[Talk-us] Tomorrow's OSM Utah map night -- wheel map?

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi folks,

I wanted to spend some time adding wheelchair accessibility tagging 
during the OSM Utah biweekly map night to benefit wheelmap.org and other 
applications that use OSM data for wheelchair accessibility / routing 
purposes. If anyone has experience with this (I don't but I plan to read 
up and practice a bit ahead of time), please join :) If you don't and 
you just want to spend an hour mapping with fellow mappers, please join 
:) It's virtual so open to anyone, not just Utahns!


Details here: https://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Utah/

Martijn


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

Re: [Talk-us] [MapRoulette] Twitch MapRoulette session Tuesday

[Martijn van Exel]

Thanks those who joined for the live stream, the recording (57m) is now 
available to watch here: 
https://archive.org/details/maproulette-create-a-challenge-geojson 
<https://archive.org/details/maproulette-create-a-challenge-geojson>

Hope to see you again next time.

Martijn

> On Aug 9, 2020, at 9:08 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I've been doing some informal Twitch streaming sessions just doing some JOSM 
> mapping, and it was quite fun. I will do another one this Tuesday 
> specifically about creating a MapRoulette Challenge. I will be starting at 
> 19:00 US Mountain Time[1].
> 
> If you have an idea for a MapRoulette Challenge that you'd like me to cover, 
> let me know and I'll do my best.
> 
> My Twitch channel is here: https://www.twitch.tv/mvexel 
> 
> Hope to see some of you then;
> 
> [1] 
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20200811T19=220=Twitch+%23OpenStreetMap+MapRoulette+Session=cursive
>  
> 
> -- 
>  Martijn van Exel
>  m...@rtijn.org
> 
> ___
> MapRoulette mailing list
> maproule...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/maproulette

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

[Talk-us] Twitch MapRoulette session Tuesday

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

I've been doing some informal Twitch streaming sessions just doing some JOSM 
mapping, and it was quite fun. I will do another one this Tuesday specifically 
about creating a MapRoulette Challenge. I will be starting at 19:00 US Mountain 
Time[1].

If you have an idea for a MapRoulette Challenge that you'd like me to cover, 
let me know and I'll do my best.

My Twitch channel is here: https://www.twitch.tv/mvexel 

Hope to see some of you then;

[1] 
https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20200811T19=220=Twitch+%23OpenStreetMap+MapRoulette+Session=cursive
 

-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

[Talk-us] Streaming JOSM -- suggestions?

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

I've been running 'Streaming JOSM' sessions on Tuesday evenings for the 
past couple of weeks and I am planning to do at least one more tomorrow 
at 7pm Mountain time[0].


The original idea stemmed from a tweet about cleaning up TIGER[1] and 
that is what I have been streaming the past couple of weeks.


I would like to do something different and would love to hear your 
suggestions. What would you like to watch me map? (Assuming you'd be 
interested in watching a random person map OSM in the first place...)


Suggestions very welcome!

Martijn

[0] Links to join here: 
https://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Utah/events/271617242/


[1] https://twitter.com/mvexel/status/1274812416337952768



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

Re: [Talk-us] Changes for USA data on Geofabrik Download Server

[Martijn van Exel]

Fantastic news! Thanks for the update, Frederik.
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Sat, Feb 22, 2020, at 04:06, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Dear US OSMers,
> 
> for historical reasons, the layout of data for the USA on the Geofabrik
> download server has always been a bit peculiar: There wasn't a file for
> "all of the US" - there was a file for North America (including Canada
> and Mexico), and then there were files for the "Census Regions" (US
> Midwest, US Norhteast and so on, and for individual states.
> 
> (The concrete historical reason is that there used to be a time when due
> to TIGER imports the US extract would have been about 95% of the North
> America file anyway, and not much would be gained by clipping Canada.
> And Mexico was initially not even part of North America on the download
> server, due to my own lack of geographic competence.)
> 
> I'm in the process of straightening that out, so that there will be the
> standard structure (one file for North America, below that a file for
> USA and its neighbours, and below that the different states) in the future.
> 
> In detail, this will mean the following changes:
> 
> (a) for download links (pbf, bz2, diff directories etc)
> 
> * North America remains unchanged.
> * US states (and Norcal/Socal) remain unchanged.
> * new http://download.geofabrik.de/north-america/us-latest.osm.pbf and
> ancillary files
> * the five census regions (Midwest, Northeast, Pacific, South, West)
> will be demoted by one directory from currently
> /north-america/us-midwest-latest.osm.pbf to
> /north-america/us/us-midwest-latest.osm.pbf - but I will set up
> redirects so that the old locations still work for a while.
> 
> (b) for HTML pages
> 
> * http://download.geofabrik.de/north-america.html will drop the US
> states and Census regions and instead list just three sub regions
> (Canada, USA, Mexico)
> * new http://download.geofabrik.de/north-america/us.html to list US
> states and census regions.
> 
> I will make these changes incrementally over the coming days. On the
> whole, this should cause minimum disruption; the only thing that will
> stop working is when someone has written instructions somewhere that go
> like "open the North America download page and select Iowa from the
> list" but I hope that people would then be able to guess that maybe they
> need to click on USA first.
> 
> If this has any unintended consequences let me know and we'll find a way
> to fix it.
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
> 
> PS: Just like with other countries, the "all of US" file is cut out of
> its parent continent file (North America) which means that those bits of
> the USA that lie outside North America will not be included. This mainly
> affects Puerto Rico. I'll be making a standalone Puerto Rico file
> available in the Central America section.
> 
> -- 
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk VS primary,

[Martijn van Exel]

I actually like your suggestion that highway=trunk does not add much value
to the U.S. map, Eric.
We love to add detail / granularity to OSM so much, it can become hard to
envisage taking some away.
Not saying we should abolish trunk right here and now, but something I'd
consider as one outcome.
Martijn

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 7:27 AM Eric Ladner  wrote:

> I personally dislike "trunk".  Its definition is vague and leaves a lot to
> interpretation (and argument).  It doesn't really add anything to the
> information on the map, IMO.  A US Highway is a US Highway regardless of
> how much traffic it carries or how many stoplights it has.
>
> Maybe if the definition of "trunk" was solidified to something more
> specific, it would have a more valuable use case.
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 5:15 AM Mike N  wrote:
>
>> On 12/17/2019 10:19 PM, Evin Fairchild wrote:
>> > some US routes are more important than others and lumping them all as
>> > primary doesn???t make any sense;
>>
>> The arguments here about relative importance of parallel routes makes
>> sense.
>>
>>Some massive changes such as in
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78620805 are raising roads which
>> have no other major choices, but are apparently just because they are
>> the most important.
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
>
> --
> Eric Ladner
> ___
> 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] Next Virtual Mappy Hour - August 12

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 
Reminder, Mappy Hour tonight! See below for details,
Martijn

> On Jul 31, 2019, at 11:31 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Hi all, 
> 
> The next Virtual Mappy Hour will be on August 12 at 6pm Pacific Time. Find 
> all the details and a sign-up link on the wiki[1].
> 
> Let me know if you want to do a 5 minute presentation about any OSM related 
> topic. Doesn't have to be anything big or fancy. We love to hear what you are 
> working on.
> 
> I hope to see you there.
> 
> Martijn
> 
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours#Schedule
>  
> -- 
>  Martijn van Exel
>  m...@rtijn.org
> 
> ___
> 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] Next Virtual Mappy Hour - August 12

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

The next Virtual Mappy Hour will be on August 12 at 6pm Pacific Time. Find all 
the details and a sign-up link on the wiki[1].

Let me know if you want to do a 5 minute presentation about any OSM related 
topic. Doesn't have to be anything big or fancy. We love to hear what you are 
working on.

I hope to see you there.

