[Talk-transit] Historic railways and route=train - is this good practice?

[Tony Shield]

Guys

Wandering through OPNVKarte I noted a railway line running through 
Kielder Water - an impossibility, further investigation showed the 
railway ways as abandoned or razed and part of a relation 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8213509/history , the Riccarton 
and Hexham railway. I suspect it was being rendered due to the 
route=train tag being set in the relation even though state=abandoned is 
present.


There is a similar rendering for the similarly abandoned Solway Junction 
Railway - 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9220571#map=11/54.9165/-3.2530=O


As these two railways have long being extinct is it correct for them to 
be route=train which I regards as current use,  or should they be a new 
thing such as route=historic?


TonyS999



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

Re: [Talk-transit] Mapping train services in Great Britain

[Tony Shield]

Hi Michael

As you say train services in England,Wales and Scotland (EWS) are 
difficult to map, Northern Ireland has its own train system.


'Routes' have different meanings depending on the view point of the user 
of the word. To a passenger there is a route Southampton to Brighton 
which is direct, there is also a route where you have to change trains 
and travels on a different railway line.


To the infrastructure operator a route is a geographic region with many 
lines and services that may use a particular piece of railway 
infrastructure. So London to Brighton is a route that may also 
incorporate the branches to Littlehampton and Newhaven.


Mapping the railway infrastructure has mostly been completed, but the 
services are complex, the route Preston to Manchester has trains which 
start in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Barrow-in-Furness, Blackpool North and 
Preston, and terminations in Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester Oxford 
Road, Manchester Victoria, Stockport, Heald Green and Manchester 
Airport.  Relating that set of variations and then been able to ask 
meaningful queries is I think beyond OSM. It is why there are many 
specialised ticket and route planning apps available.


I notice that someone has created a relation for the  10:28 service from 
Southampton Central to Brighton - but is the creator likely to maintain 
it for the years, it is of no real use unless all the other trains are 
so mapped.


Each service has its own internal reference/ID eg 1A26 which is not 
publicly available and may change with each timetable change.


My experience is that the professionals in the rail industry mess up the 
timetables with sufficient regularity that OSM maintaining its own 
version is going to be difficult.


You ask about joining and separating serves - passengers are not told if 
a service splits, they are advised to travel in first 4 coaches or the 
rear 8 coaches  - or similar. Inside the industry a service that joins 
may start as 1A88 and join with 1A56 at Preston to go forward as 1A88.


I'll happily help if I can but mapping the EWS rail system is hard - 
even for the professionals.


Tony

TonyS999

On 30/05/2021 21:52, Michael Tsang wrote:

Dear all,

I'm attempting to map some of the train services in Great Britain. However,
the rail network in GB is so hard to use and so hard to understand that I need
to ask the correct way to map it.

For example, the route I'm working on is Southampton - Brighton, however, it
seems that trains between these two termini have different stops for every
departures. In this case, do I create a relation showing the stops served for
each departure?

Also, there are some cases where a train split or merge en-route. How do I map
these services?

Thanks,
Michael

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

Re: [Talk-GB] An NTC Training Centre

[Tony Shield]

I have used amenity=community_centre for my local Sea Cadet centre,

On 18/12/2020 10:25, Jez Nicholson wrote:
I just noticed "T. S. Zealous" 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/181524096 which peaked my interest. 
Turns out it is a Nautical Training Corps (NTC) centre 
http://www.ntc.org.uk/zealous/


Any hints on how to tag that? building=civic? There must be precedent 
for Scout huts and the like...


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of historic 'stink pipes'

[Tony Shield]

I Use OpenStreetBrowser and select in the sidebar Culture and Religion 
-> Historic which seems to show everything Historic I've added.


https://openstreetbrowser.org/#historic/n7138777431=14/53.6461/-2.6441=historic

TonyS999 Tony Shield

On 18/12/2020 08:39, Edward Bainton wrote:

Morning all

My local civic society is collecting the location of 'stink pipes', 
Victorian sewer ventilation shafts in cast iron. Pics here: 
https://twitter.com/TobyWoody/status/1339679166371926017/photo/1


I've suggested they use OpenStreetMap and suggested a node with tag 
historic=ventilation_shaft. Does that seem the right tag?


Also do people know a rendering that will highligh all the "historic" 
features?


Thanks,

Edward

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

[Tony Shield]

Hi

I like the idea.

Can it be extended to be a UK based map which is has greater prominence 
to aspects such as the recent discussion about cyclists and paths?



Does anyone have an idea of how it could be made to happen - could we 
(OSM UK) fund and maintain it with commitment for say 2 years? Using 
volunteers or donated equipment or personal funding commitments? Do we 
know the size of server required to support a given load? Can we manage 
the required operations and security?



Tony Shield - TonyS999




On 04/12/2020 15:40, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB wrote:

Hi,

Just floating an idea for a possible OSMUK site, namely an OSMUK 
'semi-official'  web application for walkers and hikers.


This could provide similar functionality to sites such as the 
Ramblers' Pathwatch 
(https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/pathwatch-report-path-features-and-problems.aspx) 
allowing users to report path problems as well as nice views, 
historical sites and so on. It could also provide info such as train 
or bus times (by clicking on a rail station), beers served (for a 
pub), routing via public transport to a given countryside location, 
and so on.


Reported path problems could be then made available via an API, which 
could be used by councils - and, given we have the council ROW data 
available to us via rowmaps.com  - the right of way reference could be 
sourced from this if it's not in OSM already.


For rendering, we could perhaps use Andy Townsend's SomeoneElse-style, 
maybe tweaked a little, as it appears to be the most actively 
maintained of all the England and Wales renderings. This could be 
setup on our own server, I seem to remember experimenting with this a 
couple of years ago when the OSMUK idea was first floated, on a server 
which had been loaned to the community (I need to re-check my emails, 
and indeed check if this server is still open for us to use!)


I've done similar things to this in the past on a small scale, e.g. 
Freemap (free-map.org.uk) once had the facility to add path problems, 
but now we have the OSMUK organisation in existence, maybe a 
semi-official OSMUK walkers' map with added functionality would have 
greater traction and it's something that could be launched as a 
project on GitHub?


Thanks,
Nick



Disclaimer <http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging of shared use paths

[Tony Shield]

/Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually banned?
/

Unfortunately yes - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/827379295

Quite clear signage - Mapillary - 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=53.66933432657343=-2.6290113968031967=17=_ir_HmYAIa4H0rnj1JrO8A=photo

//

When I walk there I take my chances on the illegal walking along a 
cycleway rather than the 50 mph dual carriageway where it is legal to walk.



Tony Shield - TonyS999

.

On 10/12/2020 12:47, Martin Wynne wrote:
My reasons for changing it, is that it is shared use path with a 
greater number of people of foot than bicycle (about 5:2)


Many public bridleways have many more walkers and cyclists using it 
than actual horse-riders. But are still mapped as bridleways.


Map it as a cycleway, unless it is a public bridleway, in which case 
map it as bridleway. You are mapping the status, not the actual usage.


My feeling is that a highway should be mapped at the highest level of 
permitted usage. The assumption is that pedestrians can go almost 
anywhere anyway. Motorways excepted.


Are there any public cycleways from which pedestrians are actually 
banned?


cheers,

Martin.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Footways bikes can go on

[Tony Shield]

Wiki says

bicycle  	yes 
 	Where bicycles 
are permitted, overriding default access (such as to motorways that 
permit bicycles as commonly found in western parts of North America)
bicycle  	designated 
 	Where a 
way has been specially designated 
(typically 
by a government) for bicycle use


So in the example 'designated' is not an option as there are no signs 
indicating that bicycles are allowed on this footway.


