Re: [talk-au] navit
Does the ABS have other boundaries which we can use for this? For example Sydney currently would just refer to the Sydney LGA, rather than that area which people would call Greater Sydney. Basically, do they publish boundaries such as greater sydney the newcastle region etc? If they don't then can we get LGA boundaries? That would work for basically smaller than Sydney. For instance the Lismore LGA encompasses Lismore, Goonellabah, Chilcotts Grass...Well, pretty much everything from half-way to Casino up to the Byron Shire. Otherwise could there be a way for us to define regions such as Greater Newcastle or Gympie and surrounds by forming larger multipolygon relations from a set of suburb boundaries manually? I'm just trying to brainstorm a way of achieving what you're describing while still conforming to strict boundary sources as opposed to drawing a boundary around a town by hand. Brent This is also why I was suggesting using admin_level=9 for town boundaries, for towns like gympie that don't match postcode or admin_level=10 boundaries. Then that information can be used to find any street within the Gympie town area, not just the ABS Gympie boundary. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] navit
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: I'm just trying to brainstorm a way of achieving what you're describing while still conforming to strict boundary sources as opposed to drawing a boundary around a town by hand. As far as I'm aware this is the information we have available to us, even if Franc hasn't uploaded it all yet: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/ABS_Data For anything else, like Greater Sydney Regional etc we'd need to either re-use existing boundaries and making polygons from it, similar to how the state boundary exists. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] RNA Showgrounds/Ekka
Anyone going to the Ekka to map out the showgrounds better? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?zoom=18lat=-27.45092lon=153.03295 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
I had a play around wit Inkscape and 5mins later had come up with this: http://www.overclockers.com.au/pix/st7vm The link is to a transparent png so it doesn't look right with the dark blue background of the hosting service but such is life. I can't post the svg to the list without moderator approval as it makes the message body exceed 40kb. If anybody wants it just ask and I'll shoot it through to you personally. Feedback is welcomed. Having the two Map words on the right hand side kinda bugs me. Does OSM have any other slogans we could put on it? -Brent ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Rendering Fuel tags
--- On Thu, 6/8/09, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Tags for that purpose are already described on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dfuel I just noticed this url on that page: http://www.osmfuel.org map/site for searching fuel locations Still short on listing biodiesel although that is now as rare as hen's teeth in my area ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
That looks good, but... penStreetMap It's not obvious to the layman that the magnifying glass is supposed to be an O. And because pen is a common word many people will misread this as penStreetMap which makes about as much sense as OpenStreetMap if you've never heard of either. I'd strongly discourage using the magnifying glass as an O, it can fail too easily. Matt Amos is the original designer of the logo, perhaps he has a view on this. I'm copying him. Etienne On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:44 AM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: I had a play around wit Inkscape and 5mins later had come up with this: http://www.overclockers.com.au/pix/st7vm The link is to a transparent png so it doesn't look right with the dark blue background of the hosting service but such is life. I can't post the svg to the list without moderator approval as it makes the message body exceed 40kb. If anybody wants it just ask and I'll shoot it through to you personally. Feedback is welcomed. Having the two Map words on the right hand side kinda bugs me. Does OSM have any other slogans we could put on it? -Brent ___ 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] RNA Showgrounds/Ekka
Just make sure you don't go to the effort mapping stuff which will be bulldozed for the redevelopment. From: John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Friday, 7 August, 2009 5:38:30 PM Subject: [talk-au] RNA Showgrounds/Ekka Anyone going to the Ekka to map out the showgrounds better? http://www.openstreetmap.org/?zoom=18lat=-27.45092lon=153.03295 ___ 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] RNA Showgrounds/Ekka
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, Jeff Price jeff.pr...@rocketmail.com wrote: Just make sure you don't go to the effort mapping stuff which will be bulldozed for the redevelopment. Wouldn't be any different than temporary things like burning man, the flickr tech was hoping for historical type maps. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Proposed changes for the Australian tagging guidelines.