Martijn

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours#Schedule
 
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

Re: [Talk-us] Next Mappy Hour July 10!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

Thanks for participating in the Virtual Mappy Hour this week! We had a record 
number of 16 participants (from as far away as Poland and Japan) and lively 
discussion on a variety of mappy topics. I enjoyed it very much and I hope you 
did as well. 

I will announce the next Mappy Hour soon. I suggest we make the next one about 
field mapping and associated tools like StreetComplete, GoMap, Vespucci, 
Fieldpapers etc! What do you think?
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019, at 12:34, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Hi all, 
> Final call for people who want to present a mappy topic at tomorrow's 
> mappy hour!
> Doesn't have to be anything too formal / prepared.. Just take 5 minutes 
> to present what you work on / how you map / how OSM has changed your 
> life / what you think the difference is between amenity=pub and 
> amenity=bar / ... 
> In any case, see you tomorrow!
> -- 
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019, at 08:58, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > Hi all!
> > 
> > Here’s a reminder, Mappy Hour next Wednesday! Sending out the reminder 
> > a little early because of the upcoming holiday weekend. Details and 
> > sign up link in the thread below. So far we have 9 folks signed up. 
> > Signing up is optional but you get to express your topic preferences. 
> > So far we have a wide range:
> > 
> > * Tagging for data consumers
> > * Vodka
> > * Mapping bike routes and trails; and OSMAnd Specific considerations
> > * A future program to qualify new mappers
> > * Tips on how to quickly determine potentially missing/old information 
> > of existing ways (buildings, roads, forests, etc.) 
> > 
> > I hope to see you there! July 10 6pm PT / 9pm ET
> > 
> > Martijn
> > 
> > -- 
> >   Martijn van Exel
> >   m...@rtijn.org
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 16:05, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > > Here's a sign up link. It helps me a lot if you fill this out if you 
> > > plan to attend. Thanks!
> > > https://forms.gle/WktPPimyB69jGnH29
> > > -- 
> > >   Martijn van Exel
> > >   m...@rtijn.org
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 11:16, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > > The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour will be on July 10 at 6pm PT / 9pm 
> > > > ET!
> > > > As always the Mappy Hour is a great place to catch up with your fellow 
> > > > mappers, and learn something new. 
> > > > I am always looking for volunteers to do a 5 minute presentation on 
> > > > something they are working on. This can be a personal mapping project, 
> > > > a local mapping group update, something interesting going on at your 
> > > > company.. As long as it's OSM related!
> > > > See the OSM wiki for more details on how to join --> 
> > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours
> > > > See you then!
> > > > -- 
> > > >   Martijn van Exel
> > > >   m...@rtijn.org
> > > > 
> > > > ___
> > > > 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 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] Next Mappy Hour July 10!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 
Final call for people who want to present a mappy topic at tomorrow's mappy 
hour!
Doesn't have to be anything too formal / prepared.. Just take 5 minutes to 
present what you work on / how you map / how OSM has changed your life / what 
you think the difference is between amenity=pub and amenity=bar / ... 
In any case, see you tomorrow!
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Tue, Jul 2, 2019, at 08:58, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Hi all!
> 
> Here’s a reminder, Mappy Hour next Wednesday! Sending out the reminder 
> a little early because of the upcoming holiday weekend. Details and 
> sign up link in the thread below. So far we have 9 folks signed up. 
> Signing up is optional but you get to express your topic preferences. 
> So far we have a wide range:
> 
> * Tagging for data consumers
> * Vodka
> * Mapping bike routes and trails; and OSMAnd Specific considerations
> * A future program to qualify new mappers
> * Tips on how to quickly determine potentially missing/old information 
> of existing ways (buildings, roads, forests, etc.) 
> 
> I hope to see you there! July 10 6pm PT / 9pm ET
> 
> Martijn
> 
> -- 
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 16:05, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > Here's a sign up link. It helps me a lot if you fill this out if you 
> > plan to attend. Thanks!
> > https://forms.gle/WktPPimyB69jGnH29
> > -- 
> >   Martijn van Exel
> >   m...@rtijn.org
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 11:16, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour will be on July 10 at 6pm PT / 9pm 
> > > ET!
> > > As always the Mappy Hour is a great place to catch up with your fellow 
> > > mappers, and learn something new. 
> > > I am always looking for volunteers to do a 5 minute presentation on 
> > > something they are working on. This can be a personal mapping project, 
> > > a local mapping group update, something interesting going on at your 
> > > company.. As long as it's OSM related!
> > > See the OSM wiki for more details on how to join --> 
> > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours
> > > See you then!
> > > -- 
> > >   Martijn van Exel
> > >   m...@rtijn.org
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > 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 mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Next Mappy Hour July 10!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all!

Here’s a reminder, Mappy Hour next Wednesday! Sending out the reminder a little 
early because of the upcoming holiday weekend. Details and sign up link in the 
thread below. So far we have 9 folks signed up. Signing up is optional but you 
get to express your topic preferences. So far we have a wide range:

* Tagging for data consumers
* Vodka
* Mapping bike routes and trails; and OSMAnd Specific considerations
* A future program to qualify new mappers
* Tips on how to quickly determine potentially missing/old information of 
existing ways (buildings, roads, forests, etc.) 

I hope to see you there! July 10 6pm PT / 9pm ET

Martijn

-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 16:05, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Here's a sign up link. It helps me a lot if you fill this out if you 
> plan to attend. Thanks!
> https://forms.gle/WktPPimyB69jGnH29
> -- 
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 11:16, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour will be on July 10 at 6pm PT / 9pm 
> > ET!
> > As always the Mappy Hour is a great place to catch up with your fellow 
> > mappers, and learn something new. 
> > I am always looking for volunteers to do a 5 minute presentation on 
> > something they are working on. This can be a personal mapping project, 
> > a local mapping group update, something interesting going on at your 
> > company.. As long as it's OSM related!
> > See the OSM wiki for more details on how to join --> 
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours
> > See you then!
> > -- 
> >   Martijn van Exel
> >   m...@rtijn.org
> > 
> > ___
> > 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] Next Mappy Hour July 10!

[Martijn van Exel]

Here's a sign up link. It helps me a lot if you fill this out if you plan to 
attend. Thanks!
https://forms.gle/WktPPimyB69jGnH29
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019, at 11:16, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Hi all,
> The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour will be on July 10 at 6pm PT / 9pm 
> ET!
> As always the Mappy Hour is a great place to catch up with your fellow 
> mappers, and learn something new. 
> I am always looking for volunteers to do a 5 minute presentation on 
> something they are working on. This can be a personal mapping project, 
> a local mapping group update, something interesting going on at your 
> company.. As long as it's OSM related!
> See the OSM wiki for more details on how to join --> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours
> See you then!
> -- 
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> ___
> 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] Next Mappy Hour July 10!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,
The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour will be on July 10 at 6pm PT / 9pm ET!
As always the Mappy Hour is a great place to catch up with your fellow mappers, 
and learn something new. 
I am always looking for volunteers to do a 5 minute presentation on something 
they are working on. This can be a personal mapping project, a local mapping 
group update, something interesting going on at your company.. As long as it's 
OSM related!
See the OSM wiki for more details on how to join --> 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours
See you then!
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

[Talk-us] Announcing State of the Map US CFP info session next Monday

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

State of the Map US is in a few months and the CFP (call for proposals) is open 
for a few more weeks.

Perhaps you’ve been thinking about submitting a session but aren’t quite sure 
yet. Well I can assure you, you’re in good company.

To help out a bit I am hosting an info session next Monday. I’ll go over the 
submission process, I can give feedback on ideas, answer any question about 
speaking at SOTM US (or so I hope).

More info in this diary post, with link to sign up / join: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/218281 
 

Hope to see you there / then!

