Re: [OSM-talk-be] Lost property: one forest, messages, Bing
Hello Le lundi 12/11/2012 14:55:00 A.Pirard.Papou a écrit : While dealing with borders, I discovered this unidentified multipolygon http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/150921 fortuitously. Then I loaded the members and I found landuse = forest on one, that makes it correct on the map. Isn't landuse = forest supposed to be tagged on the relation instead? I've never been able to contact Renaud Michel on various subjects. That's me, I generally answer the messages I receive via OSM, I just checker and I had forgotten one (3 months ago), but I don't think it was from you. To send an e-mail to someone, I must fill a web form asking her?/him to reply so that I know his e-mail address to which I send my e-mail (not only OSM). Does anybody know when someone will invent a Web button next to the form to do that automatically, or do I miss something? One of my messages is to beware of Bing. At higher (closer) zooms, it may have in some places an erroneous offset http://www.google.be/search?q=bing+offset+%28higher+OR+lower%29+zoom. I think that the lower zooms are always the correct ones. JOSM allows to set an offset to compensate. I know, but I have compared bing image position with GPS traces and, at least near Liège, it is quite accurate (to a few meters). Actually, the old yahoo images that were used some years ago were a lot less accurate And I had to reposition them according to (my and other's) GPS traces. cheers -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Demande de libération de données de la Région Wallonne
Bonjour On mardi 13 mars 2012 at 22:17, Julien Fastré wrote : Nous utilisons actuellement la licence Open Database Licence (ODBl) [1] Attention, ce n'est pas exact. D'abord jusqu'à présent les données sont encore distribuées sous licence CC- BY-SA 2.0, cela pourrait changer après le 1 avril, mais il reste encore une quantité non négligeable de donnée non compatibles, localisée dans certains pays, cf http://odbl.poole.ch/ De plus, même quand le changement sera fait et que la base de donnée sera distribuée sous ODbL (attention à la casse), les données sont contribuées sous les «contributor term» http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms qui autorisent plus largement OMSF à distribuer les données sous CC-BY-SA ODbL ou toute autre licence libre votée par 2/3 des contributeurs actifs. On donne donc un droit nettement plus large que de contribuer simplement sous ODbL, dans cinq ans les données pourraient être distribuées sous une licence qui n'existe pas encore. Je pense qu'il est important de ne pas occulter ce point pour ne pas avoir de surprises plus tard. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] GPS Logger
On lundi 07 novembre 2011 at 08:13, Maarten Deen wrote : I've been using the iGot-U GT-600 for a while now http://www.i-gotu.com/ and I'm quite pleased with it. The only annoying thing is that it has yet another different USB cable, but the non-standard connector is to make the case completely watertight. It also does not have a replaceable battery, but my last GPS logger died before the battery did. I have the GT-200e, it works fine either as a standalone datalogger or as an external GPS via bluetooth. Logging frequency can be changed to a maximum of one point/sec and can also be set to be dependant on the speed you move with. Downloading the logs is possible with bluetooth but also when connected via USB. You have to use their proprietary program (@trip PC) to download the logs, but it has an easy export to GPX. There is a program (igotu2gpx) to extract the logs for linux and macos https://launchpad.net/igotu2gpx/ version 0.3.0 is outdated, you should take the source from the trunk https://code.launchpad.net/~igotu2gpx/igotu2gpx/trunk and if you want to clear the memory from a GT-200e or GT-600 you should take the branch (or apply its changes to the trunk, it has not been integrated yet) https://code.launchpad.net/~charles-fleche/igotu2gpx/gt600 The program is based on qt4 (even the command line tool), and the gui has an optional plugin to display the tracks over an OSM map using marble. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Orphaned Relations
On mardi 19 juillet 2011 at 00:54, Jorge Gustavo wrote : I remove my orphaned relations, using JOSM. 1) wget http://jxapi.openstreetmap.org/xapi/api/0.6/relation[boundary=administrat ive][@uid=193530] -O old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm 2) JOSM - Open - old_relation_boundary_jgr.osm No need to download each relation manually before opening in JOSM, JOSM can download an object by ID (type Ctrl-Shift-O, or from the File menu), and recent versions of JOSM even accept a list of IDs to download them all at once. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problems with JOSM's unwanted behaviour.
