterým z lesa "vyhání" mapování podle zákona o ochraně přírody. Netuším,
jestli si uvědomuje, že jím požadovaným zákazem mapování nemovitostí "v
cizím majetku", což vypadá na jeho poslední nápad, by v podstatě
zlikvidoval veškeré mapování, protože to se nikdy dříve nedělalo jinak.
Počítám, že tedy jde příkladem a nepoužívá papírové mapy, mapové aplikace
ani navigaci.

Ale nápad, vytvořit úřad pro to, aby postihoval "nelegální" mapování mě
utěšuje v tom, že lidi jsou všude stejní a blbé nápady se rodí všude
stejně.
Představa, jak by na jedné straně taková mapa vypadala (zmapování "jen toho
svého") nebo jak se k tištěné mapě přidává nejen index ulic, ale ke každé
přihazuje i několikasvazková kniha, kde budou kopie souhlasu všech majitelů
každého zmapovaného prvku je docela zajímavá.

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

Re: [talk-cz] WeeklyOSM CZ 444

[majka]

Otázka spíš je, kde ty budovy jsou. České Budějovice, Tábor, Plzeň - nikde
nic. Že bych záviděla, to ani moc ne, proti OSM je to jednoznačně krok zpět.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 13:21, Jakub Jelen  wrote:

> Doporucuji prohlednout Apple Mapy v DuckDuckGo. Bylo by zajimave toto
> pridat do porovnani map, protoze doted jsme mohli majitelum jablecnych
> zarizeni jejich mapy pouze zavidet.
>
> Nektera mista z pohledu budov jsou klidne ~10 let zpet, nekde chybi uplne.
> Na druhou stranu silnicni sit vypada docela aktualizovana ci importovana
> vcetne poslednich zmen. V nekterych mistech se tyto dve "vrstvy"
> prekryvaji, takze clovek muze narazit na domy pres silnici coz nevypada
> uplne sikovne:
>
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[majka]

Další z tohohle ranku, opravdu editovali pod heslem "hlavně daleko":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738476
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738598

Momentálně str. 9 dotazu na osmcha

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

Re: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

[Sérgio V .]

Bom dia Alexandre.
Algumas considerações que creio podem ajudar:
1- nas fotos seria útil manter a escala gráfica do JOSM, para poder avaliar o 
quanto é a diferença; não me pareceu muito mais desalinhadas do que o comumente 
observado em outros materiais de OSM e prefeituras; sempre existe algum 
desalinhamento entre materiais de fontes diversas, feitos sobre imagens 
diversas;
2-o fato de ser WGS84 no OSM e SIRGAS2000 na prefeitura não deve ser em si 
causa de alguma diferença, pois ambos são praticamente idênticos, o SIRGAS2000 
foi uma padronização para ajustar ao padrão WGS84; a causa principal de 
diferenças costuma ser o fato de que o que é mapeado no OSM é sobretudo sobre 
imagens (como BING principalmente), estas sim podem ter desalinhamentos, 
sobretudo no passado;
3-para saber qual dos 2 está mais alinhado, a melhor forma é comparar com 
traçados de GPS, ou com elementos de coordenadas exatas, como marcos geodésicos 
que possam ser visíveis em imagens. Com os GPS do OSM pode fazer no JOSM mesmo.
4-como exemplo, em Porto Alegre quando importei os prédios da prefeitura em 
2016, verifiquei um deslocamento médio de 6m para NE, um pouco variável em 
regiões diversas do município; confirmou comparando com os marcos geodésicos 
visíveis de coordenadas exatas oficiais; aí procedi com um realinhamento manual 
da cidade, rua por rua, onde mais necessário; sem ainda importar os prédios; 
deslocamentos menores que 50% da largura da rua não são muito significativos 
(se a rua tem 8m, 4m de deslocamento do eixo permanece dentro);
5-importante é não ter vias cortando outras coisas, como prédios.
Att.,


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs


De: Alexandre Oliveira 
Enviado: quarta-feira, 30 de janeiro de 2019 02:31
Para: talk-br
Assunto: [Talk-br] Importação de shapefiles da PBH

Bom dia (ou boa noite?),

Estava fuçando o site da prefeitura de Belo Horizonte procurando mapas
e outras coisas que poderiam auxiliar no mapeamento da cidade e
descobri que existem camadas georreferenciadas disponíveis no site
deles.

