Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

[Sebastian S.]

I recall these discussions vaguely.
Was not one of the reasons for removing them from the map as the rangers or gov 
wanted them to be renaturatin etc. So from that perspective I understand why 
not having them in a map is in their interests.


On 21 September 2023 11:25:02 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 20:57, Mark Pulley  wrote:
>
>> I know this has been discussed on the list before, but the NSW NPWS has
>> deleted some informal paths at Apsley Falls (Oxley Wild Rivers National
>> Park).
>>
>> These were deleted in 2022 by a NPWS employee, and after discussion were
>> reverted. I re-surveyed them later that year.
>> These paths have been recently deleted again, initially edited by a
>> different NPWS employee. (Three different change sets, summarised below.)
>>
>> I had thought the consensus last time was to leave the paths in, tagged as
>> informal=yes (unless the path has been formally closed, in which case
>> access=no can be used). Is this still the case? Also, do we need to add a
>> policy to the wiki for similar situations?
>>
>
>We have
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Cycling_and_Foot_Paths#Closed/Illegal_Path
>
>
>Informal Paths (informal=yes) - these would still show up as for use, but
>with the note that they may not be maintained, may not have signage etc.
>
>Closed Paths (abandoned:highway=* or disused:highway=* + access=no) - These
>should not show up as for use, but still be present in OSM data for users
>looking for closed paths.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers

[Sebastian S.]

Good point, supercharger and most likely any fast chargers do come in 
multiples. As in one fuel station with many pumps. 

I would take the same approach, map the 'station' first. For Tesla Supercharger 
you could indicate the model which in turn defines the max charging current etc.

On 26 December 2022 10:22:22 am AEDT, Phil Wyatt  wrote:
>For multiple chargers you could use a 'named' area rather than individual
>chargers. The individual chargers could also be points with details on
>output etc, especially if they differ
>
>Cheers - Phil
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Ian Steer  
>Sent: Monday, 26 December 2022 9:56 AM
>To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers
>
>I also agree - but if there are several superchargers at the same location,
>do they all get the same name? (probably)
>
>Ian
>
>On 16 December 2022 1:33:21 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey
> wrote:
>>I think it's reasonable for it to have a name like "Tesla Supercharger 
>>Hollydene, NSW". If Tesla refers to it as such, and you might ask 
>>someone to meet you at the Tesla Supercharger Hollydene, then that's 
>>it's
>name.
>>Just like we would map name="Woolworths Dee Why", since that's what the 
>>receipt would label it as, and what you might tell someone when 
>>referring to the store. It doesn't stop you also tagging brand= and
>branch=.
>>
>
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers

[Sebastian S.]

I agree with you here. In my view OSM aim should be to have the charger mapped 
with a 'name' and/or reference so other data consumers can find and relink with 
additional information.

On 16 December 2022 6:55:53 pm AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>On 16/12/22 09:54, Phil Wyatt wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks folks,
>> 
>>  a consumer of EV chargers is unlikely to be using OSM as their primary 
>> source for charging information. Its more likely to be an app or in car 
>> service.
>
>
>I believe the apps also give information on 'out of service' chargers ...
>
>With a bit more effort they could also tell if any are vacant/available.. but 
>that does not look to be the case as yet.
>
>Possibly the apps give connection method (plug type/s) and charging rate (both 
>$ and kWh)
>
>
>OSM might still be a preferred method of navigating to the charger, just not 
>the best method of getting real time charger information.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers

[Sebastian S.]

Yes indeed, charging cost is something that is already in flux give the general 
rise of energy cost and it is going to hopefully be showing cost benefits when 
we charge during the day when the sun is high. 

I agree that this is an attribute that is better left off since it will likely 
not age well.

On 16 December 2022 10:19:27 am AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
 wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 at 08:58, Phil Wyatt  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> There are some well attributed chargers out there -
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7814409569/
>>
>
>I'd question having the actual $ cost listed, rather than just fee=yes?
>
>We tag servo's as having 91, 98 & diesel, but we don't attempt to say that
>diesel is $2.29 / l as the prices are constantly changing.
>
>Wouldn't the electricity cost via the charger also change on a regular
>basis?
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Andrew,
I agree with this.

On 16 December 2022 1:33:21 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>I think it's reasonable for it to have a name like "Tesla Supercharger
>Hollydene, NSW". If Tesla refers to it as such, and you might ask someone
>to meet you at the Tesla Supercharger Hollydene, then that's it's name.
>Just like we would map name="Woolworths Dee Why", since that's what the
>receipt would label it as, and what you might tell someone when
>referring to the store. It doesn't stop you also tagging brand= and branch=.
>
>On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 at 00:02, Sebastian S.  wrote:
>
>> Hi Phil,
>>
>> I think you are getting to the real question...
>>
>> So I did some checking and the charging invoice from Tesla does not give
>> any REF or Name. It simply states the address.
>> The map in the car and on the phone gives ' Tesla Supercharger Hollydene,
>> NSW' in bold as the identification token (trying to avoid using ame here).
>>
>> For me as an user I want to find this charger when I search for it. I want
>> to see the full token to easily distinguish between several chargers. I
>> also would be happy to see the token on a rendered map.
>>
>> Weather the text is in the REF or NAME tag I don't care.
>>
>> I do think the chargers should also have tags for address details, plug ,
>> access and cost, network, operator and brand details. We are allowed to
>> dream right?
>>
>> So back to the real question. Is the argument that
>> ' Tesla Supercharger Hollydene, NSW' is not a name and should not be used
>> as a single text string? Or should the text string simply not be a NAME tag
>> and instead a REF tag?
>>
>> Or lastly is the expectation that data consumers 'construct' the
>> information from other tags? For the last point I think it is a great idea
>> but unrealistic see my ' Tesla Supercharger Central Coast NSW' example
>> where the city=Tuggerah.
>>
>> I'm happy to use REF if this is the majority preference.
>>
>> Cheers Seb
>>
>> On 15 December 2022 11:07:47 pm AEDT, Phil Wyatt 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sebastian,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I suppose for me it’s a question of should OSM hold a name which can be
>>> made from other attributes and does it fit with the name and charging wikis?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do tesla chargers/charge areas also have reference numbers like other
>>> networks? This usually goes in the ref key.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I suspect many of these are ‘named’ simply so they get a label in the
>>> carto map without people realising that the operator and ref are used for
>>> labelling charging stations in that map instance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Other apps may well use other OSM attributes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Some interesting ‘name’ insights in this post as well
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SimonPoole/diary/397565
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers – Phil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Sebastian S. 
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, 15 December 2022 10:34 PM
>>> *To:* talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Phil Wyatt ;
>>> 'Warin' <61sundow...@gmail.com>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> As an EV driver I think that some charge stations have names.
>>>
>>> I do agree that 'Tesla Supercharger ' is not a name with much value.
>>> Tesla has names in their app for these charging stations, e.g. 'Tesla
>>> Supercharger Hollydene, NSW' or 'Tesla Supercharger Central Coast, NSW'.
>>> For the latter the name is not the same as the address which is one of my
>>> key reasons to have the name tag, full length.
>>>
>>> Aside from the Tesla supercharger there will be other large high current
>>> or DC charging stations that in my view warrant a name. Mainly because the
>>> are or will be key stopover points that people will navigate to.
>>>
>>> But I'm also of the opinion that the name of the Woolworths in Dee Why is
>>> ' Woolworths Dee Why '
>>>
>>> Seb
>>>
>>> On 15 December 2022 8:23:19 pm AEDT, Phil Wyatt 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Warin,
>>>
&

Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Phil,

I think you are getting to the real question...

So I did some checking and the charging invoice from Tesla does not give any 
REF or Name. It simply states the address.
The map in the car and on the phone gives ' Tesla Supercharger Hollydene, NSW' 
in bold as the identification token (trying to avoid using ame here).

For me as an user I want to find this charger when I search for it. I want to 
see the full token to easily distinguish between several chargers. I also would 
be happy to see the token on a rendered map.

Weather the text is in the REF or NAME tag I don't care.

I do think the chargers should also have tags for address details, plug , 
access and cost, network, operator and brand details. We are allowed to dream 
right?

So back to the real question. Is the argument that 
' Tesla Supercharger Hollydene, NSW' is not a name and should not be used as a 
single text string? Or should the text string simply not be a NAME tag and 
instead a REF tag?

Or lastly is the expectation that data consumers 'construct' the information 
from other tags? For the last point I think it is a great idea but unrealistic 
see my ' Tesla Supercharger Central Coast NSW' example where the city=Tuggerah.

I'm happy to use REF if this is the majority preference.

Cheers Seb

On 15 December 2022 11:07:47 pm AEDT, Phil Wyatt  wrote:
>Hi Sebastian,
>
> 
>
>I suppose for me it’s a question of should OSM hold a name which can be made 
>from other attributes and does it fit with the name and charging wikis?
>
> 
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
>
> 
>
>Do tesla chargers/charge areas also have reference numbers like other 
>networks? This usually goes in the ref key.
>
> 
>
>I suspect many of these are ‘named’ simply so they get a label in the carto 
>map without people realising that the operator and ref are used for labelling 
>charging stations in that map instance. 
>
> 
>
>Other apps may well use other OSM attributes.
>
> 
>
>Some interesting ‘name’ insights in this post as well
>
> 
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SimonPoole/diary/397565
>
> 
>
>Cheers – Phil
>
> 
>
>From: Sebastian S.  
>Sent: Thursday, 15 December 2022 10:34 PM
>To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Phil Wyatt ; 'Warin' 
><61sundow...@gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers
>
> 
>
>Hello all,
>
>As an EV driver I think that some charge stations have names.
>
>I do agree that 'Tesla Supercharger ' is not a name with much value. Tesla has 
>names in their app for these charging stations, e.g. 'Tesla Supercharger 
>Hollydene, NSW' or 'Tesla Supercharger Central Coast, NSW'. For the latter the 
>name is not the same as the address which is one of my key reasons to have the 
>name tag, full length.
>
>Aside from the Tesla supercharger there will be other large high current or DC 
>charging stations that in my view warrant a name. Mainly because the are or 
>will be key stopover points that people will navigate to.
>
>But I'm also of the opinion that the name of the Woolworths in Dee Why is ' 
>Woolworths Dee Why '
>
>Seb
>
>On 15 December 2022 8:23:19 pm AEDT, Phil Wyatt <mailto:p...@wyatt-family.com> > wrote:
>
>Thanks Warin,
>
> 
>
>Its pretty obvious that most are not real names but actually descriptions or 
>operators/networks and locations
>
> 
>
>https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1p4N
>
> 
>
>Cheers - Phil
>
> 
>
> 
>
>From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com <mailto:61sundow...@gmail.com> > 
>Sent: Thursday, 15 December 2022 8:00 PM
>To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-au@openstreetmap.org> 
>Subject: Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers
>
> 
>
> 
>
>On 15/12/22 17:11, Ben Kelley wrote:
>
>My thoughts:
>
> 
>
>I wouldn't remove the names. It's a big call to say that this thing definitely 
>does not have a name, when someone else says it does, especially if 50% have a 
>name.
>
> 
>
>"Tesla supercharger" is not an individual name, probably a brand. And there 
>would be many that have that "name" in the world. It would be like tagging 
>some petrol stations with 'name=Shell'. 
>
>The easiest thing to do is change the key 'name' to 'description', that way 
>OSM looses no information. 
>
>Then add tags for brand/operator/ref/*. 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> - Ben.
>
> 
>
>On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 14:24, Phil Wyatt <mailto:p...@wyatt-family.com> > wrote:
>
>Hi Folks,
>
> 
>
>Thoughts on 'named' EV chargers? Around 50% of chargers in Oz have some 'name'.
>
> 
>
>

Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers

[Sebastian S.]

Hello all,

As an EV driver I think that some charge stations have names.

I do agree that 'Tesla Supercharger ' is not a name with much value. Tesla has 
names in their app for these charging stations, e.g. 'Tesla Supercharger 
Hollydene, NSW' or 'Tesla Supercharger Central Coast, NSW'. For the latter the 
name is not the same as the address which is one of my key reasons to have the 
name tag, full length.

Aside from the Tesla supercharger there will be other large high current or DC 
charging stations that in my view warrant a name. Mainly because the are or 
will be key stopover points that people will navigate to.

But I'm also of the opinion that the name of the Woolworths in Dee Why is ' 
Woolworths Dee Why '

Seb

On 15 December 2022 8:23:19 pm AEDT, Phil Wyatt  wrote:
>Thanks Warin,
>
> 
>
>Its pretty obvious that most are not real names but actually descriptions or 
>operators/networks and locations
>
> 
>
>https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1p4N
>
> 
>
>Cheers - Phil
>
> 
>
> 
>
>From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> 
>Sent: Thursday, 15 December 2022 8:00 PM
>To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [talk-au] 'Named' EV chargers
>
> 
>
> 
>
>On 15/12/22 17:11, Ben Kelley wrote:
>
>My thoughts:
>
> 
>
>I wouldn't remove the names. It's a big call to say that this thing definitely 
>does not have a name, when someone else says it does, especially if 50% have a 
>name.
>
> 
>
>"Tesla supercharger" is not an individual name, probably a brand. And there 
>would be many that have that "name" in the world. It would be like tagging 
>some petrol stations with 'name=Shell'. 
>
>The easiest thing to do is change the key 'name' to 'description', that way 
>OSM looses no information. 
>
>Then add tags for brand/operator/ref/*. 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> - Ben.
>
> 
>
>On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 14:24, Phil Wyatt  > wrote:
>
>Hi Folks,
>
> 
>
>Thoughts on 'named' EV chargers? Around 50% of chargers in Oz have some 'name'.
>
> 
>
>Most look to be adding the either the location or name of the operator etc (ie 
>Freds Shop, XYZ carpark, Tesla supercharger etc), I suspect so it gets 
>rendered on the map. 
>
> 
>
>Are folks happy if I remove the names. I will ensure that no details are lost 
>by making sure any operator or network details gets added to the correct tags.
>
> 
>
>(I will also post to Oceania Forum and Discord)
>
> 
>
>[Overpass query](https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1p4u)
>
> 
>
>Cheers - Phil
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org  
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] The Paradox of Postcodes (Was Re: Victorian Vicmap Address Import Proposal - Suburb and Postcode discussion)

[Sebastian S.]

Me is wondering how I would get notified if my postcode would change? By 
Australia Post? By ABS?

On 19 June 2021 9:48:56 am AEST, Ewen Hill  wrote:
>Hi all,
>We have been using the ABS 2016 postcode boundaries under intense
>scrutiny compared to the "current" Auspost and found very few
>inconsistencies in Victoria and I would suggest that this is mere legal
>jargon to avoid any commercial litigation or that this was required
>under
>the release terms to the ABS. The issues we have seen are
>
>   - The new postcode of 3336 for Deanside, Aintree and Fraser Rise -
>   https://auspost.com.au/postcode/3336
>- Another new postcode or altered postcode boundaries around
>Tallangatta
>   or Albury (can't remember what the specifics of this one were)
>- The population of 3066 of Derrimut and Laverton North of "72" when it
>   was  industrial / farm land has now ballooned into the thousands
> - Some minor anomalies where roads have been rerouted (Geelong by-pass
>   from memory)
>   - Some park land / national park differences
>
>As there is no formal process by Australia Post that I can see from
>announcing changes, then I see Andrew's approach is solid and will
>require
>minimal upkeep - and who sends a letter nowadays ;)
>
>Ewen
>
>
>
>On Sat, 19 Jun 2021 at 03:58, stevea  wrote:
>
>> On Jun 17, 2021, at 2:14 AM, Andrew Harvey via Talk-au <
>> talk-au@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>> >> It's a fair point that Vicmap's own postcode field shouldn't be
>taken
>> as 100% correct, it looks like it might have been assigned based on
>> postcode boundaries so might still suffer issues because of this, but
>where
>> addr:postcode is not already mapped, most of the time the Vicmap one
>will
>> be correct.
>>
>> To be clear, I'm 100% OK with postcodes on nodes with addresses, such
>> things belong together (as that tag on that node):  it is indeed "the
>> correct way to go."  (IMHO).
>>
>> I'm not terribly excited (dejected) to see a suggestion that ABS'
>> described "imprecise process" (of conflating postcodes with
>geographic
>> boundaries) is glibly said as "we can still have postal_codes on
>admin
>> boundaries where the vast majority of addresses within that boundary
>have
>> that postcode."
>>
>> In the USA (in OSM) we say rather bluntly "ZIP codes are not
>boundaries."
>> (ZIP codes are USA postcodes).  It seems ABS agrees.  Putting them on
>> entire admin boundaries, especially where they are not 100% correct
>(all of
>> them?) adds noise to our data, which I am identifying and say "in the
>USA,
>> we just don't do this" (as they are simply not the same).
>>
>> Though, postcode tags on address nodes, sure.  Good way to do it,
>correct
>> way to go, et cetera.
>>
>> In the USA, OSM imported mid-2000s national census data to "lay down
>a
>> road grid."  We continue to unravel and fully "TIGER Review" these
>data, 15
>> years later.  They are "noisily (though that gets better over time,
>with
>> effort) mostly correct" today, but.
>>
>> There is a wide distribution / spectrum of such (postal) data
>scattered
>> around OSM in various jurisdictions.  I'm saying that at this level
>of
>> conversation, pave the road smarter, rather than glibly or easily. 
>Good
>> planning makes better maps.
>>
>> Thank you for saying "fair point," too.  I hope I haven't beaten it
>up too
>> much, so thank you to all for patience reading.
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Warm Regards
>
>Ewen Hill
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] The Paradox of Postcodes (Was Re: Victorian Vicmap Address Import Proposal - Suburb and Postcode discussion)

[Sebastian S.]

Lots to read here.
My take away is
Postcodes are not from Australia Post and a proprietary system.

Postcodes are not great for areas, it might work but can also be complex. (I'm 
thinking sprinkled houses in a rough terrain making the relation consists of 
several areas that are not officially defined?)

Postcodes are considered part of the address by most of us, however Australia 
Post could go without.

I still prefer them on the node, however I'm ok if the import proceeds without. 
As being said, we should get going, make a decision, document it and go.

On 19 June 2021 3:54:38 am AEST, stevea  wrote:
>On Jun 17, 2021, at 2:14 AM, Andrew Harvey via Talk-au
> wrote:
>>> It's a fair point that Vicmap's own postcode field shouldn't be
>taken as 100% correct, it looks like it might have been assigned based
>on postcode boundaries so might still suffer issues because of this,
>but where addr:postcode is not already mapped, most of the time the
>Vicmap one will be correct.
>
>To be clear, I'm 100% OK with postcodes on nodes with addresses, such
>things belong together (as that tag on that node):  it is indeed "the
>correct way to go."  (IMHO).
>
>I'm not terribly excited (dejected) to see a suggestion that ABS'
>described "imprecise process" (of conflating postcodes with geographic
>boundaries) is glibly said as "we can still have postal_codes on admin
>boundaries where the vast majority of addresses within that boundary
>have that postcode."
>
>In the USA (in OSM) we say rather bluntly "ZIP codes are not
>boundaries."  (ZIP codes are USA postcodes).  It seems ABS agrees. 
>Putting them on entire admin boundaries, especially where they are not
>100% correct (all of them?) adds noise to our data, which I am
>identifying and say "in the USA, we just don't do this" (as they are
>simply not the same).
>
>Though, postcode tags on address nodes, sure.  Good way to do it,
>correct way to go, et cetera.
>
>In the USA, OSM imported mid-2000s national census data to "lay down a
>road grid."  We continue to unravel and fully "TIGER Review" these
>data, 15 years later.  They are "noisily (though that gets better over
>time, with effort) mostly correct" today, but.
>
>There is a wide distribution / spectrum of such (postal) data scattered
>around OSM in various jurisdictions.  I'm saying that at this level of
>conversation, pave the road smarter, rather than glibly or easily. 
>Good planning makes better maps.
>
>Thank you for saying "fair point," too.  I hope I haven't beaten it up
>too much, so thank you to all for patience reading.
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Victorian Vicmap Address Import Proposal

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Andrew,

Have you considered adding a 
ref:{Vic map reference}={Vic map ID} 
Tag to the imported data points?

