Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Trophées fondation EDF

[François Lacombe]

Bonjour Martin

Merci pour l'info, cela va concerner quelques initiatives ici

Pour ma part, ça serait tellement bien qu'EDF contribue en propre au lieu
de considérer ça comme de la com
Comme beaucoup d'entreprise par ailleurs...

Bonne journée
François

Le 2 oct. 2016 3:36 PM, "Martin Noblecourt"  a
écrit :

> Bonjour à tous,
>
> Je relaie sur cette liste l'appel à candidature des Trophées des
> associations EDF, qui a cette année une thématique "Solidarités numériques"
> : http://tropheesfondation.edf.com/
>
> Je pense qu'un certain nombre d'associations qui gravitent autour d'OSM
> (voir OSM-Fr directement ?) seraient tout à fait éligibles, et il y a
> encore peu de concurrence sur cette thématique ;-)
>
> Bonne chance à tous !
>
> (CartONG n'est pas éligible, budget trop important, donc on ne vous
> concurrencera pas ;-) )
>
> --
> [image: CartONG]
>
> Martin Noblecourt
> [image: Email:] m_nobleco...@cartong.org
> [image: Phone:] +33 (0)4 79 26 28 82
> [image: Mobile:] +33 (0)6 04 09 74 19
> [image: Skype:] martin.noblecourt
>
> Humanitarian mapping and information management
>
> [image: Website:] cartong.org | [image: Twitter:] @assocCartONG
>  | [image: Address:] Chambéry, France
>
> Lon: 05°55'24'' | Lat: 45°30'20''
> [image: GeOnG 2016 - The Humanitarian Forum for Geographic Information -
> 17th-18th-19th of October - Chambéry, France]
> 
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-cz] Chybějící vlakové zastávky

[Jethro]

Zdar,
v souvislosti s prací na jízdních řádech (viz minulý mail) jsem
zjistil, že v OSM chybí / jsou špatně zmapovány některé vlakové
zastávky. Jedná se o následující:

Červenka zastávka
Litoměřice dolní nádraží
Vraný / Vrbičany - v OSM je Vraný, jinde Vrbičany, jak se jmenuje teď?
Martiněves u Libochovic
Velké Hamry zast.
Železnice
Nová Huť
Přísečná

Mohl by je někdo s místní znalostí prosím zmapovat?
MSF
Jethro
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-cz] Změna vlastnictví nádraží

[Jan Macura]

Viděl bych to tak, že operátorem nádraží je SŽDC a operátorem prodejny
jízdenek pro vlaky ČD je ČD.

Nádraží je prostě něco jako obchoďák a uvnitř jedné fyzické budovy se může
nacházet víc POI.

Honza/YjM

Dne 3. října 2016 0:21 Jethro  napsal(a):

> Zdar,
> nedávno přešla nádraží od ČD pod SŽDC. Neměl by se globálně změnit
> operator? Je zde provozovatelem SŽDC, nebo ČD, které v ní prodávají
> jízdenky? (A co stanice, kde prodávají jízdenky i jiní?)
> MSF
> Jethro
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

[Talk-cz] Čísla železničních stanic

[Jethro]

Zdar,
v souvislosti s prací na jízdních řádech vlaků
(ftp://ftp.cisjr.cz/draha/celostatni/) se mi podařilo spárovat skoro
všechny vlakové stanice s osobní dopravou s identifikátory v těchto
řádech používanými. Vzhledem k tomu, že se tyto identifikátory
používají i na jiných stránkách souvisejících se železnicí, myslím, že
je to ten správný identifikátor k napsání do ref. S tím se pojí
několik věcí:

1) identifikátor v JŘ se dělí na kód železnice (u nás 54), evidenční
číslo (různé) a kód obvodu (obvykle 0). Jaký formát by měl ref mít?
2) Jde o import? Pokud ano, byl by mi někdo ochoten pomoci s formální částí?
3) Jak nejlépe import provést? Umím si vygenerovat dvojice
(osm_id,ref), jak je předhodit nějakému editoru, abych to mohl dávkově
nahrát?

Případné další komentáře vítány.

OT: Program který píši převádí formát Kango do GTFS, bude uvolněn jako
open-source někdy v průběhu podzimu.

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

[Talk-cz] Změna vlastnictví nádraží

[Jethro]

Zdar,
nedávno přešla nádraží od ČD pod SŽDC. Neměl by se globálně změnit
operator? Je zde provozovatelem SŽDC, nebo ČD, které v ní prodávají
jízdenky? (A co stanice, kde prodávají jízdenky i jiní?)
MSF
Jethro
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-it] ancora su civici e POI

[Fra Mauro]

Prima di tutto grazie per le risposte

>> La residenza fiscale di una attività mi interessa poco quando guardo una
> > mappa e non mi sembra la situazione "sul terreno".

> Interessa poco te, non è detto che non interessi a qualcun'altro...il
> "guardare la mappa" è solo uno dei metodi di consultazione del database
OSM

Mi sono espresso sbrigativamente.
Capisco che la residenza fiscale interessi a qualcuno e condivido che
sarebbe un informazione utile da riportare, ma a me pare che l'informazione
primaria sia la dimensione fisica del negozio, per tanti motivi che se
interessa posso anche dettagliare.
L'unico modo in cui vedo ipotizzabile dare una idea della dimensione fisica
è dire quali sono i civici occupati. Nel mio contesto la mappatura interna
dei locali è improponibile.

>> Come fate invece se avete più POI allo stesso civico?
>> Ad esempio un palazzo di uffici con un'unica entrata a cui corrispondono
>> uno studio medico, una società finanziaria e una assicurazione, tutti al
>> civico di Via Accademia 4?
>
> l'unica soluzione che mi viene in mente è l'indoor mapping ma deve esserci
> sicuramente un altro metodo per una mappatura più elementare

Non avevo in mente un contesto che si presta all'indoor mapping.
Da queste parti a volte uno studio medico è al primo piano di un palazzo di
appartamenti.
In questo caso il civico "Via Accademia 4" NON è l'indirizzo dello studio
medico; è l'indirizzo in cui c'è ANCHE lo studio medico.
è chiaro che non voglio mappare l'interno del palazzo (e probabilmente non
posso...).
è anche chiaro che vorrei fornire quest'informazione, così chi usa la mappa
non si aspetta uno studio medico a livello strada.
è anche chiaro che magari al secondo piano ho uno studio di avvocati
Ho più POI allo stesso civico. Posso forse definire una relazione?

Grazie in anticipo


Il giorno 2 ottobre 2016 08:28, Aury88  ha scritto:

> Fra Mauro-2 wrote
> > La residenza fiscale di una attività mi interessa poco quando guardo una
> > mappa e non mi sembra la situazione "sul terreno".
>
>  Interessa poco te, non è detto che non interessi a qualcun'altro...il
> "guardare la mappa" è solo uno dei metodi di consultazione del database OSM
> e per quanto riguarda il fatto di non rappresentare la situazione "sul
> terreno" io sono dell'opinione opposta. Un locale ha associato
> ufficialmente
> un civico così come le strade hanno nella loro interezza un nome anche se
> esso viene indicato con apposita cartellonistica solo agli ingressi ad
> essa.se dovessimo limitarci alla situazione "sul terreno" tanto varrebbe
> togliere tanti altri tag quali numeri di telefono, siti internet, partite
> iva ecc
>
>
> > Come fate invece se avete più POI allo stesso civico?
> > Ad esempio un palazzo di uffici con un'unica entrata a cui corrispondono
> > uno studio medico, una società finanziaria e una assicurazione, tutti al
> > civico di Via Accademia 4?
>
> l'unica soluzione che mi viene in mente è l'indoor mapping ma deve esserci
> sicuramente un altro metodo per una mappatura più elementare
>
>
>
>
> -
> Ciao,
> Aury
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.
> com/ancora-su-civici-e-POI-tp5883516p5883702.html
> Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] [wikimedia-it] via romea germanica

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Io, in mancanza di segnali, non inserirei. Se all'estero fosse già
segnalata, farei un abbozzo di relazione, nell'attesa di un riscontro sui
luoghi.

--
cascafico.altervista.org
twitter.com/cascafico
Il 02/ott/2016 19:01 "girarsi_liste"  ha scritto:

> Il 02/10/2016 04:14, Volker Schmidt ha scritto:
> > ... secondo la prassi attuale ...
> >
>
> Trattandosi di una strada storica magari non ha senso come cammino, ma
> solo come percorso conosciuto, comunque attend per capire cosa dicono
> gli altri, sperando interessi.
>
>
> --
> Simone Girardelli
> _|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
> |_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[John Aldridge]

On 02-Oct-16 17:30, SK53 wrote:

My personal rules on this have always been two independent sources of
information OR a survey...



FHRS data should contain full address details most of the time, so there
should be no need to add anything from the website other than the url...


By url do you mean the fhrs:id tag?


