Re: [Talk-it-trentino] possibile violazione licenza

[Luca Delucchi]

2017-01-17 22:07 GMT+01:00 Dario Zontini Gmail :
> Sul sito di TwoNav [1] se si clicca sull'icona "Vedi localizzazione" di una
> mappa in vendita appare una schermata che sembra OSM ma senza indicazioni
> alla licenza. Ho cercato nel sito ma non ho trovato riferimenti.
>
> Che ne pensate?
>
> [1] http://www.twonav.com/it/carte/italia
>
>

qualcosa gli scriverei... anche perchè nella sezione
openstreetmap-italia c'è qualche imprecisione


-- 
ciao
Luca

www.lucadelu.org

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

Re: [Talk-lt] Asociacija „Atvirasis žemėlapis“

[Darius Žitkevičius]

Puiki idėja.
Kaip įstoti?

2017 m. sausio 17 d. 22:25, Tomas Straupis  rašė:

> Sveiki
>
>   Įkurta asociacija „Atvirasis žemėlapis“.
>   Bendrą informacija kaip/kur/kas rasite dienoraštyje:
>   https://blog.openmap.lt/2017/01/17/asociacija-atvirasis-zemelapis/
>
> --
> Tomas
>
> ___
> Talk-lt mailing list
> Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt
>



-- 
Darius Žitkevičius

Laimingas tas, kuris džiaugsmingai dirba ir džiaugiasi darbais, kuriuos
padarė. – J. V. Gėtė.
___
Talk-lt mailing list
Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt

Re: [Talk-us] Green Mountain National Forest cleanup

[Kevin Kenny]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Adam Franco  wrote:

> Thanks for another fabulously detailed reply Kevin!
>
> So it sounds like I'm on the right track then and it makes sense to leave
> the broad outer boundaries as *boundary=national_park* and use the 
> *boundary=protected_area
> + leisure=nature_reserve* combo for the smaller US Forest Service-owned
> parcels.
>

That's what I did when I reimported the Adirondack and Catskill data. There
wasn't a clear consensus that the tagging was 'right' - but nobody really
complained after the job was done.

The tagging that I used is described in
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NYS_DEC_Lands
In the Catskills, there was a second category of public land:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import:_NYCDEP_Watershed_Recreation_Areas

I believe that it will be important, if anyone does get around to using the
protected_area tagging, that protect_class and protection_object be
something reasonable; that's something that's likely to affect the
rendering. I'm not all that familiar with GMNF, so I don't know if there
are a range of protection classes in it the way there are in the New York
forests.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Green Mountain National Forest cleanup

[Adam Franco]

Thanks for another fabulously detailed reply Kevin!

So it sounds like I'm on the right track then and it makes sense to leave
the broad outer boundaries as *boundary=national_park* and use the
*boundary=protected_area
+ leisure=nature_reserve* combo for the smaller US Forest Service-owned
parcels.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Kevin Kenny 
wrote:

> My big issue with this is that we - alas! - need to have something "tagged
> for the renderer."
>
> Over on the other side of Lake Champlain and the Taconics, we have the
> same problem with the Catskill and Adirondack Parks, which are protected
> areas with an immense public-private partnership. (Something over half the
> Adirondack Park is owned by New York State, and the rest is quite
> restrictively administered by the Adirondack Park Agency. Its level of
> protection exceeds that of any of our National Parks.)
>
> The problem is that boundary=protected_area does not render in any of the
> map layers available from openstreetmap.org. People editing
> protected_area's cannot see their results on the server, and newcomers to
> OSM don't even know that we have them in the database.
>
> I'd say that the answer is, "fix the renderer" - and surely
> Mapnik/Carto/... can handle it, since I use that toolchain to render my own
> maps. The underlying issue is that to fix it in any of the default
> renderings (OSM default, OpenCycleMap, etc.), 'hstore' would have to be
> enabled on the server's database to get the 'protect_class' tag into the
> system. For whatever reason, the server team has balked at doing this for
> quite literally several years. I do not expect this situation to resolve in
> my lifetime,. and I have ceased to request any support for protected area
> rendering. Instead, I do most of my own rendering on maps such as
> http://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test3.html, and accept the fact that I
> will have a day or two delay in being able to retrieve any updates. (I
> don't have the resources to accept minutely updates, so I depend on the
> daily extracts at geofabrik.de. Often, I let my map fall several months
> behind, when I'm not actively mapping).
>
> Most US mappers have simply accepted that the renderer will not be fixed.
> The compromise that I used when reworking the Adirondack Park polygons was
> not well received on this list, but at least nobody reverted the changes.
> In that compromise solution:
>
> - the Adirondack and Catskill Parks as a whole were tagged
> boundary=national_park. This tagging is close to the truth except that it
> is New York State rather than a nation-state that administers it. Given the
> US principle of separate sovereignty, I'm willing to live with this.
>
> - the individual state (and in the case of the Catskills, New York City)
> owned parcels received the additional tagging of 'leisure=nature_reserve'
> plus appropriate 'protected_area' tagging. That way, they are correct in
> the new scheme and still render plausibly. 'Nature reserves' encompass many
> different things, so I wasn't too uncomfortable with this tagging.
>
> - I seriously attempted to make appropriate choices for 'protect_class'
> and related tags. This sometimes meant up-classifying relative to the IUCN
> database. IUCN wants to classify the Adirondack and Catskill holdings no
> higher than protect_class=6, because they don't enjoy national-level
> protection. That's again a failure to understand the US legal system; the
> State-level protection that they enjoy is far stronger than any Federal
> protection: these two parks are read into the state constitution. I was
> entirely comfortable giving the High Peaks or West Canada Lake wilderness
> areas protect_class=1b. They are indeed protected wilderness, where Man is
> a visitor who does not remain.
>
> The result of the compromise is, as you can see:
>
> - everything renders on the main page. The parks are at least visible.
> (There has been at least one round with the National Forests that rendered
> them entirely invisible.)
>
> - the 'landuse=forest' tag is not abused. There is no green infill on
> tracts that are not forested. The system still presumes that
> 'landuse=forest' means 'every square metre covered by trees - and cannot
> cope with the idea of 'the landowner's intent is to use the tract for
> forestry, but this particular bit, this year, is occupied by beavers' -
> according to the OSM purists, that's no longer 'forest'. (For this reason,
> I find 'landuse=forest' to be nearly useless: all the 'forest' tracts that
> I've ever mapped have transient or permanent phenomena meaning that
> individual pieces may be clearcut, bare rock, or open water at a particular
> time.)
>
> - the 'leisure=nature_reserve' tag is only slightly abused. A wilderness
> area, a wildlife management region, or a protected watershed (all of which
> permit recreational use) are all reserved to nature, and no US English
> speaker would be astonished at the tagging. I refuse to 

Re: [Talk-pe] Uso de Software Gis Libres

[Omar Vega Ramos]

Hola, hace un momento me equivoque respondiendo solo a Arnold y ahora
cuando quise enviarlo a la lista me equivoco de hilo :P

-- 
Omar Vega Ramos
GPG ID: 9825028B

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

Re: [Talk-pe] Uso de Software Gis Libres

[Omar Vega Ramos]

Hola

> Este es un interesante caso donde no sabemos qué hacer cuando alguien
> incumple la licencia de OSM o de cualquier otra herramienta. ¿En qué
> quedó el tema?

Gracias por hacerme recordar. Acabo de enviarle un mensaje a su cuenta
de OSM[0] , modificando un poco un correo de ejemplo [1] que encontré en
la wiki de OSM. Si para mañana no me responde le enviaré también a su
correo electrónico.

Si alguien usa facebug, tal vez podría recordarle también esto luego
como comentario en el post donde había publicado los datos [2].

[0] http://openstreetmap.org/geogepsperu
[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Lacking_proper_attribution/Example_email
[2]
https://www.facebook.com/geogpsperu/photos/a.230296050488503.1073741828.227457154105726/530262530491852/?type=3

-- 
Omar Vega Ramos
GPG ID: 9825028B

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

[OSM-talk-fr] Cartographie des églises

[Donat ROBAUX]

Bonjour à tous,

Je suis plutôt assez fier de vous dire que le chantier des églises de
Meurthe-et-Moselle est achevé.

Le département correspond au diocèse de Nancy-Toul.
L'objectif initial était d'avoir au moins une église par commune (au sens
de code INSEE), moins les 8 communes qui n'en ont pas (0.88%).

Chaque église a les tags qui vont bien: *place_of_worship*, *religion*,
*denomination*, *building*. Dans l'idéal il faudrait vérifier par commune
et par* admin_level 9 ...*


Église qui au-delà de son aspect cultuel est un point de repère évident
pour tous (randonneurs, automobilistes,...) aussi bien dans le réel que sur
les cartes. Ca permet aussi de ne pas perdre la mémoire des noms. Le site
clochers.org qui autorise la réutilisation des données à condition de citer
est d'une grande aide. Il renseigne les lieux de culte (chrétiens) par code
INSEE commune et indique souvent quand il s'agit d'anciennes communes
fusionnées, ce qui est pratique. On a même les photos pour nous aider à
différencier les formes de clocher ;)

J'en ai profité pour m'amuser de faire un nuage de mot des dédicaces (nom)
des églises. J'en ai conclu que c'est souvent St-Martin qui détrône tout le
monde avec 10% du total à lui tout seul. https://twitter.com/drobaux/status/
821499898130534400


Merci à Pierre-Yves qui m'a aidé à faire la requête pour vérifier
l'exhaustivité de ma cartographie.


L'objectif à terme étant d'industrialiser ca via Mapcontrib ou autre:


   1. repérer les communes sans église (on les repère assez bien même sans
   cadastre, notamment grâce aux clochers, aux noms de rue genre rue l'église,
   ou encore aux bornes géodésiques)
   2. compléter les infos, notamment *name *(dédicace), *building*,
*denomination
   *et si on a la foi (c'est presque le cas de le dire) les liens
   Wikipedia, Wikidata ou encore MHS pour faciliter le tourisme.

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

Re: [Talk-pt] Importação massiva na Anadia

[Jorge Gustavo Rocha]

Olá malta,

Acho que temos que promover uma discussão entre nós em torno do que tem
interesse em termos de usos e ocupação do solo.

Ocupação do solo (o que existe)

De repente, acho que coisas como a Corine Land Cover não têm interesse
nenhum: é informação obsoleta, feita para estatísticas europeias, com
uma escala e um erro que não interessa (ao OSM). Qualquer um de nós
conseguiria fazer melhor de forma sistemática, hoje, usando dados do
Sentinel-2, sem sair do computador.

Prefiro deveras que sejam os mapeadores a irem dizendo o que realmente
existe no terreno. Prefiro um mapa "menos" preenchido, mas "bem"
preenchido. O que está tem que estar bem.

Quando exigimos que as importações têm que ser discutidas é para isso
mesmo: para entrarem dados bons, e não dados para depois serem corrigidos.

Quando uma área, como Anadia, está toda preenchida, não sei o que está
bem e o que está mal. Infelizmente assumo que está tudo mal, mesmo que
um coitado de uma mapeador tenha já endireitado uma parte da importação.
Fica a dúvida sobre toda a área.

Nestes casos de importação, também acontece que (sem querer) quem faz a
importação está a exigir aos outros mapeadores que corrijam e conciliem
o que foi importado com o que estão a mapear. Eu gosto de mapear onde e
quando me apetece e não gosto tanto de estar condicionado pelas
importações dos outros.

Usos do solo (o que é permitido existir)

Coisas relacionadas com usos do solo (regulamentação), determinados por
PDM de Câmaras e afins, poderão ter algum interesse, mas muito limitado.
É preciso ver que usos interessam. Sei que o geospot_mike (Águeda) tem
as áreas industriais (que me parece interessante), mas pouco mais
informação é relevante.

Proposta para o primeiro SOTM-PT

Acho que a necessidade deste tipo de discussão nos "obriga" a organizar
o primeiro SOTM-PT "oficial". Já tivemos grandes parties e algumas
oficinas de dados, mas acho que podemos fazer um SOTM com uma certa
dimensão. Se gostarem da ideia, ofereço-me para começar a tratar da
organização.

Voltando a questão inicial dos usos e da ocupação do solo, gostava que
partilhassem a vossa opinião para depois tomar uma decisão. Estou
inclinado a pedir para retirarem a informação importada da Anadia.