Bus stops tagged with route_ref and not loc_ref. Most cities have an integrated transport system that spans many councils. I also like the idea of shelter yes/no. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=bus_stop Rail-trails tagged as highway = path, not footway, cycleway or bridleway. Seem everyone has a political agenda here. Maybe make reference to http://www.railtrails.org.au for clarification as to why not to use tag cycleway. This follows for shared paths as-well, should also be tagged as path not cycleway. Bush walking paths should also be tagged as path not footway, except for National parks were bicycles / horses are typically banned. Many state parks allow bicycles, horses and motorbikes, these would best be addressed with yes/no properties. For Victoria: http://www.parkweb.vic.gov.au/1parks.cfm In Europe cycleway tag is being discouraged as it should only be used for paths that are bicycle exclusive. The German forum is discussing the best way to address this issue now with over 170 000 routes tagged as cycleways and no- one ever surveying an exclusive cycleway! I think they are going to simply change all to paths. I think we should make it clear, use path for paths that can be traversed by more than one means. For exclusive paths use cycleway or footway. Evan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
Noted, version 2: http://ocau.com/pix/yg3b2 - Original Message - From: 80n 80n...@gmail.com Date: Friday, August 7, 2009 5:53 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] posters/banners To: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com That looks good, but... penStreetMap It's not obvious to the layman that the magnifying glass is supposed to be an O. And because pen is a common word many people will misread this as penStreetMap which makes about as much sense as OpenStreetMap if you'venever heard of either. I'd strongly discourage using the magnifying glass as an O, it can fail too easily. Matt Amos is the original designer of the logo, perhaps he has a view on this. I'm copying him. Etienne On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:44 AM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: I had a play around wit Inkscape and 5mins later had come up with this: http://www.overclockers.com.au/pix/st7vm The link is to a transparent png so it doesn't look right with the dark blue background of the hosting service but such is life. I can't post the svg to the list without moderator approval as it makes the message body exceed 40kb. If anybody wants it just ask and I'll shoot it through to you personally. Feedback is welcomed. Having the two Map words on the right hand side kinda bugs me. Does OSM have any other slogans we could put on it? -Brent ___ 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] posters/banners
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Noted, version 2: http://ocau.com/pix/yg3b2 I actually like the other OSM logo, it gives the eye something to look at, just my humble opinion. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] mailing lists and replying to them.
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Sam Couter wrote: John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote: Any point in asking to have this list default changed to reply to list or would that be inviting a pointlessly endless argument with no outcome? You'll get me posting this, as I do on every list that this discussion comes up on: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html I understand but will never accept the opposing position as I use a mail client that does handle reply-to-list correctly and have no sympathy for people who choose to use poor quality software when better alternatives exist. So do I, and have it set that a reply-to from this folder will go the list and as a result of my sort system have sent emails to the list which didn't concern the list at all so the trouble can go both ways. I think it would be nice if we had the list reply-to set to reply to the list. Apparently even advanced systems like gmail can't cope as well as minority systems like kmail with reply to list. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 26, Issue 11
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, dar...@tpg.com.au wrote: Hi Liz, Have a look at this one, it has many more features. http://www.gpsaustralia.net/forums/showthread.php?t=8914 Darylr I wasn't going to buy one - my Freerunner does all of that and can make phone calls as well. I was just interested in what was now available Yesterday when a lady was telling me about losing her dementing mother-in-law who was driving around town, I suggested a GPS tracker planted in the car which they could ring to get a position report would be helpful :-) Someone else has trained her husband to set a sat-nav to home and follow the voice prompts so he doesn't get lost ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
Yeah, the 2 logos kind of each represent an extreme: one is a bit plain and the other is too distracting. I might try putting a map rendered as the background, but have it more as a watermark than an attraction. It's probably time to read some Inkscape tutorials... Any other ideas are most welcome. - Original Message - From: John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com Date: Friday, August 7, 2009 7:05 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] posters/banners To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org --- On Fri, 7/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Noted, version 2: http://ocau.com/pix/yg3b2 I actually like the other OSM logo, it gives the eye something to look at, just my humble opinion. ___ 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] navit