I'm confused, then, by the assertions on the web page for this project


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_2016_Q4_Project:_Food_Hygiene_Ratings


that

(a) this process might be completely automated [how does that square 
with requiring two sources of information], and


(b) that one of the goals is to accelerate our completion of UK postcode 
data [I'd assumed that implied we needed at least to add addr:postcode 
too, with or without further checks]


--
Cheers,
John

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[Neil Matthews]

> 1.We have a great tool 
developed some time ago by 
gregrs, whose work we should really recognise by making use of it.


Tool looks good, but is there any way to get a feature request: to 
identify items in the fhrs data that don't match to OSM in a region (and 
ideally get a GPX file for surveying). Maybe also sort the regions 
alphabetically on the launch page?


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

[Talk-at] Stammtisch Wien

[ScubbX]

Hallo liebe Mitmapper und Mitmapperinnen!

Am 6.Oktober ist es es wieder so weit! Es gibt einen OSM Stammtisch in Wien.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wien/Stammtisch

lg, Markus


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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] landuse

[Philippe Verdy]

En anglais les "résidences" (nom usuels souvent un peu pompeux), ou
"copropriétés" (pour leur statut légal en France) ont une page wiki
appelée "homeowners' association" qui semble bien correspondre à la
copropriété (concept français déjà ancien mais bien intégré à la
législation, qui maintenant s'étend à d'autres pays).

Là encore il n'y a rien de clair.

Les lotissements ne sont pas nécessairement des copropriétés (la
copropriété peut n'exister que durant le temps de leur aménagement et leur
revente, jusqu'à ce que finalement, une fois la voirie commune réalisée et
jugée conforme par les collectivités elles acceptent de prendre en charge
cette voirie, il peut rester des espaces partagés comme des jardins ou
parkings partagés réservés aux résidents mais non assignés, mais souvent
ces copropriétés ont tendance à se dissoudre : les parkings sont assignés,
les garages sont réparties ou revenus hors des résidents, les réseaux sont
repris par les distributeurs: eau potable, eaux usées/égouts, électricité,
et le reste individualisé, il reste le cas des jardins extérieurs qui
éventuellement sont eux aussi lotis et alors barrés de clôtures
individuelles ou convertis en parkings/garages et cédés aux résidents ou
ailleurs, et la commune put ne garder qu'un petit bout à sa charge et
reprendre aussi l'éclairage, la responsabilisation des résidents pour les
ordures ménagères est aussi accentuée en supprimant les poubelles
collectives). Nombre de lotissements s'intègrent dans leur quartier et le
nom initialement utilisé disparaît quand il n'y a plus d'opération
d'aménagement. Il peut rester ensuite éventuellement des assos de résidents
mais souvent elles aussi disparaissent au profit des assos de quartiers,
sur des territoires plus étendus et plus conforme à la politique locale de
la ville.

Parfois le nom du lotissement peut être gardé par la commune mais comme nom
d'un nouveau quartier qui va inclure d'autres terrains ou réunir plusieurs
opérations successives de lotissement et des aménagements publics proches
(dessertes par des transports publics par exemple). Le terme "lotissement"
même cesse d'être utilisé, il n'a plus lieu d'être puisque tous les lots
sont réalisés et individualisés.




Le 2 octobre 2016 à 21:19, Ralf Treinen  a écrit :

> Bonsoir,
>
> On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 09:01:13PM +0200, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> >
> >
> > Le 2 octobre 2016 à 18:03, Jérôme Amagat  a
> écrit :
> >
> > En zone résidentielle, dans une précédente discussion on disait
> qu'il n'y a
> > rien comme tag pour les résidences ou pour les lotissements (moi
> pour les
> > lotissement je dirais que c'est un quartier et donc utilise place=
> > neighbourhood si le nom du lotissement reste après la fin des
> construction)
> >
> >
> > Sauf que place=suburb et place=neighborhood sont déjà utilisés pour les
> grands
> > quartiers et quartiers administratifs. Les petits lotissements dans un
> > quartiers et les résidences c'est nettement plus petit qu'un quartier. Il
> > faudrait un d'autres valeurs pour place=* (sachant aussi que
> place=locality est
> > inapplicable car c'est pour des lieux-dits inhabités, pas plus que place=
> > isolated_dwelling pour un habitant individuel, ni place=hamlet pour de
> tous
> > petits villages tout entiers et mal venus dans ces résidences et
> lotissements
> > en milieu urbain.
> >
> > J'avais proposé ici place=residence mais on pourrait avoir un
> place=block, ou
> > place=sector (exemples les secteurs urbains de La Défense, ou les
> secteurs de
> > villes chef-lieu des communes urbaines au Burkina Faso, ces secteurs sont
> > numérotés mais n'ont pas de nom et ne sont pas réellement des quartiers
> mais
> > plus ou moins des entités statistiques et électorales)
>
> en regardant la page Neighbourhood sur le wiki [1] je trouve les
> concepts x "Housing subdivision, housing development, and residential
> community" qui semblent bien adaptés (sauf que les noms sont trop longs).
>
> -Ralf.
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Neighbourhood
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-cz] Jak zanést sdílení koloběžek

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

až to budeš přidávat do mapy, tak by se tam měla vyplnit i dostupnost,
jinak to bude dost matoucí. Ty koloběžky jsou totiž přes týden vyhrazené
jen pro studenty ZČU přes JIS karty a přes víkend jsou dostupné i pro
ostatní, ale zase je tam omezení, že půjčovatel musí mít Plzeňskou kartu.
Možná použít access = customers? Nebo podrobněji access:conditional =
customers @ (Sa-Su)? Ale netuším, zda do toho jde nějak zakomponovat ta
povinnost mít speciální kartu.

Honza/YjM

Dne 2. října 2016 10:55 Pavel Cvrček  napsal(a):

> Ahoj,
>
> v Plzni bylo spuštěné sdílení koloběžek [1]. Existuje způsob, jak to
> vhodně zanést do mapy? Znám pouze sdílení kol, takže mě napadá použít to:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:amenity%3Dbicycle_rental
>
> Díky
>
> Pavel
>
> [1] http://plzen.cz/studenti-mohou-jezdit-do-kampusu-zcu-
> na-kolobezkach-63528/
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] landuse

[Ralf Treinen]

Bonsoir,

On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 09:01:13PM +0200, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> 
> 
> Le 2 octobre 2016 à 18:03, Jérôme Amagat  a écrit :
> 
> En zone résidentielle, dans une précédente discussion on disait qu'il n'y 
> a
> rien comme tag pour les résidences ou pour les lotissements (moi pour les
> lotissement je dirais que c'est un quartier et donc utilise place=
> neighbourhood si le nom du lotissement reste après la fin des 
> construction)
> 
> 
> Sauf que place=suburb et place=neighborhood sont déjà utilisés pour les grands
> quartiers et quartiers administratifs. Les petits lotissements dans un
> quartiers et les résidences c'est nettement plus petit qu'un quartier. Il
> faudrait un d'autres valeurs pour place=* (sachant aussi que place=locality 
> est
> inapplicable car c'est pour des lieux-dits inhabités, pas plus que place=
> isolated_dwelling pour un habitant individuel, ni place=hamlet pour de tous
> petits villages tout entiers et mal venus dans ces résidences et lotissements
> en milieu urbain.
> 
> J'avais proposé ici place=residence mais on pourrait avoir un place=block, ou
> place=sector (exemples les secteurs urbains de La Défense, ou les secteurs de
> villes chef-lieu des communes urbaines au Burkina Faso, ces secteurs sont
> numérotés mais n'ont pas de nom et ne sont pas réellement des quartiers mais
> plus ou moins des entités statistiques et électorales)

en regardant la page Neighbourhood sur le wiki [1] je trouve les
concepts x "Housing subdivision, housing development, and residential
community" qui semblent bien adaptés (sauf que les noms sont trop longs).

-Ralf.

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Neighbourhood

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] landuse

[Philippe Verdy]

Le 2 octobre 2016 à 18:03, Jérôme Amagat  a écrit :

> En zone résidentielle, dans une précédente discussion on disait qu'il n'y
> a rien comme tag pour les résidences ou pour les lotissements (moi pour les
> lotissement je dirais que c'est un quartier et donc utilise
> place=neighbourhood si le nom du lotissement reste après la fin des
> construction)
>

Sauf que place=suburb et place=neighborhood sont déjà utilisés pour les
grands quartiers et quartiers administratifs. Les petits lotissements dans
un quartiers et les résidences c'est nettement plus petit qu'un quartier.
Il faudrait un d'autres valeurs pour place=* (sachant aussi que
place=locality est inapplicable car c'est pour des lieux-dits inhabités,
pas plus que place=isolated_dwelling pour un habitant individuel, ni
place=hamlet pour de tous petits villages tout entiers et mal venus dans
ces résidences et lotissements en milieu urbain.