Martijn

PS There’ll also be a virtual mappy hour again soon, on the 22nd.___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Bus route relation names

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi, 

I started adding local bus route relations some time ago[1] (just the ways, not 
yet the stop locations etc) and named them according to the official names as 
listed on the UTA (agency) web site. I discussed this at one of our local map 
events. An example:

* UTA bus route 6 —> 
http://www.rideuta.com/Rider-Tools/Schedules-and-Maps/6-6th-Avenue?page=Bus-BusHome-Route6
 

 name: “6th Avenue”. 
* OSM relation —> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8338140 
 

As you can see `njtbusfan` has gone in and changed the name to something more 
descriptive but also something that doesn’t match either the official name *or* 
the suggested tagging[2] that suggests ": 
 → ”. I chose to use the official name but would be happy to conform 
to this convention if that’s what people tend to use in the U.S. as well. That 
is my first question.

What’s more, njtbusfan seems to have created new relations for the same route 
without adding them to the master relation. For example here is my master 
relation for UTA route 6: 8338141 
 which has the eastbound / 
westbound children 8338140  and 
8338139 . He added 9485804, 
9485805, 9485806, 9485807, 9485808, 9485809 which are not part of that master. 
Some of these routes contain new information (weekend routes) but some overlap 
with what was already there. Frankly I didn’t know how to map weekend / weekday 
variants of routes so I just stuck with the weekday route initially.

Finally, njbusfan did not check the OSM wiki for existing organized effort 
around adding bus routes in my area[1] or existing local conventions which 
suggested a naming convention that diverged from what’s on the wiki 
(appropriate or not).

So it’s a bit of a mess, and part of it may very well be me being a relative 
novice at this, but there are a few things that are demonstrably sloppy / 
wrong. But what concerns me is that this mapper seems to have been going around 
the country adding / changing bus route relations. I have initiated a 
discussion with them here[3] and would like it if others can weigh in here as 
well. Njtbusfan, if you’re on this list, thanks for reading and let us know 
your plans, please.

Martijn

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Utah/Transit 
 
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport#Service_routes 
 
[3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/69327505 
 ___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Reminder - Mappy Hour this Wednesday!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hey, 
That was fun. We had about 15 people participating. Thank you all!
Alan presented on using Map Paint Styles in JOSM. Bryce talked about his quest 
to stop SEO spam from a company named e-gumball (?). I would love to see a 
write-up or SOTM US talk about this. We also touched on imports, SOTM US, and 
mapping for people with mobility limitations (see accessmap.io 
<http://accessmap.io/>, opensidewalks.com <http://opensidewalks.com/>).
The next mappy hour is scheduled for May 22. We will have Geoff Maas presenting 
about Open Data in Minnesota.
One critical note. From what I can tell we were 100% men. I don’t like that. 
Who will help me change that?
Martijn

> On Apr 24, 2019, at 4:01 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> I final reminder that mappy hour is happening TONIGHT at 6pm PT / 9pm ET. You 
> can use anything from zoom to your rotary dial phone to call in and chat 
> about OSM for an hour. Details in the link below. Bring a drink and a story, 
> grab a chair and relax.
> Martijn
> 
>> On Apr 22, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all, 
>> The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour is this Wednesday at 6pm PT / 9PM ET!
>> If you want to do a 5 minute presentation / lightning talk / discussion 
>> starter about anything OSM related, yes please! Please feel free to add your 
>> topic to the wiki[1] or just email me and we will make it happen.
>> The dial-in and Zoom connect information are also on that same wiki page.
>> I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
>> I hope you can make it!
>> Martijn
>> 
>> [1] 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours#Presentations
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] Reminder - Mappy Hour this Wednesday!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,
I final reminder that mappy hour is happening TONIGHT at 6pm PT / 9pm ET. You 
can use anything from zoom to your rotary dial phone to call in and chat about 
OSM for an hour. Details in the link below. Bring a drink and a story, grab a 
chair and relax.
Martijn

> On Apr 22, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Hi all, 
> The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour is this Wednesday at 6pm PT / 9PM ET!
> If you want to do a 5 minute presentation / lightning talk / discussion 
> starter about anything OSM related, yes please! Please feel free to add your 
> topic to the wiki[1] or just email me and we will make it happen.
> The dial-in and Zoom connect information are also on that same wiki page.
> I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
> I hope you can make it!
> Martijn
> 
> [1] 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours#Presentations
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Reminder - Mappy Hour this Wednesday!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 
The next OSM US Virtual Mappy Hour is this Wednesday at 6pm PT / 9PM ET!
If you want to do a 5 minute presentation / lightning talk / discussion starter 
about anything OSM related, yes please! Please feel free to add your topic to 
the wiki[1] or just email me and we will make it happen.
The dial-in and Zoom connect information are also on that same wiki page.
I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
I hope you can make it!
Martijn

[1] 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Foundation/Local_Chapters/United_States/Virtual_Mappy_Hours#Presentations



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

Re: [Talk-us] trail tagging

[Martijn van Exel]

I hadn’t looked at that page in a while, but I’ve been using highway=path in 
the same way as you describe. Hiking trails, singletrack MTB. Footway I only 
tag in built up areas. 
What do other places in the world do?
Martijn

> On Apr 19, 2019, at 8:28 AM, brad  wrote:
> 
> Everywhere I've been in the US or Canada a dirt 'way' too narrow for a 4 
> wheel vehicle is called a trail, path, or single track.   For the most part 
> they are appropriately (IMO) tagged as path.   Unfortunately the wiki says 
> this for highway:path (the highlighting is mine):
> 
> A non-specific path. Use highway <>=footway 
>  for paths mainly 
> for walkers, highway <>=cycleway 
>  for one also 
> usable by cyclists,highway <>=bridleway 
>  for ones 
> available to horse riders as well as walkers and highway <>=track 
>  for ones which is 
> passable by agriculture or similar vehicles.
> 
> I think it makes no sense to call a dirt path, open to more than 1 user 
> group, anything other than a path.Since about 98% of the trail tagging 
> that I've seen seems to agree, Is there consensus on this?   Perhaps if the 
> international group likes the description as is, a clarification on the US 
> road tagging wiki page?
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging 
> 
> ___
> 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] Virtual Mappy Hour, April 2019

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

The first Virtual Mappy Hour (after a multi-year hiatus) was great fun and, if 
you ask me, a success. I enjoyed (re)connecting with fellow mappers which I 
think is a big piece of what OSM is all about! So we will do more of them, for 
now every month. The next one is planned for April 24 at 6pm Pacific time.

For next time I would like to offer a challenge. Who wants 5 minutes to present 
something? This can be anything you want — your favorite mapped area on OSM, a 
tagging question or answer, a report on your local group. The only rule is that 
there needs to be one slide. We will do up to 4 5-minute presentations if 
people step up.

Let’s hear it!
Martijn
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Your local events on weekly osm and the OSM wiki

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi, 

If you’re subscribed to or read weekly OSM (weeklyosm.eu 
) you will have noticed an event calendar on there. You 
may wonder, how do I get my local event to appear on there? 

The answer is that you need to edit 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Calendar 
 , which acts as the 
source for both weeklyosm and the OSM event calendar on the wiki home page. 
This involves inserting some cryptic code into the wiki source. 

If you find that intimidating (I did!) drop me a line and I will add it for 
you, or I can show you how it’s done.