Or do you consider a ref tag or source tag an issue for users?

I am also wondering if it makes sense to add a clean up tag for all duplicate 
points. Think tiger data import.

On 10 June 2021 8:55:29 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey via Talk-au 
 wrote:
>On Tue, 8 Jun 2021, at 7:33 PM, Ewen Hill wrote:
>> Andrew,
>>   Thank you for both your initial work and the communication as well
>as the listening. Can I congratulate you on the lib/toOSM.js for the
>capitalisation and duplication processing. Very detailed
>> 
>> A few numpty questions after being late to the party...
>>  * Is there a node id on the vicmap address and are we storing this
>in OSM so we can match and look for missing or deleted ones later?
>
>Good question, I've added a section to the code repo at
>https://gitlab.com/alantgeo/vicmap2osm/-/tree/master#why-no-vicmap-id,
>essentially because such an ID makes it confusing for OSM contributors,
>makes the data feel less organic to OSM, and conflation can still be
>done without it.
>
>>  * Can we provide a couple of samples of the
>existingAddressesWithNewTagsOnly export once available
>
>Yes I'll post the full import candidates shortly, I'm still working
>finalising them at the moment.
> 
>>  * Could we perform some sampling of suburbs/levels. Perhaps 
>>* Mallacoota (large reserves, complex islands and altered
>crown/public land ownership)
>>* Meringur or Learmouth (large farming community)
>>* Fitzroy (complex inner city)
>
>Yes, I can sample these out, I'll post them shortly.
>
>>  * I can't see what happens on collision with a totally incorrect
>address. Is the new node just added where you can't find a matching
>address. 
>
>At the moment yes if it doesn't find an exact match then the new node
>will be imported. In the conflation I broke the state up by city block
>(land surrounded by roads) because where there are no addresses in OSM
>in that block we can be fairly certain there will be no conflicts.
>Where there are addresses in the block there is a chance that the
>address exists but it wasn't an exact match, I haven't decided what I
>think should happen here.
>
>Treating all the blocks where at least one address already exists in
>OSM would be too overwhelming to review them all manually (636,532
>addresses fall into this category compared to 1,311,095 which very
>likely aren't already in OSM, compared to 107,194 which are certainly
>already in OSM).
>
>1,311,095 Vicmap addresses are in a block which has no OSM addresses
>13,830 Vicmap addresses are within an OSM address polygon (which may or
>may not be the same address)
>636,532 Vicmap addresses are in a block which has some OSM addresses
>already but couldn't be matched exactly
>107,194 Vicmap addresses are in a block which has some OSM addresses
>already and there was an exact match found
>
>>* Is there an exceptions file for the above that can be reviewed.
>Could map roulette some of these?
>>  * How have you gone with best practices globally?
>
>Let me circle back to these points. I have created two sets of
>MapRoulette challenges (not publicly visible yet) but these are for the
>Vicmap complex name and building / property name, which we aren't
>importing automatically instead via MapRoulette inviting the local
>community if they'd like to review these.
>
>> I am amazed by the amount of code you have developed and documented
>to do this. The benefits of adding this import will far outweigh any
>minor local issues. Chapeau!
>
>From the README I wrote, Vicmap data isn't perfect, OSM data isn't
>perfect. This import isn't without issues, it aims to get it right for
>the vast majority of instances, but local mappers will still be left
>with some burden of correcting or cleaning up edge and corner cases.
>I'm with you that the benefits outweigh the issues.  
>
>I've done on the ground surveying of addresses and shocked by how many
>errors I made.
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Victorian Vicmap Address Import Proposal

[Sebastian S.]

Thanks Andrew for this great proactive communication. Please keep at it.

With regards to the suburb etc tags I must say I was swayed for some time. 
However I still feel that including the full address has more benefits for the 
majority of users. 
At the same time you have also provided options for checking and maintaining 
the data. A Maproulet task that flags POI seems a good idea to me.

It is true that the postcode etc can be deduced from the boundary relations but 
until this is done by the consumers for all POI I will support the full address.

Another way to argue would the that the postcode area could be deduced from the 
cloud of address points.



On 8 June 2021 2:59:01 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey via Talk-au 
 wrote:
>To sum up the contentious issue of suburb, postcode, state tags,
>
>- Phil, Daniel and Seb would prefer the suburb and postcode on each
>address object.
>- Andrew Davidson and cleary would prefer we not include suburb and
>postcode on each address object and instead require data consumers to
>derive this data from the existing boundaries, and actively discourage
>mappers manually adding this data via removing the preset in ID.
>
>Thinking further I'd support including the full address details on each
>address object, to provide a complete address, even if duplicated by
>the boundary. QA tools could be built to validate these match the admin
>boundaries and it becomes a maintenance task to maintain these tags,
>but I think that's okay.
>
>However, to avoid stalling this import on this issue (it doesn't sound
>like anyone will change their mind soon), I'll plan the minimum viable
>option of excluding addr:suburb, addr:postcode and addr:state from the
>import.
>
>There's nothing stopping a further discussion of a planned automated
>edit to update address objects with suburb, postcode and state if the
>community changes their mind later on.
>
>I'll make these changes to the import code, then once I've completed
>all the documentation and remaining issues hopefully post some import
>candidate files if anyone would like to review.
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Street Lamps

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Andrew,
Great that you reach out to the community.

For osm imports planning and community buy in are important steps prior to the 
actual import.

This is to ensure high quality imports, avoiding reverts and can also get you 
additional hands doing the work.

There are different ways of doing this. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines will give you some 
guidance.

Essentially you should be writing down what you want to do and how you want to 
do it.

The how should cover preparation of the data, tags you want to use, how to deal 
with existing osm nodes and objects.
For large imports it's also suggested to use a separate account. 

As I see it there are two ways of going about it. One is to sketch the idea and 
work through the details with the community, then write the import page on the 
wiki as a summary.
The other approach would be to start the import page first then seek feedback 
from the community.

In either case please don't feel discouraged by any of this. 

Thanks for your contributions.
Seb



On 13 June 2021 11:02:31 am AEST, Andrew Munday  wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "how I'm mapping into the OSM tag
>schema" but for street lamps I was placing nodes and using the tag
>"highway"="street_lamp" which is how the wiki says to tag them.
>As for dealing with conflicts, I used overpass turbo to query all the
>existing street lamps and made sure to do my test uploads in suburbs
>that
>didn't already have any street lamps in them. I'm not really sure how
>I'd
>merge with any existing street lamps at the moment.
>Hopefully this goes to the mailing list. I don't really know what I'm
>doing.
>
>On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 20:42, Andrew Harvey 
>wrote:
>
>> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
>>
>> For starters I'd like to see how you're mapping into the OSM tag
>schema,
>> how you plan to deal with conflicts (if any are already mapped in the
>ACT).
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2021, 10:03 am Andrew Munday, 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone. I'm not sure what I'm doing with this mailing list
>thing
>>> so bear with me. I'm building an augmented reality game ala Pokemon
>Go and
>>> one of the objects in the game are street lamps. I've been adding a
>lot of
>>> changes around my house in Canberra for around a year and the other
>day I
>>> found out about automated edits and figured I could use the street
>lamps
>>> dataset at
>>>
>https://www.data.act.gov.au/Infrastructure-and-Utilities/ACT-Streetlights/cfpr-4tpw
>>> to speed up the process. I did look at the automatic edits code of
>conduct
>>> page and I couldn't figure out who I should contact about my plans
>to do it
>>> so I submitted a few changesets and ticked the box saying I wanted
>someone
>>> to review my edits which got someone to tell me to message here. I'm
>happy
>>> to undo the changesets if needed but I'd like some guidance on how
>to do
>>> this sort of thing.
>>> ___
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>>
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Victorian Vicmap Address Import Proposal

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Andrew,
Great interaction and transparency!

I have not read the code, will have a look but not sure how much I will 
understand. Therefore I'm asking how do you determine the location of the POI 
to be added?

In the NSW the address data was part of an area of the plot of land the address 
is for. So as part of the import process the area was converted to a node 
location.
Long driveways or other thin parts of the plot resulted in the node often being 
outside of the actual area.

Also most plot of lands have the house towards one end and garden in the other. 
This results in the node outside of the building.

I assume that you do not intend to manually correct node locations such that 
they are on top of an unit.


On 19 May 2021 11:26:57 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey via Talk-au 
 wrote:
>I've started to summarise the general consensus to some of the import
>questions at https://gitlab.com/alantgeo/vicmap2osm#community-feedback.
>
>Another thing is where someone has mapped an address with
>housenumber=2/5, but Vicmap is indicating it's unit 2 number 5, we
>convert this to addr:unit=2 addr:housenumber=5. This is slightly
>overstepping simply importing Vicmap data, to changing existing data in
>OSM (which mostly for the rest of the import, if OSM says something
>different we flag it for manual review), so I'm happy to also skip
>this.
>
>However, given X/Y usually means unit/number, and then only where
>Vicmap data confirms this, and given addr:unit is a widely used tag for
>unit value, I feel it's probably best we do this.
>
>Soon I'll share some links to actual maps and data that show exactly
>what would be changes so we can do more QA.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Suggested Aus guideline on gravel roads

[Sebastian S.]

Awesome write up.
I've grown up in Europe and can't recall any roads that would match coarse, 
angular railway balast. I really wonder why this is even a definition that made 
in into the wiki.

Are there any example photos we can add to the Aus wiki text?


On 6 March 2021 12:40:32 pm AEDT, Little Maps  wrote:
>Hi folks, everyone's thoughts on unpaved road surfaces have been very
>valuable. I wholeheartedly support Tony's suggestion to add more photos
>of
>Australian examples to the international wiki, as the European examples
>bear little semblance to most Australian roads.
>
>In addition to Tony's suggestion, can I suggest that we also add a
>section
>to the Australian tagging guidelines (and perhaps also to the
>international
>wiki) that explicitly describes the differences between how the tag
>surface=gravel has been used in Australia compared to the international
>wiki. I've drafted the following text and welcome all feedback. Thanks
>again and best wishes, Ian
>
>Suggested text: Gravel roads
>
>Unpaved 'dirt' roads in Australia are widely called 'gravel roads' and
>are
>often signposted as such. Similarly, surface=gravel is currently (March
>2021) the most widely used tag for unpaved road surfaces in Australia
>(excluding the broader term, surface=unpaved, which is commonly used).
>h
>ttps://taginfo.geofabrik.de/australia-oceania/australia/keys/surface#values
>
>The interpretation of the tag surface=gravel by many mappers in
>Australia
>differs greatly from the idiosyncratic definition of surface=gravel on
>the
>international wiki, which defines 'gravel' as coarse, angular railway
>ballast. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface This coarse
>surface exists but is relatively rare on Australian roads.
>
>While mappers are generally advised to follow the accepted definitions
>of
>surface tags as described on the OSM wiki, map users should be aware
>that
>most roads, tracks and paths that are tagged with surface=gravel in
>Australia will have surface materials far finer than railway ballast.
>These
>surfaces may accord with a wide range of accepted surface tags,
>including
>surface=compacted, fine_gravel, gravel (rarely), dirt and earth.
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
>
>Given the large number of highways that have been tagged with
>surface=gravel in Australia (>26,000), the discrepancy between
>Australian
>and international usage of this tag is unlikely to be overcome in the
>foreseeable future.
>
>All feedback is most welcome.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Aus tagging guidelines on highway surface tags

[Sebastian S.]

+1 from me too.

I would go even further and explicitly encourage local, on ground tagging to 
use the more detailed tags such as gravel or asphalt over paved/unpaved.
I have been updating these tags locally using Street complete as I consider it 
better data.

The rewording gives me confidence that this is not reverted.

Great Initiative. 
Cheers, Seb


On 1 February 2021 12:26:00 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 at 15:16, Little Maps  wrote:
>
>> Hi folks, wondering if I can promote some discussion about the
>section of
>> the Aus tagging guidelines on adding surface tags on roads. The text
>> currently reads,
>>
>> “For most types of highway=* tags you don't need to specify the
>> surface=paved key/value pair as this is assumed, however make sure
>you tag
>> the road surface when it isn't a paved road.”
>>
>> This assumption is fine in large cities but is problematic in rural
>and
>> regional Australia. Can I suggest that it is replaced by something
>like the
>> following...
>>
>> "Surface tags should be added to roads wherever possible, especially
>in
>> regional areas. This advice differs from that on the international
>> key:surface wiki page, which states that, 'there is normally an
>assumption
>> that the surface is surface=paved unless otherwise stated.' However
>this
>> assumption is not valid across regional Australia as: (1) most roads,
>> including many major roads, are unpaved, and (2) mapping intensity
>varies
>> greatly among regions. Many roads that do not have a surface tag may
>not
>> have been examined by mappers. Adding a surface tag will assist data
>users
>> and help mappers to further refine the regional road network."
>>
>
>+1 from me. I believe there has been a shift in community sentiment
>regarding this, the current wording reflects sentiment from a few years
>back where you'd generally only map surface=unpaved and assume
>everything
>else is paved. However especially with the Microsoft mappers adding
>many
>surface=paved tags and with StreetComplete surface quest asking for
>surface
>type for all roads, this has led to it being much more common for an
>explicit surface tag to be acceptable. It's fitting to update the wiki
>to
>say that it's now commonplace to always add a surface tag even when
>it's
>paved to provide more complete data and higher confidence in the data.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Contributions to Road Geometry in Perth, Australia

[Sebastian S.]

Hi,
I have made excessive use of the node tag for islands.
Particularly for pedestrian crossing.

Splitting the road into two separate ways for only a few metres seems excessive 
to me. Even when there is a several Meter long raised kerb separating the lanes 
I would not split the road.




On 1 September 2020 10:05:42 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>Heads up, looks like their team has started to map in Perth, see on
>OSMCha
>-> https://osmcha.org/?aoi=80b50a6d-6bb5-48cb-8ac4-4b2ddd9d5d76
>
>Mostly looks okay to me, and mostly minor tweaks, though I raised a few
>questions and issues on changeset comments but also listed most of them
>here:
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/840589945/history was added but the
>existing road name and other applicable attributes were not applied.
>This
>same issue happens in quite a few other places too so appears to be
>systemic. I've raised some changeset comments but worth including this
>as
>part of the standard practice by your editing team.
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/842851495/history is that a
>roundabout? I
>can't tell from the Maxar imagery, yet that is the claimed source, how
>could you tell from the imagery what this is?
>
>I personally find splitting ways for a traffic island at roundabouts
>like
>in https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/840189281/history a tad to
>excessive
>(would prefer to just tag the node as traffic island and use one way,
>gives
>a much cleaner dataset as the transition between dual and single
>carriageways is always messy) but I guess it's not wrong and both
>styles
>are popular in OSM currently. Does the community have a view on this?
>
>Unclear source of the turn restriction in
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/90223764#map=18/-32.04553/115.80953
>
>On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 21:28, OSM NextBillion. AI 
>wrote:
>
>> Thank you cleary for valuable insights, we would be more cautious
>while
>> mapping in such areas. While Satellite Imagery is our prime resource,
>we’d
>> consider mapillary photos as well wherever available. We do have some
>> expert assistance in our team for interpreting satellite imagery and
>map
>> something only if we’re double sure of it’s existence. We will refer
>to
>> mappers history before editing existing data to understand if it was
>> created using local expertise and would change only if there is
>conclusive
>> evidence from satellite and mapillary imageries.
>>
>> We will reach out to local mapping experts through forum and/or
>changeset
>> comments if we require further help.
>>
>> Thank you all once again for the suggestions, we look forward to
>working
>> with you all. :)
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 05:35, cleary  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the interest in mapping in Australia and thanks for
>posting
>>> your plans on this list.
>>>
>>> I would add to the caution expressed by others.  I live in an urban
>>> location in Australia but I have travelled in other areas within
>>> Australia.  It has taken me quite some time to learn to interpret
>satellite
>>> imagery and I still have a lot to learn about this country.  After
>>> personally visiting areas and noting what I see, and sometimes
>taking
>>> photographs, I then return home and compare my notes with what I see
>in the
>>> imagery and I am still surprised.  I think it can be quite
>precarious to
>>> map features using just satellite imagery unless you have expert
>assistance
>>> in interpreting the imagery.  For example, a common error by others
>has
>>> been to map lines of cleared vegetation as roads when they are
>actually
>>> fences. Even where an unmapped road exists, it is probably still
>unmapped
>>> because it is a private road and not accessible by the public - many
>of the
>>> roads on rural properties in Australia are private and, if added to
>the
>>> map, need to marked as such. Farmers get annoyed about intruders on
>their
>>> farms especially as biosecurity is a significant concern in parts of
>>> Australia.
>>>
>>> So while I appreciate contributions to the map, I suggest that
>"armchair"
>>> mapping needs to be undertaken with a lot of caution.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 15 Aug 2020, at 2:17 AM, OSM NextBillion. AI wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > We’re a small team based out of Hyderabad, India. We would be
>doing
>>> > minimal edits in Perth and contribute to OSM in the next couple of
>>> > weeks, in-line with OSM and Australia specific tagging guidelines
>[Link
>>> >
>].
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Please refer our Wiki
>>> >  and
>Github
>>> >  project pages
>for
>>> > more information.
>>> >
>>> > Looking forward to suggestions, if any ☺
>>> >
>>> > Thanking you in advance,
>>> > Team NextBillion
>>> > ___
>>> > Talk-au mailing list
>>> > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>>> > 

Re: [talk-au] Working with local government

[Sebastian S.]

I think in the US the tiger import used such tags with the aim to remove them 
once the item has been checked. A massive and still ongoing effort from what I 
heard.

On 20 July 2020 10:17:25 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 12:33, David Wales 
>wrote:
>
>> Is there any reason against using a custom tag as a linking key?
>>
>> e.g. some_import_object_id=123456
>>
>> Then when you need to update the data, you can match the key in OSM
>with
>> the key in the source data.
>
>
>It can be a deterrent to mappers, they may see these external ids and
>think
>oh I don't understand that, maybe it's special and I shouldn't touch
>it,
>maybe it is owner by someone else and they update it directly.
>
>Similar to what Mateusz said, if the community can't verify it, how do
>we
>know it's right? What should we do if things change on the ground? How
>do
>we know if the ID still applies to the new tag? In my opinion a better
>solution for a private linkage is for the 3rd party database to point
>directly to the OSM node/way/relation ID. The external database should
>monitor for changes to those IDs and then review after each change if
>the
>linkage is correct or needs changing.
>
>Though still the private ID method has been used for imports of the
>past,
>and I'm not saying it can't be used, but there are disadvantages and
>valid
>concerns.
>
>On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 at 14:08, Greg Dutkowski 
>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I was thinking of using the ref tag to store the council ID for the
>> object, and then the council could use the OSMID in their database.
>> What I was looking for was tools or approaches for keeping the two in
>> sync. The foreign keys in each system are part of that.
>> The conflation tools Andew Harvey pointed to may be a way to go.
>> OSM is so big and diverse it is hard to get your head around all of
>the
>> possibilities, so contacts with people who are making conflation work
>would
>> be ideal.
>>
>
>I haven't tried those tools before, but my outsider view is that they
>are
>too low level and not mature. I would love to see something similar to
>Maproulette or Tasking Manager from an ease of use and non-technical
>setup
>point of view but for maintaining linkages with external datasets.
>
>I wrote recently about a conflation I did to compare government traffic
>lights data https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aharvey/diary/393663 and
>I
>avoided any coding in that process.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Show your support of OpenStreetMap in our region: OSMF Application 

[Sebastian S.]

