Re: [Talk-in] Tagging VCBs

[I Chengappa]

To me this looks like a variation of a dam or weir while of course it is
not one of these. It almost certainly needs a new tag. I  think it may be
worth asking this question in the general forum.

On 22 May 2018 at 05:23, Jaisen Nedumpala  wrote:

> This too:
>
> http://www.nregs.kerala.gov.in/index.php/gallery/work-
> photos/vented-cross-bar-muliyar-gp-kasaragod-19#joomimg
>
> 2018-05-22 14:47 GMT+05:30 Jaisen Nedumpala :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> How to tag VCBs (Vented Cross Bars) in OSM? They are irrigation
>> structures present numerous all over Kerala. For those who don't know what
>> it is, here is the link:
>>
>> http://www.irrigation.kerala.gov.in/index.php/infrastructure
>> /other-mi-structures
>>
>> --
>> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
>>  - ജയ്സെനോവ് നെടുമ്പാലോവിച്ച് പഹയനോവ്സ്കി -
>> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
>> (`'·.¸(`'·.¸^¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
>> «´¨`·* . Jaisenov. *..´¨`»
>> (¸.·'´(`'·.¸ ¸.·'´)`'·.¸)
>> ¸.·´^.`'·.¸ ¸.·'´
>>  ( `·.¸`·.¸
>>   `·.¸ )`·.¸
>>  ¸.·(´ `·.¸
>> ¸.·(.·´)`·.¸
>>   ( `v´ )
>> `v´
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
>  - ജയ്സെനോവ് നെടുമ്പാലോവിച്ച് പഹയനോവ്സ്കി -
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
> (`'·.¸(`'·.¸^¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
> «´¨`·* . Jaisenov. *..´¨`»
> (¸.·'´(`'·.¸ ¸.·'´)`'·.¸)
> ¸.·´^.`'·.¸ ¸.·'´
>  ( `·.¸`·.¸
>   `·.¸ )`·.¸
>  ¸.·(´ `·.¸
> ¸.·(.·´)`·.¸
>   ( `v´ )
> `v´
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Importing data to osm using python

[I Chengappa]

hi

It depends on what your data is.

For any quantity of data generated externally, you should first read
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines and follow the
guidelines there. Otherwise there is a strong likelihood of the change
being reverted.

For the practicalities of using csv data, one way would to import it would
be to construct a suitable mapping file (geojson, osm, et.c.) that can be
read by one of the standard editors, then use the editor to upload it.

Thanks, user indigomc.

On 8 February 2018 at 08:02, anitha ganesan  wrote:

> Hai to all,
>
> I am Anitha Ganesan, I am new to osm. I have doubt, how to import a csv
> data file to osm using python.
>
> any help please
>
> Thanks and regards
>
> Anitha Ganesan,
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Tagging service roads of National Highways

[I Chengappa]

hi

It definitely should not be trunk_link.

The advice at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Frontage_road is that it
should be tagged as a minor road as compared to the major road. The tagging
level should depend on its function in local connectivity i.e. how
important it is in connecting local settlements. I think most of them could
reasonably be tagged as tertiary or secondary roads.

Thanks,

On 19 August 2017 at 10:15, Srihari Thalla  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Some of the major National Highways (like Asian Highways[1]) have service
> roads running in parallel. What is the standard tagging of these roads?
>
> I have tagged them as "trunk_link" [2] but I am not sure if this is the
> one followed by others.
>
> [1] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/471481188
> [2] - http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/421844986
>
> Cheers,
> Srihari
> --
> Cheers,
> Srihari
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Large number of damaging edits in India

[I Chengappa]

Can't figure out how to add anyone or anything to it, though those editors
I've seen today are already on it.

