Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM plugin to increment or decrement house numbers

[Steve Friedl]

The HouseNumberTaggingTool is great for auto-incrementing house numbers as
you touch each house going along the street.

https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Plugin/HouseNumberTaggingTool

It's not entirely on point, but would be faster for fixing numbers than
doing it by hand.

Steve

---
Steve Friedl // Software & Network Security Consultant // 714-345-4571
st...@unixwiz.net // Southern California USA // I speak for me only

-Original Message-
From: Andy Mabbett  
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2022 4:48 AM
To: OSM talk mailing list 
Subject: [OSM-talk] JOSM plugin to increment or decrement house numbers

A local street has houses numbered even on one side, odd on the other.

One number has been missed from the middle of the even side, so every number
from that point to the end of the road needs to be increased by 2.

Is there a JOSM plugin that will do this?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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


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

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] private or not, USA ?

[Steve Friedl]

Answering a different question than what you asked: they don’t belong in OSM, 
so any other answer is off topic.

 

Right?

 

Steve

 

--- 

Steve Friedl // Software guy + Volunteer mapper // Southern California USA

st...@unixwiz.net [OSM:SJFriedl] // OpenStreetMap MWG //  Fix ALL the maps!

 

 

From: 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk  
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 5:59 PM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org; t...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] private or not, USA ?

 

Are wi-fi passwords and the IP number of a hot spot, located in MC Donald, 
burger-king, Starbucks,

 

motel 6, super 8, best western ect. public ?

 

 

 

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM nicknames are Unicode characters? (not Ascii?)

[Steve Friedl]

> If there is any real problem here, it could be with people using names that 
> look like the names of other community members (but technically are 
> different) for abusive scopes

Can I be Ṡtereo ? :-)

-Original Message-
From: Martin Koppenhoefer  
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 8:38 AM
To: Oleksiy Muzalyev 
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM nicknames are Unicode characters? (not Ascii?)



sent from a phone

> On 28. May 2020, at 17:20, Oleksiy Muzalyev  
> wrote:
> 
> Practically all people in Russia studied a foreign language within the 
> compulsory education system. ... I am sure that typing several Latin letters 
> would not be a challenge.
> 
> Besides in such disciplines as mathematics or chemistry the Latin letters are 
> being used widely for variables in formulas, etc.
> Customarily, a keyboard with the Russian layout has got also the Latin 
> letters on the keys (buttons) [1].
> 
> I do not know exactly about Japan and China, but I guess that it is about the 
> same there too.


I think the question is not so much whether someone not usually writing in 
latin characters will be able to do it, but more whether a name written in 
latin is suitable for them to identify with. IMHO there is great benefit in 
allowing unicode names, and very little problem with people using “strange 
looking” characters to mean something in different than what the characters are 
originally intended for.

If there is any real problem here, it could be with people using names that 
look like the names of other community members (but technically are different) 
for abusive scopes. This shouldn’t be tolerated of course, and would be 
individually reacted to by the admins, if it is detected.

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




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

Re: [Talk-us] What's protecting the map?

[Steve Friedl]

One who wanted to take his datal and go home would have to present/manufacture 
evidence that the data was taken from a source with a closed/incompatible 
license.

 

 

 

From: Ian Dees  
Sent: Sunday, June 9, 2019 12:45 PM
To: Paul Johnson 
Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap 
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] What's protecting the map?

 

 

On Sun, Jun 9, 2019, 15:38 Paul Johnson mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org> > wrote:

 

 

On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 1:23 PM Nuno Caldeira mailto:nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com> > wrote:

But what happens if the Foundation is taken over by people with commercial 
interests? 

*   You still own the rights to any data you contribute, not the 
Foundation. In the new Contributor Terms, you license the Foundation to publish 
the data for others to use and ONLY under a free and open license

 

This got me thinking, particularly considering the license change a few years 
ago and what a fiasco that was.  What's protecting the map here?  What's to 
stop a prolific contributor from taking their ball and going home, to the 
overall detriment of the map?

 

To be clear, this is not something I am going to to.  For the sake of playing 
Devil's advocate, what is to stop me from, after nearly a decade, taking my 
data and going home?  This would leave a roughly 400 kilometer wide hole 
centered in Tulsa, some serious breakage in metro Portland and thousands of 
pockmarks around the world.  If I were to pull out and take my data with me, it 
would swiss cheese the map.

 

What does "taking my data and going home" mean? You've already given OSMF a 
license to use the data you've contributed so far, so there wouldn't be any 
reason for OSMF to remove the data from a legal perspective. I suppose you 
could go around and delete the data you've contributed, but that would likely 
be considered vandalism and your changes reverted. 

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

Re: [Talk-us] OSM map use w/o attribution at US News & World Report

[Steve Friedl]

Hmmm.  Yesterday I had found proper attribution (via Leaflet) in other 
non-health areas of their website and was putting together more comprehensive 
notes for them, but today I see my original health.usnews.com link *does* work 
(as do links for other doctors), so I assume this was just a website glitch 
that’s since been fixed.

 

Never mind 

 

Steve

 

From: Harald Kliems  
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 8:56 AM
To: Levente Juhász 
Cc: Steve Friedl ; OpenStreetMap talk-us list 

Subject: Re: [Talk-us] OSM map use w/o attribution at US News & World Report

 

Yeah, same for me: https://i.imgur.com/t7VuFDB.png 

Maybe they fixed it very rapidly?

 Harald.

 

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:37 AM Levente Juhász mailto:jlevent...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Maybe I am missing something here but when I checked the link you provided I 
can see the proper attribution displayed in the Leaflet map. Screenshot: 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EBzE3_0Lc6qVkKeYYhYbpz9CFrWOiGpc/view

 

Cheers,

Levente

 

 

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:51 PM Steve Friedl mailto:st...@unixwiz.net> > wrote:

[trying this again]

Good morning,

I've never done a use-without-attribution case before, would like to get
some suggestions before I dive in. I'm pretty sure this is a "substantial"
violation.

It seems that US News & World Report is using OSM data/maps without
attribution in their Health website; my opthalmologist's page 

https://health.usnews.com/doctors/jared-younger-768369

includes a map that I instantly recognized as OSM.  I make it a point to
enhance the maps every time I have an appointment somewhere, and I had done
substantial cleanup of the maps in the northeast corner of Brookhurst &
Ellis in Fountain Valley.

The *current* map doesn't look much like the one in the US News page:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62921271#map=18/33.69463/-117.95174

because of my subsequent changes, but - among other things - the spurious
and incorrect segment of "Ellis Street" just below the main Ellis Street was
leftover Tiger data that I'd fixed as well on changeset
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62921271

Digging in, it seems that US News runs their own tile server (example tile):

https://maptile.usnews.com/tile0/12/707/1640.png

so this is clearly them and not (say) Leaflet.

Their terms & conditions page https://www.usnews.com/info/features/terms has
a helpful email address copyrightag...@usnews.com 
<mailto:copyrightag...@usnews.com>  that invites contacts
about copyright issues.

So, I think I should be following the procedure here:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution

with a polite note to them.

Am I on the right track?

Steve

---
Steve Friedl // Software & Network Security Consultant // 714-345-4571 
 
st...@unixwiz.net <mailto:st...@unixwiz.net>  // Southern California USA // I 
speak for me only





___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org> 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-- 

Levente Juhasz
https://blog.jlevente.com/

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org> 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

[Talk-us] OSM map use w/o attribution at US News & World Report

[Steve Friedl]

[trying this again]

Good morning,

I've never done a use-without-attribution case before, would like to get
some suggestions before I dive in. I'm pretty sure this is a "substantial"
violation.

It seems that US News & World Report is using OSM data/maps without
attribution in their Health website; my opthalmologist's page 

https://health.usnews.com/doctors/jared-younger-768369

includes a map that I instantly recognized as OSM.  I make it a point to
enhance the maps every time I have an appointment somewhere, and I had done
substantial cleanup of the maps in the northeast corner of Brookhurst &
Ellis in Fountain Valley.