Hello all, late to the game.
Did the meeting take place?
Is there some outcome or summary of it?

Cheers,
Sebastian

On 19 July 2020 5:17:40 pm AEST, Edoardo Neerhut  wrote:
>Hi again,
>
>Andrew informs me that the calendar invite link doesn't work. I'll send
>out
>invites to everyone who puts 'Yes' next to the question about
>volunteering
>on the working group, or feel free to respond to this email requesting
>an
>invite.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Ed
>
>On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 16:49, Edoardo Neerhut 
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Oceania,
>>
>> *TLDR: Show your support for OpenStreetMap in Oceania by filling in
>this
>> brief form
>>
>,
>> and if you're interested, volunteering to help create an OSM Oceania
>> working group.*
>>
>> The purpose of this email is to gather support and volunteers to
>establish
>> a local chapter of the OpenStreetMap Foundation
>>  (OSMF) in Oceania.
>OSGeo
>> Oceania  has been supporting the
>> application, and the benefits and objectives of this Local Chapter
>have
>> been shared with the Australia
>>
>,
>> New Zealand
>> ,
>and
>> Oceania
>
>> talklists in earlier emails and on the Maptime Oceania Slack
>>
>.
>> You can find the local chapter application that was submitted to the
>OSMF
>> here
>>
>.
>>
>> *Application review*
>>
>> As part of the application review process, the OSMF Board, namely
>Joost
>> Schouppe and Rory McCann, have already reached out to the community
>via
>> various channels to gauge the level of community support for the
>> application. While they received positive responses, the response was
>> limited. I think we can do better.
>>
>> *Establishing an OpenStreetMap working group*
>>
>> One of the concerns raised by the OSMF Board and others is that OSGeo
>> Oceania might not be truly representative of the OSM community. One
>> solution to address this concern is to establish an OSM focused
>working
>> group made up of representatives from across the region. While I
>hinted at
>> this in May, I am now formally proposing that we establish a working
>group.
>>
>> The working group is a good solution because it will allow a wider
>range
>> of voices from the region, without the requirement that those voices
>have
>> any affiliation with OSGeo Oceania. At the same time, the working
>group
>> would be able to benefit from the resources, structure, and
>conference
>> platform that OSGeo Oceania has already established.
>>
>> *I propose the following:*
>>
>>
>>1.
>>
>>An initial meeting of interested parties at 12:00 pm AEST/2pm New
>>Zealand/Fiji time
>>   
>
>>this Thursday, July 23rd. The Google Meet link is in the calendar
>invite.
>>If you're unable to make this time, let me know and I will arrange
>an
>>additional meeting. Discussion via email is also acceptable.
>>2.
>>
>>Formal establishment of an OSM working group and nomination of a
>>leader to coordinate these efforts.
>>3.
>>
>>Notification to OSGeo Oceania that this working group has been
>>established.
>>4.
>>
>>Notification to the OSMF that this working group has been
>established
>>and that it will seek to understand and represent stakeholders in
>Oceania's
>>OSM community.
>>5.
>>
>>Consultation period where the working group gathers input from
>>throughout the region.
>>6.
>>
>>Documentation of the working groups first priorities.
>>
>>
>> The OSMF Board can then make a determination on whether to recognise
>OSGeo
>> Oceania and by extension this working group as the local chapter for
>> OpenStreetMap in Oceania.
>>
>> Thank you for your time and I hope you'll lend your support to this
>> initiative.
>>
>> Edoardo Neerhut
>>
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Sources for power line details, NSW

[Sebastian S.]

Thanks Tony,
I will have a go at this.

We have some poles around here where on the top there are 3 pairs of double 
wires in > form and on a level below there are three single wires horizontal.

On 20 April 2020 8:40:53 am AEST, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
>> In the state of Victoria at least, you can do a bit by visual 
>> inspection. With timber poles, the voltages typically are 415v 22kv 
>> and 66kv. If it feeds houses and shops its 415v. If it feeds into
>pole 
>> mounted transformers (with 415v out) its 22kv. If it feeds into
>small 
>> suburban sub stations (22kv output) its 66kv.
>
>Hi all
>To my email above I should have added:
>With this understanding of the network topology, you only need a  
>single transformer nameplate or busbar label to confirm the voltage of 
>
>a feeder for its entire length. If you can observe the busbar and  
>switching layout at the source substation you will be able to confirm  
>the voltage of the sister feeders too.
>
>Tony
>
>
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Sources for power line details, NSW

[Sebastian S.]

Hi all,
I've been wondering if there are usable sources to add voltage and other power 
line details to OSM.

I see distinctly different power lines and poles around my area but so far I 
was not able to find details about them.

On Ausgrid I can identify all power poles though not OSM licenced.___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Murray River mapping by a newby?

[Sebastian S.]

Another aspect to work on is to write down or brush up some of the agreed ways 
of doing things.
In my experience this is a good opportunity for a newbie. Someone new reads 
wikis and instructions differently. Finds mistakes or unclear bits.
Together with the mailing list as a feedback pool this is another area to work 
on.
However not is not everyone's cup of tea.


On 8 April 2020 7:31:20 pm AEST, Little Maps  wrote:
>Hello everyone, I’m Ian, I’m new to this group and pretty new to OSM.
>Being stuck inside for the foreseeable future, I’m keen to do something
>useful. 
>
>I live on the Murray River and have noticed that many sections of the
>river along the NSW-Vic border could benefit from some extra work. In
>lots of places, the boundaries of the river, local government areas,
>reserves and tree cover are all mapped differently, creating a mess of
>intertwining boundaries. I hope I’m not offending anyone who has done
>great work on the river in the past.
>
>I’ve got a lot of time on my hands and am happy to try to improve the
>mapping, taking on small chunks at a time. (I imagine it’s an enormous
>job to do it all.) However I realise that it would be easy to stuff up
>a lot of adjoining relationships so am keen to solicit advice from this
>sage group.
>
>Is this a task you think worthy of working on? Is it something that can
>be done by a relative newby? (I worked as a research scientist for 25
>years before I retired, but not in spatial sciences, so I’m used to
>working accurately and methodically on big projects). More to the
>point, if the task is worthwhile, is it possible to invite a mentor or
>two to provide advice and feedback on techniques and results before I
>make any big changes, so the results reach your high standards?
>
>Thanks very much for your interest, I look forward to your feedback.
>Best wishes and stay healthy. Cheers Ian
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Murray River mapping by a newby?

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Ian,
A warm Welcome from me too. The fact that you reach out before you start 
editing is a good thing.
Similar Ed I can't comment on your particular question but this is certainly 
the right place to seek advice for questions.
I myself stay away from complex large relations.

On 8 April 2020 8:20:19 pm AEST, Edoardo Neerhut  wrote:
>I'm not the best to provide advice here Ian, so I'll wait for others to
>chime in, but I just want to say welcome!
>
>This is an excellent introductory email and I am sure everyone will
>appreciate your considered approach to editing in OpenStreetMap and
>your
>enthusiasm to help.
>
>On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 19:32, Little Maps  wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone, I’m Ian, I’m new to this group and pretty new to OSM.
>> Being stuck inside for the foreseeable future, I’m keen to do
>something
>> useful.
>>
>> I live on the Murray River and have noticed that many sections of the
>> river along the NSW-Vic border could benefit from some extra work. In
>lots
>> of places, the boundaries of the river, local government areas,
>reserves
>> and tree cover are all mapped differently, creating a mess of
>intertwining
>> boundaries. I hope I’m not offending anyone who has done great work
>on the
>> river in the past.
>>
>> I’ve got a lot of time on my hands and am happy to try to improve the
>> mapping, taking on small chunks at a time. (I imagine it’s an
>enormous job
>> to do it all.) However I realise that it would be easy to stuff up a
>lot of
>> adjoining relationships so am keen to solicit advice from this sage
>group.
>>
>> Is this a task you think worthy of working on? Is it something that
>can be
>> done by a relative newby? (I worked as a research scientist for 25
>years
>> before I retired, but not in spatial sciences, so I’m used to working
>> accurately and methodically on big projects). More to the point, if
>the
>> task is worthwhile, is it possible to invite a mentor or two to
>provide
>> advice and feedback on techniques and results before I make any big
>> changes, so the results reach your high standards?
>>
>> Thanks very much for your interest, I look forward to your feedback.
>Best
>> wishes and stay healthy. Cheers Ian
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Practicality of mapping high-speed motor-traffic routes as cycle routes

[Sebastian S.]

Hi, thanks for the Strava point. A subset indeed but a substantial use.

I agree with Andrew that tagging family friendly routing is not something for 
the map but for a routing engine.

Maybe there is a tag combination similar to discouraged and surface quality to 
indicate the proximity to high speed traffic. But then again as Andrew said the 
highway/motorway tagging dies indicate that already.


On 13 April 2020 9:43:54 pm AEST, Little Maps  wrote:
>Hi everyone, I’m very new to OSM so can’t comment on the technicalities
>but to add some data to the question of frequency of usage, the Strava
>heat map shows that the M1 and M2 are among the most frequently ridden
>roads in Sydney, by those cyclists who log their tracks in Strava. A
>biased subset of cyclists to be sure, but the heat map does provide
>unambiguous data on usage and the motorways definitely get used a lot.
>See here... (you have to log in to Strava to see closeup images).
>
>https://www.strava.com/heatmap#11.94/151.13897/-33.87583/hot/ride
>
>Best wishes Ian
>
>
>
>> On 13 Apr 2020, at 9:07 pm, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I have bicycled on the M2. I much prefer it the the alternative that
>has a lot of up and down, dangerous cross streets where some drivers
>assume right of way over bicycles and a less direct route. There are
>people who commute to and from work on it, if there were a convenient
>safer route they would use that instead. 
>> 
>> 
>> On 13/4/20 8:01 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>>> I think it's a fair argument to say it's not an actual route (but
>still designated bicycle infrastructure since it's signposted), I can
>see arguments both ways. 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 19:27, Dongchen Yue 
>wrote:
 It’s certainly true that some people rely on motorway routes (I
>agree that the solution for family-friendly routes would be a different
>renderer, until conditions change in Australia). However, regarding the
>bike symbol on the M2 on the Mapillary example, it’s designed to be a
>sign of caution instead of a route guide
>(https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/documents/business-industry/partners-and-suppliers/lgr/cycling-aspects-of-austroads-guides.pdf).
>> 
>> The document is 177 pages long... which page? 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Some bicycle signs are to caution motor vehicle operators as to the
>presence of bicycles, not to caution the bicycle rider.
>> 
 
> Am 13.04.2020 um 7:21 PM schrieb Andrew Harvey
>:
> 
> Example of a dedicated bicycle crossing on a motorway entry ramp
>on the M2 in Sydney
>https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/3HCnt9rSnC2Z9OLn0GSslA and on the M7
>in Sydney https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/JGrFtWbs5DYbMywYpVetoA.
> 
> The M7 Shared Path is is a completely different thing, it's a
>shared path and off road, but as you can see above on the M7 motorway
>itself there is clearly dedicated bicycle signage and infrastructure.
> 
> Who says it's not recommended to cycle on the motorway? I've never
>seen a sign to say this. Whether it's common or not is irrelevant we
>mostly map the infrastructure on the ground not the traffic level of
>the road. 
> 
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 19:11, Dongchen Yue
> wrote:
>> The most noticeable example in Sydney would be the M7 Shared Path
>(https://www.westlinkm7.com.au/about/shared-path), which is a ~40km
>uninterrupted bi-directional path alongside the M7 Motorway with
>normally (though obviously not currently) very high usage for
>recreational cycling. However, although cycling on the motorway
>shoulders is neither recommended nor common, it’s been mapped on OSM as
>the cycle route „M7s"
>(https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-33.83065/150.85767=C)
>along with the „M7 Cycleway“ route.
>> 
>>> Am 13.04.2020 um 6:52 PM schrieb Ewen Hill
>:
>>> 
>>> Hi Dongchen,
>>>Can you provide a couple of examples please so we can review
>and discuss them. There may be good reasons (the red carpet Gardiners
>Creek cycle path in Melbourne hangs under the freeway might appear
>incorrect but is not). 
>>> 
>>>  Ewen
>>> 
>>> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 at 18:20, Dongchen Yue
> wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 I’ve noticed many motorway shoulders in Australia (especially
>in Sydney) being mapped as cycle routes on OSM. Although this seems to
>be a common approach for motorways/other high-speed roads in Australia
>of which cycling is allowed on, I can hardly imagine it to be of any
>practical use (i.e. providing convenient and safe connections for
>people cycling).
 
 Foremostly, this mapping approach defies the general purpose of
>cycle routes (both from an engineering perspective and the official OSM
>Wiki), that is, guiding people onto safe & convenient ways. Although
>cycling on most motorway shoulders in Australia is technically
>permitted and commonly done by the very few “strong and fearless”
>people (only ~1%, as indicated in past transport research), it’s both
>subjectively and 

Re: [talk-au] Question about houses

[Sebastian S.]

I'm sure you have seen that the building tag cane be yes, house, Appartement, 
Garage, shed, etc.

You can also add building levels if you know the area well.


On 29 March 2020 12:12:29 pm AEDT, James Cridland  wrote:
>All awesome, thanks, folks. I'll ensure I do it right, then! :)
>
>-- 
>Tel/SMS/Signal/WhatsApp: +61 447 692743
>Podnews  · My radio trends newsletter
> · Speaking and consultancy
>
>Amazingly Brilliant Pty Ltd · ABN 30 612 913 514
>
>
>On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 08:55, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 29/3/20 9:13 am, David Wales wrote:
>>
>> Realised that I replied directly, rather than to the list...
>> Reply below:
>>
>> Hi James,
>>
>> If there is only one building at the address, I would merge the
>building
>> and the address point.
>> You can mark the entrance as described here:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entrance
>>
>> If there is more than one building, add a perimeter, and merge the
>address
>> to that:
>>
>>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses#Multiple_buildings_for_one_housenumber
>>
>>
>> If the other buildings are garages, garden sheds then I would still
>put
>> the address on the house.
>>
>>
>>
>> Note that according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses
>> there are several options for tagging buildings with addresss, but
>the
>> above are my preferred methods.
>>
>> Regards,
>> David
>>
>> On 29/3/20 9:11 am, Dion Moult wrote:
>>
>> Hello James!
>>
>> FYI those addresses you see were likely created as part of the NSW
>address
>> import project - that is why they are in the middle of the lot :)
>Please
>> feel free to improve on its accuracy by merging it into an actual
>building!
>>
>> Dion Moult
>>
>>
>> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>> On Sunday, March 29, 2020 9:08 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>>   wrote:
>>
>> G'day James & welcome!
>>
>> Personally, I've always gone with either #3, with the address node at
>the
>> driveway, or drawn the building & added the address details to that.
>>
>> Either way seems to work, in the they render, & also appear in an
>address
>> search (at least on OSMand!)
>>
>> Good luck & have fun!
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 28 Mar 2020 at 21:47, James Cridland 
>wrote:
>>
>>> Hello, folks - first time poster here, and (while I first edited OSM
>a
>>> while ago) this my first time doing a lot of work in it to make it
>nicer.
>>>
>>> I'm adding the buildings around where I live. They're all individual
>>> buildings, mainly houses. In my part of Australia we've address
>points,
>>> which come from the local council. They're in the middle of the lot
>- not
>>> necessarily in the middle of the building on the lot.
>>>
>>> Should I be:
>>> 1. Adding the building outlines and moving the address points to the
>>> centre of the building?
>>> 2. Adding the building outlines and dropping the address point onto
>the
>>> outline, so they're merged?
>>> 3. Adding the building outlines and dropping the address point onto
>the
>>> outline at the entrance, so they're merged?
>>> 4. What the hell are you doing James, don't touch the address
>points?
>>>
>>> Looking at the renderer: if I do #3, that moves the street number to
>the
>>> entrance of the property, which is quite helpful, especially for a
>building
>>> on a corner.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tel/SMS/Signal/WhatsApp: +61 447 692743
>>> Podnews  · My radio trends newsletter
>>>  · Speaking and consultancy
>>> 
>>> Amazingly Brilliant Pty Ltd · ABN 30 612 913 514
>>> ___
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Postal addresses

[Sebastian S.]

In other parts of the world house name or landmarks are used for navigation. I 
like that although uncommon nowadays. I think landmarks are particularly 
important for walking routing.
I have tagged names of large Appartement Blocks If the name is prominently 
displayed outside. For that I have used name=

On 19 March 2020 9:39:52 pm AEDT, Ben Kelley  wrote:
>Hi.
>
>I sometimes tag house names if they are known. I don't think the wiki
>implies that you should not add house name if you add house number, but
>I
>agree it's not generally useful in terms of delivering mail in
>Australia.
>
> - Ben.
>
>On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 at 17:08, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>>  2 things on addresses.
>>
>>  Firstly house names.
>>
>> While these exist they are seldom required for postal addresses so
>the should not be placed into addr:housename=* but rather into name=*.
>>
>> The wiki specifically implies if there is a addr:housenumber there
>should be no addr:housename.
>> See
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr#Commonly_used_subkeys
>>
>>  Secondly remote addresses - Roadside Mail Box/Bag, Roadside Mail
>Service, Private Bag etc.
>>
>> These are hard to find out how to map them on the wiki, I think they
>need to go into the Australian Tagging guidelines.
>>
>> The answer is the same for PO boxes - use addr:full=*
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Ben Kelley
>ben.kel...@gmail.com
>https://mrebenezer.blogspot.com/
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Gravel pits?

[Sebastian S.]

Is this a temporary thing?

Or is this similar to sand boxes they (used to) have next to rail lines? (For 
traction in winter)


On 17 February 2020 10:14:47 am AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
 wrote:
>What do we map gravel pits as? (Areas off the side of a main road, used
>by
>Dept of Transport Main Roads to dump gravel etc for road building /
>repairs)
>
>Quarry seems a bit excessive!
>
>Depot doesn't really cut-it either as there's nothing there except for
>a
>pile of dirt.
>
>& is this another Aussie-only?
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Bushfire mapathon - kudos

[Sebastian S.]

Thanks indeed.
Kudos to you guys.

On 10 February 2020 3:56:08 pm AEDT, John Bryant  wrote:
>I wasn't able to attend the SSSI National Bushfire Recovery Map-a-thon
>yesterday, but thanks to the open-access chat, I was able to follow
>along
>as an observer as I had time. It sounded like it went well, with a lot
>of
>participation, including a large number of people encountering
>OpenStreetMap for the first time.
>
>I want to shine a bit of a spotlight on Andrew Harvey, Phil Wyatt, and
>Ewen
>Hill. They each put in a considerable effort in making the event a
>success:
>securing waivers, answering questions from organisers, providing
>technical
>support, and helping new mappers find their way.
>
>When the event organisers had some difficulties due to unfamiliarity
>with
>the OSM project & community, Andrew, Phil, & Ewen really stepped up at
>short notice to make sure that new mappers had a great experience,
>handling
>themselves professionally and staying positive & productive throughout.
>And, I'll note - they're not done yet, these guys are still working on
>waivers, data cleanup, and lessons learned, even after most of the
>event
>participants have moved on.
>
>Great work you guys. Made me feel proud to be part of such a great
>community.
>
>Cheers
>John
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] SSSI National Bushfire Recovery Map-a-thon - Sunday 9th Feb

[Sebastian S.]