J'avais proposé ici place=residence mais on pourrait avoir un place=block,
ou place=sector (exemples les secteurs urbains de La Défense, ou les
secteurs de villes chef-lieu des communes urbaines au Burkina Faso, ces
secteurs sont numérotés mais n'ont pas de nom et ne sont pas réellement des
quartiers mais plus ou moins des entités statistiques et électorales)


> En zone industrielle :
> il y a bien sur landuse=industrial.
> pour une zone industriel qui a un nom sur quoi mettre le nom, un
> landuse=industrial (ou utiliser un place=locality)?
>

Là encore locality c'est pour des lieux-dits ruraux, les zones
industrielles ont la plupart du temps aussi du logement disséminé dedans,
et ce n'est pas à franchement parler des hameaux; en revanche les ZI/ZA/ZAC
sont souvent des quartiers administratifs (et là je pense qu'un
place=suburb/neighborhood devrait convenir la plupart du temps et sinon
place=hamlet pour les quelques logements qui pourraient s'y trouver).
Cela n'empêche pas du tout de nommer les polygones languse=industrial. Mais
on a des difficultés quand ces landuse se trouvent dans des zones
portuaires ou aéroportuaires (quelle priorité accorder entr ele nom du
port/aéroport, et celui d'une sous-zone dedans ?

et pour une usine d'un zone industriel, il ne faut pas utiliser a nouveau
> landuse=industrial mais sur quoi mettre le nom? j'utiliserais bien
> man_made=works mais c'est pour un bâtiment ou c'est pour une usine. et si
> c'est autre chose qu'une usine mais que ça correspond bien à une entreprise
> industriel comme un entrepôt (exemple : https://www.openstreetmap.org/
> way/445062150 )
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[Dudley Ibbett]

Hi

I have taken a look at my data for this area.  I have a few pictures from when 
I walked through this "farmyard" that are from 2013.  It was in my early days 
of mapping.  Looking at this data on JOSM and my pictures I have tidied it up a 
bit.  I think the satellite imagery has also improved since 2013.

I must admit I don't use highway=path in the UK although it seems to be quite 
commonly used in other parts of the world.   I have changed these to 
highway=footway and add access=customers.  These "paths" seem to be about 
accessing the toilet block and car park with regard to customers using the 
campsite.  The one south of the toilet block is sign posted "booking in" where 
it joins the track.I will have removed the foot=permissive as my 
understanding that this implies general "permissive" access for the public.

When it comes to the "paths" in the woods I have changed these to footways and 
add access=customers.  I assume that if you stay on the campsite you can access 
these as paying customers.   

I don't know all the detail of the main OSM websites rendering.  If 
access=customers doesn't render any differently then the owners of this 
campsite still might not be happy.  I must admit I find it odd that people are 
walking into this area anyway.  The footpaths in the wood accessable from the 
campsite don't join up to the public footpath to the west.  There is however a 
National Trust sign at the south end of this area and it maybe that people 
presume this gives them a general right of access.

This area also currently has two "place" nodes.  One is for a "village" and the 
other a "farm".  It probably was a large farm at one tome but now looks more 
like a hamlet when you walk through it.  There is a small farmyard and a few 
residential properties.

Hopefully the above is going to be acceptable.  Its about as good as my 
knowledge and understanding of tagging gets I'm afraid.

Regards

Dudley






> Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2016 17:15:09 +0100
> From: davefoxfa...@btinternet.com
> To: for...@david-woolley.me.uk; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale
> 
> 
> On 02/10/2016 14:21, David Woolley wrote:
> > So I would say that highway=path was equivalent to highway=path; 
> > foot=yes; bicycle=yes; horse=yes; motor_vehicle=no (spellings may be 
> > wrong). highway=footway would imply yes to just foot.  Renderers and 
> > routers will, I think follow this policy.
> >
> 
> I certainly didn't map highway=path with those assumptions. Could you 
> please list some data users who do?
> 
> (I don't use path at all now as it's irrelevant & confusing. I use 
> footway with all other attributes described in sub-tags).
> 
> Dave F.
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

[Talk-cz] OSM na konferenci OpenAlt? | 5.-6. listopadu | Brno

[Ladislav Nesnera]

Zdravím vespolek

Koukám na témata, co se nám sešla na tento ročník OpenAltu - 5.-6.
listopadu v Brně, a chybí mi tam něco z OSM světa. Přitom vzhledem k
letošní aktivitě mi přijde, že je o co se podělit..

Také bych byl moc rád, kdyby se i v Brně rozjela skupinka "Missing Maps
ČR " a Alt mám za dobrou
startovací příležitost, ale to předbíhám jednáním, která se rýsují na
příští týden.

Zkrátka, je-li trochu chuť a síla, prostor je. Uzávěrku máme 3.10., ale
pár dnů ještě dolaďujeme, tak se tím nenechte zbytečně odradit. Stačí
vyplnit formulář ..;?)



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

[Talk-GB] Contact with Food Standards Agency

[Jez Nicholson]

I mentioned the quarterly project to Dr Sian Thomas, Head of Information
Management at Food Standards Agency. Her reaction was, "how exciting! When
is it and how can we help?"
https://twitter.com/drsiant/status/778887195432194048

The FSA are keen advocates of open data and I imagine would be happy to be
involved. I'm not sure how exactly, but the door is open.

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

Re: [Talk-it] [wikimedia-it] via romea germanica

[girarsi_liste]

Il 02/10/2016 04:14, Volker Schmidt ha scritto:
> ... secondo la prassi attuale ...
> 

Trattandosi di una strada storica magari non ha senso come cammino, ma
solo come percorso conosciuto, comunque attend per capire cosa dicono
gli altri, sperando interessi.


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



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly project - taginfo tracker

[Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)]

On 2 October 2016 at 15:38, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> Which tags would you like me to set up a tag-info script for? We can then
> track these throughout the quarter.

Off the top of my head, I'd have thought it would be good to know
about number of instances of fhrs:id=* and addr:postcode=*, and
numbers of eating type places (perhaps just one count for all
amenity=cafe|restaurant|fast_food|pub|bar). Maybe also the
number/proportion of such places that have a name tag. Possibly you
could do other measures postcode progress, such as number of unique
correctly-formatted postcodes in addr:postcode tags and/or number of
postcode sectors ("AB12 X..") with at least one addr:postcode tagged.

Robert.

-- 
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[SK53]

My personal rules on this have always been two independent sources of
information OR a survey. This is easy for schools, and harder for pubs just
using aerial imagery & data from FHRS and/or Edubase. Groups of shops can
often be identified from aerial imagery, and correctly associated with FHRS
data through postcode centroids. In this circumstance I would add the
retail area with the postcode, but not any of the retail units unless
additional info is available.

A useful dataset is the full Naptan bus stops: this will often have useful
corroborating information on (particularly) the locations of pubs & post
offices. Once one or two FHRS addresses have been accurately located it is
possible to use this information to derive more info about the immediate
area, which in turn may allow better interpretation of aerial imagery.

For me the key aspect of FHRS data is that it allows a lot of information
to be added from the briefest of surveys. Ideally it should be survey led.
At present of course we have a very large amount of data which can be
enriched from FHRS, which in turn enhances our ability to improve overall
address data.

FHRS data should contain full address details most of the time, so there
should be no need to add anything from the website other than the url. It
is not unknown for details on websites to be incorrect & FHRS data is as
prone to data entry slipups as any other.

Jerry

On 2 October 2016 at 10:56, John Aldridge  wrote:

> On 02-Oct-16 10:32, Jez Nicholson wrote:
>
>> I have added the page
>> to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Project
>>
>
> I'm not quite clear what the concrete goals are here: is it just to add
> fhrs:id and addr:postcode tags to relevant establishments (and perhaps to
> map those establishments if they're not already there in OSM?)
>
> What degree of verification is expected on the part of the mapper? Is the
> existence of a (probably fuzzy) name match between an OSM feature and a
> nearby FHRS record adequate justification for adding the relevant tags, or
> is some local knowledge or survey expected?
>
> (On a related topic, suppose an establishment has a web site which
> includes useful information like address & postcode details. Would one be
> breaking rules to copy that information to OSM? After all, the text on the
> web site will be, AIUI, copyright.)
>
> --
> Cheers,
> John
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[Dave F]

On 02/10/2016 14:21, David Woolley wrote:
So I would say that highway=path was equivalent to highway=path; 
foot=yes; bicycle=yes; horse=yes; motor_vehicle=no (spellings may be 
wrong). highway=footway would imply yes to just foot.  Renderers and 
routers will, I think follow this policy.




I certainly didn't map highway=path with those assumptions. Could you 
please list some data users who do?


(I don't use path at all now as it's irrelevant & confusing. I use 
footway with all other attributes described in sub-tags).


Dave F.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[Richard Fairhurst]

David Woolley wrote:
> So I would say that highway=path was equivalent to highway=path; 
> foot=yes; bicycle=yes; horse=yes; motor_vehicle=no (spellings may 
> be wrong). highway=footway would imply yes to just foot.  Renderers 
> and routers will, I think follow this policy.