The *current* map doesn't look much like the one in the US News page:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62921271#map=18/33.69463/-117.95174

because of my subsequent changes, but - among other things - the spurious
and incorrect segment of "Ellis Street" just below the main Ellis Street was
leftover Tiger data that I'd fixed as well on changeset
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62921271

Digging in, it seems that US News runs their own tile server (example tile):

https://maptile.usnews.com/tile0/12/707/1640.png

so this is clearly them and not (say) Leaflet.

Their terms & conditions page https://www.usnews.com/info/features/terms has
a helpful email address copyrightag...@usnews.com that invites contacts
about copyright issues.

So, I think I should be following the procedure here:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution

with a polite note to them.

Am I on the right track?

Steve

---
Steve Friedl // Software & Network Security Consultant // 714-345-4571
st...@unixwiz.net // Southern California USA // I speak for me only





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

Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Steve Friedl]

> I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed 
> it on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up. 

I’m exactly one of those users: once I’ve confirmed or fixed the object, I 
delete the tag, so this is still useful for me as a kind of to-do list.

I also delete tiger:reviewed=yes tags when otherwise editing an object.

Steve


From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org] 
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:56 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

I believe folks still use it in places to indicate that no-one has reviewed it 
on the ground, but I cannot find the thread(s) where that was brought up. 

I think a mechanical removal may be a bit overzealous, even though I personally 
wouldn't shed a tear. As long as there is at least one tag left that would 
indicate TIGER as the original source, so we can continue to detect 'unmodified 
TIGER' roads.
--
  Martijn van Exel
  mailto:m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 10:25, Clifford Snow wrote:
The tag, tiger:reviewed that is left over from the 2006/7 import of TIGER roads 
has lost any meaning. For example, look at 196th Avenue Southwest [1] in 
Thurston County WA. It's on version 6 yet still has tiger:reviewed=no. Note I 
picked this street at random from a overpass query [2]. I see this tag all the 
time. It's time to get rid of it. Not through a mechanical edit, but by editors 
making changes to roads.

I'm proposing to open a ticket for JOSM to add this tag to the list of 
discarded tags. I'd like to hear if there are any objects or think this is a 
good idea.

I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add tiger:reviewed to 
the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going to preferences->Advanced 
Preferences and adding tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload 
JOSM for the changed to be active.

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173554611
[2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yJh

Clifford

-- 
@osm_seattle
http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us



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

Re: [Talk-us] Looking for GPS with voice annotation?

[Steve Friedl]

I received a number of really useful notes that have been really helpful.

@Martjin:
I purchased a Columbus V900 from eBay – about $100 – and will play with it over 
the weekend to see if I can find a workflow that works for me.  

A number of folks suggested OSMTracker and KeypadMapper, but – alas – they are 
Android and I use an iPhone. I do have a Samsung tablet that runs Android, but 
it’s a bit large to be walking around a neighborhood – I worry about getting 
called out until I have a bit more experience doing this.

I do notice that for both OSMTracker and KeypadMapper note “This app may not be 
optimized for your device”, but I don’t know if that’s serious or not.

I have played with Vespucci, but it’s also Android only. I guess I should buy a 
cheap old phone and just use it for wifi where I don’t care about a SIM or a 
carrier or whatever.

I’ve been using Go Map!! on my iPhone, which is a lovely app by Bryce Cogswell, 
and I found a workflow that mostly works.

At the start of a block I’ll manually add house points for that block on top of 
the aerial imagery (each node on top of the house itself), entering everything 
*but* the house number. Now I have a block full of partial entries. I do this 
while standing out of the way and it looks like I’m sending a text message.

Then I walk the block and enter the numbers: this is made easier when most 
blocks have uniform numbering that I can just mentally note “plus 10… plus 10… 
plus 10…” and enter most of them at the end of the block.

When I get home I use JOSM to clean everything up.

The bummer with Go Map!! is that it hasn’t been updated in several years, and 
it’s an *amazing* battery hog. I assume that there are battery optimizations 
that haven’t been done yet, and I hope Bryce picks this back up sometime.

It was also suggested that I take pictures of the house numbers and correlate 
them later: I do this now for points of interest or odd things, but I’m not 
sure this would scale up to hundreds of houses in a busy residential 
neighborhood. 

Thanks again, all. I’m about to head out for another foot survey mission.

Steve

From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:mve...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2018 5:03 PM
To: Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net>
Cc: OSM US Talk <talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Looking for GPS with voice annotation?

Steve, 

I have used the Columbus V900[1] for that purpose. It is a nice little unit, 
the main drawback being that it does not save tracks in GPX format. There is a 
plugin for JOSM that loads its CSV track files, though.

The audio files are of pretty low fidelity, but good enough. JOSM shows the 
audio clips as points on the map. 

There is a newer model which is much fancier looking but lacks the audio 
recording feature, as far as I know.

Martijn

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Columbus#Columbus_V-900



On Feb 10, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Steve Friedl <mailto:st...@unixwiz.net> wrote:

Happy Saturday, all,

I have a Garmin GPSmap 64st unit that does a fine job of recording tracks, but 
I’m looking to do foot surveys of house numbers in an area, and for that I’m 
hoping to find something that has both GPS and audio recording.

Proposed use case is walking along a sidewalk and pressing a button to mark a 
GPS location, then quietly speak the house number.  I’d use some kind of 
playback in JOSM to enter all this data. 

I've tried using a standalone audio recorder, but it's way too easy to get out 
of sync with the waypoints. Actually *entering* house numbers (in Go Map!! on 
my iPhone would take too long and attract way too much attention.

Rafts of google and bingle searches have brought up nothing except how to spy 
on my spouse with a covert GPS audio recorder: that’s not what I’m looking for 

I can’t be the first to want this: anybody seen such a thing?

Steve

--- 
Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571
mailto:st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy |  
http://unixwiz.net



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



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

[Talk-us] Looking for GPS with voice annotation?

[Steve Friedl]

Happy Saturday, all,

I have a Garmin GPSmap 64st unit that does a fine job of recording tracks, but 
I’m looking to do foot surveys of house numbers in an area, and for that I’m 
hoping to find something that has both GPS and audio recording.

Proposed use case is walking along a sidewalk and pressing a button to mark a 
GPS location, then quietly speak the house number.  I’d use some kind of 
playback in JOSM to enter all this data. 

I've tried using a standalone audio recorder, but it's way too easy to get out 
of sync with the waypoints. Actually *entering* house numbers (in Go Map!! on 
my iPhone would take too long and attract way too much attention.

Rafts of google and bingle searches have brought up nothing except how to spy 
on my spouse with a covert GPS audio recorder: that’s not what I’m looking for 

I can’t be the first to want this: anybody seen such a thing?

Steve

--- 
Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571
st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net



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

Re: [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Steve Friedl]

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 10:31:14AM -0700, Tod Fitch wrote:
> There was a (poorly) done import of house numbers done in San Diego county a 
> long while back. Data from that import usually has a source tag of "SanGIS 
> Addresses Public Domain (http://www.sangis.org/)???. I think a reasonable 
> check for some of the questionable street names in that area could be done by 
> verifying that at least some of the addr:steet tags along the way match with 
> the name tag.
> 
> Unfortunately, I attempted a clean up of that import[1] a while ago so my 
> edits may have muddied the water. On the other hand, in areas where there 
> were objects with address information I did review the street name and 
> addr:street against the most recent TIGER imagery available in JOSM at the 
> time. So there is a good chance that I reviewed many of the street names 
> against TIGER data.
> 
> When you reviewed Orange County, how did you do it so quickly? The only way I 
> know to go through this is looking at each one, one at a time.

One. At. A. Time.

Using JOSM, I downloaded each object ID and inspected it, comparing with the
OC Landbase, the open parcel data hosted in GIS cloud. Virtually all were
correct in OSM.

Curiously, the "official" OC Landbase had some mistakes, which I confirmed
with (non-open) OC Assessor data and sent off corrections to OC Public
Works, with whom I have a great relationship.