I agree that putting the building on the map should rank higher than giving it 
a lifecycle or damaged attribute that hard to assess from the image quality. 

This is also the approach I recall from HOT disaster mapping. Roads and 
building from satellite, destruction details from ground crew. (Admittedly I 
might be wrong here).

On 8 February 2020 6:44:30 pm AEDT, John Bryant  wrote:
>>
>> *Maybe swap across to LPI imagery & just map all the buildings &
>other
>> POI, without worrying about damage? That would be a huge bonus as far
>as
>> OSM is concerned, but wouldn't actually do anything at all for the
>disaster
>> recovery side of things?*
>>
> This seems like a productive idea to me... capturing buildings in
>bushfire-affected areas could produce a useful input to spatial
>analyses. I
>don't know what the agencies already have in this regard though.
>
>On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 17:14, Phil Wyatt  wrote:
>
>> Some new imagery is being uploaded... not sure on resolution
>>
>>
>> Cheers - Phil,
>> On the road with his iPad
>>
>> On 8 Feb 2020, at 5:49 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 16:24, Ewen Hill  wrote:
>>
>>> Sadly the Planet quality appears less than optimal.
>>>
>>
>> You're not wrong!
>>
>>
>>> If I look at the town of Cobargo where there were buildings lost
>just
>>> north east of the Narira Creek Highway crossing, I can't tell.what
>has been
>>> destroyed, damaged or otherwise. :
>>> https://tasks.hotosm.org/project/7898?task=591
>>>
>>
>> No, there's no way of telling if a building has been damaged - I'm
>been
>> mapping for a while & I couldn't even pick them as buildings, without
>> changing to a different set of imagery. Where I was just looking I
>couldn't
>> even tell if the area had actually been burnt over - it all looked
>like
>> normal dry grassland to me?
>>
>> I think we really need to come up with a backup plan for this event
>and
>>> quietly push SSSI towards that.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe swap across to LPI imagery & just map all the buildings & other
>POI,
>> without worrying about damage? That would be a huge bonus as far as
>OSM is
>> concerned, but wouldn't actually do anything at all for the disaster
>> recovery side of things?
>>
>>
>>> We don't want people's first taste of OSM to be a poor one.
>>>
>>
>> No, & I agree with you that it won't be a good, first look :-(
>>
>>   Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] SSSI National Bushfire Recovery Map-a-thon - Sunday 9th Feb

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Andrew, are they (the organisers) aware of the licensing issues/requirements?

Are they following here? Please engage with the discussion :-)

On 6 February 2020 12:37:16 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>I was corrected by someone off list, looks like they are planning on
>mapping within OSM https://tasks.hotosm.org/project/7893. Now I have to
>scrabble to validate Planet Labs has provided the necessary permission
>for
>their imagery to be traced into OSM.
>
>On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 12:12, Andrew Harvey 
>wrote:
>
>> I sent an email to the contact email to ask for more information, but
>by
>> the looks of it they aren't uploading anything to OpenStreetMap, they
>are
>> creating their own datasets (which may or may not be released as open
>data,
>> they haven't stated yet). It's unclear how they are planning on
>consuming
>> OpenStreetMap though. I'm still keen to see what they've identified
>as
>> important or useful to map.
>>
>> What they've stated is they'll be using Planet Labs imagery
>> https://www.planet.com/disaster/fires-in-australia-2019-11-06/.
>>
>> 1) As far as I'm aware we don't have an imagery tracing waiver from
>Planet
>> Labs, it's worth reaching out to Planet Labs to ask for this waiver
>for use
>> in OpenStreetMap.
>>
>> 2) Since access to the imagery is restricted "We provide limited
>access to
>> Explorer for up to 30 days to qualified disaster volunteer
>organizations,
>> humanitarian organizations, and other coordinating bodies." it's
>unclear
>> how we'd go about asking for access, and who gets access. But for now
>at
>> least, without (1) my view is we can't trace Planet Labs imagery for
>use in
>> OpenStreetMap.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 11:50, Stephen Backway 
>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi group,
>>>
>>> I just came across this Map-A-Thon by chance, apologies if it has
>been
>>> shared already and I missed it:
>>> https://sssi.org.au/fire-map-a-thon/about-map-a-thon
>>>
>>> Extract from the above page:
>>>
>>> *The SSSI National Bushfire Recovery Map-a-thon is being held on
>Sunday,
>>> 9th February, 2020 and registrations are now open!  To register
>visit: SSSI
>>> National Bushfire Recovery Map-a-thon
>>>
>
>*
>>>
>>> *SSSI is thankful to the surveying and geospatial community for
>reaching
>>> out to assist with the bushfire recovery effort and for the
>continued
>>> offers of assistance from individuals and businesses from within
>Australia
>>> and globally.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From reading through the pages, they are going to be using
>OpenStreetMap
>>> in conjunction with government data and imagery, so not sure if they
>have
>>> any new datasets/imagery layers that we haven't already mentioned on
>the
>>> list...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Stephen.
>>> ___
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>>
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Australian guidelines for mapping landuse-landcover?

[Sebastian S.]

If the page has not Australian specifics, get rid of it/delete.

I also agree on the length of the tagging guidelines being too long. How do 
other languages or counties solve that?


On 5 February 2020 2:35:47 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>I'm for just deleting this page.
>
>While I agree the Australian Tagging Guidelines is getting long, I'd be
>concerned splitting it up would make it harder to find content, so I'm
>on
>the fence on that.
>
>On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 13:28, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>  There is a page on the wiki for mapping landuse in Australia..
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapping_Landuse_in_Australia
>>
>> It is rather dated, carries little information and appears to have no
>real Australian content.
>>
>> And it does not link to the Australian pages.
>>
>> The page 
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines
>>
>> is getting rather large, I would not suggest adding landuse to it,
>rather a link to the other page and up date it to something better?
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] traffic_calming=choker and table

[Sebastian S.]

Hallo, 
I saw that you update the wiki with the link.
Before I sign up to that website to download that pdf... Are there images that 
show this?
I read the text but am lacking the imagination...

Are other traffic_calming options mentioned and missing in the wiki?

On 4 February 2020 4:20:16 pm AEDT, Alex Sims  wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I obviously hang around with the wrong type of people, council people,
>traffic engineers, community groups etc. It’s a commonly used term,
>particularly in Local Government. To quote Austroads guide to Local
>Area Traffic Management,
>https://austroads.com.au/publications/traffic-management/agtm08/selection-of-latm-devices/horizontal-deflection-devices/driveway-links
>(free but registration required)
>
>“Description of driveway links
>
>Driveway links take the form of a single‑lane two-way meandering road
>extending over the length of two or more property frontages. They are
>an extended form of a slow point that generally provides a greater
>visual and physical impact on the street and the amount of traffic
>using it. Passing points may be required along the link if it is either
>very long or it is curved such that approaching drivers cannot see to
>the far end. Driveway links are particularly effective in reducing
>through traffic. Consideration needs to be given to maintaining
>drainage paths and providing bypasses for bicycles where possible”.
>
>A chicane is something you’ll find on a racetrack, best not to get them
>confused.
>
>Alex
>
>
>From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
>Date: Tuesday, 4 February 2020 at 1:34 pm
>To: "talk-au@openstreetmap.org" 
>Subject: Re: [talk-au] traffic_calming=choker and table
>
>On 4/2/20 8:23 am, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>Yep, choked_table sounds good.
>
>From that wiki page, though, I notice that a chicane is "Called a
>driveway link in Australia"? Maybe so, but for 40+ years of driving in
>Australia, I've only ever known them as chicanes!
>
>
>
>Who calls a chicane a "driveway link'??? Not I.
>
>
>
>Arr Alex Sims in South Australia added it .. message sent.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Fire Station Operators

[Sebastian S.]

Since last JOSM release building=fire_station is also now recognised/available 
in the drop down.

On 3 February 2020 10:17:18 am AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>What I was talking about were
>
>building=fire_station
>
>.. of which there were 944 in the OSM data base WORLD WIDE.
>
>There are now some ~1,200 world wide.
>
>See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Abuilding%3Dfire_station
>Note I created this wiki page to encourage others to tag the building 
>detail.
>
>Note: Some places have both a 'Fire and Rescue' and 'Rural Fire' 
>stations, these may be in separate locations but within the same town.
>
>
>On 2/2/20 5:32 pm, Andrew Davidson wrote:
>> On 26/1/20 12:29 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:> However, there were 
>> "only" 718 listed. Earlier, Warin mentioned 944 > stations in the 
>> database, & I've spotted 3 that I know of that weren't > listed (or 
>> previously mapped).
>> I was confused by this as well. At the moment there are 734 "fire 
>> stations" in OSM (NSW):
>>
>> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Qjr
>>
>> But these include a number of control centres and training facilities
>
>> so it a bit over the actual number correctly mapped.
>>
>> According to the latest annual report of FRNSW there are 335 metro 
>> fire stations in NSW, and NSW RFS says there are 2002 rural brigades.
>
>> Given that a rural brigade does not necessarily have a physical 
>> presence on the ground or they might have more than one home, we
>can't 
>> really say how many RFB stations there are.
>>
>> The Base Map has 1688 rural fire stations and 338 metro, which is
>just 
>> over 2000 (but these include control centres and training facilites
>as 
>> well). By my calcs that's about 1200 missing fire stations, and
>that's 
>> before we start worrying about the 300 RFB that may or may not be on 
>> the LPI map.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Fire Station Operators

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Graeme,
I tried to fix some of the skipped ones, however only in one case I could find 
a reference website from RFS or RFB. I however was able to add two fire 
stations that where missing, the base map is your friend here.
Adding 220 stations via searching the base map is however not a sensible way of 
doing it.


On 26 January 2020 12:29:29 pm AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>& done! (apart from ~17 that are too hard, mainly because I can't see
>if
>there actually is a Station in that spot / area)
>
>However, there were "only" 718 listed. Earlier, Warin mentioned 944
>stations in the database, & I've spotted 3 that I know of that weren't
>listed (or previously mapped).
>
>How do we find the extra 220 odd?
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
>
>
>On Thu, 9 Jan 2020 at 11:10, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Agreed as to non fire stations - control center is one, the other
>> headquarters.
>>
>> Headquarters would be an 'office' type function.
>>
>> Control center looks, from imagery, to not only control but supply?
>>
>> There is a fire & rescue station in 'town' that is mapped into OSM.
>>
>> There are a number of rural fire stations around Narrabri .. some of
>them
>> unmapped.
>> These show up very well on the LPI Base Map even when zoomed out a
>fair
>> way.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/1/20 8:12 am, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 22:40, Sebastian Spiess 
>wrote:
>>
>>> I've done a few. Two raised questions.
>>>
>>> Narrabri - There are two fire ' services'  according to LPI map. How
>to
>>> tag them?
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79336523
>>
>>
>> Looks like there is a Fire Control Center there, I'd just tag that
>> building as office=government + operator + name, since they have more
>of an
>> office function.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> and RAYMOND TERRACE Fire Station - This seems to be and old fire
>station
>>> as according to https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/news.php?news=608
>>> a new one was built. I can't tell if the old one was closed down.
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79336870
>>
>>
>> If you're not sure and street level imagery doesn't help, just mark
>it as
>> too hard and skip it. You can create a note so that someone with
>local
>> knowledge can help.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 2020-01-08 21:24, schrieb Andrew Harvey:
>>> > If someone has carefully surveyed the name as signposted I leave
>that
>>> > intact. branch is not mandatory but helpful since consumers can
>choose
>>> > how they want to format the such as "Narooma", "Narooma RFS",
>"Narooma
>>> > Rural Fire Brigade", etc. especially when combined with operator.
>The
>>> > whole point was to be neutral on the exact name format and not
>engage
>>> > in a mass edit to reformat them to be the same, but instead
>respect
>>> > names will look different based on signage.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 21:05, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I have used the LPI Base Map for both name and operator, see
>>> >>
>>> >> Way: Narooma Fire Station (761122699) [operator fire & rescue]
>>> >>
>>> >> and
>>> >>
>>> >> Way: Narooma Rural Fire Service (761122698)
>>> >>
>>> >> I do not bother with the 'branch' as that is usually the leading
>>> >> value in the name and probably the same as the areas
>administration
>>> >> name too.
>>> >>
>>> >> The LPI Base Map also gives the area so it can be mapped as a
>way.
>>> >>
>>> >> On 08/01/20 16:13, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> No, just confirming details was all I was thinking about!
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >>
>>> >> Graeme
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 14:57, Andrew Harvey
>>> >>  wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> It's normally considered okay to check a business website as a
>>> >> reference and picking up their contact details, but to err on the
>>> >> side of caution taking a whole database from fire.nsw.gov.au [1]
>and
>>> >> mass importing is not advised.
>>> >>
>>> >> So I'd suggest not just copying everything from that website. For
>>> >> the RFS operated fire stations normally the name will indicate
>this,
>>> >> or a quick look at google search results may also indicate,
>>> >> sometimes it's visible on Mapillary based on the signage.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 15:39, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>>> >>  wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Just a thought?
>>> >>
>>> >> Are we allowed to use 
>https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=467
>>> >> or not?
>>> >>
>>> >> I've thinking we would still need permission & waiver?
>>> >>
>>> >> Big question, I guess, is - are we commercial or not?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >>
>>> >> Graeme
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Links:
>>> > --
>>> > [1] http://fire.nsw.gov.au
>>> > ___
>>> > Talk-au mailing list
>>> > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>

[talk-au] Shoulder and cycle usage

[Sebastian S.]

Hi, what is the view of tagging road shoulders and particularly when they have 
painted bicycle signs?

Motorways would be another candidate.

A wiki entry for shoulder exists but is very basic 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shoulder___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] AU task server (was: Maxar bushfire imagery)

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Cameron,
Thanks for your offer. I'm interested in running or participating on this, 
however have little to no server experience...

Let me know regarding your timing...

On 19 January 2020 10:07:34 am AEDT, came...@dewitte.id.au wrote:
>I saw your last message about having a task server too, and was going
>to say that I'd be happy to look into running one though I don't have
>the ability to right at this point. But in a month or so I should be
>able to give it a go.
>
>____
>From: "Sebastian S." 
>Sent: Sunday, 19 January 2020 8:33 am
>To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Graeme Fitzpatrick; Andrew Harvey
>Cc: OSM Australian Talk List
>Subject: Re: [talk-au] Maxar bushfire imagery
>
>Another good use case for an Australian or Oceania centric task server.
>
>Any takers?
>
>On 19 January 2020 8:36:03 am AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote:
>>
>> Load into iD to start with!
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 23:18, Andrew Harvey
> wrote:
>>>
>>> How to load into iD/JOSM or how to make use of it for mapping?
>>>
>>> On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 08:24, Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for putting these up Andrew.
>>>>
>>>> The silly question though is how do we use them? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Maxar bushfire imagery

[Sebastian S.]

Another good use case for an Australian or Oceania centric task server.

Any takers?

On 19 January 2020 8:36:03 am AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>Load into iD to start with!
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
>
>
>On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 23:18, Andrew Harvey 
>wrote:
>
>> How to load into iD/JOSM or how to make use of it for mapping?
>>
>> On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 08:24, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for putting these up Andrew.
>>>
>>> The silly question though is how do we use them? :-)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Graeme
>>>
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Maxar bushfire imagery

[Sebastian S.]

I think the discussion regarding damaged is good, however I feel that this is a 
too fine grained quality for mapping from satellite images.

I would use ruined. Ruined can be fully destroyed or partially.

If damaged my next question would be how much? A little? Very subjective to 
quantify.



On 18 January 2020 9:34:58 am AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 17/1/20 10:08 pm, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 17 Jan 2020, 11:42 by andrew.harv...@gmail.com:
>>
>> I'm all for using the lifecycle prefix,
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix. I agreed
>> that if there's still remains there use ruined or destroyed, not
>> sure what the difference is though.
>>
>> ruined implies that ruins still remain, destroyed may mean that or 
>> that there is no trace at all
>>
>> in practice difference is minor if any
>
>Most of these will still have foundations in place, they may not be fit
>
>for reuse but they are there. Some fire places and chimneys too remain.
>
>I'll use ruined. Unless there are other ideas?
>
>
>> Once it's been cleared you could use demolished, removed or
>raised
>>
>> Probably razed, not raised. I see not real difference.
>>
>> , again not sure what the difference is. While damaged is not
>> documented it seems the perfect fit since there is no other
>> suitable tag for this on the wiki.
>>
>> damaged seems to me a poor fit as prefix, damaged building is still a
>
>> building,
>> and I would expect building=something tag to be used.
>
>
>By damaged I mean part of the building is intact but another part has 
>been damaged .. e.g. a truck has run part way through the building.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] NPWS landing sites task

[Sebastian S. via Talk-au]

That was quick, good on ya!

On 12 January 2020 2:49:55 pm AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>& done!
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
>
>
>On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 10:14, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks fellas!
>>
>> Back to it, then :-)
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 22:08, Sebastian S. 
>wrote:
>>
>>> I use a node for most.
>>> Only if there is a distinct clearing in the middle of nowhere or a
>marked
>>> helipad then I use an area.
>>>
>>> On 11 January 2020 8:56:01 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey <
>>> andrew.harv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form
>that
>>>>> says there is a landing site at "this" spot.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes that's right.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as
>a
>>>>> landing site?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing
>site,
>>>> either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just
>mapping
>>>> any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site,
>only those
>>>> which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Node or area?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary
>you
>>>> can see I'd just go with a node.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened
>out
>>>>> square of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a
>clearing in
>>>>> the forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot
>in an
>>>>> open paddock.
>>>>>
>>>>> & it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in
>any way
>>>>> - does that matter?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by
>maps
>>>> and apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps
>justify
>>>> getting it into maps and apps.
>>>>
>>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Way has been simplified...

[Sebastian S.]

Thanks all, I will probably have a look at OSMAnd settings as a first step.

When editing the note don't bother me too much.

On 12 January 2020 9:31:33 pm AEDT, Mateusz Konieczny  
wrote:
>
>
>
>12 Jan 2020, 03:18 by 61sundow...@gmail.com:
>
>> On 12/1/20 12:37 pm, Sebastian S. wrote:
>>
>>> When using OSMAnd for routing I came across the following note: "way
>has been simplified using a error criteria of 3m" it is usually in
>green text.
>>> Does anyone know what this means, why do we need the note? What
>purpose does it serve?
>>>
>>
>>
>> This is usually from an import of data. The data may have many points
>(nodes in OSM) that lead to data bloat.
>>
>> JOSM has a tool that reduces the number of nodes such that any error
>will be less than 3 meters from the original information, 'simplify
>way'.
>>
>>
>> It may be better to have these as 'comment=*' rather than 'note=*'?
>They should only be for other mappers to see if they have some concern
>with the data.
>>
>I think that place for such notes is a changeset history. Is it maybe
>really old import
>before changesets were added?
>
>I would delete such notes and have changeset with 
>"original way geometry was simplified some time ago, unnecessary nodes
>were deleted"
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Way has been simplified...

