Re: [talk-ph] #MyInspirationCanRollOverNow

[Russell Deffner]

Hello all,

Some background for you Andy - that project was made by SeverinGeo in 2014
so it's older than the organized editing guidelines. It also does not
include the hashtag in question - that was likely added by the mapper
independently. I'm not sure the best way to contact the Projet Espace
Francophone folks, but I would be willing to bet that if you reach out to
Severin, he's going to say that the project is so old he's forgotten about
it or 'written it off'.

In this case, no matter where this mapper is from it looks to me like a new
mapper who stumbled across a very old project and probably just needs some
guidance. Not an organized editing issue per se, but if you want to ask
Severin to archive that project if they're no longer actively managing it,
that would be great!

Best regards,
=Russ

*Russell Deffner*

*Disaster Response Coordinator+*
russell.deff...@hotosm.org
*OpenStreetMap: russdeffner | +8 UTC*

*Click here to find a meeting time
*

*Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team*
*Using OpenStreetMap for Humanitarian Response & Economic Development*
web  | wiki
| contact
|
feedback | donate 


On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 7:44 AM Erwin Olario  wrote:

> Hi Andy. I haven't encountered this hashtag in the Philippines, and the
> user who uses this particular hashtag doesn't appear to have edited
> anything in the Philippines.
>
> Do you mind sharing with us why you think this user is from the country?
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> » email: erwin@ *n**gnu**it**y**.xyz*
>  | gov...@gmail.com
> » mobile: https://t.me/GOwin
> » OpenPGP key: 3A93D56B | 5D42 7CCB 8827 9046 1ACB 0B94 63A4 81CE 3A93
> D56B
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 7:08 PM Andy Townsend  wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here.  We're trying to identify an
>> organised mapping project - someone has complained to the DWG about poor
>> mapping, and I'm trying to track down the project that those edits were
>> part of.
>>
>> The actual edits were in Côte d’Ivoire and seem trying to map things for
>> https://tasks.hotosm.org/projects/710 (unfortunately that task seems to
>> offer no guidance), but the mapper concerned appears to be based in the
>> Philippines (based on other edits) and uses the changeset comment
>> "#MyInspirationCanRollOverNow" for these changes.
>>
>> This appears to be undocumented at
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities (or
>> anywhere else in the OSM wiki).
>>
>> If anyone knows which organisation this hashtag refers to can can put
>> them in contact with the DWG or tell us how to contact them, that'd be
>> really helpful.  The best address to use for direct email is probably
>> d...@openstreetmap.org (see
>> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group for more details).
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk-ph mailing list
>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>>
> ___
> talk-ph mailing list
> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
>
___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM on Raspberry pi 4

[John Whelan]

Thank you for the process.

Cheerio John

James wrote on 2020-12-21 19:15:

wget https://josm.openstreetmap.de/josm-latest.jar

java -jar josm-latest.jar

in a terminal

On Mon., Dec. 21, 2020, 7:13 p.m. John Whelan, > wrote:


I don't know enough about the pi to know where to copy it to.
Getting the latest .jar isn't a problem.

Thanks John

James wrote on 2020-12-21 19:11:

https://josm.openstreetmap.de/josm-latest.jar

java -jar josm-latest.jar

On Mon., Dec. 21, 2020, 7:10 p.m. John Whelan,
mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com>> wrote:

It seems to load from "sudo apt-get install josm" but it is
version 14760. thank you Martin Bone you tube. I'm not too
sure where to download the new .jar file to get it to a more
recent version. So technically it will work. The big question
then becomes is it useful? Low power but needs a screen. Can
we leverage it in anyway? I'm thinking if it gets into
schools it might be useful but if it needs a more powerful
machine than the school might purchase can we nudge up the
specs in someway? I know you can use a smartphone but JOSM is
a bit more powerful and you can grab a bit of osm compress it
then load it up on the pi. Not real time but in areas where
there is little activity a 3 or 4 day old file might well be
good enough. I'm thinking Africa here. Solar panel into a
powerbank, run the pi from a powerbank. On a slightly larger
scale solar panel into an instant pot with battery, gives you
enough power to run a pi as well. Instant pots have been run
from solar with battery, the 3 quart pot requires a lower
power level. Can someone come up with a mixture that would
work? Thanks Cheerio John
Oliver Simmons wrote on 2020-12-21 18:48:


You’ll want to turn as much rendering off in JOSM as you can.

Mainly:

1. Disable “Draw boundaries of downloaded area” (This is a
big performance hit for some reason)

2. OSM Data -> Options that affect drawing performance -
disable both antialiasing options.

3. OSM Data -> ditto - “Hide labels when dragging the map”
may also help.

AFAIK other options won’t make much difference, those are
just the main three.

You may also want to experiment with styles, some (such as
“Advanced lane & road attributes” will put a lot more load
on rendering due to their complexity and the transparent parts.

With the RAM & speed upgrades on the Pi4, downloading a lot
of data shouldn’t be much of an issue, only if you try to
look at it all at once.

―

- Oliver Simmons [https://goodclover.xyz]

*From: *John Whelan 
*Sent: *21 December 2020 11:30 PM
*To: *OpenStreetMap 
*Subject: *[OSM-talk] JOSM on Raspberry pi 4

Has anyone tried it?  My thoughts run along the lines of the
pi 400 which has 4 gigs of memory might be interesting,
there are pi4s with 8 gigs available.

If so how do you install it and run it.

Thanks John

-- 


Sent from Postbox 



-- 
Sent from Postbox 

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


-- 
Sent from Postbox 




--
Sent from Postbox 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-at] Trafiken

[Stefan Tauner]

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:21:46 +0100
Florian Kratochwil  wrote:

> Ich bin mir nicht sicher, wie man Trafiken richtig einträgt. Es gibt 
> shop=kiosk und shop=tobacco und shop=newsagent. Bei einer kurzen 
> overpass-Recherche habe ich gesehen, das alle drei in Wien für Trafiken 
> verwendet werden.
> --> Frage 1: Sind Trafiken so unterschiedlich, dass die verschiedenen   
> Tags gerechtfertigt sind?

Dazu müsste man sich die konkreten Beispiele ansehen. Meine Vermutung
wäre wohl eher nein.

> --> Frage 2: Wenn nein, welcher wäre denn der passendste Tag? (Mein   
> Favorit: kiosk, knapp gefolgt von tobacco).

Finde auch kiosk am besten. tobacco oder news ist dann immer eine
subjektive Geschichte, wenn beides dort zu bekommen ist. Ich war noch
nie in einer Trafik Tabak kaufen ... ;)

> Ist ihr Name "Trafik" (oder "Tabak Tafik") oder haben Trafiken in 
> Österreich üblicherweise keine Namen? Ich finde "Trafik" redundant, weil 
> kiosk eh schon Trafik bedeutet. Gibt es andere 
> shop=kiosk/tobacco/newsagent, die keine Trafiken sind?

Mich hat diese Frage auch schon beschäftigt. Ich hab name=Trafik schon
öfters aus diesem Grund entfernt (wenn ich die Location kenne und es
selbst einzeichnen hätte können, aber *eigentlich* bin ich der Meinung,
dass das in Österreich nirgendwo sinnvoll ist). Es wird aber sehr,
sehr, sehr häufig getaggt. Die Frage ist wieso? Ist das weil die Leute
der Meinung sind, dass dies den Kriterien des name-Tags entspricht oder
weil sie sich darum überhaupt nicht kümmern und name-Tags sonst auch
für irgendwelche Beschreibungen missbrauchen. Ich entferne "regelmäßig"
andere name misuses (z.B. "Aussicht" von tourism=viewpoint, oder
"Quelle" von natural=spring) und mir geht das am Keks. Die Frage ist
halt, ob es bei Trafiken einen Konsens der erfahrenen Mapper gibt.

> Ein kurzer Check mittels overpass zeigt, dass es in Österreich viele 
> shop=kiosk ohne Namen, aber ebenso viele mit Namen "Trafik" oder "Tabak 
> Trafik" gibt. Außerdem gibt es einige mit "Trafik Vorname Nachname (des 
> Betreibers, Anm.)" gibt.
> 
> Der Vorname Nachname des Trafikanten / der Trafikantin gehört meiner 
> Meinung nach in operator.

Grundsätzlich auf jeden Fall. Allerdings könnte die Trafik durchaus als
solche bekannt sein und das als Eigenname verwenden.