Abraço,

J. Gustavo

Às 23:19 de 17-01-2017, Rui Oliveira escreveu:
> Acho que cabe ao Jorge decidir como deseja proceder sendo que foi ele
> que originalmente reportou a situação. Eu recebi a mensagem do
> utilizador referido e assim que a obtive coloquei aqui na lista, logo
> talvez o utilizador hhugboss tenha também respondido ao Jorge. Vamos
> esperar para ver o que ele diz.
> 
> Cumprimentos
> 
> 2017-01-17 18:25 GMT+00:00 Marcos Oliveira
> >:
> 
> Já se passou um mês, sempre é para deixar os dados no mapa? 
> 
> No dia 15 de dezembro de 2016 às 11:48, Pedro Pereira
> > escreveu:
> 
> Bom dia,
> 
> Uma vez que o Hugo refere "Sinceramente não percebo muito bem a
> necessidade de discutir tal procedimento", sugiro que se
> responda a explicar as implicações dessas alterações tais como:
> - problema direitos autor;
> - pode originar sobreposição com informação mais detalhada;
> - a lista poder ajudar no sentido de definir as tag's;
> - entre outros...
> 
> No meu caso de importação tive o cuidado de fazer o carregamento
> por partes (apenas naquelas onde não existiam qq áreas - locais
> mais afastadas dos centros urbanos).
> 
> Abraço,
> Pedro
> 
> 2016-12-15 11:19 GMT+00:00 Rui Oliveira  >:
> 
> Bom dia a todos. 
> Apenas uma actualização acerca da importação de Anadia. O
> Utilizador responsável pela mesma respondeu-me (a mensagem
> está apresentada em baixo).  Penso que agora pode se tomar
> uma decisão. O Marcos estava correcto nas suas suspeitas, a
> fonte foi o PDM de Anadia. Jorge, também recebeste resposta? 
> 
> Bom dia!
> 
> Só para transmitir que os dados importados têm origem no
> levantamento do uso/ocupação do solo, realizado no âmbito da
> Revisão do PDM de Anadia. 
> Desconhecia por completo a obrigatoriedade de discutir com a
> comunidade a realização de importações. 
> Sinceramente não percebo muito bem a necessidade de discutir
> tal procedimento. De qualquer modo, aceito as regras e assim
> sendo deixo à vossa consideração uma decisão sobre a importação.
> 
> Com os melhores cumprimentos 
> Hugo
> 
> 
> Em 12/12/2016 17:21, "Jorge Gustavo Rocha"  > escreveu:
> 
> Olá,
> 
> Penso que não é crítico 

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Jérôme Amagat]

Le 17 janvier 2017 à 22:39, Adrien Grellier  a écrit :

> Bonjour,
>
> Merci pour cette carte très utile !
>
> Pour la blague j'en ai profité pour ajouter quelques précisions sur une
> centrale électrique particulière, celle de la base Antarctique Dumont
> d'Urville, en espérant qu'elle apparaisse un jour :-)
>
> http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon/plantetgenerator.html#-
> 66.66367,860.00474,15z
>

Le problème c'est que j'affiche que s'il y a une valeur pour
plant:output:electricity=*. là il y a yes et pas la puissance en watts.
sinon avec yes impossible de savoir si c'est une énorme centrale ou un
petit panneau solaire et donc comment l'affiché au milieu des autres qui
ont une taille proportionnelle à leur puissance?.

>
> Bonne soirée
>
> Adrien
>
> On 17/01/2017 03:45, Jérôme Amagat wrote:
>
> Bonjour,
>
> J'ai fait une carte des centrales électriques et leurs puissances
> installées présentent dans OSM :
> http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing 
> listTalk-fr@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-pt] Importação massiva na Anadia

[Rui Oliveira]

Acho que cabe ao Jorge decidir como deseja proceder sendo que foi ele que
originalmente reportou a situação. Eu recebi a mensagem do utilizador
referido e assim que a obtive coloquei aqui na lista, logo talvez o
utilizador hhugboss tenha também respondido ao Jorge. Vamos esperar para
ver o que ele diz.

Cumprimentos

2017-01-17 18:25 GMT+00:00 Marcos Oliveira :

> Já se passou um mês, sempre é para deixar os dados no mapa?
>
> No dia 15 de dezembro de 2016 às 11:48, Pedro Pereira 
> escreveu:
>
>> Bom dia,
>>
>> Uma vez que o Hugo refere "Sinceramente não percebo muito bem a
>> necessidade de discutir tal procedimento", sugiro que se responda a
>> explicar as implicações dessas alterações tais como:
>> - problema direitos autor;
>> - pode originar sobreposição com informação mais detalhada;
>> - a lista poder ajudar no sentido de definir as tag's;
>> - entre outros...
>>
>> No meu caso de importação tive o cuidado de fazer o carregamento por
>> partes (apenas naquelas onde não existiam qq áreas - locais mais afastadas
>> dos centros urbanos).
>>
>> Abraço,
>> Pedro
>>
>> 2016-12-15 11:19 GMT+00:00 Rui Oliveira :
>>
>>> Bom dia a todos.
>>> Apenas uma actualização acerca da importação de Anadia. O Utilizador
>>> responsável pela mesma respondeu-me (a mensagem está apresentada em
>>> baixo).  Penso que agora pode se tomar uma decisão. O Marcos estava
>>> correcto nas suas suspeitas, a fonte foi o PDM de Anadia. Jorge, também
>>> recebeste resposta?
>>>
>>> Bom dia!
>>>
>>> Só para transmitir que os dados importados têm origem no levantamento do
>>> uso/ocupação do solo, realizado no âmbito da Revisão do PDM de Anadia.
>>> Desconhecia por completo a obrigatoriedade de discutir com a comunidade
>>> a realização de importações.
>>> Sinceramente não percebo muito bem a necessidade de discutir tal
>>> procedimento. De qualquer modo, aceito as regras e assim sendo deixo à
>>> vossa consideração uma decisão sobre a importação.
>>>
>>> Com os melhores cumprimentos
>>> Hugo
>>>
>>> Em 12/12/2016 17:21, "Jorge Gustavo Rocha"  escreveu:
>>>
 Olá,

 Penso que não é crítico esperarmos mais algum tempo.

 Teria interesse discutirmos que manchas (isto é, que classes de usos e
 ocupação do solo) devemos importar no OSM e com que tags (qual o
 correspondente valor da tag landuse).

 Ele importou as áreas agrícolas com as seguintes tags:

 landuse=farmyard
 name=Áreas Agrícolas

 (também acabou por importar mais uma tag "id" e "Vertices" que não
 interessam para o OSM).

 Nas áreas florestais, usou as tags:

 landuse=forest
 leaf_cycle=mixed
 leaf_type=mixed
 name=Espaços Florestais

 Ao lado, em Águeda, alguns espaços florestais estão com as tags:

 landuse=forest
 name=Platanus sp.
 wood=deciduous

 Seria interessante usarmos esta importação para acrescentarmos uma
 entrada no Wiki com a melhor forma de usarmos estas informações que as
 Câmaras poderão libertar ao público. Existe a COS [1] Carta de Uso e
 Ocupação do Solo de Portugal Continental, da DGTerritório, mas não é livre.
 No entanto, todos (penso eu) devem seguir uma classificação semelhante.

 Mas gostei da sugestão do Rui. Esperamos mais uns dias.

 Abraço,

 J. Gustavo

 [1] http://www.dgterritorio.pt/cartografia_e_geodesia/cartografi
 a/cartografia_tematica/carta_de_ocupacao_do_solo__cos_/

 Às 16:34 de 12-12-2016, Rui Oliveira escreveu:

> Bem, estive a ver os changests e de facto é uma pena o utilizador não
> estar disponivel para responder... A importação foi de facto massiva,
> mas parece ser de alta qualidade, feita por quem sabe usar o JOSM e
> percebe do assunto e do que está a fazer.  Além disso foi adicionado
> muito detalhe interessante. Se como o marcos referiu foi tirado do SIG
> da CM de Anadia, pode até ser de alguem ligado ao SIG da própria camara
> (um engenheiro da câmara) e até  com autorização para o fazer. Se
> alguém
> tivesse contacto com a camara ou os serviços seria interessante de
> verificar isto...
>
> Claro que isto não implica que se passem por cima das regras da nossa
> comunidade, mas eu vou tentar enviar uma ultima mensagem ao mesmo. Já
> agora... mais mensagem menos mensagem... não irá fazer mal nenhum.
> Entretanto, proponho que se defina um prazo para, a partir daí se fazer
> a reversão.
>
> Cumprimentos.
>
>
>
> 2016-12-12 11:41 GMT+00:00 Marcos Oliveira
>  >>:
>
> Tudo indica que provêm dos SIG da CM da Anadia.
>
> Jorge, eu disponibilizo-me para reverter, caso o editor em questão
> continue a não comunicar.
>
> No dia 12 de dezembro de 2016 às 

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Dave F]

Please be aware this is the talk-GB forum.

Use of place=farm in Britain is almost certainly misguided. If anyone 
knows of an appropriate location please post here.


It's not use of the tag itself that's the problem, it's contributor's 
misinterpretation of it.


DaveF


On 17/01/2017 21:52, Warin wrote:

On 18-Jan-17 07:27 AM, Dave F wrote:


On 17/01/2017 19:38, Warin wrote:

Generally I add a node place=farm as I am not certain where the 
boundary lies 


This is a misuse of this tag. place=farm is for the rare (non 
existent?) cases where a residential community, such as a hamlet, has 
acquired the name of an adjacent farm. "a place named by a name of a 
farm" - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Farm


The description for 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dfarm is poorly written 
& confusing.


If mapping just the sheds/farmhouse etc of a farm, landuse=farmyard 
should be used.


It was discussed previously: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2016-September/019181.html 



DaveF


In Australia .. place=farm is appropriate.
The next farm may be 250 miles away, as such it usually has facilities 
for seasonal workers (say 20 people), machinery maintenance, air 
strip, ... etc.
They are substantial places that are important in a mapping and social 
sense.

Most still have the name painted on the roof to assist aerial navigation.

Remember that OSM is world wide, you can define things locally .. but 
they won't fit everywhere, hence the OSMwiki fuzziness.


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



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Christian Rogel]

> Le 2017 Gen. 17 à 16:44, Philippe Verdy  a écrit :
> 
> La bulle semble ne chercher que le nom, la puissance et l'opérateur. Il doit 
> y avoir plein de centrales qui n'ont même pas ces 3 infos de base, juste un 
> tag de classification (ou bien le nom a été effacé suite à un signalement 
> Osmose ("Centrale électrique de ") qui n'ajoute rien de plus 
> que le tag descripteur et la géoloc. Concernant les puissances, on ne sait 
> pas si c'est la puissance opérationnelle (en phase de fonctionnement normale, 
> hors maintenance régulière) ou la puissance maximale.

Je suis étonné qu’Osmose puisse retirer à l’aveugle les noms propres des 
équipements. Sa puissante intelligence artificielle ne lui permet pas d’aller 
voir ce qui est écrit sur la porte des centrales électriques;
Il y a une « usine de production d’eau potable de Kernisy », c’est ainsi que 
j’ai recopié le panneau de signalisation et c’est ce qu’indique le cadastre.
C’est un nom propre, même s’il apparaît comme générique : il y aurait pu y 
avoir « usine des eaux » ou « centrale de traitement des eaux ».
Et ça, Osmose ne pourra jamais le savoir, à moins qu’il puise dans les Big data 
et encore, car le cadastre peut contrediire le gestionnaire de l’usine.

Ne pas confondre nommage et codage : la redondance, c’est le codeur qui en voit 
partout, même quand il n’y en a pas.


Christian R.
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-GB] Become an OSM UK member before Sunday

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi all,

In order to vote at the first OSM UK General Meeting you need to be a
member for at least 30 days prior to the meeting.

I have drafted timings in the below thread (to be confirmed by the current
Directors) and this has the deadline as this Sunday.

https://www.loomio.org/d/PcOWk8n3/timings-for-getting-us-to-the-first-meeting

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

Wochennotiz Nr. 339 10.01.2017–16.01.2017

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 339 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der OpenStreetMap 
Welt ist da:

http://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2017/01/wochennotiz-nr-339/

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Wochennotiz Nr. 339 10.01.2017–16.01.2017

[Wochennotizteam]

Hallo,

die Wochennotiz Nr. 339 mit vielen wichtigen Neuigkeiten aus der OpenStreetMap 
Welt ist da:

http://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2017/01/wochennotiz-nr-339/

Viel Spaß beim Lesen!
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Adresses...