'yes'  is probably wrong as there is no obvious permission and in 
England and Wales Highways Act 1835 s72 'If any person shall wilfully 
ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set 
apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers;' . . .a penalty. 
So in the absence of any evidence - no bicycles.


In practice it is customary to ride a bicycle and no one is bothered 
unless inconvenience or damage is caused. But how to mark this in OSM? 
Change the meaning of 'yes' to include customary use?


Tony

On 21/11/2020 14:04, Stephen Colebourne wrote:

I'm of the view that if it is fundamentally a footway then it should
be tagged as highway=footway. If bicycles are allowed, then add
bicycle=designated.

If the question is here:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.545389,-0.2770973,3a,75y,234.69h,79.34t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_-EkidXXQeWqPY5KfXGmaQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D_-EkidXXQeWqPY5KfXGmaQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D96.41411%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656
then this is just a footpath across a bit of grass that someone has
decided to allow bikes on. Looks like a footway, rides like a footway,
tag like a footway

Stephen


On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 at 13:48, Dave F via Talk-GB
 wrote:

There's a misconception that highway=cycleway implies an automatic authority over 
other path users. This is untrue It's just a hierarchy of the number of different 
transport modes permitted to use it. Similarly, highway=residential permits motor 
vehicles as well as bicycles & pedestrians.Who has right of way is specific to 
certain locations.

If it's definitely designated as cyclable (I couldn't see any signs in GSV) 
then I'd tag it as

highway=cycleway
bicycle=designated
foot=designated
segregated=no
surface=asphalt  (in this case)
width=*

If you know it's a public footpath add:
designation=public_footpath

If you know the footpath's reference add:
prow_ref=*

Is there a reason you tagged it as access=no?

The only place a rider of a bicycle should go full speed is in a velodrome.

Cheers
DaveF

On 21/11/2020 10:28, Edward Bainton wrote:

Is there established tagging for a tarmac path that is ~1.5m wide, but 
designated foot and cycles shared?

Eg: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/871919974

There's highway=cycleway | cycleway=shared, but when you're on it it doesn't 
feel like one, and you can't go full speed. But maybe that's the best tag 
nonetheless?

Thanks.



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


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

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

Re: [Talk-transit] How to tag bike rule on transit vehicles?

[Tony Shield]

Good idea. Complex though.

Living in England - some bus routes will allow bicycles. Some companies 
have local bans. Train services usually need reservation on Express 
services and many local services. Some routes are run with different 
companies each with different rules. Many have a quantity limitation - 
e.g. 2 bicycles with reservation.


Folding bicycles are usually treated as luggage - allowed if there is 
space. On trains and sometimes buses.


Possible tag - bicycle:carriage= (your list below).

This tagging idea may also work for wheel chairs - wheel-chair:carriage= 
(your list below)


also mobility-scooter:carriage . . .. . In UK each train company has a 
policy on mobility scooters with most saying no or only as luggage. They 
are working on better policies.



On 18/10/2020 05:17, Phake Nick wrote:
Different bus/train/ferry/other public transit services could sach 
have different policies on whether bicycles can be allowed onboard or 
not. How should they be tagged?

Off hand I have think of several types of permission:
- Allowed
- Prior notification needed
- Only during some time period (not allowed during peak hour or 
holiday only)

- Specific service frequency only
- Only for frequencies using particular behicle
- Folded bike only
- Only if wheels are removed and packed into cycling bag
- Disallowed
Should they be tagged on individual route related or network relation?

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

Re: [Talk-transit] Talk-transit Digest, Vol 104, Issue 1

[Tony Shield]

Agree with Jo about ballpark figure - similar operator activities occur 
in UK.


On 14/10/2020 13:48, Jo wrote:
Number of seats may work. But it would have to be a ballpark figure. 
Over here in Belgium, the same line uses bendy and normal buses 
depending on the hour of the day, or on what they have available at 
that specific time.


On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 14:09 Tony Shield <mailto:tonyo...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Hi Alex

Michael Tsang asked a very similar question  about minibus routes
a few days ago.

My view is that a minibus as just that - a small bus
differentiated by the number of seats. From that I take the view
that perhaps we should be noting the number of seats/places
available on a bus service - e.g some double deckers have 80
seats, single deckers 15-60, bendy-buses - approx 140.

Using seats metric could also be applied to other transport
formats - so a Settle-Carlisle class 156 2 car train set has
approx 150 seats, a class 800 9 car train set has 611 seats;
Sydney ferries have capacities between 400 and 1150.

So service capacity may be a better metric.

Tony Shield

TonyS999

/I'm looking for community consensus about minibus routes (public
transport routes which are operated by light passenger vehicles of
roughly 8 to 20 seats with no standing allowed in general). As of
present, there are two kinds of tagging for minibus routes:/
//
/
/
//
/A. route=minibus (~30 routes around the world)/
//
/B. route=bus & bus=minibus (~300 routes around the world)/
//
/
/
//
/None of the tags seem to have widespread usage./
//
/
/
//
/Currently I can't see any renderer support for both tagging. For
option A, no renderer shows them at all. For option B, they are
shown as regular bus routes./
//
/
/
//
/Moreover, I can think of different regulatory scenarios, which
may match the different usage:/
//
/
/
//
/X. The minibus services are regulated as a separate class of
service to full-sized bus routes, with different operators,
network and fare structures, which may even with numbers
overlapping (e.g. a minibus route 25 and another full sized bus
route 25 serving the same area)/
//
/
/
//
/Y. The minibus services form a part of the bus network but with
distinct identities (e.g. a range of numbers reserved for minibus
routes and another range for full sized bus routes, with different
fare scales but still in the integrated ticket structure)/
//
/
/
//
/Z. There are no distinction in the branding between bus and
minibus services, the vehicle used mainly depend on the environment./
//
/
/
//
/Tagging A will match scenario X and tagging B will match scenario
Z, with scenario Y in between in my thinking./
//
/
/
//
/I'm looking for input how other people map their minibus routes,
and how are their routes regulated./


On 13/10/2020 12:27, Alex Dhawan wrote:


Hi all,

Never actually sent a message to this list, hopefully this works.

We’ve got a number of minibus routes around the Yorkshire Dales
here in Northern England. Currently the ones that appear in OSM
are just tagged as route=bus – with nothing distinguishing them
from full size standard buses.

Personally of your options I’d be tempted to go with B – at least
here they are treated as bus routes in most ways, just happen to
be minibuses. They do mostly have different branding, but in most
cases are intregrated fare and ticket wise, and in some cases to
overlap with standard bus routes, but do have different numbers,
although there is not a set “range” so unless you know in advance
you couldn’t tell from just the number. At least from my local
experience they are close enough to standard bus routes for most
purposes.

That said to give one example – precovid I used to take groups
walking or caving, and we often went on the buses and usually
made a specific point of avoiding the minibus routes. We’d take
out all the seats if we turned up. In the PDF timetables it will
be marked if a route is a minibus, but not on journey
planners/Google maps.

Skifans

*From: *talk-transit-requ...@openstreetmap.org
<mailto:talk-transit-requ...@openstreetmap.org>
*Sent: *13 October 2020 12:09
*To: *talk-transit@openstreetmap.org
<mailto:talk-transit@openstreetmap.org>
*Subject: *Talk-transit Digest, Vol 104, Issue 1

S


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

___
Talk-transit mailing list
   

Re: [Talk-transit] Talk-transit Digest, Vol 104, Issue 1

[Tony Shield]

Hi Alex

Michael Tsang asked a very similar question  about minibus routes a few 
days ago.


