Re: [Talk-GB] un-named roads in UK

[me]

On 29/08/18 21:21, Jubal Harpster wrote:

Rosneath Castle Caravan Park

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/92291906

https://goo.gl/maps/5zn1EEXwYER2

https://binged.it/2BCrYOr



OSM has the name on the actual caravan park, which sounds more likely:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/114942183


When I looked at this, this my feeling was that this looks like a 
private road to the Caravan Park and therefore is very unlikely to have 
a name.


Also, there has been quite a but a local activity in the area and it 
would be very unlikely that that they would have completely missed this 
if wrong.


Finally I check the council road list and this road isn't listed which 
means that it's unmaintained and increasing the likely hood that it will 
be unnamed.


The caravan site is interesting, from it's website it's probably 
Rosneath Castle Park (without the Caravan) - originally mapped by 
Central America who is based in Edinburgh, it would need a survey to see 
how it's actually signposted.


Cheers
Chris 



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Use of Drones

[me]

On 18/09/17 at 12:53pm, Philip Barnes wrote:
>There was a talk by 'the only licensed drone pilot in Scotland' at SOTM
>Scotland a couple of years ago.
> 
>I missed the outdoor demo as I went to the NLS map library.

Yes Paul has a eBee senseFly - https://www.sensefly.com/drones/ebee.html

Because it's a "winged" craft then with the right permissions it is
possible to fly over populated areas. So can get aerial footage for
relatively low cost, but is a more expensive investment than some of
the very low cost drones that seem to be more targeted towards filming.

It's also ideal for imagery as it will fly a preset route capturing the
required stills to cover the area needed, and then lands.`

Cheers
Chris


> 
>On 18 September 2017 12:14:01 BST, Marc Gemis 
>wrote:
> 
>  Oleksiy Muzalyev seems to be pretty knowledgable on drones. He has
>  posted about it a couple of times on the talk mailing list.
>  e.g. 
> [1]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-September/076758.html
> 
>  But he's not living in the UK.
> 
>  regards
> 
>  m.
> 
>  On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> 
>   The regulations on the use of drones in the UK are already quite restrictive
>   (if, of course, you're a  responsible memeber of society) and are imminently
>   to become even more restrictive with licensing and proof of competence
>   becoming requirements. I'm pessimistic about being able to make use of
>   drones to capture imagery. Does anyone have any experience of using drones?
> 
>   regards
> 
>   Brian
> 
>--
> 
>   Talk-GB mailing list
>   Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>   [2]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
>--
> 
>  Talk-GB mailing list
>  Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>  [3]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
>--
>Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> 
> References
> 
>Visible links
>1. 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-September/076758.html
>2. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>3. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Queensferry Crossing

[me]

On 30/08/17 at 10:28am, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 30/08/17 10:26, Tom Hughes wrote:
> 
> > As best I can tell from wikipedia the new bridge is the M90 and under
> > motorway conditions with the old bridge presumably expected to carry
> > non-motorway traffic as the A9000.
> 
> So from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-41086779
> it seems it is non-motorway for now but will become a motorway once the old
> bridge has been "adapted for public transport".

I am just double checking things now. As far as I can make out the new
bridge is as Tom said the M90 but with a 40mph speed limit until
October. 

To make things more complicated the Queensferry Crossing is open for 2
days, then closed for 6 before re-opening. My thinking is to leave it as
open rather than close it for 6 days. 

The old bridge is effectively closed to all motor traffic, until
October/November... 

Usefully one of the colleagues filmed the crossing this morning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25SdGmTPlf0

Cheers
Chris

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Building that have been replaced

[me]

On 04/08/17 at 09:20am, SK53 wrote:
>Around here (Nottingham) we generally put something like demolished:
>building=* on the old way. Particular ly useful if you have several active
>mappers not all knowing about recent demolitions.

This is exactly what we try and do in Edinburgh. An example is here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/372571074

When something new is build then these will get deleted. We have had
occasions where building have been re-added based on imagery.