[Sebastian S.]

When using OSMAnd for routing I came across the following note: "way has been 
simplified using a error criteria of 3m" it is usually in green text.
Does anyone know what this means, why do we need the note? What purpose does it 
serve?___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] NPWS landing sites task

[Sebastian S.]

I use a node for most.
Only if there is a distinct clearing in the middle of nowhere or a marked 
helipad then I use an area.

On 11 January 2020 8:56:01 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>
>wrote:
>
>> Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks.
>>
>> I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that
>says
>> there is a landing site at "this" spot.
>>
>
>Yes that's right.
>
>
>> So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a
>> landing site?
>>
>
>This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing site,
>either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just
>mapping
>any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site, only
>those
>which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites.
>
>
>>
>> Node or area?
>>
>
>Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary you
>can
>see I'd just go with a node.
>
>
>>
>> Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out
>square
>> of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the
>> forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an
>open
>> paddock.
>>
>> & it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any
>way -
>> does that matter?
>>
>
>That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by maps
>and
>apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps justify
>getting
>it into maps and apps.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] A nice website for a bush fire over view

[Sebastian S.]

I often wonder who puts these pages together.
Is there no requirement to give contact or responsible person details by law in 
Australia?

On 10 January 2020 1:30:06 pm AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Bush fire site for Vic/NSW with OSM attribution.. but data from other 
>sources too...
>
>https://bushfire.io
>
>Pity our federal government cannot do the same for all of Australia,
>could help stop those trolls.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] JOSM problem

[Sebastian S.]

I noticed the slow upper menus too.
If there a bug already existing that I can add to?

On 11 January 2020 5:07:25 pm AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 11/1/20 2:55 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>> Ah at the Sydney Mapathon a few people were having the same problem 
>> with the upper menus being slow on a fresh install, might want to 
>> check the JOSM issue tracker and report it.
>>
>> Either way I just fixed the missing icon in ELI 
>> https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index/pull/759 so depending if
>
>> you have swapped out your imagery source in JOSM to use ELI directly 
>> or not you may need to wait for that to get updated on the JOSM side.
>>
>> On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 14:43, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com 
>> > wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm having a problem with JOSM ...
>>
>> In trying to track it down I found the following message
>>
>> "Failed to locate image
>>
>'https://www.spatial.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/file/0010/210520/favicon.ico'"
>>
>> This is part of the imagery services from NSW LPI. They have
>> probably shifted the location thus this error.
>>
>> Oh .. my problem is JOSM is very slow to respond to the upper
>menus.
>>
>> Probably something I have done elsewhere .. so I'll be continuing
>> on with that (together with other problems).
>>
>
>New laptop. With a fresh install of linux (was windows 10 .. no thank 
>you) and updated the PC linux to the same version .. hence blaming me 
>rather than JOSM. May go back to an old JOSM version to check.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Over 55’s Lifestyle Village = retirement_home ?

[Sebastian S.]

Sounds simple. Village details then on the residential area?

Often there are shared things such as pool, meeting hall etc. How would they be 
tagged then?

On 7 January 2020 9:17:19 am AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > is a Over 55’s Lifestyle Village (like this one
>> > https://www.middlerockhomevillage.com.au) a
>amenity=retirement_home?
>>
>
>One near us  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209449523 has been
>marked
>simply as
>
>landuse=residential
>name=Miami Retirement Village
>min_age=50
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Over 55’s Lifestyle Village = retirement_home ?

[Sebastian S.]

I can confirm these observations for another similar site I've visited.

On 7 January 2020 7:30:48 am AEDT, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
>Hi
>Looking at the photos and site plan I suspect the homes may be  
>demountable, that is, on temporary foundations. Sorry , I am not  
>directly answering the tagging question, Even if purpose built it may  
>effectively be a caravan park with all the sites taken by onsite  
>cabins. Typically the site is leased but the building is owned by the  
>resident.
>
>They allow for greater density than strata plan units. The demountable 
>
>construction allows the fiction that these buildings could ever be  
>moved.
>
>Tony
>
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> is a Over 55’s Lifestyle Village (like this one
>> https://www.middlerockhomevillage.com.au) a amenity=retirement_home?
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dretirement_home
>>
>> I'm not clear if the Lifestyle Village is only a fancy marketing name
>or
>> not. I've seen such villages and some are past caravan parks that
>have
>> been re-purposed with the over 55's as clientel.
>>
>> How would you tag this?
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>> _
>> This mail has been virus scanned by Australia On Line
>> see http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Fire Station Operators

[Sebastian S.]

Hi,
Similar to schools the building should be tagged 

building=fire_station

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=fire_station


On 5 January 2020 4:55:26 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>Yes, this is
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#One_feature.2C_one_OSM_element,
>there should only be one amenity=fire_station for a single fire
>station.
>
>Where possible I prefer to trace the site boundary as this can be
>useful
>information and put all the tags on that, and then just have a way
>inside
>it with building=yes an none of the fire station tags.
>
>But I think it's also fine to just have a node, or to just have the
>building without the site as interim solutions or for fire stations
>where
>the extent is just the building which don't have a yard.
>
>On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 15:27, David Wales 
>wrote:
>
>> Somewhat related to this.
>>
>> Camden West Rural Fire Service has both a traced building, *and* a
>traced
>> site border.
>> Both are currently tagged with amenity=fire_station.
>>
>> The building has the rest of the identifying tags.
>>
>> I feel that it makes sense to only have one feature tagged with
>> amenity=fire_station, and the rest of the tags. Should this be the
>> building, or the site border?
>>
>> See link below:
>>
>>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id=724460466#map=20/-34.05818/150.67674
>>
>> Regards,
>> David Wales
>>
>> On 4/1/20 2:39 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Jan 2020 at 14:14, Sebastian Spiess 
>wrote:
>>
>>> Andrew,
>>> I've done one. Just clarifying regarding the branch.
>>>
>>> branch  =   Narrabeen Fire Station
>>> name   =  Fire and Rescue NSW Station 068 Narrabeen
>>>
>>
>> I can't see clearly from Mapillary what the singe looks like, but
>branch
>> should be just "Narrabeen", without the "Fire Station" words. Then
>you
>> could still have name=Narrabeen Fire Station.
>>
>>
>>> Is this how you suggested? Before the branch tag was the name.
>>>
>>> I've also added
>>> building =fire_station
>>>
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79179815
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing
>listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] presenting #NorthernBeachesSolar pet project

[Sebastian S.]

Thanks for the tasking manager tip. Will have a look.

Regarding start date I thought since I don't know the exact date I chose the 
one from the images.
Once images are updated the source date could be updated while the start date 
stays.

Can we go back in time with LPI images?

On 4 January 2020 9:20:15 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>Nice work, would love to see more roof top solar panels mapped.
>
>The Tasking Manager https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tasking_Manager
>might
>suit this better than MapRoulette, since Tasking Manager breaks an area
>up
>into tiles and you go in, choose a tile, complete it, then upload. It
>helps
>track progress, avoid conflicts and ensures a whole area is done
>without
>gaps in coverage.
>
>MapRoulette works differently, it's based on identifying features
>already
>which need some work.
>
>> start_date=* - set to the date of the LPI NSW Imagery - or should
>this be
>rather source:date=*??
>
>start_date is when the feature started, so when the solar panel was
>installed, you can just do  if you only know the year or -MM if
>you
>only know the month, but if you don't know you can omit it. source:date
>is
>better for the imagery date.
>
>On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 at 08:50, Sebastian S.  wrote:
>
>> So far I have not worked out a good grid method.
>> I go by suburb in my area and keep the file local until I've
>completed the
>> suburb. Only then I upload.
>> While offline I use a temporary area tagged as wood. I expand this
>box
>> over the area I've worked through. This is just because I don't know
>any
>> better solution. 
>>
>> If you want to see a map showing the modules you can use open
>> infrastructure map, link is at the bottom of the wiki.
>>
>> I thought about making this a mapping challenge on
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapRoulette but so far I've not
>> looked into it. I've got no experience with this but am happy to
>receive
>> guidance.
>>
>>
>> On 2 January 2020 7:11:07 am AEDT, Dion Moult 
>wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 11:29:13PM +1100, Sebastian Spiess wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd like to present my latest pet project:
>>>>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:ConsEbt/NorthernBeachesSolar
>>>> I wanted to share this and collect some feedback or comments.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I love it! I might do a bit of solar mapping too! How easy is it to
>set a grid
>>> to know which areas have been mapped?
>>>
>>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] presenting #NorthernBeachesSolar pet project

[Sebastian S.]

Hi thank,
I had similar ideas, still ideas tough...

On 3 January 2020 2:26:08 pm AEDT, Daniel O'Connor  
wrote:
>Nice work.
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZf3SJ1V-iQ and 
>https://openclimatefix.org/
>may be also of interest.
>
>
>One of the pet ideas for this data I had was generating a number of
>overpass queries looking for big commercial real estate without solar
>deployed; to form the basis of advocacy campaigns.
>
>For example; Wesfarmers has a program to deploy solar to the majority
>of
>its Bunnings warehouses:
>https://sustainability.wesfarmers.com.au/our-stories/bunnings/bunnings-continues-its-solar-rollout/
>
>
>Or a number of large shopping centres are rolling out solar carparks.
>
>This kinds of efforts have a very direct energy efficiency payoff; so
>potentially a persuasive letter becomes that final tipping point from
>"Maybe we should" to "everyone else is doing it".
>
>Similar things could be done for council, federal real estate.
>
>On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 11:00 PM Sebastian Spiess 
>wrote:
>
>> Hello All and Happy New Year,
>>
>> I'd like to present my latest pet project:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:ConsEbt/NorthernBeachesSolar
>>
>>
>> Inspired by an UK based project
>>
>>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_the_United_Kingdom/Rooftop_Solar_PV
>> I wanted to do something similar in front of my doorstep.
>>
>> The wiki gives some details about tags I'm using as well as three
>> changesets that are part of this project.
>>
>>
>> I wanted to share this and collect some feedback or comments.
>>
>>
>> Cheers, Seb
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] presenting #NorthernBeachesSolar pet project

[Sebastian S.]

So far I have not worked out a good grid method.
I go by suburb in my area and keep the file local until I've completed the 
suburb. Only then I upload.
While offline I use a temporary area tagged as wood. I expand this box over the 
area I've worked through. This is just because I don't know any better 
solution. 

If you want to see a map showing the modules you can use open infrastructure 
map, link is at the bottom of the wiki.

I thought about making this a mapping challenge on   
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapRoulette but so far I've not looked into 
it. I've got no experience with this but am happy to receive guidance.


On 2 January 2020 7:11:07 am AEDT, Dion Moult  wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 11:29:13PM +1100, Sebastian Spiess wrote:
>> I'd like to present my latest pet project:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:ConsEbt/NorthernBeachesSolar
>> I wanted to share this and collect some feedback or comments.
>
>I love it! I might do a bit of solar mapping too! How easy is it to set
>a grid
>to know which areas have been mapped?
>
>-- 
>Dion Moult
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] parking and bike lane

[Sebastian S.]

I agree that if there is nothing marked, however my question was rather from a 
continuity point of view.
The roads into and out of the round about have cycle lanes. The cyclist needs 
to merge with the road traffic to pass through.
Should the roundabout have cycle=designated or yes to ensure routing goes 
through it?


On 30 December 2019 6:56:31 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>If there's nothing marked on the road in the roundabout, then you can
>just
>omit the cycle lane tag from the roundabout.
>
>On Sun., 29 Dec. 2019, 2:21 pm Graeme Fitzpatrick,
>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 at 16:52, David Wales 
>wrote:
>>
>>> I prefer to use separate ways for separate foot paths.
>>>
>>
>> As do I.
>>
>>
>>> On 28 December 2019 3:02:30 pm AEDT, Sebastian Spiess
>
>>> wrote:


 I do welcome comments. In particular regarding how to go about the
>cycle
 way and the roundabout.

>>>
>> Looks OK to me, but I've also wondered how bike lanes are supposed to
>work
>> through roundabouts, when there's nothing marked on the road?
>>
>>   Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Sydney #geobeers

[Sebastian S.]

Thanks Andrew for the invite,
It's a bit early in the day considering I need to get there.. will still try.
Cheers,
Seb

On 15 December 2019 7:08:38 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>For any Sydneysiders on the list, John Bryant[1] and I have organised a
>#geobeers in Sydney this Wednesday 18th, 5pm at the Albion Place Hotel,
>all
>welcome. Hope to see some OSM faces there.
>
>[1] who you may know from being instrumental in getting our local
>chapter
>OSGeo Oceania and the FOSS4G SotM Oceania conference up and running
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Residential street, parking lane

[Sebastian S.]

Hi, how do you guys map residential streets that are as wide as a two lane road 
but have no two lane marking. Typically there is lots of parking done on these 
streets.
Example: https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/d_ymi7Vowzbof-WVbRT-1w
Or
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/zMLfESC21KVBCRXu46hG2Q

Should these roads be tagged with a parking lane? At intersections there is 
typically the continuous yellow line on the shoulder to indicate no parking but 
other than that no signage.___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Merging of Imported Address nodes with Ways and Relations

[Sebastian S.]

If you transfer an address from a note to an already existing building if say 
yes, go ahead.
On businesses I prefer to have an individual POI node (maybe combined with 
entrance) which is separate from a building. Unless I know that the building is 
solemnly used for the business.


On 22 November 2019 9:18:23 pm AEDT, Reuben via Talk-au 
 wrote:
>On 22/11/19 5:53 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>> Do you have an example? I don't quite understand what you mean by
>combining the nodes? Combining the nodes with what? Is this about if
>the address point should exist on a dedicated node or on a building or
>other amenity or poi?
>There were nodes created from the import (I was not a part of this
>import), I want to know if the community considers it appropriate to
>conflate the nodes with existing features or leave them.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] local traffic only

[Sebastian S.]

So the sign is put up by the council. Is it not an official sign?

Could someone elaborate on the legal side mentioned here. E.g. is there 
catalogue of street signs in the road rules and this one is not among them?

Are people confusing lax enforcement of the sign with it having no legal 
meaning?

On 9 November 2019 11:37:49 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 02:24, Mateusz Konieczny
>
>wrote:
>
>> Why it would be irrelevant?
>>
>
>> access tag family is for legal access (with some space for officially
>> discouraged access),
>> access=destination is for "transit is illegal", not "local residents
>> dislike transit traffic".
>>
>> OSM is not a place to add a nonexisting ban on transit traffic
>>
>
>Yeah realised this later, see my other post in this thread at
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-November/013188.html,
>which I suggested motor_vehicle:advisory=destination to tag a suggested
>or
>advised but maybe not legally enforceable destination only restriction.
>
>On Sat, 9 Nov 2019 at 01:55, Mateusz Konieczny
>
>wrote:
>
>> Is it "local traffic only" as in "resident only" or "no transit"?
>>
>> Is permission required to enter this area?
>>
>> AFAIK there is no tagging scheme for distinguishing "only with
>permission
>> of
>> homeowner" and "available to all residents of closed community".
>>
>
>It just means this road is indented to be used if you're traveling to
>somewhere along this road, but not if you're just driving through as a
>shortcut.
>
>It's still public land, not private property.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Australia Wiki Page

[Sebastian S.]

If these links come from a new template that has been rolled out I suggest to 
understand how the template is supposed to be used and not just delete the 
links.
-- 

On 11 October 2019 12:34:18 pm AEDT, David Wales  wrote:
>The Australian wiki page has been updated with a nice banner which
>contains links to various categories of information.
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australia
>
>However, a couple of these links don't appear to go anywhere:
>
>- Map Status: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australia#Status
>- Links: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australia#Links
>
>Should the page be re-organised to reflect these categories, or should
>these non-existent links be removed?
>
>Regards,
>David Wales
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Sebastian S.]

What about a repair cafe? Is that also community_center?

To me a repair cafe is a mixture of men shed and maker, tinker, hacker space.

They are often also community driven/operated.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 7 October 2019 6:07:19 pm AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 07/10/19 17:43, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> 7 Oct 2019, 08:39 by matkoni...@tutanota.com:
>>
>> Based on images it sounds close to hackerspace/makerspace, but
>> with no (or lower) focus
>> on software part and greater on direct working with wood and
>> similar materials.
>>
>> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhackerspace
>>
>> To clarify - not sure whatever describing it in this way is a good 
>> match, but maybe
>> it may be one of tags used to describe such object.
>>
>> At least it would be a good idea how it differs from hackerspace if
>it 
>> is not one
>> (minimal focus on software and electronics?).
>
>To me 'hackerspace' involves working with computers.
>
>Mens sheds typically involve older tools without any computers, this 
>keeps the cost down and, as they are older people, usually the users 
>have knowledge of and skills to suit these older tools.
>
>These were formed to provide social interaction of retired men using
>the 
>'work' as an aid to get them involved.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Mapping 'private roads' conclusion

[Sebastian S.]

I like the suggestion to add destination. This is sensible for three driveways 
leaving from the same road to different houses.

I think the wording suggestions are good.
Provide a link to this thread as reference.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 9 October 2019 3:19:11 pm AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>2 thoughts.
>
>Map the full road we can see on overhead imagery, or just up to the
>(usual)
>gate?
>
>& access=private, or =destination?
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Mailing lists (was: Re: Discussion H: public transport – the end game)

[Sebastian S.]

I too stated that the way he perceives the mailing list and wrote about the 
interface being poor that this might be due to the email client or settings he 
is using. Unfortunately there was no reaction to this (as with most of the 
other post).

I agree with Frederick that we should have more patience and how that the olive 
branch for a personal face to face will be accepted.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 2 October 2019 7:23:58 pm AEST, Andy Townsend  wrote:
>On 02/10/2019 08:19, Edoardo Neerhut wrote:
>> it would make sense to limit his communications so we're not
>bombarded 
>> daily with his emails.
>
>At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, one thing that it is 
>perhaps worth mentioning is that in most mail clients it's perfectly 
>possible to "file unseen" certain emails at the recipient end (provided
>
>you're not reading the digest, of course).  I think that I'd struggle
>to 
>make sense of some OSM mailing lists without that as an option.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Andy
>
>
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Mapping 'private roads'

[Sebastian S.]

I map them with access private because I can see them on aerial images and on 
the ground. If the path is e.g. behind a high hedge I will limit to the visible 
part or what I can see on aerial images.
I think mapping these roads adds value for everyone who is trying to get to the 
particular address. 
Thinking of a delivery vehicle I am even considering if access=permissive would 
be appropriate.

In the end it is not the map that is trespassing but the individual on location 
that is.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 5 October 2019 9:44:47 am AEST, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am in 2 minds about this ... these roads exist so they can be seen.
>
>They might be usefull navigational features;
>
>firstly to plot progress along a public road - you have just past this
>private road so you must he here on the map.
>
>secondly for any emergency services - mainly thinking of fire,
>particularly of non local fireies.
>
>Some object as mapping them may encourage inappropriate use.. "its on
>my map, so I can use it" is one of the responses. Sigh.
>
>Adding access=private works for some renders and not others.
>
>-
>
>I do like to see the map with all these tracks, even private ones.
>
>On the other hand I don't want people seeing a line on the map and
>thinking they can use it...
>
>===
>
>A middle ground? Show the start of the track and no more???
>
>--- From the Aust. Tagging Guidelines
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Road_Tagging
>
>How I would tag farm tracks..
>
>"highway=track Gravel fire trails, forest drives, 4WD trails and
>similar 
>roads. "
>
>Then goes on to
>
>"highway=service  Unnamed access roads. e.g.
>Entrance ways and roads in parks, government properties, beach access
>etc. Use a short service road where you may want to mark the entrance
>to a private/government area, but not map the interior private roads
>in detail."
>
>The problem here is that some raise the "not map the interior
>private roads in detail" as not mapping them at all.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Discussion A: Is this forum fit for purpose?

