Re: [OSM-talk] Shoud OSM Help move to Stackexchange community?
On 9/9/2012 11:33 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: As for authentication: I don't buy the 'That would make me sign up to a new thing and I would need to remember another password' argument and in general I strongly support integrating OSM authentication with existing authentication domains. I agree here - because it would still use OpenID, etc the only thing to lose would be the capability to reuse the OSM password. But as we all know, reusing passwords across sites is a poor security practice and should be discouraged. The added exposure through StackExchange can only help. Highly technical people are part of the population profile we are trying to attract. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER 2012 Roads
On 9/4/2012 7:10 PM, Ian Dees wrote: Hi all, You may remember my TIGER 2011 rendered tile layer that's based on TIGER shapefiles from late 2011. TIGER recently updated to include data from 2012, so I imported that data and have a new tile layer here: http://tile.osm.osuosl.org/tiles/tiger2012_roads/preview.html#17/41.93708/-87.70124 I feel stupid, but I tried that in JOSM as an image lary, as well as some variations, but couldn't get it to work. Is there any way to make it work as JOSM imagery? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER 2012 Roads
On 9/7/2012 9:38 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
this is the imagery url. I have just copied the 2011 setting and replaced the
year and it works for me.
tms:http://{switch:a,b,c}.tile.openstreetmap.us/tiger2012_roads/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
That works, thanks very much! One complication was that JOSM cached
the failures from my earlier guesses in my area of interest, so when I
tried the correct version nothing was even downloaded until I moved
outside of that area.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Announcing Remap-a-tron
On 8/31/2012 11:17 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I want to add The Remap-A-Tron to the ever growing list of tools designed to support the ongoing remapping effort. That's a fantastic application! ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] The Case for Open Geo Data - resources?
I map in OpenStreetMap for fun, but when it comes to talking to local governments or the media, I don't have a good idea of how to justify open data.I'm thinking in terms of being able to tell local government how open Geodata would benefit them. Are there any resources that discuss the benefits of open Geodata or open transportation data (GTFS), as well as the best license - Public Domain? Other License? Thanks, ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Data Layer
On 8/22/2012 2:43 PM, David ``Smith'' wrote: What happened to the data overlay on the slippy map? That might make analysis of situations like this easier without having to fire up an editor… It has been temporarily move to the Edit tab - click on the down arrow or hover to be able to select the data layer. As time allows, I understand that the intent is to bring it back to the layer switcher. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Update to Redacted Highways map
On 8/21/2012 10:44 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I wrote about the logic to detect those ways here: That writeup sounds like it will detect the re-introduced deleted ways I'm thinking of. Looking forward to seeing it in the tool! ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] FYI - Creating GTFS data from OSM data
On 8/18/2012 3:56 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: maybe the existence of an OSM-to-GTFS converter could be misunderstood by some as an invitation to upload OSM transit data to Google's database? I would go further and say that the existence of GTFS data itself would be an invitation to upload to Google's database. Even if I instruct the current staff about licensing issues, any new personnel would find it reasonable that they should upload to Google. And the data files themselves don't have a standard for embedding copyright information. This is because Google's Transit Content Agreement pretty much requires that all rights be assigned to Google anyway. http://odd.greatergreaterwashington.org/files/2010/stdgoogletransit.pdf So since the GTFS files include shape and stop geo data directly derived from OSM data, my project is pretty much a dead issue for licensing reasons. So the OpenTripPlanner experiment will remain a publicly accessible private toy on my personal server. As an almost related note, I hope the mobile Kickstarter project takes off - my private site will be much more usable from a mobile device: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/228865951/transit-app-for-ios-6-and-beyond If it makes its goal, I also hope they include a Pull the stop rope now - type of function. If someone takes public transit to a new location, there is little chance of them recognizing an upcoming stop. I suppose they could ask the driver to stop somewhere however. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] FYI - Creating GTFS data from OSM data
On 8/18/2012 8:00 AM, Mike Dupont wrote: This is openplans.org? is the opentrip planner able to use osm data directly? https://github.com/openplans/OpenTripPlanner Yes, OpenTripPlanner can use OSM data directly to route for cycle, foot, and even car traffic - although they don't optimize car routing at this time. OpenTripPlanner can also include public transit routing and bike rental service definitions to plan a multimode trip. In order to include public transit information, a GTFS dataset needs to be created to define the routes plans and schedules outside of the OSM data. My tool allows the user to define the schedule data based on OSM route and stop information. OpenTripPlanner then consumes those files and functions as a multimode router. I think this will be within the current and future license as long as I make the tools available to the public. And also as long as the GTFS dataset never gets uploaded to Google. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-transit] FYI - Creating GTFS data from OSM data
This project falls in the Why would anybody want to do that? [1] category. - The OSM bus route paths and stops have all been surveyed in my area. - There is no GTFS feed, and the transit provider isn't planning one soon (no budget). - I wanted to apply the data to OpenTripPlanner for bicycle and transit routing. There are some free GTFS editors, some paid products, but none that start with maximum use of OSM data as a base to create an initial GTFS feed. I had toyed briefly with teaching the local transit provider how to maintain routes and stops in OSM, but a few passes at editing route relations quickly cured me of that idea - public transport route relation edits are way too complicated for most people. So I wrote a tool to read the OSM data, allow entry of the schedules, then it would create a GTFS dataset. Future GTFS edits would be made by the transit provider with industry standard tools. The tool is written in C# / .NET - Winforms. It is in alpha stage (Worked great for me), but it's a little rough around the edges, and probably would require running in the debugger to adapt for another public transit system or to determine if a problem is caused by the OSM data or a program bug. Let me know off list if you're interested in looking at the program. After 1 or 2 people test it, I'll just check it into SVN. - 1: http://www.ypass.net/blog/2009/06/an-app-to-manage-busrail-routes-in-gtfs-format-that-no-one-wanted/ ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[OSM-talk] FYI - Creating GTFS data from OSM data
This project falls in the Why would anybody want to do that? [1] category. - The OSM bus route paths and stops have all been surveyed in my area. - There is no GTFS feed, and the transit provider isn't planning one soon (no budget). - I wanted to apply the data to OpenTripPlanner for bicycle and transit routing. There are some free GTFS editors, some paid products, but none that start with maximum use of OSM data as a base to create an initial GTFS feed. I had toyed briefly with teaching the local transit provider how to maintain routes and stops in OSM, but a few passes at editing route relations quickly cured me of that idea - public transport route relation edits are way too complicated for most people. So I wrote a tool to read the OSM data, allow entry of the schedules, then it would create a GTFS dataset. Future GTFS edits would be made by the transit provider with industry standard tools. The tool is written in C# / .NET - Winforms. It is in alpha stage (Worked great for me), but it's a little rough around the edges, and probably would require running in the debugger to adapt for another public transit system or to determine if a problem is caused by the OSM data or a program bug. Let me know off list if you're interested in looking at the program. After 1 or 2 people test it, I'll just check it into SVN. - 1: http://www.ypass.net/blog/2009/06/an-app-to-manage-busrail-routes-in-gtfs-format-that-no-one-wanted/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] License Change plans?