> "Trafik" könnte auch brand sein, weil der Schriftzug und das Logo, die 
> sind ja in Ö einheitlich.

Darüber habe ich noch nie nachgedacht, aber das klingt recht vernünftig
auf den ersten Blick auf die Definition:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:brand

> --> Frage 3: Haben Sie einen Namen und wenn ja welchen?

Manche vmtl. schon, aber sicher nie "Trafik".

> --> Frage 4: Ist "Trafik" oder "Tabak Trafik" als brand passend?  

Lt. Wikipedia heißt's *eigentlich* Tabaktrafik, aber ohne nähere
Angabe. Das wäre für mich eine Alternative zu Trafik. Tabak Trafik ist
zwar oft der Schriftzug aber eigentlich falsch geschrieben.

> Hintergrund, wie ich auf diese Frage komme? Streetcomplete fragt mich 
> immer, wie eine Trafik heißt, und ich trau es mir nicht ausfüllen.

Gr. ;)

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

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

[talk-cz] WeeklyOSM CZ 540

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj, je dostupné vydání 540 týdeníku WeeklyOSM:

https://weeklyosm.eu/cz/archives/14005

* SotM CZ+SK 2020.
* Locus Freemap.
* Dynamická data v umap.
* Diskuze u sad změn.
* Pobřežní čáry.
* Pružnost komunit.
* Kongres zastoupení OSMF.
* Kandidáti do OSMF.
* Mapper měsíce.
* Akce olovo.
* Mapy Berlína.
* CHKO Argentiny.
* Testování Potlatch 3.
* Planet přes torrent.
* Otvírací hodiny.
* Isoignoranti.
* 3D mapy na web.
* Amazon a chodníky.

Pěkné počtení ...

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

[OSM-talk-fr] Espace Naturel sensible ENS dans OSM

[Fred Moine]

Bonjour,

On vient de me fournir (dpt38) une couche des différents Espaces Naturels
sensibles (environ 150 polygones) à intégrer dans OSM
Je comptais m'inspirer du wiki ci dessous, si vous avez des idées ou
suggestions je suis preneur

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/France/Parcs_nationaux_et_r%C3%A9gionaux,_r%C3%A9serves_naturelles/Import_des_donn%C3%A9es_INPN#Phase_3_-_Choix_des_tags_.C3.A0_utiliser_pour_l.27int.C3.A9gration_dans_OSM



https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espace_naturel_sensible


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Anglican churches

[Mike Baggaley via Talk-GB]

>It's not documented anywhere at the moment, but the different coloured
>markers on the "nameless" maps at e.g.
>https://osm.mathmos.net/nameless/amenity/place_of_worship simply
>denote the type of OSM object: node, way or relation.
>
>Robert.

Hi Robert, the nameless places of worship report looks good, but for me equally 
as important is places of worship with no religion. Any chance of that being 
added?

Cheers,
Mike


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[David Woolley]

On 21/12/2020 11:14, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
More philosophically, post towns violate the “on the ground” principle. 
No one here writes their address as Chipping


Addresses used by local people can also violate the on the ground 
principle. The place name I was given when I moved in appears to have 
been invented by estate agents, and doesn't appear on maps.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

As others have said, having some uniform national scheme of
places/areas that each address is assigned to is useful for anyone
using addresses. No-one outside the local area will know which postal
districts correspond to which areas, or even where many remote postal
areas are. Local authorities would be better than postcode districts,
but again they may not always be well-known (even amongst local
residents), and their boundaries can change. Post towns provide a more
recognisable way for people to identify the rough location of an
address. They're also good for error checking / correction within
addresses.

In any case, if OSM is going to be a useful source of addresses for
businesses and the public, we need to replicate the official addresses
that everyone is currently used to using.

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 16:19, Chris Hill  wrote:
> How are they verifiable? There is no open source that is compatible with
> the OSM licence that I am aware of that lets us look up an address.

There are plenty of open sources for addresses. They won't be
complete, but if you know the postcode of the address you're
interested in, in the vast majority of cases you should be able to
find an open address that's close enough to be able to infer the post
town. In particular, there is an open dataset of addresses for all
post office branches: https://osm.mathmos.net/postoffice/data/ . This
should cover pretty much all the post towns, and if you add in the
(admittedly imperfect) FHRS data, I'd have thought that you should be
able to deduce the correct post town in almost every case.

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

[Talk-at] Trafiken

[Florian Kratochwil]

Ich bin mir nicht sicher, wie man Trafiken richtig einträgt. Es gibt 
shop=kiosk und shop=tobacco und shop=newsagent. Bei einer kurzen 
overpass-Recherche habe ich gesehen, das alle drei in Wien für Trafiken 
verwendet werden.
--> Frage 1: Sind Trafiken so unterschiedlich, dass die verschiedenen 
Tags gerechtfertigt sind?
--> Frage 2: Wenn nein, welcher wäre denn der passendste Tag? (Mein 
Favorit: kiosk, knapp gefolgt von tobacco).


Ist ihr Name "Trafik" (oder "Tabak Tafik") oder haben Trafiken in 
Österreich üblicherweise keine Namen? Ich finde "Trafik" redundant, weil 
kiosk eh schon Trafik bedeutet. Gibt es andere 
shop=kiosk/tobacco/newsagent, die keine Trafiken sind?


Ein kurzer Check mittels overpass zeigt, dass es in Österreich viele 
shop=kiosk ohne Namen, aber ebenso viele mit Namen "Trafik" oder "Tabak 
Trafik" gibt. Außerdem gibt es einige mit "Trafik Vorname Nachname (des 
Betreibers, Anm.)" gibt.


Der Vorname Nachname des Trafikanten / der Trafikantin gehört meiner 
Meinung nach in operator.


"Trafik" könnte auch brand sein, weil der Schriftzug und das Logo, die 
sind ja in Ö einheitlich.


--> Frage 3: Haben Sie einen Namen und wenn ja welchen?
--> Frage 4: Ist "Trafik" oder "Tabak Trafik" als brand passend?

Hintergrund, wie ich auf diese Frage komme? Streetcomplete fragt mich 
immer, wie eine Trafik heißt, und ich trau es mir nicht ausfüllen.


Liebe Grüße
Florian

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Colin Smale]

I agree. I suspect that the post town / dependent locality are
correlated against the post code by the OCR processing. If there was no
post town it would seriously degrade the scanning accuracy as the
postcode OCR would need to be 100% accurate, which is not going to
happen given the number of handwritten addresses. 

On 2020-12-21 16:59, Adam Snape wrote:

> Hi, 
> 
> Post towns may be somewhat arbitrary, but they are at least a verifiable 
> national scheme which we can use for addressing every location in the 
> country. That has to have some benefits compared to each individual mapper 
> deciding where they believe each address falls  - easy for many places, 
> likely contentious for others. The other consistent scheme we could use is 
> tagging by local authority but that's likely to annoy just as many people. 
> 
> I also disagree with the assertion that post towns are no longer used or only 
> of use to RM. Whilst a street address and postcode should suffice, there is 
> an expectation that post is fully addressed. By including the full address, 
> post can still arrive at the correct address despite an obscured, incorrect 
> or illegible postcode. The advantage of a consistent national scheme of 
> addressing is as useful to other couriers in this regard as it is to RM. If 
> you should use parcel labels supplied by the couriers I have usually found 
> them to follow RM's addressing scheme including the relevant post town. 
> 
> Kind regards, 
> 
> Adam 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Ken Kilfedder]

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020, at 4:35 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
> London is the Post Town. Stratford and West Kensington are not relevant for 
> the delivery of post, apparently.


Every day is a school day.   You're right, those are Postal Districts, not 
towns.   I was sure they used to recommend writing those on the envelope - 10 
years ago - but now everything I held dear is in doubt.


---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-12-21 17:11, Ken Kilfedder wrote:

> If you search for an address on the RM website, I find that (at least in 
> London) it does not suggest the post town is used at all, just "London", not 
> "Stratford" or "West Kensington" or whatever.   (I mean here- 
> https://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode )

London is the Post Town. Stratford and West Kensington are not relevant
for the delivery of post, apparently.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Chris Hodges]

On 21/12/2020 15:48, Mark Goodge wrote:


One of the reasons there are so many fields is that each field only 
ever contains a single type of data. There are no multi-purpose 
fields. So there are separate fields for name and number. And "number" 
is defined internally as an integer value, precisely in order to make 
it impossible to put anything other than a number into it. Which 
means, therefore, that something like 7A, or 7-11, has to go into the 
name field as the database simply won't allow it to go into the number.