My view is that a minibus as just that - a small bus differentiated by 
the number of seats. From that I take the view that perhaps we should be 
noting the number of seats/places available on a bus service - e.g some 
double deckers have 80 seats, single deckers 15-60, bendy-buses - approx 
140.


Using seats metric could also be applied to other transport formats - so 
a Settle-Carlisle class 156 2 car train set has approx 150 seats, a 
class 800 9 car train set has 611 seats; Sydney ferries have capacities 
between 400 and 1150.


So service capacity may be a better metric.

Tony Shield

TonyS999

/I'm looking for community consensus about minibus routes (public 
transport routes which are operated by light passenger vehicles of 
roughly 8 to 20 seats with no standing allowed in general). As of 
present, there are two kinds of tagging for minibus routes:/

//
/
/
//
/A. route=minibus (~30 routes around the world)/
//
/B. route=bus & bus=minibus (~300 routes around the world)/
//
/
/
//
/None of the tags seem to have widespread usage./
//
/
/
//
/Currently I can't see any renderer support for both tagging. For option 
A, no renderer shows them at all. For option B, they are shown as 
regular bus routes./

//
/
/
//
/Moreover, I can think of different regulatory scenarios, which may 
match the different usage:/

//
/
/
//
/X. The minibus services are regulated as a separate class of service to 
full-sized bus routes, with different operators, network and fare 
structures, which may even with numbers overlapping (e.g. a minibus 
route 25 and another full sized bus route 25 serving the same area)/

//
/
/
//
/Y. The minibus services form a part of the bus network but with 
distinct identities (e.g. a range of numbers reserved for minibus routes 
and another range for full sized bus routes, with different fare scales 
but still in the integrated ticket structure)/

//
/
/
//
/Z. There are no distinction in the branding between bus and minibus 
services, the vehicle used mainly depend on the environment./

//
/
/
//
/Tagging A will match scenario X and tagging B will match scenario Z, 
with scenario Y in between in my thinking./

//
/
/
//
/I'm looking for input how other people map their minibus routes, and 
how are their routes regulated./



On 13/10/2020 12:27, Alex Dhawan wrote:


Hi all,

Never actually sent a message to this list, hopefully this works.

We’ve got a number of minibus routes around the Yorkshire Dales here 
in Northern England. Currently the ones that appear in OSM are just 
tagged as route=bus – with nothing distinguishing them from full size 
standard buses.


Personally of your options I’d be tempted to go with B – at least here 
they are treated as bus routes in most ways, just happen to be 
minibuses. They do mostly have different branding, but in most cases 
are intregrated fare and ticket wise, and in some cases to overlap 
with standard bus routes, but do have different numbers, although 
there is not a set “range” so unless you know in advance you couldn’t 
tell from just the number. At least from my local experience they are 
close enough to standard bus routes for most purposes.


That said to give one example – precovid I used to take groups walking 
or caving, and we often went on the buses and usually made a specific 
point of avoiding the minibus routes. We’d take out all the seats if 
we turned up. In the PDF timetables it will be marked if a route is a 
minibus, but not on journey planners/Google maps.


Skifans

*From: *talk-transit-requ...@openstreetmap.org 
<mailto:talk-transit-requ...@openstreetmap.org>

*Sent: *13 October 2020 12:09
*To: *talk-transit@openstreetmap.org 
<mailto:talk-transit@openstreetmap.org>

*Subject: *Talk-transit Digest, Vol 104, Issue 1

S


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Blocked / overgrown / inaccessible footpaths and bridleways

[Tony Shield]

Recently I did


   way- 837322924

designation 
 
public_footpath
foot  
designated 

highway  
no 

lit    no
note  
Definitive Line of Right of Way, no trace on ground
prow_ref  	Chorley FP 4
source  
survey;lancashire_county_council_prow_gis_data
surface  
grass



This was based on Robert Whittakers work on a nearby bridleway  
Changeset: 77988415




On 29/09/2020 13:51, Andy Townsend wrote:

Hello,

How do people normally map things like "I know there is a public 
footpath that goes through here but it is currently inaccessible"?


A taginfo search finds a few candidates:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=overgrown#values

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=inaccessible#values

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=blocked#values

So far https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/overgrown seems the 
nearest (it's undocumented but mentioned on 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hiking ).  However, I'm sure that 
there are examples that I've missed.  Most seem to be used within note 
tags which can of course contain any old text - are there any actual 
non-note tags and values that are used for this that I'm missing?


Best Regards,

Andy




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

[Talk-GB] Brexit and OpenStreetMap

[Tony Shield]

Saw this subject in WeeklyOSM 529

 https://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/13734/
Has someone analyzed the effects of Brexit on OpenStreetMap and which responses 
could be undertaken to fix potential problems?

For example have you looked at the consequences, cost and effort of moving the 
OpenStreetMap-Foundation to a EU-country and on the problems of staying in the 
UK (e.g. database protection for new databases by UK citizens will not be given 
in the EU).

Could we keep the servers in the UK but provide services under a different 
jurisdiction (because the foundation seat is moved)?

Is it possible to move the foundation, and what are the requirements? Maybe we 
should ask the membership what they would think about such a move? Has the 
board voiced its standpoint?


If something has been written about the specific situation of OpenStreetMap I 
would be interested in a link. I would also be interested in learning about 
your thoughts wrt brexit and OpenStreetMap. Publicly it seems we have mostly 
avoided any related considerations, until last year many had been hoping that 
someone would still stop it, but now it will become effective in only 4 months.

Cheers Martin

I'm a OSM GB member not fully understanding the structure of OSM but 
here goes -


GB is soon to be like any non-EU country. Brexit occurred 31 January 
last and Withdrawal Agreement ends 31 December 2020.


The question becomes is the OSMF so dependent on EU laws that it cannot 
operate outside the EU. OSM is a global effort and operates in many 
places where laws are substantially different to those of GB and EU. 
Laws are also different within the EU.


By thinking of moving OSMF from UK to EU because of Brexit are you 
saying that OSMF may never be able to function outside the EU - what 
about Switzerland where many international organisations are based, or 
United States. These are respected countries which should be considered 
if relocation is deemed necessary.


With respect to data privacy what is to stop OSMF mandating in its 
contracts and operation that the relevant EU data laws are adhered to. 
Maintaining data integrity and security is a function of OSMF, these 
functions are mandated by EU law, OSMF wherever it is domiciled can base 
its operations on the implementation of EU law.


With respect to current operations where OSM/OSMF operate or communicate 
outside the EU what protections are necessary?


Regards

Tony Shield

aka TonyS999


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

Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN/Lancashire import

[Tony Shield]

That's always an issue with imported data, the tag naptan:verified helps 
in this respect.


In the Lancashire dataset there are HAR (Hail and Ride) and  CUS 
(Customary) stops which I think are virtual - there is no mark on the 
ground, these will not be imported, so I think we have the main 
variations covered.


Tony

On 26/07/2019 16:10, Silent Spike wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 4:08 PM Silent Spike > wrote:


It might be worth mentioning handling for stops present in NaPTAN
which no longer exist.


To clarify, I mean stops marked as active which are no longer 
physically there (implying the NaPTAN record is outdated).


