Re: [talk-au] Project of the Week / Month

2010-11-03 Thread Elizabeth Dodd
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:33:36 -0400
Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:

 There
 are lit roads in a lot of places.  Where there are few lit roads it
 might be even more interesting to have data on where the lights exist.

Only if the roads twinkle on the glittermap
http://ivan.sanchezortega.es/glittermap/

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


Re: [talk-au] Project of the Week / Month

2010-11-03 Thread David Murn
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 10:33 -0400, Richard Weait wrote:

 I had a look at the PotW proposals[2] today and saw one for lit=yes.
 Now we haven't had a project for lit before, and it strikes me as
 fitting the goals.  There are lit roads in a lot of places.  Where
 there are few lit roads it might be even more interesting to have data
 on where the lights exist.

One question.. lit=yes is fine for ways where you want to indicate that
a way is lit, but how does one tag individual lights that arent on a
way, for example wanting to tag lights around a park, shopping area or
parking area.

David


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


Re: [talk-au] Project of the Week / Month

2010-11-03 Thread Andrew Harvey
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:33 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
 Hi talk-au,

 My name is Richard and I'm an OpenStreetMap enthusiast.  I've been
 maintaining the Project of the Week [1] for a while.  It's supposed to
 be a way for mappers to share the things about mapping that excite
 them with other mappers.  A way to encourage folks to map things they
 might not otherwise consider mapping. And a way to educate new mappers
 as to the best practices in mapping their neighbourhood.

 I intend for PotW to be inclusive and interesting and entertaining.
 For now, I am concerned about inclusion.  I had a look at the PotW
 proposals[2] today and saw one for lit=yes.  Now we haven't had a
 project for lit before, and it strikes me as fitting the goals.  There
 are lit roads in a lot of places.  Where there are few lit roads it
 might be even more interesting to have data on where the lights exist.

 And then I thought, and the days are getting shorter, so this is a
 perfect tie-in for my introductory paragraph.

 And then I thought of you and felt bad.

 I don't want you to feel excluded from Project of the Week just
 because it is written by an insensitive northerner.  So I'd like to
 invite you to participate in Project of the Week and I'd like to
 invite you to contribute to Project of the Week by by offering
 suggestions or even guest projects for consideration.  I think it
 would be great to have projects that reflect your perspective as well.

It doesn't matter that our hours of light are longer this time of
year. We can still tag lit.

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:37 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
 On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 10:33 -0400, Richard Weait wrote:
 One question.. lit=yes is fine for ways where you want to indicate that
 a way is lit, but how does one tag individual lights that arent on a
 way, for example wanting to tag lights around a park, shopping area or
 parking area.

What about adding lit=yes to the node/way/relation that has the
leisure=park, amenity=parking,... tag?

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