Re: [Talk-GB] pub defined as a relation

[Philip Barnes]

Certainly possible as we move to putting the tags on the outline instead of the 
building. It is not unusual to have the car park or garden area separated by a 
road.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 24 October 2017 17:35:01 BST, Jez Nicholson  wrote:
>Just preparing an Overpass query for the OSM workshop I am running in
>Brighton. Naturally I queried pubsthen wondered whether I need
>bother
>with relationsand found
>http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3216899
>
>Seems a bit of a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
>
>While i'm here, can anyone tell me why http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/szG
>does
>not return nodes and ways-and-their-nodes? It is very similar to the
>example
>
>area[name="Brighton and Hove"][admin_level=6];
>(
>  node(area)[amenity=pub];
>  way(area)[amenity=pub];
>);
>(._;>;);
>out body;
>
>- Jez

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Leicester A

[Philip Barnes]

Hi Gerv
Sorry you had problems, mapping hospital departments is one thing that has been 
puzzling other mappers and myself. Some mappers have used multiple hospitals, 
which breaks the one real life object to one osm object. There is only one LRI.

I have not lived in Leicestershire for six years and was not aware of any 
changes to the location of A Are you saying it is no longer close to the 
main entrance and accessed from Infirmary Close?

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 23 October 2017 06:34:09 BST, Gervase Markham  wrote:
>I had cause to go to Leicester A on Saturday. It was renewed in April
>(Google Earth suggests there was a big building project), and the map
>has not been updated, and so it's not clear on OSM where the drop-off
>is, or which is the associated multi-storey. The road I think it is, is
>part not-marked-as-such and part non-existent. There's also a separate
>Children's A entrance. Given the nature of these facilities, and the
>terrible Leicester 1-way system, it would be very good to have the map
>be extremely clear on these points!
>
>Can someone local look into the issue, please?
>
>Thanks :-)
>
>Gerv
>
>
>___
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Schools with fhrs:id

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 20:33 +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 20/10/17 18:51, Gregrs wrote:
> > I think it makes sense for both fhrs:id and addr:postcode to be on
> > the same entity, whether that's the boundary or a building. In some
> > cases schools might have more than one building with an fhrs:id,
> > but it's possible that these would have a different postcode e.g.
> > the different houses at Rugby School (http://www.openstreetmap.org/
> > way/363617437). 
> 
> The majority of UK schools will only have the one catering facility
> and
> it's unlikely that this will not be the same place as school premises
> and involve a single postcode although with the unstable ownership of
> schools these days, we may well see private food outlets inside
> 'academies'? Although central catering facilities feeding several
> schools also messes up the picture.
> 
It probably not that unusual for schools to have separate catering
facilities for the sixth form.

The school I attended in the 1970s did just that and a small amount of
research suggests my local school now has the same.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Schools with fhrs:id

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 18:43 +0100, Dave F wrote:
> I've been putting it on the boundary as it covers the whole school
> which 
> can include domestic science (or whatever it's called now) & the
> school 
> fête barbecue as well as the canteen.
> 
Interestingly I have since been looking at FHRS stuff locally and
within the area for the local comprehensive school there are three
objects listed with different postcodes and FHRS IDs.

I am guessing first to fifth form, 6th form and the the boarding
section, its quite an unusual state comprehensive with a very long
history.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging Schools with fhrs:id

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 15:17 +0100, Colin Spiller wrote:
> I've recently been catching up with some fhrs:id tags. I've found 
> several (most?) of the local schools have entries in the Food
> Standards 
> agency lists. I must have missed something, because I'm now confused.
> 
> Most of the school information is tagged to the school boundary. 
> However, I would expect the fhrs:id tag to be on the relevant
> building 
> within the boundary, but the comparison tool - thank you gregrs - 
> expects both the postcode and the fhrs:id on the same object. So is
> that 
> the standard - both on the boundary, and is it documented in the
> wiki 
> anywhere? I thought I had better check before I did too many updates!
> 
In most cases I would just stick with putting the fhrs:id on the
boundary as we do not have the necessary information to identify
individual buildings. 

There may be a few where there is more than one fhrs:id for different
facilities but that will be a very small number and is not something we
can survey.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project: Addresses and Postcodes

[Philip Barnes]

The polygons can also overlap. The road I live on is a crescent with different 
postcodes for odd (outside) and even (inside) resulting in the centroids being 
close together and within the even area.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 19 October 2017 13:00:25 BST, Steven Horner  wrote:
>>
>> Postcodes refer to points, not to polygons.
>
>Are you saying a point in OpenStreetMap terms?
>
>UK postcodes generally cover an area/polygon. How big that area is
>appears
>to come down to how much mail that area is likely to receive, I think
>that's how its described on Wikipedia. So it could cover one building,
>a
>street or a huge area if rural.
>
>Ordnance Survey sell CodePoint Polygons which is the polygons each
>postcode
>covers. Obviously we can't use that.
>
>On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Colin Smale 
>wrote:
>
>> In the UK, this algorithm is useless if you expect to get the actual
>> address that you could send a letter to, or that you could ask for
>> directions to.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2017-10-19 13:23, Marc Gemis wrote:
>>
>> Maybe it is interesting to repeat how Nominatim resolves addresses,
>> just in case someone wants to do a search after adding an address.
>>
>> - Nominatim starts from an address point (or building way with
>> address). It takes the house number from it and the street name.
>> - It tries to match the street name with a nearby street.
>> - The rest of the info, suburb, city, country, etc are taken from the
>> way. i.e. it looks in which boundary the way lies and work its way up
>> the admin levels.
>> - In case there is no boundary, it can use a place node as well to
>> determine the name of a certain admin level, but that is less precise
>>
>> - postal codes are taken from the address point, when specified. This
>> is needed in UK/USA but not in e.g. Belgium or Germany.
>>
>>
>> http://nominatim.openstreetmap.org is your friend to understand where
>> the data is coming from.
>>
>> Of course, if you only work with a relational database (as Lester
>> pointed out), one prefers all data on the address node.
>> Relational DB with GIS extensions do not need this (e.g. Nominatim).
>>
>> Nominatim's approach currently has problems with streets on the
>border
>> of e.g. 2 villages. Sara Hoffmann (Lonvia) told me that there are
>some
>> plans to fix this.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> m.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Adam Snape 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm convinced that many such addresses are unnecessarily long (are
>there
>> really multiple Weldons in the Swanscome postal area?). Nevertheless
>we
>> should have a way of mapping them if they are the official address. I
>agree
>> that more general guidance would aid consistency. My address mapping
>> practice is as follows. I would welcome correction if others feel I
>am
>> doing
>> something incorrectly::
>>
>> The post town
>>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_post_towns_in_the_United_Kingdom
>is
>> tagged as addr:city (whether or not it is a city or indeed whether an
>> otherwise more important place is nearer). Though this should all be
>in
>> upper case when used I add the tag in lower case with an initial
>capital
>> letter as it would normally be written in a sentence.
>>
>> For sub divisions of this area the wiki has documented tags
>addr:suburb and
>> addr:hamlet. I tend to default to suburb everywhere except when
>dealing
>> with
>> an actual isolated hamlet. Where there are two subdivisions as in
>Steve's
>> example, I'd use hamlet for the smaller one  and suburb for the
>larger one.
>>
>> The wiki suggests to avoid addr:street and addr:place together but I
>use
>> them for things like named retail/business parks where there is also
>a
>> street address eg. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/527520264
>>
>> I do not tag the name of the property separately if it is the same as
>the
>> main name=* tag
>>
>> Counties have not been formally part of postal addresses for many
>years.
>> Royal Mail permits people to optionally add the name of the old
>Postal
>> County, modern administrative or ceremonial county, or traditional
>county
>> to
>> their address according to their personal preference, but this plays
>no
>> role
>> in delivery. So I do not tag a county in the address.
>>
>>
>> So I'd tag Steve's example: name=The Spring River, addr:street=Talbot
>Lane,
>> addr:hamlet=Weldon, addr:suburb=Ebbsfleet Valley,
>addr:city=Swanscombe,
>> addr:postcode=DA10 1AZ
>>
>> I hope that helps
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>> On 18 Oct 2017 11:49 p.m., "Steve Doerr" 
>wrote:
>>
>> On 10/10/2017 19:07, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>>
>>
>> It doesn't seem to have been mentioned here yet, but this quarter's
>UK
>> mapping project is to improve addresses and postcodes:
>>
>https://osmuk.org/uncategorized/jump-in-to-our-quarterly-mapping-project/
>>
>>
>> It would be useful to have some guidance on tagging for UK addresses.
>For
>> instance, how would you tag the different 

Re: [Talk-GB] Rendering kissing gates in OSM

[Philip Barnes]

On 10 October 2017 09:30:38 BST, Bob Hawkins  wrote:
>I wonder why kissing gates are not rendered in OpenStreetMap –
>certainly in the Standard version?  Their installation in place of
>stiles in my part of South Oxfordshire is increasing apace thanks to
>the work of the Chiltern Society.  Are they a particularly GB or UK
>phenomenon and, as such, not considered to be of sufficient importance
>to act upon?  Can a case be made?
>
I would go further and say they are probably an England and Wales concept based 
on that even in Scotland rights of way law is different. The same goes for 
stiles.

Andy's map does render them and is the best solution for countryside mapping. 

I think getting things like stiles and kissing gates into the standard style 
would be infinitely improbable. The style does seem to be urban centric. The 
loss of colour on tertiary roads is one area where the style has become less 
friendly in rural areas. 

Phil (trigpoint) 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network Route 55

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2017-10-09 at 18:11 +0100, Philip Barnes wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-10-09 at 16:35 +0100, Adam Snape wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I noticed when plotting a route on cycle.travel that the relation for
> NCN 55 http://osm.org/relation/37734 was deleted, presumably by
> mistake, in this changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/521
> 18445. Is there a way to reinstate it without manually re-adding all
> the contituent parts.
> 
> Hi Adam
> 
> I am looking at it.
> 
All fixed in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52766965

It needs looking at still, there is a big hole between Stafford and
Stoke and a spur towards Bolton.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] National Cycle Network Route 55

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2017-10-09 at 16:35 +0100, Adam Snape wrote:
Hi all,

I noticed when plotting a route on cycle.travel that the relation for
NCN 55 http://osm.org/relation/37734 was deleted, presumably by
mistake, in this changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52118
445. Is there a way to reinstate it without manually re-adding all the
contituent parts.

Hi Adam

I am looking at it.

Cheers 
Phil (trigpoint)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Red route attribution

[Philip Barnes]

As far as I am aware red routes only exist in that there London, so a UK wide 
practice is unlikely.

Probably equivalent to no stopping tagging combined with opening hours?

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 4 October 2017 10:14:33 BST, Nils Nolde  wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>I´m trying to find out if there´s a common practice across the UK to
>attribute red routes?
>
>I found a few examples on how people deal with them, but no best
>practice.
>It seems most common to put 'red_route' for tag
>'restriction_designation':
>http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=red_route#values
>
>Would it make sense to add 2 values to the 'restriction' tag:
>'red_route_single', 'red_route_double'? Or a 'red_route' tag? Not sure
>about OSM policies here.. But I´m sure one could get the info at least
>for
>London from Transport for London.
>
>Many thanks
>Nils

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] NLS maps for OSM editing

[Philip Barnes]

Are we able to use NLS 25 inch maps in josm for OSM l editing.

I am able to access the ones added earlier, such as Hampshire but not the later 
additions such as Shropshire or Leicestershire.

Phil (trigpoint) 
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Access and other tags for a particular Restricted Byway

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2017-09-29 at 18:59 +0100, Bob Hawkins wrote:
> 
> Jerry
> I thank you for your helpful reply.
> One of my difficulties with Restricted Byways is the use of 
> motor_vehicle=no as shown in Robert Whittaker’s table, http://wiki.op
> enstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Rjw62/PRoW_Table.  
> I use vehicle=yes in almost all cases, but there are properties on
> Restricted 
> Byways, as in this case, where I judge that tag to be inappropriate,
> to say the 
> least.

Hi Bob
I had never seen page, it does seem very misleading. Vehicle is an odd
tag, as a vehicle normally includes a bike. Those restrictions kind of
apply to public access by motor_vehicles.

There are two sorts of access when applied to rights of way, those
defined by the designation and what we have a right to do. But then
there are private rights too. You cannot put a blanket motor_vehicle=no
on a right of way, other than a byway it should not have yes but rights
of way (footpaths/bridleways/restricted byways) will often form access
to properties or fields. 

Each needs a case by case survey, any can be motor_vehicle=private or
destination.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OpenStreetCam or Mapillary?

[Philip Barnes]

I certainly prefer to take geo-referenced photos and upload them
through a script rather than use an app that deletes them. I at least
have a backup, and can refer back to find street or shop names that
mapillary has chosen to blur.

I have also discovered that mapillary has its own community, some of
whom set rules such as the car not being visible. I did have a sequence
 I took hidden (now lost) by someone in the mid-west. Its a lot easier
to hide the vehicle if you drive a large pickup.

The sequence was on Furteventura, so not easy to do it again.

Unlike OSM there is no way to contact another user, and the username
didn't match an osm username.