...
There's absolutely no need to replicate that complexity on a non-PAF 
database, such as OSM. For almost all practical purposes, name/number 
can be a single field. 


In fact I'd suggest the using a separate integer field for a purely 
numeric house number, and a string field for an alphanumeric house 
number (which may after all have a name as well) is bad design.  
Normally-numeric identifiers aren't really numbers. That's the sort of 
bad design that we should only be copying blindly if absolute 
compatibility is required.



Many people here will, I'm sure, have seen this non-exhaustive list of 
"Falsehoods Programmers Believe about Addresses", but for those that 
haven't, it illustrates some of these issues (and some we escape in the 
UK) quite nicely: 
https://www.mjt.me.uk/posts/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-addresses/


Chris


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

Re: [Talk-at] Probleme mit User / Qualitätsoffensive Salzburg usw.

[Robert Kaiser]

Johann Haag schrieb:

Wir sind in Österreich für eine gedeihliche Qualitätsdiskussion mit dem
grundsätzliche Problem konfrontiert, dass Österreichs Protagonisten bislang
auf das Instrument eines eigenen Local Chapter verzichten.
Mit in Anonymität auftretenden Identitäten kann man schwer in einen
fruchtbaren Dialog treten.


Weder die OpenStreetMap Foundation, noch ihre Local Chapters sind für 
die Datenqualität der OSM-Datenbank (bzw. daraus gerenderter Karten) 
zuständig. Die Leute, die in der Community aktiv sind, haben die 
Verantwortung für die Qualität, und bei Konflikten gibt es die DWG - 
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group - um diese zu 
lösen (oder auch andere Probleme, die die Daten betreffen, wie 
Lizenzkonflikte).


Zusätzlich finde ich, dass eine Gruppe wie ein Local Chapter sogar noch 
mehr "anonym" wirken würde, als Leute aus der Community, die hier 
persönlich sagen, welche Meinung sie haben. Ich habe schon viele 
fruchtbare Dialoge hier gesehen, aber dazu braucht es die Bereitschaft, 
auf den anderen einzugehen, was man sicher nicht mit Anschuldigungen 
z.B. von "Interessenkonflikten" und "Anonymität" macht. Ich bitte, hier 
konstruktiv zu sein.


Grüße,
KaiRo


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Chris Hill]

On 21/12/2020 15:59, Adam Snape wrote:

Hi,

Post towns may be somewhat arbitrary, but they are at least a 
verifiable national scheme which we can use for addressing every 
location in the country. That has to have some benefits compared to 
each individual mapper deciding where they believe each address falls  
- easy for many places, likely contentious for others. The other 
consistent scheme we could use is tagging by local authority but 
that's likely to annoy just as many people.
How are they verifiable? There is no open source that is compatible with 
the OSM licence that I am aware of that lets us look up an address. If I 
walk down a street, recording house numbers / names I know the number, 
street name and the place I am in, I have no idea what RM choose as the 
postal town. There are no name boards to see.


I also disagree with the assertion that post towns are no longer used 
or only of use to RM. Whilst a street address and postcode should 
suffice, there is an expectation that post is fully addressed. By 
including the full address, post can still arrive at the correct 
address despite an obscured, incorrect or illegible postcode. The 
advantage of a consistent national scheme of addressing is as useful 
to other couriers in this regard as it is to RM. If you should use 
parcel labels supplied by the couriers I have usually found them to 
follow RM's addressing scheme including the relevant post town.


Royal mail deliver by house number / name and street name. Ask a postie 
- I have and they confirm that. The sorting above that (to divide into 
rounds) goes by postcode. Latters without postcodes are delayed, even RM 
say that in a round about way.


Other organisations use the RM address lists because that is the only 
way to get addresses in the UK. They buy the PAF from Royal Mail then 
adapt it as needed in their own system. They include the bunkum that RM 
publish just because it is there. Postal towns were ALL about directing 
post in bulk to Royal Mail sorting offices where ever they happened to 
be and as postcodes because more established, postal town stopped being 
useful. Most sorting office have been consolidated or closed, yet the 
postal town part of the PAF has not changed - because it is no longer 
useful. RM just can't be bothered to clean up useless data in the same 
way they left the old counties in the PAF.


--

cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Ken Kilfedder]

If you search for an address on the RM website, I find that (at least in 
London) it does not suggest the post town is used at all, just "London", not 
"Stratford" or "West Kensington" or whatever.   (I mean here- 
https://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode )

---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk


On Mon, 21 Dec 2020, at 3:59 PM, Adam Snape wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Post towns may be somewhat arbitrary, but they are at least a verifiable 
> national scheme which we can use for addressing every location in the 
> country. That has to have some benefits compared to each individual mapper 
> deciding where they believe each address falls  - easy for many places, 
> likely contentious for others. The other consistent scheme we could use is 
> tagging by local authority but that's likely to annoy just as many people.
> 
> I also disagree with the assertion that post towns are no longer used or only 
> of use to RM. Whilst a street address and postcode should suffice, there is 
> an expectation that post is fully addressed. By including the full address, 
> post can still arrive at the correct address despite an obscured, incorrect 
> or illegible postcode. The advantage of a consistent national scheme of 
> addressing is as useful to other couriers in this regard as it is to RM. If 
> you should use parcel labels supplied by the couriers I have usually found 
> them to follow RM's addressing scheme including the relevant post town.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Adam
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Florimond Berthoux]

I said what I had on my heart, you can now make fun of me, or be respectful.

I agree, I already felt unpleasant manners around here.

Le lun. 21 déc. 2020 à 00:51, Martin Koppenhoefer 
a écrit :

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 21. Dec 2020, at 00:05, Clay Smalley  wrote:
>
> Va téléphone à la police.
>
>
>
> France is the spearhead against discrimination and gender disparity, in
> case you missed it, the Paris administration just recently got fined for
> putting a disproportionately high number of women in management positions:
>
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/16/world/europe/paris-too-many-women-fine.html
>
> Cheers Martin
>


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Ken Kilfedder]

> I just add `name`="Fourth Row" to the `building=terrace` for simplicity, 
> although duplicating with `addr:housename` also seems OK.

For these terraces in my neck of the woods, sometimes the numbering continues 
on the rest of the street.   For these, I use a landuse=residential with name= 
set to the name of the terrace.   Like this: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/643172532 . Those houses have the address 
"160 Langthorne Road" etc. and "St. Patrick's Terrace" is of historic/heritage 
interest.  (In my view!)

In other cases, (like this one https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/870814215 ) 
the house-number sequence is different from the main road. (e.g. there is a "1 
Margery Terrace" and a different "1 Margery Park Road").   So here I've created 
a named section of footway to bear the terrace numbering, as well as a named 
residential area to contain the footway, houses and gardens.   

I don't claim this is the best option - I offer another set of alternatives.   
But at least searching for addresses will probably give the expected result (I 
think?).


---
https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?spiregrain
spiregrain_...@ksglp.org.uk



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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Adam Snape]

Hi,

Post towns may be somewhat arbitrary, but they are at least a verifiable
national scheme which we can use for addressing every location in the
country. That has to have some benefits compared to each individual mapper
deciding where they believe each address falls  - easy for many places,
likely contentious for others. The other consistent scheme we could use is
tagging by local authority but that's likely to annoy just as many people.

I also disagree with the assertion that post towns are no longer used or
only of use to RM. Whilst a street address and postcode should suffice,
there is an expectation that post is fully addressed. By including the full
address, post can still arrive at the correct address despite an obscured,
incorrect or illegible postcode. The advantage of a consistent national
scheme of addressing is as useful to other couriers in this regard as it is
to RM. If you should use parcel labels supplied by the couriers I have
usually found them to follow RM's addressing scheme including the relevant
post town.

Kind regards,

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[James Derrick]

Hi,

On 20/12/2020 15:50, Alan Mackie wrote:

I'm also unclear how to tag numbered houses in named terraces.
addr:housename doesn't seem appropriate if they are shared along an 
entire row and addr:street already has a value.


In NE England there are a number of 1850ish - 1900ish terraces where the 
terrace is named, rather than the surrounding highway.


This caused me a lot of confusion when starting out cycle surveying and 
mapping as what street signs there were, conflicted. :-)


A good indication of such a situation up here is a battered enamel tin 
plate (dark blue rusty) or cast iron (just rusty) name plate on the 
terrace - original, and probably installed when the highway was 
compacted earth!