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

[Talk-GB] NaPTAN/Lancashire import

[Tony Shield]

Following on from SilentSpike's import of NaPTAN/Aberdeen I am planning 
to perform a similar import for Lancashire.


I've created a wiki page 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Lancashire which I have coped 
from SilentSpike Aberdeen and changed the areas, also slightly altered 
the process to use csv files.


I have performed several dry runs, there are approx 8,000 bus stops in 
Lancashire with about 4400 reported by overpass-turbo.


Importing on a town by town basis is the plan.

Comments please.

Tony Shield

TonyS999


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Automated Code-Point Open postcode editing (simple cases only)

[Tony Shield]

Hi

Starting to get a little confused here - my brother lives in Northern 
Ireland and has a BT postcode which he has given me. Am I allowed to put 
into OSM?


TonyS999

On 20/07/2019 08:02, Mark Goodge wrote:



On 19/07/2019 22:36, nd...@redhazel.co.uk wrote:

On 19/07/2019 20:29, Mark Goodge wrote:


ONS postcode products are also OGL, so can be reused in OSM and 
similar. They're also more useful than Code-Point Open in that they 
also include lookups to a number of other government codes (such as 
local authority GSS codes). It also differentiates between "large 
user" and normal postcodes, and includes an introduction date and, 
where applicable, a termination date for every valid postcode.


That would be very useful indeed but what is the license of these 
extra features? OGL alone doesn't mean anything if they qualify it 
with "data may contain third party IP" or similar.


It's OGL apart from BT postcodes, which are mentioned separately in 
the licence.



Their website says:

"Our postcode products (derived from Code-Point® Open) are subject to 
the Open Government Licence."


and then:

"If you also use the Northern Ireland data (postcodes starting with 
“BT”), you need a separate licence for commercial use direct from 
Land and Property Services."


I understand it as only the part that already exists in Code-Point 
Open is free, extra information may or may not be free, depending if 
it comes from ONS own data or other sources.


The other information is OGL as that's derived from other published 
data that's already OGL. For example, GSS codes and their associated 
names. The licence page is quite clear about that: postcode lookup 
data is OGL apart from BT postcodes. And those are easy enough to 
filter out if necessary.


Mark

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] NaPTAN Aberdeen Import Completion

[Tony Shield]

Hi Spike

Have read your diary and the NaPTAN/Aberdeen page - absolutely excellent.

Yes It will encourage me to have a go for my local area.

Regards

Tony Shield TonyS999

On 16/07/2019 12:47, Silent Spike wrote:

Just an update to say the import has been completed.

I wrote a diary entry to share some insight 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheEditor101/diary/390283), but no 
doubt forgot to mention something so feel free to ask me anything.


Now it's time for me to start confirming stop details and fixing 
discrepancies.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

[Tony Shield]

Hi

That page contains

"The Mean low water spring 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_low_water_spring> is the position of 
the lowest tide. There is currently no agreed way of tagging this line 
in OSM. One way of tagging it is to tag the area between the mean low 
water spring and OSM coastline as natural 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:natural>=wetland 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwetland>+wetland 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wetland>=tidalflat 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:wetland%3Dtidalflat>."


Methinks that MLW or MLWS should be defined in the way that 
Coastline/MHW is.




On 13/07/2019 21:52, Colin Smale wrote:


On 2019-07-13 22:42, Tony Shield wrote:


Hi

I meant that OSM does not have an agreed way of tagging MLWS or MLW. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline


That page is about coastline, which is high water, not low water. But 
you are probably right. In the case of the UK, there are proxies like 
admin boundaries which help a lot, and the OS have been good enough to 
survey all this coastal stuff, but there is no way of tagging a line 
with "boundary=lwm" or whatever. Should it be a tag on a way, similar 
to the way the coastline is tagged? Or should it be a huge relation, 
like the admin boundary of the United Kingdom?



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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

[Tony Shield]

Hi

I meant that OSM does not have an agreed way of tagging MLWS or MLW.  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline


Regards

On 13/07/2019 20:53, Colin Smale wrote:


On 2019-07-13 21:33, Tony Shield wrote:


Hi

Personally think that High Water Mark and Low Water Mark are very 
relevant to people and to OSM.


Yeah - tides are a nuisance and can never be predicted with total 
accuracy and with Global Warming HWM and LWM will change over time. 
Then there are Highest and Lowest Astronomical Tides, and then tides 
which increase or decrease according to weather conditions (pressure 
and wind) (New Orleans tonight is a good example). There are probably 
a few others which I have forgotten


Knowing the inter-tidal area at Hunstanton is important, as are those 
in Morecambe Bay and the River Dee(North Wales/England)  where paths 
cross the area.


How many beaches are there on the Thames? and what is the inter-tidal 
ground like - sand, shingle, mud . . . .And what and where  is the 
access? These questions are what OSM is about.


The OS recognises this and on their maps marks the coastline/MHW with 
a dense line, but not on non-tidal waters.


OSM needs the equivalent of MLW - as far as I know its not defined 
(and I do not feel competent to define) - and I think that Borbus is 
on the good path.


What exactly do you mean by MLW not being defined? Do you mean that 
there is not a robust definition of the concept? Or that it is 
difficult to establish the exact line of MLW?
Another reason to want MLW in OSM: The "Extent of the Realm" is *for 
the most part* defined as MLWS. This is the limit of the jurisdiction 
of normal (local) government. Beyond MLWS, the local council no longer 
has any say - it's the UK laws of the sea, as applicable to 
territorial waters.

I agree that Borbus is doing good things!

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

[Tony Shield]

Hi

Personally think that High Water Mark and Low Water Mark are very 
relevant to people and to OSM.


Yeah - tides are a nuisance and can never be predicted with total 
accuracy and with Global Warming HWM and LWM will change over time. Then 
there are Highest and Lowest Astronomical Tides, and then tides which 
increase or decrease according to weather conditions (pressure and wind) 
(New Orleans tonight is a good example). There are probably a few others 
which I have forgotten


Knowing the inter-tidal area at Hunstanton is important, as are those in 
Morecambe Bay and the River Dee(North Wales/England) where paths cross 
the area.


How many beaches are there on the Thames? and what is the inter-tidal 
ground like - sand, shingle, mud . . . .And what and where  is the 
access? These questions are what OSM is about.


The OS recognises this and on their maps marks the coastline/MHW with a 
dense line, but not on non-tidal waters.


OSM needs the equivalent of MLW - as far as I know its not defined (and 
I do not feel competent to define) - and I think that Borbus is on the 
good path.


On 13/07/2019 16:04, Colin Smale wrote:


On 2019-07-13 13:35, Borbus wrote:

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 9:11 PM Devonshire > wrote:

> Just because the coastline follows MLW as it goes around the coast
> doesn't mean it needs to follow every tidal waterway inland. That
> doesn't follow at all.

Why not? What is the meaning of "coastline"?

The Dart is one example of where it seems obvious where to "draw the
line" by taking a cursory glance at aerial imagery, but does this line
have any bearing on reality?

My feeling is that the natural=coastline tag is a misnomer and it should
really just be called "mean_high_water_level" or
"mean_high_water_spring" (I'm still unsure about whether OS show MHWL or
MHWS, I thought it was MHWL, which is between mean high water spring and
mean high water neap).
The data included with Boundary-Line would appear to be mean high 
water (springs) according to the User Guide and Technical 
Specification, although in some places it is referred to as the High 
Water Mark and High Water Line.