I can't speak for anyone else, but certainly cycle.travel presumes that a
bare highway=path (no access tags, not a member of a bicycle route relation)
does not have bicycle access.

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Upper-Booth-camp-site-Pennine-Way-near-Edale-tp5883692p5883735.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

[OSM-talk-fr] landuse

[Jérôme Amagat]

en zone résidentiel, dans une précédente discussion on disait qu'il n'y a
rien comme tag pour les résidences ou pour les lotissements (moi pour les
lotissement je dirais que c'est un quartier et donc utilise
place=neighbourhood si le nom du lotissement reste après la fin des
construction)

En zone industriel :
il y a bien sur landuse=industrial.
pour une zone industriel qui a un nom sur quoi mettre le nom, un
landuse=industrial (ou utiliser un place=locality)?
et pour une usine d'un zone industriel, il ne faut pas utiliser a nouveau
landuse=industrial mais sur quoi mettre le nom? j'utiliserais bien
man_made=works mais c'est pour un bâtiment ou c'est pour une usine. et si
c'est autre chose qu'une usine mais que ça correspond bien à une entreprise
industriel comme un entrepôt (exemple :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/445062150 )
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[David Woolley]

On 02/10/16 15:06, Andy Townsend wrote:

No - in England and Wales an unspecified access tag surely means just "don't 
know" especially as if (as seems to be the case for one of the ways here) it's 
mapped from aerial imagery.


So HGV's may be permitted on the typical footway, without an access tag?

 
shows an implied yes, for path, but with a footnote that the UK 
guidelines are that paths should always have explicit access.  footway 
is given as unequivocally implying yes.


In most/all other countries, path defaults to an unqualified yes for 
foot, horse and cycles.


Generally default accesses are implied to avoid the normal case being 
cluttered with lots of attributes.  Of course, as more private paths get 
mapped, it may be that private is the real normal case!


The UK rules would seem to suggest that path without access is a mapping 
error.


I suspect that people following these private paths are doing so from 
rendered maps, and rendered maps generally look only at access= to 
determine whether to mark a way as private.  As such the ramblers in 
question would probably behave in the same way for highway=path; foot=no 
as they would for just highway=path on its own.  To get some hope of end 
users obeying the access rules, you would need highway=path; access=private.


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

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] October meeting on Wednesday

[Ian Caldwell]

I hope to be there.

Ian

On 2 Oct 2016 3:37 p.m., "Rob Nickerson"  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Don't forget that we are meeting on Wednesday back in Birmingham for the
> winter. Who's joining me?
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mappa_Mercia#Next_meeting
>
> Best,
> *Rob*
>
> ___
> Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
> Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands
>
>
___
Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list
Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb-westmidlands

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] October meeting on Wednesday

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi all,

Don't forget that we are meeting on Wednesday back in Birmingham for the
winter. Who's joining me?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mappa_Mercia#Next_meeting

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

Re: [OSM-ja] 週刊OSM323号の紹介

[K.Sakanoshita]

坂ノ下です。

いつも翻訳ありがとうございます。
意見というより、感想になってしまいますが・・・。

> ・「クラフトマッパー」

AIマッパーと従来型マッパーの棲み分けが気になりました。

昨日もマッピングの講習をしていましたが、数年後経てば
マッパー不要な世の中になるのであれば、活動の根底から
見直すことになるのかと、少し不安を感じた記事でした。

まだ何も決まったことは無く方向性も不明とは思いますが。

それでは。

On 2016年10月02日 21:24, tomoya muramoto wrote:

こんにちは。weeklyOSM翻訳チームのmuramotoです。

SotMで賞をいただいたということで、せっかくなので今週の記事の宣伝を。
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/ja/archives/8147

今週のネタは、
・SotM2016開催
・OSMFへの寄付のお願い
・「クラフトマッパー」
・行動規範(Code of Conduct)
・これからの季節にむけてOpenSnowMap  http://beta.opensnowmap.org/
などなど

ご意見や載せてほしい記事がありましたら、このメーリングリストでも構いませんので、ご連絡いただければと思います。

muramoto


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



--
/*
 * K.Sakanoshita (http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~saka/)
 * (Phone) barsa...@gmail.com / (PC) s...@netfort.gr.jp
 */

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

[OSM-talk-fr] Trophées fondation EDF

[Martin Noblecourt]

Bonjour à tous,

Je relaie sur cette liste l'appel à candidature des Trophées des 
associations EDF, qui a cette année une thématique "Solidarités 
numériques" : http://tropheesfondation.edf.com/


Je pense qu'un certain nombre d'associations qui gravitent autour d'OSM 
(voir OSM-Fr directement ?) seraient tout à fait éligibles, et il y a 
encore peu de concurrence sur cette thématique ;-)


Bonne chance à tous !

(CartONG n'est pas éligible, budget trop important, donc on ne vous 
concurrencera pas ;-) )



--
CartONG

Martin Noblecourt

Email: m_nobleco...@cartong.org 
Phone: +33 (0)4 79 26 28 82
Mobile: +33 (0)6 04 09 74 19
Skype: martin.noblecourt

Humanitarian mapping and information management

Website: cartong.org  | Twitter: @assocCartONG 
 | Address: Chambéry, France


Lon: 05°55'24'' | Lat: 45°30'20''

GeOnG 2016 - The Humanitarian Forum for Geographic Information - 
17th-18th-19th of October - Chambéry, France 

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[David Woolley]

On 02/10/16 13:06, Nick Whitelegg wrote:


Indeed - unless they have foot=yes, foot=permissive, access=permissive
(etc) or designation=public_footpath, we are in no way telling them that
they are public access.


Whether or not there is a formal statement of this anywhere an 
unspecified access is normally understood to be access=yes for the 
normal users of an element type in the country.


So I would say that highway=path was equivalent to highway=path; 
foot=yes; bicycle=yes; horse=yes; motor_vehicle=no (spellings may be 
wrong). highway=footway would imply yes to just foot.  Renderers and 
routers will, I think follow this policy.




It is completely unreasonable for landowners to have a go at us just for
showing a path on the map. Just because it's on the map, it doesn't
implicitly mean it's public.


I would say if it is mapped as footway or path and doesn't have an 
explicit access, it does implicitly allow foot use by the general 
public.  I think the landowner could reasonably expect an explicit 
access tag with restricted rights.  That is best done by giving access= 
for the most permissive and cancelling other rights using detailed 
categories, even though there is an element of mapping for the renderer 
in that.


This needs resolving fairly quickly, otherwise the landowner will take 
matters into their own hands, register to edit, and fix the problem in a 
way that suits them, which will probably not involve the subtleties of 
coding, but simply a deletion of all the paths he thinks the public 
should not use.





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

Re: [Talk-de] Meine letzten Edits

[Heinz-Jürgen Oertel]

Danke, auch das funktioniert,
man kann sogar den Tag weglassen.


[timeout:100];
// Datum ggf. anpassen
node
   (newer:"2016-08-01T07:00:00Z")(user:Heinz)
   ({{bbox}})->.newnodes;
// Ausgabe
.newnodes out meta;


Am Sonntag, 2. Oktober 2016, 00:43:02 schrieb gmbo:
> Overpass-turbo wäre auch gegangen, da hast du alle POIs direkt
> 
> //*
> [timeout:80];
> // Datum ggf. anpassen
> node
>[tourism=caravan_site](newer:"2015-05-01T07:00:00Z")(user:gmbo)
>({{bbox}})->.newnodes;
> // Ausgabe
> .newnodes out meta;
> 
> //***
> 
> Gruß
> Gisbert
> 
> 

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

[Talk-de] Boundaries Map 4.1 - Hilfe bei Übersetzung DE--> EN gesucht

[Walter Nordmann]

Hi,

ich habe die neue Release 4.1 der Boundaries Map fast fertig. Es hapert 
nur noch an der Übersetzung der deutschen Dokumentation ins Englische. 
Mein altes Schulenglisch wird wohl grausige Reaktionen bei 
Muttersprachlern und sonstigen Lesern hervorrufen wink


Wer mir ein wenig helfen mag - und nebenbei die Freigabe ermöglicht - 
möge sich bitte per PN, OSM-Mail oder sonstwie melden. Nur sollte das 
"privat" sein, da ich erst die fertige Doku freigeben will.


Es handelt sich um einen Multi-User-Pad, wo man ohne Registrierung 
einfach loslegen kann. Very easy.


Textlänge: ca 2 Seiten.

Natürlich bin ich auch noch am Übersetzen, aber manche Sachen fallen mir 
einfach schwer.


Danke und Gruss
walter

ps: Kopie aus dem Forum, da die Resonanz dort äusserst dürftig war. Hier 
könnt ihr es besser machen ;)


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Map features page on wiki

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 02 ott 2016, alle ore 09:57, Jochen Topf  ha 
> scritto:
> 
> But it is the style that people use to check their edits


there's already a tendency of "mapping for the renderer" in the sense that some 
people prefer to use a tag that is less pertinent but rendered compared to one 
that isn't (yet?) rendered but perfectly fitting for the feature. We should not 
push this imho. There are still technical limitations (column needed for every 
tag that can be shown) that prevent the style from showing everything that 
would be desirable.

cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[Nick Whitelegg]

Indeed - unless they have foot=yes, foot=permissive, access=permissive (etc) or 
designation=public_footpath, we are in no way telling them that they are public 
access.