Now that the redaction bot has finished, what is remaining to bless the database as ODBL? Just asking because it will be good to see some of the consumers be able to switch to pulling their feeds from the new license rather than displaying data from April 2012. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] New version of US redaction map
On 8/13/2012 12:48 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: The main new thing is that it now shows deleted ways as well Very nice - this map and Toby's are very useful. I see that the deleted ways are purple. One thing I have noticed is that it would be nice to detect a new roadway having been added under the old deleted roadway, and automatically remove the notification. Thanks, Mike ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] New version of US redaction map
On 8/13/2012 11:11 PM, Paul Norman wrote: It’s all CC BY-SA right now so you’d be okay now, but I think it’d be a problem in the future under both CC BY-SA and ODbL if you were mix the data in this way. I'd think this is not actually importing any information directly from the redacted copyrighted CC BY-SA data: it's just using it to set or clear a flag. Much as if you were heading out to do a survey, printed Google navigation directions, and found that the Google directions are wrong when you get there - you'd conclude Mismatch, but still rely only on survey and approved sources to create OSM data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Redaction affected ways map
On 8/4/2012 2:27 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I would like to know if this is useful to anybody, or what I can do to make it more so. Very nice - it makes it easy to find, check, and fix all the roads that were touched. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Discardable TIGER tags
On 7/30/2012 7:18 AM, David ``Smith'' wrote: Wasn't someone working on importing address data from TIGER? I was under the impression that may have depended on tiger:tlid tags on objects already in OSM, but wasn't sure… TIGER address data isn't nearly accurate enough to import into OSM. Addressing applications who want to use TIGER addressing for a rough geo-location estimate could just use a local TIGER address database to fall back on if OSM does not contain the address. I've often discussed importing updated road data from TIGER. The single case where TLID could be useful is matching un-named driveways to existing data, then applying a geometric correction to the proper way. I've done little more than simple tests however, and nothing close to being usable. There are some ways so far off in the original TIGER data that geo-matching would fail to locate the right way. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical import: Empty relations 1
On 7/29/2012 5:06 AM, Paul Norman wrote: - Those with no members and no tags - Those with no members and type=multipolygon as the only tag Relations removed will be limited to those more than a day old to avoid conflicting with any open changesets. I would suggest a longer time interval, perhaps a week - I have performed multiple edit sessions with periodic uploads with 'dangling empty relations' before they were filled in. (Although they would have had more tags). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Discardable TIGER tags
On 7/28/2012 3:33 AM, Toby Murray wrote: Not really sure about the zip code tags. I find the county and zip code tags to be useful at times to tell me where I'm located when doing Mapdust cleanup. I could probably come up with some other way to find myself if they weren't there, but it's convenient. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-transit] Using route part relations in Route relations
On 7/24/2012 6:38 AM, Jo wrote: It would be a lot easier if it were possible to create route part relations, for example from one stop to the next and then be able to use these relations in the actual route relations. This would enable to map deviations for longer lasting road works as well. There already exists relation type=route,route=bus. type=route_master then includes members of this relation. Does this address your issue? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route_master ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [Talk-transit] Using route part relations in Route relations
On 7/24/2012 10:32 AM, Jo wrote: Well, to be honest, I had hoped that everybody who is doing PT would have been screaming for this by now. It's a message on talk-fr by somebody who wants to start doing this for cycle route relations that triggered me into proposing it yet again. I have proposed it already when the PT scheme was introduced, but they didn't want to include it back then, as they feared it might be hard enough already to get it passed, without it. Of course it's an extra layer in the hierarchy, but it would be a lot more logical than the way it's done now. As far as adding complexity goes, it would actually reduce the number of relations a particular way would be part of. Somebody told me they got a bit scared after seeing this video: I see what you're referring to now. At one time I had fantasies of turning my OSM routes + a GTFS tool that works with OSM data over to the local transit authority to use with OpenTripPlanner. However when I performed the steps to modify a route by adding a loop in the center, I was quickly corrected. While they'll be able to use OpenTripPlanner, their future work will be with some general GTFS management tool, not OSM. ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
[OSM-talk] FYI - Automated edit: footway - sidewalk
FYI, please provide any feedback to the original author on the forum. http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=17526 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] National Map Corps Revived - And Using the OSM Stack
On 7/23/2012 1:58 PM, Eric Wolf wrote: Interestingly, in Phase 2 there were some structures that got changed back to the initial state from GNIS. After a little digging, it was noted that the first volunteer fixed incorrect information from the GNIS import but then the second volunteer (during our volunteer quality control process) changed it back, citing Google as the source. Unfortunately, Google was reporting data they imported from GNIS but didn't cite their source! Even within the very controlled setting of Phase 2, volunteers contributing to the project acted in ways the USGS had not anticipated. Fascinating! I have noticed this when trying to research something that has moved - the original source of many Google hits is obviously the original GNIS data point. I have moved many churches and schools who outgrew their original location and rebuilt halfway across town. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] National Park boundaries
On 7/22/2012 7:39 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: But it turns out the NPS has a boundary shapefile for all National Parks, Historic Sites, Rivers, Parkways, Lakeshores and more than a dozen other categories[4]. Is this something to consider for importing? I am in favor of importing park boundaries in particular because it is usually impractical to survey them in the traditional way: park managers don't want random unsupervised people wandering off trail trying to find park boundaries. The boundaries might be on dangerous terrain. Park boundaries are also often not possible to spot from aerial imagery. Rivers, waterways, etc are best obtained from NHD. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Major Vandalism in the Charlotte, NC
On 7/21/2012 8:48 AM, James Mast wrote: Just thought I would give you a heads up guys, but a new guy to the project has been doing some major damage to the Downtown Charlotte, NC area putting in a ton of fictional stuff Thanks for the heads up - otherwise I would have probably been checking out some of those interstates soon. I always wonder about the thought processes when this happens... ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] LA part of the map essentially is unusable