On 13 October 2016 at 10:58, Arun Ganesh <arun.plane...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:17 PM, I Chengappa <imchenga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Some of these editors have been active again. While most of their edits
>> seem to be useful, some of the data is wrong, and some edits have been
>> destructive. They do not respond to changeset comments. The areas of
>> activity include Mysore and Bangalore cities (I've not checked any others).
>> It would be useful if these areas could be monitored.
>>
>>
> Made a changeset review list to keep a watch on the whole group, please
> add to it if someone is missing:
>
> https://osmcha.mapbox.com/?usernames=Hemanth+kumar+goli%
> 2CAvinashk%2CJitesh+Khanna%2Cchaitanyareddy%2CGIS+EXICUITIVE%2Cpujarinee%
> 2CASHISH+R+SINGH%2CAruna+V%2CChaithra123%2CEkta+Ranjan%
> 2Cdrishya%2Cchaitra+v+nadig%2Cg+sumithra%2C+Sridhar+s+k&
> is_suspect=False_whitelisted=True=False=False
>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Large number of damaging edits in India

[I Chengappa]

Some of these editors have been active again. While most of their edits
seem to be useful, some of the data is wrong, and some edits have been
destructive. They do not respond to changeset comments. The areas of
activity include Mysore and Bangalore cities (I've not checked any others).
It would be useful if these areas could be monitored.

On 5 October 2016 at 09:13, Arun Ganesh  wrote:

> Thanks everyone for helping compile the list of usernames and commenting
> on the changesets. Here it is: https://gist.github.com/planemad/
> 67d9f427c66d41f24262689ce8bba89e
>
> The data working group (woodpeck_repair) has cleaned up the edits of 3
> users but the left were left as it is. Attempting to use the revert scripts
> on them were partially successful but did not completely clean the edits.
> The scripts are not very well documented and it is unclear how they should
> be used to make a clean revert of all the user's edits. If anyone has any
> knowledge on using the perl scripts please share.
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Arun Ganesh 
> wrote:
>
>> There has been a sudden burst of editing activity in Bangalore, Mumbai
>> and Jabalpur and many important roads have gone missing and replaced with
>> fictional data. It looks like some kind of classroom activity but at the
>> moment its unclear whats going on.
>>
>> Will need some help to track down the usernames that have created the bad
>> data and revert them to its previous state. We still dont have good tools
>> to detect and undo such edit and there is a bit of manual work involved.
>>
>> - Use OSM changeset analyzer to filter and mark the bad edits as harmful
>> [1]
>> - Once we have a list of usernames, I can run the revert-scripts to undo
>> their changes [2]
>> - Send a changeset message to each of these users to enquire what
>> happened and provide help to contribute [3]
>>
>> If you have the team please review and mark the harmful ones, this will
>> be a huge help!
>>
>> [1] https://osmcha.mapbox.com/?delete__gte=1__iconta
>> ins=creat=63%2C7%2C103%2C33_suspect=False_
>> whitelisted=True=False=False
>> [2] https://github.com/woodpeck/osm-revert-scripts
>> [3] http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42605833
>>
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Administrative Boundary

[I Chengappa]

In response to why the boundary line is not visible, I'm not sure but the
lines I have seen are just marked as 'boundary=adminstrative', nothing
else. e.g. for way 433778075.

Also most boundaries are marked as a relation, not as a way. And then the
relation should be named. You can look at the Thrissur district boundary as
an example. Make sure that the boundary is closed. I noted also that some
of the nodes of the panchayat boundary are shared with other features, this
is generally a bad idea since if someone decides the other feature needs
adjusting, they can inadvertently alter the boundary as well.

Can I ask why all the building numbers are preceded with an 'X'? Will this
be removed at some stage?



On 24 August 2016 at 11:11, manoj k  wrote:

> Forget to give the link https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/10.
> 6537/76.1548
>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Ward map Bhopal

[I Chengappa]

>From exceptions to copyright, from
copyright.gov.in/Documents/CopyrightRules1957.pdf, section 52 - page 33 and
36 of the pdf file.


*52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright. -(1) The following
acts shall not constitutean infringement of copyright, namely:*
...
...








*(q) the reproduction or publication of-(i) any matter which has been
published in any Official Gazette except an Act of a Legislature;(ii) any
Act of a Legislature subject to the condition that such Act is reproduced
or published togetherwith any commentary thereon or any other original
matter;(iii) the report of any committee, commission, council, board or
other like body appointed by theGovernment if such report has been laid on
the Table of the Legislature, unless the reproduction orpublication of such
report is prohibited by the Government;*
So the question would be whether the boundaries are officially published or
reported as specified above.