Happy mapping (and event planning),

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

Re: [Talk-us] Announcing our Interim Executive Director & Upcoming Election

[Martijn van Exel]

This is great to hear and I am excited for the future!
Maggie told me she was going to do her best to make the Mappy Hour tonight, so 
that would be a great opportunity to meet (virtually).
Martijn

> On Mar 27, 2019, at 7:39 AM, Jonah Adkins  wrote:
> 
> In 2018 the board was unable to spend much time working with and supporting 
> the US mapping community because the majority of the board’s volunteer time 
> was spent on a hiring process that unfortunately did not work out as planned. 
> It became clear that the absence of an Executive Director was a step 
> backwards for the organization, and that it would be best for someone to step 
> into the role as soon as possible. We’re excited to announce that we have 
> hired Maggie Cawley to serve as interim Executive Director. Please give her a 
> warm welcome! [@MaggieMaps].
> 
> Maggie brings fifteen years of professional geospatial experience, 
> specializing in open source geospatial tools and education. Her passion for 
> maps has taken her all over the world - leading field data collection 
> efforts, training others in open source geospatial tools, or just spreading 
> the word about OpenStreetMap. She has been a board member for the last two 
> years and has also been a long time volunteer for TeachOSM, where she has 
> worked to promote the integration of geography into classrooms through 
> OpenStreetMap and supported teachers wanting to learn about OSM.
> 
> Now, Maggie will be based in Baltimore working full time to support and grow 
> OpenStreetMap US. For the remainder of the year, Maggie will be working with 
> the community and the board to develop a strategic plan for the organization, 
> including new programs and ideas for OpenStreetMap US. She will be connecting 
> with the community as much as possible, developing ways to expand programming 
> and membership, leading fundraising efforts, and supporting the board with 
> day-to-day administrative responsibilities. We believe her passion for maps, 
> professional experience, and dedication to the OpenStreetMap community will 
> benefit OpenStreetMap US over the coming months and we hope you will reach 
> out and help us welcome her into this new role.
> 
> Election to Fill Vacant Seat
> 
> As a result of taking on the interim ED role, Maggie is stepping down from 
> her seat on the board and we will need to fill her shoes through an election. 
> We urge you to nominate yourself or someone else to join the Board for the 
> remainder of the year. As a board member, you will help plan for State of the 
> Map US, be a part of the strategic planning process for the organization, and 
> support the US mapping community.
> 
> Questions? Join the #elections channel on OSM US Slack, tweet us, or email us 
> anytime.
> 
> Nomination Instructions
> 
> Nominations will be open from today, March 25 until Sunday March 31. To 
> nominate yourself, please go to the election wiki page, and add yourself to 
> the list. You can also see more information about the schedule and updated 
> timeline there.
> 
> Election Details
> 
> Monday April 1 and end Sunday April 7. This year based on popular request 
> we’re excited to announce that we’ll be using Ranked Choice Voting. To be 
> permitted to vote please make sure your OpenStreetMap US membership is in 
> good standing by March 31. We should be able to announce the new board member 
> on April 8.
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Reminder: Virtual Mappy Hour tonight!

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, don't forget that the Virtual Mappy Hour is tonight!

The details (phone, video) are in this email --> 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2019-March/019380.html 

The time is 6pm Pacific / 9pm Eastern.

Some topics we will talk about:
* OSM US news: Executive Director, Elections
* Emerging details about State of the Map US
* Discussion: who is attending local mapping groups, or organizing one even? 
What are your experiences?
* Mapping and Tagging: bring your favorite topic to discuss!
* What do YOU want out of the Mappy Hour? Presentations? Guests? Other Topics? 
Discussion.

Please join us!

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

Re: [Talk-us] Online mappy hour

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

Quite a few people can make next Thursday the 28th, at 6pm PDT / 9pm 
EDT. So let's hold the mappy hour then.


Please find the dial-in and video options below. There are zoom clients 
for Windows, Linux, and Mac if you want to participate with video.


I look forward to chatting on Thursday.

--
Martijn

---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<---8<

Martijn van Exel is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: OSM Mappy Hour
Time: Mar 28, 2019 7:00 PM Mountain Time (US and Canada)

Join Zoom Meeting
https://telenav.zoom.us/j/309926315

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,309926315# US (San Jose)
+16468769923,,309926315# US (New York)

Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
877 853 5257 US Toll-free
855 880 1246 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 309 926 315
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/aeu0XqswaC


On 3/18/19 11:05 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:

Hi all,

You may remember that I hosted online ‘virtual mappy hours’ a few years ago.

I thought it was nice and I want to resume them.

Some topics for a next one:

* State of the map US — what would make you want to be there? Thinking about 
presenting? Some details about the planning process
* Imports — I feel like we’ve seen quite a few proposals lately. Opinions? Did 
you submit a proposal and want to discuss?
* Ask the board — I’ll invite someone from the board to attend for a Q
* MapRoulette — If you all are interested I am happy to talk about the latest 
features or walk you through how to set up a challenge.
* your favorite topic, let me know.

How does next Thursday 6pm PDT / 9pm EDT sound? I’m open to alternative times, 
if you’re interested in joining you get to help decide when we’ll do it :)

There will be a video option (zoom) but you will also be able to dial-in if you 
don’t fancy proprietary tools on your computer. I’ll send details once we 
settle on a day and time.

Looking forward to chatting!

Martijn



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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 22, 2019, at 4:08 AM, Mark Wagner  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:23:48 -0600
> Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
>>> Martijn van Exel mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
>>>>> import that added them and delete objects that never had any
>>>>> reason to appear in the OSM database in any form, at least
>>>>> according to GNIS data.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will
>>>>> not make the edit without a clear support so please comment if
>>>>> you think that it is a good idea and if you think that it should
>>>>> not be done. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly
>>>> recently on Slack
>>>> https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
>>>> 
>>>> My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers
>>>> review these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes
>>>> exist mostly in ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some
>>>> human mapper attention. So I’d be in favor of trying to resolve
>>>> this using some human driven cleanup first.  
>>> 
>>> My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.
>>> 
>>> There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
>>> unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them
>>> left around me, but the most common result was that an armchair
>>> mapper would drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building,
>>> trace the building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one
>>> of these was actually a school.
>>> 
>> 
>> Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better
>> instructions?
> 
> No, I don't.  Sorting out which GNIS nodes are outdated and which are
> merely misplaced isn't something that can reliably be done from aerial
> imagery.  For something like "(historical)" GNIS nodes, it's better
> just to delete all of them.
> 

Short of messaging individual mappers, do you see a way in which MapRoulette 
could be a ‘better citizen’?
I’m thinking perhaps a way to ‘report’ challenges. (Not sure how that would 
work though.)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
> Martijn van Exel mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
> 
>>> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
>>> import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason
>>> to appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to
>>> GNIS data.
>>> 
>>> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
>>> make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
>>> that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be
>>> done.   
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly
>> recently on Slack
>> https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 
>> 
>> My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers
>> review these locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes
>> exist mostly in ‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some
>> human mapper attention. So I’d be in favor of trying to resolve this
>> using some human driven cleanup first.
> 
> My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.
> 
> There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
> unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them left
> around me, but the most common result was that an armchair mapper would
> drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building, trace the
> building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one of these was
> actually a school.
> 

Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better instructions?

Martijn

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

Re-reading this I phrased this with more hyperbole than I intended, sorry.

I do think we should learn from past mistakes and approach any automated edit, 
be it an import or a (subsequent) fix, with the proper diligence. Which is what 
we’re doing here, and I commend you for taking an open-minded approach in your 
initial email.

Martijn

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 8:29 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Stepping back a bit, the urge to fix previous automated edits with new 
> automated fixes is understandable, but it may lead to a more casual approach 
> to imports and automated edits, because we basically say with each fix that 
> ill-informed automated map edits can always be fixed with more automated 
> edits later. We’ve already gone down that path in the U.S. quite far, so we 
> should proceed with extra care - unless we as a community decide that that is 
> the nature of OSM in this country. It isn’t to me.
> 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny  
> wrote:
> 
> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
> import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason to
> appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to GNIS data.
> 
> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
> make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
> that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be done. 


Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly recently on 
Slack https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 

My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers review these 
locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes exist mostly in 
‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some human mapper attention. So I’d 
be in favor of trying to resolve this using some human driven cleanup first.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Online mappy hour

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 18, 2019, at 1:57 PM, Richard Welty  wrote:
[..]
> next thursday as in the 21st or the 28th? i'm going to be on my flight
> to IETF on the 21st but back on the 28th if the airlines cooperate.

Sorry, I meant the 28th.

Martijn

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

[Talk-us] Online mappy hour

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

You may remember that I hosted online ‘virtual mappy hours’ a few years ago. 

I thought it was nice and I want to resume them.

Some topics for a next one:

* State of the map US — what would make you want to be there? Thinking about 
presenting? Some details about the planning process
* Imports — I feel like we’ve seen quite a few proposals lately. Opinions? Did 
you submit a proposal and want to discuss?
* Ask the board — I’ll invite someone from the board to attend for a Q
* MapRoulette — If you all are interested I am happy to talk about the latest 
features or walk you through how to set up a challenge.
* your favorite topic, let me know.

How does next Thursday 6pm PDT / 9pm EDT sound? I’m open to alternative times, 
if you’re interested in joining you get to help decide when we’ll do it :)

There will be a video option (zoom) but you will also be able to dial-in if you 
don’t fancy proprietary tools on your computer. I’ll send details once we 
settle on a day and time.

Looking forward to chatting!

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

Re: [Talk-us] motel vs. hotel

[Martijn van Exel]

I've slept in some pretty nice places that had exterior room access. I wouldn't 
call that out as the only demarcating property. To my mind it's a combination 
of location, amenities and layout / architecture.

Interesting discussion!

Martijn van Exel

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 18:03, Tod Fitch  wrote:
> 
> For me the difference is interior hallway to access room (hotel) vs exterior 
> access to each room (motel).
> 
> 
>> On March 8, 2019 4:47:33 PM PST, Peter Dobratz  wrote:
>> How do you distinguish between the tourism=hotel and tourism=motel tags?
>> 
>> The criteria that I was imagining is that a motel is a single story building 
>> where you have the ability to park you car directly outside of your room. A 
>> hotel would be other types of buildings such as multi-story where most 
>> guests cannot park directly outside their room.
>> 
>> There's the curious case of the two Motel 6 facilities directly across the 
>> road from each other.  I had marked these as tourism=hotel based on the 
>> building architecture, but maybe all Motel 6's should be tourism=motel?
>> 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1645570
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Peter
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> ___
> 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] US map rendering (Was: Re: Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet))

[Martijn van Exel]

Kevin — yes, I was talking about SOTM US. Please do stay tuned to this list and 
OSM US blog for announcements for community scholarships and other initiatives 
we will deploy to make it possible to have many more community members attend 
(and also present! on interesting topics like this one.)

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 12:25 PM, Kevin Kenny  wrote:
> 
> Finding the time and money to attend a conference that my employer
> doesn't sponsor is hard for me at the moment, particularly since I'm
> already committed once or twice a year to conferences on another "free
> time" (hah!) project. (Also, I presume you mean SOTM-US? An overseas
> conference would add a whole other level of complexity to my getting
> to go.)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

[Martijn van Exel]

Perhaps they should be tagged not as peaks then but as a place node 
(place=locality probably)?

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Mike Thompson  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:29 AM Kevin Broderick  > wrote:
> 
> Would https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4992960980 
>  be an example of (or very 
> similar to) what you're talking about? 
> Yes, slightly different, but same general concept.  
> 
> 
> I've been told that one is a local reference point ("25 Short", ie. 25 feet 
> short of 10k), and at least one article 
> (https://rootsrated.com/stories/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-the-best-backcountry-skiing-in-jackson-hole
>  
> )
>  backs that up.
> I have seen back country trip reports mention such points (at least those 
> that are high points), and they have *some* value therefore, but as I 
> suggested earlier, "point n,nnn" is to me more of a description rather than a 
> name in most cases.
> 
> Mike
> ___
> 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] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

[Martijn van Exel]

I agree that a local US OSM map with a *subtly* adapted rendering would be 
fantastic. Phil Gold did some interesting work years ago on rendering US style 
highway shields taking into account (sometimes crazy) route concurrency 
(http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=13=39.75926=-86.02786=B
 
<http://elrond.aperiodic.net/shields/?zoom=13=39.75926=-86.02786=B>
 - note that this is based on years-old data and probably pre-carto-switch 
stylesheet). Lars Ahlzen created the beautiful TopOSM which is a lot more 
divergent from the main map style, but another great example of initiatives 
around custom map rendering coming out of the US community.

Perhaps something for a BoF session at the next SOTM!

Finally, I don’t think it’s a funding or infrastructure issue. It’s just that 
someone needs to lead it.

Martijn

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 9:27 AM, Kevin Kenny  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 10:59 AM Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>> If it’s just a shortcut to have the main OSM map display elevation in feet, 
>> that’s not right, but it indicates a need that is currently unaddressed: 
>> displaying elevation in local units on the main map.
> 
> Even as a USAian, I'm fine with SI units on the main map. If the
> USAians need a map localised to US conventional units, let the USAians
> host it.
> 
> (and openstreetmap.us miught be a perfect place to put such a thing,
> but I know, the infrastructure and funding really isn't there.)

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

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

[Martijn van Exel]

If it’s locally known as such, to my mind, it’s totally fine tagging it that 
way, even if it’s only by backcountry skiers. I would say this is common in 
OSM, I see (and appreciate) a lot of named trails that are not always 
signposted as such but locally known by those names (like 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/624949038 
). Local knowledge trumps most 
everything in OSM.

If it’s just a shortcut to have the main OSM map display elevation in feet, 
that’s not right, but it indicates a need that is currently unaddressed: 
displaying elevation in local units on the main map. I don’t see a ticket 
currently on the osm-carto repo that addresses this. I think it would be hard 
to get ’regional’ rendering preferences accepted however. A better / other way 
to improve on this is to change the convention for the ele tag to be more like 
maxspeed: default to meters but allow other units to be entered as ‘8801 ft’ 
for a value. Then osm-carto could pick that up more easily.

Martijn

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 6:27 AM, Kevin Broderick  wrote:
> 
> To elaborate on my previous response, now that I'm back at a computer:
> 
> Would https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4992960980 
>  be an example of (or very 
> similar to) what you're talking about?
> 
> I've been told that one is a local reference point ("25 Short", ie. 25 feet 
> short of 10k), and at least one article 
> (https://rootsrated.com/stories/a-quick-and-dirty-guide-to-the-best-backcountry-skiing-in-jackson-hole
>  
> )
>  backs that up. The old USGS quad does have a point elevation of 9975' on 
> that knob, but it looks to more properly be a shoulder of a larger mountain, 
> not a proper mountain on its own.
> 
> I'm not suggesting that the current tagging is correct, but in this case (and 
> I believe in some others, although I don't even have anecdotes to back that 
> up), point elevation marks on USGS maps have become the "names" for local 
> topographical features. They're a little wonky on the 
> on-the-ground-verifiability (you can easily verify that a height-of-land 
> exists there, but I don't know that there's a sign or survey marker 
> indicating "this is 9975" or "this is 25 Short"), but [some] locals who 
> travel in the vicinity will use the reference. So it seems like something 
> that may be very reasonable to map, but I don't know what the best tagging 
> scheme is. I do think that normalizing to meters loses the meaning in the 
> current tag-for-the-renderer scheme, because a '3040m' label isn't going to 
> translate well to '25 Short' or '9975' unless you happen to particularly good 
> at math.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 4:53 AM Dave Swarthout  > wrote:
> This is simply a way to get an otherwise unnamed peak to render and also, I 
> suspect, to sidestep the inconvenience of converting the elevation to meters. 
>  AFAIK, there are no peaks with the generic name "Point" on any USGS Topos. 
> In addition, placing the elevation into the name is another trick that should 
> be discouraged.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 2:38 PM Mateusz Konieczny  > wrote:
> If it is a peak then ele=XXX and noname=yes would be OK.
> 
> If it is not a peak it should not be present at all - otherwise it opens way 
> to importing
> LIDAR data into OSM (and there are datasets with resolution of 5 cm, dumping 
> it
> into OSM would be case of unverifiable data making it impossible to edit).
> 
> I opened https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1703462 
>  to reduce chance that it will be 
> discussed 
> and forgotten.
> 
> If this is really used name - then it would be OK but my bet is that this is 
> not an actually used name.
> 
> Mar 7, 2019, 7:04 PM by miketh...@gmail.com :
> It seems that there are a couple of mappers in Colorado US (at least, perhaps 
> mapping in other areas as well) who are adding spot elevations (presumably 
> from USGS Topo maps) to OSM tagging them as 
> natural=peak
> name=Point (elevation in feet)
> 
> For example:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4601119717 
> 
> 
> What does the community think about this?
> 
> natural=peak might be ok if said spot elevation is really a local high point 
> (some are not).  The name I am less sure of. If this belongs on the map at 
> all, it should probably have an ele tag, with value in meters.
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Swarthout
> Homer, Alaska
> Chiang Mai, Thailand
> Travel Blog at 