On 7/21/2012 5:51 PM, Evin Fairchild wrote: Would it work to do an import of TIGER 2011 data for most of the affected area? The TIGER 2011 data is much improved over the data from the original TIGER import that took place several years ago, and it would be a great way to get both the roads and the road names back on OSM. It would be much less tedious than having to re-draw and retrace everything, but we would have to make sure that the roads would be connected to other roads at intersections, and that we wouldn't be uploading any roads that are already there. What does everyone think of my idea? For City block areas and subdivisions, this is certainly one of the easiest ways: remove, then bring those areas in from TIGER 2011 and connect the intersections. This is not advisable for more major roads, which may already have relations, speed limits, lane count and other attributes already added. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Post bot cleanup
On 7/19/2012 4:22 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Another thing I find is a lot of leftover stray nodes without any tags. I select them in JOSM with type:node tags:0 -child and delete them in one fell swoop. In many cases, I find it easier to retrieve and plop the TIGER road back in as a replacement and stitch the intersections, rather than connect-the-dots. I figure that someone will run a global orphan node deletion bot some day. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] OSM is pretty
On 7/20/2012 4:46 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I was just randomly browsing the map and happened upon the Epcot center: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.373lon=-81.5483zoom=17layers=M That's one pretty looking map! Agreed! I made use of it just a few weeks ago. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Post bot cleanup
On 7/19/2012 1:42 AM, Toby Murray wrote: Now that we're cleaning up after the license bot, what problems are people seeing? The biggest problem I have run into so far is the same 'foldback' problem Kai saw. It's quite confusing when both sides of a dual carriageway are folded back and take the on- and off- ramps with them. Unwinding that is worse than any TIGER fixup. Fortunately it hasn't happened very often. I'm tempted to just do a mass delete and rebuild of such an area instead of sorting it out. FYI in South Carolina, I'm volunteering to clean up the northwestern part of the state because I have some local knowledge. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[OSM-talk] OT - Unusual Bing imagery
I spotted this today as I was entering survey information: http://greenvilleopenmap.info/Airplane.jpg I didn't realize that the Bing planes flew so high. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER fixup and mapping more
On 7/12/2012 11:43 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: I was wondering if something likehttp://frontdoor.cloudapp.net/ might be a fun solution. Present some aerial imagery, the OSM data, and say is this a track or a road?. Kind of like HotOrNot for the OSM generation. (For extra efficiency, have a button for it's a track and in fact_everything_ on this view is a track... and a link to open it in P2 (or whatever) for the really curious.) I like the idea of this type of app in general. However armchair classification of tracks locally here will often fail, even with the improved Bing imagery. They often curve about while being 90% obscured by tree cover, and cannot be distinguished from paved roads. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] railway=abandoned and mapping things that are not there any more?
On 7/12/2012 12:37 PM, Peter Dobratz wrote: It seems that there are a handful of railroad enthusiast users that are systematically adding current and former railways into OSM, and in some cases re-adding railways that I have removed. I have been operating under the assumption that if a physical feature is not currently there, then it should be deleted. That issue came up here also. I let him go since it looked like most of the work was quality and he did a bit of fixup with current physical tracks. We agreed that the abandoned railways could be deleted where they have been bulldozed over or buildings built over them. So they are present, and don't hurt anything. None of the 'standard maps' will bother to render them. A railway map could use them if it needed to. I delete them if they go through current buildings or parking lots also. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: [OSM-dev] Licence redaction ready to begin
On 7/10/2012 5:43 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Oh, and South Carolina. Not going to touch that. Don't Tread on Us - LOL. The state capital region of Columbia, South Carolina will be a prime test of the Do empty areas attract contributors? theory for some time to come. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: [OSM-dev] Licence redaction ready to begin
On 7/11/2012 8:38 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, On 07/11/12 13:59, Mike N wrote: The state capital region of Columbia, South Carolina will be a prime test of the Do empty areas attract contributors? theory for some time to come. Why, is someone planning to remove the TIGER import in that area? Bye Frederik No, just removing a prolific decliner's work - BadMap removal: http://cleanmap.poole.ch/?zoom=11lat=34.03016lon=-81.17525layers=00B For a close-up: http://cleanmap.poole.ch/?zoom=15lat=33.99334lon=-81.24366layers=00B There are many other things that could be undone, such as joining county borders in the state, and many individual node alignments that don't show up in the overview map. Not the end of the world, but routing consumers will need to adjust their expectations for a period of time. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] US Road route relation conventions
As part of the review and cleanup after the redaction bot, I am planning to go through and review state routes and create relations for them. There's been much good work in developing the Shields rendering scheme, and I would like to prepare when / if it gets rolled out in the US. Is there a Wiki page that describes the best current highway tagging scheme to document use of route relations and refs to support Mapnik with shields and other data consumers? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] new bing hires updates not visible in JOSM?
And a big thanks to the Bing Team for getting this imagery update out. It's a huge help in keeping maps current! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] new bing hires updates not visible in JOSM?
On 6/13/2012 4:06 PM, hbogner wrote: Try to delete the cache :D I posted this to talk-US - I have 2 instances of JOSM - one 'works', and the other always shows the 'old imagery'. I removed all cached images from the JOSM settings folder, and the shared %TEMP%\JmapViewer_UserName cache (for Windows). I ran a Procmon trace, and cannot see that it accesses any image files from any other folder. The only thing I haven't done is a network trace to see what the difference between the 2 instances is, as well as double checking and comparing the cached image file contents between instances. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] new bing hires updates not visible in JOSM?
On 6/13/2012 5:58 PM, Jonas Häggqvist wrote: Remove bing.attribution.xml from the cache dir: %APPDATA%\JOSM\cache\bing.attribution.xml on Windows ~/.josm/cache/bing.attribution.xml on Linux This appears to be a JOSM bug, as the attribution file/config should not be cached. https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/7778 Thanks - that worked here! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Bing Imagery link changed for JOSM?
On 6/13/2012 5:22 AM, James Mast wrote: I've also noticed this in the happening in St. Louis along I-64. JOSM is still loading the old imagery, while Potlatch 2 is getting the newer imagery. From a similar thread on talk... right-click on the editing area and select 'Flush tile cache'. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Bing Imagery link changed for JOSM?
On 6/13/2012 12:13 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Perhaps you're zoomed in too far. PL2 also gives the old imagery at zoom 20: It's also possible that they're rolling out the new stuff in stages to different servers behind the load sharing server. So that might be why some solutions work differently and at different times for different people. They might send browser / flash fetches to a different server than JOSM based on the server agent. I did find an amazing number of different image caches in JOSM's working directory tree though. The files all seem to be dated too old to still be in use. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Bing Imagery link changed for JOSM?