Is there a meaning to "coastline" that makes it distinct from any other
high water level that can't be expressed with other tags? (Other tags
could be water salinity, presence of beaches, dunes, cliffs etc. that
are real physical features).
Salinity is too variable to be useful. My vote is to stick to MHWS, or 
whatever the prevailing law states as the edge of the land.
How about creating an OSM tidal prediction model? Then we could take 
all the WGS84 elevations that are near the coast in OSM, and make our 
own model, and make it open source. How hard can it be? (PS I know 
exactly how hard it would be, but it would be a typical OSM attitude 
to reject existing standards and roll our own)
Just for completeness, even MHWS is not the limit of where the water 
comes to. It's a mean value, averaged over a long period; 
statistically, half the high tides at spring tide will encroach 
further landward than MHWS. Every tide is different. But you have to 
draw the line somewhere.
When is our coastline fit for purpose? It seems to be a rendering 
hint, to colour one side of the line "blue" and the other side various 
colours. Do we need a rendering hint to separate the sea from an 
estuary? It might also be said to form a useful polygon to allow the 
dry bits of the world to be excised from the global database in a 
convenient way. What do we want here?


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing NaPTAN Data

[Tony Shield]

Hi Spike

I'm interested in importing my local area - Chorley, Lancashire.

I've filtered the Naptan file to get Chorley csv file. I've then 
imported into JOSM conflation plug-in. I'm starting to understand how 
the conflation tool functions and I think the results are good. I've 
done several dry runs to get the technique correct. I'm planning to 
manually review each bus stop - not too bad when there are 3-400.


I too am trying to realise what Naptan codes and fields need to be 
populated for each bus stop, and agree with following the PTv2 scheme.


I haven't performed the import as I haven't been through the import 
authorisation process, and as Naptan is an established data import I 
think that it will not be too difficult as long as the process is correct.


Happy to work with you if you wish.

Regards

TonyS999


On 01/07/2019 16:02, Silent Spike wrote:

Hey folks,

I'm interested in importing NaPTAN bus stop data 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NaPTAN/Import) specifically for 
my area of the UK (Aberdeen).


As far as I can tell, some progress was made previously on importing 
NaPTAN data for specific areas of the UK. However, the process for 
requesting an import on the wiki seems to have broken down somewhere 
along the line and I believe the python script mentioned on the wiki 
is outdated.


I went ahead and wrote a 5 minute python 3 script to convert the 
NaPTAN csv bus stops file into OSM XML which I can import using JOSM. 
I'm splitting the data into files by local area - here's an example of 
an area I'm familiar with (https://i.imgur.com/xE7TF2c.png) where you 
can see the import data (blue) line up well with the existing data 
(black).


My plan for conflation was basically to do it by hand since I'm 
familiar with the area and can take my time to do each local area 
individually. However, I could probably also set up some data matching 
by checking the stop names and offsets of existing data.


As for tagging, I'm unsure what the current status is regarding the 
`naptan:` namespace. Looking at those tags, they all seem pretty 
useless to me (except `naptan:AtcoCode` as an identifier). Currently 
I'm just using roadside bus stops marked with a shelter or pole and 
following the PTv2 scheme to tag them as `highway=bus_stop`, 
`public_transport_platform` and `bus=yes`.


If anyone has any suggestions or input please let me know! Obviously I 
won't be importing anything without some community approval first.


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

[Talk-GB] Road/Rail Bridge near Preston Park

[Tony Shield]

Hi

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.83309/-0.14321

shows New England Road and Old Shoreham Road  Brighton.

The standard OSM render shows 12 rail lines bridged over the roads, 
could be read as there being 12 bridges.


Looking at aerials in JOSM looks like those 12 rail lines cross over 
using one bridge or perhaps even the road in a tunnel.


Mapillary detail not available, so in Google Street View there appears 
to be 3 bridges, an arched bridge at the east end with a light gap 
between it and the next bridge. This 2nd bridge is joined to the 3rd 
bridge with no light gap, the west most of the three bridges has support 
pillars, the central bridge doesn't.


Mapping this I think should be done as three bridges/areas using 
man_made=bridge with the railway as layer 1. But what are the other 
features to identify the arched and the bridge with support columns.


Thoughts on these railway bridges which are very common?

Regards

TonyS999


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Preston Park, Brighton

[Tony Shield]

Hi

Like the idea of focusing on a particular area such as Preston Park. I 
only know the area from photographs and maps - but i did visit Brighton 
many years ago.


Tree-y areas - many people use natural=wood. Appears to render the same 
but database users may have different uses, so I tend to natural=wood or 
both cos it is an amenity in a public park.


Seats on a bench, and are there dividers to stop people sleeping there - 
personally think if two or more can sit there and its a discrete object 
its a bench.


Parkrun as a relation - why not, its similar to a country walk and we 
notate those. Would want to add parkrun description to UK wiki as to the 
meanings in the relationship.


Clock Towers - there are two mapped in Preston Park - neither appears to 
be complete in that they are physical objects which do not render.


Your ref : 20954883
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/20954883>

is close to Preston Drove bus stop with amenity=clock & support=tower. 
Suggest man-made=tower could be more appropriate and would allow it to 
render. Local knowledge details are essential to complete it.


Additionally there is close to The Ride.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6071095402
amenity=clock
date=no
display=analog
name=Preston Park Clock Tower
visibility=area
website=https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1380948
wikidata=Q26661100

which would render with man_made=tower

Is this the type of response you were looking for, hope so,  I find it 
useful to think about it and see what other people think.


Regards
Tony Shield -  TonyS999

On 04/06/2019 11:13, Jez Nicholson wrote:
I have to admit that Preston Park is my personal micromapping 
playground. I walk the hound there nearly every day and I can capture 
excruciating detail (so shoot me!). 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1800140#map=18/50.83914/-0.14432=N 



Any suggestions?

Those tree-y areas are amenity=wood which is probably wrong. Should it 
be a land_use?


How many 'seats' to a 'normal' bench? 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/seats#values


Could I add the Parkrun route as a relation?

How did the clock tower get moved down to next to the road!! 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/20954883


Some of the fields are edged with small wooden posts to prevent 
driving onto the grass. Is this a 'fence'? if so, what is its type?


Regards,
             Jez

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC: Solar panel mapping in the UK

[Tony Shield]

Hi

In the last 18 months or so I've noticed that most of the new housing 
estates near me (Chorley Lancashire) have roof mounted solar panels. Is 
there a new regulation that all new builds have solar?


Regards

TonyS999

On 03/04/2019 17:46, ael via Talk-GB wrote:

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 05:23:03PM +0100, Dan S wrote:

Hi all,

I'd like to propose that for OSM in the UK we have a project to map
solar electricity panels (photovoltaics or "PV").

Why? In brief:

* We can do this! It involves a nice mix of aerial imagery, local
on-the-ground observation, etc; and anyone can do it, in the town and
in the countryside.

The solar farms that I have tried to map on the ground with gps usually
have very restricted access. I don't know if they are scared of people
stealing the panels, or other equipment. The panels themselves are quite
low potential, I think, but maybe if they are strung together in
series, there can be hazardous voltages.

ael


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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Measuring building height

[Tony Shield]

Hi

Been figuring out how to do this for a while - my solution-

rule - I used 30cm (aka 1 foot), calculator, known length of arm - in my 
case .6m, OSM map to measure distance from target.


With hand holding rule vertically measure the target height against the 
rule for rule height, this is the key measurement, note the measurement 
point. From the map measure the distance from the measuring point to the 
target


With this information and using proportions (which is what a tangent is) -

target height = (rule height in metres * distance from measuring point 
to target) / length of arm in metres.