I think the latter. - Ben. -Original Message- From: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Sent: 07 August 2009 13:33 To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] navit I wonder, how hard would it be to write a script which looked at the ABS boundaries and placed an is_in= tag on every way/node/whatever which is completely within the multipolygon relation? Or would it be better to modify the routing software to look at the ABS boundaries instead? Just throwing ideas around Brent - Original Message - From: Sam Couter s...@couter.id.au Date: Friday, August 7, 2009 1:07 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] navit To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote: Nothing special, just followed the directions on this wiki page: http://www.rigacci.org/wiki/doku.php/doc/appunti/hardware/eeepc_navit As a result, most of the towns and suburbs in Australia can't be searched for due to a lack of is_in tags. My patch for osm2navit (attached) is a bit heavy-handed but trivial. If you've got a build environment set up for navit, give it a go. -- Sam Couter | mailto:s...@couter.id.au OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Any other ideas are most welcome. Check out this video: http://www.vimeo.com/5594110 Very first shot shows the kind of thing I'm aiming at here. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
Hi. It would be good to sort out the highway=cycleway/footway/path issue. It seems that the status quo is What do you think the primary purpose is? Part of the problem is that things like: highway=cycleway foot=yes renders quite differently to: highway=footway bicycle=yes (esp on the cycle layer) I think I know of only one exclusive cycleway. If this is an issue in other countries then perhaps getting the rendering changed would be a good way forward. - Ben ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Ben Kelley wrote: I think I know of only one exclusive cycleway. I can think of several the western side of the big coathanger There's a big one in Adelaide the Veloway and maybe a few in Canberra I foud by googling one on King street Sydney http://cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/AboutSydney/ParkingAndTransport/cycling/CyclingInfrastructure.asp but the best offer comes from TAssie http://www.biketas.org.au/2001/SPOKE-2001-04.pdf Hobart CITY COUNCIL PLANS TRANSGLIDE 2000 ALONG INTERCITY CYCLEWAY. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
The banner shown on the slide at 21s? The slide called Tsuruga-jo Castle? I could whip up that with Australia instead of Japan, sure. - Original Message - From: John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com Date: Friday, August 7, 2009 8:24 pm Subject: Re: [talk-au] posters/banners To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au --- On Fri, 7/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Any other ideas are most welcome. Check out this video: http://www.vimeo.com/5594110 Very first shot shows the kind of thing I'm aiming at here. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
I've added a lot of cycleways in North Canberra recently. In the ACT, virtually all footpaths are legally shared (foot and bike) paths. So I've tagged most of the wider ones as highway=cycleway, foot=yes. This is how I understand the suggestion in the Australian Tagging Guidelines. Where the path isn't really wide enough for bikes to pass each other easily without one getting off the path, I've usually tagged them as highway=footway, bicycle=yes. It seems clear that the wider paths here are designed for bikes (as well as foot traffic). The guidelines go on to suggest that cycleway=track should be added where pedestrians and cyclists are separated by a line. I know that happens in places outside the ACT. John --- On Fri, 7/8/09, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote: It would be good to sort out the highway=cycleway/footway/path issue. It seems that the status quo is What do you think the primary purpose is? Part of the problem is that things like: highway=cycleway foot=yes renders quite differently to: highway=footway bicycle=yes (esp on the cycle layer) I think I know of only one exclusive cycleway. If this is an issue in other countries then perhaps getting the rendering changed would be a good way forward. - Ben ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: The banner shown on the slide at 21s? The slide called Tsuruga-jo Castle? I could whip up that with Australia instead of Japan, sure. I didn't actually watch the online video, I assumed it was the same as the m4v file I downloaded, I just posted that link to save you needing to download the whole thing. However that was what I was thinking of. This vid shows a much clearer shot of it... http://www.stateofthemap.org/podcasts/sunday/state_room/1400_LT_06_Japan.m4v ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