On lundi 11 juillet 2011 at 13:03, Gerard Vanderveken wrote : Renaud MICHEL wrote: Press Ctrl while clicking on the end note, JOSM will start a new way. No, this leads to a double node and the way is not connected to the crossing. Right, I didn't pay attention this. But If you click on the last node of your way, then press Alt while adding the next node, then you end up with a new way that share its first node with the previous way. For that, I temporarily reverse the way to have the history on the good part, then reverse both part back (but this is only important for ways where the orientation matters, like oneways or rivers). That's what i try to do, when paying attention to it, but I feel JOSM should do it automatically. JOSM can't know what part of the way should keep the history, so the best he can do automatically is to always assign the history in a consistent way. The other solutions is to ask the user which part of the way should retain the history, maybe there is a plugin to do that, but I personally prefer the way it works now. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] Announce: Beginning of Phase 4 of license change process
On jeudi 16 juin 2011 at 10:20, Tom Hughes wrote : To inject some actual hard data into the conversation, here are some actual numbers, straight from the database: Users with edits who have agreed: 96917 Users without edits who have agreed: 104663 Users with edits who have not agreed: 86764 Users without edits who have not agreed: 129406 Changesets by users who have agreed: 7229801 (85.5%) Changesets by users who have not agreed: (14.5%) Edits by users who have agreed: 181482 (89.2%) Edits by users who have not agreed: 218756288 (10.8%) Thanks for the data. When you write users who have not agreed, do you mean only those that have explicitly said no to the CT? Or do you include all the users who have not made a choice yet? -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Informal Meeting next Friday
Hello On mercredi 11 mai 2011 at 11:20, Julien Fastré wrote : May I remind you our informal meeting this Friday ? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Activities#Upcomin g_activities Due to personnal problems, it is possible that I may not be able to come tomorrow. I'll decide tomorrow evening. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] New Logo in the Wiki
On samedi 30 avril 2011 at 17:54, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote : What are you all whining about ? The new CT clearly transfers most of your rights to OSMF, and this what happens if you transfer rights to a self appointed group of people that have joint together to do what they think is best for OSM, and got the power from the community. Wow! Even on a discussion about the logo someone manage to highjack the thread with FUD about the license change. Amazing! -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] tag street from calc file
On mardi 22 mars 2011 at 18:39, Jo wrote : cycleway=opposite (converted to the proper xml-format) and tag the way as modified. I don't think that tag is appropriate. It implies that there is a real cycleway on the road, but in Liege (and many other places in wallonia) you simply have an exclusion to the oneway for bicycles. For those I use oneway:bicycle=no bicycle:oneway=no (not sure which one is more appropriate, so I always add both, looking at the wiki, the oneway:bicycle seems to be preferred) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
[OSM-talk-be] sidewalk as ways or tags
Hello I have recently had a small edit war with user nondidju regarding my tracing of sidewalks as separate ways, see http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7461451 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/7528743 He argues that the mapnik rendering of this show how irrationnal it is (which is a personnal preference on which I differ) and that those should be tagged on the main way. I personnally think that it is more topologically correct, having a parallel footway (where there exists ont) and foot=no on the main road, as on important roads you may not cross anywhere, but only where a crossing exists, so a separate way allow for correct routing for pedestrians. As an example, on this way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/57687924 you may simply not cross the road between the bridges. (I don't create parallel footways for every road, only those where I consider it unwise to cross anywhere) Another example http://osm.org/go/0EqqLNEt0-- Here you may not cross the road on sides of bridge Albert 1er, you may either take the tunnel on the right side, or go to the traffic signal on the left. From a recent discussion on newbies@ http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/newbies/2011-March/006340.html it seems the recommanded way to tag those is to use a footway tag on the main road, but with this, routing engines have to do a preprossing to recreate the topologically correct ways, or have a more complex algorithm taking into account on which side of the road you are walking and where you way cross. And the problem is harder for roundabouts, see for example this one http://osm.org/go/0B964M9V@-- and his brothers along the motorway http://osm.org/go/0B965o7BK-- how would that be represented with only tags on the roads? This will end up splitting the ways many times. Now, I agree that bridges don't look very well on the rendering, but that is already a problem when you have separated roads on the same bridge (see previous link), and that is a renderer problem, maybe missing a bridge bed information to know that the ways share the same bridge. I saw a related discussion some month ago, but I don't this it ended with a way to tag it. I didn't find anything related on the pages of WikiProject Belgium (but I may have missed it). So I would like to have your thought and opinions on the matter. I think tracing ways to represent sidewalks for roads you should not cross anywhere adds valuable informations, bu if everybody is against it I will retag it as footway=left/right/both/none where appropriate. cf http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Advanced_footway_and_cycleway thank you -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] est-ce qu'on sait placer des photos sur OSM (et est-ce que c'est utile ?)