Also using a sequence camera app allows it to run in the background, so
the screen can be used for other stuff such as OSMand or maps.me.
Useful if you are somewhere you have never been before and will
probably never go again.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Wheelchair accessibility

[Philip Barnes]

I did mean to say 'in the UK'.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 21 September 2017 13:07:44 BST, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> 
wrote:
>On 21 September 2017 at 08:17, Philip Barnes <p...@trigpoint.me.uk>
>wrote:
>
>> As far as I am aware, all bus routes have to be wheelchair accessible
>by
>> law.
>
>This very much depends on the jurisdiction.
>
>Please remember that this is a global mailing list.
>
>-- 
>Andy Mabbett
>@pigsonthewing
>http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
>___
>talk mailing list
>talk@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wheelchair accessibility

[Philip Barnes]

As far as I am aware, all bus routes have to be wheelchair accessible by law.

They certainly all use low floor kneeling buses locally.

Phil

On 21 September 2017 06:22:06 BST, Maarten Deen  wrote:
>On 2017-09-20 23:10, john whelan wrote:
>> I was at a presentation yesterday evening about accessibility, well
>it
>> was free coffee what more can I say?
>> 
>> All Ottawa buses have two spaces for wheelchairs.  We map wheelchair
>> accessible toilets and other things for the map but we currently as
>> far as I am aware we don't include information on things that move.
>> 
>> Should we and how would you do it?
>> 
>> For example I understand in the UK there are problems at many railway
>> stations.  Perhaps mapping railway stations as being wheelchair
>> accessible or not would be a start.
>
>Bus routes (public transport routes in general) get mapped with 
>weelchair=yes. Totally acceptable to do so to signify that the route is
>
>accesible with a wheelchair.
>E.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4257112
>I would map public transport nodes and ways (the platform and 
>stop_position) with wheelchair too.
>
>Maarten
>
>___
>talk mailing list
>talk@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Use of Drones

[Philip Barnes]

There was a talk by 'the only licensed drone pilot in Scotland'  at SOTM 
Scotland a couple of years ago.

I missed the outdoor demo as I went to the NLS map library. 

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 18 September 2017 12:14:01 BST, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>Oleksiy Muzalyev seems to be pretty knowledgable on drones. He has
>posted about it a couple of times on the talk mailing list.
>e.g.
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-September/076758.html
>
>But he's not living in the UK.
>
>regards
>
>m.
>
>On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Brian Prangle 
>wrote:
>> The regulations on the use of drones in the UK are already quite
>restrictive
>> (if, of course, you're a  responsible memeber of society) and are
>imminently
>> to become even more restrictive with licensing and proof of
>competence
>> becoming requirements. I'm pessimistic about being able to make use
>of
>> drones to capture imagery. Does anyone have any experience of using
>drones?
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> ___
>> 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

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[Philip Barnes]

I have memories of this being in a talk at SOTM 2013 in Birmingham.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 18 September 2017 12:04:01 BST, Harry Wood  wrote:
>So I guess you're looking for : https://vimeo.com/44870758  
>SheepCamp 2012, Monica Stephens
>
>
>There's a pretty big list of articles and talks on the Diversity wiki
>page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity
>
>Harry
>
>From: Zoe Gardner 
>To: Dave F  
>Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>Sent: Monday, 18 September 2017, 11:25
>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Open survey on participation biases in OSM
>
>
>
>Hi Dave
>
>Here is a link to the article you are talking about. The author is
>Monica Stephens. It may be tricky to access if you're not affiliated to
>an institution that subscribes to the journal. However, you should be
>able access the abstract. I haven't seen her presenting this work but
>with the info from the link you may be able to find something. 
>
>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10708-013-9492-z
>
>
>Hope its what you were looking for. 
>
>Zoe
>
>
>On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Dave F 
>wrote:
>
>Hi
>>My Youtube history got cleared. Does anyone have a link the video of
>   a woman giving a lecture about contribution discrepancies in open
>   data projects. She used OSM brothels & childcare as examples.
>>
>>Ta
>>DaveF
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 04/09/2017 11:38, Zoe Gardner wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Dear OSM talk-gb subscriber
 
I am a Research Fellow in the Nottingham Geospatial Institute at the
>University of Nottingham, interested in participation biases in
>geospatial crowdsourced projects such as OSM and other Volunteered
>Geographical Information (VGI) projects. My current research project is
>concerned with the way in which participation biases in OSM may
>potentially affect the usability of the data that is collected and
>subsequently what is available to location based service providers
>which use OSM as their primary geospatial database.
The project is motivated by recent research that has found a strong
>male bias in OSM participation. This has led to assertions that various
>geospatial knowledge could be under represented or poorly recorded on
>the map. However, the actual consequences of this bias remain little
>explored or reported. By collecting information about contributors to
>OSM, which can then be analyzed along with their editing patterns, the
>impacts of this bias might begin to be measured and therefore better
>understood. I have therefore published an online survey designed to
>collect information directly from OSM editors and I would like to
>invite as many of you as possible to participate. The survey is
>anonymous and takes a couple of minutes to complete. 
If you are an OSM contributor and are interested in or would like to
>participate in the study, please click on the link below, which will
>take you to the Bristol Online Survey website where you will find more
>information and an opportunity to participate in the survey. As a small
>incentive, at the close of the survey in a few weeks’ time, 60
>respondents will be drawn at random to receive a £15 Amazon voucher.
 
To participate in the survey, click on the link below:
 
https://nottingham.onlinesurve ys.ac.uk/osm-user-profiles
 
Please do think about participating. It is hoped that knowledge
>about the way participation biases impact on crowdsourced maps will
>enable new strategies to be developed to address any resulting voids in
>the geospatial information provided by amateur mappers. In turn this
>could strengthen the role played by platforms such as OSM in urban
>planning and sustainability and raise the profile of the important
>mapping work that you all do. 
 
In the meantime, if you would like to know more about me, my
>research activities or the project, please visit my University webpage
>(link below) and do not hesitate to get in touch directly or via the
>OSM messaging service. 
 
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/e ngineering/people/zoe.gardner
 
Thank you
Zoe 
 
 
  
This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>addressee
>and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
>author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>University of Nottingham. This message has been checked for viruses but
>the contents of an
>attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>permitted by UK legislation. 

>>>
>>>

Re: [Talk-us] Open survey on participation biases in OSM

[Philip Barnes]

I am not sure pubs are a good thing to compare but I have certainly mapped 
playgrounds as I find them, no particular interest beyond trying to complete 
the map of my home town. Finding them does take time, they are not as easy to 
map as pubs (big buildings on the main roads).

We are not a huge community hence things like pubs can be surveyed just by 
driving through a place so there is going to be a bias, they are the low 
hanging fruit so to speak. 

Using playgrounds as an example, I believe I have mapped them all in my home 
town, 8 in town of 5000. But mapping such things as playgrounds does take a 
serious amount of time and shoe leather. 

Phil (trigpoint) 


On 5 September 2017 11:43:01 BST, Marc Gemis  wrote:
>While I agree that changing peoples mapping habits is possible by
>posting about certain mapping subjects, or developing apps, I do not
>see why it is wrong to question whether a typical mapper only maps
>what interests him/her or whether they also map other stuff.
>
>I map a lot of items in which I have no personal interest, but because
>I know other people are interested and because I want to work on the
>best map possible.
>Are there other mappers that map e.g. playgrounds (even if they do not
>have children) ? Or are playgrounds mainly mapped by people with young
>children?
>
>Is not it worth to investigate this type of mapping habits ?
>
>
>m
>
>p.s. Who said you have to start mapping what you do not want to map? I
>might have missed this with all the cross posting going on.
>
>On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Nick Hocking 
>wrote:
>> This is how it's done
>>
>>
>http://www.dw.com/en/online-map-shows-wheelchair-accessible-locations-worldwide/a-15381244
>>
>> I met this bloke at SOTM Japan some years ago.   He didn't put out a
>> questionaire about whether non-disabled persons tended to tag less
>> accessability tags than disabled persons, because he already knew the
>> answer. He just went out and mapped them, created a website to
>support his
>> interest and got thousands of people interested in his project. Truly
>an
>> inspirational mapper.
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
>___
>Talk-us mailing list
>Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM feature density vs edits per features

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 12:04 +0100, Andy Townsend wrote:
> 
> One thing you won't be short of is the sheer volume of data.  If you 
> like a challenge, go for it - but I suspect that you might be better 
> starting with somewhere with fewer variables if you want some 
> quantifiable results to come out of it.
> 
Or as you are based in my old hometown of Les-tah, why not use that as
a starting point to get to grips with OSM data. It has fewer variables
and is mostly mapped by locals. It is not such a tourist attraction as
London.

And as for learning OSM it makes sense to start with where you are, if
something is puzzling you then you can go and have look see without
traveling 100 miles.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Beach routing

[Philip Barnes]

This really needs routers to be able to route over areas, the same issue exists 
over large areas of grass such as found in parks or town squares.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On 29 August 2017 12:00:48 BST, James  wrote:
>"Dont tag for the rendered"
>
>Routers should make beaches routable even though theres no clear path.
>Same
>with indoor mapping: I'm not going to add a bunch of paths in something
>already tagged as a corridor/hallway
>
>On Aug 29, 2017 6:54 AM, "Jean-Marc Liotier"  wrote:
>
>> Last week-end I went hiking along the coast from Honfleur to
>> Trouville-sur-Mer. As I wondered what distance I walked, I turned to
>> Openstreetmap routers... And did not find my answer: beaches are not
>> considered as highways.
>>
>> I thought about adding paths to beach sections that I consider
>> walkable... But, while some of those beaches have an identifiable
>path
>> along their length, for the most part this would be tagging for the
>> router.
>>
>> I fail to imagine a beach that is not walkable. So, should the
>routers
>> use natural=beach the same way as
>highway=path+surface=(sand|gravel|*) ?
>>
>> The question of routing across natural=beach brings back the past
>debate
>> about highway=pedestrian+area=yes - most routers do not route over
>> areas.
>>
>> I just dug this thread, which goes along the same lines as my
>reflexions
>>
>(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2014-July/013280.html)
>> but does no definitely concludes either.
>>
>> My conclusion is that I should open wishlist entries for my favorite
>> routers... Is it a good idea ?
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Highway=trunk : harmonization between countries ?

[Philip Barnes]

On 24 August 2017 01:09:29 BST, Greg Troxel  wrote:
>
>My impreession is that in the UK, there were A/B/C/U, and then later M
>were created, and I'm not sure when trunk happened.
>
The term trunk goes back long before OSM, they date back to The Trunk Roads Act 
1936.

On the ground trunk roads are denoted by green signs and are mostly A roads, 
but there are exceptions such as a B road linking the trunk A6 to the M6 near 
Shap. 

Other A roads have white signs. 

HTH Phil (trigpoint) 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Highway=trunk : harmonization between countries ?

[Philip Barnes]

On 22 August 2017 14:46:33 BST, Richard  wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 08:40:13AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> 
>> Two points:
>> 
>>   Speed limit does not describe the speeds that reasonably
>responsible
>>   real people actually drive on roads.  The UK/IE notion of 60 mph on
>>   all roads out of village centers is one example.  Another is in the
>US
>>   where there are many roads signed 65 mph where traffic normally
>moves
>>   at 80 mph.  So, what I think OSM needs a few things:
>> 
>> - A) a "typical_speed" tag, to be used by routers instead of
>>   speed_limit
>
>called differently, but this is it:
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed:practical
>
Isn"t that going to be rather subjective?

Phil (trigpoint) 



-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Edits in Wales

[Philip Barnes]

On 15 August 2017 19:27:40 BST, Andy Townsend  wrote:
>On 15/08/2017 19:22, Brian Prangle wrote:
>> But even local authorities and the OS get into hot water  over names 
>>
>!(but
>
>> to be fair this is a placename rather than a street name with a 
>> verifiable sign)
>
>As a kid I always thought that was called "Traeth Beach" because that's
>
And you are never far from Gorsaf Station. 

A true story,  a grad from Wales was telling me that when he was at uni, some 
English friends were going to visit him. He got a phone call to say 'we have 
just passed Gwasanaethau Services. 

We do map what we see, but we also present it in a way that makes sense. The 
same name twice in different languages looks wrong and that we end up with the 
River Avon. 

The Araf/Slow rule, or the first language on the sign is a pretty good way of 
dealing with what name goes in the name tag and that seems to been the 
consensus over many years of different map is mapping in Wales. The wiki is 
after all intended to document how people map not dictate how they should map. 
The recent changes have not actually changed any method of mapping but nearly 
clarified what was already there in previous versions. 

Phil (trigpoint) 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Lewis Cubitt Square, Kings Cross

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2017-08-04 at 15:29 +0100, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> That was, of course, meant to go to the Wikimedia UK mailing list,
> not
> the OSM UK list.
> 
> I was wondering why so many replies were about mapping...

But it has sparked some useful debate, both here and #osm-gb.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Edits in Wales

[Philip Barnes]

Hi Miguel,  welcome to Wales or should I say Croisi y Cymru. 

I am based in the Marches on the border so my mapping is regularly both sides 
of the border. I do keep an eye on mid Wales through whodidit as we are very 
sparse on mappers in that area. 