[Philippe Verdy]

Pour ça le schéma proposé indique d'ajouter des suffixes aux numéros,
autrement dit les numéros/lettres de porte/bâtiment, même si ce sont des
numéros attribués au départ par une partie privée des (co)propriétaire(s).
Voilà qui dédoublonnerait le 40 rue du Bignon.
Reste à connaitre ce lettrage pour l'ajouter aux noeuds ! Cette info doit
bien exister quelque part ne serait-ce que pour la poste ou
l'administration fiscale qui ne se contente pas de taxer le propriétaire de
la parcelle, mais aussi chacun des résidents (et a donc besoin d'adresses
plus précises !), et les services de secours qui eux aussi ont besoin
d'indications. Les relevés de compteurs d'eau et d'électricité aussi...
Alors peu importe si le lettrage des numéros de la commune ou pas. Et
nombre de copropriétés sont régulièrement redivisées et sont amenées à
avoir des adresses distinctes.

Le 17 janvier 2017 à 21:22,  a écrit :

> Effectivement les Rennais avec le 40 rue du Bignon font petits joueurs :
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/432864788#map=17/48.90523/2.36466
>
> Mais tout dépend ce que l'on entend par *partie privée*. Pour moi
> Immeuble Sigma porte A fait partie de l'adresse même si c'est un terrain
> privé c'est un accès public.
>
> Un numéro de rue pour plusieurs rues (pas forcément nommées) et pas mal de
> bâtiments, c'est juste du n'importe quoi.
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Andy Townsend]

On 17/01/2017 21:52, Warin wrote:


In Australia .. place=farm is appropriate.
The next farm may be 250 miles away, as such it usually has facilities 
for seasonal workers (say 20 people), machinery maintenance, air 
strip, ... etc.
They are substantial places that are important in a mapping and social 
sense. 


I'd totally agree with that.

In the UK there may be a few farms that are "places" in that sense too, 
but not many.  Unfortunately here some people have decided to add a 
"place=farm" node (often unnamed) on every remote cowshed they find, 
which isn't particularly helpful.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Warin]

On 18-Jan-17 07:23 AM, Dan S wrote:
2017-01-17 19:50 GMT+00:00 Dave F >:



"The Bow Quarter" appears to be an attempt to posh up the area.
Gated communities scare me as the most dangerous people are
usually inside the fence.

DaveF


Oh indeed. You should see it: some rather interesting historical 
architecture, but fully gated and walled off and no way for an 
innocent mapper to get in. A gated community like that doesn't 
actually improve the area.


Dan



Some gated communities are government sponsored .. they are called prisons.
As an innocent mapper I map these from the satellite images .. and 
nothing else.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Warin]

On 18-Jan-17 07:27 AM, Dave F wrote:


On 17/01/2017 19:38, Warin wrote:

Generally I add a node place=farm as I am not certain where the 
boundary lies 


This is a misuse of this tag. place=farm is for the rare (non 
existent?) cases where a residential community, such as a hamlet, has 
acquired the name of an adjacent farm. "a place named by a name of a 
farm" - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Farm


The description for 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dfarm is poorly written 
& confusing.


If mapping just the sheds/farmhouse etc of a farm, landuse=farmyard 
should be used.


It was discussed previously: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2016-September/019181.html 



DaveF


In Australia .. place=farm is appropriate.
The next farm may be 250 miles away, as such it usually has facilities 
for seasonal workers (say 20 people), machinery maintenance, air strip, 
... etc.
They are substantial places that are important in a mapping and social 
sense.

Most still have the name painted on the roof to assist aerial navigation.

Remember that OSM is world wide, you can define things locally .. but 
they won't fit everywhere, hence the OSMwiki fuzziness.


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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Adrien Grellier]

Bonjour,

Merci pour cette carte très utile !

Pour la blague j'en ai profité pour ajouter quelques précisions sur une
centrale électrique particulière, celle de la base Antarctique Dumont
d'Urville, en espérant qu'elle apparaisse un jour :-)

http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon/plantetgenerator.html#-66.66367,860.00474,15z

Bonne soirée

Adrien

On 17/01/2017 03:45, Jérôme Amagat wrote:
> Bonjour,
>
> J'ai fait une carte des centrales électriques et leurs puissances
> installées présentent dans OSM :
> http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-it-trentino] possibile violazione licenza

[Dario Zontini Gmail]

Dimentivaco, c'è una sezione dedicata anche a OSM

http://www.twonav.com/it/carte/openstreetmap-italia


Il 17/01/2017 22:07, Dario Zontini Gmail ha scritto:
Sul sito di TwoNav [1] se si clicca sull'icona "Vedi localizzazione" 
di una mappa in vendita appare una schermata che sembra OSM ma senza 
indicazioni alla licenza. Ho cercato nel sito ma non ho trovato 
riferimenti.


Che ne pensate?

[1] http://www.twonav.com/it/carte/italia




--


Dario Zontini

o di TwoNav [1] se si clicca sull'icona "Vedi localizzazione"
 di una mappa in vendita appare una schermata che sembra OSM ma
 senza indicazioni alla licenza. Ho cercato nel sito ma non ho
 trovato riferimenti.
 
 
 Che ne pensate?
 
 
 [1] http://www.twonav.com/it/carte/italia
 
 
 
   
   
   -- 



Dario Zontini
 


---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

[Talk-it-trentino] possibile violazione licenza

[Dario Zontini Gmail]

Sul sito di TwoNav [1] se si clicca sull'icona "Vedi localizzazione" di 
una mappa in vendita appare una schermata che sembra OSM ma senza 
indicazioni alla licenza. Ho cercato nel sito ma non ho trovato 
riferimenti.


Che ne pensate?

[1] http://www.twonav.com/it/carte/italia


--


Dario Zontini


---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

[Talk-us] WikiProject US Bicycle Route System call for volunteers

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

AASHTO has completed its Autumn 2016 round from state Departments of 
Transportation (DOTs) for new routes in the United States Bicycle Routing 
System (USBRS), like “Interstates for bikes” (network=ncn in the USA).  For 
details, please see OSM’s WIkiProject USBRS, 
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_U.S._Bicycle_Route_System.

There remains only one USBR from this round to enter into OSM:

USBR 41 in Minnesota, about 300+ miles from St. Paul north to Duluth, then 
along Lake Superior to the Canadian border near Grand Portage

It can take hours, days, weeks to “gather” OSM editing resources (thank you!) 
to enter hundreds of miles of route data, hence this post request. Should you 
wish to add or improve this USBR to OSM, please read our wiki, finding a cloud 
pointer to the USBR 41 data.  There is already a "seed" relation at the north 
and south termini, so all you need to do is "build the middle!"  This is 
carefully following the map and turn-by-turn directions and including 
largely-existing bicycle infrastructure (mostly roads, you might need to add 
some cycleways) into the relation.

In July 2015 OSM-US was granted explicit permission to add USBR ballots as they 
are made available to AASHTO by state DOTs. (Again, we thank AASHTO for this 
permission; our letter is on cloud). Procedures to enter these data are 
well-established over years of steady growth in the USBRS and careful 
coordination in this WikiProject, which appreciates completion of routes from 
additional OSM volunteers.

Project Status is now “light chartreuse” (almost completely green, tinged 
yellowish by the last few hundred miles of incomplete USBR 41). Thank you in 
advance for any additional energy this project might experience of the “read 
our wiki and GO!” style of participation we enjoy. Perhaps you are inspired to 
enter route data and watch yet another national bike route blossom on the Cycle 
Map layer of OSM.  If so, please update your status in the wiki as/after you do 
so, and Thank You!

Humbly and sincerely,

Steve All
WikiProject USBRS coordinator
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[osm . sanspourriel]

Le 17/01/2017 à 20:27, Jérôme Amagat - jerome.ama...@gmail.com a écrit :

il n'y a d'indiqué que les centrales en activité,

Pour avoir les vieux tromblons :
http://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/spip.php?page=carte
Enfin au moins d'un certain type et pour la France.
Les emballages restent encore :
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/278223629
Mais le réacteur n'a plus son petit nom EL4.

http://mc.bbbike.org/mc/?lon=-76.724437=40.1533=17=2=osmfr=mapbox-satellite=ol_mapquest-labels=100?marker=Three%20Mile%20Island,%20TMI-2,%20%C3%89tats-Unis%20d%27Am%C3%A9rique

En cherchant bien on retrouve TMI-2 :
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/88109861
(Three Mile Island, 
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrale_nucl%C3%A9aire_de_Three_Mile_Island)
Là le mode de production n'est pas oublié mais ce n'est pas complet non 
plus.
Curieusement malgré l'historique lourd du site le bâti (TMI-1 et TMI-2) 
n'est représenté que comme un seul bâtiment.

Jean-Yvon
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-us] Green Mountain National Forest cleanup

[Kevin Kenny]

My big issue with this is that we - alas! - need to have something "tagged
for the renderer."

Over on the other side of Lake Champlain and the Taconics, we have the same
problem with the Catskill and Adirondack Parks, which are protected areas
with an immense public-private partnership. (Something over half the
Adirondack Park is owned by New York State, and the rest is quite
restrictively administered by the Adirondack Park Agency. Its level of
protection exceeds that of any of our National Parks.)

The problem is that boundary=protected_area does not render in any of the
map layers available from openstreetmap.org. People editing
protected_area's cannot see their results on the server, and newcomers to
OSM don't even know that we have them in the database.

I'd say that the answer is, "fix the renderer" - and surely
Mapnik/Carto/... can handle it, since I use that toolchain to render my own
maps. The underlying issue is that to fix it in any of the default
renderings (OSM default, OpenCycleMap, etc.), 'hstore' would have to be
enabled on the server's database to get the 'protect_class' tag into the
system. For whatever reason, the server team has balked at doing this for
quite literally several years. I do not expect this situation to resolve in
my lifetime,. and I have ceased to request any support for protected area
rendering. Instead, I do most of my own rendering on maps such as
http://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test3.html, and accept the fact that I
will have a day or two delay in being able to retrieve any updates. (I
don't have the resources to accept minutely updates, so I depend on the
daily extracts at geofabrik.de. Often, I let my map fall several months
behind, when I'm not actively mapping).

Most US mappers have simply accepted that the renderer will not be fixed.
The compromise that I used when reworking the Adirondack Park polygons was
not well received on this list, but at least nobody reverted the changes.
In that compromise solution:

- the Adirondack and Catskill Parks as a whole were tagged
boundary=national_park. This tagging is close to the truth except that it
is New York State rather than a nation-state that administers it. Given the
US principle of separate sovereignty, I'm willing to live with this.

- the individual state (and in the case of the Catskills, New York City)
owned parcels received the additional tagging of 'leisure=nature_reserve'
plus appropriate 'protected_area' tagging. That way, they are correct in
the new scheme and still render plausibly. 'Nature reserves' encompass many
different things, so I wasn't too uncomfortable with this tagging.

- I seriously attempted to make appropriate choices for 'protect_class' and
related tags. This sometimes meant up-classifying relative to the IUCN
database. IUCN wants to classify the Adirondack and Catskill holdings no
higher than protect_class=6, because they don't enjoy national-level
protection. That's again a failure to understand the US legal system; the
State-level protection that they enjoy is far stronger than any Federal
protection: these two parks are read into the state constitution. I was
entirely comfortable giving the High Peaks or West Canada Lake wilderness
areas protect_class=1b. They are indeed protected wilderness, where Man is
a visitor who does not remain.

The result of the compromise is, as you can see:

- everything renders on the main page. The parks are at least visible.
(There has been at least one round with the National Forests that rendered
them entirely invisible.)

- the 'landuse=forest' tag is not abused. There is no green infill on
tracts that are not forested. The system still presumes that
'landuse=forest' means 'every square metre covered by trees - and cannot
cope with the idea of 'the landowner's intent is to use the tract for
forestry, but this particular bit, this year, is occupied by beavers' -
according to the OSM purists, that's no longer 'forest'. (For this reason,
I find 'landuse=forest' to be nearly useless: all the 'forest' tracts that
I've ever mapped have transient or permanent phenomena meaning that
individual pieces may be clearcut, bare rock, or open water at a particular
time.)

- the 'leisure=nature_reserve' tag is only slightly abused. A wilderness
area, a wildlife management region, or a protected watershed (all of which
permit recreational use) are all reserved to nature, and no US English
speaker would be astonished at the tagging. I refuse to fight with the
purists on this issue. There is no other suitable tag available that will
ever be rendered on the main map.

- the 'boundary=national_park' tag is abused on very few polygons, and can
be reverted if and when there is ever a rendering of the protected_area
status. I am not optimistic that this will occur.

