Re: [talk-au] Tagging Trucks (hgv) "Use low gears"

[Ross Scanlon]

Andrew beat me to it.

There is a speed restriction associated with the "Must use low gear 
signs" under the road rules.


It states:

"you must drive in a gear that is low enough to limit the speed of your 
vehicle without using the foot brake."


Unfortunately it's not a defined limit although in places there may be a 
speed limit sign for trucks and buses as well. eg on the Great Eastern 
Freeway heading towards Perth.


Cheers

Ross



On 18/1/23 11:29, Andrew Harvey wrote:
Good point. If it's a restriction, it should be more like the maxspeed 
tag, maxspeed:hgv=*


So something like low_gears:hgv=designated rather than using the 
hazard key.


On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 at 11:25, Ben Kelley  wrote:

Just one thought on this:

The "use low gears" it not itself the hazard. It is the steep hill
that is the hazard (where the mitigation strategy for HGVs is to
use low gears. Same for rollover/sharp bend.

 - Ben


On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 at 10:38, Andrew Hughes 
wrote:

Thank You Greame,

The
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hazard#Traffic_hazards tag
seems very appropriate but in my mind, needs a :hgv namespace.

still not sure on the actual values but...tag/values I would
appreciate feedback on:

hazard:hgv=Use low gears
hazard:hgv=Long Steep Descent
hazard:hgv=Use low gears;Long Steep Descent


Another example I would appreciate feedback  are QLD "Tilting
Truck signs":
https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/signs/warning

hazard:hgv=Tilting
hazard:hgv=High Risk Rollover
hazard:hgv= ?


Kind regards,
Andrew



On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 at 11:30, Graeme Fitzpatrick
 wrote:




On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 at 10:40, Andrew Hughes
 wrote:

There are other signage like "No Engine Breaking",
could anyone propose a convention inline with the
above that could be extended for such additional signage?


Answering in reverse!

I thought I remembered something about "quiet zones" for
traffic, so did some searching & found:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:railway%3Dlevel_crossing#Quiet_zones,
but which has apparently never been used.

Also found
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:designation#Quiet_lanes

The same idea could possibly be used as
designation=quiet_zone, possibly with quiet_zone=hgv?

Can anyone suggest the most appropriate way to take
ways where the road is signed with "Use Low Gears"?


& maybe the same concept as designation=low_gears?

That one could even come in under
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hazard#Traffic_hazards
as hazard=low_gear_required?

Thanks

Graeme


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


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

Re: [talk-au] Wadbilliga Road south east NSW marked 4WD only

[Ross Scanlon]

It may be shown as tertiary but I'd be cautious about removing 4wd_only 
based on the NSW basemap only.


Have you had a look at the NSW imagery for that area or checked any 
other form of road conditions eg.


https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/things-to-do/4wd-touring-routes/wadbilliga-road-drive


Cheers

Ross



On 18/06/19 16:05, Warin wrote:

Hi,

This appears to be an error. On the LPI Base map it looks like a 
tertiary rd..


Way: Wadbilliga Road (380747553) ... this extends to the east as well.


Any objections to removing the 4WD only and upping it to tertiary class?


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



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

Re: [talk-au] new OpenStreetCam competition

[Ross Scanlon]

Hi Martijin,

When an upload completes how long should it take to show on the 
openstreetcam.org website?


Cheers

Ross



On 19/03/19 01:08, Martijn van Exel wrote:

Howdy.

We had a good time with the first OpenStreetCam competition, the 
winners received their prizes, and we decided to hold another one. The 
main prize this time is an OSC Waylens Horizon camera. This is a 
fairly nifty device that lets you automatically record and upload to 
OSC. The competition is open now until April 15th. As before, just 
collect more OSC points than other mappers to win. Read details on the 
Telenav ImproveOSM blog: 
http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2019/03/announcing-the-second-openstreetcam-australia-and-new-zealand-competition/ .


Related:
* A previous blog post 
 about 
the impact of competition number 1
* the OpenStreetCam JOSM plugin 
 was 
just updated with some new features as well.


Let me know if you have any questions, and Happy mapping!
--
 Martijn van Exel
m...@rtijn.org 


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


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

Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

[Ross Scanlon]

Welcome to oz roads.

I had a look on street view and can not see any 60 signs along Warwick 
Road they are all 70.


Cheers

Ross



On 09/03/19 10:20, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:



On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 08:48, Ross Scanlon <mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com>> wrote:


What you've said is correct for off ramps but would be incorrect
for on ramps.

The on ramp speed limit may be determined from the adjoining
road(s), as the last speed limit sign is the applicable limit
until you pass another sign.

So in the example given if the 60 sign was not on the link the
applicable limit would be what it was for Warwick Road, which from
memory is 70 near that underpass, and this would be the limit up
to the 60 sign.

So for this link it should be 70 - 60 - 100 as you go past the 60
and 100 signs.

Or, stupidly enough, if for some reason you've come down off the 
Centenary Highway via
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144077977#map=17/-27.66335/152.73924, 
through the traffic lights, then taken the on ramp we're talking about 
to go back up onto the Highway, your speed would be 60 - 60 - 100 as 
there's a 60 sign on that off-ramp. So you'd, quite legally, have 2 
different speed limits on that stretch of road!


Thanks

Graeme


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

Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

[Ross Scanlon]

| In some situations, especially on off-ramps, there isn’t any speed 
limit sign at the beginning of the link only at the end of it or in the


| middle. I observed that in these situations the speed limit of the 
motorway is added on the first part of the link. Because this is the


| predominant way of adding speed limit on links, we will map in the 
same way: if there isn’t a speed limit sign at the beginning of the link


| we will add the speed limit of the motorway and other speed limit that 
occurs along the link. If there is a speed limit sign at the beginning | 
of the link (e.g.SL60 in our example) we will add the speed limit in the 
way you mentioned (60 then 100).



What you've said is correct for off ramps but would be incorrect for on 
ramps.


The on ramp speed limit may be determined from the adjoining road(s), as 
the last speed limit sign is the applicable limit until you pass another 
sign.


So in the example given if the 60 sign was not on the link the 
applicable limit would be what it was for Warwick Road, which from 
memory is 70 near that underpass, and this would be the limit up to the 
60 sign.


So for this link it should be 70 - 60 - 100 as you go past the 60 and 
100 signs.


Cheers

Ross



On 09/03/19 02:11, Lacramioara Maghiar - (p) wrote:


Thanks for your response!

I got 80 from the trunk way from which the motorway link leaves.

In some situations, especially on off-ramps, there isn’t any speed 
limit sign at the beginning of the link only at the end of it or in 
the middle. I observed that in these situations the speed limit of the 
motorway is added on the first part of the link. Because this is the 
predominant way of adding speed limit on links, we will map in the 
same way: if there isn’t a speed limit sign at the beginning of the 
link we will add the speed limit of the motorway and other speed limit 
that occurs along the link. If there is a speed limit sign at the 
beginning of the link (e.g.SL60 in our example) we will add the speed 
limit in the way you mentioned (60 then 100).


Best,

Lacri

*From:* Graeme Fitzpatrick 
*Sent:* Thursday, February 28, 2019 12:19 AM
*To:* Lacramioara Maghiar - (p) 
*Cc:* talk-au@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Editing speed limit in Australia

Hi Lacri

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 21:56, Lacramioara Maghiar - (p) 
> wrote:


Hi all,

I’m writing you regarding the speed limit mapping in Australia.

Specifically, how would you add the speed limit on a motorway link
where the speed limit sign appears in the field towards the end/in
the middle of the link?

In Qld at least (& I think Aust-wide) speed limits officially change 
at the sign - you may start accelerating as you pass it, not before; 
but you must start slowing early so you're at the lower limit as you 
pass the sign.


Please take a look at the following example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/37282555. Here, there is a speed
limit sign of 100 (SL100 hereafter) in the middle of the motorway
link. You can see the sign here:

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo=cTDOkTXf0M0gVBjem4mt9A=-27.664412022684786=152.7436576757009=17

.


In which way would you add the speed limit information in the
above-mentioned case:

 1. maxspeed=80 until the SL100 sign and maxspeed=100 until the
end of the link?

I'm not sure where you got 80 from? I can only see a 60 sign at the 
start of the link 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-27.663581886206885=152.73979205152136=17=0.49548370263958935=0.50767663189853=0=B-1LcWLyCAjIQqhNjTQ7AQ 
, 
& speed then jumps to 100 just before merging out onto the Cunningham 
Highway


 1. maxspeed=80 represents the speed limit of the trunk way from
which the motorway link leaves.

Welcome to Australian roads! Just because it's a trunk road, doesn't 
necessarily mean it's got an appropriate speed limit :-(


 2. nothing until the SL100 sign but maxspeed=100 starting with
the appearance of the sign in the field?

60, not "nothing" between the 2 signs, then 100.

Hope that helps!


Thanks

Graeme



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

Re: [talk-au] Issues with a user putting back incorrect tags

[Ross Scanlon]

Contact the Data Working Group


On 09/09/17 10:34, Philip Mallis wrote:


Hi all,

I am seeking advice on how to proceed with an issue around Melbourne 
and Victoria regarding tagging of abandoned/disused railway stations 
and railways.


The Outer Circle Line is a railway that has been almost entirely 
ripped up and abandoned. The former track and its stations were 
previously incorrectly tagged with railway=station which meant that 
they showed up on the default OSM layer, in navigation apps and other 
places where they should not appear. I and others have been changing 
them to the correct railway:historic=station_site or 
railway:historic=station as per the consensus here: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railway_stations#Stations_and_sites_which_are_not_currently_in_operation. 
Unfortunately, every time these tags have been corrected, the user has 
changed them back.


One of the recent instances is here: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4695022174/history


I have tried messaging the user twice but no response was received 
and, as of eight days ago, the reverting has continued. I know of at 
least three other users who have also tried contacting this user over 
the past year or so to no avail.


Any advice on how to proceed?

Thanks,

Philip



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


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

Re: [talk-au] When is a Road a Track

[Ross Scanlon]

On 11/02/17 12:21, Warin wrote:

On 11-Feb-17 11:28 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote:


On 11/02/17 07:00, Warin wrote:
The NSW LPT base map is particularly helpful for road 
classifications .. tracks, unclassified, tertiary and paths.
It is in some ways better than a survey as it looks to take into 
account the importance to the community and that is very hard to 
determine by simply travelling the road.


Where a 'track' travels a long distance .. say over 50 km I would 
argue that it is 'unclassified' as that length suggests it is not a 
simple service/maintenance track but a connection between distant 
points.
As far as seeking out the 'interesting/adventure' roads .. I first 
look for unpaved, then connecting. The old 'Tracks for Australia' 
garmin map is helpful but well out of date.


So your saying above that a track like the Canning Stock Route should 
be an unclassified road?  It's about 1800kms and is definitely a 
track not a road.  There are some sections you could possibly call an 
unclassified road but they are not maintained.  For the majority of 
it's length it is two wheel tracks through the scrub and sand dunes.


I'd suggest everyone have a read of the wiki pages for track and 
unclassified.


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack
"roads for mostly agricultural use, forest tracks"
"classify them as usual 
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways#Classification> according 
to the conventions in your country,"


You conveniently left out the rest of this sentence:

" Do not use tracks to represent public unpaved roads in *built-up 
areas*[1] 
<https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/110>, that 
would be consideredtagging for the renderer 
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer>. In this 
situation,classify them as usual 
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways#Classification>according to 
the conventions in your country, and also provide asurface 
<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface>=*tag."



My bolding.

"vehicular use is dominated by field access or forest management, but 
not any heavier sort of industry. "


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dunclassified*
"*used for minor public roads typically at the lowest level of the 
interconnecting grid *"
"*The least important sort of minor roads which are either a) proper 
signposted formal parts of the public road network, or b) nominally 
private or just unsignposted but the locals use them anyway. The idea 
is that "4"-wheel vehicular use by the general public is possible, the 
general public use dominates other uses, and no single specific 
purpose dominates.*"


* These are not clear and there is suggestions to refer to the country 
guidelines

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Unsealed_and_4wd_Roads_.28Dirt.2C_Gravel.2C_Formed.2C_etc.29

and that is not clear either.

I've always tagged them by looking to see if they are 
maintained/graded.  If they are graded, and that's generally pretty 
obvious from aerial imagery as well, then they are minimum 
unclassified.  If not then they are tracks.


How frequently are they graded? Sections of the Canning are graded. A 
track locally to me was recently graded .. last grading was probably 
done 20 years ago ...but I'd not call it 'unclassified' as it is not 
important enough. It is in quite good condition now.


As I said sections of the CSR are probably unclassified, but the 
remainder is definitely a track.  There's always exceptions, so the "a 
track longer than 50kms" really does not apply to tracks like the CSR.   
And the CSR can


I'm talking about well maintained roads by council or state governments, 
graded at least once a year and could be sealed easily with spray pave 
if needed it's just an example of what is a road and not a track.  There 
are lots of these in WA in particular that are tagged as track but 
should really be unclassified surface=gravel/ground.


Tracks are like the image on the highway=track wiki page.  The actual 
track is only maintained by the passage of vehicles along it.





Have a look at this area in josm, with bing imagery

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-30.0090/116.8188


or here it is on bing maps:

https://binged.it/2kcYMV6

and where it's unsealed

https://binged.it/2kd8irh


Looking at the road that comes up from the south east and then 
according to MRWA it continues to the north west.
MRWA classifies the south east part as osm tertiary and the north 
west part as unclassified.


However I'd tag the north west part as track as it's little more than 
two wheel tracks through the scrub and the further you go along it 
the more it deteriorates.




The condition/difficulty of the road is best determined by 
travelling the road, I don't add that detail unless I have travelled 
it. I do add surface=unpaved/paved ...
on

Re: [talk-au] When is a Road a Track

[Ross Scanlon]

On 11/02/17 07:00, Warin wrote:
The NSW LPT base map is particularly helpful for road classifications 
.. tracks, unclassified, tertiary and paths.
It is in some ways better than a survey as it looks to take into 
account the importance to the community and that is very hard to 
determine by simply travelling the road.


Where a 'track' travels a long distance .. say over 50 km I would 
argue that it is 'unclassified' as that length suggests it is not a 
simple service/maintenance track but a connection between distant points.
As far as seeking out the 'interesting/adventure' roads .. I first 
look for unpaved, then connecting. The old 'Tracks for Australia' 
garmin map is helpful but well out of date.


So your saying above that a track like the Canning Stock Route should be 
an unclassified road?  It's about 1800kms and is definitely a track not 
a road.  There are some sections you could possibly call an unclassified 
road but they are not maintained.  For the majority of it's length it is 
two wheel tracks through the scrub and sand dunes.


I'd suggest everyone have a read of the wiki pages for track and 
unclassified.  I've always tagged them by looking to see if they are 
maintained/graded.  If they are graded, and that's generally pretty 
obvious from aerial imagery as well, then they are minimum 
unclassified.  If not then they are tracks.


Have a look at this area in josm, with bing imagery

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-30.0090/116.8188


or here it is on bing maps:

https://binged.it/2kcYMV6

and where it's unsealed

https://binged.it/2kd8irh


Looking at the road that comes up from the south east and then according 
to MRWA it continues to the north west.
MRWA classifies the south east part as osm tertiary and the north west 
part as unclassified.


However I'd tag the north west part as track as it's little more than 
two wheel tracks through the scrub and the further you go along it the 
more it deteriorates.




The condition/difficulty of the road is best determined by travelling 
the road, I don't add that detail unless I have travelled it. I do add 
surface=unpaved/paved ...
on some bridges I remove the surface tag as I cannot be certain what 
is there, on a few I change it to concrete.


On 10-Feb-17 05:55 PM, David Bannon wrote:


Do you mean without seeing them yourself Warren ?  I personally think 
that you should only correct another mapper's work if you have 
personally seen something that needs correction. I am sure there are 
some exceptions. But here, in particular, you seem to have "negative" 
information.