I took a screen capture of it from the vid: http://maps.bigtincan.com/data/osm-japan-capture.png ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
G'day, I'm not saying don't use cycleway, but instead use it only for these exclusive paths. Just choosing a specific tag because of the way it renders on the main map is not a good idea, this is why a variety of maps are appearing to please specific groups and will improve with time. Sorting out the rendering is another issue, first I think the data should be consistent, and the guidelines unbiased. It seems that the status quo is What do you think the primary purpose is? I think this logic is slowly changing, because it's much more useful if someone knows they can/cannot use a path because they are on foot/bike/horse. If we continue to tag shared paths as cycleway it is much less useful than knowing all the properties of a path. The best solution I think would be to use the path tag and then a bike map could look for the cycle=yes tag and display it in green like the http://www.informationfreeway.org map already does. Deciding a paths primary use is problematic and it would be better to describe it purpose. The best example here is the rail-trails, on Sundays you see maybe 50% or more of traffic being cyclist but on weekdays it could be less then 10%. This obviously varies greatly depending on regions but is just an observation from the trails I know. If the guidelines are unbiased we will attract many more interest groups to this great project, each having the option to display the map the way they see correct. Evan On Friday 07 Aug 2009 12:41:52 Liz wrote: On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Ben Kelley wrote: I think I know of only one exclusive cycleway. I can think of several the western side of the big coathanger There's a big one in Adelaide the Veloway and maybe a few in Canberra I foud by googling one on King street Sydney http://cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/AboutSydney/ParkingAndTransport/cycling/Cycl ingInfrastructure.asp but the best offer comes from TAssie http://www.biketas.org.au/2001/SPOKE-2001-04.pdf Hobart CITY COUNCIL PLANS TRANSGLIDE 2000 ALONG INTERCITY CYCLEWAY. ___ 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] posters/banners
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: The banner shown on the slide at 21s? The slide called Tsuruga-jo Castle? I could whip up that with Australia instead of Japan, sure. I didn't actually watch the online video, I assumed it was the same as the m4v file I downloaded, I just posted that link to save you needing to download the whole thing. However that was what I was thinking of. This vid shows a much clearer shot of it... http://www.stateofthemap.org/podcasts/sunday/state_room/1400_LT_06_Japan.m4v ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
My preference is for greater use of highway=path with it defaulting to foot=yes and then additional access tags relating to surface, access by bicycles, horses, etc. Basically I think anything which is not designed for a car should be a path. I would actually propose abolishing highway=footway and highway=cycleway but fear that could be met with disapproval. Certainly I think that any highway=cycleway;foot=yes or highway=footway;cycle=yes or highway=bridleway;foot=yes should be made into highway=path with appropriate tags. ~Cameron 2009/8/7 Evan Sebire e...@sebire.org G'day, I'm not saying don't use cycleway, but instead use it only for these exclusive paths. Just choosing a specific tag because of the way it renders on the main map is not a good idea, this is why a variety of maps are appearing to please specific groups and will improve with time. Sorting out the rendering is another issue, first I think the data should be consistent, and the guidelines unbiased. It seems that the status quo is What do you think the primary purpose is? I think this logic is slowly changing, because it's much more useful if someone knows they can/cannot use a path because they are on foot/bike/horse. If we continue to tag shared paths as cycleway it is much less useful than knowing all the properties of a path. The best solution I think would be to use the path tag and then a bike map could look for the cycle=yes tag and display it in green like the http://www.informationfreeway.org map already does. Deciding a paths primary use is problematic and it would be better to describe it purpose. The best example here is the rail-trails, on Sundays you see maybe 50% or more of traffic being cyclist but on weekdays it could be less then 10%. This obviously varies greatly depending on regions but is just an observation from the trails I know. If the guidelines are unbiased we will attract many more interest groups to this great project, each having the option to display the map the way they see correct. Evan On Friday 07 Aug 2009 12:41:52 Liz wrote: On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Ben Kelley wrote: I think I know of only one exclusive cycleway. I can think of several the western side of the big coathanger There's a big one in Adelaide the Veloway and maybe a few in Canberra I foud by googling one on King street Sydney http://cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/AboutSydney/ParkingAndTransport/cycling/Cycl ingInfrastructure.asp but the best offer comes from TAssie http://www.biketas.org.au/2001/SPOKE-2001-04.pdf Hobart CITY COUNCIL PLANS TRANSGLIDE 2000 ALONG INTERCITY CYCLEWAY. ___ 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] Cycleway/footway/path