Steve


> 
> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/n76/diary/38088
> 
> > On Aug 27, 2017, at 10:01 AM, Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net> wrote:
> > 
> > What a bummer.
> > 
> > I went through all the ways in California, and half of them were in Orange 
> > County where I live, so I was able to confirm / fix them via public sources 
> > - two changelists reflect the confirmation and various fixes I made while I 
> > was in the area.
> > 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51485799
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51486963
> > 
> > The rest are all but one in San Diego (one is in Los Angeles); those marked 
> > OK in the first column can be removed from the revert list; if anybody else 
> > has good data for San Diego, then perhaps we can deal with the rest of 
> > California, which is (sadly) only a small part of the area of concern.
> > 
> >5949993,"California","United States of America" Tulagi Road, 
> > San Diego
> >5957171,"California","United States of America" South M 
> > Avenue, San Diego
> >5959592,"California","United States of America" East B Road, 
> > San Diego
> >5959593,"California","United States of America" East B Road, 
> > San Diego
> >5960070,"California","United States of America" East F Road, 
> > San Diego
> >5963118,"California","United States of America" Kingston 
> > Court East, San Diego
> >5963190,"California","United States of America" Kingston 
> > Court South, San Diego
> >5963214,"California","United States of America" Kingston 
> > Court West, San Diego
> >5963786,"California","United States of America" East I Road, 
> > San Diego
> >5964547,"California","United States of America" South R 
> > Avenue, San Diego
> >5965288,"California","United States of America" McCain 
> > Boulevard, San Diego
> >5965292,"California","United States of America" McCain 
> > Boulevard, San Diego
> > xx  5969001,"California","United States of America" 4th Sttreet 
> > -- fixed to "4th Street but" not confirmed
> >5969167,"California","United States of America" North 4th 
> > Street, San Diego
> >5970892,"California","United States of America" McCain West 
> > Boulevard, San Diego
> >5994791,"California","United States of America" East G Road, 
> > San Diego
> >533,"California","United States of America" East H Road, 
> > San Diego
> >6006131,"California","United States of America" East J Road, 
> > North Island Coronado
> >6012862,"California","United States of America&quo

Re: [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Steve Friedl]

What a bummer.

I went through all the ways in California, and half of them were in Orange 
County where I live, so I was able to confirm / fix them via public sources - 
two changelists reflect the confirmation and various fixes I made while I was 
in the area.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51485799
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51486963

The rest are all but one in San Diego (one is in Los Angeles); those marked OK 
in the first column can be removed from the revert list; if anybody else has 
good data for San Diego, then perhaps we can deal with the rest of California, 
which is (sadly) only a small part of the area of concern.

5949993,"California","United States of America" Tulagi Road, 
San Diego
5957171,"California","United States of America" South M Avenue, 
San Diego
5959592,"California","United States of America" East B Road, 
San Diego
5959593,"California","United States of America" East B Road, 
San Diego
5960070,"California","United States of America" East F Road, 
San Diego
5963118,"California","United States of America" Kingston Court 
East, San Diego
5963190,"California","United States of America" Kingston Court 
South, San Diego
5963214,"California","United States of America" Kingston Court 
West, San Diego
5963786,"California","United States of America" East I Road, 
San Diego
5964547,"California","United States of America" South R Avenue, 
San Diego
5965288,"California","United States of America" McCain 
Boulevard, San Diego
5965292,"California","United States of America" McCain 
Boulevard, San Diego
xx  5969001,"California","United States of America" 4th Sttreet -- 
fixed to "4th Street but" not confirmed
5969167,"California","United States of America" North 4th 
Street, San Diego
5970892,"California","United States of America" McCain West 
Boulevard, San Diego
5994791,"California","United States of America" East G Road, 
San Diego
533,"California","United States of America" East H Road, 
San Diego
6006131,"California","United States of America" East J Road, 
North Island Coronado
6012862,"California","United States of America" Hangar Road, 
North Island Coronado
6014150,"California","United States of America" South O Street, 
North Island Coronado
6017745,"California","United States of America" Avenida de las 
Arenas, San Diego
6020277,"California","United States of America" South Cays 
CourtSan Diego
6020279,"California","United States of America" South Cays 
CourtSan Diego
6026197,"California","United States of America" North Caribe 
Cay Boulevard  San Diego
6049589,"California","United States of America" O'Keefe Street  
San Diego

13337365,"California","United States of America"55th Place  / 
Los Angeles

#--
# all these in Coto de Caza, Orange County California and 
confirmed/fixed
OK  13340935,"California","United States of America"Kingfisher Court
OK  13345902,"California","United States of America"Bentley Road
OK  31793666,"California","United States of America"Bordeaux / Coto
OK  31793683,"California","United States of America"Endicott / Coto
OK  31793688,"California","United States of America"Taiga / Coto
OK  31793691,"California","United States of America"Weather Ledge 
(was Weatherledge) fixed
OK  31793693,"California","United States of America"Tucson / Coto
OK  31793694,"California","United States of America"Lone Wolf
OK  31793706,"California","United States of America"Loam
OK  31793713,"California","United States of America"Shale
OK  31793722,"California","United States of America"Vela Court
OK  31793742,"California","United States of America"Wandering River
OK  31793744,"California","United States of America"Hickory Fork
OK  31793748,"California","United States of America"Sky Meadow  
(was plural) fixed
OK  31793754,"California","United States of America"Fair Valley 
(location was wrong) fixed
OK  31793759,"California","United States of America"Bent Oak
OK  31793760,"California","United States of America"Slate Springs
OK  31793763,"California","United States of America"Black Walnut
OK  31793765,"California","United States of America"Knotty Oak 
Circle
OK  31793766,"California","United States of America"Tortoise Shell
OK  31793777,"California","United States of America" 

Re: [Talk-us] natural=* and landuse=* multipolygons at the urban interface

[Steve Friedl]

You’re referring to the Scrub From Hell.

I (user SJFriedl) have been mapping extensively in Orange County and 
(especially) in the Santa Ana Mountains and this thing is *everywhere*. Not 
patches here and there, but everything everywhere is part of one enormous scrub 
relation and it’s positively maddening.

Even if you’re not trying to fix the big problem you’re describing, just 
cleaning up a boundary somewhere by adding a few nodes runs over the limit for 
a way (6k-ish?) and *boom* now you have to deal with the big picture. Ugh.

At the time I was most interested/frustrated in this, I didn’t have nearly 
enough chops with relations to give it a go, but after I fully relationalized 
all the city boundaries in Orange County, I’m game. JOSM is great.

You’re right that splitting this up is the right approach, because I don’t 
believe having all this as one huge relation was every the right thing to do as 
I cannot see how the related-ness of all the scrub patches in a very wide area 
is useful information (the scrubs that are part of the relation are not any 
more “related” than standalone patches of scrub in the same area).

There for sure are legitimate agricultural lands in OC, but they’re mainly in 
the foothills of the mountains; I’d not expect to see much grazing in (say) 
Ladera Ranch.

I’m glad I’m not the only one who’s noticed this :-)

Steve – who lives in Tustin

--- 
Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571
st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy | unixwiz.net





From: David Kewley [mailto:david.t.kew...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2017 1:12 PM
To: OpenStreetMap talk-us list 
Subject: [Talk-us] natural=* and landuse=* multipolygons at the urban interface

Development in Orange County, California pushes into areas currently covered by 
polygons (often large multipolygons) tagged as natural=scrub, landuse=meadow, 
or landuse=[farm|farmland]. These were part of the FMMP import 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/California_Farms.

Mostly I try to leave those large multipologons alone, because I don't feel 
confident I can handle them properly, and because I'm using iD (due to using a 
Chromebook), where relation handling is rudimentary.

But I'd like to update the urban-wildland boundary, where new suburban 
developments are pushing into former wildland, farmland, or (historical?) 
"grazing land". See for example the new development (with 2017 imagery recently 
added to Bing) at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id#map=16/33.5352/-117.6034.

Editing these huge multipolygons, and reviewing others' edits to them, becomes 
very cumbersome, at least to me. It seems to me probably sensible and 
reasonable at the urban edge to split off small parts of these multipolygons, 
e.g. at roads, to make the smaller bits easier to edit and review in the 
context of the expanding urban edge.