It is completely unreasonable for landowners to have a go at us just for 
showing a path on the map. Just because it's on the map, it doesn't implicitly 
mean it's public.


From: Richard Fairhurst 
Sent: 02 October 2016 11:33:37
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

Frederik Ramm quoted Mr Angry:
> "NONE of the paths indicated on the map that proceed north through
> Upper Booth Farm are public footpaths"

And indeed they're not tagged as such: they are tagged as the perennially
useless highway=path, some of them with highway=permissive, while the
Pennine Way PRoW is tagged (correctly) as highway=footway, foot=yes. I
suspect this is as least as much an osm-carto rendering issue as it is a
mapping issue.

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Upper-Booth-camp-site-Pennine-Way-near-Edale-tp5883692p5883715.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] Nuova "digital traver experience" di FS e Indoor OSM

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Il 2 ottobre 2016 11:25, Alessandro Palmas
 ha scritto:
> Il 02/10/2016 09:48, Aury88 ha scritto:
> A Genova ci stiamo scontrando da tempo col muro di gomma del Comune di
> Genova che non risponde nè a mail inviate ai funzionari nè quelle inviate
> alla mail ufficiale degli open data comunali (la barzelletta del secolo, a
> Genova di dice 'a foua du bestentu' parlando di una faccenda che non ha mai
> termine) per avere questi file aggiornati settimanalmente che il nostro caro
> comune passa gratuitamente a Google, società americana che fa business sugli
> accessi al proprio sito, e che non ritiene necessario passare ad altri che
> potrebbero fornire un ulteriore servizio gratuitamente e senza fare business
> sugli utenti che usugruiscono di tale servizio.


a Udine risposero mesi fa  solo che i messaggi solo lapidari: "a breve
ci saranno grosse novità per i dati [GTFS]", ma poi nulla. Fatto sta
che , come scrivevo, il 60% del pacchetto azionario dei trasporti
pubblici su gomma della provincia (Società Autovie Friulane) è in mano
ad una multinazionale inglese che credo avrà voglia di vendere i dati
a google, piuttosto che liberarli.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[Dan S]

2016-10-02 11:54 GMT+01:00 David Woolley :
> On 02/10/16 10:56, John Aldridge wrote:
>>
>> Would one be breaking rules to copy that information to OSM? After all,
>> the text on the web site will be, AIUI, copyright.)
>
>
> The question would be whether or not there is a database copyright involved.
> The actual facts that you are likely to want will not be copyrightable, but
> their aggregation into a database will be.
>
> My take on this is that:
>
> - if you have to use a search engine to find the site, you could infringe on
> the database copyright of the search engine operator;
>
> - if the feature is part of a large chain, and they have a "store locator",
> you will be infringing the database copyright on the the locator (although
> some chains may be happy for you to do this);
>
> - if you use a business directory, that is basically just another search
> engine.
>
> However, if you have a direct link to a web page or even web site that only
> relates to that one location, and that site is maintained by the company
> itself, there will be no database copyright issue and the facts you would
> normally extract would not be copyrightable.
>
> Slightly more problematic would be if the business published a link to a
> business directory page about itself.  I would play safe and assume that the
> directory owners may consider it an infringement on their database rights,
> even though the business supplied everything on the page.
>
> Narrative descriptions may be copyright and will need to be paraphrased, if
> free from database copyrights.

For what it's worth I concur with David on this except his first
point. I don't think using a search engine to find a business's
website has any copyright implications for information you then
retrieve from the business's website! The remainder is good though:
"mere facts" like an address are usually not a copyright infringement,
but if in practice you're taking them from some database or
database-driven website then you need to be wary of database rights.
inal.

Dan

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[David Woolley]

On 02/10/16 10:56, John Aldridge wrote:

Would one be breaking rules to copy that information to OSM? After all,
the text on the web site will be, AIUI, copyright.)


The question would be whether or not there is a database copyright 
involved.  The actual facts that you are likely to want will not be 
copyrightable, but their aggregation into a database will be.


My take on this is that:

- if you have to use a search engine to find the site, you could 
infringe on the database copyright of the search engine operator;


- if the feature is part of a large chain, and they have a "store 
locator", you will be infringing the database copyright on the the 
locator (although some chains may be happy for you to do this);


- if you use a business directory, that is basically just another search 
engine.


However, if you have a direct link to a web page or even web site that 
only relates to that one location, and that site is maintained by the 
company itself, there will be no database copyright issue and the facts 
you would normally extract would not be copyrightable.


Slightly more problematic would be if the business published a link to a 
business directory page about itself.  I would play safe and assume that 
the directory owners may consider it an infringement on their database 
rights, even though the business supplied everything on the page.


Narrative descriptions may be copyright and will need to be paraphrased, 
if free from database copyrights.


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

Re: [Talk-cz] Plánovač tras KČT - referenční čísla rozcestníků

[Jakub Konečný]

Tom Ka: díky za info, tak nějak jsem si to myslel, ale radši jsem se zeptal.

Jakub Konečný

Dne 2. října 2016 9:36 Tom Ka  napsal(a):

> Ahoj,
>
> - Co je v planovaci je irelevantni, neni to zdroj, ktery muzeme
> pouzit. Navic nemapujeme situaci planovace ale realitu.
> - ref se zapisuji vsechny takze napr. pro vyse uvedeny priklad
> https://api.openstreetmap.cz/img/guidepost/_1470316150799.jpg by mel
> mit ref=1058/5;6138/3
> - Cislo za lomitkem je opravdu ve vetsine pripadu vzdalenost daneho
> rozcesntiku zacatku trasy, ale nekde je to jinak. Zalezi na oblasti,
> jak moc to mistni klub KCT predelava na nove AB123 znaceni a udrzuje
> rozcesntiky.
>
> Mirku - upravil jsem tu wiki k rozcestniku, podle mne tam byla chybna
> informace ze do ref se nepridava cislo za lomitkem - pak to ale neni
> ref ale cislo trasy. Kdytzak si to prosim zkontroluj, jestli k tomu
> neco mas.
>
> Bye
>
>
> Dne 30. září 2016 13:24 Jakub Konečný  napsal(a):
> > Jojo, vím, že starší formát ref rozcestníku je číslo trasy lomeno číslo
> > rozcestníku. Dle wiki
> > (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:information%3Dguidepost) se
> má
> > jako ref uvádět pouze část před lomítkem (číslo trasy). Spíš mě zajímá,
> > jestli mám v OSM nechat i novější verzi ref, když v reálu na rozcestníku
> > není a taky tady proběhla debata, jestli vůbec můžeme přepisovat tato
> data z
> > plánovače.
> >
> > Dne 30. září 2016 12:49 Marek Musil  napsal(a):
> >
> >> Ahoj,
> >> na fotce (realita) je cislo trasy. Na rozcestniku se uvadelo cislo
> trasy,
> >> lomeno, cislo rozcestniku na trase. Dnes se jiz na rozcestnik nepise.
> >> Cislo trasy je ctyrmistne, Cervena zacinala 0, modra 1, zluta 6, zelena
> 3.
> >> Planovac pise cisla (u nas ref) prislusne k novejsimu paradigmatu, kdy
> se
> >> cislovani tyka rozcestniku samotnych a kazdy takovy by mel mit cislo
> >> unikatni a kazda tabulka (krome tabulky s nazvem rozcestniku, ktera ma
> 'm')
> >> navic male pismeno na konci urcujici poradi (zacina od 'a') na
> rozcestniku
> >> Zmena nastala nekdy mezi 2000 a 2010 zrejme podle pruznosti konkretniho
> >> znackare a mnozstvi jemu pridelenych barev a plechu na tabulky.
> >>
> >> Pokud se nemylim, soucasny pristup je takovy ze cisla tras (pokud se je
> >> podari odhalit prave ze starsich rozcestniku) se pouzivaji jako ref pro
> >> relace tras. Cisla rozcestniku jako ref k bodu popisujici konkretni
> >> rozcestnik
> >>
> >> Mara
> >>
> >>
> >> Dne 30. 9. 2016 v 12:08 Jakub Konečný napsal(a):
> >>
> >> Ahoj, dneska jsme s Petr1868 narazili na problém plánovače tras KČT.
> Chtěl
> >> jsem nahrát fotky rozcestníků z NS Drbákov - Albertovy skály
> >> (osmap.cz/#map=15/49.7243/14.3697) a všiml jsem si, že ref jsou v OSM
> >> vyplněné jinak, než v reálu na rozcestnících. Petrovi jsem napsal a
> říkal,
> >> že je převzal právě z plánovače KČT.
> >>
> >> Vypadá to, že v plánovači jsou všechny ref v novějším formatu (XY123),
> ale
> >> v reálu často takové ref na rozcestníku vůbec není. Viz třeba
> rozcestník U
> >> křížku:
> >> - realita https://api.openstreetmap.cz/img/guidepost/_1470316150799.jpg
> >> - plánovač http://trasy.kct.cz/#/?t=PB140
> >>
> >> Počítám, že mapovat by se měly reálné ref a ty z plánovače můžu smazat.
> >> Nebo ponechat i ref z plánovače?
> >>
> >> Jakub Konečný
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Talk-cz mailing list
> >> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Talk-cz mailing list
> >> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> >>
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-cz mailing list
> > Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> >
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-lt] POI paieška navigacijos programėlėse