This issue has been discussed here many times before. The result is an
impasse. This is one of the issues where nobody has been able to span the
"US-European divide." I do not expect it ever to be resolved, 

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Dave F]

On 17/01/2017 19:38, Warin wrote:

Generally I add a node place=farm as I am not certain where the 
boundary lies 


This is a misuse of this tag. place=farm is for the rare (non existent?) 
cases where a residential community, such as a hamlet, has acquired the 
name of an adjacent farm. "a place named by a name of a farm" - 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Farm


The description for http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dfarm 
is poorly written & confusing.


If mapping just the sheds/farmhouse etc of a farm, landuse=farmyard 
should be used.


It was discussed previously: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2016-September/019181.html 



DaveF


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

[Talk-lt] Asociacija „Atvirasis žemėlapis“

[Tomas Straupis]

Sveiki

  Įkurta asociacija „Atvirasis žemėlapis“.
  Bendrą informacija kaip/kur/kas rasite dienoraštyje:
  https://blog.openmap.lt/2017/01/17/asociacija-atvirasis-zemelapis/

-- 
Tomas

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Dan S]

2017-01-17 19:50 GMT+00:00 Dave F :

>
> "The Bow Quarter" appears to be an attempt to posh up the area. Gated
> communities scare me as the most dangerous people are usually inside the
> fence.
>
> DaveF
>

Oh indeed. You should see it: some rather interesting historical
architecture, but fully gated and walled off and no way for an innocent
mapper to get in. A gated community like that doesn't actually improve the
area.

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] OSM-BE website & membership

[Bessières , Marc]

Super travail Ben (et ceux qui t'ont aidé!), le site est super! 

Et inscription effectuée! 

Le 2017-01-17 17:38, Ben Abelshausen a écrit :

> Dag allen,
> 
> Bonjour à tous, 
> 
> NL: 
> 
> Voor 2017 hebben we grootse plannen met OSM-België. We hebben ondertussen een 
> nieuwe website (http:// [1]www.osm.be [1]/ [1]), en ons doel is duidelijk; 
> het verder ondersteunen van de mapping community in België! 
> 
> Om bepaalde projecten te kunnen blijven doen, bijvoorbeeld onze website maar 
> ook hackdays, mapping parties & missing maps, zullen we onszelf wat beter 
> moeten organiseren. Om dit te kunnen realiseren moeten we eerst en vooral 
> onze organisatie wat meer formaliseren en beter communiceren over wat we 
> doen. We zijn hiermee al begonnen met de nieuwe website, maar een eerste 
> belangrijke stap in dit proces is een basis ledenbestand opbouwen. 
> 
> We zouden dus willen vragen lid te worden van OSM-België. Dit is belangrijk 
> omdat je dan kan mee beslissen over de richting die we moeten uitgaan, kan 
> meebeslissen wie er bestuurder moet zijn enzovoort. Zonder leden staan we 
> nergens.  
> 
> Verder kunnen we hierdoor later ook sponsors proberen aantrekken, meedoen aan 
> 'Summer of Code' om bepaalde tools uit te bouwen of we kunnen een local 
> chapter worden van het OSMF zodat we ook daar een stem hebben. 
> 
> Je inschrijven kan hier, doen dus! 
> 
> http://www.osm.be/nl/signup.html
> 
> FR:
> 
> Pour 2017, nous avons des grands projets pour OpenStreetMap Belgique. Nous 
> avons à présent un nouveau site internet (http://www.osm.be/) et notre but 
> est clair : soutenir d'avantage la communauté "cartographique" en Belgique. 
> 
> Afin de pouvoir continuer certains projets, comme notre site web, des 
> "hackdays" et mapathons, nous devons mieux nous organiser. Pour cela, nous 
> devons en premier plus formaliser notre organisation et mieux communiquer sur 
> ce que nous faisons. Le nouveau site web est un début, mais une première 
> étape importante dans ce processus est une adhésion de base.  
> 
> Nous voudrions donc vous demander de rejoindre OSM-BE en tant que membre. 
> C'est important car vous pourrez décider la direction que nous devrions 
> prendre, choisir les responsables, etc. Sans membres, nous ne sommes nulle 
> part... 
> 
> En outre, après un peu de temps nous pouvons aussi essayer d'attirer des 
> sponsors, participer au "Summer of Code" pour y construire des outils 
> spécifiques ou encore essayer de devenir un chapitre local de l'OSM 
> Foundation de manière à y avoir aussi une voix. 
> 
> Il ne vous reste donc plus qu'à vous inscrire ! 
> 
> http://www.osm.be/ [2]f [2]r [2]/signup.htm [2]l [2] 
> 
> Cordialement, 
> Groeten, 
> 
> Ben 
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

  

Links:
--
[1] http://www.osm.be/
[2] http://www.osm.be/fr/signup.html
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Adresses...

[osm . sanspourriel]

> Rien d'inventé dans cette discussion  (sauf les numéro de rue car 
cette histoire remonte à une bonne dizaine d'année et j'ai eu la flemme 
de regarder dans la bano).


Dans le genre il y a les SI comme celui d'EDF SA qui n'accepte que les 
voies connues de son système.
Un collègue ne pouvait mettre son lieu-dit car au niveau du SI le 
lieu-dit était sur la commune d'à côté. Le lieu-dit est en fait sur les 
deux communes.


Alors il a entré une fausse adresse (ou plus probablement EDF SA l'a 
fait pour lui) et EDF SA n'arrivait pas à lui délivrer le courrier 
(l'adresse étant fausse... par construction).


> Et avec la logique du point d'accès (transition public/privé) vous 
les condamnez à avoir des adresses imprécises...


> tout ça parce qu'on ne leur donne que le point d'accès (l'adresse 
pour vous ) de l'établissement situé dans le parc Icade des portes de 
Paris  (seulement 500 mètres de large par 1 km de longueur...) , point 
d'accès qui ne sert au final pas à grand chose si après on ne sait pas 
où aller. Sans compter que des points d'accès il y en a plusieurs


Effectivement les Rennais avec le 40 rue du Bignon font petits joueurs :

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/432864788#map=17/48.90523/2.36466

Mais tout dépend ce que l'on entend par /partie privée/. Pour moi 
Immeuble Sigma porte A fait partie de l'adresse même si c'est un terrain 
privé c'est un accès public.


Un numéro de rue pour plusieurs rues (pas forcément nommées) et pas mal 
de bâtiments, c'est juste du n'importe quoi.


Faire une relation pour l'ensemble des bâtiments et rue du 40 rue du 
Bignon, est-ce que ça un sens ?


À mon avis la mairie (heu les mairies : le 40 rue du Bignon est à 
Chantepie et Cesson-Sévigné - le début de la rue est à Rennes) devraient 
nommer ces voies si le gestionnaire ne le fait pas (ou s'il ne respecte 
pas certaines règles) : OSM, BAN et BANO ne sont que des révélateurs.
Les deux personnes de Rennes Métropole auront peut-être une idée pour 
diminuer le m... dans la zone.
Car en l'état, ça donnerait "40 rue du Bignon, 31315 Chantepie", exit 
les "immeuble Sigma porte A".
Seul un nommage de toute rue accessible au public (indépendamment du 
statut privé/public de la voirie) me semble de nature à lever les 
ambiguïtés (ici les bàl sont au niveau des portes d'entrée).
Si ce n'est pas prévu alors "vous les condamnez à avoir des adresses 
imprécises".


N. B. : et l'adresse de la boîte-aux-lettres peut être ailleurs (CIDEX).
Est-ce dans 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3TzG4CYNDnYSXM0dDhaVjNGTDQ/view ce à 
quoi correspond "délivrance postale" (page 6). ? A priori oui, mais on 
va avoir plusieurs adresses à ce CIDEX là.


p15 : sans casse et en majuscule.

SI c'est en majuscule c'est que c'est en haut de casse.
Je suppose que les réacteurs ont voulu dire sans accents car La Poste ne 
gère toujours pas les accents.


13 colonnes et il s'agit d'un modèle simple ;-).


Jean-Yvon

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Paul Sladen]

On Tue, 17 Jan 2017, Dave F wrote:
> On 17/01/2017 14:32, Derick Rethans wrote:
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/77260547
> I think this is inaccurate mapping. The buildings are called 'Queen's 
> Park Court' The residential area should not include the grassed area or 
> the nursery.

Residental areas normally are mapped so that they include the gardens
belonging to the residences.  If the 'green space' is the 'gardens'
for the surrounding tower blocks this is perhaps correct?

A solution might be to ask whether somebody living in Queen's Park
Court would count the garden in the middle as being part of QPC?

For the nursery, it's could be less clear cut:  eg. is the nursey
perhaps on the ground floor with housing above?

-Paul


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Dave F]

On 17/01/2017 14:32, Derick Rethans wrote:


It is what I do too:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/77260547


I think this is inaccurate mapping. The buildings are called 'Queen's 
Park Court' The residential area should not include the grassed area or 
the nursery.


DaveF

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Dave F]

For residential areas I agree. In this case place=* would be better. An 
area's name refers to all entities in the vicinity (schools, parks etc), 
not just where people live. Unfortunately landuse=residential is still 
misused to be all encompassing of an area or even whole towns.


"The Bow Quarter" appears to be an attempt to posh up the area. Gated 
communities scare me as the most dangerous people are usually inside the 
fence.


DaveF


On 17/01/2017 13:33, Andrew Hain wrote:

A recent changeset in southwest London
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43807789] added names to 
landuse=residential and landuse=commercial polygons. The mapper has 
not responded to the changeset comment that I left some weeks ago. The 
names themselves read more like descriptions to me as a local and they 
were added to the existing polygons, which are somewhat arbitrary (you 
could micromap with a polygon for each block omitting all roads). 
These names appear on OSM-carto in italics.


What is a general view on when it makes sense to add a name to a 
landuse polygon?


--
Andrew


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




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Jérôme Amagat]

il n'y a d'indiqué que les centrales en activité, c'est les centrale
(power=plant) et la puissance est normalement la puissance nette installé
(tag plant:output:electricity=*) c'est a dire la puissance maximum qui peut
être injecté sur le réseau. Dans la légende je mets "surface des symboles
proportionnelle à la puissance installée".

j'ai réglé le problème des bulles vide (c’était quand il n'y a pas de nom
maintenant il y a la puissance qui doit toujours être affichée). par contre
pour les 0 en trop dans la puissance j'ai pas encore réglé le problème.

Sinon ici :
http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon/plantetgenerator.html
il y a, en plus des power=plant, les power=generator qui ne font pas partis
d'un power=plant (normalement il faudrait que tous ces générateurs fassent
partie d'une centrale) par contre les bulles sont vides. ça ajoute pas mal
d’éolienne et de solaire dans certains endroits de France et aussi pas mal
en Allemagne par exemple.
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-cz] Nedělitelná mezera v OSM datech

[jzvc]

Cus,

ja bych to neresil. Je to vec renederu. To jaky jazyk je primarni muze 
snadno zjistit - bud tak, ze se podiva s jakym lang tagem se shoduje, 
nebo tak, ze se podiva uvnitr jakych hranic lezi.



Jak bylo zmineno, to pak zacnem resit jestli se spravne deli slova, co 
je spojka a co predlozka ...


Ono tohle porcovani podle mezer nefunguje spravne prakticky v zadnem 
existujicim jazyce.


Apropos, kdyz uz to zminujes … typograficky spravne by si nemel pouzivat 
"anglicky" ale „cesky“ uvozovky (a ja bych mel psat nabodenicka), stejne 
tak by se nemelo pouzivat spojovnik - ale pomlcka –(—) jedno pripadne 
dvouctvercikova, pripadne minus − (i kdyz to tak nevypada sou to 4 ruzny 
znaky)  ... ;D




Takovej vyber (vazne nevim jak to dopadne v tom mailu), je to popiska, 
znak (pokud je zobrazovanej), alt sekvence, hexa kod a html entita.


Uvozovky
rovné uvozovky (na klávesnici)  "  0034x0022   
spodní uvozovky „   0132x201E   
horní uvozovky  “   0147x201C   
spodní jednoduchá uvozovka  ‚   0130x201A   
horní jednoduchá uvozovka   ‘   0145x2018   
apostrof’   0146x2019
francouzká otevírací uvozovka   »   0187x00BB   
francouzká uzavírací uvozovka   «   0171x00AB   

Matematika
X krát  ×   0215x00D7   
děleno  ÷   0247x00F7   
plus (na klávesnici)+   0043x002B   
mínus   −   8722x2212   
plus mínus  ±   0177x00B1   
stupně  °   0176x00B0   
zeměpisné minuty′   2032x2032   
promile ‰   8240x2030   
spojovník (na klávesnici)   -   0045x002D   
rozdělovník = spojovník x­x 0173
pomlčka –   0150
dlouhá pomlčka  —   0151
výpustka…   0133
nedělitelná mezera  x x 0160
narození*   
úmrtí   †   0134
euro€   8364
copyright   ©   0169
registrovaná značka ®   0174
m2  ㎡   13217   


Dne 17.1.2017 v 8:45 Lukáš Karas napsal(a):

Ahoj, o víkendu autor OSM Scout knihovny přidal užitečnou funkcionalitu
  - zalamování dlouhých popisků do více řádků. Dle očekávání se ale názvy
zalamují v místech kde vykreslovací engine uzná za vhodné, nikoliv tam kde
je to správně (předložky zůstávají na konci řádku), například:

Libčice nad
   Vltavou

  Týnec nad
   Sázavou

Tam lze "nad" na konci řádku ještě tolerovat i když mě osobně se nelibí,
ale u "u":

Nová ves u
  Chýnova

Je to typograficky špatně. Stejným neduhem trpí i Mapnik.