>
>I'm looking for other contributors in Wales, Ceredigion or even within
>Aberystwyth to coordinate with them to star editions here.
>
>For instance, I found that all street names should be tagged in Welsh
>and
>English in the name=* as you can see in the street signals or as I
>found it
>must be in the OSM wiki [3]

I would disagree with that, I prefer to map the top name in name and then use 
name:cy and name:en tags. In my experience that is the norm. Experience tells 
me that is far easier if the name contains a single language. In Ceredigion I 
would expect that to be usually Cymraig. 
>
>Moreover, I'm taking some street level photos to upload to Mapillary
>[3]
>and adding some notes [4] for future contributions.
>
>All feedback is welcome, I'm on Telegram too (same user as OSM) so you
>can
>contact to me there too.

I am not sure what telegram is, the UK community hang out on IRC in #talk-gb, 
you are welcome to join us. 
>
>Cheers & happy mapping

Have fun,  and certainly visit New Quay (Under Milk Wood), while you are in 
Ceredigion. 

Phil. (trigpoint) 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Osmf-talk] Live OSM discussion in ~45 minutes (7.30pm UK time)

[Philip Barnes]

On 27 July 2017 07:37:43 BST, Ilya Zverev  wrote:
>On SotM 2016 8 of 45 talks (18%) were given by women. Srravya C in her 
>talk at that SotM shows that only 7% posts in talk@ were posted by 
>women, and just around 2% — in the tagging@ mailing list. She gives a 
>few good ideas about increasing the participation of women, by the way:
>
>http://2016.stateofthemap.org/2016/is-she-a-part-of-your-community/

That was an interesting talk, I did have a chat with her afterwards and did 
learn some interesting stuff. 

I did learn a lot, but did see it as more cultural than sexism in OSM. In some 
parts of the world there is, for example a lack of female toilets and she did 
mention that she will avoid toilets not explicitly mapped as female. This level 
of mapping had never occurred to me as a European as the norm is male and 
female toilets are together so had never seen the need to add that level of 
detail. As part of the talk she did use Germany as an example of how few female 
toilets are mapped, but as with the UK it is not something that would be mapped 
explicitly unless they were separated for some reason. 

I also learned that in India men and women are separated when voting, that is 
one cultural difference that would never have occurred to me. 

She did also mention that many of the names used it was impossible to determine 
gender. In informal setting such as osm there is a tendency to use nicknames 
and the more general shortening of names to gender neutral shortforms. 

Phil (trigpoint) 
>
>As a member of the Russian community, I can confirm we have ZERO active
>
>female members.
>
>Ilya
>
>27.07.2017 03:14, Simon Poole пишет:
>> 
>> 
>> On 26.07.2017 23:58, Ilya Zverev wrote:
>>> 
>>> but these people are a minority in OSM,
>> Numbers please.
>> 
>> ___
>> 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

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Shared Public Rights of Way

[Philip Barnes]

On 4 July 2017 13:30:09 BST, Dave F  wrote:
>I think it's worth contacting the PCs. It's unlikely they both want to 
>take responsibility for it's upkeep.

Parish councils don't have responsibility for the upkeep of rights of way, that 
is the responsibility of the local highway authority (County Council or Unitary 
Authority). 

Phil (trigpoint) 


>
>DaveF
>
>On 04/07/2017 12:05, Bob Hawkins wrote:
>> Ed
>> I must not have made clear the situation: the bridleway is coincident
>
>> with the borders of two parishes, carrying a route code for each 
>> parish, not  a way crossing parish boundaries.
>> Bob
>>
>>
>
>
>>  Virus-free. www.avast.com 
>>
>
>
>>
>>
>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Bar v pub

[Philip Barnes]

On 23 June 2017 10:18:03 BST, Rory McCann  wrote:
>Another idea: Rather that hashing out what's a pub and what's a bar,
>why
>not use additional tags to narrow it down? There are suggestions for
>real_ale=yes/no, food=yes/no, microbrewrey=yes/no various ways to say
>"they sell this type of draught beer", real_fire=yes/no.
>
>If I see something tagged amenity=bar, real_fire=yes, food=no,
>drink:beer:Guinness=draught drink:cider:Bulmers=draught tv=no
>cocktails=no, then I know exactly what sort of place to expect!

Rory, I would tend to go with the customers v regulars approach. A pub is a 
part of a community and attracts loyalty. 

I'm not sure loud music can be used as a comparison, my local certainly has 
loud music on I open mic night or when there is a singer on. 

Phil, (trigpoint) 
>
>On 23/06/17 09:55, Alan Grant wrote:
>> Thanks all for the replies. I am inclined to agree with Rory, there
>seems
>> to be little point in worrying too much about establishments that do
>not
>> fall clearly into one or the other category. Either way the user of
>the map
>> will know that they are places that serve alcohol; beyond that there
>is a
>> wide range of individual characteristics (loud music or not? loud
>music at
>> certain time of the week? live or recorded music? proper food served
>from a
>> kitchen? emphasis on beer or wine or cocktails? open after midnight?
>> children allowed? dress code?) that can never be fully captured by a
>binary
>> bar/pub split.
>> 
>> On 22 June 2017 at 17:22, Rory McCann  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> For the differentiating rule is based on the osm-carto style choice.
>Is
>>> the normal drink there a pint? Then it's a pub. Is it a cocktail?
>Then it's
>>> a bar.
>>>
>>> Though it's not too important. In Hiberno-English the terms are used
>>> interchangibly. Perhaps in the UK with their brewery pubs and free
>houses
>>> it's different. The vast majority of the instances in Ireland are
>pubs, not
>>> bars (we love our pints).
>>>
>>> I don't think there's a clear, defined difference between bar & pub.
>There
>>> are edge cases in Ireland (and I think UK). So maybe tell the
>Spanish
>>> community that.
>>>
>>> Like many things in OSM, there are many right answers. :) We'll
>never get
>>> anything 100%.
>>>
>>> Rory
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22/06/17 14:50, Alan Grant wrote:
>>>
 Let me start by introducing myself as I have not posted on talk-ie
>before.
 I am Irish but live abroad and generally follow the Spanish
>(talk-es)
 mailing list.

 There is a rather intense debate taking place at the moment on
>talk-es (31
 posts and still going) about whether a typical Spanish
>neighbourhood bar
 should be tagged as amenity=bar, pub, or cafe. Some participants
>seem to
 assume that the bar-pub distinction is clearly defined in English
>(and
 specifically in the English OSM wiki) and that the issue is how to
>map
 that
 distinction to Spain.

 I am posting here because I wondered about whether Irish mappers do
>in
 fact
 think this distinction is well-defined and useful. It seems to me
>that in
 Ireland at least we often use "pub" and "bar" almost
>interchangeably -
 hence pub names such as "The Harbour Bar". Looking at the wiki some
>of the
 criteria seem rather vague or of doubtful relevance - should it
>matter to
 the definition of an amenity if the building that houses it happens
>to be
 modern or purpose-built? What about the suggestion that food is
>normally
 available in pubs - I seem to remember that when I was young many
>pubs
 served little more in the way of food than packets of crisps, does
>that
 mean they were then bars but have become pubs as they diversified
>into
 serving food to the lunchtime crowd?

   From taginfo the pub tag vastly outnumbers the bar tag in
>Ireland.
 Looking
 at places tagged as bar, many of them do not seem much different to
>their
 neighbours tagged as pubs as far as I can see.

 I suppose I am really asking out of curiosity rather than with any
 definite
 aim, but any thoughts would be welcome.

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


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

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Bar v pub

[Philip Barnes]

On 22 June 2017 14:39:45 BST, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
>On 22 June 2017 at 13:50, Alan Grant  wrote:
>
>> Some participants seem to
>> assume that the bar-pub distinction is clearly defined in English
>(and
>> specifically in the English OSM wiki)
>
>I would say a pub has a live-in landlord, a bar does not. But I
>couldn't cite a source for that

I would say a bar has customers and a pub has regulars and is a place of 
community beyond being simply a business. Pubs attract loyalty and as such will 
be able to field teams in darts, dominoes, quiz and bowls leagues. Bars are 
also far less likely to serve real ales. 

Phil (trigpoint) 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Access tagging for buses and service=bus

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 08:58 +, Harry Wood wrote:
> I came across a few tagging quirks to do with bus access and
> specifically "service=bus"
> 
> First of all there's some roads with service=Bus (uppercase B). So
> that's definitely a mistake.
> Only exists in a cluster in Manchester ...plus a small cluster in Sao
> Paulo!:
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22service%22%3D%22Bus%22+global
> 
> The idea of the service=bus tag is to allow a bus routing system to
> know that a service road is for buses, with the implication that all
> other service roads should be not for buses. That was a surprise to
> me. When I configured a bus routing system (doing this as part of my
> day job at TransportAPI), it didn't occur to me to disallow buses
> driving down service roads, but maybe I should rethink that.
> 
> In any case it seems to me that the access tagging should be regarded
> as orthogonal to this. What I mean is, while we might tag a road as
> service=bus, we should also make sure that all these special roads
> for buses ...allow buses! If they're access=no, then we need to also
> make sure they are bus=yes (or psv=yes). Sounds reasonable?
> 
> So I came up with this Overpass query to try to find those problems h
> ttp://overpass-turbo.eu/s/pDR  Not too many.
> 
> Should we go ahead and fix those things? Quite a small job. I can do
> it myself actually.
> 
> 
> There are many other problems (bigger problems!) we could fix with
> bus data in the UK. For example an extension of this idea would be to
> check for access tagging on all ways which are part of bus route
> relations. And of course there's coverage of the bus route relations
> themselves. That's something we were discussing here as a possible UK
> quarterly mapping project: https://www.loomio.org/d/uBc7x1Ok/quarterl
> y-project-july-sept2017
> 
Harry
Also don't forget the psv=* tag too, I suspect this should be more
common in the UK as it limits access to buses on public service and
most are also open to hackneys·

Phil (trigpoint)



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Whether to tag/best tag for an unofficial name?

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 20:02 +0100, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> On 31 May 2017 at 18:38, Philip Barnes <p...@trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Motorways in the UK do no have names
> 
> I'll bear that in mind, the next time I'm driving down the Aston
> Expressway:
> 
>    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/full-closures-of-a38m-aston-exp
> ressway-and-m6-junction-6-this-weekend
> 

I had forgotten that one :)

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Whether to tag/best tag for an unofficial name?

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 18:44 +0100, Adam Snape wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> But we do.include local names which are neither official nor signed.
> There is at least some inconsistency in application of the
> verifiability criteria.
> 
> 

Local names are one thing, this could be moved to loc_name if there is
any evidence that it is widely used, but it should certainly be removed
from the name tag forthwith, this could cause serious confusion for map
users if they are told to take "Walton Summit Motorway".

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Whether to tag/best tag for an unofficial name?

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 18:29 +0100, Adam Snape wrote:
> Hi
> 
> "Is it signed as such?"
> 
> No. No signed or official name. 

We have had issues with other mappers adding made up fantasy
descriptive names to motorways and trunk roads, these have been removed
as there is no evidence of them existing. This should go the same way.

Motorways in the UK do no have names and OSM is not the place for this,
we map what really exists and is verifiable.

Phil (trigpoint)



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

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW changes

[Philip Barnes]

On Tuesday, 30 May 2017, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 29/05/17 12:02, Brian Prangle wrote:
> > There's been a suggestion that OSMUK lobbies  for the statutory right to
> > receive copies of the legal orders which change Public Rights of Way as
> > it can be slow for any official changes to make their way onto the
> > Definitive Map and then be picked up by mappers. 
> 
> Why not instead lobby for them to be published somewhere (with a feed)?
> 
The problem here is who is going to compile the feed, they are published by 
very many different highway authorities. I assume most publish these on their 
websites which local mappers obviously can and do check.

The Ramblers Association do receive notifications which are sent to the local 
area. I don't know if they are also sent to Central Office, but will find out.

As far as I am aware  Ramblers areas are organized along highway authority 
boundaries. An area can contain more than one Highway Authority.

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Landuse Farm

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 12:22 +0100, SK53 wrote:
> Seems my earlier email was a timely reminder, We seem to be down to
> over 4,500 now. I know I can't have done more than a couple of
> thousand of these.
I have certainly seen evidence that these are simply being armchaired
with no particular overview. I had spotted some locally and decided
against changing the tags until I had the chance to review and map them
properly.

> One last note:
> 
>  The history of the landuse=farm tag is probably a good example of
> how OSM tags get revised, changed and disappear through a gradual
> process involving evolution of mappers consensus. 
> 
> I think the realisation that landuse=farm was ambiguous for mappers
> came even before I joined OSM in late 2008. I remember Harry Wood
> creating the photo showing differences in tagging back in 2009. Many
> mappers slowly moved over to landuse=farmyard & landuse=farmland, but
> obviously there were older objects which did not get retagged and
> some mappers will have continued the earlier usage. Only when it was
> clear that landuse=farm was a less widely used tag was the decision
> taken to remove rendering of the tag in the standard CartoCSS map,
> and it is this which is driving the current "NoFarm" project so as to
> minimise the appearance once that revision goes live.
> 
> This may have been a relatively uncontentious change in tagging, but
> even so it shows that for any widely used set of tags achieving a
> revision in how they are used takes time. There is always a
> perception that doing things in OSM is a race against time, but I
> think in most cases this is erroneous, and particularly because OSM
> itself is not commercial. Most stuff added to OSM is immediately
> useful to someone even if data is incomplete or tagging is
> inconsistent. 
Certainly no race against time for this one, crayoning vast areas of
the countryside orange without considering field boundaries has no
particular value IMHO.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Imports] Importing fuel stations in UK and future similar imports

[Philip Barnes]

On Sun, 2017-05-07 at 10:40 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> 
> We want to update data from the import in the future, so this kind of
> id is ok.