Using this technique I have this morning measured known height of of a 
local landmark, and the unknown height of a building. The known height 
of 50m measured 8cm at a range of 375m. The unknown height of the 
building with 5 floors was calculated to be 20.7 metres which would on 
the face of it be realistic (from 3cm and 414m). (Botany Bay mill in 
Chorley).


TonyS999

On 19/03/2019 09:30, Brian Prangle wrote:

There are also theodolite apps for smartphones

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019, 00:17 Rob Nickerson, > wrote:


For building heights why not try using a laser measure? Those with
a Pythagoras Measurement mode should automate the calculations for
you.

Price has fallen a lot over the years. Seems like even a basic £30
device is sufficient.

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] London venues

[Tony Shield]

FYI

Saturday 8 June is the Queens Birthday - Trooping the Colour occurs. 
Don't know London well enough to know if this could be disruptive.


TonyS

On 13/03/2019 23:14, Rob Nickerson wrote:

Hi all,

For the next OSM UK annual general meeting we thought we would try 
London as a possible location. Does anyone know of good (and cheap) 
venues that we can use? We have 100 members but would expect the 
number to actually attend would be in the region of 20-30 unless 
paired with a significant other event.


Dates: We are thinking Saturday 8 June as a starting point but can 
move to other Saturdays if venue availability is better.


Best regards,
*Rob*

P.S. Plans for a Bristol event are still in the works. This has taken 
longer than we had hoped as it is a joint event. Hopefully some news 
on it shortly.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Problem Saving edit to Wiki: United Kingdom Tagging Guideline

[Tony Shield]

Possibly is something I have done or not done - but even creating  
"Driving Centres in the United Kingdom" page is not allowed. - same message.


Previously edits have been allowed so I am not convinced it is my user id.


On 07/02/2019 16:18, Jez Nicholson wrote:

I think it must be you. I just edited the 'See Also..'. Perhaps it 
secretly wants you to create a "Driving Centres in the United Kingdom" 
page instead ;)


On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 12:15 Tony Shield <mailto:tony.shield...@gmail.com>> wrote:


I'm editing the UK Tagging guidelines. When Saving Changes I
receive a
panel informing -  Something went wrong - Unknown error. Dismiss
button
takes me back to the save changes dialog.

Is it likely to be me or the Wiki?

TonyS


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

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

[Talk-GB] Problem Saving edit to Wiki: United Kingdom Tagging Guideline

[Tony Shield]

I'm editing the UK Tagging guidelines. When Saving Changes I receive a 
panel informing -  Something went wrong - Unknown error. Dismiss button  
takes me back to the save changes dialog.


Is it likely to be me or the Wiki?

TonyS


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Driving Test Centres

[Tony Shield]

Summarising, which I shall write up and place on the wiki - 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines, 
creating a new section  - DVSA Tagging.


Sources:

Found this link https://www.dft.gov.uk/fyn/practical.php which is s 
search page for Driving Test Centres. Provides addresses and links to 
Google  and OSM maps.


Tagging Guideline:

Node

office=government

operator=DVSA

name=Chorley Driving Test Centre,  recommend a name but many of them do 
not have a sign on the outside, it may be on the DVSA website.


government=transportation

address tags as appropriate,.

TonyS999 -  Tony

On 28/01/2019 13:12, Paul Berry wrote:
(Moment of reflection.) Sorry, you're right, of course they're not. 
That'll teach me to attempt to multitask at work.


As you were.

Regards,
/Paul/

On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 at 12:52, David Woolley 
mailto:for...@david-woolley.me.uk>> wrote:


On 28/01/2019 12:45, Paul Berry wrote:
> Does
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddriving_school
> not fit the bill?

Schools are closer to the poacher than the gamekeeper!  No.  I don't
think they are equivalent.

> Tag usage here:
> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/amenity=driving_school#map
>

Says that the tag is not sufficiently used to be mappable!

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Dropped or lowered kerbs

[Tony Shield]

Guys
   A difficulty with crossing is that it focuses purely on the drivers
   perspective. Where there is tactile paving, or coloured paving
   surely the crossing is marked for the pedestrian/wheelchair user and
   people with restricted sight. I think that the coloured/tactile
   paving constitutes markings for the pedestrian, a driver can also
   see them so is the crossing unmarked?

crossing=unmarked
   A crossing without road markings or traffic lights
TonyS999
   Tony Shield

On 31/01/2019 10:53, SK53 wrote:

It wasn't meant to be off list!

Jerry

On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 10:35, Andy Mabbett <mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>> wrote:


On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 at 19:10, Rob Nickerson
mailto:rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com>> wrote:

> It somewhat depends on what you are trying to map.
>
> The kerb=* tag on the wiki page you linked to is for when
mapping a crossing.
[...]

Thank you. I've also had an off-list reply saying:

   For crossings on single carriageway roads I would standardly just
   tag the highway=crossing node with the relevant tags, usually
   tactile_paving and kerb tags, like this
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2303780892.

I am looking to tag dropped kerbs in two circumstances; in places that
look like this:

https://goo.gl/maps/UnBiAsxgCFR2

Sometimes, there are two crossings adjacent, or nearly adjacent,
making a place convenient as an informal crossing point for
wheelchairs, pushchairs, barrows, etc.

Often, however, there is a dropped kerb on one side, but not the
other, That's still useful info someone needs to drop off a wheelchair
user, for example.

On a simple, single-line way, I had envisioned nodes with
something like:

    kerb=dropped
    droped-kerb=both
    crossing=unmarked

or:

    kerb=dropped
    droped-kerb=left

respectively.

-- 
Andy Mabbett

@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping Driving Test Centres

[Tony Shield]

Hi

Had same problem earlier. I gave a node (5490954973) within the 
building=office outline


office=government

name=Chorley Driving Test Centre

Regards

TonyS999

On 25/01/2019 22:06, Silent Spike wrote:
Searching the wiki I can't find anything that feels right for mapping 
driving test centres.


If anyone has mapped these in the past I'd be curious to know how you 
tagged them (both practical and theory test centres).


Also curious as to how they've been named (if at all) as the DVSA just 
refers to them by where they are located.


Cheers

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Network tag on railway stations

[Tony Shield]

Lot of the obscurity is caused by the contracts from Department For 
Transport. Wikipedia - *Merseyrail* is both a train operating company 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_operating_company> (TOC) and a 
commuter rail 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commuter_rail_in_the_United_Kingdom> 
network in and around Liverpool City Region 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_City_Region>.


Ormskirk is a good case where Merseyrail manage the station - 
essentially the operator in OSM parlance.


Liverpool Lime Street is managed by Network Rail - the company which 
owns the track and stations, and trains belonging to Merseyrail, 
Northern, Virgin, Est Midlands Trains and West Midlands Trains operate 
from here. It is also part of the Merseyrail Network (Wirral Line and 
City Line operated by Northern). OSM presently has Liverpool Lime Street 
as network=National Rail and  operator=National Rail.


In my view the OSM operator is the company which manages the station, 
the network for most stations in Merseyside is merseyrail, however if 
OSM allows there needs to be the ability to have several entries for 
network so allow for those train companies which operate from there. 
However maintenance then becomes an issue.


Another view is that as all of these stations in Merseyrail are part of 
the National Rail network and tickets are valid within and without the 
Merseyrail system the question becomes murky.