Moje otázka zní, zda-li je žádoucí do OSM přidávat na taková místa nedělitelné
mezery (v xml "", unicode znak U+00A0) a existuje na to nějaký postup
jak to provést hromadně? Poradí si s tím běžné editory? Neztratí se ta mezera
při první editaci?

Pokud i s nedělitelnou mezerou to renderer zalomí špatně, je potřeba opravit
renderer, ale bez ní nemá prostě šanci cokoliv hádat...

Lukáš



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




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

[Talk-it] information=guidepost vs sign vs altro, quale meglio?

[girarsi_liste]

Si tratta di una tavoletta di legno messa in verticale come segnaletica
di entrata di un B, con scritto il nome del B e una freccia di
direzione per indicare l'entrata al cortile interno, questa è posta a
lato strada all'accesso dello stesso e sta eretta su due pali di legno,
e di legno è anche la tavoletta.

Per il momento ho taggato con:

tourism=information

information=guidepost

inscription=B nome


Però pnso vada meglio al posto di guidepost, sign, perchè di fatto è un
segnale/informazione sul posto e c'è solo quello che io sappia, non ne
ho visti altri in quel paese.


Ho già guardato su taginfo e questo valore sign ha 271 nodi taggati:

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/information=sign

Che dite?

-- 
Simone Girardelli
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|



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

[OSM-talk-be] Interior/accesibility mapping for FOSDEM

[Johan Van de Wauw]

Hi all,

FOSDEM[1] is the largest open source conference of Europe and will be
happening the first weekend of february.

For the first time this year the organizers are trying to make an
application (interior mapping/routing) to help people, especially
users of wheelchairs find their way around the campus.

Our original plan was to use and enhance Open streetmap for this, but
given the short time left (and the fact that indoor mapping +
accessibility + a temporary event are not ideal i open streetmap) it
was decided to use the indoor navigation software developed for CCC.

Work is happening in github[2], and you can check work in progress at
[3]. If you would like to help out, feel free to contact me or send a
pull request:-) You can also find us on freenode irc on
#fosdem-volunteers and #fosdem-nav. Since we have a few members who
are working at or close to ULB, it may also be useful that they check
the proposed routes and watch eg for steps. If we know it well enough
in advance we can still order ramps for doorsills, ...

Also during the event (and on friday) we can still use volunteers.
Feel free to register at http://volunteers.fosdem.org/

Last but not least, don't forget that on Sunday there will be a
geospatial track - I'm sure there will be talks which will interest
you :-) We will have a slightly larger room, so all invited!
https://fosdem.org/2017/schedule/track/geospatial/

Kind Regards,
Johan

[1] https://fosdem.org/2017/
[2] https://github.com/fosdem/maps
[3] http://nav.fosdem.org/

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

Re: [Talk-pt] Importação massiva na Anadia

[Marcos Oliveira]

Já se passou um mês, sempre é para deixar os dados no mapa?

No dia 15 de dezembro de 2016 às 11:48, Pedro Pereira 
escreveu:

> Bom dia,
>
> Uma vez que o Hugo refere "Sinceramente não percebo muito bem a
> necessidade de discutir tal procedimento", sugiro que se responda a
> explicar as implicações dessas alterações tais como:
> - problema direitos autor;
> - pode originar sobreposição com informação mais detalhada;
> - a lista poder ajudar no sentido de definir as tag's;
> - entre outros...
>
> No meu caso de importação tive o cuidado de fazer o carregamento por
> partes (apenas naquelas onde não existiam qq áreas - locais mais afastadas
> dos centros urbanos).
>
> Abraço,
> Pedro
>
> 2016-12-15 11:19 GMT+00:00 Rui Oliveira :
>
>> Bom dia a todos.
>> Apenas uma actualização acerca da importação de Anadia. O Utilizador
>> responsável pela mesma respondeu-me (a mensagem está apresentada em
>> baixo).  Penso que agora pode se tomar uma decisão. O Marcos estava
>> correcto nas suas suspeitas, a fonte foi o PDM de Anadia. Jorge, também
>> recebeste resposta?
>>
>> Bom dia!
>>
>> Só para transmitir que os dados importados têm origem no levantamento do
>> uso/ocupação do solo, realizado no âmbito da Revisão do PDM de Anadia.
>> Desconhecia por completo a obrigatoriedade de discutir com a comunidade a
>> realização de importações.
>> Sinceramente não percebo muito bem a necessidade de discutir tal
>> procedimento. De qualquer modo, aceito as regras e assim sendo deixo à
>> vossa consideração uma decisão sobre a importação.
>>
>> Com os melhores cumprimentos
>> Hugo
>>
>> Em 12/12/2016 17:21, "Jorge Gustavo Rocha"  escreveu:
>>
>>> Olá,
>>>
>>> Penso que não é crítico esperarmos mais algum tempo.
>>>
>>> Teria interesse discutirmos que manchas (isto é, que classes de usos e
>>> ocupação do solo) devemos importar no OSM e com que tags (qual o
>>> correspondente valor da tag landuse).
>>>
>>> Ele importou as áreas agrícolas com as seguintes tags:
>>>
>>> landuse=farmyard
>>> name=Áreas Agrícolas
>>>
>>> (também acabou por importar mais uma tag "id" e "Vertices" que não
>>> interessam para o OSM).
>>>
>>> Nas áreas florestais, usou as tags:
>>>
>>> landuse=forest
>>> leaf_cycle=mixed
>>> leaf_type=mixed
>>> name=Espaços Florestais
>>>
>>> Ao lado, em Águeda, alguns espaços florestais estão com as tags:
>>>
>>> landuse=forest
>>> name=Platanus sp.
>>> wood=deciduous
>>>
>>> Seria interessante usarmos esta importação para acrescentarmos uma
>>> entrada no Wiki com a melhor forma de usarmos estas informações que as
>>> Câmaras poderão libertar ao público. Existe a COS [1] Carta de Uso e
>>> Ocupação do Solo de Portugal Continental, da DGTerritório, mas não é livre.
>>> No entanto, todos (penso eu) devem seguir uma classificação semelhante.
>>>
>>> Mas gostei da sugestão do Rui. Esperamos mais uns dias.
>>>
>>> Abraço,
>>>
>>> J. Gustavo
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.dgterritorio.pt/cartografia_e_geodesia/cartografi
>>> a/cartografia_tematica/carta_de_ocupacao_do_solo__cos_/
>>>
>>> Às 16:34 de 12-12-2016, Rui Oliveira escreveu:
>>>
 Bem, estive a ver os changests e de facto é uma pena o utilizador não
 estar disponivel para responder... A importação foi de facto massiva,
 mas parece ser de alta qualidade, feita por quem sabe usar o JOSM e
 percebe do assunto e do que está a fazer.  Além disso foi adicionado
 muito detalhe interessante. Se como o marcos referiu foi tirado do SIG
 da CM de Anadia, pode até ser de alguem ligado ao SIG da própria camara
 (um engenheiro da câmara) e até  com autorização para o fazer. Se alguém
 tivesse contacto com a camara ou os serviços seria interessante de
 verificar isto...

 Claro que isto não implica que se passem por cima das regras da nossa
 comunidade, mas eu vou tentar enviar uma ultima mensagem ao mesmo. Já
 agora... mais mensagem menos mensagem... não irá fazer mal nenhum.
 Entretanto, proponho que se defina um prazo para, a partir daí se fazer
 a reversão.

 Cumprimentos.



 2016-12-12 11:41 GMT+00:00 Marcos Oliveira
 >:

 Tudo indica que provêm dos SIG da CM da Anadia.

 Jorge, eu disponibilizo-me para reverter, caso o editor em questão
 continue a não comunicar.

 No dia 12 de dezembro de 2016 às 10:47, Rui Oliveira
 > escreveu:

 Concordo.

 Se é uma importação massiva,  deve ser discutida e articulada
 com a comunidade. Se o utilizador não responde a mensagens as
 alterações devem ser revertidas.

 Gustavo, podes mandar o link do changeset? Era para dar uma
 espreitadela por curiosidade para ver o que foi alterado.

 Em 12/12/2016 10:40, "Jorge Gustavo Rocha" 

Re: [Talk-it] R: Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

[arcanma]

voschix wrote
> Scusa, mi manca ancora qualcosa per capire.
> Che cosa intendi con
> "quando qualcuno fa edit direttamente dalla pagina web di OSM e si basa su
> quanto ha visto
> in quella pagina"?
> ID? Potlatch2?

Esatto, sono andato a vedere le traduzioni dei place in Nominatim perché un
utente ha cercato Città della Pieve nella pagina principale di OSM, dato che
nel risultato compare "Frazione Città della Pieve, PG, UMB, Italia" ha
pensato che fosse inserito male, dato che è un capoluogo di comune e non una
frazione, quindi con iD ha corretto immediatamente in "city".

Ciao
Marcello



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/R-Traduzione-italiana-di-place-in-Nominatim-tp5889518p5889544.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

[Talk-us] Green Mountain National Forest cleanup

[Adam Franco]

Hello all,

I'm planning to do some cleanup of the Green Mountain National Forest in
Vermont and figured it might be useful to provide the opportunity for
feedback before embarking on this project.

The Green Mountain National forest is currently mapped as two large
outer-area relations that include large swaths of private land and many
ways and relations that mark independent parcel boundaries -- the latter
having a multitude of tag schemes.

Outer area boundaries:

   - northern section: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2030450
   - southern section: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1610349

Many parcel boundaries (examples):

   - https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6850907#map=13/44.0444/-73.0668
   - https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6631735#map=12/44.0070/-72.9569
   - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116060714#map=12/44.0123/-72.9418
   - 

There is very little consistency in the tagging of the parcel boundaries --
many are tagged as boundary=national_park, others are tagged as
boundary=protected_area. As well, many [most?] are tagged with
landuse=forest even if they are sensitive areas (protected watersheds),
wilderness areas (no logging allowed ever), designated recreation areas, or
otherwise not open to logging.

I propose to group all of the parcel boundaries into two super-relations,
one for the northern half of the GMNF and one for the souther half of the
GMNF. These super-relations would have:

   - type =boundary
   
   - boundary =
   protected_area
   
   - protect_class =6
   - protection_title
   =National
   Forest
   - protected 
   =perpetuity
   - operator =United
   States Forest Service

   - leisure=nature_reserve (this seemed to be recommended in the
"Okanogan-Wenatchee
   National Forest (landuse=forest and US National forests again)
   "
   discussion a few months ago)

as described on US Forest Service Data wiki page
.


The members of this super-relations would have their own tags either
normalized to the same values above the super-relation (maintaining
additional parcel-specific details) or would have their duplicative tags
removed. In particular, the boundary=national_park tag would be be
normalized to boundary=protected_area and the landuse=forest tag would
generally be removed.

I'm planning to do all of this cleanup manually sometime soon and just
wondered if anyone had any further suggestions. I guess an alternative
process would be to reimport the parcel boundaries from the latest "Survey
Boundaries maintained by the US Forest Service
" file, but I'm not sure
if that might be more difficult or easier.

Thanks for any input!
Adam

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Adam%20Franco
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-cz] Nedělitelná mezera v OSM datech

[majka]

Osobně se z ryze praktických důvodů přikláním k tomu, to zatím ignorovat.

I pokud bychom to opravili, nevěřím tomu, že nám to mobilní editory a
jejich uživatelé zase zpátky při případné editaci nezmění zpátky. Pokud
budeme mít štěstí, zůstanou názvy měst a obcí, ale u ostatních jmen si
nedělám iluze ohledně toho, že by tam nedělitelná mezera zůstala dlouho.
Připadá mi, že je to dost práce s velice nejistým výsledkem.

