Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

[Ian Steer via Talk-au]

As you say, they are trying to discourage walkers but nothing to indicate it
is not permitted to enter.

Path should be in OSM

Ian

> Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2023 22:52:06 +1100
> From: Mark Pulley 
> To: OpenStreetMap-AU Mailing List 
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS
> 
> On my last holiday I took a detour to re-check the Apsley Gorge track.
> 
> The asphalt path ends at a lookout
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/324186826
> 
> The ?controversial? path is still present south of here - I followed it
some of
> the way (about 350m), but didn?t follow it all the way to the end.
> 
> There is a sign just south of the lookout - Google Maps street view shows
the
> sign (the small yellow object near the southern end of the safety rail!)
> https://maps.app.goo.gl/9mDecm2GKpXxM48k6
> 
> On the left side of the sign, there?s a warning icon (exclamation mark),
then
> ?No safety rail?, another warning icon (man falling off edge of crumbling
cliff),
> then ?Unstable edges?
> 
> On the right side of the sign is the text ?End of track, no safety rail
beyond this
> point?
> 
> The sign is there to discourage walkers venturing further south, but it?s
not
> technically a ?do not enter? sign.
> 
> Does that help with what to do with this particular example?
> 
> Mark P.
> 
> >
> > On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 at 23:33, Mark Pulley  <mailto:mrpul...@iinet.net.au>> wrote:
> >> A brief summary of the options for this type of situation (not just
this
> particular edit, but similar edits in the past and probably future):
> >>
> >> 1. Revert the change sets (in the absence of more information) 2.
> >> Partial revert, with a change in tags 3. Leave the deletion as it is.
> >>
> >> For this particular example, the results would be:
> >> 1. Full revert - way will be marked informal=yes, but without access
> >> tags 2. Partial revert - could add access=no, or alternatively
> >> abandoned:highway=* or disused:highway=* 3. No reversion
> >
> > I would opt for 2, leave the way in place, but with access=no, a
lifecycle prefix
> on the highway tag like abandoned:highway=* or rehabilitated:highway=*.
> >
> > If there is signage that says closed for rehabilitation, we should
capture the
> closure reason somewhere, so OSM data consumers can present that reason
> for the closure to users, whether that be via rehabilitated:highway=* or
> something like, access:reason=rehabilitation.
> >
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-
> au/attachments/20231214/f7dcd5fa/attachment-0001.htm>
> 
> --
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
> 
> 
> --
> 
> End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 198, Issue 6
> ***


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

Re: [talk-au] Nowra bridge help

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Bob

So the western bridge is now northbound & the "middle" bridge is south?

Thanks

Graeme


On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 at 08:06, Bob Cameron  wrote:

> Wonder if someone might fix this one. Don't want to stuff it up
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/-34.86388/150.60252
>
> The main crossing over the Shoalhaven River on Princes Hwy
>
> The eastern/old span is no longer in use and gated at the northern end.
> Both "new" spans are in use one way each way 3 lanes each. My (not
> overly useful) 11/12/23 southbound Mapillary imagery hasn't merged yet.
> Typically that may take another week. No overhead imagery is current.
>
> I can dig up all the 1FPS 4K photos I have if anyone wants them.
>
> Tnx, Bob
>
>
> ___
> 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] Nowra bridge help

[Bob Cameron]

Wonder if someone might fix this one. Don't want to stuff it up

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/-34.86388/150.60252

The main crossing over the Shoalhaven River on Princes Hwy

The eastern/old span is no longer in use and gated at the northern end. 
Both "new" spans are in use one way each way 3 lanes each. My (not 
overly useful) 11/12/23 southbound Mapillary imagery hasn't merged yet. 
Typically that may take another week. No overhead imagery is current.


I can dig up all the 1FPS 4K photos I have if anyone wants them.