On 6/13/2012 2:09 PM, Mike N wrote: It's also possible that they're rolling out the new stuff in stages to different servers behind the load sharing server. OK, I'm officially stumped. I have 2 instances of JOSM - one 'works', and the other always shows the 'old imagery'. I removed all cached images from the JOSM settings folder, and the shared %TEMP%\JmapViewer_UserName cache (for Windows). I ran a Procmon trace, and cannot see that it accesses any image files from any other folder. The only thing I haven't done is a network trace to see what the difference between the 2 instances is, as well as double checking and comparing the cached image file contents. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] new bing hires updates not visible in JOSM?
On 6/13/2012 5:58 PM, Jonas Häggqvist wrote: Remove bing.attribution.xml from the cache dir: %APPDATA%\JOSM\cache\bing.attribution.xml on Windows ~/.josm/cache/bing.attribution.xml on Linux This appears to be a JOSM bug, as the attribution file/config should not be cached. https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/7778 Thanks - that worked here! ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Import discussions
On 6/11/2012 10:54 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: Personally, I wish that all those that want to import building outlines would first think about the existing street network (this, after all, being OpenSTREETMap). So much of the US is still unedited TIGER 2005 data - mis-aligned, poorly connected, stale-named, and missing lots of new construction from the peak to the end of the housing boom. I'll agree with this. I'm not sure of the value of building outlines until someone actively uses or updates them. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Special issues in LA remap
On 6/6/2012 4:12 AM, Toby Murray wrote: Without some object IDs it is hard to say exactly what blars did. If you have some specific examples, select them in JOSM and hit CTRL-SHIFT-I to open a browser window with a link you can send to the list. A lot of what I saw in LA looked like legitimate mapping to me. He was active before the TIGER import so there is a lot of his I picked an area at random near some of his edits: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=33.97985lon=-118.18848zoom=17layers=M Using way id 13292685 : http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/13292685 , I looked at the edits. In this case, some nodes were moved, presumably to align with the aerial imagery. I couldn't find any GPS tracks in the immediate area to confirm the aerial alignment. The node I looked at was moved at least 10 meters. So, the redaction bot will not completely destroy those areas. If no one has touched the road alignment since his work, it will just revert back to the original TIGER upload coordinates. All that is required after the redaction bot will be to nudge the nodes to the location where they belong. A fast preemptive remap for nodes set for redaction-move would be to just move the node to align with current Bing aerial. Note that the Bing aerial alignment might not be perfect - try to find some GPS tracks in the area to see how close it is. There should be some tracks on the nearest interstate. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Import of buildings in Chicago
On 5/29/2012 1:09 AM, Alan Mintz wrote: I used to agree with you, but in terms of minimum labor, updates are best performed by retaining the original upload data, then doing a conflation between the original data and a later update. That will highlight only changes from the original source, and only those differences will need to be manually merged into OSM. Except you won't see possible errors introduced after the first import by OSM editors. I think it's useful to see the diff between the current state of both databases. In an ideal OSM world, those errors would be caught by the 'Gardeners' in the area who tend their regions by watching OWL or an equivalent edit monitor. The best time to catch errors is while they can serve as a learning experience for a new contributor who can remember what he intended to do, as well as easier to revert if necessary. Doing a diff between the updated database and the OSM database calls out many changes that shouldn't need to be reviewed: a fence terminating at a building, gardens, plazas, sidewalks and stairways that connect to buildings. It's just a trade off in the effort needed to perform the import synchronization task. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Import of buildings in Chicago
On 5/27/2012 2:53 PM, Alan wrote: As I discussed with you, I am no longer uploading data with the tag and will go back to remove the tag from the existing data. I object. An ID tag is highly useful for future reconciliation and/or synchronization later. I used to agree with you, but in terms of minimum labor, updates are best performed by retaining the original upload data, then doing a conflation between the original data and a later update. That will highlight only changes from the original source, and only those differences will need to be manually merged into OSM. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER road expansion code
On 5/12/2012 5:54 PM, Anthony wrote: If so, this is good, but it does mean that road names are going to get out of sync, if, for instance, tiger:name_base was removed from some of the ways and not removed from others. This will complicate later fixes/enhancements. This also happens long term as people create roads from scratch and don't know about the abbreviation rule when starting. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fixing TIGER street name abbreviations
On 5/11/2012 1:36 PM, Alan Mintz wrote: Okay, so basically we're ignoring the on-the-ground rule in order to map for the renderer. Exactly :) Why that is ok, I don't know :( Mapping for the renderer has never been wrong or discouraged. Tagging incorrectly for the renderer is another story... ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fixing TIGER street name abbreviations
On 5/10/2012 9:48 PM, Anthony wrote: You seem to be assuming all the changes are positive. I didn't take it that way - it was just a quick test for orders of magnitude. An actual script takes more review. What happened to the on the ground rule, anyway? That already doesn't directly apply because most street signs are abbreviated to start with. Local and regional knowledge will be helpful though. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fixing TIGER street name abbreviations
On 5/10/2012 10:19 PM, Anthony wrote: What I'm questioning is why it doesn't apply. If the people call it Whatever Ave, shouldn't the data read Whatever Ave? Most of the US wouldn't call it 'Whatever Ave'; when spoken, it would be 'Avenue'. Having it expanded makes programs with spoken directions much more accurate. The only question is what to do about those cases where it's only referred to locally as 'Ave', and the postal service would refuse letters addressed to 'Avenue'. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fixing TIGER street name abbreviations
On 5/10/2012 10:40 PM, Anthony wrote: Depends on what street you're talking about. I've certainly lived in places where the vast majority of the locals called it Whatever Ave, and not Whatever Avenue. Most of the US...wouldn't talk about the street at all. But you wouldn't be confused if an stranger came in asking how to get to Whatever Avenue?If not, then there's no problem with the expansion. Presumably, a US-centric renderer would abbreviate names for display, while spoken directions would be no more confusing than this stranger. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Celebrating Neskie
On 5/8/2012 6:23 AM, Richard Weait wrote: He was active in several communities, with an interest in Free Software / Open Source, OpenStreetMap The follow-on question is: since he didn't have a chance to accept or reject the CT, do we honor his contribution by unleashing the ODBL deletion bot on his work? Is his estate/executor authorized to accept the CT on his behalf? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Fresno castradal imports
On 5/5/2012 1:23 AM, Gregory Arenius wrote: The OSM model isn't everything in a separate layer, it is everything altogether. What makes plots unique in this regard? Why do we want them separate? If you compare land use to TIGER - the base road network from TIGER is continually being corrected, improved and updated. Land use is typically never updated once it has been brought into OSM. Most of the changes are incidental as mappers update other objects such as roads, buildings, and power lines. Now when there is a large change, such as from an expanding city - how do you update the OSM data? Delete any changes that have been made and replace them with the new data? Contrast that to keeping the data separate: updating is as simple as replacing a group of files. (But of course the separate database is hypothetical at this point). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fixing TIGER street name abbreviations
