Re: [Talk-ca] Merging ways
There's two methods to join two areas: you can delete the coincident segments and combine the two unclosed polygons (as you have tried), or you can use JOSM's join ways feature. What you are doing (the first method) should have worked, and I don't know why the two ways don't want to stay joined together. Make sure that the two ways are open, and that their coincident nodes are merged together (highlight them both and click 'm' on the keyboard for merge). Then select both ways and 'c' on keyboard for combine. You will get a tag conflict window that allows you to select which tags should apply to the final way, as well as which member of the relation should be kept or removed. In this case you will want to delete the tags on the way (since the relation will have the tags you need), and you will want to keep the member in the relation. For the second way (faster and less involved), you need to 'm'erge all coincident nodes, and make sure there aren't any nodes that are part of only one way or another (all coincident nodes have to be part of *both* ways). Since the coincident nodes in the middle of the lake will disappear when the areas are merged, you can just delete them without worrying about merging. Then select both ways and type 'shift-j' for join areas. Deal with the tag conflicts (again, you won't need tags on the way because the tags are in the relation), and you should be done. Shift-joining areas will handle two ways, a way and relation, or two relations, just as long as they are well formed (nodes are merged properly ahead of time and all of the ways are closed polygons [this won't work where ways have been split at 2000 nodes, since those ways are open polygons and josm won't know how to merge the two areas]). I demonstrate this technique in [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJr_gucFGMY#t=3m45s] Also don't forget to copy over the name of the lake, since Canvec doesn't appear to have the name. Adam On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 10:15 PM, James Ewen ve6...@gmail.com wrote: Okay, how do I accomplish this task? I drew the outline of Wolf Lake by hand quite a while ago. I also imported the water features from CanVec as well. Now there are three ways defining the lake. One is the way that I drew by hand. The second is one imported from Canvec which is a simple outline with the tag natural:water. The other half of the lake (split across a CanVec tile boundary) is a multipolygon outer relation because there's an island in the lake. I have tried removing the ways that define the split in the tile, and join the two remaining halves. I can't do that because there's a tag conflict. I removed the tags from the natural:water side, and tried to join the remaining untagged way to the outer relation, but it does not want to stay joined together. One would think that you should be able to simply join the untagged way to the way defining the outer relation, completing the circular way. This should be the simple part, I would assume. The situation where each half of the lake is an outer relation with inner relations would make the process more complex as you would somehow have to make the inner relations on one of the outer relations move over to become inner relations to the other outer relation, while making only one of the outer relations define the whole lake. Having the CanVec data available is excellent, but stitching areas back together where they have been artificially split at a tile boundary is a bit of a bear for me. Anyone of the CanVec import experts out there have a bit of a tutorial lesson for me? Wolf Lake (Hand drawn) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/78288197 Wolf Lake (Canvec natural:water) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/81345148 Wolf Lake (Canvec outer relation) http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/81400283 -- James VE6SRV ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] Future GPS issues?
I ran across the following on a website dedicated to small boats about a possible threat to the GPS system: http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/11/reports/gps/index.htm Not sure how big an issue this will be, but it is something to watch... Colin McGregor ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Future GPS issues?