On 11 August 2016 at 16:15, Arun Ganesh  wrote:

> Would also suggest mailing the datameet group if they have pointers on how
> this could be released under an open license. Its definitely going to be a
> bit of work doing it the right way.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Arun Ganesh 
> wrote:
>
>> Nice diary entry in Hindi. Have responded there https://www.openstreetma
>> p.org/user/pratikyadav/diary/39245
>>
>> If you can somehow get permission in written form, this would be good to
>> import. We have not managed it for any city in India so far and its an
>> utter shame.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Pratik Yadav > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> http://www.bhopalmunicipal.com/city-information/informative-map.html
>>> Published by Bhopal Municipal Corporation, the^ map shows all
>>> admin-wards.
>>>
>>> The information is not yet in OSM and could be a good addition.
>>> I have send a mail to BMC to get information about the licence.
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Regards.*
>>>
>>> *Pratik Yadav*
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-in mailing list
>>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Arun Ganesh
>> @planemad
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Arun Ganesh
> @planemad
> 
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] National Highway relations are unacceptably huuuuge!

[I Chengappa]

Heinz_V has made relevant comments in a forum post at
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=17851=3. I've not been
paying attention to most road / route relations, but I understand that
there has been a coherent mapping of national highways in India, mostly due
to him, which has now been broken. As the discussion has primarily been
there so far, I suggest that it should continue there.

This discussion, between two users over one day and in a separate forum
from that discussion, does not constitute general acceptance, even by
default. Hence there is an argument for reverting the changes.

On 21 July 2016 at 16:25, Arun Ganesh  wrote:

> This is looking good to me. It would be great to have a diary post on
> tools/workflow to do this. Have always found handling and modifying these
> relations painful.
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Amaroussi (OpenStreetMap) <
> map...@minoa.li> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have set up NH765 as a prototype for the reformed relations - NH765 is
>> a small route where it should be easy to fine tune the idea before
>> full-scale conversion.
>>
>> The base route (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3871741) would
>> only contain sub-relations with for each State that it passes through with
>> appropriate role names (as the E-route system already does).
>>
>> The sub-relations, for Telangana (
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5826946) and Andhra Pradesh (
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5826980) in our case, would
>> contain appropriately ordered ways, with the main route on top and links
>> (slip roads) at the bottom.
>>
>> I envisage that one relation for each state should be sufficient for the
>> time being.
>>
>> — Amaroussi.
>> ___
>> Talk-in mailing list
>> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Arun Ganesh
> @planemad
> 
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Seeking advice for tree mapping using OSM

[I Chengappa]

For a reliable database of trees, I assume you are keeping your own data as
well. OSM is not the best place to use as a data store, like wikipedia
anything you add or change may get improved, made worse, or deleted.

All the main keys are listed at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree . You could also have
local names, in multiple languages and scripts (search the wiki for
multilingual names). For the other data you can add your own keys, but
first ensure that they don't conflict with anything else - discuss these on
the wiki talk page. Beware of different understandings of common words (the
use of circumference to describe tree trunk girth is one of my bugbears).

Bulk data imports should not be made without discussion otherwise they may
be reverted. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines.

Thanks

On 6 April 2016 at 08:12, Nikhil VJ  wrote:

> Hi Friends,
>
> I want to find out how to bring integration into OSM or similar in tree
> mapping / tree census exercises.
>
> Some non-negotiable requirements are:
>
>1. The data we pool in remains extractable for all, the way we can
>granularly extract OSM data using overpass-turbo; doesn't get locked up
>anywhere *even if the survey/census is incomplete*.
>2. It's possible to build up over time. So the trees we map this
>summer, a few months later a team could curate that data with more
>fine-tuned info; the mapping exercise will not need to be done all over
>again. Or, growth / decline of a tree's height/canopy can be tracked 
> yearly.
>
>
> I'm using Overpass Turbo  to extract OSM
> data, and running this query in the wizard:
> *natural=tree | natural=tree_row*
>
> As of now, in my city's central area, I can find a decent job of basic
> tree mapping done for one of the main public gardens in my city (like this
> ). But these only have the
> most basic key-value pair in them, so far.
>
> I want to know what are other key-value pairs etc I can use to put
> relevant data in.
> Some parameters I expect we would need:
>
>- local name of the tree species
>- scientific name of the tree species
>- height of the tree
>- canopy area
>- date or month of observation of above two properties
>- A URL to a photo of the tree that one might upload on imgur.com or
>so.
>- year of planting if known
>- was it transplanted (after sapling stage) from an earlier location
>(yes/no)
>- custom code / serial number assigned by the surveying group so they
>can keep track.
>
> Following on from requirement#2, there will be a wide variance in what
> data is recorded first and what will have to be left blank to add in later.
> Our solution needs to make room for this variability.
>
> Next, I want to learn how to upload a set of data at a go rather than one
> by one points. For example, we would have a table/spreadsheet with all the
> above parameters as columns and a latitude and longitude column. How do I
> upload that table to OSM, mapping the columns to the relevant fields?
>
> >> So can anyone help with figuring out the above?
>
> As of now, the groups I want to do this with (reforestation, local tree
> care-taking, environmental education, school projects) aren't aware about
> OSM or the fact that data can be granularly extracted using it, so they
> probably haven't tried it out yet. But I think this would be a perfect fit.
> I want to figure everything out on the computers-end and give them a neat
> and tidy process that they can adopt and integrate without needing a degree
> in IT or a diploma in GIS etc.
>
> PS: http://trees.metastudio.org is also a very promising platform, but
> still I want to explore how one might go about this in OSM all the same;
> and besides, the export feature isn't working on my end as of now, and bulk
> upload isn't directly doable either.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Nikhil
> +91-966-583-1250
> Pune, India
> Self-designed learner at Swaraj University <
> http://www.swarajuniversity.org>
> http://nikhilsheth.blogspot.in
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>
___
Talk-in mailing list
Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in

Re: [Talk-in] Automating OSM translation into Indic languages

[I Chengappa]

Re transliterations of proper nouns, these would not always be appropriate
surely. Tamil for the town generally called Dharmapuri or equivalent in
most other languages would (I believe) transliterate as Tharmapuri?

The wiki is saying that it would be a bad idea to have multiple
transliterations - not translations. But if you can translate 'police
station + place name' into multiple language it is of course reasonable to
add them, especially for major cities with several substantial language
communities.

Sorry, it should have been iso15919
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15919.

On 5 April 2015 at 18:07, Aruna S safincr...@gmail.com wrote:


 There's a lot of interesting material in your post. But first, can you
 clarify, are you seeking to add the transliterations to the OSM database,
 or adding them when rendering?. It would be worth keeping in mind this
 'guideline' - [
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Avoid_transliteration], which I
 take to mean as 'don't add a transliteration if a machine can transliterate
 on the fly for you'. (I've been adding transliterations myself in ISO15199,
 despite this).

  Regards, indigomc (I. M. Chengappa)


 Hello!

 Thank you for your mail.

 I am actually trying to translate(not transliterate), but doing it in two
 steps:
 1) Transliteration of proper nouns like Rajajinagar/Jayanagar/Bengalooru
 2) Use translations of words like police station etc from a dictionary I'm
 hoping to crowd source. I was thinking that the words that need to be
 stored for translation in such a dictionary can be obtained from
 translations of OSM tags. Common translations would be of words like
 police station or road or building or company and all these are
 words in the OSM tags.

 I am not very sure of what the wiki is trying to say actually. Would it be
 a bad idea to have multiple translation tags for nodes and ways -- for
 example, Kannada, Tamil, Hindi, Bengali tags for a node in Bangalore? Would
 this be against We want to avoid adding in tags into our database for
 every named object via automated or semi-automated Import
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import.(from the wiki)?

 What is ISO15199? Sorry, very new to OSM.

 I did it only for one node:
 https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=1118255762#map=19/12.99451/77.55430


 The [name:ta] tag added  is to just show a proof of concept. Currently it
 is only transliterated, not translated. The next version of the script
 should also translate. Ideally, it should be ராஜாஜிநகர காவல் நிலையம் and
 not ராஜாஜிநகர ஆரக்ஷக டாணெ

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


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

Re: [Talk-in] classification for rural roads

[I Chengappa]

If the roads you are mapping connect two villages / local population
centres, then it should be sufficient to tag them as tertiary roads, (with
the lane number information if you have it). That usage reflects the
original meaning outside OSM of 'tertiary road', (similarly secondary roads
connected towns, primary roads connected cities -  a quite simplistic
classification, but useful to bear in mind). Note that in the primary
definitions there is no requirement that these be asphalted, metalled or
anything else - this also is in agreement with the underlying meaning of
the terms  'road' and 'highway'. They are defined primarily by their
traffic and usage.