As one test / demonstration edit 
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51090963), I carved off a bit of 
natural=scrub from a large outer role of a multipolygon, into its own polygon. 
I manually added new boundary way segments, stitched them together into the 
existing ways, copied tags, and made the split-off piece its own polygon, 
independent of its original parent multipolygon. I did the split at an existing 
highway=residential object (Golden Ridge Lane).

I know, I should find a way to use JOSM, which I expect makes this much easier. 
:)

Meanwhile, does this seem a reasonable approach to making the urban interface a 
bit more manageable in the future? I.e. splitting off parts of large 
multipolygons (so long as they don't have names or other unique identifiers 
that matter, just generic tags things like natural=scrub), to make future 
editing easier?

I know for the above example of a new residential area, I could make a 
landuse=residential island, and make it an inner role in the surrounding 
landuse=meadow multipolygon. But at some point as the urban sprawl expands, it 
seems to me it makes more sense to stop pretending the area is dominated by the 
natural features, and make it clear it's dominated by e.g. landuse=residential, 
with possibly interspersed natural features like scrub.


What would the group suggest?

Is my test edit reasonable, or should it be reverted?

Thanks,
David


P.S. As an aside (not my main point today), the FMMP-based distinction in this 
area between scrub and meadow seems awfully arbitrary. I could be mistaken, but 
I don't believe the "meadow" is actually used today for grazing nor feed 
harvesting, and in the aerial photography, it appears indistinguishable from 
the adjacent "scrub". It appears (and I'm nearly certain from driving by) that 
there's both substantial grass and substantial woody plant cover, in similar 
ratios in both "meadow" and "scrub".

I don't believe there's any current agricultural use of that land, at least not 
near where I'm giving examples today. There might be 

[Talk-us] Help reverting duplicate changeset

[Steve Friedl]

Hi all,

 

I’ve been using GoMap!! on my iPhone, and last night it appears that the same 
changeset was submitted twice; it had been having apparent network issues, this 
morning I find duplicate objects.

 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49907654 
 

 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49908144

 

I’d like some help reverting the second changeset, as far as I can tell they 
are identical, but I don’t know how to check if anybody *else* has made 
subsequent updates to items in either changeset. I’m not sure I care to 
validate 575 nodes and 57 ways by hand. Twice.

 

Can anyone provide some guidance here? I’m fine if somebody just does this for 
me.

 

Steve

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Changesets under wrong user ID

[Steve Friedl]

Isn’t the easiest thing here to just comment on each changeset with the 
explanation?  I have done this when I put an obviously wrong comment in a 
changeset.

 

From: Kevin Kenny [mailto:kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 10:31 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-us] Changesets under wrong user ID

 

I just realized that four days ago, I made a bunch of 'boots on the ground' 
changes that inadvertently got pushed to OSM using a security token in JOSM 
that was left over from a round of importing, and therefore they appear as the 
import user ID 'ke9tv-nysdec-lands' rather than my user ID 'ke9tv'.

Is this something that I need to worry about, and if so, how do I go about 
repairing it?

For what it's worth, the changeset numbers are 49055471 49055926 49056153 
49056335 49056404 49056440 49056656 49056681.

Sorry about the mistake!

Kevin

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

Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for dealing with old TIGER tags?

[Steve Friedl]

*  Unless something changed, I think both Potlatch and JOSM will remove the 
‘junk’ tags from TIGER if you delete the reviewed=no

 

I’ve deleted thousands of tiger:reviewed tags (after proper review) and have 
never seen JOSM take anything else along for the ride.  JOSM *does* remove the 
yellow glow around ways once you remove tiger:reviewed, but that’s all I’ve 
seen.

 

I have very much wanted to dump the tags that have no obvious use for OSM, but 
had no idea if somebody else, somewhere, might use them: probably not, but it 
didn’t feel like it was my call to make. I’d love for there to be a consensus 
on this.

 

So the only things I’ve removed are tiger:reviewed, plus spurious additional 
tags that duplicate existing ones (tiger:zip_left_1 when it’s the same as 
tiger:zip_left).

 

Steve

 

From: Russell Deffner [mailto:russdeff...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 8:45 AM
To: 'Adam Franco' ; talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for dealing with old TIGER tags?

 

Oops, sorry Adam, replied directly to you versus the list; here’s the message: 

 

My thoughts:

 

Unless something changed, I think both Potlatch and JOSM will remove the ‘junk’ 
tags from TIGER if you delete the reviewed=no. Maybe this is not the case with 
iD?

 

As far as classification; please note that it is not about whether the road is 
rural or not; it’s the function – there have been people who started changing 
all ‘dirt roads’ to track around me in rural Colorado – this is NOT correct. 
Most of the ‘dirt roads’ around here are 100% verifiably “residential”. So 
please don’t encourage mass changing of classification based on anything but 
function of the roadway.

 

=Russ 

 

From: Adam Franco [mailto:adamfra...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 9:28 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org   Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for dealing with old TIGER tags?

 

Just some more feedback on the idea of a TIGER rural-residential challenge 
based on cleanup I've done throughout much of Vermont:

*   Most of the roads in rural areas should have their highway= changed to 
something other than residential. (well known issue).
*   Surface tags would be GREAT! I've added surface tags to most roads in 
Vermont, but have not quite gotten to all of them yet.
*   At least here in Vermont, "private road" means that the ownership and 
maintenance of the road is the responsibility of the resident[s], not that 
"access=private". We have many private roads due to low densities of residences 
and Towns generally won't take over ownership/maintenance unless there are at 
least 3 residences and the proposal passes a public vote. The TIGER import 
mistakenly tagged many private-roads as "access=private". It would be great to 
remove this tag if it hasn't been added by a person.

If there is any way to help out with this effort I'd love to lend a hand. 

 

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:18 AM, James Umbanhowar  > wrote:

Funny, I just looked at the MapRoulette beta and noticed that you were
already doing this.




On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 10:00 -0400, James Umbanhowar wrote:
> Minor suggestion for this MapRoulette challenge:  Could you structure
> it by state (or other geographic region, county?) and do each region
> sequentially.  I, personally, think it would be neat to see areas get
> "done" as far as Tiger clean up.  
>
> Either way, thanks for these.
>
> James
>
> On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 10:21 +0200, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> >
> > Well said. I have space in my basement also. 
> >
> > I am eager to launch a MapRoulette challenge for untouched rural
> > ‘residential’ roads - a challenge which will probably take some
> > time
> > to complete. If someone can furnish a good Overpass query for this,
> > please go ahead and do it.
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> > >
> > > On Jun 3, 2016, at 8:55 AM, Richard Fairhurst  > >  
> > > et
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > There is a special corner of hell/Steve's basement for people who
> > > remove
> > > tiger:reviewed=no on rural unpaved roads without changing the
> > > highway tag or
> > > adding a surface tag.
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org  
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Odd road / odd structure

[Steve Friedl]

I appreciate the many thoughtful replies here, thank you.

 

For the street that’s not a street, somebody else had added it as a footway, 
which feels like exactly the right thing anyway. 

 

But, to the Civil Engineer :)

 

*  Ugh...this actually pains me as a civil engineer.  Not for the traffic 
calming effort but the fact that they very evidently designed this whole thing 
with AutoCAD blocks without any thought whatsoever, to the point of running the 
concrete gutter through the green space without so much as considering a 
bollard and french drain instead, amongst many possible alternatives

 

The Irvine GIS guy told me that Paisley Place also servers as a utility 
easement, which may have impacted some of the design.  These are quite pretty 
little walkways, with a nice gate to enter, it’s just odd that it’s a street.

 

But regarding the big water catchment surface:

 

*  Depending on the cant and the surface, it could actually be some sort of 
French drain or infiltration pad designed as potentially an emergency helipad.  
I, personally, would make no assumption as to what it was without at least 
cursory knowledge of the region's drainage and/or rescue tropes …

 

I have some of that cursory knowledge, plus I actually hiked up there and 
checked it out myself – there’s no question that it’s there to collect water, 
drain it into the two cisterns to the southeast, and there’s a water tap a 
little farther to the southwest.