As Merseyrail is such a strong brand running to 2028 I think that 
network=Merseyrail is valid for Liverpool Lime Street, Ormskirk and 
stations served solely by Merseyrail .


Regards

Tony Shield (TonyS999)


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

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

[Tony Shield]

Hi

I have worked in data analysis for many years, recently become 
interested in PT and added routes to my locality. I look at PT 
timetables frequently as much of my travel is by PT.


My use case is that I want to find times and routes from A to B, I do 
not know the route numbers or their actual route. I expect the system to 
be able to give times and routes and any interchanges.


As a system I fail to see how putting the timing detail on each stop 
will enable me to efficiently perform that use case. From what is 
described system would have to identify route, then iterate route to 
check if destination is on route, if on route then  select time entry in 
A then a time entry in B and ASSUME that they both relate to the same 
journey and have been updated correctly. For connections/interchanges 
the same rules apply. Those assumptions make storing the data against a 
stop extraordinarily unreliable, the proposed method does not take 
shortened journeys - eg school or factory journeys where the whole route 
is not travelled  - into account.


I suggest that the best way to get timetable data is to replicate the 
present system that most PT organisations do - a table related to the 
route. A timetable could be associated with an OSM route. A system will 
be required to generate meaningful times and itineraries, so should we 
be asking those existing OSM routing people what  is their preferred way 
to store timetable data that can be updated reliably.


Here in the UK timetable data is in the public domain - is that the case 
in other places?


TonyS



On 06/11/2018 19:59, Jo wrote:
Indeed, a mapper who wants to add this and who can't find the 
information on the internet or in a booklet, would have travel to the 
first stop, take note of all the departure times and then establish 
the deltas between all the stops of the itinerary.
If that's the case, such a mapper would probably better use the tags 
based method on the route relations.


It all depends on how much detail you want to add (and maintain in the 
long run).


Another weakness of the relation pet stop/route pair method is that it 
will be very hard to encode the exceptions; not on Wednesdays, only on 
Fridays, etc.


Jo

Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 20:22 schreef djakk djakk >:


Ok I see.

I am still a bit reluctant to your proposal since the travelling
time between 2 stops can vary during the day, especially for train
routes.
Ok there is the possibility of adding a new timetable relation ...

Moreover, I think that data inputs from the ground can not be done
with your proposal (it needs to know the timetable for the whole
line), we’ll depend on GTFS file actually :-/

Julien “djakk”



Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 19:27, Jo mailto:winfi...@gmail.com>> a écrit :

Yes, very hard to debug and we already established some change
every few months. So after a change from the operator. One
traveler will update one of those schedules, Another may do so
for 3 stops down the line, in the mean time the stops in
between and after are not updated yet. A maintenance
nightmare. The way I proposed it, suffers less from that
problem. When timetables change it's usually that trips are
added or removed or their start time changes slightly. The
time to get from one stop to the next will remain constant,
most of the time.

Jo

Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 18:40 schreef djakk djakk
mailto:djakk.dj...@gmail.com>>:

I don’t get it ...

With my point of view, one route with 15 stops has 15
timetables, each timetable describes the arrival time and
the departure time of several trips at the stop.

There must be the same number of trips along the stops’
timetables. (Otherwise this is an other route).

You mean, if somebody messed up and add an extra trip
inside a timetable, this would be hard to figure ?

Julien “djakk”


Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 18:30, Jo mailto:winfi...@gmail.com>> a écrit :

If you have a single one for a stop/route pair, no
problem. As soon as you have a few hundred and the
information in them starts to conflict with other
another timetable relation for the same route it will
be extremely hard to figure out where it went wrong.

Polyglot

Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 17:08 schreef djakk djakk
mailto:djakk.dj...@gmail.com>>:

In which case a timetable per stop and per route
is unmaintable ?

Julien “djakk”


Le mar. 6 nov. 2018 à 16:59, djakk djakk
mailto:djakk.dj...@gmail.com>> a écrit :

I think it is important to have an osm object
  

Re: [Talk-transit] [Tagging] Public Transport Timetables

[Tony Shield]

Hi Jo

I've looked at your proposal and I'm starting to understand it and like it.

I looked at your spreadsheet and this is the style of data entry which I 
think will work, using a spreadsheet then processing it to OSM data 
formats. If we use a spreadsheet then why not put the whole timetable in 
there and then process it. In that case short journeys are allowed 
wherever they start and end, not having to calculate journey time and 
apply to a stop is easier and allows direct look up of departures from 
the stop - as Leif originally wanted, spreadsheet processing then allows 
for peak hour times; and the source and style of the data matches that 
in OSM - so traceability is resolved.


Using the route_master to hold the timetable is good.

Can't help with MapCSS - I don't know how it fits in.

Sorry - busy tonight and Friday so can't talk.

Regards

Tony





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

Re: [Talk-GB] Access restrictions for lorries above a certain GVM

[Tony Shield]

Hi

What are we going to tag? The length of road/way with the restriction 
and which lanes, or the placement of the sign as a node and with some 
directionality.


From the examples given it seems that passing the facing sign is the 
limiting event, the end of the restriction may be posted with a grey end 
of restriction sign; surveying them could be a nightmare if the road/way 
is tagged - the restriction can be several miles and in one direction.


Regards

Tony


On 26/09/2018 13:10, Mark Goodge wrote:



On 26/09/2018 12:35, Tobias Zwick wrote:

Hey there

I can't believe this didn't come up before - or maybe it did but was not
documented in the wiki.

In United Kingdom, how do you tag roads signed with this sign?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_622.1A.svg


That's a good question. I've had a look, and none of them seem to be 
tagged on the roads in my town.


Another issue is how we tag "gateway" weight restrictions. These apply 
only to traffic in one direction, and not to an entire length of road. 
They're typically used in towns and villages that have been by-passed, 
to ensure that HGV through traffic has to use the by-pass, but, having 
accessed the town via a legitimate route, can then leave it via 
whichever is most convenient. Here's an example of what I mean:


https://www.markgoodge.com/files/by-pass.png

The primary route (in green) which originally passed through the town 
has been diverted to by-pass it on a new construction. Junctions A and 
B will have weight restriction signs (as above) on the route into 
town, but junction C will not. So HGVs can enter the town via C, but 
then leave via either A, B or C. The intention, of course, is to 
ensure that only trucks which need to enter the town do so, as it 
can't be used as a short-cut (eg, if the by-pass is congested), but 
once in the town, there's no restriction on which parts of the town 
the trucks can service.


I really don't know how we'd tag that, because it would be a tag that 
only applies to one traffic direction of a way rather than the entire 
way.



Note that the GVM for which the sign applies is given explicitly on the
sign, which is apparently always the case for any HGV-access-restriction
sign in the UK.


That's not a major issue. Although the limit is always stated, it's 
also almost always 7.5t, as that's the boundary between different 
categories of goods vehicle. With very few exceptions, it's just the 
larger ones which are prohibited.


Mark

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



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Access restrictions for lorries above a certain GVM

[Tony Shield]

Hi Tobias

How is it done in Europe or The Netherlands - is it different to the 
answers given?


Tony

On 26/09/2018 12:35, Tobias Zwick wrote:

Hey there

I can't believe this didn't come up before - or maybe it did but was not
documented in the wiki.

In United Kingdom, how do you tag roads signed with this sign?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_622.1A.svg

Note that the GVM for which the sign applies is given explicitly on the
sign, which is apparently always the case for any HGV-access-restriction
sign in the UK.