We work a similar plan on shops or businesses that close, rather than delete
we would mark as disused:shop= or shop=vacant 

Cheers
Chris


>On 4 Aug 2017 07:19, "David Fox" <[1]davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> 
>  Add the new building. We should map what is currently on the ground.
>  Please don't be slave to out of date data or fear of edits being
>  reversed.
> 
>  On 4 August 2017, at 06:42, Warin <[2]61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>  How different is the footprint of the new building?
> 
>  I would think that the new building will be of a similar size to the old
>  one - given the planing permissions.
> 
>  So unless you intend to put in the new building .. I would leave it
>  alone - that gives at least an indication that there is a building
>  there.
> 
>  Add a note to say it has been replaced with something similar?
> 
>  On 04-Aug-17 09:37 AM, Dan S wrote:
>  > [3]https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:demolished:
>  >
>  > (your note is not likely to be noticed by someone who is in the middle
>  > of editing, I suggest)
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > 2017-08-03 16:39 GMT+01:00 Andrew Black
>  <[4]andrewdbl...@googlemail.com>:
>  >> What should one do if there are building that have been knocked down
>  and
>  >> rebuilt.
>  >> Loathe just to delete them because an armchair mapper will come back
>  and add
>  >> them back. The new building is not in current bing imagary.
>  >> I have added a note  #1077006
>  >>
>  >> I am loathe to take photos or roam with a GPS in a hospital grounds!
>  >>
>  >> ___
>  >> Talk-GB mailing list
>  >> [5]Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>  >> [6]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>  >>
>  > ___
>  > Talk-GB mailing list
>  > [7]Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>  > [8]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
>  ___
>  Talk-GB mailing list
>  [9]Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>  [10]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>  ___
>  Talk-GB mailing list
>  [11]Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>  [12]https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
> References
> 
>Visible links
>1. mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com
>2. mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com
>3. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:demolished
>4. mailto:andrewdbl...@googlemail.com
>5. mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>6. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>7. mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>8. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>9. mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>   10. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>   11. mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>   12. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Museums in Berwick-upon-Tweed

[me]

On 28/05/17 at 11:54am, David Woolley wrote:
> On 28/05/17 10:24, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > "The two Museum symbols at NU 00023 52563 and NT 99988 52538 are no
> > longer relevant as the museums closed several years ago and the area is
> > now private housing."
> > 
> > I'll leave it to you to figure out what these coordinates mean and which
> > museums may need to be checked
> 
> 
> Longitude: -2.00120135375
> 
> Latitude: 55.76641149
> 
> and
> 
> Longitude: -2.00175915259
> 
> Latitude: 55.7661868566
> 
> according to
> .
> 
> However, I would suggest that 10 figure OS national grid references could
> only have come from a council database based on OS data, so may not be
> usable.  They are precise to 1 square metre.
> 
> The objects that best match are:
>  and
> .

For now I've added a note.

I'm thinking about a long bike ride, so might might check it out myself.

Cheers
Chris

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Tagging redevelopment and closed roads

[me]

On 20/09/16 at 11:28am, Donald wrote:
>If a building or road is removed, and nothing has replaced it, then i
>think it is good to have some sort of lifestyle prefix like
>demolished:building or removed:road, especially as they are usually still
>visible from aerial images.
> 
>I have also used highway=no not:name= for the ITO analysis.
> 
>Once the new development goes in these can and should probably be deleted.

Worth adding the main advantage of this, is if an armchair mapper comes
along tracing, then it *should* be obvious to them that those items no
longer exist and have been deliberatly removed.

Cheers
Chris 


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New user renaming highway=cycleway with NCN references

[me]

On 10/05/16 at 08:59pm, Eric Grosso wrote:
> I removed the NCN names associated to the roads/paths in Edinburgh (at
> least until the City By-pass) modified this week-end and I also re-added
> the railway=abandoned parts as it was before tintin2873's edits --
> changeset #39226002.
> 
> I discovered that some parts of the Union Canal Towpath and the Water of
> Leith Walkway are mapped as highway=path, some others as highway=cycleway.
> tintin2873 changed all of these highways in cycleways (tagged previously as
> paths). Despite the fact that these highways became part of the NCN, I
> still consider that these highways are still primarily paths by nature.

Think parts of the towpath are debatable, but given the narrow width and
shared use. path with designanated bicycle is probably most correct. 
> 
> What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of a
> NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both part of
> a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?

I think it depends of the width of the path and likelyhood of being
shared, needing to slow down for pedestrians. On a cycleway, it should
not normally be necessary to reduce speed to pass. 

Cheers
Chris 


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