 

What you can’t see from the satellite imagery is that it’s at the top of a 
hill, the only water it can possibly collect is rainwater.  It’s also clear 
that this isn’t being used any more, but back in the forties I’m certain it was 
a great place to water your horse.

 

I think it would serve as a fine helipad, though these were constructed before 
helicopters were in widespread enough use to be considered for that.  I’m going 
to ask the local fire agency if they have records of using that spot for helo.

 

Thanks for the really useful input.

 

Steve

 

From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 2:19 PM
To: Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net>
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk-us list <talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Odd road / odd structure

 

 

 

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net 
<mailto:st...@unixwiz.net> > wrote:

Hi all,

 

I have two things that I just don’t quite know how to map.  Sorry that I have 
to provide Google Maps views to demonstrate.

 

1)  How does one represent a named street which is really a greenbelt: 
never been drivable, was assigned a name just to allow attaching a street name 
to the houses on either side.

 

Example: In Irvine California there’s a residential area shown here:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7298257,-117.7572128,19z

 

I’m referring to Paisley Place, which is shown as a named alley connecting 
Garden Gate Lane and Winslow Lane.

 

After surveying the area and seeing that the City of Irvine GIS showed Paisley 
as that greenbelt, I reported it as an error (as I’ve done dozens of times for 
other things), but the very helpful GIS manager reported that this is correct 
(but certainly odd), and the two street-like things on either side of it are 
just unnamed alleys.

 

How do I represent this in OSM?  It’s not a street that doesn’t allow access, 
it’s not really even a street!

 

I wouldn't really call that a greenbelt.  In the American context, this is an 
edge case, big time.  I would lean towards livable_street, since there's no 
separate sidewalk, no reasonable expectation you're going to go more than 
cycleway speed, and the main entries to buildings are on it.  Given my 
experience with most developments, if they literally had another street with 
the front doors, this would be highway=service, service=alley instead of being 
a worst-of-both-worlds example of trying to make a pedestrian and bicycle 
friendly space in a car-centric area by force...I don't even know what to call 
the planter midway down anything but stupid, though I would probably go 
barrier=block, vehicle=no, though it seems we have evidence that the Google Car 
has just squeezed between the trees (and there's obvious evidence that 
literally anyone that isn't a full-track vehicle and some that are go through 
there anyway).  And I don't think there's anything legally stopping you from 
stepping over the planter on foot.

 

Ugh...this actually pains me as a civil engineer.  Not for the traffic calming 
effort but the fact that they very evidently designed this whole thing with 
AutoCAD blocks without any thought whatsoever, to the point of running the 
concrete gutter through the green space without so much as considering a 
bollard and french drain instead, amongst many possible alternatives..

 

In the Santa Ana Mountains in Southern California, the satellite views show 
something that looks exactly like a helipad:

 

https://www.goo

[Talk-us] Odd road / odd structure

[Steve Friedl]

Hi all,

 

I have two things that I just don't quite know how to map.  Sorry that I
have to provide Google Maps views to demonstrate.

 

1)  How does one represent a named street which is really a greenbelt:
never been drivable, was assigned a name just to allow attaching a street
name to the houses on either side.

 

Example: In Irvine California there's a residential area shown here:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7298257,-117.7572128,19z

 

I'm referring to Paisley Place, which is shown as a named alley connecting
Garden Gate Lane and Winslow Lane.

 

After surveying the area and seeing that the City of Irvine GIS showed
Paisley as that greenbelt, I reported it as an error (as I've done dozens of
times for other things), but the very helpful GIS manager reported that this
is correct (but certainly odd), and the two street-like things on either
side of it are just unnamed alleys.

 

How do I represent this in OSM?  It's not a street that doesn't allow
access, it's not really even a street!

 

2)  How do I represent a parking-lot-sized area that's intended to
collect rainwater that fills a cistern?

 

In the Santa Ana Mountains in Southern California, the satellite views show
something that looks exactly like a helipad:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7875181,-117.5805174,419m/data=!3m1!1e3

 

But it's not. That whole huge surface - paved in asphalt - is tilted
slightly so that rainwater water will collect and fill the two cisterns to
the left (zooming in you can barely see the pipe from the big pad to the
cisterns.

 

I cannot find anything that's even close to describing what this is, but
it's so prominent on the maps (and interesting to visit) that I seems like
it should be there even if to make note that it's not a helipad.

 

Thanks,

 

Steve - who hopes the links above work.

--- 

Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571

  st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California |
Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net

 

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

[Talk-us] Optimal / preferred checkin sizes

[Steve Friedl]

Hi everybody,

 

I spend way too much time in JOSM mapping my local area, but I've never
really known how to best batch changes.

 

Sometimes it's obvious: if I work on a certain feature (say, adding details
of fire stations), I add them and check them in one at a time, but sometimes
I'm doing cleanup of a large area with no obvious breaking points.

 

I don't think that 3 square miles of road straightening ought to go in a
single [enormous] batch, but I'm not sure that 100 entries of the form
'Straightened Main Street in MyTown" / "Straightened Elm Street in MyTown" /
"Straightened Euclid Steet in MyTown" is really adding any value.

 

How does one decide how best to check stuff in?

 

Steve

 

--- 

Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571

  st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California |
Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Relations and boundaries

[Steve Friedl]

*  I think you are misunderstanding the administrative boundary situation. 

 

That’s certainly a possibility :)

 

I did speculate:

 

*  Or do we just assume that because this donut hole has been excluded from the
City of Westminster, it's automatically part of the next outer item (in this
case, Orange County). 



… and it appears that you’re saying that’s exactly what’s going on.

 

I’ve unwound my experimental changes.

 

It would be nice if the renderer would be able to label the inside of the donut 
with the name of the next outer enclosing region – Orange County – but that 
might be a harder problem than it loos.

 

Thank you for the guidance.

 

Steve

 

 

From: Peter Dobratz [mailto:pe...@dobratz.us] 
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 1:39 PM
To: Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net>
Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Relations and boundaries

 

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net 
<mailto:st...@unixwiz.net> > wrote:

Hi all,

I’ve been updating all the cities in Orange County California to have fully
segmented relationalized boundaries, such that cities sharing a common
border share a single way in each of their relations; this eliminates
overlapping ways.  It’s been very tedious but it's really getting cleaned
up.

So a few questions:

First: The individual relations – city, county, national forest, etc. – all
have full information tags about the entity, but how should the way members
themselves be tagged?


I’ve seen some OSM notes that say the ways can be tagged too, but I’m not
sure how. There’s no common name, and there may not even be the same admin
level (a city boundary on the border of a county would have two admin levels
for the given way.

My experience is that if the relation is fully tagged, and one of the ways
is tagged with the same info, we see duplicate city names along the border,
as the renderer takes the name from both the relation and the way.

I am not sure I see any value *other than* tagging it as a boundary, with no
other information. But I’d really like to do this right.

 

 

The Ways can actually be without tags as the information is fully described in 
the Relations.  Depending on the situation, it may make sense to utilize 
existing map features such as roads or rivers in the administrative boundary 
relations.

 


Second: I’m not sure how to handle quasi-enclaves.  Orange county is made of
many cities, and a few cities contain some small *county* regions - think of
them as donut holes. I don't know how to handle this.

The Orange County relation is tagged with

boundary = administrative
border_type = county
admin_level = 6

The city of Westminster relation (fully inside Orange County) is tagged with

boundary = administrative
border_type = city
admin_level = 8

Within Westminster is a "donut hole" , and the Westminster relation has it
as a role=inner.

Question: should that same donut hole be tagged role=outer in the Orange
County relation?

It just doesn't feel right to have a role=outer fully within another
role=outer, but that's the only way I can think of to handle this.

Or do we just assume that because this donut hole has been excluded from the
City of Westminster, it's automatically part of the next outer item (in this
case, Orange County). The renderer doesn't identify any parts of the
donut-hole boundary.

The hole in question:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.73488/-117.98422 
<http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.73488/-117.98422=N> =N  
it's just
to the west of Star View Elementary School  There are many of these in
Orange County.