On lundi 14 février 2011 at 22:53, Moosh wrote : est-ce qu'on sait placer des photos sur OSM (et est-ce que c'est utile ?) par exemple si je veux placer les chapelles, les châteaux d'eau, les facades de restaurant. .? Non, ce n'est pas l'endroit pour placer ce genre d'informations, car si l'image n'est pas hébergée dans un endroit permanent cela va faire de nombreux liens morts et inutiles dans la base de données. Ce qui peut éventuellement se faire, c'est placer un lien vers la page wikipedia correspondante (si elle existe) avec le tag wikipedia, cf http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia il suffit d' placer la langue et le titre de la page, pas besoin d'y mettre l'URL complète. bonsoir -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] Bing coverage - more levels
On vendredi 11 février 2011 at 02:43, Toby Murray wrote : On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: At what zoom level to I have to be at to view an already zoomed in area to view dark blue (z20)? I'm trying, but still failing to see the benefit in this. If enough of an area has been populated, it shows at pretty low zoom levels. Hey look, Topeka has z20 imagery! http://ant.dev.openstreetmap.org/bingimageanalyzer/?lat=39.70429533168507 4lon=-95.39738145713467zoom=8 Moving around a bit on that map, I found this http://ant.dev.openstreetmap.org/bingimageanalyzer/?lat=31.61276546098359lon=-47.38712755088407zoom=6 looks like someone has a lot of time to waste... -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Non-map-based OSM editor
On lundi 24 janvier 2011 at 11:38, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote : I wonder if the issue might be that I use Windows. Do most JOSMers use Windows, or some other OS? I'm sure Java is especially sucky on Windows. did you try to give it more memory? As soon as you offer it say 600MB-1 GB it gets more stable ;-) I use it with -Xmx512m with openjdk (on Linux), I don't remember having JOSM crash. Lastly I have used it for hours with tens of thousands of objects loaded, lots of tiles from bing or yahoo and more than a thousand edits in the undo list. From the few times I did use potlatch (about a year ago) it was way slower than JOSM (on the same computer), but flash for Linux is quite bad. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bingify Belgium
On jeudi 23 décembre 2010 at 16:47, Peter Leemans wrote : Also did some 'electrifying' work in very different regions Same here for Nijlen and region. Done that too, it is fun to search for the next tower to continue the power line. I also draw rivers (some parts of Meuse, Sambre and Vesdre so far), and use it to add many details to places I know (mainly in Namur and Liege). Got a question with respect to the landuse. I see different ways of connecting different neighbouring land-uses. Is it recommended to reuse the same points, or as I did, just draw the borders very close to each other. My personal rule is, if the landuse are really connected (there is nothing between them, or only a barrier) I reuse the same nodes. If there is a highway, or a track between them I trace the three of them separated. I never connect a landuse to a highway, to do so would require to draw the highway as an area to connect the correct edge to the landuse. I think that a highway drawn as a single line is supposed to correspond to the center of the road/way. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bingify Belgium
On jeudi 23 décembre 2010 at 16:21, Kenny Moens wrote : Also some parts to watch out for, which I already experienced: don't try to blindly trust bing data, the data isn't perfectly current. For example in my town of Houtvenne there is a new street (at least 1 year old), which is not visible on Bing yet, but which I mapped earlier on by means of GPX tracks. Yes, I can point you to a few places in Liege where bing is outdated, mainly new roundabouts (we never get enough of those) :-) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapping of Boundary
Hello Le dimanche 05 décembre 2010 à 10:02, Kenny Moens a écrit : In the region where I live (Hulshout), some of the borders are recently mapped, but they don't follow the exact features which form the border. For example, in the area between Ramsel and Westmeerbeek the city border follows the Steenkensbeek which I recently mapped based on Bing data, if I look at the border itself it has much less points and more-or-less follows the stream, but not exactly as it should be. How is the best way to correct this? * Splitting the border and adding the tags/relations of the border to the stream. Which would mean the line of the stream would both represent the border and the stream itself. * Glueing all points of the border towards the stream, so that they form a single line (but are effectively still two separate lines). * Or something else. There has been discussions about this on the talk list. From what I understood, I'd say: - If the border is legally bound to the stream, and should move with it in case its path change, then you should tag it on the same way (or share the nodes). - If it is actually on the same path than the stream, but must stay where it is in case the stream path change, then draw a separate way, approximately over the stream, but not sharing nodes. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapping of Boundary
On dimanche 05 décembre 2010 at 12:30, Ben Laenen wrote : Boundaries used to be bound to streams, roads etc, but not any more. Now they're all defined by sets of coordinates. If for example bad weather happens and the stream suddenly follows a different course, the boundary won't move with it. And there are many streams and rivers that changed course over time (mostly with some human help of course), but where the boundaries never followed suit. Thank you. On talk some people argued that in their country come boundary were legally bound to some physical feature, and I didn't know what was the case for Belgium. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?