[Sebastian S.]

Hi,
I've said it before but this is not a forum. It is a mailing list. Therefore 
many of your points seem to have the wrong perspective.

On 25 September 2019 9:00:50 am AEST, "Herbert.Remi via Talk-au" 
 wrote:
># Discussion A: Is this forum fit for purpose?
>
> “PLEASE KEEP IT BRIEF. SPACE OF OF A PREMIUM. THANKS, JANE”
>
>## The Issue
>
>The forum needs to be robust. It needs to tolerate a lot of traffic. It
>needs to work on the busy days, not just the quiet. It needs a
>functionality that allows you to manage congestion. It needs to
>tolerate diverse interest and writing styles. It needs to have room for
>growth.
>
>**I believe OSM is too important for anything else!**
>
>If you love OSM, and I am sure you do, then we need a more modern
>platform then this. This mailing list is so 90s.
>
>The good news is there is plenty of options and I am sure that here
>there is the technical expertise and ability to put it on a better
>footing.
>
>## Features that would be of value:
>
>- You need to be able to tailor your view of the content without
>intervention of a group moderator or group consensus.
>
>- You need to filter the content for topics your interest in and topics
>you’re not
>
>- You need to filter the content with posts from people you like and
>block those that you don’t (whitelist and blacklist).
>
>- You need to be able to search by including and excluding keywords,
>preferably both in the same query
>
>- You need to be able to search by post tags, again both including and
>excluding
>
>- Preferable, it would be best to combine both tag and keyword searches
>(but many platforms have problems with this)
>
>- Every post should be tagged with country and state of jurisdiction.
>The country could be default and I only suggest it as at some time
>other this idea may spread.
>
>- Provide the option to tag (plain text) the posts with the topic under
>discussion e.g. highway, lifecycle, announcement, events, registration,
>mapping party, instructions, and message type (“The Facts”, “The
>Issue”, etc)
>
>- You should be able to move between chat groups and follow multiple
>chat groups. Slack does this well.
>
>- A post should be able to include “attachments” that are not visible
>until open: office files, photos, PDF, HTML links. This saves screen
>space.
>
>- Posts should have a header. It provides a (searchable) overview and
>the actual post could be blended in and out.
>
>- A smartphone app would be great. Why? Seek data shows most job
>applications are done on the app and take less than 15 minutes. It is
>remarkable how much you get done on the way to work on the bus.
>
>- The help provided by this forum should be made available as soon as
>it is posted: 365 days a year, 24 hours per day.
>
>- Ideally, it should support a "forms" function for registration to
>group events (or link to an external platform that supports such)
>
>- It would be great to have a calendar function for events.
>
>- We need more than a plain text. Rich text functionality is advisable.
>A HTML capable editor is an option (transparent). As I have previously
>mentioned, "markdown" is a popular modern option support by FOSS/GitHub
>
>Everybody is welcome in an OSM forum, no matter the interest. We need
>everybody we can find to help with this project. We should try to
>create an environment where is happy to do what they do best, and come
>and go as they please.
>
>I welcome your comments. 
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] What are the Facts?

[Sebastian S.]

Herbert,
All this is quite a lot and lacks clear issues to discuss.
It also reads to me as if you would be writing down some text that has been 
developed by a larger group and you are writing done their view?


Keep in mind that little response to your lengthy text does not mean consent or 
endorsement.
-- 

On 23 September 2019 8:35:53 pm AEST, "Herbert.Remi via Talk-au" 
 wrote:
>What are the Facts?
>> ‘Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.’>
>— Daniel Patrick Moynihan
>I have decided to publish the discussion brief in two parts: “The
>Facts” and then “The Issue”. This is me telling you I am going to do
>that. I will send you the first part tomorrow.
>"The Facts" is a summary of information from various relevant sources
>in OSM Wiki, laws and regulations that apply to the ACT and any other
>information of a factual nature which may help clarify “The Issue.”
>In principle, the facts should be straight forward.
>The first step is the pick through what we know and clarify, confirm
>and remove any errors that have crept into the brief. This information
>creates a level playing field of knowledge.
>Your comments are more than welcome. To quote OSM Wiki, “be bold.”
>If you think any of the information is in error, please try to provide
>the correct information and preferably with a link, or at least mention
>the source of this information. At every level in OSM, it always comes
>back to the principle of “verifiable”. It is easy to get things wrong
>when we are relying on memory.
>Please stick to critiquing the facts and not getting off-topic. I will
>process your feedback at the end of the calendar day and integrate the
>information into the brief or correct it as is required.
>The updated and corrected facts section will be published with the full
>brief including “The Issue” on the following day.
>The same is true for the quality definition. A word can have many
>meanings. This is why the OSM technical definition is so valuable.
>The purpose of the quality definition is to define in OSM terms, for
>example, what a shared bike path is, within the context of its
>information provided in “The Facts”. In other words, we cannot have a
>quality definition that is illegal under ACT law or unfit for purpose.
>Coming tomorrow 24/9/2019
>The Facts for Discussion C: Two steps forward and one step back:
>confusion about tagging bike tracks in the ACT
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] topic A: the platform itself

[Sebastian S.]

Hello, 
I think it is important to be precise in the language we use. Therefore I'd 
like to point out that this is a mailing list and not a forum.

If you find the UI poor then this likely due to the way you use the mailing 
list.

Browsing the archives on the list website is not how I participate on current 
topics.

I use mostly my phone's email client. My email client does thread topics 
together which allows to follow or skip certain topics.

Just thought I throw this in because when people speak of a forum I don't think 
of this mailing list and forum UI has in my view no relevance to mailing list 
UI.

Cheers, Seb
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 20 September 2019 5:25:18 pm AEST, Edoardo Neerhut  
wrote:
>Thanks for bringing this up Herbert.
>
>*Similar sentiments*
>This has actually been bothering me the last few weeks as I started to
>realise how much of my day is spent reading through talklists that do
>not
>have relevance to me or that I do not have time to respond to. For
>those of
>us subscribed to multiple talklists, it becomes a very time consuming
>and
>inefficient communication method.
>
>The problem is that you need to read every single one in case you miss
>something relevant. There are lot of good conversations taking place
>and I
>wish I had time to engage more, but I need to be selective.
>
>*The platform*
>I like the idea of a forum which can be categorised and allow the
>viewer to
>make quicker decisions about which topics that would like to engage
>with.
>Whether that is the OpenStreetMap forum or something else doesn't
>bother
>me. Although the OpenStreetMap forum would make sense so that people
>can
>find it easily.
>
>Slack is very convenient, but it is not good for important discussions
>because the messages get archived unless you sign up to a cost
>prohibitive
>plan which our community would not be able to afford.
>
>*Setting a standard*
>I am not sure any of this can be dictated, but it is a good discussion
>to
>have and I would be interested to see how the rest of the community
>feels.
>Of course asking here is inherently going to target those already using
>the
>talklists, so I will bring this up in other places as well.
>
>Overall I support the interest to discuss this on a more efficient,
>intuitive platform.
>
>On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 09:10, David Wales 
>wrote:
>
>> I am a member of some international OSM Slack channels.
>>
>> However, because it requires a whole different app (which I only have
>> space for on my computer), I only check it monthly at best.
>>
>> On the other hand, I read every talk-au message within a few days of
>> original posting, because they all arrive in my email inbox on my
>phone.
>>
>> If the number of talk-au emails reaches overwhelming levels, it might
>be
>> necessary to investigate other solutions. However, I don't think we
>have
>> reached that point yet.
>>
>> If we ever did explore alternatives, I would prefer an open platform,
>> which we can host ourselves, rather than Slack or some other
>proprietary
>> system.
>>
>> Regards,
>> David
>>
>> On 20 September 2019 4:31:44 pm AEST, Frederik Ramm
>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 9/20/19 03:14, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au wrote:
>>>
 I will post several concerns and information on several issues, but
>the
 first is this platform itself.

>>>
>>> You call this platform a "forum" which is ok in the abstract sense,
>but
>>> note that there is actually an Australia forum in addition to this
>>> Australia mailing list
>>> (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=24). The forum
>>> provides a slightly different user experience but is used less.
>>>
>>> In other countries, people have set up Slack channels or Facebook
>groups
>>> or even more esoteric channels of communication, in addition of or
>as a
>>> replacement for mailing lists - browse
>>> https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index if you want to get an
>idea.
>>>
>>> There's no strict rule about where the OSM community should discuss
>>> their issues, however media that requires prior registration with a
>>> third-party entity - like Slack or Facebook - are sometimes frowned
>upon
>>> as they give control over who can participate to that third party
>and
>>> might require the participant to agree to wide-ranging exploitation
>of
>>> their personal data by a commercial entity.
>>>
>>> In Germany where I hail from, the forum and the mailing list are
>used by
>>> about the same number of (but largely different) people, and since
>the
>>> total number of contributors is large enough to guarantee lively
>>> discussion on both, that's totally fine. Germany also has mailing
>lists
>>> for individual states but they are used very little, and even
>>> state-specific issues would often be discussed on the nationwide
>list to
>>> ensure they get enough attention.
>>>
>>> Speaking very generally, OSM has achieved the success it has with a
>>> "just do it" attitude: Instead of 

Re: [talk-au] Topic B: inconsistencies, idiosynchrosies and vagueness

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Andrew, I fully, whole heartedly agreed.
Wiki is supposed so evolve. 
Gardening to fix little broken or spelling issues.
Bigger changes are best outlined here on the list to capture common sentiment.

I must admit I often just look up things in the wiki, so for me it is mostly a 
reference and it takes more commitment to actually improve. To update e.g. 
tagging guideline aspects one would first need to step back, which is what you 
seem to have done.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 21 September 2019 10:45:44 am AEST, Andrew Harvey  
wrote:
>I completely agree the "how to map" of OpenStreetMap (not just tags,
>but
>also things like when to split a highway, when to snap nodes, what
>should
>be mapped etc) is full of "inconsistencies, idiosyncrasies and
>vagueness".
>But when I look at where OSM is today I think we've done a pretty
>amazing
>job all things considered, yes we still have much more work to do, but
>being a mostly volunteer self organising community the best way to make
>OSM
>stronger is hands on driving this change.
>
>I think the easiest way to get started is improving documentation on
>the
>wiki, documenting all the different "how to map" concepts used today,
>documenting these "inconsistencies, idiosyncrasies and vagueness", then
>as
>a community we can refine approaches to eventually resolve these
>issues.
>There's a lot of precedent in OSM for deprecating things when we have
>better/more commonly used.
>
>Any time you encounter an inconsistencies I'd encourage you to raise
>it,
>either on the globally tagging list, or if it's local here on talk-au.
>
>On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 09:57, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au <
>talk-au@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> A special thank you for the links yesterday. I have read them.
>"Australian
>> Tagging Guidelines" and "Good practice" are worth knowing and I am
>very
>> grateful for our forefathers that put so much effort into writing
>these
>> documents. It worth noting, however, when you compared the two that
>they
>> are riddled with inconsistencies, idiosyncrasies and vagueness. It is
>worth
>> remembering this when we experience another of those "I am right, you
>are
>> wrong" conversations.
>> Reading "Australian Tagging Guidelines," I thought of Geffory Rush
>from
>> Pirates of the Carribean, "they are more guidelines than rules."
>Unapproved
>> tracktypes for 4WD (inventing tags, don't exist but perhaps they
>should)
>> and small towns called cities so they appear the map (mapping for the
>> renderer), and the principle of "we map what is there" but then don't
>map
>> what is private (often difficult to verify too). The descriptions are
>full
>> of contradictions and vagueness. The "Lifecycle prefix" wikitext
>needs more
>> work, particularly examples of use to get consistency in its
>application.
>> As much of it is not rendered (Mapnik), mapping it could be
>considered as a
>> low priority.
>> Harry Wood's blog "community smoothness" addresses vagueness in
>language
>> and how everybody has a different opinion of what a text means. That
>is not
>> new of course and with certainty, everybody has an opinion about what
>the
>> right way is. It is human nature, when it comes to our own beliefs,
>every
>> evidence supporting it is embraced and every evidence against
>excluded.
>> Finally, it is easy to forget that the Wiki is written in dozens of
>> different languages and there will be inconsistencies between Wiki
>entries
>> in different languages. I can verify that for two. English and German
>wiki
>> pages descriptions are not surprisingly culture-specific (see also
>the
>> chemist/pharmacy/drug store discussion for AU/UK/US comparison).
>> Despite our best efforts inconsistencies, idiosyncrasies and
>vagueness
>> will reign in the OSM anarchy.
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Discussion of state regulation and planing issues for OSM

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Herbert, 
Not sure if I get your point.

With regards to the list, my take on it is that this list is the right and good 
place for any of your issues/OSM Australian centric topics.

If traffic on a particular aspect of issues is getting to much this might be an 
indicator that a separate list could make sense.

The fact that not all of the aspects that you are interested in are discussed 
on the list might be a mere reflection of the various interest amongst the list 
participants and their level of expertise.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Are we allowed to use PTV datasets (CC 4.0)?

[Sebastian S.]

Hi and also welcome,
It would be good if you update the wiki once you've sent the waiver request off.
This helps tracking what's going on.

Cheers,
Seb
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 14 September 2019 10:01:34 pm AEST, Aaron Fang Shenhao 
 wrote:
>Thank you both for the helpful info!
>
>I'll get onto sending the waiver letter to PTV. Once it comes back I'll
>make sure to update the wiki and report back.
>
>I've summarised the number of stops and routes in the dataset for
>anyone
>who is interested.
>
>  Transport Medium   │ No. stops   No. routes
> ╪
>  Metropolitan Train │ 222 99
>  Metropolitan Tram  │ 167373
>  Metropolitan Bus   │ 18241   354
>  Regional Train │ 110 206
>  Regional Bus   │ 6644356
>  Regional Coach │ 859 658
>  Night Bus  │ 452 22
>  TeleBus│ 100 8
>  Interstate │ 11  11
>  SkyBus │ 5   2
>
>For completeness, here's the summary from OSM using the tags
>railway=station, railway=tram_stop and highway=bus_stop inside the
>area ISO3166-2=AU-VIC.
>
>  Transport Medium │ No. stops   No. routes
> ══╪
>  Train│ 442 38
>  Tram │ 157091
>  Bus  │ 4793716
>
>
>On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 6:15 PM Andrew Harvey
>
>wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 23:29, Aaron Fang Shenhao <
>> aaronshenhao2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> This is my first time using the mailing list.
>>>
>>
>> Welcome!
>>
>>
>>> I’ve noticed that PTV’s (Public Transport Victoria) datasets (
>>> https://www.ptv.vic.gov.au/footer/data-and-reporting/datasets/) all
>fall
>>> under Creative Commons International 4.0, which requires explicit
>>> permission to be used according to OSM’s blog. I’ve looked at the
>wiki and
>>> can’t find any of these specific datasets in the list approved for
>use.
>>>
>>
>> Graeme pointed to the catalogue on the wiki of waiver status. I
>missed PTV
>> when doing the initial round, so feel free to add this to the wiki
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue.
>>
>>
>>> Has anyone asked for permission to use these datasets before? I
>>> downloaded the GTFS dataset for a programming project, and it seems
>>> amazing: we could add all the stops and connect all the routes for
>all
>>> modes of transport in VIC just from this dataset?
>>>
>>
>> I haven't approached PTV about this, and since it's not listed on the
>> wiki, I'd say go ahead and put together the waiver letter and send it
>off.
>> The metadata records have a contact email you can use. If you do send
>off a
>> waiver request please update the status and date you sent it to the
>wiki
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue, this
>> really helps the rest of the community see what's going on.
>>
>> There'd still be a fair bit of manual work involved in an import to
>avoid
>> duplicates and to integrate with what's already in OSM, but with a
>solid
>> plan and engaging with this mailing list and local mappers with the
>plan
>> and execution, an import could be a good thing to do.
>>
>> On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 at 12:33, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I see there is reference to
>>>
>https://www2.delwp.vic.gov.au/maps/spatial-data/victorian-spatial-data#Vicmap_Transport-11
>being
>>> OK but that doesn't appear to be the same thing?
>>>
>>
>> Unfortunately not, VicMap Transport only has airports, roads and
>railway
>> lines. The PTV data has bus stops and a few other datasets.
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Sebastian S.]

Good discussion,
I also think the track should be mapped.
Aside from access no I think it might be worthwhile adding decommissioned or 
rehabilitation tags to tracks that should not be used to indicate their 
intended end.

Other thoughts are: 
- why show access=no tracks on the map? Admittedly this comes down to the data 
consumers and their rendering.
- would tagging the whole area with access=conditional add any value?
- how will this discussion that will end in some form of agreed practice be 
documented on the map, aside from revised tracks that is?
- have they also threatened other mapping companies with legal actions? ianal 
but my response would be highlighting the various mismatches as already pointed 
out in the thread.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 12 September 2019 6:27:23 pm AEST, Ewen Hill  wrote:
>>
>> Frederick,
>
>   If I use the term bush walking colloquially, then it means to use a
>track that already exists., either single track or 4wd track (fire
>trail)
>predominantly however there might be times where you cross a grass land
>where there is no well defined track.
>
>If you are talking about walking through a forest not on a track or the
>track is hideously overgrown than I would call that "bush bashing". 
>The
>term hiking has connotations mainly of trails with the odd bit of bush
>bashing included.
>
>Large wombats and kangaroos who can create tracks in sparse undergrowth
>that is hard to tell from a man-made walking trail on the ground.
>Another
>issue is old bulldozer tracks or firefighter tracks that were used to
>stop
>wild fires (sometimes called mineral earth breaks). Normally these are
>removed post the wildfire but sometimes only at the start of the new
>track.
>
>In the brochure, that sounds like I should stay on the trails.if
>walking
>
>Ewen
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] International GIS Day Missing Maps Mapathon

[Sebastian S.]

Hi, I'm based on the Northern Beaches, North of Sydney that is and I'm also 
happy to help.
Cheers, seb
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 5 September 2019 5:48:36 pm AEST, "Vilppola, Ritva"  
wrote:
>Hi Team,
>
>WSP is planning on holding a global Missing Maps Mapathon with our
>Australia, UK and India offices after work November the 14th. There
>will be around 35 offices involved in total which is shaping up to be a
>big event!
>
>I have a few office representatives who are new to organising Mapathons
>and it would be great to get some local OSM/Missing Maps reps to help
>them with the introduction and training section of the session. It is
>very casual and can vary in size (we had around 10 participants in
>Melbourne and 30 in Brisbane last time).
>
>Is anyone based in Canberra, Sydney and Perth with experience in
>Missing Maps keen to volunteer some time to help out locally?
>
>Thanks for your help!
>
>Ritva Vilppola
>Sustainability Consultant
>
>
>[cid:image001.jpg@01D56411.D8D1D6F0]
>
>T: +7 3535 1518
>
>ritva.vilpp...@wsp.com
>
>WSP Australia Pty Limited
>900 Ann Street, Level 12
>Fortitude Valley
>4006  Australia
>
>wsp.com
>This message, including any document or file attached, is intended only
>for the addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential
>information. Any other person is strictly prohibited from reading,
>using, disclosing or copying this message. If you have received this
>message in error, please notify the sender and delete the message.
>Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>NOTICE: This communication and any attachments ("this message") may
>contain information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary or
>otherwise subject to restricted disclosure under applicable law. This
>message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any
>unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying, alteration,
>dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on, this message is
>strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you
>are not an authorized or intended recipient, please notify the sender
>immediately by replying to this message, delete this message and all
>copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies.
>
>
>
>-LAEmHhHzdJzBlTWfa4Hgs7pbKl
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Residential Poolside Building

[Sebastian S.]