 

I think you are misunderstanding the administrative boundary situation.  All 
areas within the city limits of Westminster are also contained in Orange 
County.  In other words, when you enter Westminster, you are not leaving Orange 
County.  Similarly, all areas of within Westminster are also contained within 
the state of California.  You are not leaving California when you enter Orange 
County and you are also not leaving California when you enter Westminster.

 

When you leave Westminster, you are entering an area that is in Orange County.  
If that area is not contained within another city or town, then it is said to 
be in an unincorporated area of Orange County.  So you would be traveling from 
an incorporated area of Orange County to an unincorporated area of Orange 
County, but all still within Orange County.

 

The holes in the Westminster boundary do not pertain to the Orange County 
boundary and they shouldn't be part of the Orange County relation.  Does that 
make sense?

 

Peter

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

Re: [Talk-us] Relations and boundaries

[Steve Friedl]

This was helpful, thank you.

> Generally it is recommended to tag boundary=administrative, 
> admin_level=, and no names (no county:left, 
> county:right stuff etc either).

Makes sense to me; I'll do this.

> Yes, that's what I would suggest. It would be nice if our tools allowed you 
> to simply make the Westminster *relation* an "inner" of Orange county and 
> thereby automatically do the donut justice but that's not supported by 
> anything really.

Ok, this didn't really work.

I tagged the donut hole as an "outer" role in Orange county - an outer within 
an outer - and the shared border shows "Orange County   Westminster" together 
on the outside of the donut hole. I would have imagined the OC being on the 
inside of the border.

What it looks like now: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.73459/-117.98256=N

I guess I should undo these experiments and leave it alone.

Steve

-Original Message-
From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org] 
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 11:48 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Relations and boundaries

Hi,

On 03/03/2016 08:02 PM, Steve Friedl wrote:
> I’ve been updating all the cities in Orange County California to have 
> fully segmented relationalized boundaries, such that cities sharing a 
> common border share a single way in each of their relations; this 
> eliminates overlapping ways.  It’s been very tedious but it's really 
> getting cleaned up.

\o/

> First: The individual relations – city, county, national forest, etc. 
> – all have full information tags about the entity, but how should the 
> way members themselves be tagged?

It is not necessary but may add clarity for people editing the data.
Generally it is recommended to tag boundary=administrative, 
admin_level=, and no names (no county:left, 
county:right stuff etc either).


> Within Westminster is a "donut hole" , and the Westminster relation 
> has it as a role=inner.
> 
> Question: should that same donut hole be tagged role=outer in the 
> Orange County relation?

Yes, that's what I would suggest. It would be nice if our tools allowed you to 
simply make the Westminster *relation* an "inner" of Orange county and thereby 
automatically do the donut justice but that's not supported by anything really.

> It just doesn't feel right to have a role=outer fully within another 
> role=outer, but that's the only way I can think of to handle this.

Rest assured, when you hear Mathematicians talking about geometry, they will 
happily accept that an outer ring can be surrounded by an inner ring.

Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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


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

[Talk-us] Relations and boundaries

[Steve Friedl]

Hi all,

I’ve been updating all the cities in Orange County California to have fully
segmented relationalized boundaries, such that cities sharing a common
border share a single way in each of their relations; this eliminates
overlapping ways.  It’s been very tedious but it's really getting cleaned
up.

So a few questions:

First: The individual relations – city, county, national forest, etc. – all
have full information tags about the entity, but how should the way members
themselves be tagged?

I’ve seen some OSM notes that say the ways can be tagged too, but I’m not
sure how. There’s no common name, and there may not even be the same admin
level (a city boundary on the border of a county would have two admin levels
for the given way.

My experience is that if the relation is fully tagged, and one of the ways
is tagged with the same info, we see duplicate city names along the border,
as the renderer takes the name from both the relation and the way. 

I am not sure I see any value *other than* tagging it as a boundary, with no
other information. But I’d really like to do this right.

Second: I’m not sure how to handle quasi-enclaves.  Orange county is made of
many cities, and a few cities contain some small *county* regions - think of
them as donut holes. I don't know how to handle this.

The Orange County relation is tagged with

boundary = administrative
border_type = county
admin_level = 6

The city of Westminster relation (fully inside Orange County) is tagged with

boundary = administrative
border_type = city
admin_level = 8

Within Westminster is a "donut hole" , and the Westminster relation has it
as a role=inner.

Question: should that same donut hole be tagged role=outer in the Orange
County relation?

It just doesn't feel right to have a role=outer fully within another
role=outer, but that's the only way I can think of to handle this.

Or do we just assume that because this donut hole has been excluded from the
City of Westminster, it's automatically part of the next outer item (in this
case, Orange County). The renderer doesn't identify any parts of the
donut-hole boundary.

The hole in question:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.73488/-117.98422=N  it's just
to the west of Star View Elementary School  There are many of these in
Orange County.

Steve
--- 
Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571
st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net



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

Re: [Talk-us] Why do city names display in the local language at osm.org?

[Steve Friedl]

Mapping tiles are not generated on a per-user basis; they are generated for all 
users and shared.  The rendering software has to make intelligent decisions 
about how to make the maps look reasonable for everybody, and my suspicion is 
that things like city names are chosen from the local language of the country 
that the city is within, on the grounds that most people looking at a city live 
in the country.

 

It would be great if tiles were rendered customly for everybody (I’d be able to 
see elevations in feet instead of meters), but that’s not how this one works.

 

Steve

 

From: Alan Bragg [mailto:alan.d.br...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 7:32 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap 
Subject: [Talk-us] Why do city names display in the local language at osm.org?

 

​My preferred language is set to "en"

For example Florence Italy displays as Firenze even though it's tagged with 
many languages including en:Florence

I get the same display in both the  chrome and internet explorer browsers.

 

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] SunCertPathBuilderException

[Steve Friedl]

Me too! Me too!

 

I’ve been using 9092 from home for several days, and it started fine this 
morning, but now it’s objecting. 

 

I’m on a stable home network with a quality commercial firewall and no proxies. 
 Win 7

 

Steve

 

From: Mike Thompson [mailto:miketh...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 3:24 PM
To: Greg Morgan 
Cc: Alan Bragg ; talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
Openstreetmap 
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] SunCertPathBuilderException

 

I too am now getting the problem (but am on a corporate network at the moment, 
will try from home later):

Version 8969 

Last change at 2015-10-29 22:15:23 +0100 (Thu, 29 Oct 2015) 

Java Version 1.8.0_65 

Windows 7

 

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Greg Morgan  > wrote:

 

Checking the certificate[1] via a web browser says that the certificate for 
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/StartupPage is valid 

I get the same results from a web browser as you, it is valid.

 

 

 

If the issue is a proxy problem as Mike pointed out, then I recall that you 
have to add -Dhttp.proxyHost=yourProxyURL to your JOSM arguments before you can 
change the proxy settings in your preferences.

That is correct, but if web traffic is being filtered I don't think there is 
anything that can be done within JOSM to fix the problem.  The problem for me 
in the past has been that the filter returned a response like "are you sure you 
want to go to xyz.com  ", which normally in a browser would be 
displayed and you would have an opportunity to say "yes", but JOSM didn't know 
what to do with that response, hence the error.  That isn't the problem for me 
today as I can go to josm.openstreetmap.de   (and 
directly to its IP address) without a warning from a browser.

 

Mike

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

[Talk-us] Deleting standalone empty nodes?

[Steve Friedl]

Hello all,

 

I'm mapping mostly in Southern California where I live and hike, and
sometimes I run across nodes with no tags, not part of anything, often the
owned by some kind of bot.  You can't see them directly in OSM, but in JOSM
there's a trail of them paralleling Santiago Truck Trail:

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6903/-117.5494

 

Most of them are by bots - OSMF Redaction Account, woodpeck_fixbot - and
they appear to be spurious, but I'm not sure if they are there for a reason.


 

Is there ever any benefit in a standalone node with no tags, especially if
it doesn't appear to be in an "interesting" location relative to underlying
imagery?