I just add `name`="Fourth Row" to the `building=terrace` for simplicity, 
although duplicating with `addr:housename` also seems OK.


These days, I also use the JOSM terracer to break terraces into 
dwellings - survey, count the chimneys, or check the high-res Bing back 
garden fence imagery.



I've also run into this for blocks of flats. "Block B" doesn't seem 
like a housename either? The addr:block tags seems to be for named 
city blocks.


Do we have some sort of local grouping tag?


There's a few options mentioned in 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr (which is probably the 
issue here - the lowest common denominator across cultures will always 
give confusion!).


I've used `addr:unit` for commercial premises (like 1A, 1B, 2, etc for 
shops) but `addr:block` seems to be for a very different use case (grid 
iron city blocks - Fifteenth and...).


The simple `name` or `addr:housename` tag kind of fits the hierarchy, so 
KISS?


Happy Mapping,


James
--
James Derrick
li...@jamesderrick.org, Cramlington, England
I wouldn't be a volunteer if you paid me...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/James%20Derrick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Mark Goodge]

On 21/12/2020 15:07, Andy Mabbett wrote:

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 12:50, Colin Smale  wrote:


Royal Mail say that a house number must be numeric, and anything else
(like Rose Cottage, 7A, 3-7, 11/13 etc) should go in the house name field.


So in  a row of three adjacent, identical houses, known as 11, 11A,
and 15, two have numbers and one has a name? That's not logical.


You have to bear in mind here that the point of Royal Mail's addressing 
system is to get post from origin to destination. It isn't intended to 
provide a consistent means of labelling adjacent properties.


The full PAF has 20 different fields. Some of those are always populated 
for every postal address. Others are usually blank, and only 
occasionally populated. And some are either blank or have a value 
depending on circumstances.


One of the reasons there are so many fields is that each field only ever 
contains a single type of data. There are no multi-purpose fields. So 
there are separate fields for name and number. And "number" is defined 
internally as an integer value, precisely in order to make it impossible 
to put anything other than a number into it. Which means, therefore, 
that something like 7A, or 7-11, has to go into the name field as the 
database simply won't allow it to go into the number.


In practice, though, that makes no difference to users as that 
distinction is handled internally by the PAF software. When displayed, 
the name and/or number will be shown on screen (or printed on paper) in 
the same output position on the address, either concatenated (if both 
are present) or either/or (if only one is).


There's absolutely no need to replicate that complexity on a non-PAF 
database, such as OSM. For almost all practical purposes, name/number 
can be a single field.


Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Chris Hill]

On 21/12/2020 15:28, Colin Smale wrote:


On 2020-12-21 16:07, Andy Mabbett wrote:

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 12:50, Colin Smale > wrote:



Royal Mail say that a house number must be numeric, and anything else
(like Rose Cottage, 7A, 3-7, 11/13 etc) should go in the house name 
field.


So in  a row of three adjacent, identical houses, known as 11, 11A,
and 15, two have numbers and one has a name? That's not logical.


Hey, this is Royal Mail we are talking about here...
Building Number must be numeric, max length=4
https://www.poweredbypaf.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Latest-Programmers_guide_Edition-7-Version-6.pdf

Do you think we could get away from talking about Royal Mail please as 
though they are the only way to create addresses.


The original question was about how to represent an address *in OSM*.

I have seen a number of replies that seem to say that Royal Mail is the 
authority on addressing, they are not!


Addresses are created by Local Authorities, not Royal Mail, RM only 
supply the postcode.


No one can claim that Royal Mail's handling of addresses is great, we 
have an opportunity to create useful, meaningful addresses in an Open 
database that could become the go-to place for addressing in the same 
way that OSM is steadily becoming the map of choice.


Let's start by dropping any address component that is only useful to a 
single company and that doesn't benefit anyone else, namely the postal 
town. It is not needed and it is confusing. Let's not compound the mess 
that RM has made of addresses in the UK by repeating their mistakes.


No postal town in OSM addresses please.

--
cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-12-21 16:07, Andy Mabbett wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 12:50, Colin Smale  wrote:
> 
>> Royal Mail say that a house number must be numeric, and anything else
>> (like Rose Cottage, 7A, 3-7, 11/13 etc) should go in the house name field.
> 
> So in  a row of three adjacent, identical houses, known as 11, 11A,
> and 15, two have numbers and one has a name? That's not logical.

Hey, this is Royal Mail we are talking about here... 

Building Number must be numeric, max length=4 

https://www.poweredbypaf.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Latest-Programmers_guide_Edition-7-Version-6.pdf___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Andy Mabbett]

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 12:50, Colin Smale  wrote:

> Royal Mail say that a house number must be numeric, and anything else
> (like Rose Cottage, 7A, 3-7, 11/13 etc) should go in the house name field.

So in  a row of three adjacent, identical houses, known as 11, 11A,
and 15, two have numbers and one has a name? That's not logical.


-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 12:02, Alan Mackie  wrote:
>
> I struggle with what to call the  in that example.
>
> A recent suggestion for named terraces was to use addr:street= 
> and addr:parentstreet=, but if the  relates the 
> whole building to to parentstreet, then reconstructing an address seems 
> impossible.

In cases where a building/property has a number and/or name on a main
street and is then sub-divided into dwellings, I would put the
building/property info in addr:housenumber and/or addr:housename with
addr:street as the main street. You then need a way to tag the
individual dwelling identifiers. Looking at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr#Detailed_subkeys it looks
like addr:unit might be the best tag to use.

This is a different way of thinking about things from the "named
terrace" as a sub-street approach. There are certainly real
sub-streets branching off main streets that could use addr:street=*
and addr:parentstreet=* that will want that approach. And there will
be instances of named/numbered buildings that have flats or
appartments within them that will want the approach above. There will
be probably be borderline cases between the two that could use either
scheme, though if the main property/building has a number on the main
street, you wouldn't be able to use the sub-street approach.

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Anglican churches

[Mark Goodge]

On 18/12/2020 19:01, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:


https://osm.mathmos.net/nameless/amenity/place_of_worship . I think a
lot of them may have been armchair-mapped from possibly out of date
maps. So if anyone is at a loose end and fancies trying to work out if
the places of worship listed there are still in use and if so what
their name is, please have a look.


I've fixed one of them! Not by adding a name, though, but by removing 
the tag. They're a pair of former cemetery chapels that are no longer 
used for that purpose, instead, they're just used as storage by the 
local council.


Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Electric forecourt

[Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB]

I would map it as amenity=charging_station area.

Dec 20, 2020, 12:05 by rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com:

> Hi all,
>
> I saw on Fully Charged (YouTube channel) that there is now a electric vehicle 
> charging forecourt. Unlike others, this is not a couple of charging points 
> added to an existing petrol station or slapped down in a carpark. This is a 
> full on electric version of a petrol station (without petrol as an option).
>
> https://www.gridserve.com/braintree-overview/
>
> Feels like a good time to review how we map them. Do we have the right tags 
> available?
>
> The wiki has a lot but it seems a bit jumbled. For example, I believe this 
> site has CCS socket chargers at various kW sizes. Our current tagging scheme 
> doesn't look like it allows for that. Is this an issue?
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station
>
> Best regards
> Rob
>___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-12-21 13:01, Alan Mackie wrote:

> I struggle with what to call the  in that example. 
> 
> A recent suggestion for named terraces was to use addr:street= 
> and addr:parentstreet=, but if the  relates the 
> whole building to to parentstreet, then reconstructing an address seems 
> impossible. 
> 
> The closest existing tag seems to be add:housename=, but I 
> don't know if that stretches the definition too much.

That will cause problems if the constituent parts (flats, houses in a
terrace etc) have a "name" instead of a number. Royal Mail say that a
house number must be numeric, and anything else (like Rose Cottage, 7A,
3-7, 11/13 etc) should go in the house name field. The OSM Wiki allows
non-numeric values though for some cases. 