Baixei as camadas e abri no JOSM. Percebi, comparando a região do
bairro Pampulha, que há um desalinhamento entre os dados do OSM e da
PBH, conforme escrito na wiki[1].

Procurei e achei um link[2] de uma discussão na lista em inglês do OSM
de alguém com o mesmo problema de desalinhamento, e o que o pessoal
recomendou pra ele foi uma linha de código para ser passada ao ogr2osm
para fazer a correção necessária.

Porém, ao consultar a wiki[3], descobri que o formato utilizado pelo
OSM (WGS84) é praticamente o mesmo utilizado nas camadas da PBH, que
são SIRGAS2000. Só que não é o que eu vi ao importar as camadas no
JOSM([4] e [5]).

Alguém tem alguma ideia do que pode ser feito? Até agora percebi que
tem algumas delimitações de bairros desalinhadas e as vias estão
desalinhadas também.

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_endere%C3%A7os_do_Brasil
[2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-May/050065.html
[3] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Importa%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_Redes_Geod%C3%A9sicas_do_IBGE
"Sobre as referências (CRS) dos dados do IBGE"
[4] https://i.imgur.com/XoSqalT.png
[5] https://i.imgur.com/bOYGN8G.png (o traço cinza é o da camada da PBH)

___
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-cz] opět Prušánky

[majka]

Ne, podívej se na komentář
. Ty změny jsou všechny
uzavřené 13:15-13:20, možná by se to podle toho dalo dohledat - uživatelé
registrovaní 22.01.2019 + changeset v téhle době. Příklad uživatele kukoslav
 - jednoznačně je tohle ze školy,
podle toho času se dá dohledat i vyučovací hodina (netuším, jestli iD
uzavírá všechny changesety, nebo to vypršelo), ti další je víceméně totéž.

Majka

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 11:59, Tom Ka tomas.kaspa...@gmail.com
 wrote:

Tak trochu bych cekal, ze to co my vidime jsou veci, co si dani
> studenti zkousi mimo skolu a dohled ucitele, ale uvidime, kazdopadne
> upozornenim nic nezkazime.
>
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Ian Bennett]

Concur. Be ruthless. These people are akin to nuisance callers and should be 
publicly flogged.

Ian


On 30/1/19 7:22 pm, nwastra wrote:
We seem to be getting a lot of business edits in this form lately with only a name and description 
tag, often with address details or just spam in the description tag.
As is usual with spam like business edits, they use a throw away email to make the edit and you 
never get a response from any query.

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372
I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.


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



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

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[Tom Ka]

Tak trochu bych cekal, ze to co my vidime jsou veci, co si dani
studenti zkousi mimo skolu a dohled ucitele, ale uvidime, kazdopadne
upozornenim nic nezkazime.

Bye

st 30. 1. 2019 v 11:38 odesílatel majka  napsal:
>
> Já bych je místo na sandbox navedla na hotosm. Editovat by mohli “živá” data, 
> má to ale výhodu toho, že - i když občas až někdy za rok či dva - ty editace 
> bude kontrolovat nějaký validátor.
> Naprosto klidně by to mohl být ten jejich učitel, jen by se mu muselo chtít. 
> Mělo by to i tu výhodu, že jedničku dotyčný nedostane za takovéhle zvěrstvo.
>
> Majka
>
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 11:10, Jan Cibulka  wrote:
>>
>> Loni jsem mluvil přímo s tim odpovědnym učitelem a zástupkyní ředitele. 
>> Slíbili nápravu, nestalo se nic. Vzpomínam si, že jsme je odkazovali i na 
>> nějakej mapovací sandbox. Možná by pomohlo je důrazně odkázat znova a 
>> zároveň jim zabanovat IP školy pro editaci. Ani by to nebylo třeba na celej 
>> rok, jen na ty dny, kdy se to tam obvykle dle osnov (já vim, RVP) učí ;)
>>
>> On 30.01.2019 10:55, Tom Ka wrote:
>>
>> Byla vlastně někdy z Prusanek ze skoly nejaka reakce, nebo jsou to
>> mrtvi brouci? Vzhledem k tomu, ze je to porad dokola, mozna by zase
>> stalo za to, se tomu nejak venovat. Muzeme jim napsat (vyhruzny :-D)
>> mail/dopis za spolek.
>>
>> tom.k
>>
>> st 30. 1. 2019 v 10:50 odesílatel Marián Kyral  napsal:
>>
>> -- Původní e-mail --
>> Od: Milan Cerny 
>> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
>> Datum: 29. 1. 2019 14:50:58
>> Předmět: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
>>
>> V Prušánkách se dnes opět vyučovalo mapování. Tentokrát bylo asi součástí 
>> zadání "mapujte raději někde dál" :-)
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738378
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738494
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738537
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nebyl jsem si jistý, ale zřejmě máš pravdu. terezameclova se na tamní škole 
>> nachází 
>> https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-rok-201819/.
>>  Navíc v Prušánkách začala.
>>
>>
>> Blbé je, že achavi nemá na ty jejich changesety dostatek paměti :-(
>>
>> Marián
>> ___
>> talk-cz mailing list
>> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>>
>> ___
>> talk-cz mailing list
>> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>>
>> --
>> S pozdravem
>>
>> Jan Cibulka
>> tel.: +420 776 307 158
>> datastory.cz
>> ___
>> talk-cz mailing list
>> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