In other words, you will never find a sign like this in the UK:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nederlands_verkeersbord_C7.svg

Greetings
Tobias

P.S: GVM is gross vehicle mass
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_vehicle_weight_rating

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



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

Re: [Talk-transit] Bus Service - Route - end of life

[Tony Shield]

Thanks to Markus and Polyglot for clarifying.

I can work with this advice.

Cheers.

Tony


On 24/09/2018 13:08, Jo wrote:

Hi Tony,

At the moment we don't have anything in place to do that. When 
itineraries disappear, their corresponding route relations are 
deleted. When entire lines disappear their route_master and route 
relations are deleted. If they are renamed and/or their identifier 
changes and it's obvious that it's all based on an already mapped 
predecessor, you could 'reuse' the relations.


But we don't have any way to indicate when the new situation starts or 
the old situation ceases.


The same goes for (long term) detours. We can't represent that.

Polyglot

Op ma 24 sep. 2018 om 13:32 schreef Tony Shield 
mailto:tony.shield...@gmail.com>>:


Hi

My local bus operator has ceased to operate a route, so the
question is
what is the best way to handle this end-of-life cycle?

Should I delete the relation or is there an end date tag which
says that
the route is no longer running?

Conversely is there a start date tag?  - my operator announces
new  bus
routes in advance - I can create the relations in advance but should
they be published in advance of them actually running?

And do the PT maps groups respect such start and end-dates?

When I get answers should I update the wiki?

Regards

Tony


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



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


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

[Talk-transit] Bus Service - Route - end of life

[Tony Shield]

Hi

My local bus operator has ceased to operate a route, so the question is 
what is the best way to handle this end-of-life cycle?


Should I delete the relation or is there an end date tag which says that 
the route is no longer running?


Conversely is there a start date tag?  - my operator announces new  bus 
routes in advance - I can create the relations in advance but should 
they be published in advance of them actually running?


And do the PT maps groups respect such start and end-dates?

When I get answers should I update the wiki?

Regards

Tony


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Coastline and tidal rivers

[Tony Shield]

I'm with Colin on this.

My experience of sailing and reading Admiralty charts is that the 
coastline is the High Water line.  Yes it looks inconvenient or 
unnatural - but tidal area as implied by coastline is so important to 
small boat users. The River Dart



   Way: 194211894 waterway= riverbank

is a really arbitrary line across the river from Dartmouth Castle, this 
offends my view of what a coastline is.


Another relevant concept is salinity - tidal coastline is saline and 
does affect plant and marine life . Which leads us into a conundrum - 
things such as salt marsh and mangrove swamps which are all inter-tidal; 
where should the coastline be?


We should also be aware that an incoming tide blocks the natural flow of 
the river and causes the river to form a type of lake which reduces as 
the tide ebbs. This effect can cause people to think a river is tidal in 
that area when it is not.


In my local area the River Ribble estuary in OSM changes from riverbank 
to coastline near Warton airfield, but wikipedia describes "The Normal 
Tidal Limit (NTL) of the river is at Fishwick Bottoms, between Preston 
andWalton-le-Dale , 11 
miles (18 km) from the sea"


so where should the boundary of coastline to  riverbank be? I suggest 
where the inter-tidal range or zonal area is small - range < 1 foot, 
line of zone perpendicular to the boundary is < 1 yard (or metric 
equivalent).
A heuristic could be where it becomes long and thin? Ribble is almost 
acceptable - Dart is not as I write this.


But really I prefer the existing guidance.

Regards
TonyS999


On 28/08/2018 08:49, Colin Smale wrote:


That old chestnut again...

There seems to be an open discussion about how far up a river the 
natural=coastline should go. The wiki suggests the coastline should be 
the high water line going up to the tidal limit (often a lock or a 
wier) but this can be a substantial distance inland. This is AIUI the 
general scientific approach.


There has been some discussion in the past about letting the coastline 
cut across the river at some convenient point, possibly because it 
"looks better" or "seems more natural" or "is less work."


I looked at a few rivers along the south coast to see how they had 
been tagged and it seems most have the coastline up to the tidal 
limit. However the coastline around the mouth of the Dart has recently 
been modified to cut across the mouth, and Salcombe Harbour is also 
mapped this way.


Is there a consensus for a particular definition of "coastline" in 
tidal estuaries? Should we try to keep a consistent paradigm, or 
doesn't it matter?





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


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

[Talk-GB] MapthePaths & Lancashire

[Tony Shield]

Hi

Love MapthePaths; in Lancashire the path is presented as "Public 
footpath, ref 9-8 18", I have manually translated this to the prow_ref 
of "Charnock Richard FP 18". I have performed this conversion by looking 
at Barry Cornelius's data file and extracting District and Parish ID's 
and matched them to the 9-8 element of the ID. I have a spreadsheet of 
the DIstrict and Parish combinations - is there somewhere I can place it 
to help others? Alternatively could MapthePaths be modified to use the 
parish name instead of the District/Parish ID numbers.


I noted there are 231 parishes and unparished towns, some with only one 
footpath. Some of the parish names are mis-spelt eg BYRNING-WITH-WARTON 
should be Bryning . . .



Regards

Tony Shield


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

[Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[Tony Shield]

Guys

Recently changed Chorley station adding more details. Added covered=yes 
cos there is a canopy for us to huddle under but not the whole length of 
the platform, there are also bus shelter type of shelters so shelter=yes 
was also added.


Checked that my changes had rendered ok but found to my horror that the 
platforms had disappeared. Investigations showed -


https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kocio/diary -


   OpenStreetMap Carto release v4.11.0
   

Posted bykocio on 11 May 2018 
inEnglish (Englis h) 



 * Hiding railway=platform with location=underground, tunnels and
   covered=yes

Have changed Chorley to delete covered tag - expect the render to show 
as expected for the surface.
A quick overpass  (inexpertly done) shows the following railway stations 
may be affected adversely -

Holyhead
Manchester Airport
Salford Quays - Anchorage
Manchester Piccadilly
Harrogate
Hull
Sleaford
Bury St Edmunds
Guildford
Bracknell
Westbury
and many in London and there are others

I know we shouldn't map to the render but the meaning of covered seems 
to vary globally.   I know that

Manchester Airport
Salford Quays - Anchorage
Manchester Piccadilly
Harrogate
Guildford
Bracknell
Westbury
are all similar to Chorley - I've visited or passed through them; 
Manchester Piccadilly  I know well and the solitary (covered=yes) 
platform 12 is the same as the other 11 platforms - mostly under the 
glass train shed.
In my mind accurate representation of platform location is so important 
when travelling.


At the end of this week (2nd June) I intend to change the platforms I 
know to remove covered=yes, if you disagree please challenge.


Looking at Manchester Piccadilly I can see that there are many 
opportunities to improve the data and thus the representation, anyone 
fancy a mapping party there?


Regards
Tony  - TonyS999







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

[Talk-GB] OSM AGM and notification

[Tony Shield]

Hi All

Starting to get into OSM mapping and things OSM - so I've found this 
talk-gb mail system, I've just found the website OSM UK and seen the 
weeklyOSM 403 global newsletter.


I can't see the AGM details on the OSM UK website, nor details on the 
AGM in the list of events carried in the weeklyOSM letter. Should the 
AGM be added to these places?


I hope to attend the AGM  - Manchester is close to me as I live in 
Lancashire - so I hope to be able to meet you guys and check what I am 
doing is correct.


To help identification will people be wearing name cards with their OSM 
handle, name and location e.g. . . .


TonyS999

Tony Shield

Chorley, Lancashire


Regards.


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