I believe the present system works better than the simplified system proposed. With a system of shared paths, the simplified system would result in all paths being treated the same. They would become indiscernible. This link provides a good example: http://osm.org/go/uNP_xlQv All paths marked are shared paths, but one side of the creek is much more suitable for cycling than the other. And this is because of the significantly different physical properties of the paths themselves. We should not be prepared to see this valuable information lost. By parity of reasoning, we could remove all ambiguity in deciding between the different types of road (motorway or trunk, trunk or primary, tertiary or unclassified, etc) by having just one type: motor_traffic=yes. Problem solved in one fell swoop. I have a strong feeling that this would be unacceptable. We need to know about different types of path and road. Just knowing that they're suitable for bicycles or for motor traffic isn't enough. Such dumbing-down of the data to meet a lowest common denominator is something I believe we should be avoiding like the plague. John --- On Fri, 7/8/09, Cameron osm-mailing-li...@justcameron.com wrote: My preference is for greater use of highway=path with it defaulting to foot=yes and then additional access tags relating to surface, access by bicycles, horses, etc. Basically I think anything which is not designed for a car should be a path. I would actually propose abolishing highway=footway and highway=cycleway but fear that could be met with disapproval. Certainly I think that any highway=cycleway;foot=yes or highway=footway;cycle=yes or highway=bridleway;foot=yes should be made into highway=path with appropriate tags. ~Cameron ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Yeah, the 2 logos kind of each represent an extreme: one is a bit plain and the other is too distracting. I might try putting a map rendered as the background, but have it more as a watermark than an attraction. It's probably time to read some Inkscape tutorials... Any other ideas are most welcome. Version 2 gets my vote. Plain is infinitely better than crowded IMHO. Just make sure the two lines of text are horizontally centred with respect to each other. I wouldn't bother with putting a map in the background. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
What I'll probably do is just upload all versions of the banner somewhere and let whoever is paying for the print choose and tweak to their liking. That way all we need to agree upon is the OpenStreetMap name and the magnifying glass icon. In the end it's literally a 5min job to make different versions. For example, I personally believe that the Japanese banner was made for an international audience, why else would it have Japan not only written on it but in Roman characters. So, if we want a banner to be shown in a SoTM presentation then having Australia on it would be appropriate. Otherwise it may be best to have Gathering or Mapping Party or Meeting instead. With regard to horizontal centering: I aligned the text on the right hand edge but intentionally left the bottom line a bit to the left on the LHS so as to balance the protrusion of the magnifying glass. I'll whip up a few more versions tonight. Going on an endurance training ride today :). - Original Message - From: Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009 7:55 am Subject: Re: [talk-au] posters/banners To: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Yeah, the 2 logos kind of each represent an extreme: one is a bit plain and the other is too distracting. I might try putting a map rendered as the background, but have it more as a watermark than an attraction. It's probably time to read some Inkscape tutorials... Any other ideas are most welcome. Version 2 gets my vote. Plain is infinitely better than crowded IMHO. Just make sure the two lines of text are horizontally centred with respect to each other. I wouldn't bother with putting a map in the background. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 6:08 AM, j...@talk21.com wrote: I have a strong feeling that this would be unacceptable. We need to know about different types of path and road. Just knowing that they're suitable for bicycles or for motor traffic isn't enough. Such dumbing-down of the data to meet a lowest common denominator is something I believe we should be avoiding like the plague. I'm pretty sure no one was suggesting this (i.e. removing information). It's the way the information in entered in tags that is being discussed. The fact is that we currently have highway=cycleway;foot=yes AND highway=footway;cycle=yes, and it is difficult to choose which is appropriate for a particular shared-use path. We also ALREADY have highway=path, which is for non-specific or shared-use paths. This makes the above two tagging combinations redundant. I would therefore suggest at least changing the highway=cycleway and highway=footway descriptions from mainly/exclusively to exclusively - and preferably getting rid of them altogether. All paths marked are shared paths, but one side of the creek is much more suitable for cycling than the other. And this is because of the significantly different physical properties of the paths themselves. Please describe the significantly different physical properties, and see if they can be described by adding tags to a highway=path. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Proposed changes for the Australian tagging guidelines.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Evan Sebiree...@sebire.org wrote: Bush walking paths should also be tagged as path not footway, except for National parks were bicycles / horses are typically banned. I think these should still be tagged as path, with additional tags added as necessary. Often there are signs at the entrance with bike/horse, etc pictograms either crossed out in red or circled in green - would seem to be very simple to translate these into access=designated/yes/no. In Europe cycleway tag is being discouraged as it should only be used for paths that are bicycle exclusive. The German forum is discussing the best way to address this issue now with over 170 000 routes tagged as cycleways and no- one ever surveying an exclusive cycleway! I think they are going to simply change all to paths. I think we should make it clear, use path for paths that can be traversed by more than one means. For exclusive paths use cycleway or footway. That is definitely a step in the right direction. But really, cycleway/footway are made completely redundant by highway=path with the relevant access tags. And I'm not a fan of redundant tags. And given, as you say, Germany is getting rid of cycleways altogether, why not follow their lead and suggest using paths exclusively... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] mailing lists and replying to them.
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Huh? I've never had any trouble with Gmail. Are you trying to make a distinction between reply to all and reply to list? There may be a technical distinction but the end result is identical from my perspective. Reply to list pulls the list address from email headers, this way you don't end up with 2 other people being emailed as well such as in this email. You mentioned before about these emails not being very big, but that isn't the problem, it's the volume of emails and spam filters needing to scan each one, and if they go to the same person twice then it gets filtered twice and filtering can be very CPU intensive depending how complex it is. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:56 AM, John Smithdelta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Fri, 7/8/09, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty sure no one was suggesting this (i.e. removing information). It's the way the information in entered in tags that is being discussed. The fact is that we currently have highway=cycleway;foot=yes AND highway=footway;cycle=yes, and it is difficult to choose which is appropriate for a particular shared-use path. The other poster was commenting on how these render, and by marking them all virtually the same you can't tell at a glance if it's a better path for cycling or not, so yes you would loose information. Gah... don't tag for the renderer. What is it about the path that makes it better for cycling in your opinion? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] amenity=shelter
Hi all, I was having a conversation the other day when the purpose of amenity=shelter was brought into question. http://barstool.ash.ms/photos/07082009-shelter.jpg Above is a photo I took while out the other day. It's a shelter with a picnic area, bbq, and some benches under it. Can I clarify whether this is actually supposed to be *amenity=shelter;tourism=picnic_site*, or perhaps something different? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dshelter Cheers, Ash. attachment: 07082009-small.jpg signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Gah... don't tag for the renderer. We're not tagging for the renderer, we're tagging to describe something, perhaps this is just a case of needing a width and to render accordingly, however you need something more than just highway=path to describe what is currently being described. What is it about the path that makes it better for cycling in your opinion? I don't cycle much so it isn't going to do much for me either way, but the previous poster had a point about showing paths that were more for bike riders because they were wider. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Agreed, highway=path should almost always have accompanying tags to give more details. I think this is quite reasonable. For width, use width=*. Can someone marking in these cycle paths comment on if there is common widths or what width would people deem to be a footway, cycleway, bridleway, etc? ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Gah... don't tag for the renderer. We're not tagging for the renderer, we're tagging to describe something, perhaps this is just a case of needing a width and to render accordingly, however you need something more than just highway=path to describe what is currently being described. What is it about the path that makes it better for cycling in your opinion? I don't cycle much so it isn't going to do much for me either way, but the previous poster had a point about showing paths that were more for bike riders because they were wider. The seafront area in Cairns has a mixture of cycle only paths / shared use paths / pedestrian paths through a single big park area So something that rendered those differently would be ideal. I know we should not tag for the renderer. So a cyclist path is wider, has no steps and has probably a maximum gradient. It should also have a dip in the kerb where it meets / crosses the road. A wheelchair suitable path would have even less gradient, and again have no steps, but might be narrower. I haven't read the Australian standards there, so someone else who has a better idea should chime in. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