 

Thanks,

Steve

 

--- 

Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571

  st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California |
Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] San Diego Address Import Update

[Steve Friedl]

Richard Welty wrote:
> the real problem is that the tagging scheme we are using didn't consider the 
> divergence between postal and administrative city names and is insufficiently 
> rich to express the details.

I agree.  There are areas near me in unincorporated Orange County that can go 
by multiple names, and I'm not sure how to tag them.

Ref, about a mile from my house: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6816/-117.6279=N

This is a modern development right next to very old mountain neighborhoods, and 
though the development name is Portola Hills, and that's how most of the locals 
(including me) refer to it, the post office "prefers" Trabuco Canyon, which is 
a wider region that encompases an actual canyon some miles away. The name (and 
region) Trabuco Canyon goes back more than 200 years.

How does one decide what to call it? My inclination is to tag addr:city = 
Portola Hills, because that's how most people refer to it.

And a new development is going in right next to it known as Portola Center, and 
that's likely to add that name to the mix (and not even considering if they get 
annexed by the City of Lake Forest, where I live, which would change actual 
administrative boundaries).

Steve -- who realizes that he's helping hijack a thread about America's Finest 
City

-Original Message-
From: Richard Welty [mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 8:24 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] San Diego Address Import Update

On 11/10/15 11:09 AM, Clifford Snow wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Tod Fitch  > wrote:
>
> So what is a good definition for what should go in the addr:city
> tag? If it is based on being within a formal administrative
> boundary then we may not need the tag at all as it should be easy
> for a data consumer to detect that. I have come to the conclusion
> that the addr:city is best to indicate what the locals feel their
> town name is. In the western US my impression is that has a high
> correlation with the USPS designation. Further, when dealing with
> any financial or government entity, it seems the city they want to
> hear about is the one the post office delivers to, not some subset
> or superset defined by a formal boundary of an incorporated town
> or city. So equating the post office town name with the OSM
> addr:city value seems proper to me.
>
>
> +1
>
the real problem is that the tagging scheme we are using didn't consider the 
divergence between postal and administrative city names and is insufficiently 
rich to express the details.

it'd be good to consider what the actual use cases are for the data. the most 
obvious one is geocoding, and a case can be made that geocoders based on both 
types of city names are useful.

i can also imagine querying OSM for the data for other GIS style purposes and 
wanting either type.

at the present time, we can derive admin city from admin boundaries if they are 
present.
if we discard the postal city name, though, we can't derive it from any thing 
else in OSM, as there are no postal boundaries that function like city admin 
boundaries. you can sort of fake it using census bureau ZCTA boundaries, but 
the mapping from ZCTA to city is missing and it would take a bit of work to put 
that together.

richard

--
rwe...@averillpark.net
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting  OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - 
Linux  Java - Web Applications - Search




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

Re: [Talk-us] Maxweight in the USA

[Steve Friedl]

This issue has come up as well with the height of mountain peaks; those of us 
who hike in the mountains in the US know peak heights *only* in feet, but OSM 
seems to reflect this in meters; this is entirely unhelpful to local hikers.  
Us locals think of Sierra Peak as 4050 feet, not 928 meters.

The discussion was strictly informal, but I think a number of us liked the idea 
to support a unit of measure, such as ele=4050ft or maxweight=10t

Steve

-Original Message-
From: Andy Townsend [mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2015 1:59 PM
To: Talk Openstreetmap 
Subject: [Talk-us] Maxweight in the USA

Just a heads up...

There's a bit of a discussion going on at the moment as to whether it makes 
sense to store SI units (or actually a derivative - metric tons) in maxweight 
tags.  I noticed a few changes (initially to other values in the UK), and 
commented on
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35009662 , and the person making a 
changes (who's the author of one of the popular routers using OSM
data) wrote a diary entry here: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/karussell/diary/36220 .

The argument in favour of the change is that storing an SI derivative makes the 
data easier to consume; my counter-arguments are that (a) it makes it harder 
for mappers to verify values and (b) anything consuming data shouldn't assume 
the data is valid anyway (for "Bobby Tables" 
reasons if for no other).

Whilst doing this I noticed that a bunch of other "x tons" weight limits had 
had values changed a while back (see for example 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32719427/history ).  That's now been changed 
to "maxweight=4.5359237" which is at least not heavier than the actual posted 
restriction.  However there are still some other integer values without units 
which implies metric tons (see for example http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/cqw ).  
It may be that Pittsburgh has woken up one morning and decided to adopt SI 
units ahead of the rest of the country, but I doubt it.  Logically I'd expect a 
router encountering "maxweight=10" in the USA might want to interpret it as "10 
US tons" 
rather than 10,000 kg, but based on the above I suspect that at least one 
router isn't going to do that.

The relevant wiki page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweight
does say "as of September 2014 only metric units of weight (metric tonnes or 
kilograms) are supported for this tag".  I'm unaware of any discussion prior to 
the 17 September 2014 change (not that that means that it didn't happen, just 
that I'm unaware of it).

I'm not from the US, and I'm not sure what the right answer is (if as a 
community you're happy entering maxweight=4.5359237 it'd certainly make 
everyone's lives easier), so I'm posting this here and then retiring back 
across the Atlantic :)

Cheers,

Andy (SomeoneElse)


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


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

Re: [Talk-us] Flash Map Mobs!

[Steve Friedl]

Meetup does provide for text notification for events you’ve been signed up for; 
I always get texts ~3 hours in advance of a hike I lead or attend.

 

Most people don’t use this because they likely assume they will be inundated 
with texts containing the same stuff they get via email (which can easily be 
overwhelming), but the setting I use, at least, texts me *only* a 
three-hour-in-advance reminder, never for anything else.

 

Steve

 

 

From: Eleanor Tutt [mailto:eleanor.t...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 4:43 AM
To: Martijn van Exel 
Cc: OSM US Talk 
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Flash Map Mobs!

 

Clarification - I don't think Meetup itself allows notification by text 
message. I think that's something you would have to set up yourself using a 
different service. (That's why I said it was a long term idea...it probably 
takes some work and I'm not sure what particular tools people use.)

 

I was under the impression you announced the day of - if you announce more in 
advance, text isn't so important. :)

 

Eleanor

 

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Martijn van Exel  > wrote:

Hey Eleanor,

Thanks for sharing your ideas.

> On Oct 18, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Eleanor Tutt   > wrote:
>
> Very cool & good pointers!
>
> Am I correct that you set the location on Meetup in the morning and then you 
> meet in the afternoon? (i.e., quick & "flash mob"-y?) That sounds like a lot 
> of fun as it wouldn't take a lot of pre-planning or worrying about 
> expectations.

Until now I have picked the location a few days - a week in advance. Day-of 
would be interesting too, especially in combination with your idea below:
>
> It might be worth promoting the *idea* of the flash map mob as a permanent 
> Meetup event - you could probably make it sticky so it always shows up on the 
> front of the page, but without a set date attached (does Meetup allow that?) 
> That could help with awareness/excitement I think.

I think that is a great idea and I am going to try it right away.
>
> Long-term, the "generic" meetup might even have a way to text to opt in to 
> "flash map mob" notifications - I know I have opted into several text 
> notification services from local organizing groups and I definitely notice 
> those announcements more than I would notice a Meetup for day-of 
> announcements. I'd be sad if I missed the flash map mob b/c I wasn't checking 
> Meetup and/or email! YMMV depending on how people typically organize in Salt 
> Lake City.

I didn’t know Meetup had such sophisitcated methods of letting folks know about 
events and have them RSVP by text message too! Do you know how to set that up?

Thanks,
Martijn

 

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

[Talk-us] Am I doing this right? Houses w/ addresses

[Steve Friedl]

Hi all,

 

I've been adding individualized house numbers to many houses in my
neighborhood, and I'm just not sure this is how I'm supposed to do it
because it just looks funky on the map.

 

One area with 1 or 2-digit house numbers:

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.68743/-117.66593
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.68743/-117.66593layers=N
layers=N

 

Another area with 5-digit house numbers:

 

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/33.65699/-117.65517
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/33.65699/-117.65517layers=N
layers=N

 

Having the detailed address information in the database has to be useful,
but this presentation with numbers scattered all over just doesn't look
right, so maybe I'm doing something wrong.