> On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 06:41, Peter Neale via Talk-GB 
>  wrote: 
> 
>> At the risk of throwing another edge case into the pot (and mixing 
>> metaphors), can I ask how I should tag our flat? 
>> 
>> The Post Office Official postcode checker renders it as: 
>> 
>> Flat  
>>  
>>   
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> where  refers to the whole block and is common to all the 
>> flats. 
>> 
>> I cannot see what the Post Office is calling the various data fields, but I 
>> assume OSM would be happy with (taking elements from above)  
>> 
>> addr:housenumber= 
>> 
>> addr:street= 
>> addr:city= 
>> addr:postcode= 
>> 
>> That just leaves me to deal with the "Flat" element. 
>> 
>> Consulting the Wiki, I THINK I can cover that with: 
>> 
>> add:flats=  (for one specific flat) 
>> 
>> ...or addr:flats= (for the whole block) 
>> 
>> However, I unsure whether to include the word "Flat" in the value field of 
>> "addr:flats=*", or not.  The Wiki page for Key:addr includes, as an example, 
>> "addr:flats=Suite 110A", which seems fine for a single living space unit.  
>> It could be called "Flat 110A", "Suite 110A", "Apartment 110A", etc., so 
>> including the descriptor word could be useful to the data consumer.  
>> However, the Wiki page for Key:addr:flats shows only numeric values.  
>> 
>> TagInfo shows 203.5k uses of "addr:flats", but only 38 uses of 
>> "addr:flats=*flat*" and 42 uses of "addr:flats=*suite*", again suggesting 
>> that only the unique value(s) (e.g. "1", "2", "13B", etc.)  are sufficiently 
>> used to warrant data consumers catering for them.  
>> 
>> So, should I omit the word "Flat", "Suite", "Apartment" etc., leaving the 
>> data consumer to guess (or to default to "Flat...")? 
>> 
>> Regards, 
>> Peter 
>> 
>> On Monday, 21 December 2020, 09:30:37 GMT, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
>>  wrote: 
>> 
>> Like it or not, in the UK addresses are defined by Royal Mail. They're
>> introduced the concept of a "postal town", and this is one of the few
>> common elements that each address must always have. Once you accept
>> that the Post Town is intended to be a nearby significant place (to
>> help with delivery routing and identifying the rough location of the
>> addressed property) rather than being a place that the address is
>> "in", then it's really no more of a fiction than the postcode. (The
>> village I grew up in had a GL postcode, despite it being in
>> Worcestershire. I've currently got an IP postcode, despite being in
>> Norfolk and closer to Norwich (NR) than Ipswich.)
>> 
>> On the basis that it's a required part of each address, I would
>> recommend that we do store the post town in OSM addresses. There are
>> significant advantages to storing it in a consistent way, and the best
>> existing tag to do this would be addr:city. (We wouldn't want to
>> invent a new tag (e.g. addr:posttown), since as a UK-only term that
>> will simply be ignored by most international data consumers.
>> 
>> We then have a possible hierarchy of named localities between the
>> street and the post town to record as part of the address. I would
>> suggest using appropriate values from the set {addr:hamlet,
>> addr:village, addr:town, addr:suburb}. (I don't see any other
>> alternatives to this.) Most of these key names already have a
>> reasonable number of uses in OSM (addr:town is the lowest, but that
>> still has 59k uses), so it seems that others are doing this too.
>> 
>> Regarding properties (e.g. on named terraces or sub-streets), where
>> there are two street names (Thoroughfare and Dependent Throughourfare
>> in Rail Mail terminology) then we need a second key to store the other
>> street name under. Certainly if there is an addr:housenumber or
>> addr:housename, I think we need to use addr:street for the
>> street/terrace name on which that name or number applies. Otherwise,
>> software that's unaware of the second key name will think it's house
>> number n on the main street not the sub-street. There are already
>> about 3.5k uses of addr:parentstreet in OSM, so I'd recommend using
>> that for the main street, and addr:street for the terrace or
>> sub-street name. If any data-users aren't aware of addr:parentstreet
>> it's not a major issue, since it will still pick up the 

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Alan Mackie]

I struggle with what to call the  in that example.

A recent suggestion for named terraces was to use addr:street=
and addr:parentstreet=, but if the  relates the
whole building to to parentstreet, then reconstructing an address seems
impossible.

The closest existing tag seems to be add:housename=, but I
don't know if that stretches the definition too much.

On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 at 06:41, Peter Neale via Talk-GB <
talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> At the risk of throwing another edge case into the pot (and mixing
> metaphors), can I ask how I should tag our flat?
>
> The Post Office Official postcode checker renders it as:
>
> Flat 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>
> where  refers to the whole block and is common to all the
> flats.
>
> I cannot see what the Post Office is calling the various data fields, but
> I assume OSM would be happy with (taking elements from above)
>
> addr:housenumber=
> addr:street=
> addr:city=
> addr:postcode=
>
> That just leaves me to deal with the "Flat" element.
>
> Consulting the Wiki, I THINK I can cover that with:
>
> add:flats=  (for one specific flat)
>
> ...or addr:flats= (for the whole block)
>
> However, I unsure whether to include the word "Flat" in the value field of
> "addr:flats=*", or not.  The Wiki page for Key:addr includes, as an
> example, "addr:flats=Suite 110A", which seems fine for a single living
> space unit.  It could be called "Flat 110A", "Suite 110A", "Apartment
> 110A", etc., so including the descriptor word could be useful to the data
> consumer.  However, the Wiki page for Key:addr:flats shows only numeric
> values.
>
> TagInfo shows 203.5k uses of "addr:flats", but only 38 uses of
> "addr:flats=*flat*" and 42 uses of "addr:flats=*suite*", again suggesting
> that only the unique value(s) (e.g. "1", "2", "13B", etc.)  are
> sufficiently used to warrant data consumers catering for them.
>
> So, should I omit the word "Flat", "Suite", "Apartment" etc., leaving the
> data consumer to guess (or to default to "Flat...")?
>
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
>
> On Monday, 21 December 2020, 09:30:37 GMT, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) <
> robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Like it or not, in the UK addresses are defined by Royal Mail. They're
> introduced the concept of a "postal town", and this is one of the few
> common elements that each address must always have. Once you accept
> that the Post Town is intended to be a nearby significant place (to
> help with delivery routing and identifying the rough location of the
> addressed property) rather than being a place that the address is
> "in", then it's really no more of a fiction than the postcode. (The
> village I grew up in had a GL postcode, despite it being in
> Worcestershire. I've currently got an IP postcode, despite being in
> Norfolk and closer to Norwich (NR) than Ipswich.)
>
> On the basis that it's a required part of each address, I would
> recommend that we do store the post town in OSM addresses. There are
> significant advantages to storing it in a consistent way, and the best
> existing tag to do this would be addr:city. (We wouldn't want to
> invent a new tag (e.g. addr:posttown), since as a UK-only term that
> will simply be ignored by most international data consumers.
>
> We then have a possible hierarchy of named localities between the
> street and the post town to record as part of the address. I would
> suggest using appropriate values from the set {addr:hamlet,
> addr:village, addr:town, addr:suburb}. (I don't see any other
> alternatives to this.) Most of these key names already have a
> reasonable number of uses in OSM (addr:town is the lowest, but that
> still has 59k uses), so it seems that others are doing this too.
>
> Regarding properties (e.g. on named terraces or sub-streets), where
> there are two street names (Thoroughfare and Dependent Throughourfare
> in Rail Mail terminology) then we need a second key to store the other
> street name under. Certainly if there is an addr:housenumber or
> addr:housename, I think we need to use addr:street for the
> street/terrace name on which that name or number applies. Otherwise,
> software that's unaware of the second key name will think it's house
> number n on the main street not the sub-street. There are already
> about 3.5k uses of addr:parentstreet in OSM, so I'd recommend using
> that for the main street, and addr:street for the terrace or
> sub-street name. If any data-users aren't aware of addr:parentstreet
> it's not a major issue, since it will still pick up the correct
> terrace/sub-street name, and the locality, which will probably be
> enough to use as an address.
>
> I would strongly argue against using addr2 in connection with
> sub-streets, as it's not standardised, and is likely to not be picked
> up by any software. There's an abondoned proposal at
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr2 , but that
> was for the case of a single property on a street corner having two
> formal addresses, one on each street, 

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Colin Smale]

That's why RM have a Dependent Locality, to distinguish between cases
like this. If the OSM addr:* tags are to represent postal addresses (and
that seems to be the consensus) then OSM should offer a place for the
Dependent Locality. RM say the Post Town is a mandatory component; why
do you disagree with them? 

If you are sending post to someone, you will most likely have got their
address from them, and not got it by reverse geocoding. They, in turn,
will have been told their postal address by Royal Mail. Your correct
postal address is ".., Charlbury, Chipping Norton, .." whether you like
it or not... Is OSM to record the "postal address" or "people's
perception of a postal address"? Or should OSM not define that, and
allow "any old definition of an address"?