I've also been mapping pools occasionally.
Thinking about it I'm actually not sure what the value for the map could be but 
they stand out a lot on good quality aerial images.
access=private for sure.

On 13 August 2019 8:23:08 am AEST, David Wales  wrote:
>I think in this day and age, we can't really consider anything private
>if it's visible from space...
>
>Apple appears to be mapping backyard tennis courts now.
>https://www.justinobeirne.com/new-apple-maps
>
>Just make sure that you tag them as access=private !
>
>On 12/8/19 7:58 pm, Warin wrote:
>> On 12/08/19 19:46, Benjamin Ceravolo wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've been tracing in residential swimming pools and I have not as
>yet
>>> found an appropriate tagging for the small poolside buildings that
>>> (from my experience); may have an area to get changed and to store
>>> pool-toys, chemicals and other pool care items.
>>>
>>> My current guess is just to mark it as: building=yes
>>>
>>> If there are any other tags I have missed or if I'm just being blind
>>> and missing something obvious, I would like to hear your
>>> option/response.
>>
>> Caution: there are some who object to 'private' things being mapped.
>>
>> These buildings my have toilets and showers too, tags exist for
>these.
>> I would like a tag for changing rooms, some sports venues have them,
>> some beach side buildings have them. Amenity=changing_rooms?
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Copying address from business website?

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Kim,
If you have added the website tag I must have missed it, too many tabs.
I did not mean to come across condescending. I'm sorry.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 26 July 2019 9:51:19 am AEST, Kim Oldfield  
wrote:
>Hi Sebastian,
>
>The source website was in the tag I added: 
>website=http://www.maroondahleisure.com.au/venues/maroondah-nets/
>
>My understanding of how to use source is as a generic description of 
>where the information came from, rather than an exact reference. For 
>example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source lists 
>source="aerial imagery" as commonly used, while I would have expected
>it 
>to be depreciated with preference to the name of the aerial imagery 
>used, eg source=bing.
>
>
>On 26/7/19 9:02 am, Sebastian Spiess wrote:
>> Hi, I find it odd that you state source:website but don't proved the 
>> website in the website tag. Why not?
>>
>> PS: I see the website of the business as the virtual front and 
>> consider the information public as any sign etc on the actual shop.
>So 
>> Yes I do this also all the time. (Individual POIs, not mass import)
>>
>> Am 2019-07-22 15:47, schrieb Kim Oldfield:
>>> Graeme: It's nice to know that I'm not the only one who has done
>this.
>>> This particular change caused me to reconsider how appropriate it is
>>> as it was all sourced from the website so I used source=website
>which,
>>> when viewed superficially, appears to contradict guidelines for
>where
>>> to source map data.
>>>
>>> Andrew: It is nice to know that this is generally considered OK for
>>> individual facts.
>>>
>>> Adrian: As part of manually adding these facts I check that the
>>> address I'm adding is for this physical location, ie at least the
>>> street adjoins the business being tagged.
>>>
>>> On 22/7/19 3:28 pm, Adrian Hobbs wrote:
 Might be issues where contact address (e.g. head office) being 
 copied is different to physical location on map.
 Adrian Hobbs

 ⁣Sent from BlueMail ​

 On 22 Jul. 2019, 15:21, at 15:21, Andrew Harvey 
  wrote:
> This has come up a few times on the mailing lists, and the advise
> usually
> given is it's okay to source a few facts here and there like the
> address or
> contact number, but just don't start taking a whole database of
>venues
> and
> copy that database.
>
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 at 13:06, Kim Oldfield
>
> wrote:
>
>> Is it acceptable to copy a street address (and other contact
>details)
>> from a business's webpage?
>>
>> For example in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/72452124
>(what
>> changed is easier to see at
>> https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/705884944 ) I
>added
> the
>> street address as listed on their website.
>>
>> If this isn't acceptable, what is an acceptable way of getting an
>> address if it is not obvious during a site survey?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kim
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-au mailing list
>>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Road classification in AUS

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Aleksandar,

Just in case you have not reviewed it, there Is a wiki page Australian tagging 
guideline https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines

However Regarding your question 1 mayor road classification has always been a 
no-go for me.
E.g. A8 Pittwater Road, North of Sydney, NSW.

It is an 'A' road according to Wikipedia these As are "primary highways, 
including urban arterials and interstate or interregional single carriageways."

Now for the most part the A8 has two or more lanes that are separated, however 
the road is also lined with intersections with red lights, driveways and 
houses. It is an important and high capacity road.

While the first points to me indicate it should be highway=trunk the last 
points make me think it should be highway=primary.

As I often find myself in similar dilemmas I tend to not change the 
classification.

Aside from providing some examples of your cases I ask you what is your driver 
to look at the road classification and see the need to revise it?

What are the benefits of a road changing between trunk and primary? What does 
it do for map users and data consumers?

The way I understand your email you refer to major review of the classification 
and not a fix if a single local point.

Or do you consider the classification of (some) roads that wrong that you can't 
live with it?

Curious, Sebastian
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 23 July 2019 12:50:19 am AEST, "Aleksandar Matejevic (E-Search) via Talk-au" 
 wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>My name is Aleksandar Matejevic, I work for Microsoft OSM Editorial
>team. In order to make the best decision in classifying roads across
>Australia, I need some help.
>
>In government data and on signposts you can find on mapillary and/or
>open street cam, you can track route numbers. I found out that routes
>mostly consist of:
>
>M route - motorways
>
>A route - trunks
>
>B route - primary roads
>
>C route - secondary roads
>
>As long you map in non-urban area this is 99.99% true, but when you map
>into city area it starts to get confusing.
>
>On this wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highways_in_Australia
>there is no real explanation how to classify AUS roads in OSM
>
>If you strictly follow this page:
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway than you should change
>road classification several times on the same route way.
>
>Therefore I have a couple of questions:
>
>1. Do you change the classification of highway on the motorway route
>into trunk through the city because it does not have a physical barrier
>in between (not restricted access) or do you keep it as motorway
>because of consistency?
>
>2. If we were to change the road classification several times during
>one route way, should we ignore segments that are less than 3km (for
>example motorway going through minor city in which it has a quality of
>trunk)?
>
>3. Can motorway have some traffic signals when passing through city?
>
>4. How to classify State routes (for example in Melbourne)?
>
>
>
>Best regards,
>
>Aleksandar
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Map use without attribution

[Sebastian S.]

I meant to add the link to switch2osm, thanks for that.
PS: Message reads fine.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 25 July 2019 12:58:58 pm AEST, came...@dewitte.id.au wrote:
>We have https://switch2osm.org/ which details how to use OSM in place
>of Google maps. In terms of the OP and the incorrect attribution, what
>I assume has happened is that after Google's pricing change they just
>switched out the image source in their existing map embed for
>tiles.osm... resulting in what we see.
>
>https://operations.osmfoundation.org/policies/tiles/ is OSMs tile
>policy. My general understanding has always been that for small/low
>traffic things using tiles.osm is fine, but for anything that will send
>significant traffic to the tile CDN is probably better off using a
>proper tile service.
>
>(Apologies if something goes weird with this message, I've never sent
>to a mailing list before)
>____
>From: "Sebastian S." 
>Sent: Thursday, 25 July 2019 12:31 pm
>To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Graeme Fitzpatrick; Kim Oldfield
>Cc: OSM-Au
>Subject: Re: [talk-au] Map use without attribution
>
>Hi Gream,
>I've been thinking the same back when Google upped their prices. 
>
>This is what I understand and I'm happy to be corrected.
>
>OSM (and their infrastructure) is not intended to be used as tile
>server for (commercial?) Tile consumers. If you search for it OSM has
>in the past disabled access to load hungry tile consumers, think apps
>etc.
>
>The idea is that osm provides the data. Tile consumers should either
>engage with a 3rd party that provides tiles (e.g. geofabrik or MapQuest
>or...) Or set up their own tile renderer.
>
>
>-- 
>Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
>On 25 July 2019 8:30:27 am AEST, Graeme Fitzpatrick
> wrote:
>>
>> OT to this particular problem, but still sort of on this subject ...
>>
>> One of the aircraft tracking sites I use 
>http://aussieadsb.com/VirtualRadar/desktop.html# has mentioned in this
>last week that they have changed their background from Google Maps to
>OSM, as, due to much increased use of their site while Ex Talisman
>Sabre is on, they had passed their allowed limit for use of Google Maps
>(28000 /  month) & it was now going to cost them $3000 / month !
>>
>> Is there any established "marketing / advertising" link to push OSM
>for similar sites / groups?
>>
>> & yes, they have attributed us correctly! :-)
>>  
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Map use without attribution

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Gream,
I've been thinking the same back when Google upped their prices. 

This is what I understand and I'm happy to be corrected.

OSM (and their infrastructure) is not intended to be used as tile server for 
(commercial?) Tile consumers. If you search for it OSM has in the past disabled 
access to load hungry tile consumers, think apps etc.

The idea is that osm provides the data. Tile consumers should either engage 
with a 3rd party that provides tiles (e.g. geofabrik or MapQuest or...) Or set 
up their own tile renderer.


-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 25 July 2019 8:30:27 am AEST, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>OT to this particular problem, but still sort of on this subject ...
>
>One of the aircraft tracking sites I use
>http://aussieadsb.com/VirtualRadar/desktop.html# has mentioned in this
>last
>week that they have changed their background from Google Maps to OSM,
>as,
>due to much increased use of their site while Ex *Talisman Sabre* is
>on,
>they had passed their allowed limit for use of Google Maps (28000 / 
>month)
>& it was now going to cost them $3000 / month !
>
>Is there any established "marketing / advertising" link to push OSM for
>similar sites / groups?
>
>& yes, they have attributed us correctly! :-)
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] GHG mitigation and FOSS4G SotM Oceania

[Sebastian S.]

Hi, while I won't be attending I wanted to say that this is a great initiative.
Thanks for initiating it.

On 17 June 2019 7:13:31 pm AEST, adam steer  wrote:
>Hi folks
>
>Following from an earlier discussion [1] on osgeo-oceania about
>offsetting
>emissions which are incurred by getting to FOSS4G SotM Oceania, there’s
>been a long chat in the Maptime Australia slack channel about creating
>a
>low-carbon conference.
>
>This has also been raised as an issue for the global FOSS4G [2].
>
>The upshot of the conversation is that we’re looking at ways to
>mitigate
>our impact on the planet using something other than throwing money at
>offsetters [3].
>
>With that in mind, I’ve sent enquiries to Bush Heritage Australia [4]
>and
>the NZ Native Forest Regeneration Trust [5] about donating an amount to
>work toward landscape-scale forest and biodiversity restoration - since
>buying acres of maybe-never-planted monoculture is really not a
>solution
>(see [3]).
>
>The idea is that the conference uses some of its budget (amount TBA) to
>‘offset’ the event. Since the event is in NZ, the main carbon source is
>air
>travel - so I’ll do some modelling work to estimate travel GHG
>emissions,
>based initially on 2018 attendees and refining as we go.
>
>If you have any useful tools to hand for that task to hand, I’d
>appreciate
>hearing about them (or better! collaboration!). John Bryant already
>suggested this one:
>https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/CarbonOffset/Pages/default.aspx
>
>If you know any other ‘boots on ground’ organisations we should
>consider,
>also please let us know.
>
>Regards
>
>Adam
>
>[1]
>https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g-oceania/2019-April/001348.html
>[2]
>https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2019-June/005222.html
>(end
>of a discussion)
>[3]
>https://features.propublica.org/brazil-carbon-offsets/inconvenient-truth-carbon-credits-dont-work-deforestation-redd-acre-cambodia/#162201
>[4] https://www.bushheritage.org.au
>[5] https://www.nfrt.org.nz
>
>
>-- 
>Dr. Adam Steer
>http://spatialised.net
>https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer
>http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer
>http://orcid.org/-0003-0046-7236
>+61 427 091 712 ::  @adamdsteer
>
>Suits are bad for business:
>http://www.spatialised.net/business-penguins/
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Proposed deletion of part of the Gwydir River

[Sebastian S.]

I have heard of rivers that are mostly underground during certain times. I'm 
not sure if this would apply here but it might be worthwhile asking.
-- 
Regards, Sebastian

On 24 June 2019 9:34:30 pm AEST, Michael James  wrote:
>There are lots of rivers in Australia that do not always have water in
>them
>
>The correct tag is intermittent=yes
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:intermittent
>
>Thanks Michael
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Monday, 24 June 2019 8:58 PM
>> To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Proposed deletion of part of the Gwydir River
>> 
>> On 24/06/19 18:19, cleary wrote:
>> > In the past, I added some parts of the Gwydir River to the map
>using the NSW
>> LPI Base Map because I could not see a clear waterway on satellite
>imagery.
>> Since then, I have visited the area twice and cannot actually find a
>river where it
>> is shown on the map. Much of the "river" is in private property but
>public roads
>> cross waterways at various locations.
>> >
>> > The western end of the Gwydir River seems not to exist except on
>the NSW LPI
>> Base Map and maps which have used it as a source (including OSM).
>> >
>> > As far as I can ascertain, the river used to dissipate into
>wetlands and, if there
>> was enough water, the seepage from the wetlands re-formed into
>waterways.
>> However intensive irrigation has resulted in such low water flow that
>the
>> wetlands are largely dust and water seems never to flow beyond them
>(except
>> perhaps in major flood events which are relatively rare).  Water from
>the eastern
>> Gwydir may flow west to the Barwon River via Carole Creek into Gil
>Gil Creek,
>> via the Gingham Watercourse and via the Mehi River.  But the
>so-called Gwydir
>> River, west of the wetlands, does not appear to exist except on the
>LPI Map.
>> And part that of the waterway that does exist is signposted by the
>Moree Plains
>> Shire Council with a different name (Big Leather Watercourse) at the
>two places
>> where it crosses public roads.  GNB uses this name for another branch
>of the
>> river nearer to Moree but locals, including the local council, seem
>to have a
>> different view.
>> >
>> > When visiting the area, I found water to be difficult to discuss
>with locals as
>> there are some strong points of view. Maintaining a river on the map
>may be a
>> political imperative for government but is not consistent with OSM's
>philosophy
>> of mapping what is actually on the ground at particular locations.
>> >
>> > After reflection, I think the Gwydir River does not really exist
>west of the
>> wetlands and I think it should be deleted from OSM, even though it is
>shown on
>> the LPI Base Map. I propose to delete this section of the river and
>follow the
>> local council signposted name for the more westerly waterway that
>does
>> actually exist at Morialta and Watercourse Roads.
>> >
>> > I would appreciate any views on this issue.
>> 
>> If deleted someone will put it back.
>> 
>> How about using the 'life cycle' tags?
>> 
>> disused? abandoned? raised? Disused might be a good fit.. thought
>with climate
>> change? abandoned:waterway=river??
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Local Chapter

[Sebastian S.]

What is the benefit of including these regions if there is no representation? 
(Based in the assumption that no one will claim representation)

What about an opt in/out for these regions? If at a later point in time a 
separate chapter wants to form they should be able to. Or maybe the general 
view is that a larger chapter can achieve more for these smaller regions.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 2 June 2019 11:29:19 am GMT+08:00, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
 wrote:
>On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 at 20:08, John Bryant  wrote:
>
>>
>> Re: geographic extent, one of the definitions we've been using for
>other
>> purposes (eg conference travel grants) is the UN geoscheme for
>Oceania:
>>
>> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_geoscheme_for_Oceania
>>
>
>Interesting bit I just noticed off that map / list ...
>
>Sub-regions are A-NZ, Micro-, Mela- & Polynesia, none of which include
>Hawaii, but Honolulu is listed as one of the largest cities?
>
>I think we would definitely be stepping on toes if we tried to pinch
>Hawaii! :-) (although I don't know how Guam, New Caledonia etc would
>work -
>as mentioned, Oceania or US & France? I can see that there is a New
>Caledonia mailing list, but no separate list for Hawaii or any of the
>other
>Pacific nations.)
>
>But I personally agree that we need to reach out and canvass any local
>> communities that may exist, for their thoughts. We do have some reach
>via
>> existing OSGeo community, mailing lists, travel grant program, and
>other
>> networks.
>>
>> After putting in our best effort, if there are countries where there
>is no
>> feedback, are we in a position to form a regional chapter including
>those
>> countries, under the assumption that we aren't stepping on any toes?
>>
>
>I would think we'd be OK, as long as we can show that we've made the
>effort?
>
>& if, some years down the track, "Palau" (picking a name at random)
>wanted
>to form it's own chapter, I would think we would then offer them every
>assistance possible :-)
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] use of addr:unit

[Sebastian S.]

Well David my question originated from the address import undertaking.
As I was dispersing nodes I though why not combine all into one and add the 
information via the unit tag.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 17 May 2019 2:14:00 pm AEST, David Wales  wrote:
>Hi Sebastian,
>
>If you want to go crazy, you could try Simple Indoor Tagging:
>
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indoor_Mapping
>
>This allows you to separately map each floor of the building, thus
>allowing each address to be mapped specifically!
>
>Regards,
>David Wales
>
>On 17/5/19 9:53 am, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>> Agreed,  if it's an apartment block, then just the street address
>> should be enough. The unit field would be more helpful for say
>> townhouses where the units are spread out and you could tag
>> individually, or shops as Graeme notes.
>>
>> There is
>> also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:flats which you
>> can add to t he block of flats/apartments to tag how many units are
>> contained in the building. This is useful for people to determine
>> density (even though most people would just use GNAF etc for this
>> rather than OSM, some new developments OSM could be ahead of GNAF and
>> the other state address databases).
>>
>> On Fri, 17 May 2019 at 08:13, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>> mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 16 May 2019 at 23:51, Andrew Harvey
>> mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com>>
>wrote:
>>
>> To me they are all the same. I think addr:flats given it's
>> documented on the wiki and is in use is the best tag to use.
>> Open to other opinions.
>>
>>
>> I usually just tag the whole building with the street address
>(100
>> This Street, Somewhere, QLD, 1234), & then only add individual
>> unit numbers for shops / offices etc (shop=butcher is Unit 1, 100
>> This Street ...), rather than residential units.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Pharmacy/chemist tagging

[Sebastian S.]

A pharmacy in a hospital is accessible to customers (as in patients).
E.g. when I was at the emergency department and they release me with a 
prescription I can go there to obtain the medication.
Or where you referring to the 'pharmacy' where doctors and nurses get the drugs?

I agree with all other points as well.
I would even argue that some chemist are shops, they are selling soft drinks 
and icecream.