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

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[majka]

Já bych je místo na sandbox navedla na hotosm .
Editovat by mohli “živá” data, má to ale výhodu toho, že - i když občas až
někdy za rok či dva - ty editace bude kontrolovat nějaký validátor.
Naprosto klidně by to mohl být ten jejich učitel, jen by se mu muselo
chtít. Mělo by to i tu výhodu, že jedničku dotyčný nedostane za takovéhle
zvěrstvo.

Majka

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 11:10, Jan Cibulka  wrote:

> Loni jsem mluvil přímo s tim odpovědnym učitelem a zástupkyní ředitele.
> Slíbili nápravu, nestalo se nic. Vzpomínam si, že jsme je odkazovali i na
> nějakej mapovací sandbox. Možná by pomohlo je důrazně odkázat znova a
> zároveň jim zabanovat IP školy pro editaci. Ani by to nebylo třeba na celej
> rok, jen na ty dny, kdy se to tam obvykle dle osnov (já vim, RVP) učí ;)
> On 30.01.2019 10:55, Tom Ka wrote:
>
> Byla vlastně někdy z Prusanek ze skoly nejaka reakce, nebo jsou to
> mrtvi brouci? Vzhledem k tomu, ze je to porad dokola, mozna by zase
> stalo za to, se tomu nejak venovat. Muzeme jim napsat (vyhruzny :-D)
> mail/dopis za spolek.
>
> tom.k
>
> st 30. 1. 2019 v 10:50 odesílatel Marián Kyral  
>  napsal:
>
> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Milan Cerny  
> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic  
> 
> Datum: 29. 1. 2019 14:50:58
> Předmět: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
>
> V Prušánkách se dnes opět vyučovalo mapování. Tentokrát bylo asi součástí 
> zadání "mapujte raději někde dál" :-)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738378https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738494https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738537
>
>
>
>
>
> Nebyl jsem si jistý, ale zřejmě máš pravdu. terezameclova se na tamní škole 
> nachází 
> https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-rok-201819/.
>  Navíc v Prušánkách začala.
>
>
> Blbé je, že achavi nemá na ty jejich changesety dostatek paměti :-(
>
> Marián
> ___
> talk-cz mailing 
> listtalk-cz@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-czhttps://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
> ___
> talk-cz mailing 
> listtalk-cz@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-czhttps://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
> --
> S pozdravem
>
> Jan Cibulka
> tel.: +420 776 307 158
> datastory.cz
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Andy Townsend]

On 30/01/2019 10:25, Andrew Harvey wrote:
I agree, unless they come to the table to discuss we should block as 
much as possible to limit their abuse of OSM.


On Wed., 30 Jan. 2019, 7:24 pm nwastra  wrote:


...




https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372
I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.



Hi,
I'd also press the "report" button on the user account in OSM (and 
mention there that you've already removed the data).  This should alert 
the admins to the spam user and (in case it gets bounced to the DWG for 
data tidying) alert us that you've already done that.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG).