You seem very anti-RM because they are commercial; however they also
have statutory roles, whether we like it or not. One of those is
"guardian of postal addresses". In your references to other carriers do
you really expect a house to have multiple addresses according to the
carrier? If I order something online for example, I fill in my (only)
address. I don't want to have a list of addresses, depending on the
carrier chosen by the webshop (which is actually none of my business
anyway). I would say that alternatives to the PAF give alternative
sources of information, not alternative addresses. 

On 2020-12-21 12:14, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

> Robert Whittaker wrote:
>> On the basis that it's a required part of each address, I 
>> would recommend that we do store the post town in OSM 
>> addresses. There are significant advantages to storing it 
>> in a consistent way, and the best existing tag to do this 
>> would be addr:city. (We wouldn't want to invent a new tag 
>> (e.g. addr:posttown), since as a UK-only term that 
>> will simply be ignored by most international data
>> consumers. 
> 
> I quite strongly disagree with this.
> 
> My address is x Market Street, Charlbury, Oxfordshire. My addr:city is 
> therefore Charlbury.
> 
> This suggestion would see my house tagged with addr:street=Market Street, 
> addr:city=Chipping Norton, because Chipping Norton is the Royal Mail post 
> town.
> 
> If a letter is addressed to x Market Street, Chipping Norton, it will end up 
> at x Market Street, Chipping Norton (and yes, there is one). Not x Market 
> Street, Charlbury. You suggest using addr:town to get around this, but that 
> seems to fall foul of your "ignored by most data consumers" point.
> 
> A post town isn't a required part of an address. It's an occasionally 
> suggested part of an address for customers of Royal Mail, useful only in 
> circumstances where the postcode is omitted. Royal Mail themselves don't make 
> any reference to it in their own consumer-facing recommendations, they just 
> say "the town" 
> (https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/81/~/how-to-address-your-mail-%28clear-addressing%29).
> 
> Royal Mail is one privately-owned delivery business which is heading rapidly 
> towards being a minority provider, and by some measures already is. Other 
> providers are not beholden to PAF and are increasingly looking outside it to 
> their own datasets. Post towns are in any case superfluous for addresses 
> derived directly from PAF (e.g. via an autocomplete mechanism on a website), 
> because you have the postcode in that case. And that's just the delivery 
> market - addresses serve other purposes, principally around 
> geocoding/routing, for which post towns are irrelevant.
> 
> More philosophically, post towns violate the "on the ground" principle. No 
> one here writes their address as Chipping Norton unless PAF autocompletes it 
> for them. No one has Chipping Norton on their letterhead. Trusting some 
> remote third-party database in preference to local knowledge is not what OSM 
> does, and particularly not OSM in the UK.
> 
> By all means namespace it (royal_mail:addr:city) or use a bespoke tag for 
> what is a bespoke concept (addr:post_town). But let's not remove useful 
> information (the actual town/city) in favour of it, and let's not tag as if 
> post towns are an intrinsic part of UK addresses, because they're not.
> 
> Richard 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Lester Caine]

On 21/12/2020 11:14, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
More philosophically, post towns violate the “on the ground” principle. 
No one here writes their address as Chipping Norton unless PAF 
autocompletes it for them. No one has Chipping Norton on their 
letterhead. Trusting some remote third-party database in preference to 
local knowledge is not what OSM does, and particularly not OSM in the UK.


By all means namespace it (royal_mail:addr:city) or use a bespoke tag 
for what is a bespoke concept (addr:post_town). But let’s not remove 
useful information (the actual town/city) in favour of it, and let’s not 
tag as if post towns are an intrinsic part of UK addresses, because 
they’re not.


I have a similar problem with 'PAF autocomplete' ... my business address 
does not actually exist at all and the post code covers a large area of 
the business park, so even that is of little help to any delivery 
driver. Adding a phone number to the delivery details helps some of the 
time and with temporary drivers being used in the run up to Christmas 
I've had to talk a couple in this last week.


Full address is
L.S.Caine Electronic Service
Willersey Suite
De Montfort House
Enterprise Way
Vale Park
Evesham
WR11 1GS

The number of websites that do not allow for that in terms of numbers of 
lines or limiting lime length preventing two elements per line ... at 
least some of the delivery services are using OSM these days ... De 
Montfort House, Enterprise Way takes them straight to the door :)


--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - https://lsces.uk/wiki/Contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - https://lsces.uk
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - https://medw.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - https://rainbowdigitalmedia.uk

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Peter Neale via Talk-GB]

At the risk of throwing another edge case into the pot (and mixing metaphors), 
can I ask how I should tag our flat?
The Post Office Official postcode checker renders it as:
Flat  
where  refers to the whole block and is common to all the flats.
I cannot see what the Post Office is calling the various data fields, but I 
assume OSM would be happy with (taking elements from above) 
addr:housenumber=addr:street=addr:city=
addr:postcode=
That just leaves me to deal with the "Flat" element.
Consulting the Wiki, I THINK I can cover that with:
add:flats=  (for one specific flat)
...or addr:flats= (for the whole block)
However, I unsure whether to include the word "Flat" in the value field of 
"addr:flats=*", or not.  The Wiki page for Key:addr includes, as an example, 
"addr:flats=Suite 110A", which seems fine for a single living space unit.  It 
could be called "Flat 110A", "Suite 110A", "Apartment 110A", etc., so including 
the descriptor word could be useful to the data consumer.  However, the Wiki 
page for Key:addr:flats shows only numeric values. 
TagInfo shows 203.5k uses of "addr:flats", but only 38 uses of 
"addr:flats=*flat*" and 42 uses of "addr:flats=*suite*", again suggesting that 
only the unique value(s) (e.g. "1", "2", "13B", etc.)  are sufficiently used to 
warrant data consumers catering for them. 
So, should I omit the word "Flat", "Suite", "Apartment" etc., leaving the data 
consumer to guess (or to default to "Flat...")?

Regards,Peter

On Monday, 21 December 2020, 09:30:37 GMT, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
 wrote:  
 
 Like it or not, in the UK addresses are defined by Royal Mail. They're
introduced the concept of a "postal town", and this is one of the few
common elements that each address must always have. Once you accept
that the Post Town is intended to be a nearby significant place (to
help with delivery routing and identifying the rough location of the
addressed property) rather than being a place that the address is
"in", then it's really no more of a fiction than the postcode. (The
village I grew up in had a GL postcode, despite it being in
Worcestershire. I've currently got an IP postcode, despite being in
Norfolk and closer to Norwich (NR) than Ipswich.)

On the basis that it's a required part of each address, I would
recommend that we do store the post town in OSM addresses. There are
significant advantages to storing it in a consistent way, and the best
existing tag to do this would be addr:city. (We wouldn't want to
invent a new tag (e.g. addr:posttown), since as a UK-only term that
will simply be ignored by most international data consumers.

We then have a possible hierarchy of named localities between the
street and the post town to record as part of the address. I would
suggest using appropriate values from the set {addr:hamlet,
addr:village, addr:town, addr:suburb}. (I don't see any other
alternatives to this.) Most of these key names already have a
reasonable number of uses in OSM (addr:town is the lowest, but that
still has 59k uses), so it seems that others are doing this too.

Regarding properties (e.g. on named terraces or sub-streets), where
there are two street names (Thoroughfare and Dependent Throughourfare
in Rail Mail terminology) then we need a second key to store the other
street name under. Certainly if there is an addr:housenumber or
addr:housename, I think we need to use addr:street for the
street/terrace name on which that name or number applies. Otherwise,
software that's unaware of the second key name will think it's house
number n on the main street not the sub-street. There are already
about 3.5k uses of addr:parentstreet in OSM, so I'd recommend using
that for the main street, and addr:street for the terrace or
sub-street name. If any data-users aren't aware of addr:parentstreet
it's not a major issue, since it will still pick up the correct
terrace/sub-street name, and the locality, which will probably be
enough to use as an address.

I would strongly argue against using addr2 in connection with
sub-streets, as it's not standardised, and is likely to not be picked
up by any software. There's an abondoned proposal at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr2 , but that
was for the case of a single property on a street corner having two
formal addresses, one on each street, not for the case of two streets
in a hierarchy.

Robert.