[atvejis]

Sveiki
Pabandžiau su maps.me bei OsmAnd+ -  objektą kaip school "Vilniaus licėjus" 
surado.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Žilvinas Jonaitis

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[Richard Fairhurst]

Frederik Ramm quoted Mr Angry:
> "NONE of the paths indicated on the map that proceed north through 
> Upper Booth Farm are public footpaths"

And indeed they're not tagged as such: they are tagged as the perennially
useless highway=path, some of them with highway=permissive, while the
Pennine Way PRoW is tagged (correctly) as highway=footway, foot=yes. I
suspect this is as least as much an osm-carto rendering issue as it is a
mapping issue.

Richard



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Upper-Booth-camp-site-Pennine-Way-near-Edale-tp5883692p5883715.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[John Aldridge]

On 02-Oct-16 10:32, Jez Nicholson wrote:

I have added the page
to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Project


I'm not quite clear what the concrete goals are here: is it just to add 
fhrs:id and addr:postcode tags to relevant establishments (and perhaps 
to map those establishments if they're not already there in OSM?)


What degree of verification is expected on the part of the mapper? Is 
the existence of a (probably fuzzy) name match between an OSM feature 
and a nearby FHRS record adequate justification for adding the relevant 
tags, or is some local knowledge or survey expected?


(On a related topic, suppose an establishment has a web site which 
includes useful information like address & postcode details. Would one 
be breaking rules to copy that information to OSM? After all, the text 
on the web site will be, AIUI, copyright.)


--
Cheers,
John

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

Re: [Talk-it] Nuova "digital traver experience" di FS e Indoor OSM

[Alessandro Palmas]

Il 02/10/2016 11:05, Fabrizio Tambussa ha scritto:


Mah, io sono scettico. Sono anni che gli "opendatari" chiedono 
l'apertura della licenza delle  API trenitalia,  perché le API sono 
già accessibili, ma nulla.
Adesso trenitalia si è integrata con google per fornire soluzioni di 
viaggio in treno.
Non credo che allo stato attuale inserire le relazioni route mancanti 
possa far diventare appettibile Osm.
In più trenitalia tramite Rfi e Grandistazioni ha già le planimetrie 
delle stationi. Avendo già tutti i dati in mano loro, ci mettono un 
attimo a trovare chi gli sviluppa una app su misura per la loro 
"customer experience".

Saluti



Senz'altro infiocchetteranno una App perchè Grandi Stazioni per loro è 
una grossa opportunità di business. Però OSM potrebbe dire la sua per la 
facilità e flessibilità d'uso; in fondo quanti enti hanno cartografia 
propria ma poi utilizzano OSM?


Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Autumn Quarterly Project

[Jez Nicholson]

I have added the page to
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Quarterly_Project

- Jez

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 at 17:13 Brian Prangle  wrote:

> Hi everyone
>
> It seems that the idea that got most traction from discussions  is to use Food
> Hygiene Rating data  from the Food Standards
> Agency to improve the density of POIs, addresses and postcodes in town
> centres.(Town centres are not exclusive - it's just they'll provide the
> most impact for users)
>
> 1.We have a great tool developed
> some time ago by gregrs, whose work we should really recognise by making
> use of it.
> 2. We could semi-automate  the process if someone wants to build on the
> code developed by Christian Ledermann for schools.
> 
> (We might even be very daring and completely automate it! That would
> certainly accelerate our completion of UK postcode data which according to
> Jerry's current estimate of completion will take 2-3 decades)
> 3. There are indications that the FSA might want to assist us.
> 4. This quarter might we try  a couple of new approaches?
> a)collaborate on an area that needs some attention
> b)in addition to improving the map and the community, improve our reach by
> contacting potentially interested organisations/mappers outside the reach
> of this talk group?
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it] Nuova "digital traver experience" di FS e Indoor OSM

[Alessandro Palmas]

Il 02/10/2016 09:48, Aury88 ha scritto:

Imho dobbiamo cercare di rendere OSM il più attraente possibile per questa
occasione...il che significa partire con il realizzare le relazioni route
per le linee ferroviarie (alcune ancora mancano) fino ad arrivare a fare
l'indoor mapping delle stazioni...


Aury da spesso stimoli sui quali sarebbe spesso necessaria una 
discussione profonda su dove vuole andare OSM. Ma OSM è al 99% ciò che i 
mappatori nazionali vogliono che sia.


Ognuno è libero di mappare ciò che vuole solitamente in base alla 
propria 'visione': se a me piace OSM perchè mi permette di creare la 
mappa libera del mio quartiere mi concentrerò solo su quella zona, ecc.. 
Visione assolutamente rispettabile, in fin dei conti costui/costei 
migliora la mappa OSM.


Dai discorsi che girano in talk (non molti a dire il vero) c'è anche la 
visione globale. Parlare della mappatura delle stazioni e della rete 
ferroviaria nazionale lo è senz'altro (come lo è il fantastico lavoro di 
Sbiribizio sulla rete di distribuzione elettrica). Mentre però il lavoro 
di Sbiri, basato principalmente su open data e fotointerpretazione, lo 
si fa principalmente con l'armchair mapping, progetti del genere 
prevedono la quasi totalità del lavoro come survey.
Progetti come questi, per avere una buona percentuale di successo, 
dovrebbero ricevere il sostegno attivo di un pò di componenti. Vedo 
però, e mi pare ben più di un'impressione personale, che in Italia la 
comunità sia poco focalizzabile su progetti  strategici (quel quello dei 
numeri civici).
Pensate se nelle grandi stazioni ferroviarie ci fosse la mappa indoor 
con l'attribuzione di OSM; vi pongo una sola domanda: quanta visibilità 
ci porterebbe?



Per questi punti visto l'interesse da parte di fs secondo me potrebbe essere
l'occasione d'oro per richiedere i dati su cui basare la nostra
mappatura...che ne pensa wikimedia italia?
ci sono possibilità di collaborazione con FS?
In questi mesi (a partire da novembre 2015) che in WMI ho l'onore, lo 
scrivo senza retorica, di promuovere OSM in Italia, sono venuto in 
contatto con importanti realtà nazionali e non.
Come molti sanno o immaginano, quasi tutte le grandi compagnie tengono 
un occhio all'evoluzione di OSM. Parlando di rete ferroviaria già circa 
3 anni fa in lista spuntò un messaggio non ufficialmente proveniente da 
RFI ma da qualcuno del settore che operava sulla rete; in quel messaggio 
si discuteva (addirittura) sul routing ferroviario e in quel periodo mi 
dedicai a verificare la correttezza della linea tirrenica Genova - Roma.


Certamente ci sono possibilità di collaborazione sia con FS sia con 
altri enti. Il problema è che a una collaborazione occorre dare seguito 
con un qualche tipo di attività da parte della comunità. Ciò 
comporterebbe la condivisione di un progetto da seguire con un minimo di 
priorità rispetto alla discussione su come mappare la forma delle 
pensiline delle fermate dell'autobus caratteristiche di un paesino.
Ricordo che intorno al 2010 avevamo iniziato a proporre mensilmente la 
mappatura di determinate caratteristiche sulla falsariga di quello che 
fa, o faceva Wikipedia; dopo 4 o 5 mesi visto lo scarsissimo seguito 
terminammo questo tipo di proposta.


Approfitto dell'occasione per parlarvi della giornata di ieri a Genova 
con l'appena concluso evento 'Mappalonga' in stretta relazione 
all'argomento della mail.
Questo evento, che spingevo da aprile, ha visto in primo piano la 
Regione Liguria che si è occupata dell'organizzazione (e delle spese) 
della giornata ed ha visto partecipare quasi 70 persone, un paio delle 
quali provenienti anche dal Veneto. E questo è il primo atto ufficiale 
di una collaborazione partita quasi un anno fa e che mira a sviluppare 
l'utilizzo degli open data e ad un uso dei dati OSM all'interno dei DB 
regionali.
Ciò porta benefici ad OSM, sia in termini di visibilità che di 
contributori, ma anche alla collettività migliorando i dati che Regione 
Liguria pubblicherà sul proprio geoportale. Come è avvenuto tutto ciò? 
Senz'altro con un gran lavoro della comunità ligure, con pochi utenti ma 
fortunatamente piuttosto agguerrita :-)
Nella giornata ho avuto modo di avere contatti con diversi enti che 
conoscono OSM e desiderano quanto meno utilizzarlo, favorendo già al 
primo stadio (l'utilizzo, appunto) un'ulteriore ampliamento della 
conoscenza di OSM tra il grande pubblico.
In generale, oltre ai grandi obbiettivi, si nota una vera e propria fame 
verso le soluzioni che può dare OSM anche da parte di piccole 
associazioni che operano a livello comunale o di quartiere, che sia per 
fare informazione o cultura/protezione del territorio.




una domanda: su SOM mappiamo anche gli orari oltre che le linee? se è sì
dove trovo lo schema di tagging per inserire gli orari?