For the first two options you mention, I see these problems -
- a  country lane or any other road that does not serve residential houses
is not a residential road, pretty much by definition.
- any road that requires drivers to pull over on to their shoulders to pass
each other is not a two lane road, again almost by definition.

I agree that there is a significant problem with the attempt to create a
distinct road classification for India - yes that wiki page is still a list
of suggestions mixed with opinions and discussions. I think that when you
find it does not make sense for any particular situation, the best solution
is to fall back on the basic and underlying OSM definitions e.g. at
highway=residential
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dresidential. These
definitions will return anyway, because they reflect both wider OSM
practice, and often normal English usage, hence many contributors will keep
using them.

Thanks, user indigomc


On 28 March 2015 at 11:14, Nura Uttelamiak uttelam...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,

 I have been trying to map some of the roads around my area.  I have seen
 quite a few types of roads around here.

 1) Asphalted roads that are wide enough just for a single car/small truck.
 There are no shoulders to these kind of roads and the road boundaries are
 usually hard walls built around farm land. so if some other car comes in
 the opposite direction, you certainly have to go back 100-200meters to let
 it  pass.

 2) Asphalted roads that are wide enough for a car/small truck, but with
 shoulders. so it is possible to let the car in opposite side to pass by
 moving over to road shoulder.

 3) Asphalted roads that are wide enough for 2 cars or a bus. typically
 connects 2 main villeges.


 I tried to look at
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tagging_Roads_in_India to see how
 these roads can be classified. It looks to me that one way to classify this
 would be for

 (1) = tag is as residential road and put lanes=1

 (2) = tag it as unclassified road and put lanes=2

 (3) = tag it as tertiary  road and put lanes = 2.

 Could somebody comment if this is alright ?


 (i still can't make out if Tagging_Roads_in_India page contains a number
 of suggestions from different people which is still under discussion or if
 there is some consensus. if there is consensus,  can someone familiar with
 it put a summary at the end of the page).

 thanks,
 arun


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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Quality of satellite imagery

[I Chengappa]

Mapbox will often come to your rescue in such situations. Sometimes they
use the same maps as Bing though.


On 3 June 2014 17:30, Aneesh T doc.ane...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hubli, Karnataka
 Parts of Mangalore



 On 3 June 2014 21:41, Prasanth Rajan rajanp...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thank you.

 Areas in Pathanamthitta and Kozhenchery in Kerala are two examples. I
 will try and keep a note of all such areas I see and send in a separate
 note.

 Regards.
 Prasanth


 On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya 
 ichattopadhy...@gmail.com wrote:

 All the satellite imagery comes from Bing, as per their timelines.
 Which areas do you see cloud covering? Can we detail all such places so
 that we can keep an eye going forward?


 On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Prasanth Rajan rajanp...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Hello.

 Is there a time-bound update of satellite imagery of India; some of the
 areas are cloud covered as well. Does OSM run a due-diligence before
 publishing the new images and does OSM also ensure map alignment between
 old and new imageries when the publishing happens? I suppose these are
 rather basic questions regarding OSM in India...

 The reason I am prompted to ask the aforementioned is the difference in
 the quality (even in brightness) of imagery in OSM and G-Maps.

 Thanks and regards.
 Prasanth

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



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



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



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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Usage of www.surveykshan.gov.in

[I Chengappa]

Copying coordinates is of course plainly wrong without the owner's
authority. However any published data can be used as a reference and as a
check. Bing maps gives us much of the information necessary for mapping,
but identification of features is a separate matter. If the pwd data is
being used for reference, e.g. to confirm highway codes, place names et.c.,
that should be ok, especially as the government would be the body to
identify and name highways and many other features. I don't believe the use
of names can be copyrighted in any country.




On 5 October 2013 06:42, Ishan Chattopadhyaya ichattopadhy...@gmail.comwrote:

 Unless the pwd data is released at an open license, I suggest we not
 use it for osm mapping in any way.