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

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[Tom Ka]

IP se podle mne normalne nebanuje, jen ucty. Klidne se zkusim s nima zase
pobavit. Honzo, muzu poprosit soukrome jestli mas nejake kontakty, pripade
dalsi detaily at se na to muzu odkazat?

Diky tom.k

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019, 11:10 Jan Cibulka  Loni jsem mluvil přímo s tim odpovědnym učitelem a zástupkyní ředitele.
> Slíbili nápravu, nestalo se nic. Vzpomínam si, že jsme je odkazovali i na
> nějakej mapovací sandbox. Možná by pomohlo je důrazně odkázat znova a
> zároveň jim zabanovat IP školy pro editaci. Ani by to nebylo třeba na celej
> rok, jen na ty dny, kdy se to tam obvykle dle osnov (já vim, RVP) učí ;)
> On 30.01.2019 10:55, Tom Ka wrote:
>
> Byla vlastně někdy z Prusanek ze skoly nejaka reakce, nebo jsou to
> mrtvi brouci? Vzhledem k tomu, ze je to porad dokola, mozna by zase
> stalo za to, se tomu nejak venovat. Muzeme jim napsat (vyhruzny :-D)
> mail/dopis za spolek.
>
> tom.k
>
> st 30. 1. 2019 v 10:50 odesílatel Marián Kyral  
>  napsal:
>
>
>
> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Milan Cerny  
> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic  
> 
> Datum: 29. 1. 2019 14:50:58
> Předmět: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
>
> V Prušánkách se dnes opět vyučovalo mapování. Tentokrát bylo asi součástí 
> zadání "mapujte raději někde dál" :-)
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738378https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738494https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738537
>
>
>
>
>
> Nebyl jsem si jistý, ale zřejmě máš pravdu. terezameclova se na tamní škole 
> nachází 
> https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-rok-201819/.
>  Navíc v Prušánkách začala.
>
>
> Blbé je, že achavi nemá na ty jejich changesety dostatek paměti :-(
>
> Marián
> ___
> talk-cz mailing 
> listtalk-cz@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-czhttps://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
> ___
> talk-cz mailing 
> listtalk-cz@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-czhttps://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
> --
> S pozdravem
>
> Jan Cibulka
> tel.: +420 776 307 158
> datastory.cz
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Andrew Harvey]

I agree, unless they come to the table to discuss we should block as much
as possible to limit their abuse of OSM.

On Wed., 30 Jan. 2019, 7:24 pm nwastra  We seem to be getting a lot of business edits in this form lately with
> only a name and description tag, often with address details or just spam in
> the description tag.
> As is usual with spam like business edits, they use a throw away email to
> make the edit and you never get a response from any query.
> https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372
> I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[Jan Cibulka]

Loni jsem mluvil přímo s tim odpovědnym učitelem a zástupkyní ředitele. Slíbili 
nápravu, nestalo se nic. Vzpomínam si, že jsme je odkazovali i na nějakej 
mapovací sandbox. Možná by pomohlo je důrazně odkázat znova a zároveň jim 
zabanovat IP školy pro editaci. Ani by to nebylo třeba na celej rok, jen na ty 
dny, kdy se to tam obvykle dle osnov (já vim, RVP) učí ;)

On 30.01.2019 10:55, Tom Ka wrote:

> Byla vlastně někdy z Prusanek ze skoly nejaka reakce, nebo jsou to
> mrtvi brouci? Vzhledem k tomu, ze je to porad dokola, mozna by zase
> stalo za to, se tomu nejak venovat. Muzeme jim napsat (vyhruzny :-D)
> mail/dopis za spolek.
>
> tom.k
>
> st 30. 1. 2019 v 10:50 odesílatel Marián Kyral
> [](mailto:mky...@email.cz)
> napsal:
>
>> -- Původní e-mail --
>> Od: Milan Cerny
>> [](mailto:milan...@centrum.cz)
>> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic
>> [](mailto:talk-cz@openstreetmap.org)
>> Datum: 29. 1. 2019 14:50:58
>> Předmět: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
>>
>> V Prušánkách se dnes opět vyučovalo mapování. Tentokrát bylo asi součástí 
>> zadání "mapujte raději někde dál" :-)
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738378
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738494
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738537
>> Nebyl jsem si jistý, ale zřejmě máš pravdu. terezameclova se na tamní škole 
>> nachází
>> https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-rok-201819/
>> . Navíc v Prušánkách začala.
>>
>> Blbé je, že achavi nemá na ty jejich changesety dostatek paměti :-(
>>
>> Marián
>> ___
>> talk-cz mailing list
>> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>
>> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