Le dimanche 05 décembre 2010 à 11:16, Manuel Reimer a écrit : is it secure to use Bing? Any license risks? Could Microsoft, at some day, just force us to remove everything with source=Bing on it? Am I forced to have this source tag there? Should stuff, taken from Bing, be verified via GPS track at some time to get the data secure? I also would like to know if this is fine, and I add another question: Is it OK to use bing imagery when you have accepted the contributors term, as I have explicitly accepted them (version 1.0), and every mapper who registered after March 2010 (correct?) are also contributing under CT 1.0? -- Renaud Michel ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?
Le dimanche 05 décembre 2010 à 11:49, Mike Dupont a écrit : On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Renaud MICHEL r.h.michel+...@gmail.com wrote: Is it OK to use bing imagery when you have accepted the contributors term, How are they connected? please explain. Because of the terms of the CT, I don't know if tracing from bing allows me to to give to the OSMF all the rights that are required by CT. And from all the discussions/trolls/rants there have been on this list and on talk on this subject I am even more confused. -- Renaud Michel ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Busroutes
Le samedi 13 novembre 2010 à 14:42, Gerard Vanderveken a écrit : I tend to consider them as copyrighted material, and thus forbidden to be used at all with OSM How can a number be copyrighted? -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Busroutes
Le samedi 13 novembre 2010 à 15:37, Jo a écrit : Now I'll go and eradicate the child relations... after that, not sure if I'll touch any public transport data anymore, apart from a bus stop here or there. Why? It is much more easier to have the common part of alternative bus routes in a single relation shared by all the alternatives. In Liège I have mapped bus route 10, there are 3 variation of this bus route: 10 Fléron http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148168 10 Mangée http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148170 10 Romsée http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148169 Up to Fléron, those three are identical, so that common part is in relation http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148167 which is shared by the three, further, 10 Magnée and Romsée share a small part which I have put in relation http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1148166 It is much easier to have it that way, if a bus stop change in the common part it must only be changed in one relation (and maybe others if the same stop is part of different routes, like 38b). I intend to do the same for other bus routes that I map (I already have a work in progress for 33 which also have alternatives (33 Vaux, 33 Trooz). -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] MapQuest Belgium
Le mercredi 20 octobre 2010 à 10:05, Lennard a écrit : Today, MapQuest rolled out a Belgian version of their Open MapQuest program. This is based on OpenStreetMap data and also uses several tools that have come to be regarded as part and parcel of OSM: The mapnik renderer is used to create the map, and Nominatim is used as the search engine. You can also click on the symbols at the top of the page, to get popups on the map with the category you searched for. Currently it seems to be in French only, but I'm sure they've planned a Dutch language version in the future: http://open.mapquest.be/ It doesn't work at all in konqueror (from KDE 4.4), either with khtml or webkit. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] Let's prepare to Fork OSM to a CCBYSA 2.0 continuation
Le dimanche 22 août 2010 à 13:08, Florian Heer a écrit : This means we have to find a new domain, new servers, and get the usernames/passwords copied so people can login to the CCBYSA 2.0 fork without new registration. I think this could be a real problem. Because I for one do not agree to have my log in credentials copied to any other server. I agree with that. Although my login informations in OSM are not very sensible, I expect them to be reasonably confidential and only accessible to a few administrators. I have no problem if the data I contributed is copied by [one or multiple] fork (that's why a full history dump has been created, cf http://planet.openstreetmap.org/full-experimental/ ), but as those forks would be different projects I expect the account I created in OSM to be confined in that project. If, after some though, I decide I prefer to work on a fork, then I will create a new account there, possibly using the same user name if it is still available, or a new one. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Let's prepare to Fork OSM to a CCBYSA 2.0 continuation
Le dimanche 22 août 2010 à 14:13, vous avez écrit : If, after some though, I decide I prefer to work on a fork, then I will create a new account there, possibly using the same user name if it is still available, or a new one. I don't think making passwords publicly available is a good idea, Actually, I'm not very concerned about the password (I don't reuse passwords), but more about the email I used to create the account at the time, which is a more personal email, as it was (and still is) guaranteed not to be displayed publicly. but it might be a sign of good faith on OSM(F)'s behalf if it were to facilitate an easy method for people waiting to claim their account/edits on a forked database. Actually, that would be more a sign that they are not trustworthy. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Let's prepare to Fork OSM to a CCBYSA 2.0 continuation
Le dimanche 22 août 2010 à 16:58, Milo van der Linden a écrit : - Changing from mysql to postgresql/postgis as the core database This one has already been done during the API 0.6 switch, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Servers/smaug So this is actually a reason to fork for the pro-mysql camp ;-) -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] RFC: what are empty nodes and how should we use them?