On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 12:47, Dave Abbott  wrote:
> I am trying to make sure I tag addresses correctly. I am currently
> trying to understand how to map in my area.
>
> The postal addresses are like:
>
> 99 Postal Street
> Smalltown
> Largertown
> West Yorks XY9 7GY
>
> Smalltown is geographically separate to Largertown, which however is the
> Postal Town. Omitting Smalltown from the address is probably correct
> postally-speaking, but local residents would object as Smalltown is seen
> as completely separate to other places under the same Postal Town.
>
> Currently tagging as -
> addr:housenumber=99
> 

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Richard Fairhurst]

Robert Whittaker wrote:
> On the basis that it's a required part of each address, I
> would recommend that we do store the post town in OSM
> addresses. There are significant advantages to storing it
> in a consistent way, and the best existing tag to do this
> would be addr:city. (We wouldn't want to invent a new tag
> (e.g. addr:posttown), since as a UK-only term that
> will simply be ignored by most international data
> consumers.

I quite strongly disagree with this.

My address is x Market Street, Charlbury, Oxfordshire. My addr:city is 
therefore Charlbury.

This suggestion would see my house tagged with addr:street=Market Street, 
addr:city=Chipping Norton, because Chipping Norton is the Royal Mail post town.

If a letter is addressed to x Market Street, Chipping Norton, it will end up at 
x Market Street, Chipping Norton (and yes, there is one). Not x Market Street, 
Charlbury. You suggest using addr:town to get around this, but that seems to 
fall foul of your “ignored by most data consumers” point.

A post town isn’t a required part of an address. It’s an occasionally suggested 
part of an address for customers of Royal Mail, useful only in circumstances 
where the postcode is omitted. Royal Mail themselves don’t make any reference 
to it in their own consumer-facing recommendations, they just say “the town” 
(https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/81/~/how-to-address-your-mail-%28clear-addressing%29).

Royal Mail is one privately-owned delivery business which is heading rapidly 
towards being a minority provider, and by some measures already is. Other 
providers are not beholden to PAF and are increasingly looking outside it to 
their own datasets. Post towns are in any case superfluous for addresses 
derived directly from PAF (e.g. via an autocomplete mechanism on a website), 
because you have the postcode in that case. And that’s just the delivery market 
- addresses serve other purposes, principally around geocoding/routing, for 
which post towns are irrelevant.

More philosophically, post towns violate the “on the ground” principle. No one 
here writes their address as Chipping Norton unless PAF autocompletes it for 
them. No one has Chipping Norton on their letterhead. Trusting some remote 
third-party database in preference to local knowledge is not what OSM does, and 
particularly not OSM in the UK.

By all means namespace it (royal_mail:addr:city) or use a bespoke tag for what 
is a bespoke concept (addr:post_town). But let’s not remove useful information 
(the actual town/city) in favour of it, and let’s not tag as if post towns are 
an intrinsic part of UK addresses, because they’re not.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Christian Rogel]

> Le 21 déc. 2020 à 00:54, Martin Koppenhoefer  a écrit 
> :
> France is the spearhead against discrimination and gender disparity, in case 
> you missed it, the Paris administration just recently got fined for putting a 
> disproportionately high number of women in management positions:
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/16/world/europe/paris-too-many-women-fine.html

Hi, Martin,

But, the law was modified in 2019 and there is no limitation anymore.
Fortunately, none will be removed.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Colin Smale]

On 2020-12-21 10:27, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

> Regarding properties (e.g. on named terraces or sub-streets), where
> there are two street names (Thoroughfare and Dependent Throughourfare
> in Rail Mail terminology) then we need a second key to store the other
> street name under. Certainly if there is an addr:housenumber or
> addr:housename, I think we need to use addr:street for the
> street/terrace name on which that name or number applies. Otherwise,
> software that's unaware of the second key name will think it's house
> number n on the main street not the sub-street. There are already
> about 3.5k uses of addr:parentstreet in OSM, so I'd recommend using
> that for the main street, and addr:street for the terrace or
> sub-street name. If any data-users aren't aware of addr:parentstreet
> it's not a major issue, since it will still pick up the correct
> terrace/sub-street name, and the locality, which will probably be
> enough to use as an address.

Indeed, exactly that, Royal Mail say if you don't have space for both
the Thoroughfare and the Dependent Thoroughfare, use the Dependent
Thoroughfare (sub-street) and leave out the Thoroughfare (main street);
the post town / dependent locality / postcode will do the rest. 

Using addr:housename for the substreet is definitely a bad idea, as an
address could actually need both: "Mon Repos, Rose Cottages, Green Lane"
etc.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-at] Probleme mit User / Qualitätsoffensive Salzburg usw.

[Johann Haag]

Hallo erst einmal,
Frederik hat einige interessante Vorschläge gemacht, wobei ich zu meinen
Vorbereitungen zu Straßenflächen
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/47.52605/12.39857 , bei Frederik
einen Interessenkonflikt mit einem Produkt seiner Firma orte.
Wir sind in Österreich für eine gedeihliche Qualitätsdiskussion mit dem
grundsätzliche Problem konfrontiert, dass Österreichs Protagonisten bislang
auf das Instrument eines eigenen Local Chapter verzichten.
Mit in Anonymität auftretenden Identitäten kann man schwer in einen
fruchtbaren Dialog treten.

Grüße Johann

Am So., 20. Dez. 2020 um 19:52 Uhr schrieb Frederik Ramm <
frede...@remote.org>:

> Wenn im nächsten Jahr die Diskussion um Qualitätsstandards geführt wird,
> dann bitte ich alle Seiten, das möglichst freundlich und ohne
> Unterstellungen zu tun. Keiner von uns ist ein Vandale, wir wollen alle
> das bestmögliche OpenStreetMap.
>
> On 12/20/20 19:43, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Hallo,
> >
> > ich habe den User "beautifulplaces" jetzt in
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4634
> >
> > eindringlich um eine Verhaltensänderung ersucht. Insbesondere:
> >
> > * keine ansatzweise kritikwürdigen Edits mehr in diesem Jahr
> > (Alltagsmapping in der Heimat ist ok, aber keine Qualitäsoffensiven usw.)
> >
> > * im Januar auf dieser Mailingliste Qualitätsstandard festlegen und erst
> > danach eventuelle umfangreichere Mappingtätigkeiten wieder aufnehmen.
> >
> > Ohne eine Übereinkunft in der österreichischen Community, was "Qualität"
> > ist, kann es keine "Qualitätsoffensive" geben.
> >
> > Ich wünsche allen einen friedlichen Jahreswechsel.
> >
> > Bye
> > Frederik
> >
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> Talk-at mailing list
> Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
>


-- 
Mst. Johann Haag
Innsbruckerstraße 42
6380 St. Johann in Tirol
ÖSTERREICH
Tel: +43 664/174 7414
Mailto:johannh...@hxg.at
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

[Talk-de] Die OSM Emergency Map ist wieder da

[wambacher]

Moin,

ich habe mich dazu durchgerungen, die OSM Emergency Map 
 zu reanimieren.


Im Gegensatz zu früher deckt sie nur Deutschland ab und wird derzeit nur 
1x pro Tag aktualisiert. Grund ist, dass ich kein Planet-File vorhalte 
und die Daten daher auch nicht minütlich aktualisiere.


Einige Layer fehlen noch (u. A. Entries & Ambulance Stations) bzw sind 
unvollständig (z.B . Hydranten). Dies wird sich aber nach und nach ändern.


Die Performance ist nicht so doll und manchmal antwortet der in USA 
stehende Server für 30-60 Sekunden nicht, aber mehr ist derzeit nicht 
drin sad


Gruss
walter

ps: Die Software Watchlist gibt es auch w8ider: 
https://wambachers-osm.website/SoftwareWatchlist.html


--
My projects:

OSM Software Watchlist 


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

[Talk-at] Die OSM Emergency Map ist wieder da

[wambacher]

Moin,

ich habe mich dazu durchgerungen, die OSM Emergency Map 
 zu reanimieren.


Im Gegensatz zu früher deckt sie nur Deutschland ab und wird derzeit nur 
1x pro Tag aktualisiert. Grund ist, dass ich kein Planet-File vorhalte 
und die Daten daher auch nicht minütlich aktualisiere.


Einige Layer fehlen noch (u. A. Entries & Ambulance Stations) bzw sind 
unvollständig (z.B . Hydranten). Dies wird sich aber nach und nach ändern.