Its also worth remembering that highway= indicates the purpose of the 
road or track, a number of other tags indicate its condition. In 
theory 


David


On 10/02/17 10:51, Warren wrote:
I have asked this question before but did not really get a clear 
answer.


I am working off the Western Australian Main Roads data checking 
against the OSM road attributes.  Occasionally I come across lines 
that are classed in OSM as highway:unclassified or 
highway:residential that do not appear on the Main Roads data base.


I would argue that these are named tracks rather than roads but I 
wanted to check others opinion.


Do I leave them alone or change the classification to highway:track?


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



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




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



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

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for Pipeline Reserves

[Ross Scanlon]

On 08/02/17 11:17, Warin wrote:

On 08-Feb-17 12:10 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote:

On 08/02/17 11:00, Warin wrote:


Some pipe lines cross farms, residential areas ... so ?

I will ask on the tagging list as it is not Australian specific.

I note the pipeline is not visible ... I assume underground and the 
location is not evident so you cannot map the pipe line itself.


As far as most people are concerned it is a park, so that is 
appropriate.


I don't think park=pipeline_reserve would be best .. as you would 
then need something similar where the pipeline crosses a farm etc.


Why would you need that?


For the same reason you need to tag the pipe line reserve in the park.
Most of the time it has no effect on the attributes of the place.
However it is an added attribute that is verifiable and can be mapped.



But you don't have to have it where it crosses other areas.  In this 
case we are talking about what type of park it is.  Not what type of 
pipeline, which to me is what you are trying to do.


The area shown by Adam is the whole area not a sub area of it.  It 
appears to be a park and locals probably consider it as a park. However 
it is still a pipeline reserve so that's what type of park it is.






By tagging it park=pipeline_reserve your describing the type of park 
not the type of pipeline.


A pipe line reserve is not necessarily a park.


Yes, but in this case the park is a pipeline reserve, so describe what 
type of park it is.







On 08-Feb-17 11:31 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote:


park=pipeline_reserve



On 08/02/17 10:29, Adam Horan wrote:
My local area (and I'm sure many others) have lots of pipeline 
reserves.


I'm really not sure how to tag these. They appear to have public 
access for walking at least. (One local one has a sign disallowing 
golf...) Some others appear to be across private land, and i'm 
less interested in those, I'd really like to show those ones with 
public access.


examples: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370388062#map=17/-38.15997/145.20073


I've tagged them as leisure=park previously, and paths evident on 
the ground have just been tagged highway=path.


Any ideas?

Thanks,

Adam


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




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





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




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





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


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

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for Pipeline Reserves

[Ross Scanlon]

On 08/02/17 11:00, Warin wrote:


Some pipe lines cross farms, residential areas ... so ?

I will ask on the tagging list as it is not Australian specific.

I note the pipeline is not visible ... I assume underground and the 
location is not evident so you cannot map the pipe line itself.


As far as most people are concerned it is a park, so that is appropriate.

I don't think park=pipeline_reserve would be best .. as you would then 
need something similar where the pipeline crosses a farm etc.


Why would you need that?

By tagging it park=pipeline_reserve your describing the type of park not 
the type of pipeline.





On 08-Feb-17 11:31 AM, Ross Scanlon wrote:


park=pipeline_reserve



On 08/02/17 10:29, Adam Horan wrote:
My local area (and I'm sure many others) have lots of pipeline 
reserves.


I'm really not sure how to tag these. They appear to have public 
access for walking at least. (One local one has a sign disallowing 
golf...) Some others appear to be across private land, and i'm less 
interested in those, I'd really like to show those ones with public 
access.


examples: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370388062#map=17/-38.15997/145.20073


I've tagged them as leisure=park previously, and paths evident on 
the ground have just been tagged highway=path.


Any ideas?

Thanks,

Adam


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




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





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


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

Re: [talk-au] Tagging for Pipeline Reserves

[Ross Scanlon]

There's no real issue with heading out on your own with this type of tag.

What you are doing is describing the type of park.

So in this case the park is a pipeline reserve so therefore 
park=pipeline_reserve would be acceptable.


People still regard it as a park which is the major tag.


On 08/02/17 10:56, Adam Horan wrote:
There's only a few hundred examples of park=* in taginfo, and none are 
for pipeline_reserve. I don't really want to head out on my own if 
there's already a convention.

I'm not even sure if leisure=park is an accurate description :)

On 8 February 2017 at 11:31, Ross Scanlon <i...@4x4falcon.com 
<mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com>> wrote:


park=pipeline_reserve



On 08/02/17 10:29, Adam Horan wrote:

My local area (and I'm sure many others) have lots of pipeline
reserves.

I'm really not sure how to tag these. They appear to have public
access for walking at least. (One local one has a sign
disallowing golf...) Some others appear to be across private
land, and i'm less interested in those, I'd really like to show
those ones with public access.

examples:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370388062#map=17/-38.15997/145.20073
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370388062#map=17/-38.15997/145.20073>

I've tagged them as leisure=park previously, and paths evident on
the ground have just been tagged highway=path.

Any ideas?

Thanks,

Adam


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

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


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

Re: [talk-au] Parks Vic data

[Ross Scanlon]

capad



On 08/02/17 09:49, nwastra wrote:

Hi
I have found many problems with the Heathcote-Graytown National Park in 
Victoria.
Is there a place from which I can download the boundary as we have done with 
the NSW LPI NPWSReserve - public/NSW_Administrative_Boundaries, so I sort out 
where the gazetted boundary is and then fix the boundary in the osm?


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



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

[OSM-talk] agri.openstreetmap.org not working

[Ross Scanlon]

All the imagery hosted on openstreetmap servers as listed here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aerial_imagery#Imagery_hosted_on_OSM_servers

Except for the South African imagery.

Cheers
Ross


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

[talk-au] agri.openstreetmap.org not working

[Ross Scanlon]

All the imagery hosted on openstreetmap servers as listed here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aerial_imagery#Imagery_hosted_on_OSM_servers

Except for the South African imagery.

Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] Advice on Tags in a Hamlet

[Ross Scanlon]

Split the way at the railway tracks, add name="Smith Street", add 
alt_name="Lalbert - Kerang Road" to the section west of the railway.


Like this:

http://map.fosm.org/browse/way/102503479#map/18/-35.676/143.377

Cheers

Ross


On 16/01/17 10:30, Simon Slater wrote:

G'day all,
We needed our daughter to pick something up from Lalbert and 
since she
had never driven there herself, we looked up the map.  However, Smith 
St did

not appear, instead tagged as the Lalbert Kerang Rd, as here: https://
www.openstreetmap.org/way/80838220#map=17/-35.67595/143.37920

For the locals and for street numbers, it is Smith St, at least from 
the Swan
Hill - Donald road to the rail tracks.  How can I tag to reflect 
this, leaving

the Lalbert - Kerang tag for the bigger picture?

On a secondary note, the node for Lalbert is in the middle of empty 
land:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1774352212#map=16/-35.6726/143.3759 
Should
this be moved a bit more centrally, like near the cafe and garage on 
Main St?


I have seen both these scenarios a few times in the hamlets around here.
Apart from tidiness, would this also improve routing?



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



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

Re: [talk-au] AGRI.openstreetmap.org not working

[Ross Scanlon]

Still not available.

Any update on when it's likely to be back.

Cheers
Ross


On 17/10/14 08:40, Ross Scanlon wrote:

Any update on when this will be fixed?

Cheers
Ross


On 10/08/14 23:54, Grant Slater wrote:

Hi All,

Sorry... Not yet been able to get access to the broken machine. It will
remain high on my task list to get it up and running again.

Longer term the rest of the sysadmin team are planning to replace faffy
with a better more reliable imagery server.

/ Grant

On 10 Aug 2014 12:25, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com
mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:

On 6 July 2014 15:30, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com
mailto:openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
  We had a problem with the server (faffy) which runs
  agri.openstreetmap.org http://agri.openstreetmap.org, it no
longer starts up, we were limited on
  time and were not able to get it up and running again.
 
  I will visit the data centre in a week to fix or replace the
hardware.

I do find the AGRI imagery useful and it would be great if we could
access it again.

Many thanks for all your effort Grant, hopefully you are able to fix
the remaining issues.



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




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



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

[talk-au] AGRI.openstreetmap.org not working

[Ross Scanlon]

As the title says agri.openstreetmap.org does not appear to be working.

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] VicMap in Potlatch2

[Ross Scanlon]

Thanks.

It can also be used in josm.

Edit-Preferences-WMS/TMS

add a new tms

http://whoots.mapwarper.net:80/tms/{zoom}/{x}/{y}/WEB_MERCATOR/http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/geowebcacheWM/service/wms?VERSION=1.1.1TILED=true

Cheers
Ross


On 14/05/14 11:08, Steve Bennett wrote:

Hi all,
   I've just discovered you can add VicMap, Victoria's open data
licensed authoritative mapping service, into Potlatch 2. It's not at all
obvious how, so here's the answer:

In Background, click Edit then add:
http://whoots.mapwarper.net:80/tms/$z/$x/$y/WEB_MERCATOR/http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/geowebcacheWM/service/wms?VERSION=1.1.1TILED=true

To explain:
- Vicmap provides an API which is basically a weird forked version of
OpenLayers:
http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/index.php/developers-resources/javascript-api
- Digging through that you can find their actual WMS endpoint, which is
http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/vicmapapi/map/wms
- Except, that data is in EPSG 3111 projection, rather than the web
standard EPSG 3857. Their documentation says that EPSG 3857 will be
available by the end of August 2013, then no more info about it:
http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/index.php/product-information/projections-sacles/web-mercator
- Anyway it turns out the EPSG 3857 projection is available at
http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/geowebcacheWM/service/wms (I assume the WM
stands for 'web mercator', aka EPSG 3857)
- But still, it's only provided as a WMS service, which isn't directly
supported by Potlatch 2. That's why you need to use the
whoots.mapwarper.net http://whoots.mapwarper.net proxying service
which converts WMS to web tiles.

Enjoy.

Steve


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




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

Re: [talk-au] QLD GTFS Data Imports

[Ross Scanlon]

On 24/02/14 12:01, waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:

Bummer that you can't get in contact with morb_au


Have you tried twitter?

A search there shows he's still around but possibly not really 
interested in osm any more.


His first diary post gives a hint to the dis-interest.


Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] Motorway edits in NSW / Vic

[Ross Scanlon]

If DWG has put a block then he can not edit until responding to it to 
the DWG.


That's not to say he can not make another user name.

Cheers
Ross


On 17/02/14 09:27, Jason Ward wrote:

It still leaves correction of errors up to the community I'm afraid and
if he ignores that message in the user block DWG will need to be
notified again to get that account dealt with more permanently.

Good luck guys.

Cheers,

Jason

On 17 Feb 2014 07:41, Leon Kernan lker...@gmail.com
mailto:lker...@gmail.com wrote:

Thanks Jason for contacting DWG on this.  It seems he's been issued
with a warning, we'll see if it has any impact.

Today the Western highway has been upgraded again after it had been
reverted to normal.
I notice that supposedly we have tunnelled around Beaufort now,  As
a Victorian taxpayer i'd like to know how we can afford these
tunnels as long as the East-West link! :-p

One positive in this, it's got me to start using JOSM a little.  I
might just change over from Potlatch 2 yet..



On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Jason Ward jasonjwa...@gmail.com
mailto:jasonjwa...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi DWG (CC talk-au list),

Below is a segment of a discussion on talk-au regarding edits
made by http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/robbief14.

He is unresponsive to messages sent via OSM and continues to add
and remove content that has been established as incorrect.  I am
notifying you as users within the talk-au discussion have
established some actions within his edits to be vandalism (with
some rollbacks by users being re-added back in by this user).

If you have any questions please contact the guys on the list
and I apologise if you have been notified separately to my comms
(no-one was nominated or volunteered so I just sent this message).

Cheers,

Jason


On 16 February 2014 08:31, Leon Kernan lker...@gmail.com
mailto:lker...@gmail.com wrote:

No, he seems to be putting back his fake roads again.  Just
as I finished fixing some of them from last time...

Has anyone managed to contact him (I noticed several people
in the talk-GB list were trying to) and is it time to get
someone like the Data Working Group involved to deal with
him?  At the least, I believe every one of his edits in
Australia is bogus.

I've checked the following:
  He's reinstated the Shepparton bypass again.  I can
say with certainty that that road doesn't exist except in
the road authorities future plans.
  There is also a Pacific Highway tunnel that's appeared
in Sydney that I believe is still in the planning phase.

  The Adelaide northern connector is also in the
planning phase (still not funded according to their website)
and sure enough, he's made it complete.

Look at this minor example:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/261508781#map=19/-37.56324/143.93172

There is no justification for adding those ramps, which
would be dangerous if they were actually built like that.


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 3:49 AM, SomeoneElse
li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk
mailto:li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:

There seem to be a lot of deletions in this and
subsequent changesets:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/__changeset/20555081
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/20555081

Are they valid?

Cheers,

Andy



_
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-au
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au



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



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




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




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

Re: [talk-au] Motorway edits in NSW / Vic

[Ross Scanlon]

Contact the DWG, get them to put a block on this user.

Then you can do something about the edits.

This is similar to previous vandalism in the Perth area by the likes of 
user Brendan_Cherry


Cheers
Ross


On 16/02/14 13:23, Leon Kernan wrote:

Problem is that some of these were tagged under construction where
appropriate.  He's just changing them to open and sometimes adding his
own embellishments.



On Sunday, February 16, 2014, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com
mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:

Some don't read their email

How about
marking the things he is adding -
under construction - so they don't apear on maps
Nameing them Reiff14 READ YOUR EMAIL!
Adding Note with the same as name...

Note I've not used his actual 'name' .. but I'd think that may get
through?
There is a twitter account with that name ... and a mapmy person
with the same name too...



On 16/02/2014 9:31 AM, Leon Kernan wrote:

No, he seems to be putting back his fake roads again.  Just as I
finished fixing some of them from last time...

Has anyone managed to contact him (I noticed several people in the
talk-GB list were trying to) and is it time to get someone like
the Data Working Group involved to deal with him?  At the least, I
believe every one of his edits in Australia is bogus.

I've checked the following:
 He's reinstated the Shepparton bypass again.  I can say with
certainty that that road doesn't exist except in the road
authorities future plans.
 There is also a Pacific Highway tunnel that's appeared in
Sydney that I believe is still in the planning phase.

 The Adelaide northern connector is also in the planning phase
(still not funded according to their website) and sure enough,
he's made it complete.

Look at this minor example:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/261508781#map=19/-37.56324/143.93172

There is no justification for adding those ramps, which would be
dangerous if they were actually built like that.


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 3:49 AM, SomeoneElse
li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk'); wrote:

There seem to be a lot of deletions in this and subsequent
changesets:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/20555081

Are they valid?

Cheers,

Andy



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Talk-au@openstreetmap.org');
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org  
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Talk-au@openstreetmap.org');
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




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




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

Re: [talk-au] Motorway edits in NSW / Vic

[Ross Scanlon]

If the DWG does not respond then try contacting

Frederik Ramm at;

frederik at remote dot org


He is usually very helpful with instances of vandalism.

Cheers
Ross



On 16/02/14 13:46, Ross Scanlon wrote:

Contact the DWG, get them to put a block on this user.

Then you can do something about the edits.

This is similar to previous vandalism in the Perth area by the likes of
user Brendan_Cherry

Cheers
Ross


On 16/02/14 13:23, Leon Kernan wrote:

Problem is that some of these were tagged under construction where
appropriate.  He's just changing them to open and sometimes adding his
own embellishments.



On Sunday, February 16, 2014, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com
mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:

Some don't read their email

How about
marking the things he is adding -
under construction - so they don't apear on maps
Nameing them Reiff14 READ YOUR EMAIL!
Adding Note with the same as name...

Note I've not used his actual 'name' .. but I'd think that may get
through?
There is a twitter account with that name ... and a mapmy person
with the same name too...