--- On Fri, 7/8/09, ed...@billiau.net ed...@billiau.net wrote: The seafront area in Cairns has a mixture of cycle only paths / shared use paths / pedestrian paths through a single big park area So something that rendered those differently would be ideal. I know we should not tag for the renderer. Rendering different paths based on the width is the only way to tag something verifiable and be able to render various paths differently that I can think of. So a cyclist path is wider, has no steps and has probably a maximum gradient. It should also have a dip in the kerb where it meets / crosses the road. A wheelchair suitable path would have even less gradient, and again have no steps, but might be narrower. I haven't read the Australian standards there, so someone else who has a better idea should chime in. Are there tags for gradient? Also it should be some sort of grading for wheel chair users, some like to wheel chair off road, some like to road race, I realise you are probably thinking of some kind of hospital type wheel chair but that isn't the only kind. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
Thought I'd jump in late with some more input. I aligned the screen cap John posted, and created these posters based on the Japanese one. I personally like the “Australia” included, it makes it feel more like an Australian effort, rather than the mainly European effort that seems to take a lot of the focus. :) I also modified the OSM logo in a few, I'm not sure what kind of trade mark/tarms of use there are associated with it though, so it may not be appropriate for use. Just playing with some ideas. Anyway, the SVG sources are available too if anyone wants to have a go. http://barstool.ash.ms/osm/posters/2009-08-09/gallery ← Gallery http://barstool.ash.ms/osm/posters/2009-08-09/ ← Directory listing Cheers, Ash. On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 08:39 +1000, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: What I'll probably do is just upload all versions of the banner somewhere and let whoever is paying for the print choose and tweak to their liking. That way all we need to agree upon is the OpenStreetMap name and the magnifying glass icon. In the end it's literally a 5min job to make different versions. For example, I personally believe that the Japanese banner was made for an international audience, why else would it have Japan not only written on it but in Roman characters. So, if we want a banner to be shown in a SoTM presentation then having Australia on it would be appropriate. Otherwise it may be best to have Gathering or Mapping Party or Meeting instead. With regard to horizontal centering: I aligned the text on the right hand edge but intentionally left the bottom line a bit to the left on the LHS so as to balance the protrusion of the magnifying glass. I'll whip up a few more versions tonight. Going on an endurance training ride today :). - Original Message - From: Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009 7:55 am Subject: Re: [talk-au] posters/banners To: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Yeah, the 2 logos kind of each represent an extreme: one is a bit plain and the other is too distracting. I might try putting a map rendered as the background, but have it more as a watermark than an attraction. It's probably time to read some Inkscape tutorials... Any other ideas are most welcome. Version 2 gets my vote. Plain is infinitely better than crowded IMHO. Just make sure the two lines of text are horizontally centred with respect to each other. I wouldn't bother with putting a map in the background. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Ashley Kyd • Web Software Development in Brisbane, Australia. • Phone (07) 3129 2332, or visit http://kyd.com.au/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
Actually, a follow-up to that, the logo is indeed trade marked, so it'll have to remain as is, and possibly be okayed for use first. I don't know how trade mark law works, so someone else might have to work that out. Cheers, Ash. On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 08:39 +1000, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: What I'll probably do is just upload all versions of the banner somewhere and let whoever is paying for the print choose and tweak to their liking. That way all we need to agree upon is the OpenStreetMap name and the magnifying glass icon. In the end it's literally a 5min job to make different versions. For example, I personally believe that the Japanese banner was made for an international audience, why else would it have Japan not only written on it but in Roman characters. So, if we want a banner to be shown in a SoTM presentation then having Australia on it would be appropriate. Otherwise it may be best to have Gathering or Mapping Party or Meeting instead. With regard to horizontal centering: I aligned the text on the right hand edge but intentionally left the bottom line a bit to the left on the LHS so as to balance the protrusion of the magnifying glass. I'll whip up a few more versions tonight. Going on an endurance training ride today :). - Original Message - From: Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com Date: Saturday, August 8, 2009 7:55 am Subject: Re: [talk-au] posters/banners To: b.schulz...