Le mardi 17 août 2010 à 19:06, vous avez écrit : Is there any part of the earth which is really empty in terms of not having any possible landuse or natural tag to describe it? But putting nodes everywhere with fixme missing landuse would be a big waste of time and resource. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] RFC: what are empty nodes and how should we use them?
Le mardi 17 août 2010 à 21:10, Pierre-Alain Dorange a écrit : Empty node has no information, it must not be used to mean something ; that's all. Yes, that's basically what I said in my first post. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] RFC: what are empty nodes and how should we use them?
Le lundi 16 août 2010 à 22:35, Dave F. a écrit : It looks like some people left their common sense at home today. Deliberately adding empty tags, indeed. What a ridiculous notion. Please stop it. I don't understand your message. I think no one has suggested to add empty tags. We were talking about nodes without any tag, and many people suggested that if those nodes are supposed to be useful for anything, then they should be tagged with (at least one) meaningful tag. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] RFC: what are empty nodes and how should we use them?
Hello Le dimanche 15 août 2010 à 23:42, Jonas Stein a écrit : Validators claim empty nodes are defective, but are they right? Is painting with empty nodes data that we want to have in the database? Are there any empty nodes that make sense, or is a empty always node nonsense? I'd say the validators are right, because a node that is neither part of a way, nor part of a relation, and has no tags is simply useless: we have no idea why it sits there. If you put a note as a reminder of something, then you should at least put a note tag on it. Maybe most of those empty nodes are remnants from some time ago, when some editors would delete a way, but not the nodes it contained (I think there used to be such a bug, even before I started contributing to OSM). -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] busroutes
Le mercredi 11 août 2010 à 13:26, Ben Laenen a écrit : You could fill in the roles of those nodes in the relation of course. I've even seen the bus stop nodes being numbered, so you'd get something like stop_15 as a role. The number was used before API0.6, when relations didn't preserve ordering, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:type=route#Members -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk-be] busroutes
Le mardi 10 août 2010 à 12:41, Ben Laenen a écrit : Yes, please put the bus stop nodes next to the way, not on the way. OK, that seems more logical anyway. btw, the page talks about an *extra* node on the way, used together with the bus stop node next to the way. Is it useful? If I split the route in two relations, forward and backward, most bus stops will only be part of one relation or the other. -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] The Best way to show individual shops within a shopping complex?
Le lundi 03 mai 2010 à 11:02, Nic Roets a écrit : Sometimes I include some of the halls / walkways. This one has half of the walkways. The other half are on the upper level, but I can't see any benefit in adding them. openstreetmap.org/?lat=-25.78316lon=28.27535zoom=17 You could have connected those halls to the surrounding streets, where appropriate, so that they can be routable. Here is an example I am working on http://osm.org/go/0EqqhQFBj- (still have to add the individuals shops thought) cheers -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Street name abbreviations
Le samedi 24 avril 2010 à 16:29, Andrew Gregory a écrit : I'd been thinking for a long time that the OSM wiki needed a table with some common street name abbreviations (if it exists, I can't find it). When I started surveying I kept on finding weird abbreviations that took some searching to figure out (all the other online maps are also abbreviated). After months of survey, I found I had a large list, compiled from a variety of web sites (councils, real estate, universities) as well as personal knowledge. It's English, and as I'm in Australia, it probably has a couple of local peculiarities, but should probably be good for other English-speaking countries. I hope it's useful. I thought the consensus was not to abbreviate and always use the full name? -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] konqueror does not display openstreetmap anymore
Le dimanche 18 avril 2010 à 10:59, Rainer Dorsch a écrit : I noticed that konqueror stopped displaying the openstreetmap maps some time ago. The page of http://www.openstreetmap.org/ is loaded, but the screen stays empty (see screenshot at http://bokomoko.de/~rd/osm.png ). No problem here with konqueror 4.4.2 -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Path vs footway vs cycleway vs...