Die Performance ist nicht so doll und manchmal antwortet der in USA 
stehende Server für 30-60 Sekunden nicht, aber mehr ist derzeit nicht 
drin sad


Gruss
walter

ps: Die Software Watchlist gibt es auch w8ider: 
https://wambachers-osm.website/SoftwareWatchlist.html


--
My projects:

OSM Software Watchlist 

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] 'losse' wegen

[Tim Couwelier]

Het is een gevalletje van 'taggen voor de render'.
De mapper in kwestie is aan het micro-mappen geweest (maar is er gelukkig
wel consistent in geweest), en heeft ze als highway = footway getagd,
terwijl dat helemaal niet nodig was.

Ik gok overigens dat (doordat de kleur vrij dicht aanleunt bij die van een
residential landuse) het effect visueel knal hetzelfde was geweest zonder
ze toe te voegen.

Corrigeren zou kunnen door ze in bulk te selecteren in JOSM en dan zo in 1x
de tag van alle geselecteerde objecten aan te passen, alleen weet ik
eerlijkheidshalve ook niet zo zeer naar wat je ze zou aanpassen dan.
'Private verharding' zonder te specifiëren wat, daar ken ik niet meteen een
gepaste tag voor.

Op ma 21 dec. 2020 om 08:31 schreef joost schouppe :

> Dag Meannder,
>
> De oorzaak lijkt me dat iemand al de opritten heeft ingetekend als vlak,
> maar zonder ze te verbinden met de rest van de weginfrastructuur. Dat ziet
> er wel mooi uit, maar het is volstrekt zinloos voor navigatie. En als je
> dus een woning hebt die nabij verschillende wegen ligt, dan gaat de oprit
> niet helpen om dichter bij je bestemming gestuurd te worden. Alleszins is
> de foutmelding wel terecht: er zijn hier talloze verkeerseilandjes
> gecreëerd.
>
> Mvg,
> Joost
>
> Op zo 20 dec. 2020 18:44 schreef meannder :
>
>> Dag-ga-dag,
>>
>> In Zwevezele zijn, al een aantal maanden, ontelbaar veel
>> 'niet-verbonden' wegen te zien op
>>
>> https://www.keepright.at/report_map.php?zoom=16=51.0357=3.2121
>>
>> Zijn dit schoonheidsfoutjes -toch niet te zien op de map-, de moeite om
>> op te lossen  en desgevallend... HOE (zonder uren werk)?
>>
>> groet, meannder
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [Talk-GB] Anglican churches

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) via Talk-GB]

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 20:07, Donald Noble  wrote:
> Forgive me if I've missed it somewhere, but what do the different colours 
> represent on the nameless places of worship page?

It's not documented anywhere at the moment, but the different coloured
markers on the "nameless" maps at e.g.
https://osm.mathmos.net/nameless/amenity/place_of_worship simply
denote the type of OSM object: node, way or relation.

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

[Talk-de] Überholverbot Fahrrad und andere Zweiräder

[Markus]

Es gibt ein neues Überholverbot, aber noch kein tag:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE_talk:Key:overtaking#Überholverbot

Gruss, Markus

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK street addressing

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

Like it or not, in the UK addresses are defined by Royal Mail. They're
introduced the concept of a "postal town", and this is one of the few
common elements that each address must always have. Once you accept
that the Post Town is intended to be a nearby significant place (to
help with delivery routing and identifying the rough location of the
addressed property) rather than being a place that the address is
"in", then it's really no more of a fiction than the postcode. (The
village I grew up in had a GL postcode, despite it being in
Worcestershire. I've currently got an IP postcode, despite being in
Norfolk and closer to Norwich (NR) than Ipswich.)

On the basis that it's a required part of each address, I would
recommend that we do store the post town in OSM addresses. There are
significant advantages to storing it in a consistent way, and the best
existing tag to do this would be addr:city. (We wouldn't want to
invent a new tag (e.g. addr:posttown), since as a UK-only term that
will simply be ignored by most international data consumers.

We then have a possible hierarchy of named localities between the
street and the post town to record as part of the address. I would
suggest using appropriate values from the set {addr:hamlet,
addr:village, addr:town, addr:suburb}. (I don't see any other
alternatives to this.) Most of these key names already have a
reasonable number of uses in OSM (addr:town is the lowest, but that
still has 59k uses), so it seems that others are doing this too.

Regarding properties (e.g. on named terraces or sub-streets), where
there are two street names (Thoroughfare and Dependent Throughourfare
in Rail Mail terminology) then we need a second key to store the other
street name under. Certainly if there is an addr:housenumber or
addr:housename, I think we need to use addr:street for the
street/terrace name on which that name or number applies. Otherwise,
software that's unaware of the second key name will think it's house
number n on the main street not the sub-street. There are already
about 3.5k uses of addr:parentstreet in OSM, so I'd recommend using
that for the main street, and addr:street for the terrace or
sub-street name. If any data-users aren't aware of addr:parentstreet
it's not a major issue, since it will still pick up the correct
terrace/sub-street name, and the locality, which will probably be
enough to use as an address.

I would strongly argue against using addr2 in connection with
sub-streets, as it's not standardised, and is likely to not be picked
up by any software. There's an abondoned proposal at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/addr2 , but that
was for the case of a single property on a street corner having two
formal addresses, one on each street, not for the case of two streets
in a hierarchy.

Robert.

On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 12:47, Dave Abbott  wrote:
> I am trying to make sure I tag addresses correctly. I am currently
> trying to understand how to map in my area.
>
> The postal addresses are like:
>
> 99 Postal Street
> Smalltown
> Largertown
> West Yorks XY9 7GY
>
> Smalltown is geographically separate to Largertown, which however is the
> Postal Town. Omitting Smalltown from the address is probably correct
> postally-speaking, but local residents would object as Smalltown is seen
> as completely separate to other places under the same Postal Town.
>
> Currently tagging as -
> addr:housenumber=99
> addr:street=Postal Street
> addr:city=Smalltown, Largertown
>
> But I am pretty sure this is wrong.
>
> There is a page at
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/UK_Address_Mapping which
> mentions "suggested tags" but there is no evidence that this is in use.
> If correct I would be tagging as -
>
> addr:housenumber=99
> addr:street=Postal Street
> addr:town=Smalltown
> addr:city=Largertown
>
> Hoping someone can advise me as to the correct way to tag for the UK...
>
> Dave Abbott  (OSM user DaveyPorcy)
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Making GPS tracks in Android

[Simon Poole]

Non-open apps will typically use googles play services fused location 
provider, which as the name implies doesn't just use GNSS data. For 
generating tracks it is unsuitable in any case so a pure tracker is 
unlikely going to use it.


Simon

Am 21.12.2020 um 01:02 schrieb Alan Mackie:
I have noticed that Google Maps somehow seems to get a location at 
times when all other apps are struggling.


I'm not entirely convinced the playing field is level there.

On Sun, 20 Dec 2020, 18:18 Simon Poole, > wrote:


I don't expect side loading to be a thing for very much longer.
Given googles crack down on anything using location, see
https://twitter.com/vespucci_editor/status/1331541328883298306

for some of the drama, it would seem to be silly to leave that
avenue open. Definitely you are going to run in to problems as
soon as you start building against more recent SDK.

Simon

Am 20.12.2020 um 20:28 schrieb ipswichmapper--- via talk:

In this case simply use Fdroid. Its not hard and the apps on
there give you peace of mind.

--


20 Dec 2020, 19:14 by talk@openstreetmap.org
:

Gps logger was perfect, unfortunately :
https://github.com/mendhak/gpslogger/issues/849

Yves

Le 20 décembre 2020 19:43:00 GMT+01:00, Martijn van Exel
  a écrit :

Andy,

If you would like something lightweight that just does
GPS track recording, I would recommend GPS Logger
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GPS_Logger_for_Android
 .
A nice bonus is that you can have the app automatically
upload your tracks to OSM in whatever privacy mode you
choose. It can also sync with Nextcloud, Dropbox etc.

OSMTracker offers a little more functionality like
recording waypoints with specific, configurable notes,
and recording audio notes.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSMTracker_(Android)


I’m not on Android right now but I’ve used both these OSS
apps for years.

Martijn


On Dec 20, 2020, at 5:36 AM, Andy Mabbett
mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>> wrote:

Father Christmas came early this year, and has delivered
to me a smart
new Android phone, whose GPS is much better than on my
old one.

I want to use it to trace some tracks on a local nature
reserve. What
app(s) do you recommend for this?

-- 
Andy Mabbett

@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk 

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





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


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




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