On 5/1/2012 12:59 PM, Anthony wrote: I'm not sure what you're saying. Automatically expanding abbreviations is a terrible idea. If an abbreviation is unambiguous, then it can be expanded during the preprocessing step. If, on the other hand, it is ambiguous, then you are turning ambiguous data into incorrect data, which certainly diminishes the data. What preprocessing step? TIGER data has already been imported. The types of errors I'm referring to are where you go to upload from JOSM, then decide to slavishly submit to the validator's warnings about abbreviated street names. What person manually types 2 - 3 dozen versions of Street , Avenue, Boulevard, Point, Circle without any typos? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fixing TIGER street name abbreviations
On 5/1/2012 1:21 PM, Anthony wrote: The preprocessing step between downloading the data from OSM and doing something with it. That assumes that the TIGER tags will always be present to assist with proper automatic expansion. And I'd rather have the US data in line with the world-wide OSM data where it makes sense. That way the US can consume OSM US data with tools developed worldwide, without the tool writers needing to implement US-specific rules. After analysis, most of the US opinions fall on the side of no abbreviations. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fixing TIGER street name abbreviations
On 4/30/2012 10:24 PM, Toby Murray wrote: I believe It was stopped after some complaints about it not handling some situations correctly. But I would probably be in favor of trying to complete it. I would agree - there's no point in asserting that we have to spend time manually expanding everything, it's not adding value to the map data. And the bot is probably more accurate than a human, limited only by the accuracy of the base TIGER data - think of all the possible typos on streeet, avenve, and boulavard. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] New editors
On 4/19/2012 3:50 AM, Floris Looijesteijn wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Mike Nnice...@att.net wrote: ... But one newbie deleted about 300 streets, seemingly for a wedding-related event map :-( ... I couldn't help laughing, that's actually pretty funny. Did you contact the user? Yes, I sent a message, but got no reply. Perhaps they were too embarrassed, so the revert will be initiated. It would be funny to get the printed wedding invitation, containing just the remaining major streets! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] New editors
In this area, there's been a surprising number of new contributors in the last 2 months: about 5 altogether. This is most likely from publicity received from the news stories surrounding the #switch2osm cases. In one case, they had actually registered a year ago, but made no edits until now. But one newbie deleted about 300 streets, seemingly for a wedding-related event map :-( No new power editors yet, but there's always hope. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit: Empty Relations
On 4/13/2012 5:12 AM, Paul Norman wrote: I will filter out ones touched in the last 24 hours to avoid conflicting with anyone. Could this be extended to 30 days, or at least a week? I remember creating a set from a survey on one weekend, and finishing it the following weekend. I think part of this included the empty relation, although I would just go ahead and populate the relation immediately now that I know what I'm doing. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Excellent progress, u.s.
On 4/12/2012 11:13 PM, James Mast wrote: It seems that they are just starting a new way and connecting each old node to the new way without at least moving the old node, which means if Lar created the node and nobody has moved it since, it still will get deleted and mess up the highway alignment. My first plan of action after the removal bot is to revalidate all interstate geometry. In my Interstate remapping, I didn't bother with all nodes to be removed, and I'll just go in and correct that later. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] tagging cul-de-sacs
On 4/10/2012 10:17 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: A roundabout (or mini_roundabout) implies to me (although it is not defined on the wiki) that there is more than one entry / exit road. So intuitively I'd say that is not an appropriate tag. I agree, this is not a roundabout. I use turning_circle, unless there is an island in the middle, in which case I draw the circular way as used in this example. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NHD import
On 4/9/2012 1:39 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Here's some NHD 'data': Perhaps rice fields, based on a Google Street View, but I can't see for sure. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Mapdust
On 4/6/2012 10:24 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: Anyone else try to fix bugs off there? I have tried as I want to improve OSM. I am increasingly finding it a waste of time, too many bugs are labelled 'other' and just don't have enough info to work out what the problem is. In these cases I usually close them, and work on the ones that are solvable, or at least someone has bothered to try to describe the problem. But now can't do that as 'word verification' is broken. I type the code, but now it just gives me another code. What a useless site. Not totally useless, and quality of reports varies, but they have identified some routing problems for me. I also find most of the 'other' class reports to be unusable without an explanation from the reporter. Occasionally you can spot something that doesn't look right and fix it. The 'Verification code' is time sensitive, and at times requires a second entry if you enter it after correcting a problem for some time. If it asks more than twice, something may be broken. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Mapdust
On 4/6/2012 11:13 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: Have spotted one problem, not got a clue if its what was reported, where the route was going onto a roundabout, rather than using the bypass lane. Have changed the bypass to 'Trunk link' from 'Primary link' to see if that will fix it. Are there any online mapping sites that use the live map so that I can test my theory. The roundabout is Dobbies Island, Shrewsbury when going from Meol Brace onto the A5 eastbound. Mapdust itself has an Interactive Mapping tab on the right side. But I find that it occasionally does not agree with the highlighted route on the bug report. All the routing sites I've seen operate with some delay from live updates, typically a day.But perhaps now suspended until the license cleanup is complete and much of the previous data has been recreated. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering
On 4/2/2012 8:25 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: Richard Weait and I have been working on a rendering that uses route relations to make individual shields that reflect what each state uses. Superb! This will greatly assist OSM to make inroads in the US - for those who glance at the map, see the weird ovals, and dismiss it as a child's toy. I looked at some of the states that I know about, and they look great to me.In SC, I haven't bothered with route relations yet - I see that it will now be project ONE after the great license purge of 2012 is complete! (NE2 has created several in SC: http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=16lat=33.80378lon=-78.79053layers=B0 ) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Highway Shield Rendering
On 4/2/2012 8:25 AM, Phil! Gold wrote: please let me know what you think! Looks great - does the US OSMF have server(s) that can host this style yet? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] It has begun
On 4/1/2012 3:01 PM, Toby Murray wrote: I attempted contact with 168 users. 105 of them accepted the new terms. That's much higher than I would have expected. My stats: Contact about terms via OSM: 8 Response: 0Obviously I used the wrong wording or was unlucky. But I did tailor the message to their home edits. Coincidentally, I've sent 5 OSM contact messages to local mappers over the past 3 years to explore a meetup idea. Zero responses. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Update on remapping