 Sent from my Nokia Lumia (Windows Phone)
 From: Yogi
 Sent: 04-10-2013 23:03
 To: OpenStreetMap in India
 Subject: Re: [Talk-in] Usage of www.surveykshan.gov.in
 On Friday 04 October 2013 01:54 PM, doc.ane...@gmail.com wrote:
  www.kpwd.gov.in
 Thanks Aneesh, I'm mapping part of northern Karnataka and this kpwd
 webris link is very useful.:)


 thanks,
 yogi

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

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

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

Re: [Talk-in] Relation tags for archaeological sites

[I Chengappa]

I'd suggest some research first before settling on style=hoysala. Use of
'style' may possibly conflict with other uses of the word. And similar
questions may have been discussed before. I see that there is a shelved
discussion at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:architecture

See also

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:historic:era
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historic


On 13 April 2013 09:10, paramvi...@gmail.com wrote:

 Excellent idea Doc

 Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
   *From: *doc.ane...@gmail.com
 *Sent: *Saturday, 13 April 2013 1:34 PM
 *To: *OpenStreetMap in India
 *Reply To: *OpenStreetMap in India
 *Subject: *Re: [Talk-in] Relation tags for archaeological sites

 Oh so, style = hoysala is valid?

 Cool... Coz there are some well hidden temples of that era with such
 intricate carvings.. I'd want to put all the locations on osm and tag them



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

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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Relation tags for archaeological sites

[I Chengappa]

I didn't mean research on the temples, I meant research to make sure they
are tagged with the right key in OSM!




On 13 April 2013 10:10, doc.ane...@gmail.com doc.ane...@gmail.com wrote:

 I'm talking about the documented ones, built by hoysala kings... Wikipedia
 has a list with references... I won't use it unless it's convincing

 Sent from my HTC


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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Relation tags for archaeological sites

[I Chengappa]

Why would you want to do this? I understand that there is a logical
relation between these temples, but I can't see that there is any mapping
relation that is relevant to OSM and its renderers. Whereas for instance in
a multipolygon with holes (islands in a lake) there is a clear relation.


On 11 April 2013 01:33, doc.ane...@gmail.com doc.ane...@gmail.com wrote:

 I'm planning on mapping all the significant hoysala temples in
 Karnataka... Is there a way to group them together using relations?

 If yes, can someone tell me what tags to use?


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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Mapping in Kannada

[I Chengappa]

This used to happen for me with JOSM on Mandriva 2010; the only Indian
script that was visible there was Devanagari. With JOSM on Mageia 2, the
Kannada is visible, so it may be that you need to update Ubuntu or wait for
a newer version. However the Kannada text is scaled badly into the text
boxes and is not always readable. I'd guess that this is due to an issue
with the font installed on the system.

On 20 December 2012 15:27, Bhargav Kowshik bhargav.kows...@yahoo.comwrote:

 Hello,

 Has anybody had any success giving Kannada names for name:kn tag in JOSM?
 I am using JOSM in Ubuntu and Kannada text appear as boxes.

 Thanks,
 Bhargav.



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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Classifying places - cities, towns and villages

[I Chengappa]

 City: Any UA with more than 100,000 population
 Town: 10,000 - 100,000 people
 Village: Below 10,000


Yes, the above is what I would use, because it is the generic guideline and
hence it is most likely to correspond to the rest of the world.  This is an
important point; India is a country and can be treated in isolation, but
there are also other countries and it is useful to have the map cover a
wider area and still mean the same thing. When looking at a border area,
say India and Nepal, it would be useful not to have the same tag mean
different things on different sides of the border. Similarly, it will be
useful to be able to use the Cloudmade downloads with the knowledge that
things have the same meaning wherever you are. And most users will not be
especially interested in the formal government designations unless they
become widespread in normal use (and as with names it is common in India to
ignore such formal names in favour of past practice e.g. Bangalore /
Bengaluru).

Again, to go back to the US as an example, there any 'city' that is
actually a small town of 10k population is tagged in the OSM as place=town,
because users understand that and it allows the same rules files to be used
as the rest of the world. There is nothing to stop them also adding the
government classification and then adaptng the osmarender rules files so as
to show towns  with formal 'city' tags for an administrative map .
Meanwhile the base map still retains its comparability with other
countries, and the straightforward renderings function as now for the more
common uses such as a driving map.