On 19 May 2019 8:52:24 am AEST, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 18/05/19 21:05, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>> I agree with David's comment at 
>>
>https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/2597#issuecomment-492617726
>>
>> For almost all retail outlets, they match the wiki descriptions for 
>> both amenity=pharmacy and shop=chemist, so both tags should be used
>on 
>> the same node/way (it's all one on the ground feature, so should only
>
>> have one object in OSM), ie.
>>
>> amenity=pharmacy
>> shop=chemist
>> name=Amcal
>> brand=Amcal
>>
>> The same would normally apply for all those other names mentioned.
>>
>> I further agree with David, that in-hospital pharmacies may not have 
>> the shop=chemist part (per OSM wiki) so could only have 
>> amenity=pharmacy, but since many of these in-hospital pharmacies 
>> wouldn't be open to the public, so would be access=private.
>:) An OSM amenity should be for the public ... so there is a conflict 
>with the use of the amenity key with a pharmacies... I see pharmacies
>as 
>part of heath care.
>
>
>>
>> On Sat, 18 May 2019 at 18:03, Mateusz Konieczny 
>> mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> How for example Amcal will be tagged?
>>
>> amenity=pharmacy
>> name=Amcal
>>
>> or
>>
>> amenity=pharmacy
>> shop=chemist
>> name=Amcal
>>
>> or
>>
>> shop=chemist
>> name=Amcal
>>
>> ?
>>
>> The same for objects with
>>
>> name="Blooms The Chemist"
>> name="Chemist King Discount Pharmacy"
>> name="Guardian Pharmacy"
>> name="PharmaSave"
>> name="Pharmacy 4 Less"
>> name="Priceline Pharmacy"
>> name="UFS"
>>
>> I am asking as I want to improve
>> https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/
>> and I lack local knowledge how it should be tagged. Data from
>this
>> project are
>> used for example by iD and Vespucci.
>> Improving it may help mappers using this editors as they will be
>> guided better during editing.
>>
>> In this case it was triggered by
>> https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/2597
>>
>> PS
>> What is the preferred tagging of name for "Chemist King Discount
>> Pharmacy"?
>> name="Chemist King Discount Pharmacy"
>> or
>> name="Chemist King"
>> official_name="Chemist King Discount Pharmacy"
>> ?
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] What data is useful - request for ideas

[Sebastian S.]

Came here to say something similar.
Mapillary has the option to indicate 45 deg to the left or right. 
This might be an option for town centres instead of the 90 deg.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 8 May 2019 10:08:16 am AEST, Sam Wilson  wrote:
>On 5/8/19 7:44 AM, Phil Wyatt wrote:
>> One thing that is useful in small towns is a cruise around the main
>and back 
>> streets with a camera at 90 degrees (I shoot over the road from the 
>> drivers side) to capture shop fronts etc. This can be useful for 
>> business points - the local butcher, hardware shop, addresses etc.
>
>I second this. It's great to have side-on imagery in lots of places. I 
>guess the main trick is to ensure you're going slow enough that things 
>aren't blurry.
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] User Diaries Spam

[Sebastian S.]

Simon,
I know about the reporting option, have reported some myself.
However as outlined on this diary entry 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary/172800
there have been thousands in the last couple of days.
Manually responding to so many, likely automatically generated, post seems a 
very inefficient approach.
It takes 3 clicks and some text typing to report one post.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 7 May 2019 6:01:13 pm AEST, Simon Poole  wrote:
>
>Am 07.05.2019 um 05:18 schrieb Sebastian Spiess:
>> Every now and then I have a look at User Diaries.
>> Today I am on page 26 https://www.openstreetmap.org/diary?page=26 and
>> still only SPAM.
>>
>> I guess this was already noted but I could not find anything on
>> mailing list talk.
>>
>> Who and how is this managed?
>
>You report the user in question.
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Seb
>> PS: its not an new issue:
>>
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-September/070792.html
>
>This has long been integrated (and announced), see above.
>
>The point to realize is that there are many spam protections in place,
>what you see on the diary pages are those that have managed to "slip"
>through. Counter measures are limited though as there are certain areas
>we don't want this to escalate in to and privacy concerns make using
>any
>third party service difficult if not impossible (not that I would
>expect
>any long term relieve from them to start with).
>
>Simon
>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Street address: Corner

[Sebastian S.]

Hi all,
How do you tag addresses of POI when only corner of two streets is given and no 
house number?
E.g. Cnr Grose & Megalong Streets
Cheers Sebastian
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Shout out

[Sebastian S.]

Of course Graeme, you are right. That should not be forgotten.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 11 April 2019 12:11:17 pm AEST, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 10:14, Sebastian S.  wrote:
>
>> So what is a good approach to do here?
>> Ideally we could encourage the participant to make better valued
>> contributions.
>> E.g. by
>> A) proper tagging
>> B) use of Most recent images
>> C) changest comments
>>
>> But how to reach him best?
>>
>
>& thank them very much for their wonderful efforts! :-)
>
>Either start a discussion on a changeset, or send a message via their
>user
>page "should" reach them?
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
>
>>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Shout out

[Sebastian S.]

So what is a good approach to do here?
Ideally we could encourage the participant to make better valued contributions.
E.g. by 
A) proper tagging
B) use of Most recent images
C) changest comments

But how to reach him best?
Regards Sebastian
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 11 April 2019 8:02:29 am AEST, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 at 18:12, David Wales 
>wrote:
>
>>
>> Probably worth loading up some LPI NSW imagery and seeing if things
>look
>> legitimate.
>>
>
>When you go into edit mode, it certainly appears that way.
>
>The person concerned is still very busily mapping, at the moment down
>Holsworthy way.
>
>I wonder if it may be somebody working for Microsoft or similar, purely
>using imagery, as there are no comments on any of their edits, nothing
>is
>named (eg retail buildings, schools etc), & the source on everything is
>Bing?
>
>I think I may have actually tried to contact them once before, to
>clarify a
>discrepancy between current maps & available imagery that I spotted via
>a
>Map Roulette challenge, but never got a response?
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Aboriginal art sites

[Sebastian S.]

I second that the elders wishes should be respected.

With regards to documenting.
One way would be to mark the local indigenous area/tribe/... And then outline 
in the wiki what should not be mapped in order to respect the wishes. I recall 
a recent blog post or Diary entry regarding indigenous communities mapping.

In a sense this falls in the same category as 'I don't want my backyard shed or 
pool mapped from satellite images'. Although the cultural aspects are not the 
same :-)

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 3 April 2019 8:17:25 am AEDT, Graeme Fitzpatrick  
wrote:
>On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 20:27, Ian Sergeant  wrote:
>
>> How do we actually contact "local elders"?
>>
>
>Would have to be done "on the ground" in that local area
>
>
>>   Where do we record their consent?
>>
>
>Possibly in Notes? Maybe the Oz Data Catalogue page
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue or
>similar?
>
>  What if they change their minds?
>>
>
>Then I think we would need to delete the entries, similar to the way
>that
>you can request your premises not be shown on Google Maps. I have seen
>a
>comment on the Tagging list that some town in the US requested that all
>it's minor streets be deleted from all online maps to prevent
>rat-runners
>from driving down them!
>
>
>>
>> Are we saying other mappers should delete these sites if they see
>them on
>> the map?  How do they know if approval was obtained?
>>
>
>I would hope that people have done things "properly". As mentioned
>though,
>if the site is advertised / signposted, then it's fine to map. But if
>you're walking in the Kimberley & find a cave full of paintings, then
>you
>should ask for approval before mapping them. This was discussed a while
>back about mapping a track up in that area, but I can't find the
>reference
>in the archives
>
>
>> is this form of censorship practised anywhere else in OSM - maybe for
>> other indigenous people - that we could copy their model?
>>
>
>I don't know? I'll post the question on the Tagging list.
>
>
>> P.S. It's Strait - not "Straight".
>>
>
>Thanks! Corrected :-)
>
>Thanks
>
>Graeme
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Large contribution to update OSM rural / offroad tracks in Australia

[Sebastian S.]

When uploading your traces you can name and tag them to ensure they would be 
identified as coming from you.
For this you could also have a maproulette challenge.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 4 April 2019 9:45:15 am AEDT, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
>On Wed, 3 Apr 2019 at 16:00, James Nuccio 
>wrote:
>
>> I'm relatively new to using and contributing to OSM but must say I'm
>> really getting into it.  I am currently building a navigation app
>targeted
>> towards the 4wding market which makes use of OSM.  Part of our
>offering is
>> to geo-track our users as they navigate through the bush to better
>> understand the 4wd tracks themselves.
>>
>
>Welcome!
>
>Have you seen the smoothness tag?
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness It can be used to
>flag
>how "off-road" a track is.
>
>
>> A byproduct of this process is that we have hundred of traces to be
>able
>> to validate the geometry of current tracks, as well as add new tracks
>to
>> the database.  All of these traces are an aggregation of user data,
>not
>> traces of individual users.
>>
>> I am keen to get this info back into OSM but I'm looking for help as
>I
>> don't have capacity to do so myself.  However I'd still like the
>> contributions to be entered under my OSM userid.
>>
>
>Just to add to what David said, the OSM gps traces are at
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/traces, if you choose those traces will
>be
>entered under your OSM username.
>
>This then immediately makes your data available to OSM editors who can
>use
>the traces to improve geometry of ways, identify and add in missing
>tracks
>etc from your traces, to be entered under each mapper's OSM username.
>
>Alternatively you could go with Sebastian's suggestion which would keep
>your gps traces separate from all the other traces submitted to OSM.
>
>With those gps traces available, either you or the community could run
>a
>process to flag areas where OSM and your traces differ and create new
>maproulette.org tasks, like Sebastian suggested. Any edits though will
>fall
>under the actual mapper's username.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Aboriginal art sites.

[Sebastian S.]

What about 'rock art' ?
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 31 March 2019 11:13:07 am AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>
>Aboriginal rock engravings are tagged;
>
>"historic"="archaeological_site"
>
>site_type"="petroglyph"
>
>
>What should Aboriginal painted sites be tagged?
>
>
>"historic"="archaeological_site"
>
>site_type"= ???
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Platform names

[Sebastian S.]

If you believe Wikipedia 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_railway_station%2C_Sydney
The stations name is 'Central railway station' but it goes by many colloquial 
names.

I don't like the way the platforms are named currently. "Platform 8+9 (8;9)" is 
surely not the name on the signboards. I am in favour of splitting the 
platforms to have each number just called "Platform $". Maybe you can also 
indicated on which side 8 and 9 is in relation to a path which you would walk 
into the platform.

Maybe name:left=Platform 8 makes sense?

Another question I have is how would you route a blind person to and onto the 
platform when there is no way?
What about segment indicators. I have not been to central station but I assume 
for long trains there are segment indicators along the platform for passengers 
to find they carriages quicker. Are you planning to mapping these?
Have you looked at other train station in OSM?
I suggest to have a look at 
Hamburg  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=53.552778=10.006389=15#map=18/53.55274/10.00677
Or Cologne https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.94319/6.95853
Or Paris Gare du Nord https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/48.88156/2.35623
Or London Kings Cross https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.53194/-0.12326
Regards Sebastian
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 21 March 2019 11:26:39 am AEDT, Thomas Manson  
wrote:
>Looking at Central Station, Sydney, the platform names are things like
>'Platform 4+5'. (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6015392)
>
>
>From my reading of
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Apublic_transport%3Dplatform,
>this should be
>the name of the station , so in this case that would be either Central
>or Central Station, with the platform numbers as the ref tag (which is
>already populated).
>
>1) First of all, is my understanding correct? It should be the station
>name.
>2) Secondly, should the name be Central or Central Station (assuming 1
>is correct)?
>
>Regards,
>Thomas
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Platform names

[Sebastian S.]

Yes there is a tag for short name. Don't know at the moment but is listed in 
the wiki under the names site.
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 21 March 2019 6:40:25 pm AEDT, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 21/03/19 15:42, Andrew Davidson wrote:
>> On 21/3/19 11:26, Thomas Manson wrote:
>>> 1) First of all, is my understanding correct? It should be the 
>>> station name.
>>
>> Depends on which version you'd like to believe. The original proposal
>
>> for public_transport=platform 
>> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?oldid=625726#Platform)
>said:
>>
>> "The name by which the platform is known."
>>
>> someone has later decided to change this. Which one is "correct"?
>When 
>> using PTv2 I stick to just the original proposal description as the 
>> various "translations" has made it harder and harder to understand
>(in 
>> other words the platform name is fine).
>>
>> However, I'd split them into single platforms, there's no need to 
>> combine them.
>
>+ 1
>Split the platforms if possible/convenient and you have time.
>The train arrives at/departs from platform 4 ... not platform 4+5.
>
>Central or 'Central Station' refers to the whole thing. When you are 
>there you talk of 'platform 5' not 'Central Station Platform 5' .. so 
>I'd stick with just the platform as the name - locally that is what is 
>used.
>Same with other stations.
>
>
>>
>>> 2) Secondly, should the name be Central or Central Station (assuming
>
>>> 1 is correct)?
>>
>> Central is the short name, Central Station is the full name. 
>
>Not certain if OSM has short_name .. if not I'd use local_name.
>
>___
>Talk-au mailing list
>Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Sydney mapathon

[Sebastian S.]

Hi all,
Since I'm new to the area I would firstly like to meet other mappers from OZ 
and put a face to a name.
Secondly my interest is then onto mapping OZ because this is where I'm as a 
user and data consumer. I'm open to HOT and missing maps etc but it is not at 
the top of my list.
I would not expect talks at a first meeting, likely we'll end up chatting and 
the 2 hours will be gone in a whiff.

Cheers Sebastian
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 20 March 2019 6:02:49 pm AEDT, Dion Moult  wrote:
>Hi Andrew,
>
>I'm not entirely sure what we might get up to. I'm keen for some hands
>on work, and it'd be good to double up as a local meetup if one doesn't
>already exist. I'm sure we all love to map locally too, so please do
>come if you can :)
>
>A mix of presentations does sound really good. Maybe not for the first
>meet up, but perhaps for subsequent ones?
>
>Sent from ProtonMail mobile
>
> Original Message 
>On 20 Mar. 2019, 4:31 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
>>> Casual meetup of Sydney based OSM mappers, let's meet up and do some
>humanitarian mapping tasks on HOTOSM!
>>
>> Dion, is the intention to be a local OSM meetup + a Missing Maps
>(http://www.missingmaps.org) style humanitarian mapathon?
>>
>> Should I come if I'm interested in Australian OSM, but not interested
>in remote mapping outside Australia?
>>
>> There's been two Missing Maps events in the past in Sydney that I
>know of and both times almost all attendees were new to OSM, so it
>didn't act as a local community meetup.
>>
>> I'm very interested in a Sydney OSM event for locals to catch up
>about all things OSM. I think a mix of presentations + social is
>perfect, like GeoRabble, https://georabble.org. I see that as a bit
>different to a mapathon, which is a bit of into followed by actual
>hands on work.
>>
>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 at 19:08, Dion Moult  wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all! I've started an event here:
>https://gettogether.community/events/1001/sydney-osm-mappers/
>>>
>>> If you could sign up or comment there I can change the venue and
>time easily without spamming the talk-au list. I've changed the date to
>30th March Saturday . it would also allow me to know who is coming and
>what to cater for if we get food.
>>>
>>> My company in north sydney is open on weekends and I've received
>approval for using computers and guest WiFi. Also informal approval for
>getting pizza and drinks (non alcoholic).
>>>
>>> Need a bit more approval from management to let strangers in the
>office (I will be liable, obviously) but I suspect I can host.
>>>
>>> Sent from ProtonMail mobile
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>> On 18 Mar. 2019, 2:34 pm, David Wales < daviewa...@disroot.org>
>wrote:
>>>
 Hi Ben and Dion,

 Saturdays are normally good, but I'm moving house on the 23rd!
 So if that's the date, I won't be able to make it.

 Regards,
 David Wales

 On 18/3/19 1:29 pm, Ben Kelley wrote:
> Practically it will probably need to be a weekday evening, as we
>are not
> open on the weekend.
>
> Also it will need to be a time I can make it. :)
>
>
>  - Ben Kelley
>
> On 18/3/19 13:03, Dion Moult wrote:
>> Hey Ben! Thanks for the option!
>>
>> I'm going to tentatively suggest meeting this Saturday, 23rd
>March,
>> say after lunch, so 2:30pm? Just for a very informal mapping
>session
>> to see how things go, doesn't have to be a large crowd or
>anything?
>>
>> Ben, do you think it will be possible for us to use your office
>at
>> that time? I do not have a laptop, so I'm not sure if computers
>can be
>> used, or if that is against company policy?
>>
>> My company in North Sydney, walking distance from the train
>station,
>> offers wifi, but although I've started asking internally, there
>is a
>> little red tape before they might say yes to anything like
>providing
>> refreshments and allowing strangers in the office. Although I
>think
>> they might support this.
>>
>> Sent from ProtonMail mobile
>>
>>

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

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

Re: [talk-au] new OpenStreetCam competition

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Michael,
Do you have recommendations for a ODB2 dongle available in OZ?
Regards Sebastian
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 19 March 2019 8:12:03 am AEDT, Michael James  
wrote:
>Hi Martin
>
> 
>
>I've only just started trying with the app, is there any word on when
>the
>bug with ODB2 & BT getting fixed
>
> 
>
>Namely this open bug :-
>
>https://github.com/openstreetcam/android/issues/125
>
> 
>
>My testing shows that you really need the ODB adapter when doing urban
>streets as the GPS averaging is too slow to deal with the acceleration
>changes.
>
> 
>
>Thanks Michael
>
> 
>
> 
>
>From: Martijn van Exel  
>Sent: Tuesday, 19 March 2019 1:08 AM
>To: OSM Australian Talk List 
>Subject: [talk-au] new OpenStreetCam competition
>
> 
>
>Howdy.
>
>We had a good time with the first OpenStreetCam competition, the
>winners
>received their prizes, and we decided to hold another one. The main
>prize
>this time is an OSC Waylens Horizon camera. This is a fairly nifty
>device
>that lets you automatically record and upload to OSC. The competition
>is
>open now until April 15th. As before, just collect more OSC points than
>other mappers to win. Read details on the Telenav ImproveOSM blog:
>http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2019/03/announcing-the-second-openstreetcam-au
>stralia-and-new-zealand-competition/ .
>
> 
>
>Related: 
>
>* A previous blog post
>ia-newzealand/>  about the impact of competition number 1 
>
>* the OpenStreetCam JOSM plugin
>ent/>  was just updated with some new features as well.
>
> 
>
>Let me know if you have any questions, and Happy mapping!
>-- 
> Martijn van Exel
> m...@rtijn.org  
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] new OpenStreetCam competition

[Sebastian S.]

Hi Martin,
Just on the last competition.
I have uploaded photos as ConsEbt and was wondering how you send the prize.
I checked my email but either did not receive it missed any notification.
The email associated with my account is sign...@consebt.de which I recently 
changed to this one.

Regards Sebastian

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

On 19 March 2019 2:08:29 am AEDT, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>Howdy.
>
>We had a good time with the first OpenStreetCam competition, the
>winners received their prizes, and we decided to hold another one. The
>main prize this time is an OSC Waylens Horizon camera. This is a fairly
>nifty device that lets you automatically record and upload to OSC. The
>competition is open now until April 15th. As before, just collect more
>OSC points than other mappers to win. Read details on the Telenav
>ImproveOSM blog:
>http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2019/03/announcing-the-second-openstreetcam-australia-and-new-zealand-competition/
>
>.
>
>Related: 
>* A previous blog post
>
>about the impact of competition number 1 
>* the OpenStreetCam JOSM plugin
>
>was just updated with some new features as well.
>
>Let me know if you have any questions, and Happy mapping!
>-- 
> Martijn van Exel
> m...@rtijn.org
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au