That type of data cannot be relied upon for maintenance. As others have
said these 'meaningless' tags will be removed by mappers. Objects will
be copied to create nearby competitor modified but this "meaningless"
tag left behind.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Imports] Importing fuel stations in UK and future similar imports

[Philip Barnes]

A few issues I have spotted with the proposed data,

Website: This should only be included if it refers to the actual object
and should not be set to the shell.co.uk site.

I have spotted some really silly street names, such as
addr:street=A46/A6 A46/A6 Trunk Road.

A filling station is often part of something larger such as
highway=services, in that case many of the tags i.e. postcode/phone
number belong on the higher level object, not the filling station. 

Service Areas often have more than one filling station, one for cars
and bikes and another for HGVs.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [OSRM-talk] getting into Oxford Street

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu, 2017-03-16 at 14:21 +, Alan Bell wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> there is a segment of Oxford Street in London from about the Park 
> Street/Portman Street crossing to Regent Street where the turn 
> restrictions prevent you from going straight on into it, or turning
> left 
> or right from any of the crossing roads.
> 
> http://map.project-osrm.org/?z=15=51.514218%2C-0.130098=51
> .515313%2C-0.140419=51.514525%2C-0.147876=en=0
> 
> so without any one way street issues, this is an area of perfectly
> good 
> road from which you can exit but never enter.
> 
> I am not entirely sure what the facts on the ground are (it isn't a
> very 
> sensible place to be driving) but is there something that can be done
> in 
> the profile or by editing the map to avoid that bit of road if it
> has 
> actually been pedestrianised or something?
> 
> Alan.
> 
Hi Alan
I looks perfectly correct to me, you can access certain sections to
leave side streets. The section you were initially going into is tagged
as motor_vehicle=no, bus=yes, psv=yes.

There is nothing wrong with OSRM in this area.

If you are unsure it would be better to ask on talk-gb where you will
find local mappers who can explain the reasoning for the tagging.

Or try #osm-gb on irc.

Phil (trigpoint)



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging adjacent barriers on a way

[Philip Barnes]

On Sun, 2017-03-12 at 10:50 +, Adam Snape wrote:
> How should we tag a situation where there are different
> adjacent barriers affecting different users of a highway? These are
> often used where there is some public access but public vehicular use
> ifs restricted. To provide some examples:
> 
> 1.A stile next to a locked vehicular gate (a public footpath goes
> along an otherwise private track)
> 2. A locked vehicular gate with adjacent gap for
> cyclists/pedestrians (A cycle route with a gate allowing maintenance
> vehicles).
> 3. A cattle grid on a road, with adjacent gate to
> allow pedestrians/equestrians to bypass it
> 
> In all these cases is it best to divide the highway into separate
> ways at these points and apply the relevant barriers to the separate
> ways?
> 
That is my usual approach, at these points they are separate ways. Then
add the appropriate access tags.

In the case of a cattle grid I would consider the gate as being for
horses, I as a walker tend to walk over the grid, in my nearly 30 years
as a rambler I have never know anyone to open a gate in these cases.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Blackwall Tunnel

[Philip Barnes]

Blackwall tunnel routing now works, thank you for your help in spotting
the odd barriers.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Blackwall Tunnel

[Philip Barnes]

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4062586422
I have retagged this from barrier=flood_gate to barrier=gate,
gate=flood_gate which seems more hierarchical and simpler to follow. I
have added access=yes to the node.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/88830172
This seemed a strange one when I was sitting in the pub with my phone,
how does a lift gate enforce a minimum speed of 10 mph.

I found it on mapillary
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.499379=0.001662=17=cuc
eMHfhej2h9QBs2MOyhA=photo

In my mind the tags belong to 3 separate objects, there is a lift gate,
 a sign and minspeed belongs on the way. I have created a new node for
the sign and simplified the tagging on the lift gate and added
access=yes.

Thank you all
Phil (trigpoint)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Blackwall Tunnel

[Philip Barnes]

On Wednesday, 8 March 2017, Michael Booth wrote:
> Seems to be missing from OSRM's list of barrier features that cars can 
> be routed through: 
> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/blob/c2727f202975414ffdaf9bfb8a4dd54615bcb9d0/features/car/barrier.feature
> 
> Might be worth opening an issue on their github about the problem.

I wonder if anything similar exists elsewhere in OSM, it is some sort of 
movable barrier.  My feeling is adding flood_barrier to allowed routing would 
cause problems elsewhere. 
If its invisible,  I wonder how he mapped it.

Thank you
Phil (trigpoint)

> 
> On 08/03/2017 22:08, Philip Barnes wrote:
> > Thank you Adam, I can't even guess what that one is.
> >
> > Phil (trigpoint)
> >
> > On Wednesday, 8 March 2017, Adam Snape wrote:
> >> Also this barrier http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/88830172
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >> On 8 March 2017 at 21:51, Philip Barnes <p...@trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thank you Franz
> >>>
> >>> I will try adding an access=yes tag.
> >>>
> >>> Phil (trigpoint)
> >>>
> >>> On Wednesday, 8 March 2017, Franz v. Gordon wrote:
> >>>> Hello Phil,
> >>>>
> >>>> I found this barrier=flood_gate [1] at the exit of the southbound
> >>>> tunnel, which may be an unknown barrier with no access for anyone. Mabe
> >>>> an access=yes may help here.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4062586422
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards
> >>>> Franz (OSM:FvGordon)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from my Jolla
> >>> ___
> >>> Talk-GB mailing list
> >>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >>>
> 
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Blackwall Tunnel

[Philip Barnes]

Thank you Adam, I can't even guess what that one is.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Wednesday, 8 March 2017, Adam Snape wrote:
> Also this barrier http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/88830172
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Adam
> 
> On 8 March 2017 at 21:51, Philip Barnes <p...@trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Thank you Franz
> >
> > I will try adding an access=yes tag.
> >
> > Phil (trigpoint)
> >
> > On Wednesday, 8 March 2017, Franz v. Gordon wrote:
> > > Hello Phil,
> > >
> > > I found this barrier=flood_gate [1] at the exit of the southbound
> > > tunnel, which may be an unknown barrier with no access for anyone. Mabe
> > > an access=yes may help here.
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4062586422
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Franz (OSM:FvGordon)
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my Jolla
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Blackwall Tunnel

[Philip Barnes]

Thank you Franz

I will try adding an access=yes tag.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Wednesday, 8 March 2017, Franz v. Gordon wrote:
> Hello Phil,
> 
> I found this barrier=flood_gate [1] at the exit of the southbound 
> tunnel, which may be an unknown barrier with no access for anyone. Mabe 
> an access=yes may help here.
> 
> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4062586422
> 
> Regards
> Franz (OSM:FvGordon)
> 
>

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

[Talk-GB] Blackwall Tunnel

[Philip Barnes]

This may be a question for OSRM but I thought I would start locally.

A problem, i have come across after a new mapper tried to fix it, is
that OSRM will not route through the southbound tunnel.

http://map.project-osrm.org/debug/#17.52/51.51198/-0.00679

I cannot spot any problem with the mapping, the debug map shows the
entire network with pink edges which I think means a routing island but
cannot find any documentation of the meaning.

There does not appear to be any significant difference between the
tagging of the northbound, which works.

Mapzen does not have a problem.

Thanks
Phil (trigpoint)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Legally permitted vs inadvisable

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 11:41 +, SK53 wrote:
> Inadvisable is probably too dependent on the individual and their
> particular situation.
Absolutely, doing this could make many PROW inaccessible.

Phil (trigpoint)


> As ever it is better to try adding something more objective to the
> data which allows these routing situations to be better handled. The
> current tags which allow this are sidewalk & verge. I think a
> sensible solution for your generic case would be to disallow
> pedestrian routing along A-roads which have sidewalk=none (perhaps
> when maxspeed > 30 mph). Verges will not be practicable for many
> pedestrians (Mums with pushchairs, toddlers, older people etc) so I
> think can be ignored.
> 
> This would still allow routing where no-one has surveyed or tagged
> sidewalk provision, and is therefore less likely to break places
> where there are pavements or paths. It also allows those cases where
> walking along the road is inadvisable to be mapped on a case-by-case
> basis.
> 
> Other refinements might include considering whether a road is urban
> or rural (Richard Fairhurst does this on cycle.travel): OS Open Data
> provides a decent data set of this & the one I generate from OSM is
> very similar.
> 
> On a broader community level: mapping presence of absence of
> pavements or other paths alongside main roads in the countryside (and
> when absent features of the verge) is probably something we should
> aim to do alongside completing speed limits for trunk roads. Much can
> be done from Mapillary images.
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 8 March 2017 at 11:27, Stuart Reynolds  org.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > What’s the thinking about tagging foot=no along busy dual
> > carriageways? Specifically I would like to remove a walk from a
> > stretch of the A2 near Barham in Kent where there are bus stops,
> > but no footways along the verge (and indeed very little in the way
> > of
> >  verge at some points). It is technically legal to walk along the
> > A2 from the junction to the south, but it is most certainly not
> > advisable and you would be taking your life into your hands if you
> > did so.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > BTW, access to the northbound bus stop is via a footpath through
> > the woods. Technically the southbound one is accessed via a
> > footpath across a break in the crash barriers - but we don’t have
> > that on OSM, and I’m not about to add it in.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/26237116#map=18/51.21188/1.16626
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Stuart Reynolds
> > for traveline south east & anglia
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > 
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > 
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > 
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> > 
> > 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Is this a pokemon go edit?

[Philip Barnes]

Hi Ian
It certainly looks like a pokemon edit or vandalism. 
I would simply revert it.

It is too unlikely, unlikely that shops would be demolished for a park. 
Unlikely as it is too small an area. 

Phil (trigpoint)

On Monday, 6 March 2017, Ian Caldwell wrote:
> This changeset look wrong.
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46565840
> 
> I have contacted the contributor but no reply in 24 hours.
> 
> Is it the kind that pokemon go players do?
> 
> Should I reverse it without a ground survey?
> 
> Ian
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] No changeset discussion box - Modified via wheelmap.org?

[Philip Barnes]

Not closed yet, the box will appear in time.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Wed Mar 1 13:33:33 2017 GMT, Dave F wrote:
> Hi
> 
> This changeset has no discussion box:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/46492338
> 
> The user's other edits does. Is it due to it being via wheelmap 
> (created_by rosemary v0.4.4)?
> 
> DaveF
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Help with Speed Camera Relation

[Philip Barnes]

It depends on the type which is missing from the tagging, the most common 
(GATSO) only work in one direction and read the rear plate.

As an aside I did read today that one area is turning it front facing cameras 
around because they have finally realised motorcycles don't have front plates.

Phil (trigpoint).

On Fri Feb 24 13:16:29 2017 GMT, jonat...@bigfatfrog67.me wrote:
> Thanks Brian. What do you mean by Single Direction?  They don’t swivel and 
> I’m assuming they will target traffic going in both directions.
> 
> Jonathan
> http://bigfatfrog67.me
> 
> From: Brian Prangle
> Sent: 24 February 2017 10:40
> To: Jonathan
> Cc: talk-gb-westmidlands
> Subject: Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Help with Speed Camera Relation
> 
> Looks fine to me jonathan in terms of relation structure. I can't comment on 
> the direction enforced. I'm assuming of course it is a single direction 
> enforced
> Regards
> Brian
> 
> On 23 Feb 2017 10:46 p.m.,  wrote:
> Hi,
>  
> I’ve created a relation for a speed camera which I believe is correct but I’d 
> appreciate a second opinion:
>  
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7002742#map=19/52.40109/-1.93670=D
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Jonathan
> http://bigfatfrog67.me
>  
> 
> ___
> Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
> Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
> 
>

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

Re: [Talk-GB] Fwd: [Talk-scotland] Estate Agent Solicitors

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2017-02-20 at 11:58 +, Paul Oldham wrote:
> On 20/02/17 11:50, SK53 wrote:
> 
> > A couple of other points:
> > 
> >   * I think office=lawyer is more widely used than UK specific
> > terms
> > like solicitor.
> 
> Funnily enough I was just reading the wiki page on that very thing.
> So I 
> should have
> 
> office=lawyer
> lawyer=solicitor
> 
> As per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:office%3Dlawyer
> 
> >   * You could also do shop=estate_agent;office=lawyer too.
> > Certainly
> > around Nottingham we use shop=estate_agent for walk-in high
> > street
> > agents, and office=estate_agent for mainly commercial agents
> > who are
> > usually not located in retail premises. Others regard anywhere
> > that
> > does not allow immediate purchase of a product as an office
> > rather
> > than a shop.
> 
> That does seem like a tempting solution. Apart from anything else it 
> gives the renderers a better chance of doing something plausible. So
> I 
> end up with:
> 
> office=lawyer
> lawyer=solicitor
> shop=estate_agent
> 
Its certainly not an unusual situation in small towns in England and
Wales either.