On 16/02/2014 9:31 AM, Leon Kernan wrote:

No, he seems to be putting back his fake roads again.  Just as I
finished fixing some of them from last time...

Has anyone managed to contact him (I noticed several people in the
talk-GB list were trying to) and is it time to get someone like
the Data Working Group involved to deal with him?  At the least, I
believe every one of his edits in Australia is bogus.

I've checked the following:
 He's reinstated the Shepparton bypass again.  I can say with
certainty that that road doesn't exist except in the road
authorities future plans.
 There is also a Pacific Highway tunnel that's appeared in
Sydney that I believe is still in the planning phase.

 The Adelaide northern connector is also in the planning phase
(still not funded according to their website) and sure enough,
he's made it complete.

Look at this minor example:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/261508781#map=19/-37.56324/143.93172

There is no justification for adding those ramps, which would be
dangerous if they were actually built like that.


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 3:49 AM, SomeoneElse
li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk');
wrote:

There seem to be a lot of deletions in this and subsequent
changesets:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/20555081

Are they valid?

Cheers,

Andy



___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Talk-au@openstreetmap.org');
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Talk-au@openstreetmap.org');
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




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




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



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

Re: [talk-au] Address tagging guidelines for Australia

[Ross Scanlon]

I'd still suggest

addr:city=Brisbane
addr:suburb=The Gap

This follows the full addressing, I don't know if there is any other 
suburb The Gap but imagine two suburbs A_suburb in two different cites 
A_city and B_city in the same state in the same country.


The if you put:

addr:city=A_suburb
addr:state=state
addr:country=country

Then which one are you talking about.

Where as if you put:

addr:suburb=A_suburb
addr:city=A_city or B_city
addr:state=state
addr:country=country

Then it's immediately apparent which is which.

Just my thoughts.

Cheers
Ross


On 19/01/14 13:00, Stéphane Guillou wrote:

Thanks everyone for your input.

I wonder what was the rationale behind using abbreviations for countries
and states as I understood that the database must be as human-readable
as possible.
Still, I will be following the recommendations on the Key:addr page for
addr:country=AU.

However, I am still unsure about suburb vs city. Key:addr tells us to
watch out for the Australian definition of suburbs, and Wikipedia says
the following:

In Australia and New Zealand, suburbs have become formalised as
geographic subdivisions of a city and are used by postal services in
*addressing*.

As we are here tagging the address, I was wondering: are we tagging so
the addresses appear as they should when we use them (e.g. when we write
them on an envelope) - the original point of tagging an address I guess
- (in which case I would just go with addr:city=The Gap), or should we
understand the tags as literally as possible (in that case, I would go
addr:city=Brisbane and addr:suburb=The Gap).

What would be the best way to decide on a convention so we can add
guidelines for OSM-AU?

Cheers

Stéphane (chtfn)

On 19/01/14 11:04, Ross Scanlon wrote:

I'd suggest you check this page

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr

You'll see that the addr:country is supposed to be:

The ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 two letter country code in upper case.

We are talking addresses not is_in.

Also addr:state can be either but it tends to be the abbreviation.

Cheers
Ross



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

Re: [talk-au] Address tagging guidelines for Australia

[Ross Scanlon]

I came to this because I was asking myself:
- Are we using QLD or Queensland for addr:state?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:state
- What is our definition of suburb vs city for the tags? (e.g. The Gap
vs Brisbane. Postal addresses only contain The Gap, and it is referred
as a suburb of Brisbane in spoken language, but does the tagging scheme
ask for The Gap as addr:city?)


addr:state=Qld

addr:city=Brisbane
addr:suburb=The Gap

I'd also suggest adding to all

addr:postcode=
addr:country=AU

I know that nominatim can determine these but other data users may want 
this information for other purposes.


Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] Australian Tagging Guidelines

[Ross Scanlon]

On 08/01/14 10:26, Warin wrote:

Hi,

Some thoughts on Australian Tagging Guidelines - OpenStreetMap Wiki.htm

First it is very good - covers most common issues. In fact I'd call it
excellent.

But .. there could be some additions?


How do you tag a 'Gully'? .. I've used waterway=stream intermittent=yes,
googled from an American post. Looks to work (I've used it on Gallipoli).


+1


Changes?


The default number of lanes.

Currently 2 except for oneway, there it is 1.

Change to

Default number is 2 except for

Motorways = 4?


Would have thought 2 would be more likely, given that they tend to be 
two on each carriageway except in urban areas and where additional lanes 
may be required.
Mind you it's a while since I drove on one as I tend to avoid them where 
possible, rather take the scenic route.



4WD difficult ratings .. well the Mountain Bikers have a system .. use
that? While the difficulty levels change with the vehicle - deep sand
springs to mind .. 4WDs float over it ... motorcycles have to speed over
it, with mountain bikes sinking into it, but it might be a starting point?


Look at a new key for this rather than modifying the 4wd_only key.

Don't reinvent the wheel either there is a classification system for this:

http://www.4wdqld.com.au/track-classification.html
http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/iconic-four-wheel-drives/track-classification

so something like:

4wd:scale=easy/medium/difficult/very-difficult

when rendered next to the 4wd_only key use the appropriate icon from the 
above.



Surfaces - we have paved/unpaved sand/dirt/wood etc .. but not
corrugated(washboard American)[probably most significant], rocky nor
ripio (South American). Mud? though that may be seasonal. :)


corrugated is intermittent, depends on when the road/track was last 
graded and probably should be part of smoothness. The surface is still 
gravel/dirt/ground,etc.


surface=mud is already in the wiki

surface=rock is probably better than rocky

Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] Murchison - Square Kilometer Telescope not showing on Garmin maps

[Ross Scanlon]

On 31/12/13 10:17, Warin wrote:

Hi,

I've noted that some (if not all) of the Australian  Square Kilometer
Telescope north east of Murchison WA is entered (and has been for some
time) in OSM  but it does not show up on my Garmin maps.

26.7S 116.7E
entries are
key man_made value radio telescope
key website value http://www.atnf.csiro.au/projects/askap/
key name value Burara (etc - some 36 so far .. many more to come)
etc.

as the value radio telescope does not look to be official yet .. would
a value of tower suit - and edit the names to inculse a prefix of
radio telescope followed by the present name be an aproach that would
see these things actually apear on the maps?


This is Mapping for the renderer.  If you want something mapped then 
get the renderer changed not the data



What of Parks? Naribri? .. humm looking .. Ok Parks is a tower .. humm
some of the other details .. well yes ok ..



So it looks to me as if a value of tower would be best .. then add a
prefix to the name


Again mapping for the renderer.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice




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

Re: [talk-au] Sydney: Epping M2 + Devlins Creek - bridge + levels

[Ross Scanlon]

On 19/12/13 11:07, Warin wrote:


Hi,

I though I changed this ..

Where Devlins Creek goes under the M2

The creek is at  'gound level' - as are the path to the east and the
'cycleway' (actually cycle + foot + emergency vehicles)  to the west.
The M2 is on a small bridge at that point .. you may not see it from the
M2 .. but it is obvious from the creek..

1) I had inserted a bridge there, and set the levels .. I though
correctly... any hints on how to ensure I don't 'break' the M2 when
including a bridge? I simply use the JOSM function  'split way at
selected node' - to seperate a section (actuall 3 - separte at that
point) and then tag that section(s)  bridge, level 1 ... and leave it at


layer=1 not level


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

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

[Ross Scanlon]

On 07/12/13 17:34, Will Rouesnel wrote:

Ok this is what I got from a brief walk around the neighborhood with
OSMPad on my phone:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2569340857#map=17/-33.82359/151.25009layers=ND

The addresses line up to the post-box / domestic entrances where
possible - my motivation here is to get places I travel to give
accurate GPS coordinates from things like OSMAnd.


I'm of the opinion that this is where the address node should be.


The biggest problem at the moment seems to be the Bing imagery has a
couple meter shift in this area, so things line up but the roads are
offset a bit - I can't decide whether to recenter my points around the
roads or not, since presumably if it's ever correct a big shift would
then line everything up nicely.


Read this in regards to bing imagery being offset

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bing#Precision

You need to reference the bing imagery to the gps traces or roads marked 
as source= survey or nearmap or agri.


Cheers
Ross




On Sat 07 Dec 2013 15:29:54 EST, Ross Scanlon wrote:

But where should the node go? Referring to here
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_feature/associatedAddress
it seems like the address node should be inside an area assocated
with
the object it assigns an address to, but in the case of parcels of
land/buildings this wouldn't be the case


At the entrance to the property where known.  This would be just
inside the boundary so matches what is above and the above is only a
proposed feature.

Try adding some addresses then link to them to show what you've done.
Mind you there'll still be six different responses.

Cheers
Ross


On 07/12/13 13:32, Will Rouesnel wrote:

I'm still a little confused about the separate node model (which seems
to make more sense to me, in so far as it resolves better for dealing
with some large areas like farms).


i.e. my house's address node should logically be at the entrance where
you can enter it, but that's outside a building and if I don't map land
parcels is outside an area).

I'm thinking just don't worry about it I guess - i.e. presumably at some
point someone will get all the zoning from the local council and somehow
upload that, at which point the address assignments would make sense
provided I stuck address points at all the entrances?

On 05/12/13 21:07, Ross Scanlon wrote:

I'd suggest you read these wiki pages:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address

My personal opinion is that the address should be on a separate node
at the entrance to the property. This is preferred for disability
access programs.

It also takes into consideration that the address is unlikely to
change but the building or landuse may.

Cheers
Ross


On 05/12/13 19:34, Will Rouesnel wrote:

A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
buildings be tagged?

The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
tagged house.

Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to
get
my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
provide navigation to specific locations.

Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my
area)?

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










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

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

[Ross Scanlon]

On 07/12/13 17:34, Will Rouesnel wrote:

Ok this is what I got from a brief walk around the neighborhood with
OSMPad on my phone:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2569340857#map=17/-33.82359/151.25009layers=ND


Looks pretty good.

I'd add

addr:suburb=Balmoral or where ever

I also always add:

addr:state=NSW or where ever


Cheers
Ross



The addresses line up to the post-box / domestic entrances where
possible - my motivation here is to get places I travel to give
accurate GPS coordinates from things like OSMAnd.

The biggest problem at the moment seems to be the Bing imagery has a
couple meter shift in this area, so things line up but the roads are
offset a bit - I can't decide whether to recenter my points around the
roads or not, since presumably if it's ever correct a big shift would
then line everything up nicely.

On Sat 07 Dec 2013 15:29:54 EST, Ross Scanlon wrote:

But where should the node go? Referring to here
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_feature/associatedAddress
it seems like the address node should be inside an area assocated
with
the object it assigns an address to, but in the case of parcels of
land/buildings this wouldn't be the case


At the entrance to the property where known.  This would be just
inside the boundary so matches what is above and the above is only a
proposed feature.

Try adding some addresses then link to them to show what you've done.
Mind you there'll still be six different responses.

Cheers
Ross


On 07/12/13 13:32, Will Rouesnel wrote:

I'm still a little confused about the separate node model (which seems
to make more sense to me, in so far as it resolves better for dealing
with some large areas like farms).


i.e. my house's address node should logically be at the entrance where
you can enter it, but that's outside a building and if I don't map land
parcels is outside an area).

I'm thinking just don't worry about it I guess - i.e. presumably at some
point someone will get all the zoning from the local council and somehow
upload that, at which point the address assignments would make sense
provided I stuck address points at all the entrances?

On 05/12/13 21:07, Ross Scanlon wrote:

I'd suggest you read these wiki pages:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address

My personal opinion is that the address should be on a separate node
at the entrance to the property. This is preferred for disability
access programs.

It also takes into consideration that the address is unlikely to
change but the building or landuse may.

Cheers
Ross


On 05/12/13 19:34, Will Rouesnel wrote:

A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
buildings be tagged?

The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
tagged house.

Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to
get
my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
provide navigation to specific locations.

Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my
area)?

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










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

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

[Ross Scanlon]

 But where should the node go? Referring to here
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_feature/associatedAddress
 it seems like the address node should be inside an area assocated
 with
 the object it assigns an address to, but in the case of parcels of
 land/buildings this wouldn't be the case

At the entrance to the property where known.  This would be just inside 
the boundary so matches what is above and the above is only a proposed 
feature.


Try adding some addresses then link to them to show what you've done. 
Mind you there'll still be six different responses.


Cheers
Ross


On 07/12/13 13:32, Will Rouesnel wrote:

I'm still a little confused about the separate node model (which seems
to make more sense to me, in so far as it resolves better for dealing
with some large areas like farms).


i.e. my house's address node should logically be at the entrance where
you can enter it, but that's outside a building and if I don't map land
parcels is outside an area).

I'm thinking just don't worry about it I guess - i.e. presumably at some
point someone will get all the zoning from the local council and somehow
upload that, at which point the address assignments would make sense
provided I stuck address points at all the entrances?

On 05/12/13 21:07, Ross Scanlon wrote:

I'd suggest you read these wiki pages:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address

My personal opinion is that the address should be on a separate node
at the entrance to the property. This is preferred for disability
access programs.

It also takes into consideration that the address is unlikely to
change but the building or landuse may.

Cheers
Ross


On 05/12/13 19:34, Will Rouesnel wrote:

A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
buildings be tagged?

The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
tagged house.

Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to get
my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
provide navigation to specific locations.

Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my
area)?

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








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

Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?

[Ross Scanlon]

I'd suggest you read these wiki pages:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Address

My personal opinion is that the address should be on a separate node at 
the entrance to the property. This is preferred for disability access 
programs.


It also takes into consideration that the address is unlikely to change 
but the building or landuse may.


Cheers
Ross


On 05/12/13 19:34, Will Rouesnel wrote:

A simple example starting with my own house - how should residential
buildings be tagged?

The block they sit on is more of a land use concern, but the specific
buildings don't occupy the entire block - and seem like they should be
tagged house.

Is this a correct way to go about things? The goal here would be to get
my local area updated with street numbers so generated addresses can
provide navigation to specific locations.

Would it be correct to trace the outline of the blocks, and label them
with the address and tag the land as residential use? Would this be
likely to accomplish the overall goal (provide street numbers for my area)?

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




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

Re: [talk-au] South Australia - Public Transport / OSM data

[Ross Scanlon]

The advantage of the Vicmap address data is that it's the entrance to 
the property for the address. Mostly, there are some that are center of 
the property where the entrance is not known.


This is the preferred data for addresses.

Cadastral data usually shows the boundary of the property but gives no 
clue to the entrance for the address.


If SA published a georeferenced entrance node address data licenced 
appropriately it would give the address data but it also lets you 
determine the street names.


Cheers
Ross




On 28/11/13 16:23, Daniel O'Connor wrote:

Yeah, that'd be really, really great if SA could publish cadastre and
other information openly.

It'd be interesting to know what's already available via the land
services group - I know for example that cadastre and address info is
published and integrated by the PSMA to make GNAF/Cadlite information;
but presumably that's not an easy process to open up to the public at
the drop of a hat.

That said, just last week I was speaking to a few commercial entities
who were helping with the publication of vicmap data - taking the raw
shapefiles and slicing/dicing/serving it up to business, to take away
the integration pains - so there are clear examples of both the public
and commercial sectors benefiting from this sort of open data.



On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com
mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:


·Street Address Limitations ( missing streets and street numbers)


Make a dataset like this available for inclusion in openstreetmap

http://www.data.vic.gov.au/__raw_data/vicmap-address/4875
http://www.data.vic.gov.au/raw_data/vicmap-address/4875

Would resolve the above fairly rapidly.

Cheers
Ross


·walking paths data not included across many of the highways
(North East

and Main North Gepps cross) connected to transport
infrastructure, such
as railway stations, and bus interchanges. Grange is a hot spot,
as has
been Aldinga, Blackwood and Belair, Mclaren vale ( which looks
like its
improving) and some areas around

·Southern and Northern suburb areas not detailed

·Smaller Shopping Centres, Councils and other places of interest
not named.