On 4/1/2012 4:42 AM, James Mast wrote: So, who else here was at least somewhat successful in their objective in data cleanup (I still think this whole thing was kinda stupid, as I'd rather been fixing/adding new stuff instead of redoing stuff that others added)? I was somewhat successful in the sense that for the little time I could spend on it, I was able to clean up a small circular region around me. In some cases, I didn't bother to touch all nodes for an Interstate; there will be some zany geometry when they are deleted, and I'll just recreate at that time. In addition, some intersecting nodes are still on the chopping block, and they'll have to be detected by Mapdust or Keepright.I also felt it was important to keep adding new stuff instead of 100% on cleanup. Columbia, SC however will be unusable for navigation for some time to come. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Update on remapping
On 4/1/2012 7:51 AM, the Old Topo Depot wrote: I cleaned up most of I95, I20 and I26 in SC, I saw those come through - thanks for fixing them! ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Update on remapping
On 4/1/2012 8:07 AM, James Mast wrote: Hopefully I can finish the I-81 rebuild off-line before the database is live so it can be one of the first uploads. And a small caution - if the ODBL removal bot happens to hit it before your upload, there will be version conflicts. I have no idea on its timing however. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Update on remapping
On 3/28/2012 2:55 AM, Toby Murray wrote: I've seen a little work being done on interstates but so far it's been a drop in the bucket. My logic is that data consumers will shut off their feed, so we won't have instant chaos on Mapquest.com for example. After the license change, any Interstate breaks will be easy to spot and fix because they all have relations, whereas small local road deletions will be lost in the noise and the only way to reclaim them is to wait for a Mapdust report or compare against TIGER for an entire area. I've been trying to preserve the small roads in my area while they're easy to identify. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] OSM Moment
There haven't been many 'OSM Moments' for me; you know, out of the blue, you see one of your major map works in use in a completely unexpected context. I actually had 2 of those moments in 2012 - where 2 unrelated planning documents featured OSM maps which were much more detailed and up to date than any other map. I'm not going to share them because they didn't provide attribution (and I don't care). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] New local groups
On 3/26/2012 10:52 AM, Richard Weait wrote: What incentive would it take to push you over the edge to make you actually do it? I tend to be a hands-on person, and ultimately the motivation would be that there is an immensely useful data consumer. It doesn't help that the first project I worked on in OSM (a rails-to-trail fitness trail) just got a map applet commissioned for it. You'd think they'd have used OSM data? No, they sent out their own team to survey all the drinking fountains, ATMs, restaurants, and POIs along the trail, put them into their own app and released that separately. Even the premiere OSM Nav app (Skobbler's Nav2) doesn't yet use OSM address data in the US because there just isn't enough of it. And for cases where I've entered OSM address data for popular destinations, they haven't yet begun to use OSM address data. Now with a bunch of South Carolina's capitol city losing most of the roads and local knowledge due to the license change, an opportunity would be to advertise the situation: Fill in the missing roads around our city and start some meetups that way. It's a bit far for me to travel for six meetings though. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Problem user
On 3/24/2012 9:06 AM, Alexander Jones wrote: What do we do about user balrog-kun? He apparently declined the new terms, but he is using an alternate account that has accepted the new terms. He is a prolific editor in the areas I work in (San Antonio and California). Would we end up deleting everything he has touched? (And in effect, from my limited experience, a relatively large portion of the country.) I believe this has been, or will be resolved: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-January/007233.html ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] automated abbreviation changes?!
On 3/23/2012 8:36 AM, Mikel Maron wrote: User chdr (http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/chdr) seems to be running a script to automatically replace street name abbreviations with the full word. They don't look like mass automated edits to me - these are smaller quantities of changes made via Potlatch. They could just be responding to the editor's prompts not to use abbreviations. In the US, there is this thread - http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-February/007436.html The consensus seems to lean toward automating the name expansion. And no matter how many times it is discussed ahead of time, someone will be surprised when the script is run (if it ever does run). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] Uploads to City of Salisbury, MD
On 3/22/2012 9:12 AM, Nick Chamberlain wrote: I was getting a proxy error and the uploads were timing out when I attempted to upload the entire batch. This is a common problem with uploading large changesets with JOSM, where upload failures result in a partial upload. We're hesitant to put automatic failed changeset upload recovery and resolution into JOSM for fear that someone will create a mass conversion of shapefiles and upload it all without even trying to tune the data to OSM standards.g ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] suburban superblocks that nobody wants to survey
On 3/15/2012 8:52 AM, Hillsman, Edward wrote: In the interest of figuring out how to attract more people to participate in OSM, I'd like to see some more discussion of this. Is it generally true that people who work on OSM don't like to map subdivisions? And, if so, why? Because these are home to so many people in the US, it raises a question about the viability of strategies that suggest people start in OSM by mapping their own neighborhoods. I don't know anything about this specifically. It's interesting that not a single person in those 120 subdivisions was interested in mapping their own subdivision. I have done some onsite surveys of smaller subdivisions (100-400 homes), and can set this up with a camera, video cam, and bike to collect quite a lot of information in a single visit, and the end result is streets with lanes, speed limits, one ways, and house numbers. In this area, since no one else is participating[1], it's just a practical matter to create the base new subdivision information from TIGER since the local governments don't freely give this information. The only followup surveys are quick to clarify obvious errors in the TIGER data. The subdivision plat idea is new to me, but I'm not sure where I'd find them. [1] It is notable that likely because of the Apple publicity spike, a single new mapper popped up and added streets in his neighborhood and did a quality job. If this was indeed because of the lure of the 'blank page', our license removal exercise will create many more blank pages to test this theory with. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Survey about Incentives to contribute to OSM
On 3/14/2012 11:10 AM, Richard Weait wrote: You might not be sick of nonsense survey authors requesting our personal information to study our project. You might even be tempted to reply and to fill in their survey. I noticed that the first survey redirected 40% of the users to something like a simulation survey site. I didn't analyze the difference between the 2 links however. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] More TIGER importing