The geocaching community has been watching this for a while. I don't understand why this has gotten as far as it has given that the GPS system is owned by the United States and is used for military and law enforcement applications domestically. You would think that the government would just say no to this. This shouldn't have a huge impact in Canada, except perhaps near the border. --G Sent from my iPad On 2011-08-21, at 14:54, Colin McGregor colin.mc...@gmail.com wrote: I ran across the following on a website dedicated to small boats about a possible threat to the GPS system: http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/11/reports/gps/index.htm Not sure how big an issue this will be, but it is something to watch... Colin McGregor ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Merging ways
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Adam Dunn dunna...@gmail.com wrote: There's two methods to join two areas: you can delete the coincident segments and combine the two unclosed polygons (as you have tried), or you can use JOSM's join ways feature. What you are doing (the first method) should have worked, and I don't know why the two ways don't want to stay joined together. Not sure what was going on there, but Potlatch 2 didn't want to play nice. I watched your videos and decided to give JOSM yet another go... I've tried twice before and both times gave up in disgust with trying to figure out the arcane logic behind using JOSM. Perhaps I have learned a bit over the years using other editors, like Merkaartor, but this time I had better luck.I still hate using an editor with defined modes. There are far too many extra button presses to get it to just do what you want. Just to add a node to an existing way I have to press A, then click on the node, then hit ESC to stop adding a way. Why not just shift-click on the way like you do in Potlatch? I found where you can select having JOSM go to modeless like Potlatch but it doesn't seem to make any changes. Anyway, I think I managed to merge a few ways to create a one piece version of Wolf Lake. I don't think I've buggered anything up, but time will tell. About a week from now, if Wolf Lake disappears, we'll know why. Video tutorials like the ones you made are a great help. Trying to follow along in a written help file can be pretty tough if you have no idea what they are telling you to look for, or where to find the buttons to press. The video help was nice and easy to follow, and I was able to replicate the instructions given without having to go back and watch the video again to figure out what you had done. Thanks for the help Adam! BTW, what do you do with an entity that has over 1000 nodes? You said you don't like to make any that big. Do you just arbitrarily cut lakes or forests into bits? Should I just leave the Canvec tile boundaries in place if the lake is too big? When you zoom in, the lines show up, which isn't all that desirable. The only other way to reduce the number of data points would be to reduce the precision level of the depiction of the feature, which also is not desirable. -- James VE6SRV ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Merging ways
My involvement with OSM predates Potlatch by a couple months, so I learned to edit OSM with JOSM, and that's what feels most natural to me. I get frustrated trying to use Potlatch. The complete opposite of you :) Your data looks good, except for one thing: you tagged the way with the name, whereas the proper thing is to tag the relation with the name. The way should have no tags in this case (there may be other cases where the way would have tags even though is a member of a relation, but not in this case). For 1K, I split at approx the half-way mark. Doesn't need to be exactly half. Linear ways (highways, etc) just get split and left as two ways, whereas polygons (lakes, forests) get split and then made into a multipolygon relation. I think that having boundaries will be inevitable, especially when mapping out forests of Canada (a forest relation could extend hundreds of kilometers!). I'm currently experimenting with making Great Slave Lake a giant multipolygon, which may end up being the largest multipoly in OSM, since GSL is the 9th largest lake in the world, and I expect the 8 larger are tagged with coastline. I'm doing this to see how well the renderers deal with this case. I wouldn't suggest making multipolys so large, and they should be divided at smaller areas. Where to split is up to you, and how large to make a multipoly is up to you, just as long as an individual way does not exceed 2000 nodes. Just to be sure you're aware: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon Happy mapping! Adam On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:33 PM, James Ewen ve6...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Adam Dunn dunna...@gmail.com wrote: There's two methods to join two areas: you can delete the coincident segments and combine the two unclosed polygons (as you have tried), or you can use JOSM's join ways feature. What you are doing (the first method) should have worked, and I don't know why the two ways don't want to stay joined together. Not sure what was going on there, but Potlatch 2 didn't want to play nice. I watched your videos and decided to give JOSM yet another go... I've tried twice before and both times gave up in disgust with trying to figure out the arcane logic behind using JOSM. Perhaps I have learned a bit over the years using other editors, like Merkaartor, but this time I had better luck.I still hate using an editor with defined modes. There are far too many extra button presses to get it to just do what you want. Just to add a node to an existing way I have to press A, then click on the node, then hit ESC to stop adding a way. Why not just shift-click on the way like you do in Potlatch? I found where you can select having JOSM go to modeless like Potlatch but it doesn't seem to make any changes. Anyway, I think I managed to merge a few ways to create a one piece version of Wolf Lake. I don't think I've buggered anything up, but time will tell. About a week from now, if Wolf Lake disappears, we'll know why. Video tutorials like the ones you made are a great help. Trying to follow along in a written help file can be pretty tough if you have no idea what they are telling you to look for, or where to find the buttons to press. The video help was nice and easy to follow, and I was able to replicate the instructions given without having to go back and watch the video again to figure out what you had done. Thanks for the help Adam! BTW, what do you do with an entity that has over 1000 nodes? You said you don't like to make any that big. Do you just arbitrarily cut lakes or forests into bits? Should I just leave the Canvec tile boundaries in place if the lake is too big? When you zoom in, the lines show up, which isn't all that desirable. The only other way to reduce the number of data points would be to reduce the precision level of the depiction of the feature, which also is not desirable. -- James VE6SRV ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