I’d be very happy to help as I am also involved with the
Government Open
Data program at http://data.sa.gov.au/

I’m keen on building some good relationships with contributors and
application developers so would like to gather some more support
for OSM
in South Australia.


_
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-au
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au





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

Re: [talk-au] South Australia - Public Transport / OSM data

[Ross Scanlon]

·Street Address Limitations ( missing streets and street numbers)


Make a dataset like this available for inclusion in openstreetmap

http://www.data.vic.gov.au/raw_data/vicmap-address/4875

Would resolve the above fairly rapidly.

Cheers
Ross



·walking paths data not included across many of the highways (North East
and Main North Gepps cross) connected to transport infrastructure, such
as railway stations, and bus interchanges. Grange is a hot spot, as has
been Aldinga, Blackwood and Belair, Mclaren vale ( which looks like its
improving) and some areas around

·Southern and Northern suburb areas not detailed

·Smaller Shopping Centres, Councils and other places of interest not named.

I’d be very happy to help as I am also involved with the Government Open
Data program at http://data.sa.gov.au/

I’m keen on building some good relationships with contributors and
application developers so would like to gather some more support for OSM
in South Australia.



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

Re: [talk-au] loading JOSM

[Ross Scanlon]

Revert to java 6

The message on the start up screen has been there for ages and it's 
sometime soon.


I'm using ubuntu 12.04 as well and have no problems running josm with 
java 6.


Cheers
Ross


On 27/10/13 11:27, Arthur Geeson wrote:

Hi,

Firstly a thank you to the replies I got about the missing bench seats
that were not appearing on the map.

I have been trying to get JOSM working and it implied that I had a
version of java that was too old. I then spend several hours to get a
new version of java and now when I try to run JOSM it just falls over. I
am using Ubuntu 12.04 and get the following problems:

arthur@arthur-Aspire-5750G:/usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-i386/bin$ java
-version
java version 1.7.0_25
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (IcedTea 2.3.10) (7u25-2.3.10-1ubuntu0.12.04.2)
OpenJDK Server VM (build 23.7-b01, mixed mode)

arthur@arthur-Aspire-5750G:/$ josm
Using /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-i386/bin/java to execute josm.
java.awt.HeadlessException
at java.awt.GraphicsEnvironment.checkHeadless(GraphicsEnvironment.java:207)
at java.awt.Window.init(Window.java:535)
at java.awt.Frame.init(Frame.java:420)
at javax.swing.JFrame.init(JFrame.java:218)
at
org.openstreetmap.josm.gui.MainApplication.main(MainApplication.java:316)

I have tried reloading JOSM and the plugins but it seems there maybe
something wrong with java?

Thanks - Arthur (geesona)

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



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

Re: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 76, Issue 8

[Ross Scanlon]

Hi Li,

Yes.

There is no automatic method to compare in josm.

However you can set up a number of searches to make the job easier.

eg (addr:housenumber=* | addr:street=*) -source=vicmap will find all 
address data not sourced from vicmap.


Cheers
Ross


On 14/10/13 16:47, Li Xia wrote:

Gday Ross,

Great workflow suggestion mate. To clarify, when you say compare, you
mean manually in JOSM right?

Li.


On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 5:27 PM, talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
mailto:talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:

Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to
talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
mailto:talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than Re: Contents of Talk-au digest...


Today's Topics:

1. Re: vicmap data licensing (Ross Scanlon)
2. Re: South Australia Suburb Boundries (Daniel O'Connor)


--

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 08:57:13 +1000
From: Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] vicmap data licensing
Message-ID: 525730c9.5070...@4x4falcon.com
mailto:525730c9.5070...@4x4falcon.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

Cut the data into small chunks (0.25 x 0.25 deg).

Load each chunk it into josm.

Download the relevant area to a separate layer.

Compare with what is already there.

Expect to spend a least 2 hours with each chunk depending on what data
your adding.

Cheers
Ross


On 11/10/13 06:37, Li wrote:
  Does anyone have experience on importing data? In particular avoiding
  duplicates?
 
  Li.
 
  On 10 Oct 2013, at 5:16 pm, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com
mailto:ben.kel...@gmail.com
  mailto:ben.kel...@gmail.com mailto:ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Hi.
 
  I guess the thing to consider is how you would handle a second
import
  if someone had edited the data in OSM in between.
 
  I think this kind of conflict would be very difficult to
resolve. You
  could either plan to do a 1-off import, or maybe include a tag
on the
  imported data matching a unique identifier for the same feature
in the
  vicmap data. The US Tiger import did something like this.
 
  - Ben Kelley.
 
  On 10 Oct 2013 17:12, Li Xia m...@lixia.co mailto:m...@lixia.co
mailto:m...@lixia.co mailto:m...@lixia.co wrote:
 
  Hi everyone,
 
  I'm meeting Vicmap and data.gov http://data.gov
http://data.gov staff tomorrow
  to get their blessing on importing vicmap data into OSM.
 
  Once the licensing is squared away, we can move onto discussing
  techniques of importing the data. Snapshot data in shp
format is
  available from data.vic.gov.au http://data.vic.gov.au
http://data.vic.gov.au.
  Alternatively a vicmap provides a live feed to weekly data diffs
  directly. Any advice on how to import this data is much
appreciated.
 
  Li
 
  ___
  Talk-au mailing list
  Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
 
 
 
  ___
  Talk-au mailing list
  Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




--

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2013 02:41:02 +1030
From: Daniel O'Connor daniel.ocon...@gmail.com
mailto:daniel.ocon...@gmail.com
To: Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com
mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com
Cc: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org
mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] South Australia Suburb Boundries
Message-ID:
CAJsZyFCxk2C1s2YE8x9xwegQBe_p=guvq9k_npgjarefup3...@mail.gmail.com
mailto:guvq9k_npgjarefup3...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Did the bits to produce .osm files (again on github); suitable to
open up
and view in JOSM.

I spot checked two areas near me that I know well, and the accuracy is
pretty high.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/241675341
http

Re: [talk-au] vicmap data licensing

[Ross Scanlon]

Cut the data into small chunks (0.25 x 0.25 deg).

Load each chunk it into josm.

Download the relevant area to a separate layer.

Compare with what is already there.

Expect to spend a least 2 hours with each chunk depending on what data 
your adding.


Cheers
Ross


On 11/10/13 06:37, Li wrote:

Does anyone have experience on importing data? In particular avoiding
duplicates?

Li.

On 10 Oct 2013, at 5:16 pm, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com
mailto:ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:


Hi.

I guess the thing to consider is how you would handle a second import
if someone had edited the data in OSM in between.

I think this kind of conflict would be very difficult to resolve. You
could either plan to do a 1-off import, or maybe include a tag on the
imported data matching a unique identifier for the same feature in the
vicmap data. The US Tiger import did something like this.

- Ben Kelley.

On 10 Oct 2013 17:12, Li Xia m...@lixia.co mailto:m...@lixia.co wrote:

Hi everyone,

I'm meeting Vicmap and data.gov http://data.gov staff tomorrow
to get their blessing on importing vicmap data into OSM.

Once the licensing is squared away, we can move onto discussing
techniques of importing the data. Snapshot data in shp format is
available from data.vic.gov.au http://data.vic.gov.au.
Alternatively a vicmap provides a live feed to weekly data diffs
directly. Any advice on how to import this data is much appreciated.

Li

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




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



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

Re: [talk-au] ISP caching problems with JOSM ?

[Ross Scanlon]

Sounds more like the caching within JOSM.

Cheers
Ross


On 12/09/13 23:15, Grant Slater wrote:

Hi Ian,

The api.openstreetmap.org map data servers send no-cache headers and
proxy/caches should therefore NOT be caching the results...
But some ISPs are too aggressive with their caching.

Make sure JOSM is set to the default OSM server (there are 3rd party
caching API servers available):
JOSM -  Edit -  Preferences (shortcut: F12) -  Connection Settings
(World Icon) -  make sure: User the default OSM server URL is
checked.

I am happy to help diagnose the error with you.

Regards
  Grant

On 12 September 2013 13:01, Steerist...@iinet.net.au  wrote:

I’m wondering if I’m striking caching problems with my ISP or my PC.  I make
changes and upload them with no error messages and close JOSM.  I re-open
the next day, and my changes aren’t there – but they are present in the
“slippy map”.  I re-do them and upload them and get a conflict saying the
server version is newer than mine.  I can close JOSM, re-open and
re-download, and the server version and my version don’t change.



I have googled this problem, but it was all a bit above my head.  Does
anyone have a solution for this problem they can describe in simple terms ?
J



thanks



Ian


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



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



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM

[Ross Scanlon]

On 24/08/13 17:46, Lester Caine wrote:



Notice the broken casing on the sides of some of the roads.

If what you are talking about is the change in style on the roads to the
right, then how were they generated as they do not appear on the main
database? It's nice to see I can just cut and paste the old style
location urls and they will be recognised - hopefully no-one will remove
that as redundant ;)


Have a look at what layer is selected.

You see that it's not osm.

Cheers
Ross



I have an interest in this for showing what is to the side of roads.
While on one hand macro mapping says add tags to a road to show things
like footpaths and cycleways, micro mapping would show the all of the
infrastructure actually as areas, but at least as separate identifiable
ways which can be selected in preference to the road for planning waking
and cycling activity. If the 'road' with no 'side furniture' is rendered
with broken sides like this it makes sense. Africa has considerably more
of the 'tracks' that I am talking about and there it is even more
important to identify ones where the two ruts making up the track would
make it dangerous for following on foot? While many parts of the world
have different requirements, generally the same rules apply worldwide?




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

Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM

[Ross Scanlon]

On 24/08/13 19:39, Lester Caine wrote:

Ross Scanlon wrote:

Notice the broken casing on the sides of some of the roads.

If what you are talking about is the change in style on the roads to the
right, then how were they generated as they do not appear on the main
database? It's nice to see I can just cut and paste the old style
location urls and they will be recognised - hopefully no-one will remove
that as redundant ;)



Have a look at what layer is selected.
You see that it's not osm.


Hence the question!

Ok.  The roads in question are not in osm, they were pre redaction, they 
are still in another database.  The rendering based on that database is 
the layer shown.


Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM

[Ross Scanlon]

I think this is the type of rendering that Darren is looking for:

informationfreeway.org/?lat=-20.374lon=148.633zoom=15layers=00F000B0

You'll have to copy and paste the link.

Notice the broken casing on the sides of some of the roads.

Cheers
Ross


On 24/08/13 03:58, Darren Biggs wrote:

That is what I am looking for with the default OSM render.  I use OSM in
aplications like www.ridewithgps.com http://www.ridewithgps.com.  That
use the default/OSM render.  That way cyclist/motorcyclists can know if
the road is dirt or not.


On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr
mailto:pierz...@yahoo.fr wrote:

The HOT HDDM Mapcss style under development adresses the question of
road surfaces and it is a very good progress to represent both road
classification and surface conditions.  However, I would like that
the rendering of surface condition do not have preseance over the
road classification.

Below are two rendering examples with this style :

1. Residential roads
see http://hotosm.github.io/HDM-CartoCSS/#19/19.67173/-72.12289

2. An unpaved segment of a primary road
see http://hotosm.github.io/HDM-CartoCSS/#17/18.60331/-72.27918
Pierre


*De :* Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com mailto:a...@mapbox.com
*À :* Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com
*Cc :* talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org
talk@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org; Darren
Biggs ou98dtbi...@gmail.com mailto:ou98dtbi...@gmail.com
*Envoyé le :* Vendredi 23 août 2013 10h16
*Objet :* Re: [OSM-talk] Dirt Roads in Mapnik, default render in OSM

+1

The absence of a style for surface=unpaved leads to a very common
misunderstanding and large amounts of roads mistagged:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/110


On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:



Il giorno 23/ago/2013, alle ore 15:44, Darren Biggs
ou98dtbi...@gmail.com mailto:ou98dtbi...@gmail.com ha scritto:


Specifically the Unsurfaced road dashed lines.  I see many
tracks, but not one Unsurfaced road



any road can be unsurfaced
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway

cheers,
Martin

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



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





--
Have Bike will Travel
http://thebikeandmore.blogspot.com/



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



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

Re: [talk-au] Incorporating public information into OSM - Legal situation

[Ross Scanlon]

Did they confirm with Geoscience that the Creative Commons Attribution 
3.0 Australia is compatible with ODBL?


This is one of the reservations that some of us had with changing to ODBL.

Also you will find it's not that easy.  It takes a significant amount of 
time and effort to include this data from the downloaded shapefiles. 
They can not just be imported to osm.


Cheers
Ross


On 19/08/13 19:19, Brett Russell wrote:

Hi

I have been working on OSM maps for bushwalking and this has generated a
fair bit of interest. A few people have taken up mapping and one person
approached me on lifting rivers and streams data from the 1:250,000
publicly available data. My response was no as it is likely copyrighted
and OSM requires no restriction be placed on the data. Not to be
defeated he wrote to A/g Manager, Information  Product Management
Policy Unit Information Management Corporate Services | GEOSCIENCE
AUSTRALIA and received this reply.

Thank you for your email enquiry in regards to copyright and Creative
Commons. The material available as a free download under a Creative
Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence is still under copyright. We
are releasing many of our products under the CC-BY licence which means
that you may share (copy, distribute and transmit the work), remix and
make adaption or even make commercial use of the work. The only
condition for using the product under this licence is that you must
attribute Geoscience Australia.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en

If you have any further questions or would like me to send you the
attribution statement we require please let me know.

Regards

Given that this data (rough as it might be) might be available what is
the OSM community thoughts on an Australia wide approach? Basically has
anyone been down this road. I would imagine the challenge would be to
identify what data is available under what license.

Anyway your thoughts please.

Cheers

Brett



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



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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM uploads past 2000 points

[Ross Scanlon]

Hi

I am all to aware of the 2000 node limit with OSM but when using JOSM to
create lakes as multipolygons from multiple ways it is easier to create
the ways, link them a multipolygon relationship, tag properties and
upload. JOSM then creates a change set and gives five tries and fails so
if you hit upload again it tries again. Strangely if I use Polatch 2 to
check I nearly always find the lake is added to OSM. On at least one
occasion JOSM uploaded the lake more than once. In fact five times. I
have to exit JOSM and restart it to avoid the changeset wanting to
endlessly upload,


Rather than restarting josm:

Upload-Changesets-Upload to a new Changeset

The old changeset will time out and you can upload to new changeset(s) 
from there on.



Has anyone else experienced this issue. Reading on the web suggests this
is a common problem with some claiming a configuration setting in JOSM
can eliminate this issue.


Don't know about a config setting but if you have the Selection panel 
open on the right hand side of the window, then select the object it 
will tell you how many nodes are used by it.  It is then a simple matter 
to split (Tools-Split Way) the way into two (or more) pieces.  If its a 
loop way then select two (or more) nodes on opposite sides and then 
split it.


If you do the split after adding all the tags or creating the 
multipolygon they are copied to the new way.


Cheers
Ross



As usual any help would be appreciated as you can imagine it is
frustrating when mapping large lakes.

Cheers

Brett

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



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



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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM uploads past 2000 points

[Ross Scanlon]

Hi,

When you click on Upload then there is an Advanced tab.

Settings are in there.

Cheers
Ross


On 25/06/13 17:56, Brett Russell wrote:

Hi

My menu is File, Edit, View, Tools, Presets, Imagery, Windows, Audio, Help.

Were will I find the settings you mention?

Cheers Brett

  Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:54:57 +1000
  From: i...@4x4falcon.com
  To: brussell...@live.com.au; talk-au@openstreetmap.org
  Subject: Re: [talk-au] JOSM uploads past 2000 points
 
  Hi,
 
  As Ian points out
 
  Upload-Advanced-Chunks
 
  or
 
  Upload-Advanced-Individually
 
  Cheers
  Ross
 
 
  On 25/06/13 15:44, Ian Sergeant wrote:
   Hi,
  
   I don't know quite what happened, but the relation and all the ways
were
   duplicated four times.
  
