Re: [talk-au] Uluru naming consistency

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 at 06:22, Joachim  wrote:

>
> @Graeme: You went for "Uluru / Ayers Rock", but I hope you can accept
> the majority's choice.
>

Not a problem!

Although I'll openly admit that whenever it comes up in conversation
amongst the family, it's *always* Ayers Rock :-)

  Thanks

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

Re: [talk-au] Uluru naming consistency

[Joachim]

As the majority was for the "preferred  proposal" I just implemented
it. Thanks for your input!
@Graeme: You went for "Uluru / Ayers Rock", but I hope you can accept
the majority's choice.

Have nice day Joachim/Jojo4u

Am Mo., 28. Okt. 2019 um 19:39 Uhr schrieb Joachim :

> OSM has two features (notice the underlined r on some names which is
> native Pitjantjatjara):
> a) The peak (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2251425855)

> b) The "bare_rock" (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32639987/)

> My preferred proposal for both features:
> name = Uluṟu
> name:en = Uluru
> name:pjt = Uluṟu
> alt_name = Ayers Rock
> alt_name:en = Ayers Rock
> official_name =  Uluru / Ayers Rock
> official_name:en =  Uluru / Ayers Rock

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

Re: [talk-au] (NSW) Email Update – Changes to permanent speed limits

[David Wales]

A relevant paragraph from the terms of use:

"The Service is intended for personal use only. You must not use it for 
business purposes or re-supply the information to others."

This seems at odds with the CC 4.0 license which the website itself is under!

I suspect you would need to either track down the original data source behind 
the emails, or you would need to contact Transport for NSW to get permission. 

Regards,
David



On 13 November 2019 10:21:58 pm AEDT, Luke Stewart 
 wrote:
>In case you were not aware, there is a bi-monthly service from the NSW
>government advising when and where new speed limits have been
>introduced
>across the state, allowing us to keep our maxspeeds up to date.
>
>https://www.saferroadsnsw.com.au/emailupdates.aspx
>
>I was considering adding a note to the locations that have been changed
>each time the email is sent, but would this count as adding
>non-copyrighted
>data, even though it would only request a resurvey?
>
>Interested to hear your thoughts,
>Luke
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] (NSW) Email Update – Changes to permanent speed limits

[Luke Stewart]

In case you were not aware, there is a bi-monthly service from the NSW
government advising when and where new speed limits have been introduced
across the state, allowing us to keep our maxspeeds up to date.

https://www.saferroadsnsw.com.au/emailupdates.aspx

I was considering adding a note to the locations that have been changed
each time the email is sent, but would this count as adding non-copyrighted
data, even though it would only request a resurvey?

Interested to hear your thoughts,
Luke
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

[Sebastian Spiess]

Thanks Andrew,
I have updated the street accordingly. See
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/174303541/history

On 11/11/19 7:24 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> In an effort to try to document the outcome of this discussion, I've
> updated 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Local_Traffic_Only
>  though
> if any one still feels this isn't the best way to tag this feature,
> please speak up.
>
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 10:26, Ian Sergeant  > wrote:
>
> What does "official" mean?  It's official, in that the signs are
> placed by the local council.  However they are not enforceable,
> because no law (regulation, etc) gives them a legal meaning.
>
> There is no definitive list of street signs that are advisory vs
> enforceable.  But the RMS has a partial list on their website, and
> the definitive is the Australian Road Rules (as in various state
> legislation).
>
> Councils use them to discourage local streets for through use. 
> They advise drivers that they aren't a main road - and they may
> have traffic calming, etc on them and be otherwise unsuited in
> design for through use.  They aren't used at all in many (most?)
> council areas.
>
> In some cases, they may also have a reduced speed-limit on the
> same sign.  That would be enforceable.
>
> It's pretty low value information to capture in OSM.  But the
> signs exist, so we can capture them - but a access restriction
> would be inappropriate.  I've said before I agree with Andrew's
> proposed tagging for discouraged access.
>
> Ian.
>
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 06:38, Sebastian S.  > wrote:
>
> So the sign is put up by the council. Is it not an official sign?
>
> Could someone elaborate on the legal side mentioned here. E.g.
> is there catalogue of street signs in the road rules and this
> one is not among them?
>
> Are people confusing lax enforcement of the sign with it
> having no legal meaning?
>
> On 9 November 2019 11:37:49 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey
> mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 02:24, Mateusz Konieczny
> mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Why it would be irrelevant?
>
>
> access tag family is for legal access (with some space
> for officially discouraged access),
> access=destination is for "transit is illegal", not
> "local residents dislike transit traffic".
>
> OSM is not a place to add a nonexisting ban on transit
> traffic
>
>
> Yeah realised this later, see my other post in this thread
> at 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-November/013188.html,
> which I suggested motor_vehicle:advisory=destination to
> tag a suggested or advised but maybe not legally
> enforceable destination only restriction.
>
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 01:55, Mateusz Konieczny
> mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Is it "local traffic only" as in "resident only" or
> "no transit"?
>
> Is permission required to enter this area?
>
> AFAIK there is no tagging scheme for distinguishing
> "only with permission of
> homeowner" and "available to all residents of closed
> community".
>
>
> It just means this road is indented to be used if you're
> traveling to somewhere along this road, but not if you're
> just driving through as a shortcut.
>
> It's still public land, not private property. 
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


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