Phil



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

Re: [Talk-GB] London, network=Barclays Cycle Hire

[Philip Barnes]

I see no problem with this edit, however should we keep changing the
name of the sponsor, or should we be even more bold and simply call it
London Cycle Hire, or similar, in the same way the BBC refer to the FA
Cup rather than the name of the sponsor it happens to have this year?

My 2 pence worth.

Phil (trigpoint)



On Sat, 2017-02-18 at 12:31 +, Dan S wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Exactly 1 year ago, Harry pointed out that most of London's bike hire
> scheme was still tagged as "Barclays Cycle Hire" even though it's not
> called that any more.
>  London_Cycle_Hire#Santander_Cycles>
> 
> He said: "I think this is a case where (PROPOSAL) we Londoners should
> be bold and swap them all over as a single edit."
> 
> I concurred back then, and I still do. I invite opinions as to the
> best value to put in the network=* tag (see the discussion on the
> wiki, for some suggestions). I've pasted at the end of this email,
> the
> current counts of values used.
> 
> I'd like to propose carrying out that edit, i.e. a simple edit to the
> network=* values listed below, for amenity=bicycle_rental. (Note that
> we'd avoid editing other network=* values such as "Brompton Dock",
> different scheme.)
> 
> Best
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> 422 "network": "Barclays Cycle Hire"
>   1 "network": "Barclays Cycle Hire Scheme"
>   1 "network": "Barkleys Cycle Hire"
>   1 "network": "Santander"
>  20 "network": "Santander Cycle Hire"
>  42 "network": "Santander Cycles"
>   1 "network": "TfL"
>   1 "network": "TFL"
>   3 "network": "TfL Cycle Hire"
>   1 "network": "TFL Cycle Hire"
> 
> ___
> 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] Should a place be tagged with a node or area?

[Philip Barnes]

Hi Adam
The place is put on the node.

Normally only admim boundaries are mapped in OSM. Suburbs, localties etc do not 
tend to have defined boundaries so are generally only mapped as nodes.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Thu Feb 9 23:48:30 2017 GMT, Adam Snape wrote:
> Thanks Phil,
> 
> Our local place mapping must be quite primitive, because few place
> boundaries are mapped. Do you mean that both the boundary and node should
> carry the place=tag? Where there isn't a clear boundary to the place,
> should the mapper estimate it? Glad to hear I've been putting the nodes in
> the right place anyway :)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> Normally places are mapped with both a boundary and node.
> 
> A node is certainly needed for navigation and should be somewhere sensible,
> normally the centre is where someone who puts the placename into a satnav
> would expect to end up, rather than a housing estate in the geographical
> centre.
> 
> Phil (trigpoint)
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Traditional/Historic Counties

[Philip Barnes]

Normally places are mapped with both a boundary and node.

A node is certainly needed for navigation and should be somewhere sensible, 
normally the centre is where someone who puts the placename into a satnav would 
expect to end up, rather than a housing estate in the geographical centre.

Phil (trigpoint)
 

On Thu Feb 9 22:30:03 2017 GMT, Adam Snape wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Apologies for asking two questions in quick succession.
> 
> It has occurred to me that the traditional/historic UK counties aren't
> mapped in OSM and I wondered if it would be acceptable to add relations
> for these with the boundary=historic tag.
> 
> I know that we have Historical OSM  for long vanished historical features,
> and I would have no desire to see osm filled with antiquities,. but I think
> that the traditional counties are still relevant to people. People still
> identify with and talk of themselves as being from "Yorkshire". People
> might well wish to search a map for "Sussex" etc.
> 
> We have good sources for the pre-1974 county boundaries in the form of out
> of copyright OS maps. The boundaries almost entirely follow current
> administrative boundaries, so wouldn't result in lots of extra clutter on
> the map.
> 
> Obviously it would be a big task and not one I'm volunteering to do in its
> entirety (if I get round to it at all),  but does anybody find the
> principle of adding of traditional counties objectionable?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Adam
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

[Philip Barnes]

On Tue Feb 7 15:04:22 2017 GMT, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 2017-02-07 15:01, Philip Barnes wrote:
> 
> > Hi Adam, welcome to the list.
> > 
> > If the definitive line is obstructed you have an absolute right to go 
> > around it.
> 
> Are you sure about this? I would expect that you only have a right to
> report the obstruction to the LA or apply to the courts. Technically,
> you might not even have the rights to remove the obstruction as it
> consists of private property. If I am wrong here, I would appreciate a
> link... 

http://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/rights-of-way-law-in-england-and-wales/basics-of-rights-of-way-law.aspx

Section 22 deals with removing an obstruction.

Thats the reason you take your secateurs on every walk and don't go home for 
them :)

Phil

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

[Philip Barnes]

Hi Adam, welcome to the list.

On Tue Feb 7 13:26:00 2017 GMT, Adam Snape wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This is my first post to this (or indeed any) mailing list. Apologies if
> I've made any errors.
> 
> I agree with Colin that we should certainly not be assuming permissive
> status for paths which are not included on the definitive map. The DM is
> legally definitive in the rights that it shows but it is also explicitly
> not evidence about the non-existence of other rights. We can't say "the
> definitive path goes this way, thus the path going the other way must be
> permissive". In order to tag a way as permissive we ought to have some
> verifiable evidence that public use is by permission.

I disagree with you here, the walkable line  should be mapped as the right of 
way whether it follows the definitive line or not. It absolutely should not be 
mapped as permissive, the landowner is not giving permission. If the definitive 
line is obstructed you have an absolute right to go around it.

The walked line and the definitive line are often different, I have heard 50m 
as being a reasonable guide from the LA.
> 
> As Andy and Colin say, some common sense needs to be applied before adding
> information from the DM/DS into OSM. Until we come up with a  tagging
> system to say "this map feature exists legally but not on the ground",
> adding obvious errors, paths which have subsequently been built across, or
> stiles/gates which now exist only on the DS lessens the usability of the
> map for people actually wanting to use the paths.

We should map what is there, stiles is where we are making a better map.

Thete is some deregulation of footpath diversions on the way, particularly 
where the walked line and definitive line differ and providing it is agreed by 
all parties, then a map modification order will be able to be made without 
expensive lawers getting involved. I am hoping that will improve the situation. 

And when you are out walking do take your secateurs.

Phil (trigpoint) 
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpath Open Data is not always accurate.

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2017-02-06 at 14:53 +, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 06/02/2017 11:18, Colin Smale wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> >   
> >   On 2017-02-06 09:57, Dave F wrote:
> >   
> > >  On 05/02/2017 11:33,
> > > Colin Smale wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >   Any paths that no longer follow the official route
> > > > (as per
> > > > the DM/DS) should not be tagged as PROW and
> > > > probably as
> > > > access=permissive unless they go across otherwise
> > > > public
> > > > land. The official route is still a public right of
> > > > way,
> > > > it's just no longer usable as such.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > We should be mapping what's on the ground, as PROW signs
> > > &
> > > stiles indicate, even if that doesn't correspond with the
> > > definitive map. They should be tagged to correspond with
> > > the
> > > signs status.
> > 
> >   Not sure I agree with this - the "on the ground" principle
> > can
> > be taken too far. The real principle is "objective
> > verifiability" - so two independent "mappers" would come to
> > the
> > same conclusion. That doesn't always imply that things are
> > actually visible on site, only that there is an agreed
> > "single
> > point of truth". In my book that single point of truth
> > would be
> > the Definitive Map and Definitive Statement, and NOT the
> > signs.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, I think just applying a bit of common sense is the
> thing to do here.  I normally "map what's on the ground" but it's
> pretty common to find PRoW signs pointing in odd directions,
> often
> where some local scally has decided to have a play with the
> sign. 
> You can usually figure out where it's supposed to go though,
> usually
> from signage along the way.  Similarly many people in a
> particular
> area can point to "the footpath that officially goes through
> someone's house" or "the footpath that officially goes through a
> sewage farm".  Usually these are just an error (FSVO error) on
> whatever map they occur on (for all the reasons already
> discussed).
> 
> 
> 
> Adding an source explicit source for "designation" if it's not
> on-the-ground signage does make sense to me though, if only to
> avoid
> the problems that we had with people "helpfully" filling in names
> from OS Locator (even when a split-second of thought would have
> suggested that those names might not be corrent due to obvious
> spelling errors etc.).  
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, not all "obviously wrong" paths are wrong, though -
> like
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/53.02259/-1.45416 which is a
> footpath through a (former) pub.
> 
> 
> 

As Andy says, it is important to use common sense and to remember that
the definitive line was never surveyed so the line shown may never have
been the line (or even possible).
The definitive map as drawn onto OS maps in the 1950s by Parish
Councils, some were better and more conscientious than others. But
mistakes were made, pens slipped and at that time fewer people will
have been familiar with map reading.
Most of the time the system works well and right of way mapping is one
of the areas we can excel and produce a better map. We can map surveyed
lines and also map the 'barriers'. It is important that we map the
positions of stiles, gates and kissing gates.
We should certainly not map a path as permissive just because it
differs from the line on the definitive map, 50m is a rough guide for
it accuracy. If its the surveyed line then its the path.
Phil (trigpoint)___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] OS products (WAS:Quarterly task)

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2017-01-04 at 19:57 +, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> >BTW:
> >https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendatadownload/products.html
> >
> > >OS Open Map - Local (has several water layers) and OS Open Rivers
were
> >updated 10/2016
> 
> How do I view these in JOSM? Thanks :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Assuming they are shape files, just open them in a different layer.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia/Wikidata admins cleanup

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2017-01-04 at 18:16 +0200, Tomas Straupis wrote:
> There was a flow of undiscussed automated wikidata additions in
> Lithuania with problems. I asked for discussion before automated
> changes. I was given a promise that a discussion will follow. But
> there was no discussion. And automated changes resumed. I see it as
> violation of automated edit rules and would like these edits to stop.
> Anybody can do atomated changes, it does not take too much knowledge
> or inteligence to do them. We will do it ourselves, when we want it.
> So stop!

That also happened in the UK, the community were promised time to
review the proposed imports for our areas but it happened before we had
a chance to comment.

Phil (trigpoint)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly task

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2017-01-04 at 17:05 +, Christian Ledermann wrote:
> BTW:
> https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendatadownload/products.html
> 
> OS Open Map - Local (has several water layers) and OS Open Rivers
> were
> updated 10/2016
> 

It certainly a useful project. I often come across npe streams, that
are in the wrong place and drawn with a tiny fraction of the nodes they
require, when adding PROW, hedges, fences and the like. For it to be
useful it needs to be done with care and an eye on what else is mapped.
We certainly can't just remove them and re-import without causing more
problems than we already have. My preference is to drag and add nodes
to improve what we have using a combination of OS Opendata, bing and
mapbox (much newer but less sharp imagery).

Also bear in mind that a stream mapped as source=npe may not be,
mappers do forget to remove the tag or leave it as they have only
corrected a short stretch that has got in the way at the time.

Phil (trigpoint)



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Ideas for quarterly projects

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu, 2016-12-29 at 19:17 +, SK53 wrote:ertainly round Nottingham
many Notes persist because they remain relevant. 
> 
> In Tendring poleclimber adds notes from planning applications. New
> notes tend to get looked at by someone present on the osm-gb IRC
> channel within a short time of them appearing and spurious ones get
> closed.
> 
> We get plenty of notes via MapBox which are in areas where we don'
> t have mappers and therefore it is not possible to close them without
> a specific survey.
> 
> I worry that a focus on clearing Notes & Fixmes would end up in the
> removal of useful information. So I'm not in favour of this for a
> quarterly project.
> 
> I would also add that Andy (SomeoneElse) has created a very simple to
> use way of grabbing a set of notes or fixmes and creating a GPX file
> which can be loaded into a GPS or smartphone for mapping on the move.
> 
I'm with Jerry on this, new notes are notified to the #osm-gb channel
and we are pretty good at clearing up the rubbish as it is created so
what remains is mostly stuff that needs surveying and will be in areas
where we don't have mappers or mappers don't visit often. These should
not be simply closed.
OSMand displays notes, so when travelling it is useful to be able to
see and maybe change route a bit to survey notes, I would certainly
encourage this. But to make this a task would be wrong. 
Phil (trigpoint)___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Local Authority rights of way information

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2016-12-21 at 11:07 +, Chris Hill wrote:
> Have any Local Authorities released their definitive maps or
> statements under OGL? I want to know so I can use examples as a lever
> to persuade East Riding of Yorkshire and Hull City councils to
> release *anything* as open data. 
> 
The big problem there is unless they have done an independent survey,
then any digitisation will still retain the Crown Copyright of the
original definitive map. IMHO that include rowmaps too.

For example the parish councilors drawing in the rights of way, said
that path runs parallel to that hedge. The hedge is where it is because
OS surveyed it.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Local Authority rights of way information

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2016-12-21 at 10:39 +, Paul Berry wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> As you probably know, local authorities must keep available an up-to-
> date copy of rights of way for inspection. Can this information then
> be incorporated into OSM, having been witnessed, or is it a case of
> public but copyrighted? I'm currently nursing a complaint about a
> rural right of way blockage (without a stopping-up order) in my area
> and have had the need to get very familiar with my local footpaths...
> 
In most cases it cannot be simply incorporated into OSM. The definitive
maps were drawn onto OS maps, and all I have seen are overlayed onto OS
maps with the words Crown Copyright.