 

Is this the way it's supposed to be done? 

 

Steve

 

--- 

Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571

 mailto:st...@unixwiz.net st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California |
Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Mappy Hour - Next Monday

[Steve Friedl]

Announcing this in advance allows us to put it in our calendars, reserving the 
time.

 

Another announcement shortly before reminds us to look at our calendars J

 

Steve – see you all later!

 

From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:mart...@openstreetmap.us] 
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2015 2:04 PM
To: Toby Murray
Cc: OpenStreetMap US Talk
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Mappy Hour - Next Monday

 

Thanks Toby - I realized I should have sent out a reminder - announcing early 
just means more work it turns out... See you tonight!

 

Martijn




Martijn van Exel
Secretary, US Chapter
OpenStreetMap
http://openstreetmap.us/
http://osm.org/
skype: mvexel

 

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:

I was just wondering if there was a mappy hour tonight and found this email. 
Thought I'd send out a ping in case others weren't sure either. Hope to see 
some of you tonight :)

 

Toby

 

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:26 AM, Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com 
wrote:

 

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:

OpenHistoricalMap. Read about it here: http://www.openhistoricalmap.org/about 
but better still, come join the Mappy Hour next week. 

 

That is great! nice to hear about that project. Good job!



-- 

James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://www.flossk.org
Saving Wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com

 

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

 


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

 

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

[Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas

[Steve Friedl]

Hi all,

I’ve been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my
local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California).
As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than
I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of
effort vs results.

My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the
whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway.

1) Address points –vs- house outlines?

Originally I had gone in to add points with building=house all over, but
until an address is added, they simply don't show up *at all* on OSM, so I'm
not sure that house points really help much.

Adding an address means they show up as numbers, which I think is ugly, and
this is probably all that's required for routing to work properly. I do
understand that interpolation can work by pegging the addresses at each end,
but around here when roads go around curves, there are holes in the
sequences that individual numbering fixes.

Example: all along Toulon Place (points, not outlines)

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68761/-117.65302layers=N

[it still may be rendering those tiles]

What are the thoughts on points vs outlines?

a) House outlines are really helpful, thank you
b) Outlines not necessary, the address is what matters, but knock yourself
out
c) please don't do outlines, it's clutter
d) adding all these house outlines approaches vandalism
e) something else?

2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough?

So in my area I've been making the outlines look actually like the house, as
best as I can, but there's no way I'm going to do this to every house in
America.  For other areas, assuming house outlines are warranted, I can use
the building tool in JOSM (what a *great* tool) to make strictly rectangular
outlines that vaguely approximate the shape of the house. What are the
thoughts on this?

a) A rectangular outline is great, thank you
b) It's better than nothing,  but only marginally so
c) drawing squares on non-square things is inaccurate
d) something else?

I like a lot of detail

3) Driveways?

Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a
corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the
actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out.

Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N

But in some neighborhood I've added driveways to all the houses just for
consistency. I can see several schools of thought here:

a) you don't need driveways in residential areas at all
b) only include the driveway if it adds clarity that's not obvious
c) adding them all isn't really a good use of time, but hey, knock yourself
out
d) holy crap, this makes things way too busy, please don't
e) adding them everywhere approaches vandalism.
f) something else?

Thanks for any guidance or discussion.

Steve

--- 
Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571
st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net



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

Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units

[Steve Friedl]

I noticed that about other items, but the key:ele wiki page defines this 
clearly: it’s in meters, and this suggests to me that others using 3643_ft or 
3643ft are doing it wrong, or at least inconsistently with advertised 
expectations. 

 

If my goal is to just make local maps look nice, I’ll just set the ele = “3643 
feet”, but at what point is it detrimental to the project as a whole to go 
against specific and explicit guidance, such that it will break software that 
relies on people playing well in the sandbox [by setting numeric meters].

 

Put another way: am I being selfish to just do it my own way and screw anybody 
else who’s counting on me to play by the rules?

 

Seems to me that it *is* reasonable to set elevation to include a number + unit 
of measure, but doesn’t this kind of thing go for a proposal, get input from 
others who care about the matter, standardize on formats such that validators 
can validate and harmonize, and go for some kind of vote?

 

I’m much too new to the project to charge ahead I that way, but I do welcome a 
discussion.

 

Steve

 

From: Harald Kliems [mailto:kli...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 7:18 PM
To: Steve Friedl; talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Elevation in local units

 

Hi Steve:
one tag where units are in common use is maxspeed. The default is km/h but you 
can also use mph or knots. I don't see why this wouldn't be feasible for the 
ele tag as well.

 

If you look at taginfo, you can also see that ft is used quite a bit -- 
unfortunately often in an inconsistent way, e.g. ele=3643_ft or 3643ft. 
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ele#values (you have to search for ft in 
the search box). 

 

 Harald.

 

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:57 PM Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote:

Hi all,

 

I appreciated being able to join my first Mappy Hour yesterday, though without 
mic/camera. I’m quite enamoured with this project and hope to fit  in with the 
goals and the vibe.

 

One thing we talked about, and I’d like to explore more formally, is how to 
deal with elevation in local units.

 

I lead hikes in the local Santa Ana Mountains, and there is not a single person 
who hikes here, not even those from Europe or those who personally invented the 
metric system, who thinks of peak  elevations in meters. The guides and the 
maps are all in feet, the surveying markers are in feet, as are the topo maps.

 

This is just a fact of life even if we all [including me] agree that Americans 
are foolish for not adopting the metric system.

 

An obvious thought is to enter the elevation including the units, so Sierra 
Peak would show as “3045 feet” rather than “928”, but this won’t work.

 

The wiki page for the “ele” key defines the tag as meters, so it’s reasonable 
to expect that some software out there relies on this, and it would have no 
provisions to convert anything on the fly because it ought to expect numeric 
meters.

 

But even with this aside, that still doesn’t solve the rendering problem: I 
believe that page tiles are rendered as images, so it’s got to pick *something* 
for the text, and I don’t think there’s any way of having a user preference to 
show these things in local units.

 

My suspicion is that there is no easy fix here, but I think a discussion is in 
order. I’ve added a section to the key:ele page that touches on this, not so 
much to propose a solution, but to let others with this same issue know that 
it’s seen as an issue.

 

Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele#Local_Units

 

Is this kind of thing suitable for the key:ele page?

 

Steve

 

--- 

Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571

st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net

 

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

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

[Talk-us] Elevation in local units

[Steve Friedl]

Hi all,

 

I appreciated being able to join my first Mappy Hour yesterday, though
without mic/camera. I'm quite enamoured with this project and hope to fit
in with the goals and the vibe.

 

One thing we talked about, and I'd like to explore more formally, is how to
deal with elevation in local units.

 

I lead hikes in the local Santa Ana Mountains, and there is not a single
person who hikes here, not even those from Europe or those who personally
invented the metric system, who thinks of peak  elevations in meters. The
guides and the maps are all in feet, the surveying markers are in feet, as
are the topo maps.

 

This is just a fact of life even if we all [including me] agree that
Americans are foolish for not adopting the metric system.

 

An obvious thought is to enter the elevation including the units, so Sierra
Peak would show as 3045 feet rather than 928, but this won't work.

 

The wiki page for the ele key defines the tag as meters, so it's
reasonable to expect that some software out there relies on this, and it
would have no provisions to convert anything on the fly because it ought to
expect numeric meters.

 

But even with this aside, that still doesn't solve the rendering problem: I
believe that page tiles are rendered as images, so it's got to pick
*something* for the text, and I don't think there's any way of having a user
preference to show these things in local units.

 

My suspicion is that there is no easy fix here, but I think a discussion is
in order. I've added a section to the key:ele page that touches on this, not
so much to propose a solution, but to let others with this same issue know
that it's seen as an issue.

 

Ref: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ele#Local_Units

 

Is this kind of thing suitable for the key:ele page?

 

Steve

 

--- 

Stephen J Friedl  | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571

 mailto:st...@unixwiz.net st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California |
Windows Guy |  unixwiz.net

 

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