Re: [Talk-us] Spot elevations collected as natural=peak and name=Point (height in feet)

[Martijn van Exel]

That doesn’t seem right to me. Natural=peak is for actual high points in the 
landscape, and should be named by their established names, if available. 
Elevation, as you say, should be in meters on the ele tag.

Best thing to do is probably to send these folks a kind note pointing out OSM 
conventions and asking them to cease. You could point out that there’s OSM 
based topo maps that overlay elevation info on OSM data. The lovely 
http://toposm.ahlzen.com/  comes to mind, but 
there’s also opentopomap.

Martijn

> On Mar 7, 2019, at 11:04 AM, Mike Thompson  wrote:
> 
> It seems that there are a couple of mappers in Colorado US (at least, perhaps 
> mapping in other areas as well) who are adding spot elevations (presumably 
> from USGS Topo maps) to OSM tagging them as 
> natural=peak
> name=Point (elevation in feet)
> 
> For example:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4601119717 
> 
> 
> What does the community think about this?
> 
> natural=peak might be ok if said spot elevation is really a local high point 
> (some are not).  The name I am less sure of. If this belongs on the map at 
> all, it should probably have an ele tag, with value in meters.
> ___
> 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] Map roulette challenges - Missing named roads [VA, NJ, NY, MN, SC]

[Martijn van Exel]

I did a fair amount and noticed similar things — some of the suggestions 
concern private drives, others are not corroborated by available aerials. But I 
did find a decent ratio of fixable things, and as you go through the tasks, you 
get a better sense of which ones are likely to be fixable. The rest you can 
just mark as too hard or not an issue.

As for TIGER fixing, I was inspired by Mike N’s posting about his TIGER fix up 
effort and figured you can use MapRoulette to do some of it. A comprehensive 
review of TIGER roads is probably best done using his Tasking Manager approach, 
but to review just the ‘main’ roads MapRoulette is quite usable. I created a 
challenge for Utah as a proof of concept and working my way through the tasks: 
https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3610 
 

If you want to help out, great. If you want to recreate this challenge for a 
different area, let me know. The overpass query can easily be adapted.

Martijn

> On Feb 13, 2019, at 10:31 AM, Kevin Kenny  wrote:
> 
> I've done some of the MapRoulette items for this project, but frankly
> I'm not that good at it. For the stuff nearest me, most of the missing
> roads are either too new to show on the orthos (which are updated on a
> rolling 4-year cycle) or else are old platted rights-of-way that are
> now abandoned. I find that I can't do much with them without
> boots-on-the-ground knowledge. I was therefore able definitively to
> dismiss a few of them with: "I've been there. There's no road," but
> that's been the exception rather than the rule.
> 
> Finding that sort of thing in the MapRoulette items that I have taken
> on makes me wonder what sort of data quality we'll get out of this
> effort. Frankly, I've found TIGER review (and this part of the world
> is still very much a TIGER desert!) looks to be more fruitful. I find
> the NYSDOT database to be an extremely useful cross-check on names and
> purported alignments, though. Many ways shown in TIGER around here
> were digitized from pencil sketches of census workers and can be
> hundreds of metres from the actual locations, but NYSDOT usually has
> its information derived at least crudely from survey data.
> 
> But perhaps I'm being too much of a perfectionist.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:51 AM Oisin Herriott (Insight Global Inc)
> via Talk-us  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks Kevin for the tip! I have updated the instructions to call out the 
>> NYS ortho online imagery layer to look at for the NY challenge.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Also, after some more fiddling with the roads dataset for the project, I 
>> have also reduced number of roads to check and updated the New York 
>> challenge here:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> New York: https://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/2346/challenge/3593
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks again for the tip!
>> 
>> Oisin
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] US Bureau of Land Management Boundaries

[Martijn van Exel]

Brad — 

My reference to Gaia GPS was meant to illustrate that third party apps are 
perfectly capable of overlaying data from various sources. Just because a data 
source exists doesn’t mean that it should be in OSM. On the ground 
verifiability has always been the gold standard for OSM, and I feel strongly 
about keeping it that way. We have departed from that gold standard somewhat 
already, especially when it comes to administrative boundaries.

Another argument for keeping this data out of OSM comes to mind. In many 
places, OSM has come to be the most complete map out there. OSM data is now 
used by major companies and organizations, and is therefore increasingly seen 
as ’the truth’. With that comes scrutiny and responsibility. We have already 
seen the project drawn into political disputes that are not ours to take a 
stance in. To give one recent example, our representation of the Ukraine / 
Crimea border recently drew sharp criticism and unneeded negative attention to 
OSM that could easily have been avoided. I’m not saying that public lands 
boundaries in the U.S. are to be compared with international conflicts, but 
public lands are in fact under heavy scrutiny here in the West, and 
incorporating these boundaries into OSM would just generate another attack 
vector we can do without.

If you want a Garmin map that incorporates both OSM data and boundary data from 
BLM or other federal or state sources, there are great ways to accomplish that 
goal, and I would be happy to help with it.

Martijn

> On Jan 6, 2019, at 8:50 AM, brad  wrote:
> 
> Martijn,  Gaia is not available on a Garmin, or on a PC.  It also costs $40 a 
> yr.   Why do you trust Gaia as an authoritative source?   How often do they 
> update from government sources?   BLM boundaries do not change very often.  
> Probably less often than city/town boundaries. For an authoritative 
> source, I have national forest maps that are 10 - 20 years old.  A download 
> today from a federal database is way better than that and in 5 years will 
> probably still be just as good.In relatively sparsely populated areas, on 
> the ground verification does not work as well as it does in the city.If 
> we make OSM more useful for more people then more folks will get involved.
>   

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

Re: [Talk-us] US Bureau of Land Management Boundaries

[Martijn van Exel]

Brad — I make use of BLM / NPS / NF boundary data a lot too. I use Gaia GPS for 
this, which overlays this data nicely with what’s in OSM[1]. There are lots of 
other outdoor apps that do the same. I prefer this data live outside of OSM as 
well for similar reasons as Ian stated. Knowing whether land is public or 
private or whether it’s inside or outside a NP, is important to me when I’m in 
the outdoors. I would much rather rely on an authoritative definition of these 
boundaries, than on whatever happens to be in OSM. Since there is no 
on-the-ground verifiability, boundary data is prone to growing stale, as you 
can see happening with census place boundaries. Unreliable data in this case is 
worse than no data at all.
If you’re looking to make a great impact on the map as an outdoors user, I 
would suggest mapping things you know and things you observe when you’re out 
there. Countless times have I been out in the middle of nowhere, to find that 
some mapper before me added a landmark, a water source, or something else that 
really helped me. That is what I like to pay forward.