   I deleted three of them.
  
   You can specify in the advanced settings of josm to upload the
changeset
   in smaller chunks. I find this is useful.
  
   Ian.
  
  
   On 25 June 2013 13:43, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au
   mailto:brussell...@live.com.au wrote:
  
   Hi Ross
  
   Thanks for the info. I will give it a shot and look for the node count.
  
   I have when creating a way found hovering back over it down the
   bottom of the screen it will tell me the nodes used.
  
   What I have found if I create a way of say 1500 nodes and upload,
   then create another way of say the same number of nodes, and then
   upload and finally then create a multipolygon relationship and tag
   the properties and upload all works well. But if I do it in one step
   and then upload I strike the mentioned problem. My worry is
   multiple uploads as they are a pain to find, edit and or remove.
   Just want to keep OSM data a clean as possible and not corrupt the
   database.
  
   From memory moving a large multipolygon lake in JOSM creates a
   similar problem. So I align lakes in Polatch 2 and all works well.
  
   Finding JOSM very powerful but still very much a newbie with it.
  
   Cheers
   Brett Russell
   PO Box 94
   Launceston Tas. 7250
   Australia
   0419 374 971
  
   On 25/06/2013, at 1:25 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com
   mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
  
Hi
   
I am all to aware of the 2000 node limit with OSM but when using
   JOSM to
create lakes as multipolygons from multiple ways it is easier to
   create
the ways, link them a multipolygon relationship, tag properties and
upload. JOSM then creates a change set and gives five tries and
   fails so
if you hit upload again it tries again. Strangely if I use
   Polatch 2 to
check I nearly always find the lake is added to OSM. On at least one
occasion JOSM uploaded the lake more than once. In fact five
   times. I
have to exit JOSM and restart it to avoid the changeset wanting to
endlessly upload,
   
Rather than restarting josm:
   
Upload-Changesets-Upload to a new Changeset
   
The old changeset will time out and you can upload to new
   changeset(s) from there on.
   
Has anyone else experienced this issue. Reading on the web
   suggests this
is a common problem with some claiming a configuration setting
   in JOSM
can eliminate this issue.
   
Don't know about a config setting but if you have the Selection
   panel open on the right hand side of the window, then select the
   object it will tell you how many nodes are used by it. It is then a
   simple matter to split (Tools-Split Way) the way into two (or more)
   pieces. If its a loop way then select two (or more) nodes on
   opposite sides and then split it.
   
If you do the split after adding all the tags or creating the
   multipolygon they are copied to the new way.
   
Cheers
Ross
   
   
As usual any help would be appreciated as you can imagine it is
frustrating when mapping large lakes.
   
Cheers
   
Brett
   
___ Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
   
   
   
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
   
   ___
   Talk-au mailing list
   Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
   http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
  
  
 



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

Re: [talk-au] JOSM uploads past 2000 points

[Ross Scanlon]

Hi,

As Ian points out

Upload-Advanced-Chunks

or

Upload-Advanced-Individually

Cheers
Ross


On 25/06/13 15:44, Ian Sergeant wrote:

Hi,

I don't know quite what happened, but the relation and all the ways were
duplicated four times.

I deleted three of them.

You can specify in the advanced settings of josm to upload the changeset
in smaller chunks.  I find this is useful.

Ian.


On 25 June 2013 13:43, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au
mailto:brussell...@live.com.au wrote:

Hi Ross

Thanks for the info. I will give it a shot and look for the node count.

I have when creating a way found hovering back over it down the
bottom of the screen it will tell me the nodes used.

What I have found if I create a way of say 1500 nodes and upload,
then create another way of say the same number of nodes, and then
upload and finally then create a multipolygon relationship and tag
the properties and upload all works well. But if I do it in one step
and then upload I strike the mentioned problem.   My worry is
multiple uploads as they are a pain to find, edit and or remove.
  Just want to keep OSM data a clean as possible and not corrupt the
database.

 From memory moving a large multipolygon lake in JOSM creates a
similar problem. So I align lakes in Polatch 2 and all works well.

Finding JOSM very powerful but still very much a newbie with it.

Cheers
Brett Russell
PO Box 94
Launceston Tas. 7250
Australia
0419 374 971

On 25/06/2013, at 1:25 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com
mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:

  Hi
 
  I am all to aware of the 2000 node limit with OSM but when using
JOSM to
  create lakes as multipolygons from multiple ways it is easier to
create
  the ways, link them a multipolygon relationship, tag properties and
  upload. JOSM then creates a change set and gives five tries and
fails so
  if you hit upload again it tries again. Strangely if I use
Polatch 2 to
  check I nearly always find the lake is added to OSM. On at least one
  occasion JOSM uploaded the lake more than once. In fact five
times. I
  have to exit JOSM and restart it to avoid the changeset wanting to
  endlessly upload,
 
  Rather than restarting josm:
 
  Upload-Changesets-Upload to a new Changeset
 
  The old changeset will time out and you can upload to new
changeset(s) from there on.
 
  Has anyone else experienced this issue. Reading on the web
suggests this
  is a common problem with some claiming a configuration setting
in JOSM
  can eliminate this issue.
 
  Don't know about a config setting but if you have the Selection
panel open on the right hand side of the window, then select the
object it will tell you how many nodes are used by it.  It is then a
simple matter to split (Tools-Split Way) the way into two (or more)
pieces.  If its a loop way then select two (or more) nodes on
opposite sides and then split it.
 
  If you do the split after adding all the tags or creating the
multipolygon they are copied to the new way.
 
  Cheers
  Ross
 
 
  As usual any help would be appreciated as you can imagine it is
  frustrating when mapping large lakes.
 
  Cheers
 
  Brett
 
  ___ Talk-au mailing list
  Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
 
 
 
  ___
  Talk-au mailing list
  Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
 
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au





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

Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach

[Ross Scanlon]

On 16/12/12 16:50, Russell Edwards wrote:

Could I ask a newbie question on this topic?

I want to update some roads that are 4wd-only in certain sections.

Any new approach aside, what is the best way to do this -- a) what tag
do I use, and b) how do I handle the changing traversibility - separate
ways linked as a route, or... ?

Thanks in advance

Russell


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


a) Well if you look at the wiki

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Unsealed_and_4wd_Roads

This will give you an idea of where to start.

b) Realistically if the track is 4wd_only=yes;recommended for part of 
it, it should be 4wd_only=yes;recommended for it's entire length. 
Unless there is definitely a section that can be accessed by other 
vehicles without having to go through a 4wd_only=yes section.


For example I'd tag a track as below in exactly the way the tags are on 
the appropriate sections this would show that all vehicles can acces the 
section up to the 4wd_only=yes but you need to have 4wd_only from there on.


Start of track - 4wd_only=no - 4wd_only=recommended - 4wd_only=yes - 
4wd_only=no - End of track


This one there is really no point in tagging the center bit as 
4wd_only=no (or no tag) as only 4wd's can access the track anyway.


Start of track - 4wd_only=yes - 4wd_only=recommended - 4wd_only=no - 
4wd_only=yes - End of track.


No need to put it in a relation I'd just tag the individual sections of 
the way with the appropriate 4wd_only tag.


A link to the way you are looking at editing would help us help you as well.

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] tagging 4WD and dirt roads - I give up.

[Ross Scanlon]

For rendering, no surface= or surface=asphalt/concrete/paved would
produce the current rendering. Any other surface= would produce a dashed
line/casing. To me that's a relatively simple distinction that would be
more appealing to those maintaining the renderers.



I've been working on this rendering and I'd suggest the reverse of this 
for the condition as it is easier to implement in mapnik.  It would 
produce the same result so I put it up as a tip for anyone wanting to 
implement this.


Any thing that has 
surface=unpaved/dirt/sand/gravel/fine_gravel/earth/compacted/clay/grass/pebblestone/ground 
is rendered with the dashed line/casing and all others are rendered as 
normal.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] traffic lights on dual carriageway intersections

[Ross Scanlon]

And the only area it's done like this is in Melbourne.

Cheers
Ross


On 03/11/12 17:03, John Henderson wrote:

Steer wrote:


I have been trying to find the accepted practise for mapping traffic
lights where dual carriageways interest. There is much discussion
on various sites, but most seems to be a bit old, and I’m not
convinced I’ve found what is the latest accepted practise.



I checked some intersections in Melbourne’s CBD, and the method I saw
that I liked and thought the best was where there were 4 lights at
the intersection, but they were not placed on the intersecting modes,
but one node back “upstream” on each way. I think this is good
because no matter which way you go through the intersection, you only
pass one set of lights (rather than 2 if they were placed on the
actual intersecting nodes).



Any comments?


I have always entered such traffic lights on dual carriageways in the
way you describe. This is because:

1. The traffic light count along a section of road is then accurate, and

2. It's the accurate representation of what's on the ground. It lets
us convey the significance of the stop lines associated with the lights.
That's something we can't do with two-way traffic without compromising
point 1.

I have argued this position on previous occasions.

John

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



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

Re: [talk-au] [Imports] Importing locality names from GeoScience Australia dataset.

[Ross Scanlon]

On 27/10/12 18:52, Chris Barham wrote:

Hi,

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 6:48 AM, Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com
mailto:lisxia1...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP

1. Can anyone suggest tags other than the following?
name:different
place:locality
source: © Commonwealth of Australia (GeoScience Australia) 2006.

2. Using JOSM at the moment and uploads take a while, is there a
better way of bulk uploading data?

/SNIP


Some questions for you:
1) Can you post a link to the source data and licence?
2) that copyright tag looks ominous, are you sure it's licenced
appropriately for import to OSM?
a) The site http://ga.gov.au has a footer that says:
Unless otherwise noted, all Geoscience Australia material on this
website is licensed
under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence.
I believe this may not compatible with OSM...



CC-By-SA 3.0 Australia Licence is not automatic permission to use it in 
an ODBL database.


Cheers
Ross



b) ...Unless you got the data from http://data.gov.au/ for which
OSM has obtained rights to import


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

Re: [talk-au] 4wd_only Tag - is it the right choice ?

[Ross Scanlon]

You point out the problem with this:

tracktype is ignored on everything except highway=track

You would have to modify this in the rendering anyway.

As 4wd_only can apply to any highway= tag it is more appropriate.

From memory this was part of the original discussion when 4wd_only was 
proposed.


Additionally my feeling is that because it's not rendered it's not used 
and Australian understanding of 4WD is definitely different to the 
European understanding.


Have a look through the original proposal on the wiki and also the 
smoothness discussion



Cheers
Ross


On 28/10/12 11:00, David Bannon wrote:

Now, I am not suggesting that tracktype is a dropin replacement for
4wd_only, far from it, the definition I read says to me it stops before
4wd_only (see  http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype ) but we
might find getting a grade 6 and grade 7 (or better still,
4wdRecommended and 4wdOnly) added to tracktype easier than getting
4wd_only=recommended added to the list. And if we do, then with all
those numbers, we may be able to get special rendering, and, importantly
special routing rules apply to them.

Indeed, seems that at present, all five grades of tracktype are rendered
differently. Ranges from grade one as a thin but solid brown line to
grade5's small dots.

So, I know this is not what was discussed, but do people want to re
think the agreed position ?

David




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



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

Re: [talk-au] Dirt Roads

[Ross Scanlon]

On 26/10/12 08:43, Andrew Harvey wrote:

On 22/10/12 11:20, Ross Scanlon wrote:

Mapnik 2 will allow tagging of 4wd_only=recommended and 4wd_only=yes.

An example of 4wd_only=yes here:

http://map.4x4falcon.com/?zoom=14lat=-20.73023lon=116.99701layers=B0F

The 4wd_only=recommended is similar but shows 4WD Recommended.

It is a trivial matter with Mapnik 2 to use text substitution for this
and what you actually show on the map can easily be changed.


That is neat.

Using broken lines for the casing of classified roads which are unpaved,
I think would be a huge improvement to the cartography.



I agree.

I'm still working on that one.

Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] Dirt Roads

[Ross Scanlon]

Mapnik 2 will allow tagging of 4wd_only=recommended and 4wd_only=yes.

An example of 4wd_only=yes here:

http://map.4x4falcon.com/?zoom=14lat=-20.73023lon=116.99701layers=B0F

The 4wd_only=recommended is similar but shows 4WD Recommended.

It is a trivial matter with Mapnik 2 to use text substitution for this 
and what you actually show on the map can easily be changed.


Cheers
Ross


On 22/10/12 06:53, Nathan Van Der Meulen wrote:

Hi David

Tho I can't say much about it yet, the outcome is for public use (within
a product). Once we have some details nutted out we hope to have some
more detail. We can't define 4wd_only=yes from 4wd_only=recommended due
to software restrictions and other difficulties. But we are certainly
trying to get 4wd_only=yes defined, and surface=unpaved is already done.
Like most things in OSM, the end result really relies on proper
placement and tagging - not only roads but also places etc.

Matt, the Peninsular Dev Rd is certainly another example. In fact there
are heaps of Dev Rds that are state roads or major roads, but in quite
poor condition. Go to the extreme - National Route 1 across the gulf.

Nathan



*From:* talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
*To:* talk-au@openstreetmap.org
*Sent:* Sunday, 21 October 2012 10:00 PM
*Subject:* Talk-au Digest, Vol 64, Issue 18

Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to
talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than Re: Contents of Talk-au digest...


Today's Topics:

1. Re: Lanes tag (John Henderson)
2. Re: dirt roads (John Henderson)
3. Re: dirt roads (Matt White)
4. Re: dirt roads (Ian Sergeant)
5. Re: dirt roads (Nathan Van Der Meulen) (dban...@internode.on.net
mailto:dban...@internode.on.net)
6. Re: dirt roads (dban...@internode.on.net
mailto:dban...@internode.on.net)
7. Re: dirt roads (Ian Sergeant)


--

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 14:03:49 +1100
From: John Henderson snow...@gmx.com mailto:snow...@gmx.com
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Lanes tag
Message-ID: 50836615.5000...@gmx.com mailto:50836615.5000...@gmx.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

On 21/10/12 13:40, Paul HAYDON wrote:

  It occurs to me there's at least one other case which warrants
  tagging the lanes - a two-way road (or section thereof) having only
  a single lane. I.E. when there are LESS than one in each
  direction, making passing difficult or unsafe at normal speeds.
 
  Any thoughts?

I reckon that's quite legitimate if two cars can't pass. Exceptional
conditions should be flagged as appropriate.

But I wouldn't think a road simply too narrow for two caravans to pass
should automatically get the lanes=1 treatment. Caravaners are
especially aware of the need to drive to the prevailing conditions, as
are truck drivers.

The width or est_width tags from
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features are more appropriate in
most such circumstances.

John



--

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 14:12:04 +1100
From: John Henderson snow...@gmx.com mailto:snow...@gmx.com
To: dban...@internode.on.net mailto:dban...@internode.on.net
Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] dirt roads
Message-ID: 50836804.1010...@gmx.com mailto:50836804.1010...@gmx.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

On 21/10/12 13:28, dban...@internode.on.net
mailto:dban...@internode.on.net wrote:
  OK, I'm interested in what you say about lanes= John (and the rest
  too!)
 
  I use lanes=1 to indicate that a road is generally only wide enough
  for one car, if one approaches traveling in the other direction, both
  need to slow a little and pull of to the side. Similarly for
  overtaking. Thats actually a pretty important factoid, lots of
  caravaners for example would studiously avoid such a road.

That's especially important if pulling off the road is also impossible.
I can think of cases where roads cut into mountainsides have short
sections too narrow for two cars, and have a drop on one side and a rock
face on the other.

Don't forget the established use of tagging a way as
access:caravan=unsuitable

John




--

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 14:34:06 +1100
From: Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org 

Re: [talk-au] Dirt Roads

[Ross Scanlon]

I'm happy for you to use that link as a reference.