Non sono dati direttamente mappabili su OSM. Lo schema GTFS, creato un 
Google ma di formato aperto (sono dei semplici file in formato testo) è 
utilizzabile su applicazioni basate 

[Talk-lt] POI paieška navigacijos programėlėse

[Žilvinas Jonaitis]

Sveiki,

susidūriau su problema. Mano navigacijos programėlė *MapFactor GPS
Navigation*, kurią naudoju savo *Windows 10 Mobile* telefone (pasirodo, dar
vis yra ir tokių naudotojų...;), neranda POI ("*Point of Interest*")
objekto jeigu jį sudaro ryšys *type=multipolygon*. Tai dažniausiai
pastatai/teritorijos turintys vidinius kiemus ar kitas vidines teritorijas
ir sudaryti iš dviejų arba daugiau ploto ("*Area*") narių.

Noriu paklausti, ar su tokiomis problemomis susiduria kitų navigacinių
programėlių naudotojai kitose OS platformose (Android / iOS)?

Pasibandymui siūlau Vilniuje paieškoti gimnazijos "Vilniaus licėjus",
teatro "Lietuvos nacionalinis dramos teatras", "Vingio parkas", "Vingio
parko karių kapinės".

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

Re: [Talk-it] Nuova "digital traver experience" di FS e Indoor OSM

[Fabrizio Tambussa]

Mah, io sono scettico. Sono anni che gli "opendatari" chiedono l'apertura
della licenza delle  API trenitalia,  perché le API sono già accessibili,
ma nulla.
Adesso trenitalia si è integrata con google per fornire soluzioni di
viaggio in treno.
Non credo che allo stato attuale inserire le relazioni route mancanti possa
far diventare appettibile Osm.
In più trenitalia tramite Rfi e Grandistazioni ha già le planimetrie delle
stationi. Avendo già tutti i dati in mano loro, ci mettono un attimo a
trovare chi gli sviluppa una app su misura per la loro "customer
experience".
Saluti

Il 02/Ott/2016 10:29, "Michael Moroni"  ha
scritto:

>
>
> Sent from my WIKO PULP FAB 4G
> Il 02/ott/2016 09:48 Aury88  ha scritto:
> >
> > una domanda: su SOM mappiamo anche gli orari oltre che le linee? se è sì
> > dove trovo lo schema di tagging per inserire gli orari?
> >
>
> Non penso proprio, dato che le informazioni sono numerose (orario di
> partenza di un treno, orario di arrivo, binario, frequenza settimanale,
> ...) per un solo elemento. Inoltre alcune informazioni potrebbero non
> essere "statiche" da essere inserite su OSM. Per quello ci sono alcuni
> servizi, come Transit.land e Navitia, che usano i file GTFS dei servizi di
> trasporti come aggregatore di feed per varie app, come Transportr, software
> libero che usa tali dati e usa i dati di OSM per mostrare il percorso con i
> mezzi. Recentemente si è parlato dell'accordo tra Trenitalia e Google per
> inserire i dati di Trenitalia su Google Maps/Google Transit. Si potrebbe
> chiedere invece di creare una piattaforma come fa l'azienda di trasporto
> ferroviario nazionale francese, SNCF.
> Torno a lurkare :D
> - MM
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[Talk-cz] Jak zanést sdílení koloběžek

[Pavel Cvrček]

Ahoj,

v Plzni bylo spuštěné sdílení koloběžek [1]. Existuje způsob, jak to vhodně
zanést do mapy? Znám pouze sdílení kol, takže mě napadá použít to:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:amenity%3Dbicycle_rental

Díky

Pavel

[1]
http://plzen.cz/studenti-mohou-jezdit-do-kampusu-zcu-na-kolobezkach-63528/
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-it] Nuova "digital traver experience" di FS e Indoor OSM

[Michael Moroni]

Sent from my WIKO PULP FAB 4G
Il 02/ott/2016 09:48 Aury88  ha scritto:
>
> una domanda: su SOM mappiamo anche gli orari oltre che le linee? se è sì
> dove trovo lo schema di tagging per inserire gli orari?
>

Non penso proprio, dato che le informazioni sono numerose (orario di partenza 
di un treno, orario di arrivo, binario, frequenza settimanale, ...) per un solo 
elemento. Inoltre alcune informazioni potrebbero non essere "statiche" da 
essere inserite su OSM. Per quello ci sono alcuni servizi, come Transit.land e 
Navitia, che usano i file GTFS dei servizi di trasporti come aggregatore di 
feed per varie app, come Transportr, software libero che usa tali dati e usa i 
dati di OSM per mostrare il percorso con i mezzi. Recentemente si è parlato 
dell'accordo tra Trenitalia e Google per inserire i dati di Trenitalia su 
Google Maps/Google Transit. Si potrebbe chiedere invece di creare una 
piattaforma come fa l'azienda di trasporto ferroviario nazionale francese, SNCF.
Torno a lurkare :D
- MM
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] Upper Booth camp site, Pennine Way near Edale

[Dudley Ibbett]

Hi

Although not the type of feedback we want, it is actually good to hear that 
people are using the map.  I have walked through here and may have some 
pictures for reference so will see what I can do without a survey.  It is a 
well used walking area so the owners are unlikely to dispute public rights of 
way.  I don't recollect putting in these features.  It looks like it has been 
done by someone that must have stayed on their campsite.   It will have to wait 
until this evening.

Regards

Dudley

Sent from my iPad

> On 1 Oct 2016, at 22:35, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>   OSMF board has received a complaint by the operator of the Upper
> Booth campsite, namely that they're seeing an increase of people
> trespassing due to OpenStreetMap featuring the campsite toilet as a
> public toilet.
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/53.36523/-1.84623
> 
> I fixed that for them, but they have only replied with more (quote):
> 
>> I have looked at the map and there are numerous other inaccuracies.
>> The ONLY footpath is the Pennine way from Edale to Upper Booth. NONE of the 
>> paths indicated on the map that proceed north through Upper Booth Farm are 
>> public footpaths, similarly the P marked is the private parking for campsite 
>> users.
>> To the west of the farm is a stream running north /south there is only 1 
>> public footpath that runs alongside the stream NONE of the others indicated 
>> are correct.
> 
> I don't want to edit things based solely on what they're saying - I know
> that property owners sometimes have different ideas about which paths
> are private than the law.
> 
> Maybe if someone passes that farm on a weekend out they can survey the
> situation and mark things as private where necessary.
> 
> I'll place a note there linking to this message.
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
> 
> -- 
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Map features page on wiki

[Jochen Topf]

On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 08:54:09AM +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > Il giorno 01 ott 2016, alle ore 16:23, Paul Norman  ha 
> > scritto:
> > 
> > OpenStreetMap Carto is given special treatment on osm.org by being the 
> > default layer, so the wiki should reflect that.
> 
> 
> Just because there's already special treatment does not mean we have to carve 
> it in stone. The icons which osm carto currently displays, belong into an osm 
> carto map key, not in the wiki on feature definition pages or map features 
> compilation pages. Let's not mix up the cartographic representation and 
> interpretation and choices of a specific style with the definition of the 
> tags. It was always postulated that osm is about data, and that the osm carto 
> style is just a demo implementation of one possible interpretation of this 
> data.

But it is the style that people use to check their edits. I just see
this as "giving people what they want". The current Map Feature page
shows that there are people who thought this was a good idea, otherwise
they wouldn't have gone through the considerable effort of adding those
images to the wiki.

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  joc...@remote.org  http://www.jochentopf.com/  +49-351-31778688

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

[Talk-it] Nuova "digital traver experience" di FS e Indoor OSM

[Aury88]

Per i prossimi anni le FS metteranno in campo una serie di investimenti per
potenziare i propri servizi. tra questi spicca la nuova "digital travel
experience" per fornire soluzioni in tempo reale per spostarsi in italia e
all'estero tramite "un journey planner utile fin dalla programmazione del
viaggio, e presente fino alla sua conclusione, capace di modificare le
scelte fatte laddove si renda necessario. L’obiettivo è una Extended
Customer Experience contraddistinta da servizi come, il travel companion,
l’*indoor mapping di stazione*..."