Le samedi 28 novembre 2009, Steve Bennett a écrit : 1) In the parks near me, there are lots of paths, which I guess were probably intended for pedestrians, but cyclists use them too. Sometimes paved, sometimes not. I've been tagging them highway=path, bicycle=yes (to be safe). If you use highway=path and not highway=footway, then you should also add foot=yes (or even foot=designated if appropriate). If I understand correctly http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=path adding a bicycle=yes to a highway=path means that only bicycles are allowed (whereas highway=path alone would mean any non-motorized vehicle). -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New proposal: Bad data
Le mercredi 26 août 2009 à 09:56, John Smith a écrit : Anything tagged source=yahoo* or source=landsat should be treated worst than source=survey and people should source the data properly otherwise others will assume the data was traced if hi-res imagery is available. What does survey mean? The page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source doesn't list that value. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [RFC] Deprecating the use of Tag :highway=stop in favour of Key:stop
Le lundi 24 août 2009 à 15:25, Lester Caine a écrit : Adding an extra node does make sense, but probably needs a 'relation' to the intersection as well? In any case the direction through this new node is the critical piece of information? Tagging ways would require that every section of a way is broken up. I'm thinking of some route around here that have several intersections along them, many but not all of which are compulsory stop along that single way. Simply adding nodes on the correct side of each intersection would be somewhat easier to implement, while currently these restrictions are not recorded. How about simply creating a relation with those two nodes? You have an intersection of two (or more) roads and when you come to that intersection from one particular road (in one particular direction) you have a stop. Then you add a node on that way before the intersection, then create a relation (let's say of type=stop, or any more self-explanatory value) where you have the stop node with role stop_from and the intersection with role stop_at. Such a scheme can be easily interpreted as: when you pass over a node highway=stop that is a member of a relation type=stop with role stop_from, then you must stop at the node of that relation that has the role stop_to. You might eventually add the way to the relation to avoid ambiguity in complex case, the way would have a role like stop_along and be interpreted to stop at the stop_at node only if travelling along that way. What do you think? -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] copyright problem with data copied from a map
Hello Le mardi 18 août 2009 à 13:55, Morten Kjeldgaard a écrit : Educating mappers so they fully understand the free-and-open principles means that they in turn can teach others, and everyone saves time in the end. Throwing the book at this fellow is too harsh at this point. You can email him and politely ask if he wants to put the roads back on the GPS trace, or you will do it. Convince him to get a GPS and start collecting data. Tell him it's fun. That's what I did. I first sent him a message telling him that he was doing wrong edits. He answered me once and told me he was actually copying a scanned map. So I answered back explaining why he should not do that, that was eight days ago and to this day I've had no more answers. I've sent him another message two days ago telling him that his edits might be removed due to copyright problem if he did not clarify the situation. As adviced by Andy, I've sent a mail to the osmfoundation explaining the situation. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] copyright problem with data copied from a map
Le lundi 17 août 2009 à 20:37, Andy Allan a écrit : Hi Renaud, Hello, thank you for your answer. I think the best thing for you to do in this case is to contact the Foundation, as explained in the FAQ. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Faq#I_think_someone.27s_been_entering_ copyrighted_data_-_how_do_we_deal_with_that.3F I had missed that question in the FAQ, should have read more carefully. Provide all the details you have gathered so far, and it will be passed on. Copyright violation is something we need to take seriously, and the relevant working group can take further actions such as banning the user and removing data from the history should such things prove necessary. You have certainly done the right thing so far by contacting the user directly to make initial investigations. OK, I'll mail them all the informations. thanks -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] copyright problem with data copied from a map