I'll refrain from commenting on the remainder of that para.

When the 4wd_only tagging was introduced it was attempted to get this 
included in the mapping but there was reluctance to do so.


Like most proposals it did not have a rendering proposal included and is 
something that should be mandatory for all proposals.  Including mapnik 
xml at the very least.


Cheers
Ross


On 24/10/12 08:48, David Bannon wrote:

Ross, thats pretty cool.

My plan at the moment is to document this discussion on the OSM wiki and
then start lobbying the people who maintain the OSM website's slippery
map to do just what you have done there. I guess we all expected it to
be do-able but nice to have it confirmed.

Would you mind if I used that link as a reference ?  I must admit I
don't know just how good the relationship between fosm and osm is ?

David



- Original Message -
From:
i...@4x4falcon.com

To:
talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Cc:

Sent:
Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:20:56 +1000
Subject:
Re: [talk-au] Dirt Roads


Mapnik 2 will allow tagging of 4wd_only=recommended and 4wd_only=yes.

An example of 4wd_only=yes here:

http://map.4x4falcon.com/?zoom=14lat=-20.73023lon=116.99701layers=B0F

The 4wd_only=recommended is similar but shows 4WD Recommended.

It is a trivial matter with Mapnik 2 to use text substitution for this
and what you actually show on the map can easily be changed.

Cheers
Ross


On 22/10/12 06:53, Nathan Van Der Meulen wrote:
  Hi David
 
  Tho I can't say much about it yet, the outcome is for public use
(within
  a product). Once we have some details nutted out we hope to have some
  more detail. We can't define 4wd_only=yes from
4wd_only=recommended due
  to software restrictions and other difficulties. But we are certainly
  trying to get 4wd_only=yes defined, and surface=unpaved is
already done.
  Like most things in OSM, the end result really relies on proper
  placement and tagging - not only roads but also places etc.
 
  Matt, the Peninsular Dev Rd is certainly another example. In fact
there
  are heaps of Dev Rds that are state roads or major roads, but in
quite
  poor condition. Go to the extreme - National Route 1 across the gulf.
 
  Nathan
 
 
 

  *From:* talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
  talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
  *To:* talk-au@openstreetmap.org
  *Sent:* Sunday, 21 October 2012 10:00 PM
  *Subject:* Talk-au Digest, Vol 64, Issue 18
 
  Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to
  talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 
  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
  http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
  or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
  talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
mailto:talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
 
  You can reach the person managing the list at
  talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org
mailto:talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org
 
  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
  than Re: Contents of Talk-au digest...
 
 
  Today's Topics:
 
  1. Re: Lanes tag (John Henderson)
  2. Re: dirt roads (John Henderson)
  3. Re: dirt roads (Matt White)
  4. Re: dirt roads (Ian Sergeant)
  5. Re: dirt roads (Nathan Van Der Meulen) (dban...@internode.on.net
  mailto:dban...@internode.on.net)
  6. Re: dirt roads (dban...@internode.on.net
  mailto:dban...@internode.on.net)
  7. Re: dirt roads (Ian Sergeant)
 
 
 
--
 
  Message: 1
  Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 14:03:49 +1100
  From: John Henderson snow...@gmx.com mailto:snow...@gmx.com
  To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org
  Subject: Re: [talk-au] Lanes tag
  Message-ID: 50836615.5000...@gmx.com
mailto:50836615.5000...@gmx.com
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
 
  On 21/10/12 13:40, Paul HAYDON wrote:
 
   It occurs to me there's at least one other case which warrants
   tagging the lanes - a two-way road (or section thereof) having only
   a single lane. I.E. when there are LESS than one in each
   direction, making passing difficult or unsafe at normal speeds.
  
   Any thoughts?
 
  I reckon that's quite legitimate if two cars can't pass. Exceptional
  conditions should be flagged as appropriate.
 
  But I wouldn't think a road simply too narrow for two caravans to
pass
  should automatically get the lanes=1 treatment. Caravaners are
  especially aware of the need to drive to the 

Re: [talk-au] Aligning steets

[Ross Scanlon]

On 20/09/12 22:30, Stephen Hope wrote:

I'm not saying that a mini-roundabout isn't a roundabout, it is, and all
the normal signs and laws apply. What it also is, however, is
traversable.  If you have a vehicle that cannot go around it, because it
is too large, then you're allowed to go over it.


No, a mini-roundabout can be traversed by ANY vehicle legally and this 
is not the case in Australia.  You can only do so where impracticable 
for the vehicle.



I'd be just a happy to use a normal roundabout way, and mark it as
traversable with traversable=yes. Traversable could have values like
yes/no/semi (for those ones that have a traversable skirt but a raised
centre plinth). However, when I suggested that on the talk list a while


Agree.

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Tasmanian Survey Marks

[Ross Scanlon]

something that will enable me to check my Garmin 62s' accuracy and give
the ability to align Bing when I find them on the ground providing that
they can be seen from Bing. Be great if they are in nice circles of


I doubt if you'll see them on bing as most survey points are way too small.

You'd probably be better of using the agri control points

http://agri.openstreetmap.org/download/AGRI_GCP/AGRI_GCP.gdb.csv

As these are generally road intersections etc and include photos so can 
be easier to confirm with bing.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Aligning steets

[Ross Scanlon]

On 19/09/12 19:28, Michael James wrote:

On 09/19/2012 04:35 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote:

They are not mini-roundabouts if you can not drive over them.

Look here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundabout

Also read the Australian Tagging Guidelines here:

wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines

mini_roundabout is not determined by size.

Australia does not have mini roundabouts, road rules require you to
drive around the center island unless it is impractical to do so, ie
truck, bus.


According to the tagging guidelines for mini roundabout this is one :-

http://goo.gl/maps/8WAZ6

Are you saying it isn't?

___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Yes it is a small roundabout as you can not legally drive over it unless 
it is impractical to do so.


The vehicle in the street view is clearly about to drive around the 
center island.  Whereas if it was a truck/bus/caravan it would be able 
to drive over it if necessary.


Read through the mailing list archives all this discussion was thrashed 
out years ago and nothing has changed.


Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] Introduction

[Ross Scanlon]

On 29/07/12 00:58, Andrew Allison wrote:

Hello:
I'm doing some arm chair mapping of Broome and surrounding area from
Canada. I'd appreciate a quick review from someone more familiar with
the local area. I might be mistaking dirt tracks for dried creek beds.

Any mentoring would be appreciated :-) From way up here, looks like a
nice town to live in.

Andrew
aka PurpleMustang.


Not dried creek beds but fencelines with firebreaks down each side,

as here:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/173207364

Normal for most armchair mappers to think it's a track.

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Redaction progress

[Ross Scanlon]

On 20/07/12 09:43, Simon Poole wrote:



As all probably know we have two large areas where data had to be
removed, Poland and Australia besides a number of smallish hotspots.

I would think it would be a really good idea to set up a HOT tasking
server (no idea about it inner workings and if it makes sense to do this
all in one, or have two) for the coordination of our largish army of
armchair mappers. Particularly in AUS were we have good quality imagery
available this would seem to make a lot of sense. Any local takers? Or
should I do it from here?


What imagery?

Bing is suitable in some areas but absolutely useless in others.

And even where it is suitable it can be up to 100m out.

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] User hardsoft's remapping attempts

[Ross Scanlon]

Maybe you need to send them a message directly and point them to these 
pages:


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice

Cheers
Ross


On 08/04/12 07:01, Michael James wrote:

I would have introduced myself normally but 

It would seem that use http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hardsoft is on
a campaign to remap everything, this would be ok except that most of
his/her remapping attempts will require repair as the new ways rarely
connect to other ways.

Some examples (this is certainly not a complete list)
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/156728997
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/156728991
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/156728986
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/40556031
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/156752098
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/154407242

Now this is going to create just as much work reconnecting ways as what
there would be if the ways were just deleted in the great purge.

So my message to hardsoft and anyone else contemplating mass remapping
efforts is, slow down and check your work otherwise some else is going
to have to come along and fix it all *again*

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



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

Re: [OSM-talk] automated abbreviation changes?!

[Ross Scanlon]

On 23/03/12 21:04, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:

On 23/03/2012 13:47, Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) wrote:

On 3/23/2012 8:36 AM, Mikel Maron wrote:

User chdr (http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/chdr) seems to be
running a script to automatically replace street name abbreviations
with the full word.
so 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW becomes 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Northwest. Which is not the way anyone ever writes street names here
in DC.

IMHO, here in the US we have the USPS which has published standardized
street naming conventions specifically using the abbreviations. It
would seem to me that these official street names are what should
stick and the expansions of them should not be happening. Not to
mention how much more crowded the map labels would become.

I'm new to this problem, but those possible strategies spring to my mind:
- Record only the abbreviated name and let the user expand it using his
favourite rules if he wants.
- Record only the canonical expanded name and let the user abbreviate it
using his favourite rules if he wants.
- Record both the canonical expanded name and the abbreviated name, let
the user choose which one he wants.



They are correct as per here:

wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29

in that openstreetmap wiki has always had this.

For the other questions it's easy to go from the full name to an 
abbreviated output but not always easy to go from abbreviated to full.


For example is Ln Line or Lane as per here:

wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Name_finder:Abbreviations

This has been debated many times.  I know the USPS has it's standard 
listing but the data input is more important to be the full name and 
then abbreviate if necessary when output.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Finding untagged dead-ends

[Ross Scanlon]

/me is waiting for someone to make the obvious and completely useless
suggestion of some bonkers noexit hierarchy. noexit=bus, noexit=mouse,
noexit=elephant, noexit=blue_whale


noexit=flying_pig




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

Re: [talk-au] 1st few silly question

[Ross Scanlon]

On 25/01/12 19:14, Don Thomas wrote:

1/ In our area there are a number of small sections of road subject to
flooding, generally they are at small bridges/ causeways and the like. I
can't work out how they should be marked, can some one advice me please?


Are these fords or just sections of road subject to flooding.  If fords 
then ford=yes on the road section, split it where it starts and ends, 
or water intersection node.



2/ I have seen in the guide about rural addressing but can't see any
examples in the maps. Is no one bothering with setting up rural
addressing? I actually can't work out about the tagging to set the start
end, which is why I was looking for examples.


I know what the guide says but any I've done have been from imagery and 
survey and added as all other addressing eg.


addr:housenumber
addr:street
addr: ...etc

See here:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-20.29676lon=148.6707zoom=17

the 1681, 1697 and 1742 are all rural address.

As the section on the wiki says the relation metho will not render.


3/ I saw stuff somewhere about gates etc, but now can't find it and I
want to know how to tag stock grids, how?


barrier=gate
barrier=cattle_grid


4/ Is it correct that you have to 'trace' over your GPS trace in order
to form a way in potlatch 1.4? Do you have to do that in other editors,
potlatch2 ran so slow for me its use was not feasible, I notice there
are other editors that can be downloaded and run locally, are they a
better option?


Not in josm as you can convert to data layer and then simplify.  However 
don't forget that your gps trace may not signify the center of the way. 
 Really need one each direction for each two way road or as I do.  The 
gps aerial is at the very righthand side of the vehicle and I drive as 
close to the center of the road as practicable.  If not able then use 
the trace to align imagery and then use that to trace.


Cheers
Ross




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

Re: [talk-au] maxspeed removal

[Ross Scanlon]

I've removed the maxspeed tags from about 1000 roads in Redcliffe
(Brisbane) with changeset
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10338587


Hi,

Can you just explain this a little bit further?  My understanding is it
is a pretty specific set of these maxspeed changes we are currently
targetting, all of which have maxspeed:source as it was added by the
same bot.

Ian


As Ian suggested it was the maxspeed:source changes that are the problem 
not the ones with maxspeed=* only on them.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] maxspeed removal

[Ross Scanlon]

On 09/01/12 11:51, Richard Weait wrote:

On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Ian Sergeantinas66+...@gmail.com  wrote:

On 9 January 2012 13:12, Richard Weaitrich...@weait.com  wrote:



I've removed the maxspeed tags from about 1000 roads in Redcliffe
(Brisbane) with changeset
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/10338587



Hi,

Can you just explain this a little bit further?  My understanding is it is a
pretty specific set of these maxspeed changes we are currently targetting,
all of which have maxspeed:source as it was added by the same bot.


I thought it was said earlier that the bot did not add the
source:maxspeed(etc) tags in all cases.

Shall I revert?


The bot added

maxspeed:source=default residential speed limit in Australia

 not source:maxspeed.

I've manually changed dozens (hundreds) to source:maxspeed.

I think it would be best if you reverted.

Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] maxspeed removal

[Ross Scanlon]

On 09/01/12 13:47, Richard Weait wrote:

On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Ross Scanloni...@4x4falcon.com  wrote:

On 09/01/12 11:51, Richard Weait wrote:

Shall I revert?



I think it would be best if you reverted.


Done.  You want to take a go at clearing some of these up?



Are they maxspeed:source?

I just search for:

maxspeed:source=*

(quotes required)

in josm and change it to source:maxspeed

Or maybe do what you did before but instead of deleting the maxspeed=* 
change maxspeed:source to source:maxspeed


Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] Apology and Re: Mass revert now??

[Ross Scanlon]

On 08/01/12 08:20, Nick Hocking wrote:

David wrote
I can always retag from my records after the split
Hi David,

It does seem that most of your work will survive.
Those maxspeed edits done by bots (under the userid of
JohnSmith or Rosscoe) will disappear without harm in April.
A lot of  them are incorrect so the accuracy of the OSM data
will actually improve a bit.


I have never run any maxspeed bot.  In fact I actively started changing 
them manually to source:maxspeed which is what they should have been in 
the first place and where they were incorrect and I could apply correct 
data (from nearmap or survey) then I've changed that.


I'm still manually changing maxspeed:source to source:maxspeed when ever 
I load a section of data into josm along with several other common 
errors like junction=roundabout oneway=yes but you'll never see it in osm.


I also disagreed with what John did with this bot although I can see his 
logic in originally doing it and asked him via this list to re-run it so 
that it was source:maxspeed but he did not complete this.



However some decliner edits will affect your work.
If you look at the intersection of Leichardt Avenue
and Amity Drive. It seems that you mapped this area well,
in 2007. Then in 2009 the user JohnSmith and also Rosscoe have
made minor improvements and tweaks. This has, in a lot of
cases ended up with them being version1 owners of the roads
you mapped.


Impossible for either to be version one owners if we edited existing 
data.  It could only be for new information added.


Cheers
Ross



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

Re: [talk-au] Apology and Re: Mass revert now??

[Ross Scanlon]

On 08/01/12 11:11, Peter Watson wrote:

If a way is cut to add a bridge or whatever the second part becomes
yours as V1 but the nodes will still be the original contributors. Hence
a seemingly good way with red nodes. This is outlined on the wiki under
remapping.


This is new information, ie the way that was originally here now has a 
bridge, roundabout, whatever, in the middle and is composed of the two 
ways either side of it.  It's not as Nick suggest that the original 
information is changed in it's entirety only certain sections that are 
new info and hardly the fault of the person editing as it's part of the 
way osm works.


 I am actively remapping areas which I have surveyed previously. I am
 suprised some mappers are still adding data to ways that are red because
 these will go I am certain, and I don't want to wait till April and
 still have to remap these areas.
 Peter W

Some people just don't subscribe to the mailing lists and so are 
unlikely to receive the information that these edits will be lost.


Cheers
Ross



However some decliner edits will affect your work.
If you look at the intersection of Leichardt Avenue
and Amity Drive. It seems that you mapped this area well,
in 2007. Then in 2009 the user JohnSmith and also Rosscoe have
made minor improvements and tweaks. This has, in a lot of
cases ended up with them being version1 owners of the roads
you mapped.


Impossible for either to be version one owners if we edited existing
data.  It could only be for new information added.