Hamlet: ?


The common English usage of hamlet is of course pretty much that of a tiny
village; the OSM wiki says typically 100 people. At this size in the India
map there are few such even marked. This may be considered to leave a gap
to village, but it seems to me that village suffices for most small
settlements. I've just seen that in the US parts of the OSM, place=hamlet
is sometimes used instead of place=suburb.

Suburb: ?


It has a useful meaning as a named and identifiable village sized part of a
larger urban area.

As to coming up with a specific proposal, changing the existing default
definitions was not my idea (and I will anyway be busy with real life for
some weeks).  I am not arguing against the classification of
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Places but only against trying to
shoehorn it into the existing tags/values.  Ideally  a new namespace prefix
would be agreed for the new scheme; this would also allow for further
differing policies to be recorded, e.g. if a state had a classification
that was different from the central government's. I've already suggested
census2011:town as one possible prefix but others based on the policy might
be more suitable e.g. mdds:town.

Thanks, indigomc

On 14 May 2012 20:55, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:


 On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 2:08 PM, I Chengappa imchenga...@gmail.comwrote:

 Can you point me to the definition of a city in the MDDS designations
 because I cannot find it?

 This is what the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Places proposal
 is about. It is the local body type  place= value mapping that we need to
 discuss and decide. And that will solve any further confusion.


 Can we agree that if any such designation is changed from an existing
 one, that the justification should be included. Again I would ask that you
 consider using a tag. Census2011;town or similar, which would deal with all
 such issues without a problem.

 I still do not see how using a census tag will solve the primary problem
 of which place= tag to use. If I understand correctly this is the
 guidelines you want to use?
 City: Any UA with more than 100,000 population
 Town: 10,000 - 100,000 people
 Village: Below 10,000
 Hamlet: ?
 Suburb: ?

 If you have proper definitions for how all the tags should be used for
 India please make it clear. There is no point debating over an incomplete
 tagging proposal.


 Also, I see that Mandya has a new tag/value of admin_level=5?

 This is for indicating that it is an district headquarter.



 Thanks, indigomc


 On 11 May 2012 06:22, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:

 Indigomc, let me recap, because we are going in circles:


 What should not be done is to divert a generally understood global
 designation such as 'city' that already has the neutral population
 definition.


 The so called global definition of a city on the osm wiki has been
 arbitrarily defined and has no basis or credibility.
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dcity


 Especially to change it to correspond to a mixture of regional
 government designations that may change.  Do people in Mandya believe that
 Cambridge is more important than their 'town'?


 There will arise cases in future where a person from a village, may want
 his place to be marked as a town or a city because he feels its important.
 It is therefore important to have

Re: [Talk-in] Classifying places - cities, towns and villages

[I Chengappa]

Can you point me to the definition of a city in the MDDS designations
because I cannot find it?

Can we agree that if any such designation is changed from an existing one,
that the justification should be included. Again I would ask that you
consider using a tag. Census2011;town or similar, which would deal with all
such issues without a problem.

Also, I see that Mandya has a new tag/value of admin_level=5?

Thanks, indigomc


On 11 May 2012 06:22, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:

 Indigomc, let me recap, because we are going in circles:


 What should not be done is to divert a generally understood global
 designation such as 'city' that already has the neutral population
 definition.


 The so called global definition of a city on the osm wiki has been
 arbitrarily defined and has no basis or credibility.
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dcity


 Especially to change it to correspond to a mixture of regional government
 designations that may change.  Do people in Mandya believe that Cambridge
 is more important than their 'town'?


 There will arise cases in future where a person from a village, may want
 his place to be marked as a town or a city because he feels its important.
 It is therefore important to have a clear definition which links official
 classification of the place to osm tags and is not ambiguous.


 As to the suggestion that the government has an 'official system', please
 document where this policy is stated and how it is being implemented.


 The census 2011 has an official and exhaustive list of populated places
 with the classification of the local governing body. It has also
 established a system of unique e-governance code for every place
 (urban+rural) which is now the standard for future e governance services.
 This is the best reference document available to date which records the
 nature and size of every place in the country.
  http://censusindia.gov.in/2011census/MDDS_Directory.aspx
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDDS


  A standard used by the census and not used by the state governments or
 in general usage is just that, of use for the census and nothing else.