On 3/14/2012 6:40 AM, Alexander Jones wrote: Hey, is there some sort of tutorial for a beginner (me) to import TIGER 2011 data for a really small town (Wheatland, CA)? I'm going to be doing a bus route there, but half the streets on it aren't even in OSM. Welcome to OpenStreetMap! The good news is that the area around Wheatland hasn't been edited by a license decliner, so it will be safe to work there; no data will be removed in April 2012. (per http://cleanmap.poole.ch/). The tool most of us have been using for this is JOSM, and some variation of the methods here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Manual_conflation http://ksmapper.blogspot.com/2012/03/remapping-using-tiger-2011.html I would add to these to use JOSM's Simplify way to prevent bringing in streets where a single block contains 200 nodes. Just converting the TIGER shapefiles into OSM format is a challenge - I've uploaded a copy of Yuba county from 2011 - http://www.greenvilleopenmap.info/Yuba_CA.zip This is not the most advanced conversion algorithm, but should be usable.I can see where the new subdivisions have been added around Wheatland, so this should help.It's important to be sure that only the ways you edit are uploaded, and not the entire file. My method is something like this: 1. Download the area of interest in JOSM. 2. Open the OSM TIGER file 3 After finding the new or corrected roads, go to the TIGER layer 4 Select the new roads to be imported 5 Activate the downloaded data layer 6 Paste the new roads 7 Simplify way to clean up geometry 8 Be sure the roads are properly connected to existing roads 9 Add turning circles, etc. In many cases the new TIGER geometry must be corrected to align to aerial. If you have a number of GPS traces, be sure to align the aerial imagery to the GPS traces first. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] More TIGER importing
On 3/14/2012 11:44 AM, Alexander Jones wrote: Yikes, I already uploaded it! :X The changeset is here[1]. Please revert if necessary. I'll be asleep the rest of the day, and I'll be back at around 7 PM Central. I'd say you did a good job - everything looks to be connected. Per latest standards: here is an update for the county without tiger: tags and with like-named ways already combined. (We're updating procedures as we go). http://www.greenvilleopenmap.info/Yuba_CA.zip Although roads will be split later as more details are surveyed (speed limits, bus routes, etc), multiple segments of the same street can be (c)ombined in JOSM to make future edits easier. One thing I see is that part of McDevitt Drive is named just 'McDevitt'. I frequently see this in TIGER data, and I'm guessing both of those would be McDevitt Drive. The tiger:reviewed=no tag usage varies with each person, but generally anything validated by a human against local knowledge or an aerial image doesn't need the tiger:reviewed tag at all. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] More TIGER importing
On 3/14/2012 11:44 AM, Alexander Jones wrote: I personally believe, and I think consensus is growing, that none of the tiger:* tags should be imported (I delete all of them after working on a way). Ref tags should be populated with the route number, such as SR 20, and oneway tags seem to be missing from dual carriageways. Also, the segments need to be glommed, that is joining multiple ways with the same tags into one way, to make future editing easier. I agree that tiger: tags are not really useful when bringing in new data. I had toyed with algorithms to match TLID values to unnamed streets/driveways in the old data, but even then there is no reason to upload TLID with new data. So I've uploaded the data again with glommed street segments: http://www.greenvilleopenmap.info/Yuba_CA.zip Check it out and confirm that it makes sense. And certainly, if better state or county data is available, it would make sense to use that instead of TIGER. Otherwise this is useful for at least street name + geometry (of varying quality). Should we write this up in the Wiki somewhere? I remember bits and pieces of this procedure being placed there, but cannot find them now. The master wiki TIGER page at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tiger or the main links don't seem to address the subject either. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Remapping from TIGER 2011
On 3/11/2012 10:28 PM, Josh Doe wrote: Do you find the new subdivisions manually as well? Yes, I just used the overlay method as outlined on the Wiki where new roads are highlighted. The only trick was that deleted roads also would show up as new roads, and recognizing that someone had really deleted an original TIGER road, and it was not a newly created road. Fortunatelyg, this area is a desert of OSM participation, so there were not many delete-road corrections. Just a point of clarification regarding my conflation plugin [0]; currently it is geared towards finding 1-to-1 correspondences, such as matching GNIS nodes to areas. It does not handle N-to-M correspondences like you'll have with roads, and it doesn't take care of topology issues. However there is another user working on a TIGER conflation plugin which should handle these things, but I'm not sure how far he is from having something usable. That being said, I am sorely in need of getting feedback on the design of my conflation plugin.:) I gave it another spin and created a TRAC ticket. The big gain is when I can conflate between layers - either with the conflation pugin or the possible TIGER plugin. There will certainly be other mod wishes for that application such as glomming roads and tag handling such as removing tiger:reviewed... etc. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Remapping from TIGER 2011
On 3/11/2012 6:48 PM, Toby Murray wrote: I just wrote up a quick blog post about it and would welcome any comments on the subject. Last year I did all the new subdivisions in my whole county using TIGER 2010 against the original import. There were approximately 120 new subdivisions to add since then. It was all a manual process. I want to revisit Josh's handy new conflation plugin some more with this process in mind. I noticed the same thing you did - with large areas, it's easy to lose track of the boundaries of what you've already touched - particularly in mountainous areas. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun
I looked at the .CA lists and couldn't tell if this was due to removing data that isn't even CC-SA compliant, or making it easier to get a jump start on remapping. If the purpose is to make remapping easier, I think it is disrespectful of data consumers. Data consumers are aware of the 1 April date, after which time anything goes as far as removing non-ODBL data. They can prepare for 1 April by stopping real time updates, however this removal may have taken them by surprise. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] iPhoto for iOS Not Using Google Maps
On 3/7/2012 7:50 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: ...and the consensus is that the data is from some time late March/early April 2010. Yes, really. With an update rate of at least 2 years, I don't expect they'll see a problem with temporary license data deletion. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] TIGER 2011 Road Tiles
On 2/17/2012 10:05 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: On the topic of TIGER layers: Harry Wood made an interesting suggestion in the comments section of my blog post on road analysis (see other post): wouldn't it be interesting to crowdsource particularly problematic (in terms of alignment) areas of TIGER data? What do you think? (How) could that work? I don't think that would lend itself to 'Mechanical Turk' general solutions in the way that turning circles would for example. It takes a bit of analysis to sort out - in many of the cases I've seen, intersecting roads must be untangled, changing the order at which they intersect the road in question. It would require that the crowds be well trained the the use of the OSM editor they are using. That being said, this could be done by armchair mappers, provided that there is enough 'armchair labor' available. Another aspect is use of improved geometry from another layer via a conflation plugin. This has been discussed several times before but I haven't had time to work on it. I've used the concept on a small scale against Mapdust reports, bringing in new TIGER data from another layer, then from JOSM's UtilsPlugin2, 'More tools' / Replace Geometry. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Analysis of US road network and TIGER status
On 2/16/2012 6:38 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Hi, I did an state-by-state and county-by-county analysis of the road network in the US. I focused particularly on TIGER and user-related metrics. Results (with maps of course) are here: https://oegeo.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/the-state-of-the-openstreetmap-road-network-in-the-us/ I'd love to hear your ideas for further analysis, and other feedback. A very good analysis! I have some observations, that may or may not be significant. For the Average version increase over TIGER ways - the effects of the name expansion bot may have created the green states out west 'balrog-kun'. This might also apply to the 'Percentage untouched TIGER ways' map. I'm surprised by the 'Percentage TIGER ways' map, in which NC and SC both have less than 50% roads as TIGER roads. Just to confirm that this is for roads only and no hydrography or other ways? Once again, thanks - I like to see this sort of information! ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Finding untagged dead-ends
