[Talk-GB] Bus Depots
Back in 2008, the recommendation for tagging bus depots, according to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Buses#Depots http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Buses#Depots, was to use amenity=parking, access=private and landuse=industrial. However, I have seen other London depots use myriad other tags such as amenity=commercial and amenity=bus_station. Are there more relevant tags to this facility, or should the 2008 recommendation stand as it is? Amaroussi signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Quietways question
Hi, I have three questions in respect of the article of http://www.sustrans.org.uk/news/sustrans-deliver-quietways-london: 1. Will Quietways be numbered for easy reference? 2. Will Quietways completely entail the start of the gradual phase-out of the current LCN and LCN+ system so that OpenStreetMap would be less confused with the myriad systems we currently have (LCN, LCN+ and the newer Superhighways)? 3. Finally, to encourage cycling further, could you kindly help provide the necessary legal clearance to allow OpenStreetMap to map the new quietways as they come in? Thank you in advance, Antje. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Suburbs in London/Brum - big edits
“Town centre” is usually a figure of speech but the necessity of reverting depends case by case. Sometimes a “limited revert” is better because the edit was in good faith but the problems caused were unintentional. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] LEZ get this completed?
Hi, I wonder if someone could help me complete this LEZ thing in London? I’ve only been able to add the boundaries from what I actually saw, but progress is incredibly slow. If an import is necessary, it has to be ODbL-okayed. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] LEZ get this completed?
I live in London, so I could figure out a small part of the boundary based on the fact that it doesn’t go outside London for obvious reasons, and on the basis of a number of past surveys and personal memory (which I call leftovers). Do you think you want to change this relation to be node-based? I’m only going by what the Germans do for their LEZs. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] LEZ get this completed?
In my case, I have to consider the following: - How the boundary will avoid approved turn-backs like the London Gateway services on the M1. - How the boundary will avoid land that’s technically in the boundary but accessed by driveways that only enter from and exit into non- LEZ roads. You are right that an LEZ boundary is arbitrary and this is why the TfL version is clearly wrong. OSM can try its best to be as respectful as possible but it’s a learning process. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] LEZ get this completed?
Nah, I already ignore those: they include land that’s technically in the boundary but accessed by driveways that only enter from and exit into non- LEZ roads. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Deletions and newbie editors (was: Vandalism in London)
I am trying to think how to reduce incidents that would cause alarm to users like me, but there is no point in flagging new editors because it won’t help them integrate into OSM. I am not an expert in iD since I moved on from Potlatch, but Potlatch at least denotes relations on ways, while iD does not. I know that people are trying to make OSM easy to edit but how it would not make sense to at least put a prompt saying “Deleting this way will affect routes that depend on it: make sure that such routes have an appropriate diversion. Are you sure you want to do this?” I notice that the relations are way down the sidebar: is this causing some users to not know about relations? Antje ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Vandalism in London
Suddenly I came back to the map just to find that my new bus relations are damaged by some vandal. I’m not rebuilding it. I give up. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Vandalism in London
Here is the list of London bus routes for starters: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bus_routes_in_London The ones that I dramatically improved are the new-style route_master relations, which are: 3, 4, 8-11, 18, 19, 21, 24, 30, 38, 43, 49, 57, 73, 76, 100, 144, 148, 192, 205, 277, 341, 390, 393, 394, 476. I was going to do 453 because of the Borismaster, but I am doubtful. I’m well known for extremely strict standards in bus routes because I just want nothing but the best on OSM: If you open the route 30 relations (unaffected by the incidents), you can see the effort I put into making the routing perfect, from the stops to the directions and even the operators. Given the military-precision effort, I don’t have the perseverance like most of you do because I now have university to attend to. Even the Inner ring road is damaged (3124618). Maybe we need a second “bus route czar”. Antje.___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