Martijn

[1] https://www.gaiagps.com/offroad/#maps 
 

> On Jan 5, 2019, at 8:43 PM, brad  wrote:
> 
> Ian, 
> I want to import this data because I think its important for a complete map.  
>  We have national forest, wilderness  and national park boundaries in OSM!   
> This is no different.   If you look at many maps they show all of them.
> 
> I'd like it to show up on any map that I use.   I'm working on a 'better' 
> version for garmin using mkgmap.   I hope it gets rendered with OpenAndroMaps 
> too.   I haven't used the onine osm.org map very much.
> 
> I am excited to participate and improve OSM and in my opinion this is a big 
> gap in the OSM database.   Where I live, we don't use OSM for building 
> footprints, we use it to find our way in the national forest, the BLM land 
> and the national parks.   It's very useful to know what is public or private 
> land.
> 
> Brad 
> 
> On 1/5/19 8:19 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
>> Hi Brad, thanks for proposing this import and posting it here.
>> 
>> I would strongly prefer that we not import boundaries like this into OSM. 
>> Boundaries of all sorts are almost impossible to verify with OSM's "on the 
>> ground" rule, but BLM boundaries in particular are such an edge case (they 
>> have no other analog in the world, really) and almost never have apparent 
>> markings on the ground to check. Since these boundaries aren't visible, this 
>> data can never be improved by an OpenStreetMap contributor. The boundaries 
>> are defined by the government, and any sort of change to them would make 
>> them diverge from the official source.
>> 
>> But having said that, I'm curious why you wanted to import this data? Did 
>> you want to have it show up on the osm.org  map? Are you 
>> trying to build a custom map? Or are you excited to participate and improve 
>> OSM? If it's the latter, there's lots of other data that is a better fit to 
>> import into OSM: address points and building footprints come to mind, for 
>> example.
>> 
>> -Ian
>> 
>> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 9:03 PM brad > > wrote:
>> I'd like to import BLM (US Bureau of Land Management) boundaries into 
>> OSM.This is not an automated import as you can see from my workflow.
>> 
>> Workflow:
>> Download shape file from PADUS (1 state at a time): 
>> https://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/data/download/ 
>> 
>> Load into Qgis and filter for BLM boundaries
>> Clean up as necessary (there are some extraneous ways at state 
>> boundaries & elsewhere)
>> 
>> Convert to OSM with ogr2osm and the following tags
>>  tags.update({'type':'boundary'})
>>  tags.update({'boundary':'protected_area'})
>>  tags.update({'operator':'BLM'})
>>  tags.update({'ownership':'national'})
>>  tags.update({'protect_class':'27'})
>>  tags.update({'source':'US BLM'})
>>  use the shapefile attribute 'Unit_Nm' as the name
>> 
>> Import with JOSM
>> 
>> The San Luis unit (CO) is here for your inspection.
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/qxv5gny2396ewki/sanLuisBLM.osm?dl=0 
>> 
>> 
>> Comments?
> 
> ___
> 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] Monterey - Santa Cruz County line in Monterey Bay

[Martijn van Exel]

You are correct. The official Monterey County GIS file from [1] has the 
boundary at the shoreline, whereas OSM has it going out into the ocean, see 
https://imgur.com/a/aCMROQZ  (OSM in orange, 
Official GIS in dark gray).

I don’t know all coastal counties have their official boundaries at the 
shoreline, but OSM has them all reaching into the ocean. [2]
I also don’t know if there is some convention in OSM (US) to have coastal 
country boundaries match up with the higher level boundary. If there is perhaps 
we may need to revisit?

Martijn

[1] 
http://montereycountyopendata-12017-01-13t232948815z-montereyco.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/moco-boundary
 

[2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/EgP  (large 
query)

> On Dec 3, 2018, at 5:48 PM, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> From the Help page, user kurtrad writes:
> 
>> "A friend of mine says the Monterey/Santa Cruz county line in openstreets 3 
>> miles out to sea that travels from the mouth of the pajaro river to the 
>> north south california boundary line is wrong. In openstreetsmap the line 
>> travels west, south, west. My friend says the line should travel directly 
>> west."
> 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/36.8266/-121.9009
> 
> "I have a friend who says the openstreets map county line between
> Monterey and Santa Cruz is wrong according to a 1927 California
> Supreme Court Ruling."
> 
>> "Comments: Official boundaries of Monterey-Santa Cruz, as determined by the 
>> California Supreme Court in Ocean Industries v. Superior Court of 
>> California, in and for Santa Cruz County (1927) 200 Cal. 235. The decision 
>> held that Monterey Bay as a "closed bay" under law, and there is treated as 
>> if it were land for purposes of State and County jurisdiction -- which, in 
>> the case, held that Santa Cruz County could enforce fishing regulations in 
>> SCZ waters in Monterey Bay more than 3 miles offshore."
> 
> "I have a longish discussion at
> http://creagrus.home.montereybay.com/MtyBay-boundaries.html;
> 
>> "Government Code section 23127 defines Monterey County as "beginning in the 
>> Pacific Ocean, at the southwest corner of Santa Cruz [County]; thence east 
>> to the mouth of the Pajaro River". Likewise, section 23144 defines Santa 
>> Cruz County, in pertinent part, as "westerly along said [Pajaro] River" 
>> along the northern line of San Benito and Monterey "to the Bay of Monterey, 
>> and three miles westerly into the ocean."
> 
>> "The ... map shows a line across Monterey Bay in this tiny sliver of the Bay 
>> that runs not > "west-east" but about WSW-ENE and connects up with the 
>> "nearest point of land" line at the 3 mile limit west of Monterey Bay."
> 
>> "To see images go to 
>> http://creagrus.home.montereybay.com/MtyBay-boundaries.html;
> 
> Does anyone want to look into this?
> - Joseph
> 
> ___
> 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] Forest Routes

[Martijn van Exel]

On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 02:07:45 -0800
Minh Nguyen  wrote:

> On 2018-11-28 01:57, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> > On 2018-11-20 08:57, Martijn van Exel wrote:  
> >> When I map these roads I include the FS number (just the number)
> >> as a ref, since that is how they are signposted in the field.   
> > 
> > I think the ref tag on the ways should have a prefix and not just 
> > consist of a bare number. Otherwise, it's just as ambiguous for
> > data consumers as the (123) refs all over New Jersey, since the
> > U.S. doesn't have a highway tag that corresponds one-for-one with
> > forest routes.  
> 
> (I hit send too soon.) Lots of shields show only the number and no 
> prefix, such as the U.S. Route shield, but we still use the "US"
> prefix anyways.
> 
> Data consumers really should be using route relations instead of ref 
> tags on ways whenever possible. Some ambiguity is unavoidable on way 
> refs, which IMO should reflect what's on plain-text signage or in 
> publications. If one thinks of the way refs as a compatibility shim, 
> then "FS" doesn't seem unreasonable as a prefix.

I think you are right. It would be good if we can arrive at a common
prefix and document it on the wiki. 'FS' makes sense. Perhaps even a new
page dedicated to roads that are maintained directly by federal agencies
(NPS, USDA, others?) would make sense. I'd be happy to help set it up.

Martijn

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

[Talk-us] Short 'connector' roads -- _link or not?

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi, 
As I was creating more ‘unnamed roads’ challenges in MapRoulette, and spot 
checking them, I came across a number of cases like this one:

https://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3313/task/6414594  

To my mind these need to be fixed, but I wanted to ask here first, so I can get 
the instructions right.  
Either such a segment is part of a 3 or 4 way intersection of higher class dual 
carriageway roads, in which case it should probably be named. 
Or as in this case, it is an extension of the service road, and it should be 
highway=service and remain unnamed like the service road itself.
..And I guess a third case is like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/288576287 
, which should be a _link?