On 2/15/2012 12:41 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: (nodes contained in only one highway way) ... and first or last node of the way? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Contact And Remap Campaign
On 2/7/2012 2:19 PM, Toby Murray wrote: Any chance we could get on the front page of slashdot with a relicensing post from some official blog? The google-vandalising-osm story got there somehow... Using a slant of searching for missing / long-lost contributors and losing their work would hopefully get the attention of those who need to see it. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Remapping
On 2/7/2012 7:04 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: One other question. Sunny added streets using TIGER data. (Imported?) If I replace the data, all the TIGER data goes away. Is that something I should worry about? Don't worry about losing the TIGER reference tags - just copy the street name and any tags added by accepting users. One situation is where a declining user added an obvious tag, such as oneway = yes. I've just been deleting the whole way (a simple way such as a motorway link) and redoing it to the aerial image. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Remapping tips
On 2/6/2012 11:47 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: andrzej wrote my personal appeal is that you spend the time between now and April 1 mapping one of the so many blank spots in OSM I totally disagree, There are real people out there actually using OSM Data for car navigation, cycle navigation etc.. andrzej makes many good points. This has been publicized long enough that I hope that routing data consumers are planning to shut off their update feed on April 1 to protect their applications. Each area will need to be evaluated as to when a feed will be resumed. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Contact And Remap Campaign
On 2/6/2012 11:02 PM, Toby Murray wrote: Just yesterday I managed to track down a phone number for the biggest remaining non-decider in Kansas. I gave him a call, had a pleasant conversation and then he logged in and agreed a few minutes after we hung up. I often wonder - do these guys never read their Email? Did he give any clue why he hadn't already logged in and made a decision? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Getting ready for the license change
On 1/14/2012 1:20 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: As you can see, the situation for highways / interstates is particularly bad in SC / GA. I'd say that is a priority if you want to help out. I've not had any reply back from my 'Decliner'-contact in SC about a public domain option. At this point, it does not look hopeful. He has done a huge amount of TIGER fixup on highways, and stitched up all the county borders in SC to become routable; and did detailed road work centered in the Columbia, SC area. With work, I probably won't have time to do any remapping before April 1. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] switch2osm.org
On 1/25/2012 6:13 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Lots of you will have seen the interest recently in switching from proprietary mapping providers to OpenStreetMap - blog postings by Nestoria and StreetEasy, Wired's article, and so on. We started a Twitter hashtag, #switch2osm, and it's rather taken off Please monitor the forum for these questions as well - I'm starting to see many requests there from new arrivals. It's been a while since I've set up a tile server, so most of the time I don't have useful hints for them. help.osm.org would be considered new-user friendly; many of them would consider the mailing lists as awkward. http://forum.openstreetmap.org/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Finding new roads
On 1/22/2012 4:06 PM, Bryce2 Nesbitt wrote: And here is where the rusty old TIGER data still has something to offer OSM: address data. A very common map use case is show me a map around this address. Bringing in that data from TIGER might not bring any more /mappers/, but it could bring a lot of /viewers/. TIGER's address ranges are obfuscated by law for privacy reasons. The typical resolution is only to within the nearest block. Anyone who needs to geolocate an address is still free to fall back to the TIGER address ranges using a secondary data source if the address is not in OSM's database. I believe this is already how Nominatim or one of its sources works. Another advantage of keeping the TIGER address ranges in a secondary database is that the information can be easily updated by replacing with new data rather than needing to conflate with existing OSM data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] name expansion bot (Re: Imports information on the wiki)
On 1/15/2012 8:01 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: and the script ignored the TIGER subtags and improperly expanded it to West Avenue East I'm not sure what you mean about ignoring the TIGER subtags, but this street has tiger:name_direction_suffix = E, which the script used to expand the name. In my opinion, it's just a TIGER data entry error. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] name expansion bot (Re: Imports information on the wiki)
On 1/15/2012 8:28 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: Actually the script also expanded the W to West. But my point is that it is a TIGER entry error, and any future script needs to take into account that these exist and people may have already fixed them to the correct names. Agreed- if we're thinking of a bot that periodically fixes everything, we need a special tag that says abbreviation_bot=back_off (but perhaps not so verbose) - something that tells the bot not to touch the name because it is unusual and has been manually checked. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] name expansion bot (Re: Imports information on the wiki)
On 1/15/2012 12:47 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote: Perhaps checking if either the name= tag or the direction_suffix tag has ever been edited by a human would be a good measure. The ways which have been edited might need to be manually reviewed if they contain an unexpanded N, E, W or S. I agree that this is a good strategy for TIGER data, but there was also talk of running the bot for all ways, including those having just highway= and name= tags. Everyone will certainly enter name=Xyz Rd for their first edit. The JOSM validator will pick this up, but I don't remember if Potlatch 2 would notice that. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] What is a dual carriageway?
On 1/15/2012 12:45 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I only map two separate ways when there's a median you can't cross, so the two directions are physically separate. By that rationale, it should be one way feature. I am curious if other mappers use the same convention. I agree with that method. Since navigation apps area very useful application of OSM data, visualize driving the road and turning left anywhere, as opposed to being directed to the next intersection and told to make a U turn. Similarly when being directed out of a location left onto the road, directions should be to turn left instead of right+U turn when there's no driving median separator. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Getting ready for the license change
On 1/14/2012 1:20 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: As you can see, the situation for highways / interstates is particularly bad in SC / GA. I'm still checking the PD option for most of one of the SC decliner's work - I should hear back this weekend. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Getting ready for the license change
On 1/13/2012 10:49 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: * Remap data that remains at risk of being removed, following the guidelines on the wiki (see links below). Assuming that the April 1 delete is a smart delete, is it better to wait until afterward? I'm thinking of this - 1 TIGER - agreer 2 Bridges, etc - decliner 3 Attribution - Maxspeed, lanes, etc. - agreer Rather than just deleting the road and starting over from aerial or TIGER, will the April 1 roll back the decliner's edits, thus preserving the agreer's contributions? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