--
S pozdravem

Jan Cibulka
tel.: +420 776 307 158
datastory.cz___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[Tom Ka]

Byla vlastně někdy z Prusanek ze skoly nejaka reakce, nebo jsou to
mrtvi brouci? Vzhledem k tomu, ze je to porad dokola, mozna by zase
stalo za to, se tomu nejak venovat. Muzeme jim napsat (vyhruzny :-D)
mail/dopis za spolek.

tom.k

st 30. 1. 2019 v 10:50 odesílatel Marián Kyral  napsal:
>
>
> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Milan Cerny 
> Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
> Datum: 29. 1. 2019 14:50:58
> Předmět: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
>
> V Prušánkách se dnes opět vyučovalo mapování. Tentokrát bylo asi součástí 
> zadání "mapujte raději někde dál" :-)
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738378
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738494
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738537
>
>
>
>
>
> Nebyl jsem si jistý, ale zřejmě máš pravdu. terezameclova se na tamní škole 
> nachází 
> https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-rok-201819/.
>  Navíc v Prušánkách začala.
>
>
> Blbé je, že achavi nemá na ty jejich changesety dostatek paměti :-(
>
> Marián
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

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

Re: [Talk-it] Amazon logistic contribuisce a OSM

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 30. Jan 2019, at 07:38, Aury88  wrote:
> 
> interessantissimo, non lo sapevo. Felice di sapere che anche amazon utilizza
> e sopratutto contribuisce ad osm



si, inizialmente c’erano dei problemi in Germania, c’è un thread nel forum (in 
tedesco), credo hanno migliorato per esempio creato 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Amazon_Logistics

questo è il thread 

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=63394

Hanno 

Ciao, Martin 


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

[talk-cz] WeeklyOSM CZ 444

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj, je dostupné vydání 444 týdeníku WeeklyOSM:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/cz/archives/11389

* Spolek OSM ČR má bankovní účet.
* Aktualizace kopie Strava heatmap ČR.
* Novinky vrstvy X na freemap.sk.
* Členové Nadace OSM z firem.
* Cyklo vybavení pro fotky Mappilary.
* Aktivní přispěvatelé OSM?
* OSM v Severní Korei.
* SwissOSM a vzdělávání.
* Novinky stylu Carto.
* Zákaz mapování lesů?
* Železniční atlas Adlestrop.
* Navigace Google v Palestině.
* Problémy starších GPS zařízení.

Pěkné počtení ...

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

Re: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky

[Marián Kyral]

-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Milan Cerny 
Komu: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Datum: 29. 1. 2019 14:50:58
Předmět: [talk-cz] opět Prušánky
"V Prušánkách se dnes opět vyučovalo mapování. Tentokrát bylo asi součástí
zadání "mapujte raději někde dál" :-)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738378
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738494
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66738537
"






 

Nebyl jsem si jistý, ale zřejmě máš pravdu. terezameclova
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/terezameclova) se na tamní škole nachází
https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-
rok-201819/
(https://www.zakladniskolaprusanky.cz/skola/ekoskola/260.clenove-ekotymu-pro-rok-201819/)
. Navíc v Prušánkách začala.




Blbé je, že achavi nemá na ty jejich changesety dostatek paměti :-(



Marián___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-es] Proyecto importación catastro Sant Boi de Llobregat (08199)

[Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso]

Hola Raúl.

Necesitas permiso para crear proyectos en el gestor de tareas. Dime tú
usuario y te doy el permiso.

Un saludo.