You should not copy from these maps, but they are useful to get an idea
of what is missing and can then be surveyed.

Another reason not to copy is that they are not 100% accurate and we
should map what is on the ground. The maps were originally drawn by
parish councils, and not always accurately. For example here in
Shropshire a path is shown passing through a house, built on a right of
way? No, the house was built in the 1500s, and the pen must have
slipped.

The other advantage of surveying is that we can map the barriers, this
is when OSM can beat OS as a walking map. When you survey the paths,
please map the stiles, kissing_gates, gates etc. That is important
information for many walkers.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-GB] This is an auto-generated note from MAPS.ME application:

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2016-12-09 at 12:54 +, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> On 9 December 2016 at 11:49, Dave F 
> wrote:
> > 
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Peter%20Mount/notes
> > 
> > They are all for the same entity.
> > 
> > How can we stop this annoying repetition? Can it be blocked at
> > OSM's end,
> > contact individual users or, better still, get it blocked at
> > source? Does
> > anyone have a contact at Map.me?
> 
> I wonder if this could be down to a simple misunderstanding of the
> Map.me UI. As far as the user is concerned he's stated that an object
> on the map no longer exists. He may not be aware this his action is
> adding a note rather than deleting the object immediately. So when
> the
> object stays on the map, he assumes his action has failed for
> technical reasons, and so tries again.
> 
I found out for my self that duplicate notes are easy to create on
Saturday. I was in Bridgnorth for a few beers with my mate, and before
that had had a walk around doing some mapping.

I managed to create 4 notes instead of one due to the interface.
Initially I had wanted to add a category to a building, in this case a
theatre. Maps.me didn't allow that so I added a note.

Touching the tick had apparently no effect (no animation or screen
change), so I assumed it hadn't registered and tried again. It was only
when I looked at the IRC channel and saw the 4 notes I realised what I
had done.

Phil (trigpoint)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] [OSM-talk] This is an auto-generated note from MAPS.ME application:

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2016-12-09 at 12:54 +, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> On 9 December 2016 at 11:49, Dave F 
> wrote:
> > 
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Peter%20Mount/notes
> > 
> > They are all for the same entity.
> > 
> > How can we stop this annoying repetition? Can it be blocked at
> > OSM's end,
> > contact individual users or, better still, get it blocked at
> > source? Does
> > anyone have a contact at Map.me?
> 
> I wonder if this could be down to a simple misunderstanding of the
> Map.me UI. As far as the user is concerned he's stated that an object
> on the map no longer exists. He may not be aware this his action is
> adding a note rather than deleting the object immediately. So when
> the
> object stays on the map, he assumes his action has failed for
> technical reasons, and so tries again.
> 
I found out for my self that duplicate notes are easy to create on
Saturday. I was in Bridgnorth for a few beers with my mate, and before
that had had a walk around doing some mapping.

I managed to create 4 notes instead of one due to the interface.
Initially I had wanted to add a category to a building, in this case a
theatre. Maps.me didn't allow that so I added a note.

Touching the tick had apparently no effect (no animation or screen
change), so I assumed it hadn't registered and tried again. It was only
when I looked at the IRC channel and saw the 4 notes I realised what I
had done.

Phil (trigpoint)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Ideas for quarterly projects

[Philip Barnes]

On Tue Dec 6 20:46:03 2016 GMT, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> All great ideas. The trick for Q1 is to find one that will work well in the
> cold weather. I'm not sure I know the answer to that but the idea of doing
> Fixmes and Notes is interesting - it could through up literally anything! I
> will probably learn a great deal from doing that one.
> 
Not sure about notes, we are pretty good at clearing the rubbish, the remaining 
ones are mainly things that need looking at. More a summer thing.

I find OSMand pretty good, as it displays notes and allows them to be visited 
when passing nearby.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Suspicious edits in Tarbrax, South Lanarkshire

[Philip Barnes]

On Sun, 2016-12-04 at 09:39 +, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> Is there anyone with knowledge of South Lanarkshire that could take a
> look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43929865 and the
> other
> changesets by this user? It looks to me as if the user has added
> fictitious items for fun, but whether this is vandalism or just
> misunderstanding is not clear. Either way, I think some clean-up may
> be needed.
> 
> 
Probably worth commenting on the changeset, see if you get any
response. I wouldn't hold my breath.

I did also spot another suspicious user in the area, looks like they
are connected in some way.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Hannah%20Ross


Phil (trigpoint)




> 

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road classifications in Leicester

[Philip Barnes]

Reverted in http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44047606

I do need to look at some of their other edits, whilst not so damaging
as the ring road classification, there is a lot wrong.

They have been very prolific. I think they slipped under my radar by
doing their first single edit in Leamington before moving on to
Leicestershire.


Phil (trigpoint)



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road classifications in Leicester

[Philip Barnes]

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1098

I will revert these changes to road classifications when I get home, at 
dominoes tonight. 

Phil (trigpoint)

On Tue Nov 29 21:13:27 2016 GMT, Philip Barnes wrote:
> I have requested a block, been going through their edits. They have made 
> earlier road classification changes.
> 
> Strange I didn't see them on my whodidit feed.
> 
> Phil (trigpoint)
> 
> On Tue Nov 29 20:05:49 2016 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote:
> > On 29/11/2016 19:54, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > A new user is changing road classifications. I've sent a note:
> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44042265
> > >
> > > If no change, I will ask for a temporary block on edits as the pace is 
> > > very fast.
> > 
> > Thanks Rob.  I'm not convinced by 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/456649469#map=17/52.60762/-1.07770 
> > either, so I've added a comment to 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44043027 as well.  If you need a 
> > block of any sort drop a mail to d...@osmfoundation.org so that someone 
> > should be able to pick it up fairly quickly (I'll be away from keyboard 
> > for it bit, but one of the other usual suspects behind that address 
> > should be able to respond).
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > 
> > Andy
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Jolla
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road classifications in Leicester

[Philip Barnes]

I have requested a block, been going through their edits. They have made 
earlier road classification changes.

Strange I didn't see them on my whodidit feed.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Tue Nov 29 20:05:49 2016 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 29/11/2016 19:54, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > A new user is changing road classifications. I've sent a note:
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44042265
> >
> > If no change, I will ask for a temporary block on edits as the pace is 
> > very fast.
> 
> Thanks Rob.  I'm not convinced by 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/456649469#map=17/52.60762/-1.07770 
> either, so I've added a comment to 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44043027 as well.  If you need a 
> block of any sort drop a mail to d...@osmfoundation.org so that someone 
> should be able to pick it up fairly quickly (I'll be away from keyboard 
> for it bit, but one of the other usual suspects behind that address 
> should be able to respond).
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Andy
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road classifications in Leicester

[Philip Barnes]

I was there a couple of weekends ago, there have certainly been no changes. 
Leicester is based around a trunk ring so these edits are damaging. As a local 
I would ask for a block if they are not responding. 

Phil (trigpoint)

On Tue Nov 29 19:54:22 2016 GMT, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> A new user is changing road classifications. I've sent a note:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44042265
> 
> If no change, I will ask for a temporary block on edits as the pace is very
> fast.
> 
> *Rob*
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS and businesses run from home

[Philip Barnes]

On Sat Nov 19 16:48:23 2016 GMT, Andrew Hain wrote:
> Some FHRS entries refer to people's names, or to business names, with the 
> address of a private house. These may be people who cook from home or 
> itinerantly. Is it however appropriate for OSM to map these addresses as 
> anything more than houses, for example by adding fhrs:id or the name in the 
> FHRS data set?
> 
I would say no, unless a business is verifiable i.e. has external signage then 
it has no place in OSM. We are not a business directory.

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Missing Maps humanitarian mapping party in Liverpool on Thurs eve

[Philip Barnes]

Pity its such short notice and I have a lot on this week.

For some reason the URLs are not clickable, could it be the <>.

Phil (trigpoint) 

On Mon Nov 14 12:08:06 2016 GMT, Adrian McEwen wrote:
> Following on from the HOTOSM mapping party advertised here a couple of 
> months back there's a follow-up one happening this week.
> 
> Margaux, who organised the first one, is running another this Thursday 
> at DoES Liverpool http://doesliverpool.com, from 6:30pm.
> 
> The Missing Maps project is a global initiative to let people with spare 
> time and a computer help out with humanitarian aid without having to 
> travel to where the aid is being delivered, by doing bits of mapping 
> from satellite imagery to build up maps for those on the ground to use.
> 
> No experience necessary, I expect Margaux will give a short intro talk 
> about the project, and then we'll be doing some mapping. Bring a laptop 
> (and a mouse might be useful, given the sort of editing you end up doing).
> 
> Sign up at 
> https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/missing-maps-in-liverpool-tickets-29078159558
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Adrian.
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[Philip Barnes]

Hi Greg

There do seem to be a very large number in FHRS establishments with no
matching OSM node/way that do have an OSM node. How is this match done?

For example
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/318139689

Thanks Phil

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Copyright and MAPS.ME android 6.2.5-Google

[Philip Barnes]

Maps.me is fine, as you suspect the google just means the app is from the play 
store, they were at SOTM.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Tue Oct 4 20:53:58 2016 GMT+0100, ael wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 08:49:32PM +0100, ael wrote:
> > I have just found a local cafe added to OSM by "MAPS.ME android 
> > 6.2.5-Google",
> > at least that was the "created by" tag.
> 
> I think that I may now have answered my own question. Digging into the
> Knowledge base on the app website, it does look as if the data does
> come from the user so should be legitimate.
> 
> ael
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Talk-GB Digest, Vol 120, Issue 39

[Philip Barnes]

The link leads to a Liverpool Uni webmail login.

You would increase the chances of OSMers attending if it was on a weekend. 

Phil (trigpoint)

On Tue Sep 27 13:21:27 2016 GMT+0100, Margaux Meslé wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> This is to let people know that I am co-hosting a mapathon next Monday 3rd
> of October in Liverpool. The eventbrite is:
> 
>   https://mappingeventsota.eventbrite.co.uk
> 
> 
> It would be great to have some HOT and/or OSM people there.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Margaux Mesle
> 
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:00 PM,  wrote:
> 
> > Send Talk-GB mailing list submissions to
> > talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > talk-gb-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > talk-gb-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Talk-GB digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >1. Re: UK Postcodes (SK53)
> >2. Re: UK Quarterly Project Oct-Dec 2016 (SK53)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:29:12 +0100
> > From: SK53 
> > To: Brian Prangle 
> > Cc: Talk GB 
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] UK Postcodes
> > Message-ID:
> >  > mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> > I just re-read a post
> >  > on-openstreetmap.html>
> > I wrote nearly 3 years ago. I think a lot of it holds true today, so I've
> > copied the main points here :
> >
> >
> >1. The simplest, but not necessarily the easiest target, is to map at
> >least one postcode in each postcode sector. This is harder than it
> > appears
> >because obvious things to map in sparsely populated rural areas may
> > require
> >surveys. For instance FHRS data has two B in Port Wemyss on Islay,
> > but
> >the names are not shown on the OS Open Data StreetView. Similarly a
> > degree
> >of caution must be exercised on farms in the Rhinns of Islay and on the
> > Oa
> >because individual farmsteads may include two or three properties
> > (perhaps
> >all owned by the same extended family, but nonetheless distinct.
> >
> >2. Achieve 5% completion. This reflects a DOUBLING of current postcode
> >data, and therefore must be regarded as ambitious. This is however, the
> >minimum condition for breaking the back of the postcode problem. I
> > believe
> >with a concerted effort we could achieve this in 3 months, using
> >conventional crowd-sourcing techniques.
> >
> >3. Achieve 10% completion. A second doubling will probably require more
> >tool based support. The obvious targets are semi-automated matching of
> > FHRS
> >& Land Registry data, and semi-automated identification of single
> > postcode
> >streets.
> >
> >4. Postcodes along major roads (A & B roads). These may require some
> >survey work, but again because many retail outlets are along such roads
> >there is already a decent amount of information available from FHRS.
> >
> > This was December 2013, so perhaps 5% and 10% should be nearer 10% and 20%.
> > I don't have up-to-date figures but back in May 2015 we had 73,372 full
> > well-formed postcodes for GB (not whole of UK) which is still under 5%.
> > These were located in just under 8000 postcode sectors (out of a total of
> > 12,300 or so, with another 1000 populated in the last year). FHRS data has
> > information on nearly 250k postcodes (inc NI) and 10k distinct postcode
> > sectors. All these figures are based on raw strings, i.e., not checked if
> > valid or in the right place. We still have thousands of schools mapped
> > without postcode (even some where ref_edubase was added) so this is another
> > fairly easy target.
> >
> > The big difference from 3 years ago is that we have more people interested
> > in creating tools to assist these processes: something where the 3 month
> > timescale is better than a shorter one.
> >
> > We have needed to get more address data for some, but on its own it's not a
> > very strong motivator. My hopes for making big progress with Land Registry
> > data were dashed once OpenAddresses and Owen Boswara clarified the 3rd
> > party content in the data, and similarly the OpenAddresses project finished
> > without having much in the way of additional data to offer us. (I still
> > believe that there's scope in their approach and they built 

[Talk-GB] Future quarterly project idea

[Philip Barnes]

I have just been listening to Rory McCann talking about mapping Irish
Townlands and the challenges they faced obtaining the data and tracing
it from historic OS maps. The townlands are admin_level=10 relations,
the same level as our civil parishes.