 The census is a collection of recorded facts, if it says Pune is a
 municipal corporation, then it is a municipal corporation. It is a central
 document which plays a vital role in the planning of essential services for
 the next ten years. I would rather have places classified according to the
 census, than an arbitrary definition of a mapper sitting in Europe who
 thinks that 100,000 is a good number for a place to be called a city.


 --
 j.mp/ArunGanesh

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


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

Re: [Talk-in] Classifying places - cities, towns and villages

[I Chengappa]

I don't really understand this reasoning, except that it seems to state the
idea that cities in India have to be really big and important to be called
cities. In practice of course the term 'city' is used as it is everywhere
else, to refer to a certain sized settlement, somewhat inconsistently.
There is no real difference in this regard between Europe and any other
region; if people settle in houses and settlements which they do, then
these can and should be mapped in a set manner. If you need to travel to a
very large identifiable settlement you expect to see it labelled a city.

Even in China, the lowest population of a designated city is 300,000
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_in_India


You may mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of
cities_in_Chinahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_in_India. Cities
in China are not designated anything except in Chinese, which is
then translated into English. This illustrates one problem, the English
term 'city' is used to translate a Chinese designation for an
administrative area that can include an urban settlement and lots of
surrounding rural areas and even other cities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chongqing is a 'city' with a population of
28million, of whom only 6 or 7 million live in the urban area in a total
area of 8+ sq. km.. In other words it would be called a province,
state, region, district or county in most other countries. Nevertheless
someone who wants to go to Chongqing usually wants to go to the actual
city, not to the admin region. If they want other cities in this
'Chongqing' region, they need to see a city tag there. This is strangely
enough is what the OSM has there - look in the OSM and there is not only a
city called Chongqing in 'Chongqing', there are also other places labelled
cities in 'Chongqing'. Which is what you would expect in a region with a
population of 28million. This makes the map useful.

A city is usually this highest centers of economic importance in a country
 and is region specific.It  cannot be classified just by population or size.
 In that case, Thimphu with 80,000 people will not classify as a city. While
 Tinsukia or Mandya will, which are nothing more than large towns of
 regional importance. These are not places that must show up on a 'city map
 of the world'


A  city is a large town; it may everything you have said in the first
sentence but first it it is a large town. Mandya was a pretty large place
last time I went through it, as expected by its population. Since you have
been quoting Wikipedia, I'll point out that it is called a city there as
well as on its municipal website.


 The proportion of Cities:Towns:Villages must be maintained in proportion.
 The census classification  maintains that relationship and will maintain
 consistency with other datasets following this scheme like Compensatory
 City Allowance
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_of_Indian_cities

 Hubli-Dharwad is a special case where the urban centres are far apart that
 it makes sense to have two city nodes, otherwise I see no reason not to
 adopt the census document as is for this purpose.


Census classifications should be indicated if necessary by creating
census-specific tags, of the type that already exist for many places. The
proportion of cities towns and villages is what actually occurs, and hence
what should be mapped. Cities towns and villages are the common terms and
it will not be useful to use the term village to refer to a panchayat area
that includes multiple villages; a panchayat should be mapped as an admin
area.  It is up to us to record physical realities in standard terminology
to make a useful map; it is not sensible to change standard terms to fit a
classification created for purposes other than mapping. When Cloudmade
produce their maps, it should not show differently mapped information for
one country because some contributors chose to follow a government
designation over standard recommendations.

indigomc


On 6 May 2012 13:28, Arun Ganesh arun.plane...@gmail.com wrote:


 I raised the question (with the wrong person, sorry) over the inclusion of
 a Hubli-Dharward place node in countryside between the two urban areas, and
 the downgrading of these two to 'towns'. In terms of Hubli-Dharwad; both
 Hubli and Dharwad are 'cities' by the OSM definition

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dhttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dtowncity


  I think it is necessary that the OSM should map primarily on its own
 account. It already has its own recommendations, which are based on
 population of settlements (i.e. any individual populated area that is
 actually identified on the ground). See

 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dtown and related;

 towns are settlements with populations between 1 and 10, cities
 above this, villages et.c. below this. This designation is roughly in
 accordance with general usage of these terms.


 While such definitions may be a good