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

Re: [talk-au] Back in editing - Tracks and 4wd areas

[Ross Scanlon]

On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Mark Pulleymrpul...@lizzy.com.au  wrote:

How should I mark 4wd trails? Thanks,

highway=track; surface=unpaved; if 4wd only then also add 4wd_only=yes


 From experience I've found this is really hard to determine. Often the
road quality varies and I don't really want to subdivide 30km of track
into 10m segments where some are 4wd_only and some aren't. I find it
hard to subjectively decide how small a non-4wd only section is worth
splitting up as a segment.


To me this is really odd.  If the track is 30km long and there is 1km of 
4wd only then is not this track all 4wd_only.  As without a 4wd you will 
not be able to go from one end to the other in a 2wd.


Also any track sign posted as 4wd only should be marked in it's entirety 
as 4wd_only=yes.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Back in editing - Tracks and 4wd areas

[Ross Scanlon]

But not what constitutes a 4WD-only track, or how to indicate the
difference between 4WD-only signposted and I don't think a 2WD can
drive here, which as I've pointed out isn't accurate, or how to
indicate only modified vehicles with diff locks, upgraded suspension and
winches are suitable, or how much driver skill is required.


Read the wiki:

Description:

A road signed as only suitable for 4WD Only vehicles


If it's not signposted as 4wd only and I don't think a 2WD can drive 
here then it's 4wd=recommended.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Indian Ocean Drive south of Cervantes

[Ross Scanlon]

Hi,

Although you are probably correct, I'd suggest you don't modify this 
until someone with local knowledge looks at it and/or confirms with you 
this is correct.


It also looks that this may be some more vandalism by Q4004.

Cheers
Ross


On 31/12/11 01:25, Michael wrote:

Hi all,

at present, the Indian Ocean Drive runs through here:
-30.6720, 115.1453
On aerial images, there is no bigger road in the area. But there are a
number of fairly straight GPX traces just a bit to the east of the current
way, when you download the area in an editor.
The traces go through here:
-30.6713, 115.1490

Can anybody confirm that the GPX traces correspond to the the new routing
of the Indian Ocean Drive?

Michael


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



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

Re: [talk-au] Remapping Sydney's railways

[Ross Scanlon]

The nodes would be fine if not from a ct-declining contributor.  If not 
then they need to be replaced.


Cheers
Ross


On 23/12/11 14:31, Ben Johnson wrote:

Thanks Ben that's a great idea. I'll keep whatever nodes I can and
extrapolate from there.

I really didn't want this raising old wounds, nor do I want people
dwelling on it. I was just letting the community know that someone (i.e.
me) is working on this particular piece of infrastructure, so that
hopefully others will start rebuilding other stuff. There are plenty of
things needing attention.

Does it make sense to come up with a priority list of targets to remap?
I'm thinking coastlines, lakes, islands, waterways, major road, rail, etc..

I reckon most Joe-Blow contributors in Australia are blissfully
unaware of the various license inspector tools available and the actions
needed to be taken. How do we wake them up?

BJ



On 23/12/2011, at 9:56 AM, Ben Kelley wrote:


Hi.

Many rail lines in Sydney would be traced from nearmap. Unless you
have a survey grade GPS the existing points are probably more
accurate. We can keep points mapped from nearmap even if we recreate
the ways. (I haven't checked to see if the nodes are CT-OK - hoping
they are. )

- Ben.

Ben Kelley


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

Re: [talk-au] I deleted a few locality boundaries...

[Ross Scanlon]

On 18/12/11 16:43, Andrew Harvey wrote:

Where do these official gazetted boundaries come from?

On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Ross Scanloni...@4x4falcon.com  wrote:

Wait for an import of the oficial gazetted boundaries.


Australian Bureau of Statistics

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] I deleted a few locality boundaries...

[Ross Scanlon]

On 18/12/11 17:07, Sam Wilson wrote:

Yes, I've often wondered the same: if they're officially defined as
following particular roads etc. and then those roads move, do the
boundaries move also?


No.  Do a search through the archives of the list and you'll find this 
somewhere.



Also, there seem to be some situations in which boundaries do not
actually match the locations of the roads (etc.) that they're ostensibly
following. I mean, not way off, but 10m or what have you, and not
consistently either -- there's some (although, I can't find one this
afternoon; I saw a couple last week out in the WA wheatbelt somewhere)
that cross over the road and then back again (which matches aerial
photography and GPS traces!). Do roads really move all that often, and
by not much?


Probably the original gazetted road could not be built where it was 
layed out on a blank sheet of paper and when it came to building the 
road they had to deviate around something.



I always have all administrative boundaries turned off (greyed-out) in
JOSM, because they're all a bit confusing. And not staying after the
licence change, it would seem!


That's correct as the original importer has declined the CT's.  Which 
throws up the problem of if you attach it to a road, river, railway, etc 
then that road, river, railway is also going to be deleted.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] I deleted a few locality boundaries...

[Ross Scanlon]

Yep, quite true.

That said, given the complete failure of the most other government
agencies to release the real gazetted boundaries under a free license,
having the ABS data I think is better than nothing, unless you can
obtain more fine grain data from on the ground surveys.

Licensing aside (as that has been discussed in length in other
threads), is anyone planning to mass import the ABS 2011
suburb/postcode boundaries?


Not that I'm aware of.

I'd also suggest this needs to be done only after all current 
suburb/postcode boundaries have been removed.


Something for after 1 April.

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] I deleted a few locality boundaries...

[Ross Scanlon]

On 19/12/11 08:38, Ben Kelley wrote:

What happens where the current boundaries have been edited since the
initial import?

e.g. Where the boundary follows some geographical feature that is
difficult to survey, like a river.

Often the river tags have been added to the ABS data way. Removing the
boundary removes the river. I have seen rail lines like this as well.

   - Ben.



Guess what.  It's going to be deleted too.

As I said and it's been said many times before other items should not be 
attached to boundaries.


There is details on the wiki about separating the rivers etc from the 
boundaries.  Look under Australian Tagging Guidelines.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Re-entering data to avoid licensing failure

[Ross Scanlon]

That's fine so long as you are not transferring any tags from the 
original way.


See Frederik's comments to NE2 re this, on the osm-talk list.

Mind you, you've got a lot to do in AU.

Cheers
Ross


On 14/12/11 13:56, John Henderson wrote:

As time and opportunity arises, I've started re-entering rural roads
where it's clear that the original is scheduled for deletion. I'm
deleting the old way completely, and re-entering it from GPS data I'm
gathering.

JOSM now has a License Check plugin to identify potential deletions,
bringing up the way's history and looking at the mapper's details shows
whether the original ways (and significant edits) were mapped by
somebody who's declined the new contributor terms. Similar
functionality seems to be available in Potlatch.

Are others doing this? Is there a better way of maintaining OSM's
integrity given the situation we find ourselves in?

John

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



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

Re: [talk-au] Re-entering data to avoid licensing failure

[Ross Scanlon]

Problem with this is that you are breaching copyright.

This is the same as what the user did with the data in Sydney and it was 
removed by the data working group.


It's also what Frederik was discussing on the talk list in regards
to NE2.

You are not resolving the issue of the original data being provided by a 
non valid source.  You can only do this if you remove the non compliant 
data and remap with totally new source, gps, bing, etc.


Cheers
Ross


On 15/12/11 12:34, Ian Sergeant wrote:

Certainly it is astoundingly clear to me.

For a couple of objects, I've just copied the v1 object, deleted the
current object, and reloaded into OSM with an attribution tag for the v1
author.  It isn't too many clicks to do this in JOSM, but tidying up
around the edges (linking the object) is a little time consuming.  If
there is no interest from anyone with db rights to do this, there would
be potential to develop this method further via the API.

Ian.

On 15 December 2011 15:12, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com
mailto:ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi.

I think it's clear we need an automated way to remove
non-new-ct-accepting edits from ways where v1 was by an acceptor.

Even assuming the trace data is in OSM there is still an immense
amount of work needed to cleanse these ways.

- Ben Kelley.


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




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



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

Re: [talk-au] Maxspeed bots

[Ross Scanlon]

Whatever.

My point was that maxspeed:source is incorrect and should be 
source:maxspeed and if you are adding/converting them they should be 
source:maxspeed.


Cheers
Ross


On 06/12/11 18:52, Nick Hocking wrote:

Ross wrote   The originator of the bot made a mistake with this and was
going to fix it
but the pre licence change lockout prevented this 

Ross, that's not my understanding of the situation at all.

On 25 August 2010 14:40, Ross Scanlon info at 4x4falcon.com
http://4x4falcon.com wrote:
  John are you going to do this?
JohnSmith replied

I'm stuck on 3G atm, I may not be able to get to it for a week or more
depending on what happens until I get access to a DSL connection
again.


JohnSmith's last edit before lockout was on June 19th 2011


Therefore I believe that JohnSmith had no intention of fixing these
errors in OSM.

In fact it would not matter if he did so anyway. By applying his edits
over probably
hundreds of thousands of ways and then refusing to relicence these edits
he has made the task of
making the OSM data compliant quite tricky.

It now relies on the DWG removing JohnSmith's maxspeed bot edits without
destroying
other mappers subsequent efforts. In the meantime it would be a huge
advantage if potlatch or some other
OSM viewer could just ignore all maxspeed edits in the process of
determining which ways need to be remapped.
Nick



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



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

Re: [talk-au] Intersections

[Ross Scanlon]

Well now they are doing it to Canberra too:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-35.282325lon=149.147432zoom=19

I've sent them a message to ask them to stop doing it so we will see.

Cheers
Ross


On 28/11/11 13:56, Leon Kernan wrote:

(Sorry, forgot to cc the list)

Wow, that wasn't that bad last time i looked though there.

They haven't even bothered to put in oneway tags and in at least one
intersection, have created ways for every direction except straight
through the intersection!

Has anyone contacted them yet?  If no-one beats me to it, i'll try and
and do some correcting around there tonight.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:55 PM, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com
mailto:snow...@gmx.com wrote:

On 27/11/11 11:59, Ross Scanlon wrote:

Just reading this:


https://docs.google.com/a/__osmfoundation.org/document/__pub?id=__1zMm5p70Hd6dalxte42DVCGAW-__C9Muy0pjHCZ8xWJT4w

https://docs.google.com/a/osmfoundation.org/document/pub?id=1zMm5p70Hd6dalxte42DVCGAW-C9Muy0pjHCZ8xWJT4w


While people still continue to map garbage like these

intersections:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?__lat=-37.882577lon=145.276362__zoom=18
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.882577lon=145.276362zoom=18

then people will not want to use osm data at all.

It's not immeditately apparent on the map but load it into josm or
potlatch and look at all the non existant ways, reversed direction
ways and just plain wrong ways.


And lots of lanes entered as distinct ways (implying that one can't
change lanes), when it's a lane count that would be appropriate.

What a mess.  I'm tempted to put my Garmin GPS into simulation mode and
have it simulate various entry and exit combinations.  But I already
know it'd be a dog's breakfast.

If that was in my area I'd be inclined to fix it up and put in some note
tags explaining why.

John H


_
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/talk-au
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au




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



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

Re: [talk-au] [OpenStreetMap] intersections

[Ross Scanlon]

Ok lets look at one intersection:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=potlatch2lat=-37.757227lon=145.354724zoom=18

This will open in potlatch 2 or you can view it here on the map:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.75735lon=145.355389zoom=18

ways 136173430, 13673431, 13673419, 13673432

These are not separate ways, they are lanes within the main way.  If 
they were ways then they are not two way streets.  Someone who is not 
from Australia (eg USA where they drive on the opposite side of the 
road) who was to follow this would end up facing on coming traffic on 
the wrong side of the road.  They have intersections with other ways 
without intersection nodes.


You complain about the chunkiness and messiness of the current data yet 
the information you have entered aside from being totally incorrect is 
absolutly useless to any body.  Try looking at these intersections on a 
small garmin gps screen and then try to navigate through them.


The problems you point out below are not data problems they are 
rendering issues and you are mapping incorrectly for the renderer.  If 
you want these to display differently then modify the renderer don't put 
in incorrect data.


These do not reflect reality as currently there, remember it is a map 
not a photorealistic representation of what is on the ground.  If you 
want photorealistic representation then use nearmap or bing or google.


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Don%27t_tag_for_the_renderer

Cheers
Ross


On 28/11/11 21:12, Supt_of_Printing wrote:

Hi Rosscoe,

Supt_of_Printing has sent you a message through OpenStreetMap with the subject 
intersections:

==
Well if someone can explain to me what is actually wrong with smoothing out the 
chunky jagged curves on intersections, the useless street names on slip lanes, 
etc., the useless over-abundance of directional arrows for every little bit of 
the intersection where the direction is quite obvious (making the intersection 
look messy), crossovers in median strips matching the intersecting roads rather 
than the road it is actually in, etc., etc., etc., I may get it! But surely the 
aim is to give a professional and clear non-confusing look to the roads on the 
finished product rather than how it looks on the potlatch editing mode. I would 
rather the editing mode looks like a bit of a dog's breakfast so that the 
finished product doesn't!

And yes, I have read the thread on intersections. Perhaps someone can point me to the rules 
that saysquot;there should only be two through carriage ways in both directions and the 
slip ways at the sidesquot; as this doesn't reflect reality, as there is not two through 
carriage ways with a big squarequot;islandquot; in the centre of the intersection on 
the ground.

I will continue to edit to get the roads and intersections to look 
professional, reflecting reality, rather than the confusing, chunky rendering 
with an over-abundance of arrows and street names that I so often come across.

Supt_of_Printing

==

You can also read the message at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/message/read/226965
and you can reply at http://www.openstreetmap.org/message/reply/226965



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

[talk-au] Intersections

[Ross Scanlon]

Just reading this:

https://docs.google.com/a/osmfoundation.org/document/pub?id=1zMm5p70Hd6dalxte42DVCGAW-C9Muy0pjHCZ8xWJT4w

While people still continue to map garbage like these intersections:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.882577lon=145.276362zoom=18

then people will not want to use osm data at all.

It's not immeditately apparent on the map but load it into josm or 
potlatch and look at all the non existant ways, reversed direction ways 
and just plain wrong ways.


Cheers
Ross

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

[talk-au] Mini Roundabouts.

[Ross Scanlon]

Just came across this:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-32.651744lon=115.86618zoom=18

There is no way in the world that this is a mini roundabout.

Here is the nearmap imagery for it, I know it can't be used now for osm 
but using it here for reference:


http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-32.650947,115.86584z=17t=knmd=20110705

Why do people not comply with this:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Roundabouts

and read the wiki in regards to mini_roundabouts

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundabout

and it's not tagged with clockwise=yes as required for Australia as well.

As to the source of this it would have to be survey, unless they are 
illegally using nearmap as a source as the secondary road and roundabout 
are new and not on bing imagery.  The secondary road and roundabout were 
under construction in Feb 2011 and completed by July 2011.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Princes Highway (Relation 538443)

[Ross Scanlon]

On 06/09/11 10:50, Ian Sergeant wrote:

On 6 September 2011 07:13, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com
mailto:ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote:

In general I think it is common that a highway has a different name
when it goes through a town. Here the route continues, and will
often be signposted with the route number.


So best to use the route number to define a route when it exists, rather
than a road name 'route', yes?


No.  The route is still the Princes Highway as per here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Route_Numbers




I'm not sure if that is the case for every road in this relation though.


The Princes Hwy used to run through the town centre as the main road.
The through route gets diverted around town to different road.  Some
time later the road running through centre of town gets assigned a
different name (or made into pedestrian mall, one way, etc).  The
Princes Hwy road name no longer exists.  It is apparent where the
through route is, tagged with the route number.  When the name and
topology of the road has changed, I don't know how you can definitively
tell where this Princes Highway Route, should go, it is fairly arbitrary.


Then the new route should be added to the relation and the old route 
ways removed.


As Steve pointed out the relation should one from Adelaide to Sydney as 
that's where the Princes Highway runs although many different road names 
make up that highway.  Just as many different road names make up the 
route relation for highway 1.