Hello Two weeks ago, I found problem in Dison, Belgium, see here http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.6044lon=5.8522zoom=14 At that moment, the motorway had been shifted north-west by user Neo while adding other roads. I moved it back to correspond to GPS traces and messaged Neo about the problem. He did some more edits, see http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Neo/edits and that's when I realised that he was actually copying an actual map. He actually put the bounding box of his map http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38566375 He confirmed a week later that he was really copying a map he scanned and loaded in JOSM (not rectifying it, so the shifted roads). He was obviously not aware of the copyright problem as he asked me, in the same message, if he could somehow copy the map from his tomtom. I replied one week ago explaining why he must not do that and asking him to remove all the edits he made based on that map, but had no more answer so far. So now I'm thinking about removing those edits myself, but am not sure what's the best way to do so. I don't know if the changeset can be reverted, as there are many of them, and I also did some edits there (changeset #1997354 #2005715 #2046924 a least) before knowing of the copyright problem. Any advice? I think I'm going to remove all this by hand with JOSM. But the ways will still be present in the DB with the history. Can we do something about this? cheers -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] tag proposal surface=gravel; concrete; dirt; grass
Le vendredi 14 août 2009 à 15:02, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : but IMHO it is an error in the editors not to warn you, if tags are added in a combine-action (not only on contradictory tags should warn). I already filed a trac-ticket for JOSM some time ago. +1 I've had the problem some month ago (in Namur, Belgium) that someone had joined many way making one long railway that was both a tunnel and a bridge. I had a hard time splitting it again at the correct nodes (I was lucky that at the time mapnik didn't update so frequently and I was able to look where the bridges/tunnels were) potlatch should also have such a warning, as beginners generally start with potlatch and are more likely to make such a mistake. (If it already does ignore this comment, I rarely use potlatch) -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] Problem in Herve
Le lundi 3 août 2009, Ben Laenen a écrit : I have the impression that you've corrected it already now. But please contact Neo and ask him about it, so he can watch out it doesn't happen again. You can also immediately ask him to upload his gps tracks. Yes, I've never used the messaging system on the OSM site (I prefer mailing lists). I'll give it a try. There's a script available here that should be able to revert changesets: http://trac.openstreetmap.org/browser/applications/utils/revert Of course, it would also delete all the new roads in that changeset, but in case we get some vandalism or some serious mistake by a mapper which is too big to fix manually, it's good to have something. The new roads he added seemed legitimate, so I didn't want to remove all of it. And I've never used those revert scripts, so I am not very comfortable using them as I might make a bigger mess if I do something wrong. -- Renaud Michel pgp: 0x630E6AC4 (fingerprint: E051 75D0 0E02 4D7B 0384 5D8F 2A70 C289 630E 6AC4) ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Clearance
Le vendredi 31 juillet 2009 à 03:23, Roy Wallace a écrit : What about a way that has either a physical limitation or a legal limitation (not both). Perhaps there is some argument that the tag should differentiate between these situations? Though I admit I can only think of a weak one - that it makes it clearer for users and mappers I have a very good example: For an ambulance, many legal limitations (like speed limit) don't apply, so if a road has a legal limitation for the maximum height of 2m but you can actually physically take that road with a 3m ambulance, that is a useful information for the ambulance driver who then knows he can actually take that road, although regular users may not. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Undo request button for changesets
Le mardi 14 juillet 2009 à 13:13, Francois Van Der Biest a écrit : Therefore, I imagine we should show features which have been created/updated/deleted in different colors (eg: green/blue/red) on the changeset page. +1 That would be really cool. I've been missing such a feature since changeset have been introduced. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Move the Map
Le mardi 16 juin 2009 à 22:45, SteveC a écrit : One of the main annoyances that people tell me that they have with OSM is that whenever they visit the site, the map shows them just the UK. I thought that the IP 2 geo stuff was in there to make it default to the country it thinks you're in? It is. When I open my browser on OSM it is centered on belgium (except from some place where it is whole europe, probably because it can't associate the IP there to a specific country). -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk-be] New member
Le mercredi 10 juin 2009 à 21:49, Sam Pastuer a écrit : I'm Sam, when in Belgium I'm spending most of my time between Molenstede/Diest and Blauberg/Herselt. I just bought myself a Garmin Edge 705 for road cycling and mountainbiking. I'm quite new to the whole mapping thing, but have some experience with engineering/scientific software and 'computers' in general, so as long as I find the time it should work out. I've always been a fan of Open and Community based projects/software, so I'll do my best to contribute to the still less developed eastern flemish-brabant area. Hello, and welcome to OSM! It is always good to see new volunteers joining the community. Did you already register on the wiki? There is a specific subproject for belgium, whose entry page is here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium I wish you lots of fun building with us a free world map :-) -- Renaud Michel ___ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
[OSM-talk] How to tag oneway exceptions?