Tnx, Bob


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

[OpenStreetMap Serbia] Geospatial Community of Serbia - First Meetup

[Komadinovic Vanja]

Foursquare Srbija i Microsoft Srbija organizuju meetup u prostorijama
Foursquare Srbija. Tekst opisa dogadjaja:

Welcome to the first Geospatial Community of Serbia meetup! The idea behind
the meetup is to bring together geospatial professionals and enthusiast, as
well as members of other IT communities, to connect, share informations and
discuss geospatial topics. Folks from Microsoft, Foursquare, Open Street
Maps will be there, and many more. The event will happen at the Foursquare
office in Dom Sindikata, Trg Nikole Pasica 5, VI Floor, (entrance next to
cafe Soljica). Here is the video how to find us:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9dKdEWLsXg


Time table:
6:00pm - Meet & Greet
6:15pm - Introduction of the Geospatial Community of Serbia
6:30pm - Nikola Nedeljkovic and Danilo Strbac(Foursquare): "Visualising
Geospatial Data"
6:50pm - Aleksandar Samardzija(Microsoft): Microsoft & Open Data
7:30pm - Hangout and discussions over pizza and beer

Više možete videti na:
https://www.linkedin.com/events/geospatialcommunityofserbia-fir7140398663352184833/

Srdačan pozdrav,
Komadinović Vanja
___
Talk-rs mailing list
Talk-rs@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-rs

Re: [OSM-talk] Mechanical Edit: Merge of DB Netz AG and DB Station AG to DB InfraGO AG

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Mateusz,

Am 08.12.23 um 11:00 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via talk:

Why remove operator:wikipedia=* rather than fixing them?


I would have to change operator:wikipedia=* to point to the new article 
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB_InfraGO). However, the tag is a 
duplication if operator:wikidata=* is set. If operator:wikidata=* was 
set, I will update it. If operator:wikidata=* was missing but 
operator:wikipedia=* was set, I will set

operator:wikipedia=de:DB InfraGO.

Best regards

Michael


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Mechanical Edit: Merge of DB Netz AG and DB Station AG to DB InfraGO AG

[Mateusz Konieczny via talk]

Right now I am against making this edit due to not answering this question.


Dec 8, 2023, 11:06 by talk@openstreetmap.org:

> Why remove operator:wikipedia=* rather than fixing them?
>
>
> Dec 7, 2023, 22:12 by osm...@michreichert.de:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> as of 1 January 2024, DB Netz AG and DB Station AG will merge and 
>> renamed to DB InfraGO AG. This requires an update to lots of operator=* tags 
>> including operator:wikidata=*, and some owner=* tags. The mechanical edit 
>> will also remove existing operator:wikipedia=* from the modified objects.
>>
>> The mechanical edit affects mainly Germany, but some infrastructure is 
>> located in Switzerland, Belgium and Czech Republic. That's why I post at 
>> this mailing list at all.
>>
>> You can find the documentation at
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/Nakaner-repair/DB_InfraGO_AG
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Michael
>>
>
>

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

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

[Mark Pulley]

On my last holiday I took a detour to re-check the Apsley Gorge track.

The asphalt path ends at a lookout https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/324186826

The ‘controversial’ path is still present south of here - I followed it some of 
the way (about 350m), but didn’t follow it all the way to the end.

There is a sign just south of the lookout - Google Maps street view shows the 
sign (the small yellow object near the southern end of the safety rail!)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/9mDecm2GKpXxM48k6

On the left side of the sign, there’s a warning icon (exclamation mark), then 
“No safety rail”, another warning icon (man falling off edge of crumbling 
cliff), then “Unstable edges”

On the right side of the sign is the text “End of track, no safety rail beyond 
this point”

The sign is there to discourage walkers venturing further south, but it’s not 
technically a “do not enter” sign.

Does that help with what to do with this particular example?

Mark P.

> 
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2023 at 23:33, Mark Pulley  > wrote:
>> A brief summary of the options for this type of situation (not just this 
>> particular edit, but similar edits in the past and probably future):
>> 
>> 1. Revert the change sets (in the absence of more information)
>> 2. Partial revert, with a change in tags
>> 3. Leave the deletion as it is.
>> 
>> For this particular example, the results would be:
>> 1. Full revert - way will be marked informal=yes, but without access tags
>> 2. Partial revert - could add access=no, or alternatively 
>> abandoned:highway=* or disused:highway=*
>> 3. No reversion
> 
> I would opt for 2, leave the way in place, but with access=no, a lifecycle 
> prefix on the highway tag like abandoned:highway=* or rehabilitated:highway=*.
> 
> If there is signage that says closed for rehabilitation, we should capture 
> the closure reason somewhere, so OSM data consumers can present that reason 
> for the closure to users, whether that be via rehabilitated:highway=* or 
> something like, access:reason=rehabilitation.
> 

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