Cheers
Ross




Ian.

   - Ben.

On Sep 6, 2011 7:04 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com
mailto:inas66%2b...@gmail.com wrote:
  Does anyone have a good justification for keeping this road route
reln?
 
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/538443
 
  The Princes Highway isn't really a route. I can't get my head around
  including roads that are not the Princes Highway (where it
deviates, changes
  name, etc) in a relation called the Princes Highway. It is just
wrong IMO.
 
  Ian.




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



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

Re: [talk-au] Contribution review??

[Ross Scanlon]

On 06/09/11 11:26, Ian Sergeant wrote:

Hi Richard,

Welcome to OSM.

A few observations.

Nearmap is no longer an acceptable source for OSM, since they do not
allow traces from their imagery to be re-licensed.  I notice at least
one of your edits sourced nearmap, and that isn't allowed any more.  If
you were using Potlatch, perhaps you were using bing and didn't notice it?


If you look in the history you will see that it's prior to 17 July 2011 
and not added by Richard as a source he has just added more detail.


As Richard is using Potlatch he will be unable to access Nearmap imagery 
any way.



Using the name tag to describe the way or the amenity probably isn't
best practice, it really should be the name of the way if it has one,
and just left blank if not.  Putting path connecting two streets,
isn't the name, but you can put it in a note  tag if you think the
information is important.  Same with the playground, etc.  The name is
what displays on the map as the label.

You also don't need to put (dirt) in the name, instead you can use the
surface tags, or tracktype tags.

You don't need to put steps in the name, you can use highway=steps, or
steps=yes.

Ditto to all from me.  If your using highway=track then you should also 
include tracktype.




Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Princes Highway (Relation 538443)

[Ross Scanlon]

On 06/09/11 11:43, Ian Sergeant wrote:

On 6 September 2011 13:21, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com
mailto:i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:


No.  The route is still the Princes Highway as per here:


http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/__wiki/Australian_Tagging___Guidelines#Route_Numbers

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Route_Numbers


How do I tell where this named route goes?  I've read the Australian
tagging guidelines, but they seem to be quite at odds with the
recommendations for using the relation elsewhere.  Is there anywhere
other than Australia where we attach a road name to a road named
differently road?


I don't know but that was the original reason for creating route 
relations with the highway name and a second with the highway number.



Then the new route should be added to the relation and the old route
ways removed.

As Steve pointed out the relation should one from Adelaide to Sydney
as that's where the Princes Highway runs although many different
road names make up that highway.  Just as many different road names
make up the route relation for highway 1.


But what is the new route, and what is the old route?  If we can't
answer this question, then we can't map it.


Then leave what is there until someone goes and surveys it.


In Wollongong, you have the RTA official Princes Hwy route taking
Bellambi Lane and the Northern Distributor, while the parallel road is
named, the Princes Highway, Flinders St, Crown St.  Where does the
Princes Hwy route go?



In Victoria you have the Princes Fwy, in some instances the Princes
Highway runs next to it.  The Princes Hwy in some sections isn't even a
through route.  Where does the Princes Hwy route go?



In Sutherland you have the Sutherland Bypass on Acacia Rd, (Route MR1),
the old Princes Hwy goes into Sutherland, and then stops.  Where does
the Princes Hwy route go?



Do you see the problem?  If we aren't mapping what is on the ground,
what are we mapping?  Who makes the decision, and how to we arbitrate.
Not mapping what is verifiable on the ground is a radical departure for
OSM, and we need to think this through again.


But your saying what I'm saying map what is on the ground.

All of the above can be included in the relation a route does not have 
to be a through route.  It may have side branches as in the Sutherland 
example.  But if the sign says Old Princes Highway then it should be 
changed to that and removed from the Princes Highway relation.  If it's 
part of another named road then use alt_name.


Look at the Warlu Way in WA, not yet in osm, it does not have a route 
number but could be included in a route relation.  It's not a through 
route but has a start and end and has many side branches.


Likewise the Savanah Way, some of which is in osm.

Because things change then the route relation needs to change.

If you find these things on the ground then you need to modify them 
rather than just writing about it here.  But don't just delete the whole 
relation because one section is wrong, correct the section(s) that are 
wrong.


Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] outback SA street names

[Ross Scanlon]

Neil Penman wrote:
Yes the Coober Pedy golf course is almost identical to the google maps 
representation.  Using google earth it does however seem to me that the 
golf course in that area (no grass of course) but the area marked on the 
maps only covers a small part of the total course, maybe the club house 
and immediate surrounds.


Still the main point I wanted to make is that if before talking about 
reverting edits you need to talk to the mapper directly and get there story.



Agree totally.

Message sent.

Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] outback SA street names

[Ross Scanlon]

Ian Sergeant wrote:
As far as street names are concerned, we could just pick up the names 
for the streets currently unnamed by survey from the Atlas of SA, and 
attribute appropriately.


If someone gets updated names from survey, they can update.  Until then 
the temptation to just add them from a commercial map is gone.


It would only take a couple of minutes for Maree/Coober Pedy, and the 
problem as far as street names go would vanish.


Ian.


Good idea.

Just be careful not to replace names already surveyed.

Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] outback SA street names

[Ross Scanlon]

Neil Penman wrote:
I could be wrong about this but  It looks to me like Rosscoe added the 
street names for Marree.  Most of the information in the changeset you 
referenced is for Coober Pedy.  As far as I can tell the guy was on 
holiday in Aus mapped Coober Pedy then traveled on through Marree adding 
the pub as he went. 




Rosscoe surveyed the streets of Marree, and there are no street signs
at all. From the comfort of his German home, staehler has determined
the street names, adding in a few interesting points in the wrong
place, but just the same as certain commercial map, spelling the name
of the hotel and health service wrongly (which might avoid copyright
infringements).
I saw in this guys changesets also Halls Creek, and I really think that
we should revert any Australian stuff he has done.


I added those street names I could find and confirm at the time I 
originally surved them in 2008.


I can't remember the exact details (there at home) and I'm in WA at the 
moment.


From memory Fifth Street did not exist as currently depicted but I 
can not be sure, likewise some of the others.  The pub is on Railway 
Terrace not the Oodnadatta Track also from memory.


I doubt whether they were on holidays as suggested as there are no gaps 
in the editing time frame for staehler.  This and the Halls Creek edits 
just appear randomly in amongst all their other edits.


as here:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/staehler/edits?page=15

Cheers
Ross



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

Re: [talk-au] outback SA street names

[Ross Scanlon]

referenced is for Coober Pedy.  As far as I can tell the guy was on 
holiday in Aus mapped Coober Pedy then traveled on through Marree adding 
the pub as he went. 

The Coober Pedy ones look suspect as well.

If you compare the Golf Cource (their spelling) with the mentioned 
commercial maps then they are similar.  If you look at the satellite 
images from the same source then you see that it bears no resemblence to 
what is actually there.


Cheers
Ross


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

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

[Ross Scanlon]

 Welcome to talk-au
 I don't subscribe to the newbies list, so have no idea who is preaching what 
 on that list.
 Thanks for letting us know here what you did, so that we can discuss and 
 provide our point of view.
 Aussies of course revel in being different
 :)
Sarcasm switch firmly on.

-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

[Ross Scanlon]

 On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
  Does not show up here.  I see only one name Campbell Primary School.  
  Cyclemap and Osmarender show both names at maximum zoom.
 
 Often the node name is rendered on top of the way name, so you only
 see one. This depends on your zoom level and how close to the center
 of the way the node is.

 Mapnik takes into account the size of the way when deciding on whether
 to render the name or not at a given zoom level, I guess the idea is
 that small areas don't need the name rendered when you are zoomed out.
 This would explain why the ways name is not rendered when zoomed out,
 but a nodes name is.

I'm well aware of how mapnik works, as well as most of the other renderers, 
being a developer of software that uses it.  In this case cyclemap and 
osmarender show both names at maximum zoom only.

Mapnik will not render one name directly over the top of the other.  It will 
overlap sometimes, on linear ways, but not on areas.

In the case of Campbell Primary School it only renders one name at even the 
highest zoom level.

What you've done is basically a no-no, DON'T do mass deletes or changes of data 
without discussing it first.  Two responses on the newbies list is not 
discussing it.  Any discussion of this sort needs to be on the talk-au if it 
affects Au or on the talk or tagging list if it affects everything.


-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

[Ross Scanlon]

On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 19:16:35 +1000
Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
  URL?
 
 http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/18/239684/158567.png
 
  Is your browser caching old tiles?
 
 No.
 
 ___
 Talk-au mailing list
 Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Mine's showing both now so maybe it's just rerendered after the changeset was 
reverted. 



-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

[Ross Scanlon]

 On 31 August 2010 19:16, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:
  On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 7:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
  URL?
 
  http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/18/239684/158567.png
 
 I was after the perm link
 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-35.290188lon=149.156265zoom=18layers=M)
 
 As for the double names, you don't need a node + polygon/multipolygon
 with the same name, otherwise they both render. To fix it, all you
 have to do is shift any additional tags to the way and delete the
 node.

That's what we've been discussing but it's also a good idea to make sure you 
don't translate incorrect information like source tags.

Additionally just don't delete 300 or so nodes without seeing if it's by 
general agreement rather than just announcing that you've done it.

Not that you'd do anything like that, John :)



Personally I'd rather see the node left with name address and all the tags and 
the area just marked with the appropriate type and source.

eg for the Campbell Primary School the node has:

amenity=school
name=Campbell Primary School
addr:city=Canberra
...
source=gov.au

and the area tagged as
amenity=school
source=whatever

Then the names will not double render but the name is rendered in an 
appropriate position.  It's not really practical for suburb relations but most 
have a place= node anyway.


Cheers
Ross

 
 Another good example of names being rendered is on suburb/postcode
 multipolygons being rendered and putting the name of the
 suburb/postcode in the middle of no where.
 
 ___
 Talk-au mailing list
 Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

[Ross Scanlon]

On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:15:12 +1000
Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote:

 FYI. As per 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#One_feature.2C_one_OSM-object
 I've removed a whole bunch of nodes where the same feature was mapped
 out as a way. I made sure not to loose any tags in the process.
 Changeset http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5634963.
 
 I checked some of the other QA tools at
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance, but of course it
 would be good if there was some central framework for having QA checks
 run centrally on OSM servers. This way one could get updates when say
 a node and closed way are in the same location with the same tags.

Do you really think this was a good idea before discussing it on the list?

This has been discussed previously and it was decided that currently we would 
leave both as not all renderers and searches will work correctly on a way as 
opposed to a node.

The recommendation is only if the item is not already there, not to go and 
delete items that have both already in place.

The statement that you've ensured no tags were lost does not mean that the 
changes you have made are correct as an example the source tag for Campbell 
Primary School is now data.australia.gov.au where this was correct for the 
node but not for the way.

I'd suggest we revert this change set and let those who have added the new or 
additional data make the decision on whether to remove the nodes.


-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] FYI I removed a whole bunch on nodes where ways existed for the same object.

[Ross Scanlon]

 On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
  On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:15:12 +1000
  Do you really think this was a good idea before discussing it on the list?
 
 I did ask on the newbies list before about what to do here, I was told
 that deleting the nodes was the best thing to do.
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/newbies/2010-August/thread.html#5749


Two people on the newbies list really is not a consensus of what is the right 
thing to do.  If you are contemplating something along these lines particularly 
with mass deletes or changes then you need to bring it up here.

 
  This has been discussed previously and it was decided that currently we 
  would leave both as not all rendering and searches will work correctly on a 
  way as opposed to a node.
 
 My previous search could not find this discussion, could you point me
 to this discussion? Thanks.


The original disscussion was more than 12 months ago so not sure where you 
would find it now.


  The recommendation is only if the item is not already there, not to go and 
  delete items that have both already in place.
 
  The statement that you've ensured no tags were lost does not mean that the 
  changes you have made are correct as an example the source tag for 
  Campbell Primary School is now data.australia.gov.au where this was 
  correct for the node but not for the way.
 
  I'd suggest we revert this change set and let those who have added the new 
  or additional data make the decision on whether to remove the nodes.
 
 
 You are right, I only changed a couple of these and should have asked
 about what to do with these. Especially if the way was created after
 the node was placed, and where the way had no source tags already
 (although the source may have been in the changeset). I can track down
 all these ones with source=data.australia.gov.au, and the QLD
 DCDB-Lite ones where I may have made a similar mistake.
 
 Pending that previous discussion, I would prefer to revert the
 changeset, pick out those source=data.australia.gov.au, and possibly
 QLD DCDB-Lite ones, and then re-apply the rest.


The change set has been reverted.

I'd still be cautious about changing any of these per my previous comments.

A more useful QA task is making sure straight roads are straight and only have 
required nodes.

Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Why maxspeed:source not source:maxspeed?

[Ross Scanlon]

 I had thought the latter was the standard? I also ask because
 technically there's a conflict with the power:* proposals, one of
 which was power:source=*.

JS got it wrong ;)

Don't know for sure but I've been changing them to source:maxspeed as per here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source:maxspeed




-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [talk-au] Why maxspeed:source not source:maxspeed?

[Ross Scanlon]

On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:33:32 +1000
Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
  Don't know for sure but I've been changing them to source:maxspeed as per 
  here:
 
 Cool, surely they could be changed en masse though.
 
 Steve

John are you going to do this?

-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Unnamed Streets

[Ross Scanlon]

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 00:23:15 -0700
Gregory Arenius greg...@arenius.com wrote:

 Is there any recommended way to deal with streets with no names?  I don't
 mean streets that have a name and we just haven't added that to OSM yet.  I
 mean, how do we deal with streets that really don't have a name.
 
 I've seen two courses of action used.  One is to just leave the name field
 blank and the other is to name the street unnamed street or unnamed
 road.
 
 We could also add a tag named=no to specify that the street really has no
 name.
 
 What do people feel is the best way to do this?
 
 Cheers,
 Greg

noname=yes

As per here:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name



-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*

[Ross Scanlon]

On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 16:08:10 +0200
Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote:

 Am 31.07.2010 14:00, schrieb Peteris Krisjanis:
  2010/7/31 Ulf Lampingulf.lamp...@googlemail.com:
 
  4) Change it in every map renderer / router / other software that is out
  there - hundreds (or already even thousands?) of applications
 
  Really hunderds and thousands? I think it is more in tens ballpark, 20
  at the best. And most of them developed actively by OSM community
  which follows news from it.
 
 See:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Map_On_Garmin/Download
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Software/Mobile_phones
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_based_Services
 
 ... and those lists are only the tip of the iceberg.
 
 Please remember, that it's not done to change only the software (e.g. 
 mkgmap), but each rule file or alike in use.
 
  I know all costs,
 
 I have doubts about that.
 
 Regards, ULFL

And most of them use mapnik and/or osm2pgsl so there's no change for them but 
to load a newer version of mapnik and osm2pgsql.

-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*

[Ross Scanlon]

 Work out why it doesn't appear (5 min - your patch is actually very
 slightly wrong btw, can you spot your mistake?)

Spotted my friday afternoon coding did you.  Glad to see someones on the ball!!

 However the above is just for fun - lets replace my original statement
 with 'a lot of time' and move on...

Sounds sensible to me, I'm busy tracing new nearmap imagery.

-- 
Cheers
Ross

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Tagging] emergency=*

[Ross Scanlon]

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:06:14 +1000
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 30 July 2010 16:51, Jacek Konieczny jaj...@jajcus.net wrote:
  Provided the program is maintained. People may use programs not
  maintained any more or they may be not able to upgrade or they wouldn't
  know they need to upgrade. Things will just stop working for them,
  without a notice.
 
 Is this an objection to the current proposal, or in general?
 
 If this is a comment in general then this isn't sufficient argument
 because tags change all the time, so the other side of the argument
 would be they wouldn't see new things render ever, which would make
 them more inclined to switch to an application that does show things
 they are interested in.

Ditto.

The particular app that I'm talking about had this from the start.

-- 
Cheers
Ross

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