[Talk-GB] railway=halt

[jc...@mail.com]

On 01/02/2020 12:08, David Woolley wrote:
> That was certainly the context in which I came across them, in this
> case, Warrenby Halt, on the, then British Steel iron works at Redcar,
> which has now been mothballed, after only a short life.

> That one was actually on private land.  It used to be about here
> .
>   It may well have gone, but, also just might never have been mapped.
> (Please note that the relationship to features now mapped may be wrong
> by up to a few hundred metres.)

Looking at old maps on the NLS website, Warrenby Halt was here

on the old route of the railway. The current alignment to the southeast
opened in 1978, and as you can see on aerial imagery nothing remains of
this halt today.

Jez C

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

[Talk-GB] railway=halt

[jc...@mail.com]

On 01/02/2020 00:05, Martin Wynne wrote:
> The traditional distinction was that Halts were unstaffed.

Interesting - I didn't know this, but there's so many of these today that
it shouldn't be the only determining factor.

On 31/01/2020 23:49, Dave F wrote:
> Over the past few months I've been sorting & adding detail to the UK's
> National Rail railway stations so that OSM has the correct amount.

Thank you for doing this useful work.

> How is 'size' determined? ...

I would say length of platform(s) and number of facilities (such as lighting,
ticket machine, live departure board). I think passenger usage is irrelevant.

Also, I'd think of "stations" with only a parliamentary service as halts
but I'm interested in others' views on this.

Jez C

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

[Talk-GB] Update bus stop names

[jc...@mail.com]

On 18 January 2020 at 1340, Cj Malone wrote:
> Although now I have another issue, which data source should be preferred.

Whichever is the most up-to-date in your area. NaPTAN data has a 
ModificationDateTime field which shows when it was last updated. The SV data 
doesn't have such info so you'd need local knowledge about that. IoW bus stops 
seem to be branded which I think is rather unusual, so does the bus operator 
pay for updating them? That might be a clue to which is more recent.

Neil's example in Bristol shows that the paper timetable board has a newer name 
than both the metal sign and NaPTAN.

Conversely, in my area when many names/local_refs were changed three years ago, 
metal signs were changed first but the bus operators still used the old bus 
stop names until last year, and NaPTAN is a confusing mixture of old and new.

All local authorities are different!

Jez C

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Miniature railway or minimum gauge?

[jc...@mail.com]

On 18/05/2019 18:03, Mark Goodge wrote:

> Other 15" railways in the UK (eg, the Evesham Vale Light Railway) are
> mostly tagged as railway=narrow_gauge.

How do you come to this conclusion? Using the list of 15" railways on Wikipedia,
(including the retagged Rhiw Valley) on OSM in the UK are tagged
13 miniature
12 narrow_guage
2 light_rail
1 unspecified.
Plus Wikipedia defines narrow-gauge as starting at 1 ft 11 1/2 in.

> The OSM wiki is correct to distinguish between miniature railways (ie,
> ridable models) and small gauge "real" railways, as this reflects usage
> among railway engineers and enthusiasts in the non-mapping community.

As I'm not a railway engineer or enthusiast I'm not sure what you mean,
so please can you give specific examples?

Jez C

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Checking UK Towns

[jc...@mail.com]

On 30/01/2019 15:08, Gregory Marler wrote:
> In a lot of cases the towns nicely relate to parish wards (admin_level=10).

I understood admin_level=10 was for whole parishes, not parish wards. Surely 
parish wards should be boundary=political just like district and county 
electoral wards/divisions?

I also agree with Colin, admin_centre should only be associated with 
administrative boundaries not political ones.

Jez C

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

[Talk-GB] OSM on BBC4's 'Magic Numbers'

[jc...@mail.com]

OpenStreetMap was credited at the end of episode one from the documentary 
series 'Magic Numbers: Hannah Fry's Mysterious World of Maths' shown on BBC4 on 
Wednesday - https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bn6wtp
The map was only on screen for a few seconds near the end of the programme but 
was nevertheless pleasing to see.

Jez C

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Some leisure=track not rendering

[jc...@mail.com]

Thanks Dave

Evidently this is a long-standing issue - 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2632 - though I 
could have sworn the racecourse was visible earlier this month.

Converting my local tracks to multipolygon relations probably makes more sense 
anyway because they are loop-shaped.

Jez C
 
 
On 29/08/2018 17:11, Dave F wrote:
Hi
Hmm.. strange. Note Cycle Map does still render

Check here:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/compare/v4.10.0...v4.13.0

Raise a query here:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues[https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues]

Cheers
DaveF

On 28/08/2018 18:48, jc...@mail.com wrote:
> Has there been a recent change to the standard rendering for leisure=track? A 
> racecourse and a cycle track near me mapped as closed ways are no longer 
> showing. However another nearby track mapped as a multipolygon is unaffected.
>
> Jez C
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb]
 

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

[Talk-GB] Some leisure=track not rendering

[jc...@mail.com]

Has there been a recent change to the standard rendering for leisure=track? A 
racecourse and a cycle track near me mapped as closed ways are no longer 
showing. However another nearby track mapped as a multipolygon is unaffected.

Jez C

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Royal Mail trialling 'parcel' post boxes

[jc...@mail.com]

An interesting development but these are NOT new postboxes. For the trial Royal 
Mail are simply repurposing existing meter-type boxes as illustrated in 
Leicester Mercury, and adding a Saturday collection. 

I've found this document from the union: 
http://www.cwu.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOR-Meter-Boxes-to-Accept-Parcel-Postings-Trial.pdf

Jez C

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

[Talk-GB] 1m resolution LIDAR data for whole of England by mid-2020

[jc...@mail.com]

"Currently 40% of England is either not surveyed, has been surveyed at 2m 
(meaning it’s not as good quality) or the data is more than 10 years old."

See 
https://environmentagency.blog.gov.uk/2017/12/30/uncovering-englands-landscape-by-2020/

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Geospatial Commission

[jc...@mail.com]

Ed Parkes has a more pessimistic take on the money:
https://medium.com/@edtparkes/well-need-more-than-20m-a-year-to-get-free-maps-specifically-politicians-willing-to-share-e27e86c356ba

On a related topic, remember there was £5m in March 2016 Budget to explore 
options for open addresses and we're still waiting to find out the results:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/money_for_the_address_register_2

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

[Talk-GB] National Park extensions

[jc...@mail.com]

I know there has been some caution against using Natural England data directly 
in OSM, so I wasn't surprised that the boundaries weren't immediately updated 
when the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales National Parks were expanded from 
1st August. [1]

However since coming back from holiday, I see the OSM boundary relations have 
now been modified [2] but using the low-res PDFs from the gov.uk website. 

As a result much of what has been added is inaccurate, not least because many 
nodes are shared with highways etc. despite the written descriptions clearly 
stating "...it follows the edge..." (Yorkshire Dales was mostly clean of shared 
nodes but Lake District did have shared nodes/ways before, hence A6 road got 
broken - partially fixed by another mapper)

I think the changesets need to be reverted (can anyone on this list do this?) 
but where do we go from here in terms of new Nat Park boundaries? Is there a 
source other than Natural England?

Jez C

[1] 
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/national-parks-to-extend-by-size-of-isle-of-wight
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/spiregrain/history
e.g. way 398069815

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