El mié., 30 ene. 2019 2:03, Raul Vidal via Talk-es <
talk-es@openstreetmap.org> escribió:

> Hola,
> He estado importando edificios de catastro así como direcciones de dicho
> municipio y añadiendo contenido mediante exploración en in-situ.
>
> He visto que recientemente se ha creado un nuevo programa escrito en
> Python que utiliza otros archivos de catastro (catatom2osm) y que se debe
> registrar un proyecto para cada municipio y/o barrio en el Gestor de Tareas.
>
> El caso es que en la página del Gestor de Tareas no me aparece la opción
> de crear un proyecto. ¿Me falta algo para activar dicha opción?
>
> Gracias.
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail  Secure Email.
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
-- 
Jorge Sanz Sanfructuoso - Sanchi
Blog http://jorgesanz.es/
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

[Talk-africa] Fwd: State of the Map Africa 2019 LOGO Submission Deadline

[James Magige]

Dear all,

2 Days to go. Do you have an Idea for a great Logo Design? Drop it here for
the State of the Map Africa 2019 conference, Grand-Bassam
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/…/State_of_the_…/Logo_Contest


Deadline for Submission: Thursday 31st Jan, 2019.


Regards,

*Magige **M. **James*
*Environmental Planner and Manager*
*/GIS and Remote Sensing specialist.   *

*Kenyatta University*
*phone no:+2540707602740*
*Email: jamesmagig...@gmail.com *
*Instagram: james_magige*
*Facebook: james magige mwita*

*"GIS AND REMOTE SENSING FOR LIFE"*
___
Talk-africa mailing list
Talk-africa@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-africa

Re: [talk-cz] Mapzen projektem Linux Foundation

[xkomc...@centrum.cz]

Mapzen jako firma nabízející mapy skončil, ale spousta jejich projektů 
osiřela (část byla "adoptována" - třeba Mapbox přebral Valhallu i její 
vývojáře) a právě o tyto projekty by se mělo starat Linux Foundation. 
Tudíž IMHO budou dál vyvíjet (především) Tangram, Valhallu a Pelias + 
časem možná další související věci.


On 30. 01. 19 9:54, Tom Ka wrote:

Ahoj,

zpravu jsem cetl, ale priznam se, ze to mu moc nerozumim. Mapzen jako
firma nedavno skoncil, neco pokud (z weekly) vim prebral (koupil?)
Mapbox. Podle webu mapzen.com je ta jejich mapovaci platforma souhrn
nekolika veci - renderer, neco k vektorum, extrakty dat OSM atd. Ale
moc jasne, co tedy vlastne pod Linux Foundation projektem budou resit
a kdo mi jasne neni.

Tak jen tak.
tom.k

út 29. 1. 2019 v 10:30 odesílatel xkomc...@centrum.cz
 napsal:

Neziskové technologické konsorcium Linux Foundation oznámilo, že nejnovějším 
oficiálním projektem konsorcia se stává open source mapovací platforma Mapzen 
(Wikipedie). - via 
http://www.abclinuxu.cz/zpravicky/mapzen-projektem-linux-foundation

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

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


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

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Ben Kelley]

I agree.

 - Ben.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 19:24, nwastra  wrote:

> We seem to be getting a lot of business edits in this form lately with
> only a name and description tag, often with address details or just spam in
> the description tag.
> As is usual with spam like business edits, they use a throw away email to
> make the edit and you never get a response from any query.
> https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372
> I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.
>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-cz] Mapzen projektem Linux Foundation

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj,

zpravu jsem cetl, ale priznam se, ze to mu moc nerozumim. Mapzen jako
firma nedavno skoncil, neco pokud (z weekly) vim prebral (koupil?)
Mapbox. Podle webu mapzen.com je ta jejich mapovaci platforma souhrn
nekolika veci - renderer, neco k vektorum, extrakty dat OSM atd. Ale
moc jasne, co tedy vlastne pod Linux Foundation projektem budou resit
a kdo mi jasne neni.

Tak jen tak.
tom.k

út 29. 1. 2019 v 10:30 odesílatel xkomc...@centrum.cz
 napsal:
>
> Neziskové technologické konsorcium Linux Foundation oznámilo, že nejnovějším 
> oficiálním projektem konsorcia se stává open source mapovací platforma Mapzen 
> (Wikipedie). - via 
> http://www.abclinuxu.cz/zpravicky/mapzen-projektem-linux-foundation
>
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

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

Re: [talk-cz] Hromadná editace/úkol pro všechny? Bylo: Seznam vodních ploch se špatnou kategoriií

[Michal Poupa]

Jak kde se to renderuje dobře ...