Its a lot easier in the UK, we have a source of open data in OS
Opendata Boundary Lines so I feel that this would be a relatively
simple armchair, or at least swivel chair, project for those dark
winter nights.

They are an important level, our lowest level of Parish/Town councils
use these boundaries, they are used in planning and are uselful when
reporting issues with rights of way, in many counties path numbers
change at the boundary.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] The movie Eye in the Sky credits OpenStreetMap

[Philip Barnes]

I remember seeing an in the field  history programme which was in London,  
can't remember the name but it was with Dan Snow. They used a big print os OSM, 
A0 plus I think.
OSM was credited in the closing titles.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Fri Jul 22 08:12:16 2016 GMT+0100, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I just saw the film Eye in the Sky, starring Helen Mirren and Alan
> Rickman (the movie is really good), and I was pleasantly surprised to
> see OpenStreetMap and its contributors get a credit in the end
> credits. The surprise is partly because I do not recall seeing any map
> in the film that looked like it came from OSM.
> 
> IIRC, the credit went like “OpenStreetMap © OpenStreetMap
> contributors”. No mention of any license though.
> 
> Now I'm wondering whether there are any other mainstream films that
> also use and credit OpenStreetMap as well. This is the first time I've
> seen such a credit and I don't recall any mention as well on this
> mailing list.
> 
> ~Eugene
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Can we utilise the popularity of Pokémon Go for OSM?

[Philip Barnes]

I have already reverted some poke stops and gyms, and that was before it was 
released. Now its been released,,today in the UK,  we need to watch for this 
type of edit.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Thu Jul 14 12:57:26 2016 GMT+0100, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> I've wondered about it but doubt it. The Pokémon Go app needs to be in 
> the foreground to work whilst we would want them to swap over to Maps.me 
> (ease of use), Vespucci, OsmAnd or other app editors on occassions.
> 
> Best bet would maybe be some Field Papers thing?
> 
> --Jói
> 
> Þann 14.07.2016 11:46, Svavar Kjarrval reit:
> > Hi.
> > 
> > Now that Pokémon Go[1] is gaining popularity, people in general will
> > spend more time outside walking around with their phone in hand (and
> > some with mobile USB chargers). I'm wondering if there might be
> > opportunities for OpenStreetMap to utilise that activity to encourage
> > the gamers to collect (non-infringing) data for OSM while they're
> > playing the game anyway.
> > 
> > I'm not claiming I have any specific ideas at this point. Just wanted 
> > to
> > bring this point forward.
> > 
> > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_Go
> > 
> > With regards,
> > Svavar Kjarrval
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSMUK local chapter

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2016-06-29 at 18:55 +0100, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Unity Trust has also been recommended to us. They support online
> signing with definable limits and multiple signatories, and don't
> charge a fee.
> 
> https://www.unity.co.uk/
> 
The ramblers use unity trust, each group is supposed to. Seems to work
well.
Phil___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] How to handle Maps.Me ?

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu, 2016-06-23 at 01:17 +0900, Max wrote:
> The user experience of adding something to the maps.me map is quit
> cool
> actually. It's really satisfying to see something immediately nicely
> rendered. I recommend to try it.
> 
I did try a few edits earlier today, my first impression was how
difficult it was to place a node when you have no 'marker' and have to
guesstimate where the centre of the screen is. That will explain a lot
of the positioning issues.

Second impression is that there is a severe lack of tagging options, I
tried adding a place of worship and the most fundamental tag of all,
religion, was not available.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] How to handle Maps.Me garbage?

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed Jun 22 14:52:40 2016 GMT+0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2016-06-22 15:13 GMT+02:00 Michael Reichert :
> 
> > I decided not to write a changeset comment because it seems to me to
> > be a waste of time to comment a Maps.Me user's changeset.
> >
> 
> 
> It is also a way to document for your fellow mappers what you have found
> out, not just a way to contact the original mapper. FWIW, I have written
> quite some changeset comments to maps.me changesets and so far not yet
> received a single reply. I am not even sure if these comments reach these
> mappers.
>
 
It was mentioned on the other thread that many login through facebook, maybe 
that breaks the link between some users and osm?

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] MAPS.ME edits - partly sub-standard

[Philip Barnes]

I guess an example of what I am seeing as a poor quality edit, 
http://osm.org/changeset/40156579

An embassy called Rachel?
Mistagging of a Monument?

Phil (trigpoint)

Phil 

On Mon Jun 20 12:52:13 2016 GMT+0100, Philip Barnes wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-06-20 at 11:26 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > 
> > 2016-06-19 22:35 GMT+02:00 Ilya Zverev <i...@zverev.info>:
> > > As for the maps.me, I am glad that foreign names issue is basically
> > > the only one that most people agree on.
> > > 
> > 
> > there are lots of different issues, and even if many of them have not
> > yet commented on them, I still believe they do have the potential to
> > harm overall data quality. From the manual reviews I have performed
> > so far, the amount of new issues introduced was far bigger than the
> > useful information that has been added, but I didn't look at enough
> > data to make this representative in any way (of course).
> > 
> > Some of the issues that come to mind:
> > 1. stuff put projected to the middle of the road rather than the
> > actual position (common newbie error, possibly because that's how
> > google and others present search results)
> > 2. stuff put without a tag what it is (just a name and a property
> > like tourism=attraction)
> > 3. duplicates added (things that are already there)
> > 4. poor semantic level (very low detail in tagging, in some
> > occassions to a point where it becomes not understandable any more,
> > sometimes mistagged as something vaguely similar)
> > 5. sometimes missplaced objects far off (likely due to bad location
> > data in the device and users not familiar with the area, and not
> > willing to properly orient themselves)
> > 
> Many of these are newbie errors, the same as we see with any other
> editor however the big difference I see with maps.me is the apparent
> lack of reaction to changeset comments that allow the community to help
> newbies through their initial edits. When adding comments to maps.me
> changesets I do get the feeling I am wasting my time.
> Another observation I see is the geographical spread of edits, a bar in
> Portugal followed by a guest house in the UK about the local knowledge
> of what they are adding.
> Phil (trigpoint)
> 
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] MAPS.ME edits - partly sub-standard

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2016-06-20 at 11:26 +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 
> 2016-06-19 22:35 GMT+02:00 Ilya Zverev :
> > As for the maps.me, I am glad that foreign names issue is basically
> > the only one that most people agree on.
> > 
> 
> there are lots of different issues, and even if many of them have not
> yet commented on them, I still believe they do have the potential to
> harm overall data quality. From the manual reviews I have performed
> so far, the amount of new issues introduced was far bigger than the
> useful information that has been added, but I didn't look at enough
> data to make this representative in any way (of course).
> 
> Some of the issues that come to mind:
> 1. stuff put projected to the middle of the road rather than the
> actual position (common newbie error, possibly because that's how
> google and others present search results)
> 2. stuff put without a tag what it is (just a name and a property
> like tourism=attraction)
> 3. duplicates added (things that are already there)
> 4. poor semantic level (very low detail in tagging, in some
> occassions to a point where it becomes not understandable any more,
> sometimes mistagged as something vaguely similar)
> 5. sometimes missplaced objects far off (likely due to bad location
> data in the device and users not familiar with the area, and not
> willing to properly orient themselves)
> 
Many of these are newbie errors, the same as we see with any other
editor however the big difference I see with maps.me is the apparent
lack of reaction to changeset comments that allow the community to help
newbies through their initial edits. When adding comments to maps.me
changesets I do get the feeling I am wasting my time.
Another observation I see is the geographical spread of edits, a bar in
Portugal followed by a guest house in the UK about the local knowledge
of what they are adding.
Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[Philip Barnes]

On Sun, 2016-05-08 at 13:11 +0100, Dave F wrote:
> Did someone contact him, as he appears to be redacting.
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38353814/history#map=15/55.4568/-3.
> 6478
> 
I saw that Richard Fairhurst has added a changeset comment.
Phil (trigpoint)
> On 07/05/2016 22:21, Donald Noble
>   wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> >   > > Hi all,
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > I spotted in Edinburgh first, and across the central belt
> >   of Scotland, that a relatively new user, tintin2873 [1], has
> >   been renaming a lot of the ways that make up the national
> >   cycle network to include the NCN reference number. e.g.
> >   "Middle Meadow Walk" has been changed to "Middle Meadow Walk
> >   (NCN1)" [2]. Where there was no name, they seem to have just
> >   called the path by the NCN reference. The NCN route
> >   information is already in OSM via relations, and displayed via
> >   the cycle map layer.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > I have not contacted the user, as not quite sure how best
> >   to word an email. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > There are also a large number of ways that should probably
> >   have the name reverted, as they seem to have done most of
> >   NCN1, 75, 754, and possibly others.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > Suggestions, or actions, of how to best resolve this issue
> >   appreciated.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > regards, Donald 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > > [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/tintin2873 
> > 
> > > > [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/39162752 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> >   
> > 
> >   > > 
> >   
> > 
> >   > > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > 
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org> > 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb> > 

> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
>   > 
> > > 
>   > Virus-free. www.avast.com
> 
>   > 
>   > 


> ___
> 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] Leicester Haymarket new road layout

[Philip Barnes]

I can pm a local mapper who is normally pretty responsive. 

I rarely get into the city centre these days.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Thu Apr 28 09:51:27 2016 GMT+0100, Stuart Reynolds wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Are there any East Midlands mappers in the Leicester area who could update 
> the road & buildings in the vicinity of the new Haymarket Bus Station?
> 
> Google appears to show the new layout 
> (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.6383422,-1.1307455,319m/data=!3m1!1e3) and 
> certainly has the building work ongoing on the satellite view, but OSM still 
> shows the old layout 
> (http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10021976#map=18/52.63828/-1.13063).
> 
> If not, then I have asked contacts for maps/layout diagrams to do an armchair 
> job, but would obviously be better with a ground survey.
> 
> Many thanks
> Regards,
> Stuart
> 
> 
> Stuart Reynolds
> for traveline south east & anglia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapbox imagery update

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2016-04-27 at 16:13 +0100, Brian Prangle wrote:
> Yep - echo the big disappointment with MapBox imagery. Perhaps when
> we have OSMUK up and running we can lobby MapBox for some better and
> newer imagery?
> 
Imagery around Shropshire is certainly less than a year old, so a
definite improvement over the much older bing imagery.
For example the new Preston/Emstry Island layouts on the Shrewsbury
bypass are there, plus housing developments around Telford.
Phil (trigpoint)
> Regards> 
> Brian

> On 27 April 2016 at 15:48, Andy Robinson > >  wrote:
> > And I noted around Swaffham in Norfolk that BING and Mapbox imagery are 
> > identical.
> >  
> > Cheers
> > Andy
> >  
> > From:> >  Phillip Barnett [mailto:phillip.p.barn...@gmail.com] 
> > Sent: 27 April 2016 15:25
> > To: Andy Robinson
> > Cc: Rob Nickerson; Talk-GB
> > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Mapbox imagery update
> >  
> > Cambridge appears to be Summer 2011, sadly.

> > On 27 Apr 2016, at 14:40, Andy Robinson  wrote:
> > Mapbox imagery for the area around me in north brum is I think from 2014. 
> > It’s a little more recent than BING but not buy more than a few months and 
> > the resolution is poorer.
> >  
> > Cheers
> > Andy
> >  
> > From:> >  Rob Nickerson [mailto:rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com] 
> > Sent: 26 April 2016 20:08
> > To: Talk-GB
> > Subject: [Talk-GB] Mapbox imagery update
> >  
> > Worth checking your local area:> > 

> > https://www.mapbox.com/blog/three-million-km/> > 

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

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



> ___
> Talk-GB 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] phone boxes used for other purposes

[Philip Barnes]

On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 18:52 +0100, Robert Norris wrote:
> > 
> > From: jack.fitzsim...@ntlworld.com 
> > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
> > Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 16:13:56 +0100 
> > Subject: [Talk-GB] phone boxes used for other purposes 
> >  
> >  
> > I’m sure it must have been discussed before but how do I map a K6
> > booth  
> > with no phone currently used for another purpose? I visited two
> > today  
> > intending to get the phone numbers but discovered they were both
> > local  
> > information points. 
> >  
> I've mapped a few that I've seen used as book shares like
> amenity=book_exchange, although I'd use amenity=public_bookcase now.
> 
> Indeed the last one I remember doing has been kindly updated:
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3775804762/history
> 
> For your case I'd probably use some form of tourism tag too (see http
> ://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dinformation)
> 
I've mapped one which has a defibrillator in it as building=phone_box,
medical=defibrillator.