FS con i suoi 16,700 km di rete ferroviaria e 830 milioni di passeggeri
annui e un migliaio di stazioni questa è un occasione troppo ghiotta per
lasciarcela sfuggire.
Visti i numeri di passeggeri interessati per FS potrebbe significare
risparmiare milioni il non usare famosi servizi di routing e mappe
proprietarie e piuttosto puntare a creare un servizio proprio, basato sul
proprio hardware. L'unico problema sono i dati su cui basare questi servizi
e qui osm può fare la differenza, ma solo se si presenta in maniera
sufficientemente completa.

Imho dobbiamo cercare di rendere OSM il più attraente possibile per questa
occasione...il che significa partire con il realizzare le relazioni route
per le linee ferroviarie (alcune ancora mancano) fino ad arrivare a fare
l'indoor mapping delle stazioni...

Per questi punti visto l'interesse da parte di fs secondo me potrebbe essere
l'occasione d'oro per richiedere i dati su cui basare la nostra
mappatura...che ne pensa wikimedia italia? 
ci sono possibilità di collaborazione con FS?

una domanda: su SOM mappiamo anche gli orari oltre che le linee? se è sì
dove trovo lo schema di tagging per inserire gli orari?




-
Ciao,
Aury
--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Nuova-digital-traver-experience-di-FS-e-Indoor-OSM-tp5883704.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-cz] Plánovač tras KČT - referenční čísla rozcestníků

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj,

- Co je v planovaci je irelevantni, neni to zdroj, ktery muzeme
pouzit. Navic nemapujeme situaci planovace ale realitu.
- ref se zapisuji vsechny takze napr. pro vyse uvedeny priklad
https://api.openstreetmap.cz/img/guidepost/_1470316150799.jpg by mel
mit ref=1058/5;6138/3
- Cislo za lomitkem je opravdu ve vetsine pripadu vzdalenost daneho
rozcesntiku zacatku trasy, ale nekde je to jinak. Zalezi na oblasti,
jak moc to mistni klub KCT predelava na nove AB123 znaceni a udrzuje
rozcesntiky.

Mirku - upravil jsem tu wiki k rozcestniku, podle mne tam byla chybna
informace ze do ref se nepridava cislo za lomitkem - pak to ale neni
ref ale cislo trasy. Kdytzak si to prosim zkontroluj, jestli k tomu
neco mas.

Bye


Dne 30. září 2016 13:24 Jakub Konečný  napsal(a):
> Jojo, vím, že starší formát ref rozcestníku je číslo trasy lomeno číslo
> rozcestníku. Dle wiki
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:information%3Dguidepost) se má
> jako ref uvádět pouze část před lomítkem (číslo trasy). Spíš mě zajímá,
> jestli mám v OSM nechat i novější verzi ref, když v reálu na rozcestníku
> není a taky tady proběhla debata, jestli vůbec můžeme přepisovat tato data z
> plánovače.
>
> Dne 30. září 2016 12:49 Marek Musil  napsal(a):
>
>> Ahoj,
>> na fotce (realita) je cislo trasy. Na rozcestniku se uvadelo cislo trasy,
>> lomeno, cislo rozcestniku na trase. Dnes se jiz na rozcestnik nepise.
>> Cislo trasy je ctyrmistne, Cervena zacinala 0, modra 1, zluta 6, zelena 3.
>> Planovac pise cisla (u nas ref) prislusne k novejsimu paradigmatu, kdy se
>> cislovani tyka rozcestniku samotnych a kazdy takovy by mel mit cislo
>> unikatni a kazda tabulka (krome tabulky s nazvem rozcestniku, ktera ma 'm')
>> navic male pismeno na konci urcujici poradi (zacina od 'a') na rozcestniku
>> Zmena nastala nekdy mezi 2000 a 2010 zrejme podle pruznosti konkretniho
>> znackare a mnozstvi jemu pridelenych barev a plechu na tabulky.
>>
>> Pokud se nemylim, soucasny pristup je takovy ze cisla tras (pokud se je
>> podari odhalit prave ze starsich rozcestniku) se pouzivaji jako ref pro
>> relace tras. Cisla rozcestniku jako ref k bodu popisujici konkretni
>> rozcestnik
>>
>> Mara
>>
>>
>> Dne 30. 9. 2016 v 12:08 Jakub Konečný napsal(a):
>>
>> Ahoj, dneska jsme s Petr1868 narazili na problém plánovače tras KČT. Chtěl
>> jsem nahrát fotky rozcestníků z NS Drbákov - Albertovy skály
>> (osmap.cz/#map=15/49.7243/14.3697) a všiml jsem si, že ref jsou v OSM
>> vyplněné jinak, než v reálu na rozcestnících. Petrovi jsem napsal a říkal,
>> že je převzal právě z plánovače KČT.
>>
>> Vypadá to, že v plánovači jsou všechny ref v novějším formatu (XY123), ale
>> v reálu často takové ref na rozcestníku vůbec není. Viz třeba rozcestník U
>> křížku:
>> - realita https://api.openstreetmap.cz/img/guidepost/_1470316150799.jpg
>> - plánovač http://trasy.kct.cz/#/?t=PB140
>>
>> Počítám, že mapovat by se měly reálné ref a ty z plánovače můžu smazat.
>> Nebo ponechat i ref z plánovače?
>>
>> Jakub Konečný
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-cz mailing list
>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-cz mailing list
>> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Map features page on wiki

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Il giorno 01 ott 2016, alle ore 16:23, Paul Norman  ha 
> scritto:
> 
> OpenStreetMap Carto is given special treatment on osm.org by being the 
> default layer, so the wiki should reflect that.


Just because there's already special treatment does not mean we have to carve 
it in stone. The icons which osm carto currently displays, belong into an osm 
carto map key, not in the wiki on feature definition pages or map features 
compilation pages. Let's not mix up the cartographic representation and 
interpretation and choices of a specific style with the definition of the tags. 
It was always postulated that osm is about data, and that the osm carto style 
is just a demo implementation of one possible interpretation of this data.

cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] ancora su civici e POI

[Aury88]

Fra Mauro-2 wrote
> La residenza fiscale di una attività mi interessa poco quando guardo una
> mappa e non mi sembra la situazione "sul terreno".

 Interessa poco te, non è detto che non interessi a qualcun'altro...il
"guardare la mappa" è solo uno dei metodi di consultazione del database OSM
e per quanto riguarda il fatto di non rappresentare la situazione "sul
terreno" io sono dell'opinione opposta. Un locale ha associato ufficialmente
un civico così come le strade hanno nella loro interezza un nome anche se
esso viene indicato con apposita cartellonistica solo agli ingressi ad
essa.se dovessimo limitarci alla situazione "sul terreno" tanto varrebbe
togliere tanti altri tag quali numeri di telefono, siti internet, partite
iva ecc


> Come fate invece se avete più POI allo stesso civico?
> Ad esempio un palazzo di uffici con un'unica entrata a cui corrispondono
> uno studio medico, una società finanziaria e una assicurazione, tutti al
> civico di Via Accademia 4?

l'unica soluzione che mi viene in mente è l'indoor mapping ma deve esserci
sicuramente un altro metodo per una mappatura più elementare




-
Ciao,
Aury
--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/ancora-su-civici-e-POI-tp5883516p5883702.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [Talk-it] ancora su civici e POI

[Aury88]

Fra Mauro-2 wrote
> Il mio dubbio è il seguente:
> Se ho un bar "con un'unica porta" al civico 20 di Via Accademia, abbiamo
> già detto che è un nodo con i tag del civico e del bar
> Come faccio invece se il bar "occupa" tre civici: il numero 18 di Via
> Accademia (che è un'entrata), il numero 20 di Via Accademia (che è una
> vetrina), il numero 22 di Via Accademia (che è un'altra entrata)???

io fino ad ora ho mappato come area i locale (in manier spannometrica se non
conosco le dimensioni...nel caso aggiungo un tag fixme=*), mettendo i tag
addr:* perchè  il locale ha ufficialmente un indirizzo associato.
poi sul perimetro metto dei nodi (che appartengono alla way che traccia il
perimetro) in corrispondenza degli ingressi e altri casi (vetrine dotate di
civico ecc). sul nodo corrispondente all'ingresso (e relativo numero civico)
metto entrance=main +description:entrance=entrance locale, sugli altri metto
solo il civico e altri tag ritenuti necessari (entrance= service, emergency,
exit, secondary_entrance )

forse entro breve passerò ad uno schema di tag in cui il locale viene
privato dei tag addr:*...ma tutto il resto rimane uguale...farò questo
passaggio quando vedrò cosa decide la lista e quando mi si spiega la
metodologia da usare per mappare il caso di edifici con più ingressi tutti
con il medesimo numero civico (anche caso di targhetta non presente ma
scontrini riportanti lo stesso civico)



-
Ciao,
Aury
--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/ancora-su-civici-e-POI-tp5883516p5883701.html
Sent from the Italy General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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