út 29. 1. 2019 v 23:21 odesílatel Pavel Machek  napsal:
>
> Ahoj!
>
> > Ty největší rybníky a přehrady jsem opravil je toho dohně na ty malé
> > je třeba udělt pomoci robota - ano to landuse=reservoir vzniklo to
> > nějakým importem.
>
> Tak robot znamena debatu na imports@ listu...
>
> ...kterou by nebylo spatny udelat (idealne jeste pred tim nez se
> udelali zmeny na tech velkejch). landuse=reservoir je sice deprecated,
> ale ted se to renderuje dobre, a bylo by dobry to nerozbit...
> Pavel
> --
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) 
> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

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

Re: [Talk-se] Kartan på https://www.openstreetmap.org/ har inte uppdateras på ett tag

[Aron Bergman]

Jaha, så era uppdateringar har inte ens nått databasen?

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

Re: [Talk-se] Kartan på https://www.openstreetmap.org/ har inte uppdateras på ett tag

[Grigory Rechistov via Talk-se]

Fast visas nya ändringar inte på tiles, de har säkert nått databasen. Om man 
använder "Vad är här?" knappen och pekar på kartan där ändringarna skulle ha 
visats, kan man se nya konturer och egenskaper för nya osynliga ytor.

>Среда, 30 января 2019, 11:17 +03:00 от Grigory Rechistov via Talk-se 
>:
>
>Hej, jag märkte det också, det går långsamt för tiles att uppdateras 
>nuförtiden. Det hände förut med mina ändringar. 
>
>
>>Среда, 30 января 2019, 10:30 +03:00 от Karl-Johan Karlsson < 
>>karl.johan.karls...@gmail.com >:
>>
>>Någon annan som märkt av det här? Normalt när jag editerar i JOSM och laddar 
>>upp ändringar brukar jag efter några minuter göra shift-reload i firefox på  
>>https://www.openstreetmap.org/ för att se att mina ändringar blev som jag 
>>tänkte mig. Nu verkar kartan inte ha uppdaterats på ett eller två dygn 
>>(kanske mer).
>>
>>Har ni märkt av detta? Någon som vet något om det? Är det bara en tillfälligt 
>>glitch?
>>
>>/ Karl-Johan Karlsson
>>
>>___
>>Talk-se mailing list
>>Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
>>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
>
>
>С наилучшими пожеланиями,
>Григорий Речистов.
>Med vänliga hälsningar,
>Grigory Rechistov
>With best regards,
>Grigory Rechistov
>___
>Talk-se mailing list
>Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se


С наилучшими пожеланиями,
Григорий Речистов.
Med vänliga hälsningar,
Grigory Rechistov
With best regards,
Grigory Rechistov
___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

[talk-au] more SEO spam?

[nwastra]

We seem to be getting a lot of business edits in this form lately with only a 
name and description tag, often with address details or just spam in the 
description tag.
As is usual with spam like business edits, they use a throw away email to make 
the edit and you never get a response from any query. 
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372 

I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.

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

Re: [Talk-se] Kartan på https://www.openstreetmap.org/ har inte uppdateras på ett tag

[Grigory Rechistov via Talk-se]

Hej, jag märkte det också, det går långsamt för tiles att uppdateras 
nuförtiden. Det hände förut med mina ändringar. 


>Среда, 30 января 2019, 10:30 +03:00 от Karl-Johan Karlsson < 
>karl.johan.karls...@gmail.com >:
>
>Någon annan som märkt av det här? Normalt när jag editerar i JOSM och laddar 
>upp ändringar brukar jag efter några minuter göra shift-reload i firefox på  
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/ för att se att mina ändringar blev som jag 
>tänkte mig. Nu verkar kartan inte ha uppdaterats på ett eller två dygn (kanske 
>mer).
>
>Har ni märkt av detta? Någon som vet något om det? Är det bara en tillfälligt 
>glitch?
>
>/ Karl-Johan Karlsson
>
>___
>Talk-se mailing list
>Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se


С наилучшими пожеланиями,
Григорий Речистов.
Med vänliga hälsningar,
Grigory Rechistov
With best regards,
Grigory Rechistov
___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se