@scu.edu.au Cc: talk-au@openstreetmap.org On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM, b.schulz...@scu.edu.au wrote: Yeah, the 2 logos kind of each represent an extreme: one is a bit plain and the other is too distracting. I might try putting a map rendered as the background, but have it more as a watermark than an attraction. It's probably time to read some Inkscape tutorials... Any other ideas are most welcome. Version 2 gets my vote. Plain is infinitely better than crowded IMHO. Just make sure the two lines of text are horizontally centred with respect to each other. I wouldn't bother with putting a map in the background. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au -- Ashley Kyd • Web Software Development in Brisbane, Australia. • Phone (07) 3129 2332, or visit http://kyd.com.au/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
Actually I doubt it would matter if you modified it or not, the Japanese sign was slightly modified, as is the logo on the swiss site: http://www.openstreetmap.ch/ If you look at the handle on the magnifying glass it's been made look like a swiss army knife. And I do like the image with the Australia in the background. http://barstool.ash.ms/osm/posters/2009-08-09/openstreetmap-osm-australia-austsralia.png Do you have a high-res copy of this, either SVG or PNG? Among other things I started making a site layout based on the Swiss site, rather than just displaying a map. http://maps.bigtincan.com/index-new.php ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycleway/footway/path
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Ashley Kyda...@kyd.com.au wrote: I'm really not convinced that [it's] a good idea, for renderer *or* semantics to tag a government-designated cycleway as a path with bike access. So, something that's currently a highway=cycleway, right? highway=path; bicycle=designated; foot=yes. Why isn't that a good idea? All it does is take the guesswork/ambiguity out of cycleway, IMHO, as well as being more extensible (in terms of snowmobiles/hovercraft/etc., and in terms of designated/official/etc). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: Among other things I started making a site layout based on the Swiss site, rather than just displaying a map. http://maps.bigtincan.com/index-new.php The basic layout is OK I'd try to stop the logo overlapping with the grey bar the rendering gives coral sea islands and coral sea islands territory and ACT too much prominence and Norfolk Island doesn't appear at all (which is good rendering, but 'unfair') ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, John Smith wrote: --- On Sat, 8/8/09, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: The basic layout is OK I'm trying to make it easier for people to find Aussie specific stuff. I'd try to stop the logo overlapping with the grey bar All I did was replace the logo, the swiss site already did that. the rendering gives coral sea islands and coral sea islands territory and ACT too much prominence That's a rendering thing, I need to tweak the shields layout some more too, at some zoom levels they're fine, at other zoom levels they bunch up too much. I actually plan to ditch the references for coral sea islands out of the database, as soon as I figure out how, then they won't show. and Norfolk Island doesn't appear at all (which is good rendering, but 'unfair') I don't have any external territory data loaded in the database, but can if people think it would be useful. There are also in NW NSW a number of small places with undue prominence eg Burren Junction, Quambone and Baradine. I intend (when I have done my accounts), to downgrade every town which is not a city, back to town. Speak up now, if you don't agree. :-) -- You are a fluke of the universe; you have no right to be here. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] posters/banners
--- On Sat, 8/8/09, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: The basic layout is OK I'm trying to make it easier for people to find Aussie specific stuff. I'd try to stop the logo overlapping with the grey bar All I did was replace the logo, the swiss site already did that. the rendering gives coral sea islands and coral sea islands territory and ACT too much prominence That's a rendering thing, I need to tweak the shields layout some more too, at some zoom levels they're fine, at other zoom levels they bunch up too much. I actually plan to ditch the references for coral sea islands out of the database, as soon as I figure out how, then they won't show. and Norfolk Island doesn't appear at all (which is good rendering, but 'unfair') I don't have any external territory data loaded in the database, but can if people think it would be useful. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