On the subject of defibrillators, they could make a useful GB mapping
project. They need surveying, but it is something that both urban and
rural mappers could get out and find on the lighter evenings.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM with Wikidata: now covers UK and Ireland

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu Mar 10 21:48:45 2016 GMT, Colin Spiller wrote:
> Isle of Man conspicuous by its absence
The Isle of Man is neither part of the UK or Ireland 

Phil (trigpoint)

> 
> Edward Betts  wrote:
> 
> >I've extended my search for matches between OSM and Wikidata again. It now
> >covers all of the UK and Ireland.
> >
> >I used map data from http://download.geofabrik.de/europe/british-isles.html
> >
> >The results are grouped by region or county as well as by category.
> >
> >http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/gb-ie/
> >
> >I'm going to figure out how to upload these matches to OSM. I've registered 
> >an
> >account with the username Wikidata to use for the uploads.
> >
> >There will be one changeset per county + category for any category with 10 or
> >more matches in that county. Categories with less than 10 matches in the
> >county will be combined into a single changeset.
> >
> >OSM objects with an existing wikidata tag won't be changed.
> >-- 
> >Edward.
> >
> >___
> >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
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk-ie] [Talk-GB] OSM with Wikidata: now covers UK and Ireland

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu Mar 10 21:48:45 2016 GMT, Colin Spiller wrote:
> Isle of Man conspicuous by its absence
The Isle of Man is neither part of the UK or Ireland 

Phil (trigpoint)

> 
> Edward Betts  wrote:
> 
> >I've extended my search for matches between OSM and Wikidata again. It now
> >covers all of the UK and Ireland.
> >
> >I used map data from http://download.geofabrik.de/europe/british-isles.html
> >
> >The results are grouped by region or county as well as by category.
> >
> >http://edwardbetts.com/osm-wikidata/gb-ie/
> >
> >I'm going to figure out how to upload these matches to OSM. I've registered 
> >an
> >account with the username Wikidata to use for the uploads.
> >
> >There will be one changeset per county + category for any category with 10 or
> >more matches in that county. Categories with less than 10 matches in the
> >county will be combined into a single changeset.
> >
> >OSM objects with an existing wikidata tag won't be changed.
> >-- 
> >Edward.
> >
> >___
> >Talk-GB mailing list
> >talk...@openstreetmap.org
> >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> talk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Talk-ie mailing list
Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM with Wikidata: now covers UK and Ireland

[Philip Barnes]

What plans are there for maintenance of this data in future,  it is a move away 
from human readable tags so errors will go unnoticed.

Mappers are very unlikely to add new wikidata tags in the way we add Wikipedia. 

Phil (trigpoint) 

On Thu Mar 10 20:00:17 2016 GMT, Edward Betts wrote:
> Dave F  wrote:
> > I haven't been paying full attention to this. Are we not meant to add a
> > wikipedia tag any more?
> > 
> > Could you give a brief update on the proposal please.
> 
> Here are the relevant pages on the wiki:
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikidata
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/wikidata
> 
> -- 
> Edward.
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Guides to improve navigation data in OpenStreetMap

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 11:24 -0600, Paul Johnson wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Abhishek Saikia 
> l.com> wrote:
> > Hi Marc,
> > 
> > Thank you for the kind words and prompt feedback. `turn:lanes` are
> > exclusively for vehicles and as per discussion with the OSRM team
> > here: https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/issues/2048, we
> > are at present ignoring adding cycle lanes during `turn:lanes`
> > mapping. 
> > marc.ge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> Bicycles are vehicles in most countries, and bike lanes do pose
> problems for correct lane guidance, particularly in areas where these
> lanes are full width instead of being a door-zone buffer. 
You will also need to consider bus lanes as well.
Phil (trigpoint)___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-us] How to tag Edible Arrangements?

[Philip Barnes]

I would start with shop=confectionary  and then add some sub-tags.

Phil (trigpoint)

On Wed Mar 2 11:15:21 2016 GMT, Tod Fitch wrote:
> There is an Edible Arrangements [1] shop near by that I tagged with only name 
> and and the phone number found on the door. I could not figure out what type 
> of shop it ought to be tagged with. Now I am cleaning up issues in my area 
> noted by some of the QA tools and that has been flagged as “missing object 
> kind”. So it is time to figure out an appropriate shop value.
> 
> Nothing in the Wiki of course, so I looked at taginfo [2] to see what others 
> have done and it seems that others are as confused as I: Of the 81 shops 
> mapped there are 13 different shop values and 13 with no shop or amenity tag 
> at all. Values are florist (21 instances), gift (12 instances), yes (12 
> instances), confectionery (10 instances), bakery (1 amenity and 2 shops), 
> candy (2 instances), boutique (2 instances), food (2 instances), catering (1 
> instance), edible (1 instance), deli (1 instance), confectionary (1 instance) 
> and greengrocer (1 instance).
> 
> Suggestions on how I ought to tag my local shop (I probably will not 
> “correct” the shops tagged by others)?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> [1] https://www.ediblearrangements.com/default.aspx
> [2] http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/name=Edible%20Arrangement

-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-GB] New users and P2

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri Feb 26 11:23:34 2016 GMT, David Woolley wrote:
> On 25/02/16 17:04, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> >
> 
> > User can also enter relevant POIs like stiles, gates etc when they are
> > encountered.
> >
> >
> > When user returns home, track simplification algorithm used to make a
> > way from the GPX trace and tags it with the tags equivalent to the ROW type.
> >
> >
> > User downloads data from OSM and algorithms are used to auto-join the
> > user's new ways to existing ways where appropriate (or alternatively,
> > the user does this manually)
> 
> This might have been a good idea in the early days, when most mapping 
> used GPS and most mapping was onto an empty map.  These days, I think it 
> would just cause problems as it would probably delay the proper 
> association of the GPS tracks with, more accurate, aerial imagery data, 
> and would not properly account for features that had already been 
> mapped, but possibly on a different, or more accurate datum.
> 
PROW mapping still requires good gps traces, such mapping simply cannot be done 
using aerial imagery alone. 

Whilst my experienced countryside eye can spot a gate used by farm vehicles, 
there is no way to tell if a hedge/fence crossing in a stile,  gate or kissing 
gate without an on the ground survey. 

Any tools which help mapping these can only be a good thing. 

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] New users and P2

[Philip Barnes]

I don't think anyone was criticising P2, just questioning how so many new users 
had chosen a non-default editor. 

Phil (trigpoint)

On Thu Feb 25 13:15:11 2016 GMT, Dave F wrote:
> What's wrong with with suggesting users use P2 over iD?
> 
> P2 has a few advantages over other editors. The only real benefit I've 
> noticed in iD is it prevents loading of data if user is zoomed too far 
> out. Something that Richard Fairhurst might be able to implement fairly 
> easily into P2.
> 
> I'm even less encouraged to use iD after a couple of conversations with 
> two of the developers (the only two?). They appear resentful to many of 
> the suggestions for improvement.
> 
>  From memory Richard F. was a developer in the start up of iD, Is he 
> still involved?
> 
> Dave F.
> 
> 
> 
> On 25/02/2016 09:30, Philip Barnes wrote:
> >
> > On Thu Feb 25 06:43:23 2016 GMT, Andy Robinson wrote:
> >> I noticed that too Rob. Day before yesterday they all seemed to start at 
> >> the same time so I assumed it was uni students.
> >>
> > We spotted them as new users from the bot that reports in  #osm-gb.
> >
> > They were spread over the country,  I assume the lecturer hasn't updated 
> > his notes, the default if you hit the edit button as a new user is iD.
> >
> > Phil (trigpoint)
> >> From: Rob Nickerson [mailto:rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: 25 February 2016 00:24
> >> To: Talk-GB
> >> Subject: [Talk-GB] New users and P2
> >>
> >>   
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Is anyone aware of any recent OSM press - we've seen a lot of new OSM 
> >> mappers in the Midlands in the last 2 days :-)
> >>
> >> Also is Potlatch 2 still the default for new mappers as they all seem to 
> >> be using that? I though we'd switched to iD as the default across all 
> >> browsers now (although I don't remember where I read that!).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Rob
> >>
> >>
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] London bus lanes

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu Feb 25 13:24:40 2016 GMT, Dave F wrote:
> I believe visibility of the lanes isn't necessarily the problem, but the 
> tagging scheme. Actually, I should say schemes; quite difficult to 
> memorise the differences. And that's before finding out if taxis, 
> motorbike, bicycles or even cars are permitted.

And days/times of operation.

Phil (trigpoint)

 
> On 24/02/2016 18:02, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was slightly surprised to find that bus lane tagging in London is 
> > very patchy!
> >
> > Bus lanes are easy to spot, even from imagery:
> >
> > 1. They are on roads with bus routes (see Andy's Transport map)
> > 2. They have thick white lines separating them from the general lanes
> > 3. They are often painted red/brown
> > 4. They often have big bus-shaped objects in them
> >
> > The simplest way of tagging them is just busway=lane . (But you can 
> > add lanes:bus:forward=1 and stuff like that if you really want to. 
> > Lots more at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bus_lanes .)
> >
> > I'll add a few over the next couple of days - it would be smashing if 
> > others wanted to join in.
> >
> > cheers
> > Richard
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New users and P2

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu Feb 25 10:34:03 2016 GMT, Nick Allen wrote:
> But Some versions of Internet Explorer run P2 only,  could it be they
> are all with the same company running corporate laptops?

I'll stick with students,  the edits were spread over the country too much for 
a company. Many were homes and schools.

Phil (trigpoint)


> On 25 Feb 2016 09:31, "Philip Barnes" <p...@trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > On Thu Feb 25 06:43:23 2016 GMT, Andy Robinson wrote:
> > > I noticed that too Rob. Day before yesterday they all seemed to start at
> > the same time so I assumed it was uni students.
> > >
> > We spotted them as new users from the bot that reports in  #osm-gb.
> >
> > They were spread over the country,  I assume the lecturer hasn't updated
> > his notes, the default if you hit the edit button as a new user is iD.
> >
> > Phil (trigpoint)
> > >
> > > From: Rob Nickerson [mailto:rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: 25 February 2016 00:24
> > > To: Talk-GB
> > > Subject: [Talk-GB] New users and P2
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Is anyone aware of any recent OSM press - we've seen a lot of new OSM
> > mappers in the Midlands in the last 2 days :-)
> > >
> > > Also is Potlatch 2 still the default for new mappers as they all seem to
> > be using that? I though we'd switched to iD as the default across all
> > browsers now (although I don't remember where I read that!).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my Jolla
> > ___
> > Talk-GB mailing list
> > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New users and P2

[Philip Barnes]

On Thu Feb 25 06:43:23 2016 GMT, Andy Robinson wrote:
> I noticed that too Rob. Day before yesterday they all seemed to start at the 
> same time so I assumed it was uni students.
> 
We spotted them as new users from the bot that reports in  #osm-gb.

They were spread over the country,  I assume the lecturer hasn't updated his 
notes, the default if you hit the edit button as a new user is iD.

Phil (trigpoint)
> 
> From: Rob Nickerson [mailto:rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 25 February 2016 00:24
> To: Talk-GB
> Subject: [Talk-GB] New users and P2
> 
>  
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Is anyone aware of any recent OSM press - we've seen a lot of new OSM mappers 
> in the Midlands in the last 2 days :-)
> 
> Also is Potlatch 2 still the default for new mappers as they all seem to be 
> using that? I though we'd switched to iD as the default across all browsers 
> now (although I don't remember where I read that!).
> 
> 
> 
> Rob
> 
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] place=village/town/city

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri Feb 12 13:52:13 2016 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote:
> 
> which makes it clear why using the "legal city definition" might not 
> make sense in OSM _across the board_.  It might in some places (it's 
> essentially what the Irish do, I believe), but I'd argue it doesn't here 
> because of e.g. St David's (see below) and Telford, which despite its 
> size doesn't really feel like a city to me - although if someone more 
> local says I'm wrong, I'll believe them.

I'm local, and you are not wrong.  A city needs to be more than a big housing 
estate and a shopping centre that closes in the evening. True  50 years after 
the original planners blunder they are  doing something about it.
> 
> I'd be interested to see the history of St David's.  The current node
> 
> http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=3712052604
> 
> was only created in August 2015; I wonder what it was before?
> 
It was certainly a city before then, as far as I remember it was a road 
junction node, I should be able find it when I get home.

Phil (trigpoint )


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

Re: [Talk-GB] place=village/town/city

[Philip Barnes]

On Fri, 2016-02-12 at 14:53 +, Philip Barnes wrote:
> 

On Fri Feb 12 13:52:13 2016 GMT, Andy Townsend wrote:


I'd be interested to see the history of St David's.  The current
node


http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=3712052604


was only created in August 2015; I wonder what it was before?

It was certainly a city before then, as far as I remember it was a
road junction node, I should be able find it when I get home.


The original node, 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3216768/history


Phil (trigpoint )

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

Re: [Talk-GB] What sport is this? #osmschools

[Philip Barnes]

On Sat, 2016-02-06 at 13:54 +, Dave F wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Bing aerial map:
> http://binged.it/1STgxSc
> 
> While doing the schools project I've come across this grid layout on
> a 
> few occasions & I'm curious what activity/sport it's used for.
> 
> Who's got teenage kids that would know?
> 
Have never seen that before, certainly not when mapping local schools.

I do wonder about the value of tracing seasonal pitches within schools,
whilst the local school has rugby and football pitches at the moment,
they will be gone after easter and replaced by athletics and cricket
markings.

Phil (trigpoint)

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