V skrytu duše doufám, že render bude časem inteligentnější. Tipla bych si,
že slovo o jednom až třech písmenech se zalomením za sebou je chyba v dost
jazycích (nebo je to jedno jestli zalomit před či za). Ale vzhledem k tomu,
že se ignoruje podle mě větší chyba, a to zalamování jmen měst s pomlčkami,
protože to berou jako rozdělovací znaménko, moc naděje si v nejbližší době
nedělám.

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

[OSM-talk-fr] Intégrations données repères de crue historique

[Mides]

Bonjour,

je souhaiterai intégrer quelques repères concernant des données historiques
de crue, mais je sais pas trop quels tags utiliser mis à part :   historic=
highwater_mark.

Concernant les informations que l'on peut trouver sur ces entités, au
nombre d'une vingtaine, il existe l'adresse ou la zone approximative, le
type d'objet indiquant l'information (plaque, trait, etc), l'état du repère
à ce jour ainsi que son existence ou pas sur le terrain à l'heure actuelle.
D'ailleurs, concernant ce dernier point, existence ou pas, doit on intégrer
la donnée non existante dans la base Osm ?

J'ai jeté un petit coup d’œil sur Overpass mais pas assez de données, 6 sur
toute la France,  pour se faire une idée de la façon de taguer ces objets
avec les diverses informations fournies.

Peut être auriez vous une idée ?

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

Re: [Talk-cz] Nedělitelná mezera v OSM datech

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj, jsem proti.

Forma by měla být oddělena od obsahu.
Zalamování řádek, dělení slov, skloňování a časování ať je záležitostí
zpracování dat, ne jejich uložení.

2017-01-17 11:34 GMT+01:00 Lukáš Karas :

> Ta pravidla, která mezera může být dělitelná a která nemůže, se mohou
> lišit podle jazyka. Renderer (...) by v takovém případě musel hádat v jakém
> jazyce je dané jméno
>

Není od toho v OSM jazykový prefix?

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

[Talk-cz] WeeklyOSM CZ 338

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj, je dostupné vydání 338 týdeníku WeeklyOSM:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/cz/archives/8595

* Placené úseky na D8.
* Mapa osvětlení ulic.
* Jarní mapping party SK.
* Zdrojáky freemap.sk
* Tester adres Regio OSM.
* Další rozšíření HDYC.
* OSM a ženská obřízka.
* Uber a OSM.

Pěkné počtení ...

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

[OSM-talk-be] OSM-BE website & membership

[Ben Abelshausen]

Dag allen,
Bonjour à tous,

NL:

Voor 2017 hebben we grootse plannen met OSM-België. We hebben ondertussen
een nieuwe website (http:// www.osm.be/
), en ons doel is duidelijk; het verder ondersteunen
van de mapping community in België!

Om bepaalde projecten te kunnen blijven doen, bijvoorbeeld onze website
maar ook hackdays, mapping parties & missing maps, zullen we onszelf wat
beter moeten organiseren. Om dit te kunnen realiseren moeten we eerst en
vooral onze organisatie wat meer formaliseren en beter communiceren over
wat we doen. We zijn hiermee al begonnen met de nieuwe website, maar een
eerste belangrijke stap in dit proces is een basis ledenbestand opbouwen.

We zouden dus willen vragen lid te worden van OSM-België. Dit is belangrijk
omdat je dan kan mee beslissen over de richting die we moeten uitgaan, kan
meebeslissen wie er bestuurder moet zijn enzovoort. Zonder leden staan we
nergens.

Verder kunnen we hierdoor later ook sponsors proberen aantrekken, meedoen
aan 'Summer of Code' om bepaalde tools uit te bouwen of we kunnen een local
chapter worden van het OSMF zodat we ook daar een stem hebben.

Je inschrijven kan hier, doen dus!

http://www.osm.be/nl/signup.html

FR:

Pour 2017, nous avons des grands projets pour OpenStreetMap Belgique. Nous
avons à présent un nouveau site internet (http://www.osm.be/) et notre but
est clair : soutenir d'avantage la communauté "cartographique" en Belgique.

Afin de pouvoir continuer certains projets, comme notre site web, des
"hackdays" et mapathons, nous devons mieux nous organiser. Pour cela, nous
devons en premier plus formaliser notre organisation et mieux communiquer
sur ce que nous faisons. Le nouveau site web est un début, mais une
première étape importante dans ce processus est une adhésion de base.

Nous voudrions donc vous demander de rejoindre OSM-BE en tant que membre.
C'est important car vous pourrez décider la direction que nous devrions
prendre, choisir les responsables, etc. Sans membres, nous ne sommes nulle
part...

En outre, après un peu de temps nous pouvons aussi essayer d'attirer des
sponsors, participer au "Summer of Code" pour y construire des outils
spécifiques ou encore essayer de devenir un chapitre local de l'OSM
Foundation de manière à y avoir aussi une voix.

Il ne vous reste donc plus qu'à vous inscrire !

http://www.osm.be/ f
r 
/signup.htm l


Cordialement,
Groeten,

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] brandweer, Turnhout

[Ben Abelshausen]

Ik wil misschien wel...

Met vriendelijke groeten,
Best regards,

Ben Abelshausen

2017-01-17 16:14 GMT+01:00 joost schouppe :

> Hoi,
>
> Iemand die tijd heeft om met iemand van de brandweer te gaan babbelen over
> OSM, in het Turnhoutse?
>
> --
> Joost Schouppe
> OpenStreetMap  |
> Twitter  | LinkedIn
>  | Meetup
> 
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [Talk-it-trentino] Sportello Open

[Marco Ciampa]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 05:01:32PM +0100, Luca Delucchi wrote:
> Ciao a tutti,
> 
> volevo segnalare che Venerdì a Pergine si terrà il primo Sportello Open.
> 
> Lo Sportello Open è l'ex sportello Linux di Pergine che si amplia e
> aggiunge altre 2 attività, OpenStreetMap e Wikimedia.
> 
> L'appuntamento è presso la sede della Sat di Pergine ore 20.30.

Ecco un articolo in proposito:

https://www.cultura.trentino.it/Approfondimenti/In-Trentino-parte-lo-Sportello-Open-delle-comunita-Linux-OpenStreetMap-e-Wikipedia

Con preghiera di diffusione...

--


Marco Ciampa

I know a joke about UDP, but you might not get it.



 GNU/Linux User #78271
 FSFE fellow #364




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

[Talk-it-trentino] Sportello Open

[Luca Delucchi]

Ciao a tutti,

volevo segnalare che Venerdì a Pergine si terrà il primo Sportello Open.

Lo Sportello Open è l'ex sportello Linux di Pergine che si amplia e
aggiunge altre 2 attività, OpenStreetMap e Wikimedia.

L'appuntamento è presso la sede della Sat di Pergine ore 20.30.

-- 
ciao
Luca

www.lucadelu.org

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Philippe Verdy]

La bulle semble ne chercher que le nom, la puissance et l'opérateur. Il
doit y avoir plein de centrales qui n'ont même pas ces 3 infos de base,
juste un tag de classification (ou bien le nom a été effacé suite à un
signalement Osmose ("Centrale électrique de ") qui n'ajoute
rien de plus que le tag descripteur et la géoloc. Concernant les
puissances, on ne sait pas si c'est la puissance opérationnelle (en phase
de fonctionnement normale, hors maintenance régulière) ou la puissance
maximale.

Le 17 janvier 2017 à 16:32, Francescu GAROBY  a écrit :

> Superbe, cette carte !
> Juste une petite correction à apporter : l'affichage de la puissance d'une
> centrale électrique (avec un seul 'e' accentué...) n'est pas harmonisé.
> J'ai par exemple la valeur "12. MW", pour le parc éolien
> dans le Cap Corse (Haute-Corse). De plus, une virgule plutôt qu'un point,
> pour séparer la partie entière de la partie décimale serait préférable...
> Et sinon, pas mal de centrales ont une bulle vide, quand on clique dessus
> : bug d'affichage ou manque d'info ?
>
> Francescu
>
> Le 17 janvier 2017 à 03:45, Jérôme Amagat  a
> écrit :
>
>> Bonjour,
>>
>> J'ai fait une carte des centrales électriques et leurs puissances
>> installées présentent dans OSM :
>> http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-fr mailing list
>> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Francescu
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Philippe Verdy]

Il manque des centrales désaffectées... ou hors d'usage (Tchernobyl et
Fukushima) ! Pourtant il y a toujours une activité au moins de surveillance
et des travaux énormes (et ruineux) tout autour. Et une grosse consommation
d'énergie pour les mener. Concernant Fukushima certaines tranches ont été
redémarrées. Pour les travaux à mener (et la surveillance des sites pendant
des siècles) il a fallu même construire des petites centrales thermiques ou
augmenter la production de centrales dans la région. On ne peut pas
considérer ces centrales comme totalement démantelées, il n'y en a encore
aucune réellement dans le monde il me semble (tout ce qu'on a fait c'est
bâtir des bunkers autour).

Le 17 janvier 2017 à 16:26, Jean-Marc Liotier  a écrit :

> On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 03:45:38 +0100
> Jérôme Amagat  wrote:
> >
> > http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon
>
> "Centrales électriques dans le monde d'après" - j'adore !
>
> Bon, ma fenêtre était juste à la bonne taille pour que le
> "Openstreetmap.org" passe à la ligne suivante... Un espace insécable
> préviendrait peut-être cet incident.
>
> N'empêche, "le monde d'après" ça fait rêver...
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-pe] Uso de Software Gis Libres

[Arnold Fernádez R .]

El 2016-11-30 19:35, Runa Yachaq escribió:

En caso de que estén usando algún software Gis libre como Qgis,
gvSIG u otro; podrían indicarnos las ventajas y desventajas que han
encontrado al emplearlo. Y, si conocen alguna comunidad que esté
detrás de dichos proyectos en el Perú.

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


Comunidades de Qgis no parece que haya, gvSIG si está más presente 
aunque no lo vi la última vez como Sig Libre en la web de gnu.org. 
Saludos.


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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 03:45:38 +0100
Jérôme Amagat  wrote:
>
> http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon

"Centrales électriques dans le monde d'après" - j'adore !

Bon, ma fenêtre était juste à la bonne taille pour que le
"Openstreetmap.org" passe à la ligne suivante... Un espace insécable
préviendrait peut-être cet incident.

N'empêche, "le monde d'après" ça fait rêver...

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Francescu GAROBY]

Superbe, cette carte !
Juste une petite correction à apporter : l'affichage de la puissance d'une
centrale électrique (avec un seul 'e' accentué...) n'est pas harmonisé.
J'ai par exemple la valeur "12. MW", pour le parc éolien
dans le Cap Corse (Haute-Corse). De plus, une virgule plutôt qu'un point,
pour séparer la partie entière de la partie décimale serait préférable...
Et sinon, pas mal de centrales ont une bulle vide, quand on clique dessus :
bug d'affichage ou manque d'info ?

Francescu

Le 17 janvier 2017 à 03:45, Jérôme Amagat  a écrit
:

> Bonjour,
>
> J'ai fait une carte des centrales électriques et leurs puissances
> installées présentent dans OSM :
> http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>


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

[OSM-talk-be] brandweer, Turnhout

[joost schouppe]

Hoi,

Iemand die tijd heeft om met iemand van de brandweer te gaan babbelen over
OSM, in het Turnhoutse?

-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

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

Re: [Talk-in] Corrected Indian border not working at zoom level 3 and below

[Anish Mangal]

I think that is because at the low zoom level, mapnik uses some shp files
pertaining to borders and render. You probably again need to change the
style file to fix this.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:57 PM, VAMO Systems  wrote:

> Hi All
>
> I have customized (corrected) Indian border as Anish document. Its working
> fine but only at higher zoom level.
>
> At zoomed out level (level 3 and below) its not working. Any help?
>
> Here the access to our server
>
> http://207.154.194.241/lf.html
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Prasanna K Ram
> Director - Product Engineering
> VAMO Systems Private Limited 
> 2nd Floor, New No 21/Old No 8,
> 86th street, Ashok Nagar
> Chennai, TamilNadu, India,600083
> Mobile: +91-9840898818 <+91%2098408%2098818>
> Email: p...@vamosys.com
> twitter: @gps_vamosystems
> Skype: pkram76
>
>
> ___
> Talk-in mailing list
> Talk-in@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-in
>
>


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Derick Rethans]

On Tue, 17 Jan 2017, Dan S wrote:

> Colin, do you have your own preferred style for how to tag a named
> housing estate in a city for example? I use landuse=residential for
> this (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51736709 though that one
> wasn't by me) and I feel it a very appropriate style. It can easily be
> carved out of a larger resi area if needed, and I'm not aware of any
> drawback of that.

