Greetings all. I usually confine my mapping to bush tracks and cycle paths as
this is what I am most interested in and is often not available from other
sources. With the recent devastation of the base map I am remapping some of my
local area, and rapidly realising how little I really understand, so forgive
this basic question. I also find the wiki very hard to practically understand
as it assumes a level of knowledge that is beyond me.
I am interested in mapping/remapping the walking route the great north walk,
which is an established relation. My specific question is, when the route
passes down only part of a way, say just a few blocks of a longer street, how
do you assign the relation to just a few internodes. Is it necessary to split
the ways at the nodes and then just assign the relation to the segments
between, or is it necessary to create a new way over the top which is just the
walking route, or is there some method that is simpler that I have failed to
appreciate.
I am only able to use the potlach editor.
Thanks, and regards, adrian.
From: talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Talk-au Digest, Vol 61, Issue 32
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 06:05:00 +0100
Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to
talk-au@openstreetmap.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
talk-au-requ...@openstreetmap.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
talk-au-ow...@openstreetmap.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than Re: Contents of Talk-au digest...
Today's Topics:
1. Re: LTUAE (Ian Sergeant)
2. Re: LTUAE (Michael Hampson)
3. Re: Establishing Priorities on the Central Coast (Michael Hampson)
4. Re: LTUAE (Ian Sergeant)
--
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 08:18:12 +1000
From: Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com
To: jink...@bigpond.net.au
Cc: talk-au talk-au@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [talk-au] LTUAE
Message-ID:
calda4ykrysq4m3uewjmty6p8wlqznbvkjsunttmvea-ddfp...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
But for metroad 10 for
example, there were 2 x relations for metroad ten. I expected they were
for
north and south bound routes as that is the way they appeared to be listed
in some other areas I checked so that is what I have done. Put one
relation
for north and the other for south. If that's not right let me know and I
will fix. Not sure how a routing relation works anyway.
For the Sydney metroads I have added directional route relations, that use
two directional relations for each metroad. This allows the connectivity
of the route to be checked quickly during the reconstruction phase, and
otherwise does no harm. When we have reached the next stage of maturity we
can decide if we want to merge them back into a single route relation with
directional elements. So, yes, what you have done is correct.
2. for the road naming where the ref tag for metroad 10 was MR10 I have
changed those to network=MR and ref=10. Same for the other roads I have
worked on. Not *certain* that is correct though either so if someone
could
enlighten me would be good thanks
That is correct. See the Australian tagging guidelines in the wiki.
3. state highway 29 continues from boundary street along pacific highway
and
then along delhi road, which makes that small section of the pacific
highway
sh29 *and* mr1. what should I use to reflect that?
It can be part of both route relations.
Just my own view on the redaction process. No issue with people who
declined the licence agreement. However it was annoying for me to see one
of the very first things I used for practice vanish in a puff of smoke. It
was just a building outline, a coles supermarket. I named it, put in the
opening hours, telephone number, full address details eg addr: city: etc
etc. I turned it into a thing of beauty by entering approx 10 odd pieces
of
information, just for practice and learning. I thought it a bit harsh
just
because someone traced a building roof everything I added went as well.
Tracing the building would have taken less than a minute. I spent 40
minutes researching and entering that extra detail on that single item.
Your change sets are still available. You should be able to at least refer
to the info you have added. And yes, the loss of data in this way is the
hardest. One person just traces from an aerial and then does not agree.
Others survey, add cycle facilities, names etc that are lost to OSM. I
don't know if it still possible to better use some of this unattached
data in the database down the track.
Ian
-- next part --
An HTML