Hello I didn't find an answer in the wiki, how should I tag roads that are one way for motorized vehicles but two way for bicycle? For now those are only tagged oneway=yes, so a routing software for cycleway will think it can only go oneway. It seems unwise to use another value for oneway, so I should probably use a complementary tag, I see in tagwatch that there is bicycle:oneway which seem to be in use (and a few variations a few times) is that a good choice? -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - h==highway
Le lundi 30 mars 2009 à 05:46, PAA a écrit : Request for comments on creating the key:h and making it synonymous with key:highway. That's just ridiculous. Don't start duplicating tags with the same meaning. As i understand things, this has four huge benefits: -reduce data entry time when editing OSM (e.g. 6/7ths less characters to type) JSOM already helps you there, when adding a new highway tag I only have top type hig and JSOM adds hway, same for values. If three letters is still too much for you you can make a JOSM plugin that will translate h into highway. -reduce data entry errors when editing OSM (current obvious errors from tagwatch europe: highlight, hightway, highwaY, highwat, higwhway, and the champion, higway, with 1478 entries) That's what predefined settings are made for, you click on a menu and select primary road. -reduce OSM data storage space (over 6M highways just from http://tagwatch.stoecker.eu/Europe/En/tags.html; simple naive estimate 6M*6 bytes=36MBytes uncompressed data reduction) -reduce bandwidth for transfers to/from OSM planet files are already compressed, you won't gain much by replacing meaningful tags by codeletters. And once you start with tag names, you could go on with values and replace primary with p, secondary with s and so on. -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - h==highway
Le lundi 30 mars 2009 à 15:00, PAA a écrit : Request for comments on creating the key:h and making it synonymous with key:highway. That's just ridiculous. Don't start duplicating tags with the same meaning. It's definitely not something to be done with all tags, but i don't think you made a very good case why it's ridiculous for this one tag that is both prone to misspelling and in greater use than all others. (I replied quickly this morning before leaving for work and forgot to write my main argument, should never reply in a hurry) With two synonymous tags you can get inconsistent tagging, like a way tagged highway=primary h=secondary -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Filtering out errors from GPX file
Le mercredi 11 mars 2009 à 05:16, Simon Wood a écrit :
$ head -n 1 temp.unicsv new.unicsv
$ head -n -1 temp.unicsv | awk -F ',' '{if ($520) print $0;}'
new.unicsv
You can do that with awk only:
$ awk 'NR==1||$520{print $0}' temp.unicsv new.unicsv
Useful information anyway, thanks.
--
Renaud Michel
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Front page design and SEO
Le jeudi 05 mars 2009 à 01:47, Robert (Jamie) Munro a écrit : I.e. having windows automatically tiled the whole time, making maximum use of screen real estate. When you moved the bottom of one window, for example, you were dragging the top of the window beneath it. While I usually overlap my windows, and don't mind, sometimes the ability to force them into a grid layout would be really useful. You can. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiling_window_manager THere are many such window manager available for X window -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Add 'Keep right!' to the list of map links in the 'place' template
Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 16:48, Ed Avis a écrit : I'd like to request that 'Keep right!' http://keepright.ipax.at/ be added to this list. It checks various map errors, not all of which are covered by maplint or the other tools. Hey, I just discovered this site, it's great! I've quickly corrected many small problems in Liège, so many of the bugs present here http://keepright.ipax.at/report_map.php?zoom=15lat=50.64151lon=5.57285layers=B0T should be gone by the next update ;-) -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] amenity=doctor or amenity=doctors ? [tagging]
Le dimanche 22 février 2009 à 14:19, Guenther Meyer a écrit : Am Sonntag 22 Februar 2009 schrieb Dave Stubbs: You could just /not/ run a bot on it. Seriously, these tag correcting bots can be really annoying. As long as it's documented both ways it can be trivially implemented both ways. but why should we use two different tags for the same thing? it would be better to consolidate this... I agree. I am a recent (4 months) contributor to OSM and I sometimes find it annoying to have multiple, sometimes incompatible, tagging used for the same purpose. Sometimes I just don't tag something, not knowing an acceptable way to do so. So I acually concentrate on roads which have a good consensus on the tagging (and is the main purpose of OSM). -- Renaud Michel ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] usercases for josm outside osm
Helllo Le mardi 03 février 2009 à 04:27, Kim Hawtin a écrit : what i'd really like is a mode where i can edit the GPS trails. just top and tailing the junk off the ends where the GPS was started and stopped, any time where you are are effectively indoors... Yes i'd also like to have such editing features. also splitting large GPS trails into smaller more manageable sections. Splitting can easily be done manually with a text editor, GPX files are XML files with a simple structure. one of the issues i have is that i can spend a fair bit of time trailing and can upload those trails, but don't always have the notes to go with to identify the specific journey. you have to upload the trail to the web site before you know where it is, and them edit the other attributes to go with it. so being able to use josm to get your bearings about which GPS trail it is before uploading it would be handy... You may open GPX files in JOSM before you upload them. -- Renaud Michel pgp: 0x630E6AC4 (fingerprint: E051 75D0 0E02 4D7B 0384 5D8F 2A70 C289 630E 6AC4) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