It is what I do too:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/77260547

cheers,
Derick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[SK53]

I do use these from time to time. My usual use cases are:


   - Small named estates of social housing. These are common throughout
   Greater London and the name is usually shown on boards around the perimeter
   of each estate. Even for ones without such boards there is often good
   evidence for the name (for instance Municpal Dreams' blog on social housing
   often uses them). Conceivably these could also be tagged
   place=neighbourhood, but I think that may be misleading as they will
   usually be described as XXX Estate, YYY Suburb.
   - Student Villages. Gated sets of apartment blocks marketed to students
   only. Although a fairly recent innovation in the UK, they often represent a
   significant, and historically interesting development. These I also tag
   residential=student_village. There are at least 5 within a mile of here.
   - Very well defined, named residential areas too small to be a suburb. A
   pretty unusual occurrence because unlike the two cases above boundaries are
   often subjective. In many cases these will be discrete housing developments
   (private or social) which retain an identity. Often the name will be a
   local_name, such as Sterling Homes Estate, or the Wimpy Estate. A good
   example would be the 'Bomber Estate' in Maidenhead
   . Again I tend to avoid
   neighbourhood because what defines these places is often just commonality
   of building types and time of the development.
   - Retail Parks & Shopping Centres.
   - Industrial Estates & Business Parks.
   - Farm names on landuse=farmyard. I much prefer this to place=farm. I
   also often exclude the similarly named original farm house as these are
   increasingly not part of the farm itself. Even if the owner of the farm
   lives in the house it is unusual for them to farm themselves.

Other uses include:

   - Area with both landuse and a place tag. Most often villages, but some
   suburbs of Milton Keynes have been mapped that way. MK is unusual in that
   the grid and area names are well-defined.
   - Field names (a few examples to the W of MK). One of these
    applies to a former field
   which is now residential. Wrong in my view. (I really like the idea of
   capturing current or former field names in OSM, but I dont think this is
   the right way to do it).
   - Individual residential buildings. E.g., a hall of residence
    in London. Sometimes
   unavoidable.

So to take the examples to hand:

   - The two Hurlingham elements may represent real local distinctions.
   - Retail areas. Many of these names will be in use although probably in
   a) local planning documents; b) commercial estate agents and c) retail
   professionals. Names used by locals may different and harder to establish
   as accepted usage. In these cases it may be that the name is better placed
   in an alternative name tag, showing that the name is in use but only within
   specific communities or use cases. Perhaps someone from Geolytix could
   provide input on this subject as they have the relevant expertise.
   Alternatively diligent searching in the local press and planning documents
   may establish that the usage is current.

In short: in many cases names on landuse are a very convenient way of
ensuring a name used for a location is available with OSM without having to
precisely define it with other tags. In some cases the boundaries are very
well defined and the area is also defined with other tags such as place=*.

Jerry



On 17 January 2017 at 13:33, Andrew Hain 
wrote:

> A recent changeset in southwest London
> [https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43807789] added names to
> landuse=residential and landuse=commercial polygons. The mapper has not
> responded to the changeset comment that I left some weeks ago. The names
> themselves read more like descriptions to me as a local and they were added
> to the existing polygons, which are somewhat arbitrary (you could micromap
> with a polygon for each block omitting all roads). These names appear on
> OSM-carto in italics.
>
> What is a general view on when it makes sense to add a name to a landuse
> polygon?
>
> --
> Andrew
>
> ___
> 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: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

[Christian Quest]

Dans le même genre, tu as une carte umap des centrales à la production 
réduite ou coupée: 
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/les-centrales-electriques-actuellement-en-arret-de_97027#6/47.205/2.692


Elle s'appuie sur OpenEventDatabase, alimenté par info-réseaux, du vrai 
travail collaboratif :)



Le 17/01/2017 à 03:45, Jérôme Amagat a écrit :

Bonjour,

J'ai fait une carte des centrales électriques et leurs puissances 
installées présentent dans OSM :

http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon


--
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France


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

Re: [Talk-it] Dog toilet, posacenere e portabici

[THESTORM375]

Gianluca ma che comune é ? Ero curioso di saperlo..bella idea che ha avuto
questo comune

Il Lun 16 Gen 2017 16:06 Martin Koppenhoefer  ha
scritto:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 16 Jan 2017, at 13:22, Gianluca Boero  wrote:
> >
> > Sui primi due ho alcuni dubbi. Non sono propriamente cesti per i rifiuti
> (basket) solo che nel wiki non trovo un'analogia
>
>
> amenity=ashtray?
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
-- 

Written by Valerio
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Dan S]

Colin, do you have your own preferred style for how to tag a named
housing estate in a city for example? I use landuse=residential for
this (e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51736709 though that one
wasn't by me) and I feel it a very appropriate style. It can easily be
carved out of a larger resi area if needed, and I'm not aware of any
drawback of that.

Cheers
Dan

2017-01-17 13:44 GMT+00:00 Colin Smale :
> Can't think of any justification for name on landuse. The boundary of a
> village may be co-linear with the built-up area, so the "place" boundary may
> be co-linear with the "landuse=residential",  but they are not the same
> object and should not be conflated into a single OSM object from some
> (misguided?) principle of saving space in the database or whatever.
>
>
>
> //colin
>
> On 2017-01-17 14:33, Andrew Hain wrote:
>
> A recent changeset in southwest London
> [https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43807789] added names to
> landuse=residential and landuse=commercial polygons. The mapper has not
> responded to the changeset comment that I left some weeks ago. The names
> themselves read more like descriptions to me as a local and they were added
> to the existing polygons, which are somewhat arbitrary (you could micromap
> with a polygon for each block omitting all roads). These names appear on
> OSM-carto in italics.
>
> What is a general view on when it makes sense to add a name to a landuse
> polygon?
>
> --
> Andrew
> ___
> 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
>

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Dan S]

Hi Andrew,

Well, my 2p: I like to name landuse=residential when it corresponds to
a delineated housing estate or whatever. I agree that as in this case
they're almost always "somewhat arbitrary" (only rarely do we have
access to some official polygon corresponding to a housing estate or
retail area) though I don't think that makes them bad edits
necessarily.
In the case of this changeset, my question would be whether the names
are really names (either in local use or officially) - and you're
better placed to judge that than I am.

Actually, the "Sheen Lane Centre" tagging in particular looks odd
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8152525 - name applied to multiple
footways rather than one area - and this implies that the mapper has
been naming whatever objects are already there, rather than
creating/carving off appropriate patches, so I can see why you raise
an eyebrow.

Best
Dan


2017-01-17 13:33 GMT+00:00 Andrew Hain :
> A recent changeset in southwest London
> [https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43807789] added names to
> landuse=residential and landuse=commercial polygons. The mapper has not
> responded to the changeset comment that I left some weeks ago. The names
> themselves read more like descriptions to me as a local and they were added
> to the existing polygons, which are somewhat arbitrary (you could micromap
> with a polygon for each block omitting all roads). These names appear on
> OSM-carto in italics.
>
> What is a general view on when it makes sense to add a name to a landuse
> polygon?
>
> --
> Andrew
>
> ___
> 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] Named landuse polygons

[Colin Smale]

Can't think of any justification for name on landuse. The boundary of a
village may be co-linear with the built-up area, so the "place" boundary
may be co-linear with the "landuse=residential",  but they are not the
same object and should not be conflated into a single OSM object from
some (misguided?) principle of saving space in the database or whatever.

//colin 

On 2017-01-17 14:33, Andrew Hain wrote:

> A recent changeset in southwest London
> [https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43807789] added names to 
> landuse=residential and landuse=commercial polygons. The mapper has not 
> responded to the changeset comment that I left some weeks ago. The names 
> themselves read more like descriptions to me as a local and they were added 
> to the existing polygons, which are somewhat arbitrary (you could micromap 
> with a polygon for each block omitting all roads). These names appear on 
> OSM-carto in italics.
> 
> What is a general view on when it makes sense to add a name to a landuse 
> polygon?
> 
> --
> Andrew
> ___
> 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

[Talk-ht] Tâche de cartographie de Canaan

[Gibb, Matthew]

Bonjour,

Avec de nouvelles images drones de Potentiel3.0, la Croix-Rouge américaine a 
créé une nouvelle tâche de cartographie à Canaan, en Haïti. Une grande partie 
de la zone a été cartographiée en 2015, les POI étant collectées par des 
volontaires au début de 2016. Avec cette nouvelle imagerie (septembre 2016), 
nous mettons à jour la carte car la population de la région continue de croître.

Http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2422

En raison de l'élévation dans la région, il y aura probablement un certain 
décalage des bâtiments et des routes, s'il vous plaît aligner les bâtiments et 
les routes à la nouvelle imagerie pour éviter toute confusion. Il est 
recommandé d'utiliser JOSM Editor pour la cartographie, en raison de la densité 
de fonctionnalités dans la zone déjà.

Les images peuvent être téléchargées depuis OpenAerialMap: 
https://beta.openaerialmap.org/#/-72.24806785583496,18.666493982359626,13

N'hésitez pas à me contacter si vous avez des questions.

Merci beaucoup,

Matt Gibb
Croix-Rouge américaine


Matthew Gibb

GIS Analyst | International Services | American Red Cross

National Headquarters, Washington, DC

email: matthew.g...@redcross.org
___
Talk-ht mailing list
Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht
Notez! Vous pouvez utiliser Google Translate (http://translate.google.com) pour 
traduire les messages.

[Talk-GB] Named landuse polygons

[Andrew Hain]

A recent changeset in southwest London
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43807789] added names to 
landuse=residential and landuse=commercial polygons. The mapper has not 
responded to the changeset comment that I left some weeks ago. The names 
themselves read more like descriptions to me as a local and they were added to 
the existing polygons, which are somewhat arbitrary (you could micromap with a 
polygon for each block omitting all roads). These names appear on OSM-carto in 
italics.

What is a general view on when it makes sense to add a name to a landuse 
polygon?

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

Re: [Talk-it] R: Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

[Volker Schmidt]

Scusa, mi manca ancora qualcosa per capire.
Che cosa intendi con
"quando qualcuno fa edit direttamente dalla pagina web di OSM e si basa su
quanto ha visto
in quella pagina"?
ID? Potlatch2?

2017-01-17 13:47 GMT+01:00 Marcello :

> On 17/01/2017 12:57, Max1234Ita wrote:
> > Non dimentichiamo, poi, che esiste / isolated_dwelling
> >   /,
> utile
> > per taggare quei piccoli insediamenti che hanno un toponimo ma
> consistono in
> > 1-2 abitazioni senza null'altro attorno... e che -IMHO- anche se ne
> avessero
> > 3 o 4 sarebbe esagerato chiamare "hamlet". Ma qui mi fermo, se no
> rischiamo
> > di cadere nel " Paradosso del calvo
> >   ") :-).
> >
> > Ciao e buona giornata,
> > Max
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.
> com/R-Traduzione-italiana-di-place-in-Nominatim-tp5889518p5889521.html
> > Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
>
> Mi scuso se il mio quesito non era molto chiaro, le definizioni
> riportate nelle pagine wiki secondo me sono perfette, coprono tutti i
> possibili casi e sono ben spiegate. Il problema sorge quando qualcuno fa
> edit direttamente dalla pagina web di OSM e si basa su quanto ha visto
> in quella pagina, senza preoccuparsi di cercare pagine wiki o o altro.
>
> Dato che town è tradotto con Villaggio e in nessun vocabolario ho
> trovato tale traduzione, mentre village è tradotto con Frazione, ci
> potrebbe anche stare ma questa traduzione mi sembra più appropriata per
> hamlet, ho avuto il sospetto che per una svista o per un copia/incolla
> da una lista con membri diversi le traduzioni ai livelli sottostanti a
> city fossero slittate di un posto.
>
> Ciao
> Marcello
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] R: Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

[Marcello]

On 17/01/2017 12:57, Max1234Ita wrote:
> Non dimentichiamo, poi, che esiste / isolated_dwelling
>   /, utile
> per taggare quei piccoli insediamenti che hanno un toponimo ma consistono in
> 1-2 abitazioni senza null'altro attorno... e che -IMHO- anche se ne avessero
> 3 o 4 sarebbe esagerato chiamare "hamlet". Ma qui mi fermo, se no rischiamo
> di cadere nel " Paradosso del calvo
>   ") :-). 
>
> Ciao e buona giornata,
> Max
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/R-Traduzione-italiana-di-place-in-Nominatim-tp5889518p5889521.html
> Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

Mi scuso se il mio quesito non era molto chiaro, le definizioni
riportate nelle pagine wiki secondo me sono perfette, coprono tutti i
possibili casi e sono ben spiegate. Il problema sorge quando qualcuno fa
edit direttamente dalla pagina web di OSM e si basa su quanto ha visto
in quella pagina, senza preoccuparsi di cercare pagine wiki o o altro.

Dato che town è tradotto con Villaggio e in nessun vocabolario ho
trovato tale traduzione, mentre village è tradotto con Frazione, ci
potrebbe anche stare ma questa traduzione mi sembra più appropriata per
hamlet, ho avuto il sospetto che per una svista o per un copia/incolla
da una lista con membri diversi le traduzioni ai livelli sottostanti a
city fossero slittate di un posto.

Ciao
Marcello



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

[Talk-GB] Next Nottingham/East Mids pub meeting 24th Jan

[SK53]

Hi All,

I've updated the wiki
to add the
January meeting at the Lincolnshire Poacher, for next Tuesday (a week
today).

I've also added provisional dates

for all pub meetings for the rest of the year. These have also been added
to the calendar on the wiki. These dates should be regarded as firm for the
current quarter on a rolling basis. In other words I will only change them
with something like 2-3 months notice: I'll generally be aware of clashing
events within the next couple of months. Of course unplanned events may
impinge, but I'll deal with these as and when they arise.

One innovation: I hope we might get to Chesterfield in the early summer.
It's easily accessible by public transport from Nottingham, Derby &
Sheffield, so I'd hope we might attract mappers for whom our current
locations are a bit far away.

Best wishes for the New Year,

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

Re: [Talk-it] R: Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

[Max1234Ita]

Non dimentichiamo, poi, che esiste / isolated_dwelling
  /, utile
per taggare quei piccoli insediamenti che hanno un toponimo ma consistono in
1-2 abitazioni senza null'altro attorno... e che -IMHO- anche se ne avessero
3 o 4 sarebbe esagerato chiamare "hamlet". Ma qui mi fermo, se no rischiamo
di cadere nel " Paradosso del calvo
  ") :-). 

Ciao e buona giornata,
Max



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/R-Traduzione-italiana-di-place-in-Nominatim-tp5889518p5889521.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] R: Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

[Volker Schmidt]

Queste indicazioni utilizzando il numero di abitanti si trovano nel wiki
per 'place' in varie lingue:


English

German

French

Spanish

Italian

city

at least 100,000 people

normalerweise mehr als 100.000 Einwohner

Ville (grande) (plus de 100.000 habitants)

Normalmente deberían tener al menos 100.000 habitantes

100.000+
Capitale di Stato, Capoluogo di Regione o Capoluogo di Provincia se ha
almeno 50.000 abitanti.

town

often with a population of 10,000 people

üblicherweise mehr als 10.000 Einwohnern

Ville (moyenne, petite) (entre 10.000 et 100.000 habitants)

a menudo con una población de 10.000 habitantes

Centri abitati con oltre 10.000 abitanti o Capoluogo di Provincia.

village

nearly always be less than 10,000 people

weniger als 10.000 Einwohnern

Village (moins de 10.000 habitants et plus qu'un hameau)

casi siempre es inferior a 10.000 personas

200-10.000

hamlet

fewer than 100-200 inhabitants

typischerweise mit weniger als 100 Einwohnern

inférieure à entre 100 et 200 habitants

menos de 100 a 200 habitantes

meno di 100-200 abitanti


2017-01-17 11:16 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :

>
> 2017-01-17 9:31 GMT+01:00 frali...@alice.it :
>
>> bel quesito, perchè molti termini hanno più un percorso storico che
>> fattuale,
>> il termine più corretto sarebbe 'agglomerato urbano', poi secondo le
>> suddivisione amministrative abbiamo
>> comune o frazione. villaggio, borgo e sobborgo per noi italiani è solo
>> toponomastica.
>> io indicherei 'town' l'intero comune, 'city' il borgo con la sede della
>> casa comunale (il municipio per intenderci),
>> mentre per i sobborghi come le frazioni, utilizzerei 'village' se si è
>> certi della presenza di una delegazione comunale
>> oppure va bene anche 'hamlet'
>>
>
>
> "city" al solito in OSM descrive le più grandi città (per esempio in
> Germania quelli sopra di 100.000 abitanti), metterlo ad ogni comune con
> sede della casa comunale sarebbe sbagliato.
>
> Tutto il sistema di "place" è riferito alla socio-geografia dei centri
> abitati, ortogonale al sistema amministrativo. "town" e "city" sono due
> livelli gerarchici (molto importanti e il resto) di tutto ciò che ha il
> titolo "città", mentre gli altri centri abitati sono o "village" o "hamlet"
> (nel caso che siano piccoli), oppure sono "suburb", "quarter",
> "neighbourhood" (nel caso che fossero parti di un centro).
>
> Ciao,
> Martin
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] Nedělitelná mezera v OSM datech

[Jan Martinec]

Ahoj,

On 01/17/17 11:13, Miroslav Suchy wrote:

Dne 17.1.2017 v 08:45 Lukáš Karas napsal(a):

Moje otázka zní, zda-li je žádoucí do OSM přidávat na taková místa nedělitelné
mezery (v xml "", unicode znak U+00A0)


Osobně bych byl proti. To bychom tam pak mohli pridavat i hinty, kde rozdelovat 
slova
  Nove Mesto na Mo-
  rave
to už je overkill - nepíšeme v devanagari, abychom potřebovali znaky pro 
ZWNBJ a ZWJ. Oproti tomu nedělitelná mezera v češtině dává smysl.



Pokud i s nedělitelnou mezerou to renderer zalomí špatně, je potřeba opravit
renderer, ale bez ní nemá prostě šanci cokoliv hádat...


Ony existuji jeste i "narrow NBSP", pouzivaji se napr. ve francouzstine.

To taky, ale pro češtinu se to nepoužívá; takových je povícero:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_character#Unicode
Každopádně by se to *teoreticky* mělo chovat všechno jako whitespace, leč:
1. podpora ze strany nástrojů (taky *teoreticky* funkční, ale vsadil 
bych se, že netestovaná - tohle je moje oblíbená třída bugů)
a 2. podpora v tagování - chceme masivně přejmenovávat jak v 
jednadevadesátým? ;) (Osobně bych řekl, že ne)



Ja bych to osobne nechal na renderu.
Renderer má k dispozici jenom heuristiku, což vede k problematickýmu 
věštění z koule typu "končí -a, takže ženský rod, is_in: CZ a má tam 
*nad*, takže za to narvem NBSP" - navíc si to věštění z koule musí každý 
renderer znovu implementovat (po svým?).


Takže bych se těm hintům nebránil, a klidně bych to u těch různých 
Dlouhojmenovic nad Labem a Vedle Kopce u Dálnice zaváděl - ale postupně, 
netřeba to narvat do db po importním způsobu.


Honza "Piškvor" Martinec

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

Re: [Talk-cz] Nedělitelná mezera v OSM datech

[Lukáš Karas]

Ta pravidla, která mezera může být dělitelná a která nemůže, se mohou lišit 
podle jazyka. Renderer (v případě osmscout bych to spíš dal na starosti 
importu) by v takovém případě musel hádat v jakém jazyce je dané jméno a musel 
by si udržovat pravidla pro různé jazyky...

Samozřejmě by to šlo zjednodušit a dát nedělitelnou mezeru za všechna 
jednopísmenná slova...

Lukáš

Dne úterý 17. ledna 2017 11:13:05 CET Miroslav Suchy napsal(a):
> Dne 17.1.2017 v 08:45 Lukáš Karas napsal(a):
> > Moje otázka zní, zda-li je žádoucí do OSM přidávat na taková místa
> > nedělitelné mezery (v xml "", unicode znak U+00A0)
> 
> Osobně bych byl proti. To bychom tam pak mohli pridavat i hinty, kde
> rozdelovat slova Nove Mesto na Mo-
>   rave
> 
> > Pokud i s nedělitelnou mezerou to renderer zalomí špatně, je potřeba
> > opravit renderer, ale bez ní nemá prostě šanci cokoliv hádat...
> 
> Ony existuji jeste i "narrow NBSP", pouzivaji se napr. ve francouzstine.
> 
> Samozrejme ze ma sanci. Napriklad pro TeX existuji makra, ktere to doplnuji.
> http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/46955/is-there-way-to-put-hard-space
> -after-defined-words
> 
> Ja bych to osobne nechal na renderu.
> 
> Mirek
> 
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-it] R: Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-01-17 9:31 GMT+01:00 frali...@alice.it :

> bel quesito, perchè molti termini hanno più un percorso storico che
> fattuale,
> il termine più corretto sarebbe 'agglomerato urbano', poi secondo le
> suddivisione amministrative abbiamo
> comune o frazione. villaggio, borgo e sobborgo per noi italiani è solo
> toponomastica.
> io indicherei 'town' l'intero comune, 'city' il borgo con la sede della
> casa comunale (il municipio per intenderci),
> mentre per i sobborghi come le frazioni, utilizzerei 'village' se si è
> certi della presenza di una delegazione comunale
> oppure va bene anche 'hamlet'
>


"city" al solito in OSM descrive le più grandi città (per esempio in
Germania quelli sopra di 100.000 abitanti), metterlo ad ogni comune con
sede della casa comunale sarebbe sbagliato.

Tutto il sistema di "place" è riferito alla socio-geografia dei centri
abitati, ortogonale al sistema amministrativo. "town" e "city" sono due
livelli gerarchici (molto importanti e il resto) di tutto ciò che ha il
titolo "città", mentre gli altri centri abitati sono o "village" o "hamlet"
(nel caso che siano piccoli), oppure sono "suburb", "quarter",
"neighbourhood" (nel caso che fossero parti di un centro).

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] Nedělitelná mezera v OSM datech

[Miroslav Suchy]

Dne 17.1.2017 v 08:45 Lukáš Karas napsal(a):
> Moje otázka zní, zda-li je žádoucí do OSM přidávat na taková místa 
> nedělitelné 
> mezery (v xml "", unicode znak U+00A0)

Osobně bych byl proti. To bychom tam pak mohli pridavat i hinty, kde rozdelovat 
slova
  Nove Mesto na Mo-
  rave

> Pokud i s nedělitelnou mezerou to renderer zalomí špatně, je potřeba opravit 
> renderer, ale bez ní nemá prostě šanci cokoliv hádat...

Ony existuji jeste i "narrow NBSP", pouzivaji se napr. ve francouzstine.

Samozrejme ze ma sanci. Napriklad pro TeX existuji makra, ktere to doplnuji.
http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/46955/is-there-way-to-put-hard-space-after-defined-words

Ja bych to osobne nechal na renderu.

Mirek

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

[Talk-it] R: Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

[frali...@alice.it]

Salve,
bel quesito, perchè molti termini hanno più un percorso storico che fattuale,
il termine più corretto sarebbe 'agglomerato urbano', poi secondo le 
suddivisione amministrative abbiamo 
comune o frazione. villaggio, borgo e sobborgo per noi italiani è solo 
toponomastica.
io indicherei 'town' l'intero comune, 'city' il borgo con la sede della casa 
comunale (il municipio per intenderci),
mentre per i sobborghi come le frazioni, utilizzerei 'village' se si è certi 
della presenza di una delegazione comunale
oppure va bene anche 'hamlet'
Franco Licciardello   




Messaggio originale
Da: arca...@gmail.com
Data: 16-gen-2017 19.34
A: "Talk-It"
Ogg: [Talk-it] Traduzione italiana di place=* in Nominatim

Salve,

ho fatto notare ad un utente che aveva corretto la classificazione da
village a city di un piccolo comune (7700 abitanti in tutto il comune)
che non era appropriata l'etichetta city, mi ha risposto che aveva
creduto fosse corretta perché la ricerca del paese nel sito OSM lo
classificava come frazione villgese vi è una delegazione comunale  ed am.

Ho indagato sul funzionamento e ho trovato il file it.yml con le
definizioni per la traduzione in italiano, sembra che per i place ci sia
uno slittamento delle traduzioni, dato che town è tradotto come
villaggio, termine che oltretutto mi sembra raramente utilizzato in
italiano.

Attualmente le traduzioni (in ordine di grandezza) sono:
city: Città
town: Villaggio
village: Frazione
hamlet: Gruppo di case

Credo siano più appropriate, anche verificando su wikipedia, le seguenti
traduzioni:
city: Città
town: Cittadina
village: Paese (o Villaggio)
hamlet: Frazione

Sinceramente non ho capito come si deve agire per proporre la modifica,
qualcuno può dirmi come procedere? Grazie.

Ciao
Marcello


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



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