Advice welcome!

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

Re: [Talk-us] Forest Routes

[Martijn van Exel]

It is worth noting that the current shape file available from USDA seems to be 
more comprehensive than the forest service roads layer available: 
https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/datasets.php?dsetCategory=transportation 
<https://data.fs.usda.gov/geodata/edw/datasets.php?dsetCategory=transportation> 

Perhaps the layer was created based on a filtered or older version of this 
file. I don’t know who maintains it but it may be due for an update.

Martijn

> On Nov 20, 2018, at 9:57 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Frederik,
> I don’t remember it being widely discussed / agreed upon.
> When I map these roads I include the FS number (just the number) as a ref, 
> since that is how they are signposted in the field. 
> https://dcasler.com/2011/06/16/owl-creek-pass-getting-there-from-ridgway/ 
> <https://dcasler.com/2011/06/16/owl-creek-pass-getting-there-from-ridgway/> 
> has an example (very bottom image) but other variations of such a sign are 
> common as well.
> The printed maps I have include these numbers as well and generally they are 
> an important guidance instrument when navigating FS terrain.
> Martijn
> 
>> On Nov 20, 2018, at 9:39 AM, Frederik Ramm > <mailto:frede...@remote.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> apparently you have something in the US called "Forest Routes"
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_Highway 
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_Highway>
>> 
>> which even has its own kind of shield! (Yes I know, there are *many*
>> shields. I've followed the discussions!)
>> 
>> Is there some common understanding of how to map these, if at all? I've
>> looked around a bit and found some roads marked "ref=FS" but
>> these were few and far between.
>> 
>> 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 mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Forest Routes

[Martijn van Exel]

Frederik,
I don’t remember it being widely discussed / agreed upon.
When I map these roads I include the FS number (just the number) as a ref, 
since that is how they are signposted in the field. 
https://dcasler.com/2011/06/16/owl-creek-pass-getting-there-from-ridgway/ 
 has 
an example (very bottom image) but other variations of such a sign are common 
as well.
The printed maps I have include these numbers as well and generally they are an 
important guidance instrument when navigating FS terrain.
Martijn

> On Nov 20, 2018, at 9:39 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> apparently you have something in the US called "Forest Routes"
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_Highway
> 
> which even has its own kind of shield! (Yes I know, there are *many*
> shields. I've followed the discussions!)
> 
> Is there some common understanding of how to map these, if at all? I've
> looked around a bit and found some roads marked "ref=FS" but
> these were few and far between.
> 
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Add street names from TIGER

[Martijn van Exel]

Existing challenges all done :)
Let’s look into some new ones then. If someone wants to set up MSP based on 
existing city or TIGER data, that’d be great. 
Martijn

> On Nov 16, 2018, at 8:00 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> We’re down to 128 as of just now!
> 
> Any requests for other cities?
> 
> Martijn
> 
>> On Nov 9, 2018, at 3:36 PM, Martijn van Exel > <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> There’s currently a total of 1303 tasks in these challenges
> 
> ___
> 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] More MapRoulette fun (?)

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi folks, 

I created a few more MapRoulette challenges based on something I noticed while 
editing in my own area: some important roads (trunk, primary, secondary) that 
have neither name or ref. To my mind this is often a mistake. Here’s a 
challenge for Georgia https://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3289 
 but I created a few for other 
states as well. Is this useful? Should the instructions be improved?

If you want to make your own for another area use this Overpass query: 
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/DKC  

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

Re: [Talk-us] Add street names from TIGER

[Martijn van Exel]

I added two tickets to my map team’s tracker:
* One for adding the MSP challenge 
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/Community_involvement/issues/13 
<https://github.com/TelenavMapping/Community_involvement/issues/13> 
* One for looking at adding a challenge to look at new roads from TIGER 
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/Community_involvement/issues/14 
<https://github.com/TelenavMapping/Community_involvement/issues/14>

Martijn

> On Nov 16, 2018, at 8:32 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> That is theoretically possible and you could even do it yourself if you are 
> willing to spend some time on it.
> 
> The process is roughly as follows:
> * Download government dataset
> * Convert to OSM PBF using ogr2osm
> * Compare with OSM using Cygnus
> * Convert output file to GeoJSON
> * Upload to MapRoulette.
> 
> See 
> http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2018/01/new-features-and-enhancements-in-cygnus/
>  
> <http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2018/01/new-features-and-enhancements-in-cygnus/>
>  and 
> http://blog.improve-osm.org/en/2018/01/cygnus-conflation-at-your-fingertips/ 
> <http://blog.improve-osm.org/en/2018/01/cygnus-conflation-at-your-fingertips/>
>  for a little more background.
> 
> There’s also an option to use Ian’s workflow to identify missing roads (not 
> missing names, but perhaps it can be adapted) that he uses for the TIGER 
> overlay.
> 
> In the mean time I’m asking the Telenav map team to churn out the files for 
> the Challenge but they’re on some other project right now.
> 
> Martijn
> 
>> On Nov 16, 2018, at 8:13 AM, Joe Sapletal > <mailto:joe.saple...@charter.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> If we do MSP, how about we go 7 county metro and use the data straight from 
>> the counties - 
>> https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-mrcc-centerlines 
>> <https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-mrcc-centerlines>
>>  
>> Joe Sapletal
>>  
>> From: Ian Dees <mailto:ian.d...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2018 9:06 AM
>> To: Martijn van Exel <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>
>> Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap 
>> <mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Add street names from TIGER
>>  
>> Minneapolis/St. Paul, please!
>> 
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 9:02 AM Martijn van Exel > <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>> We’re down to 128 as of just now!
>>  
>> Any requests for other cities?
>>  
>> Martijn
>> 
>> 
>> On Nov 9, 2018, at 3:36 PM, Martijn van Exel > <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>>  
>> There’s currently a total of 1303 tasks in these challenges
>>  
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
>> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us>

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

[Talk-us] Signs detected by OSC

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

I added a list of signs that are currently detected by OpenStreetCam to the OSM 
wiki. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenStreetCam/Detected_Signs#United_States 

 

If you want to help out improve the detection mechanism, you can go to 
beta.openstreetcam.org  and find a trip that 
has detected signs, and validate them. More info on how to do that here: 
http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2018/11/help-train-openstreetcams-open-sign-detection-platform/
 

 

Martijn


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

Re: [Talk-us] Add street names from TIGER

[Martijn van Exel]

That is theoretically possible and you could even do it yourself if you are 
willing to spend some time on it.

The process is roughly as follows:
* Download government dataset
* Convert to OSM PBF using ogr2osm
* Compare with OSM using Cygnus
* Convert output file to GeoJSON
* Upload to MapRoulette.

See 
http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2018/01/new-features-and-enhancements-in-cygnus/ 
<http://blog.improveosm.org/en/2018/01/new-features-and-enhancements-in-cygnus/>
 and 
http://blog.improve-osm.org/en/2018/01/cygnus-conflation-at-your-fingertips/ 
<http://blog.improve-osm.org/en/2018/01/cygnus-conflation-at-your-fingertips/> 
for a little more background.

There’s also an option to use Ian’s workflow to identify missing roads (not 
missing names, but perhaps it can be adapted) that he uses for the TIGER 
overlay.

In the mean time I’m asking the Telenav map team to churn out the files for the 
Challenge but they’re on some other project right now.

Martijn

> On Nov 16, 2018, at 8:13 AM, Joe Sapletal  wrote:
> 
> If we do MSP, how about we go 7 county metro and use the data straight from 
> the counties - 
> https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-mrcc-centerlines 
> <https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metrogis-trans-mrcc-centerlines>
>  
> Joe Sapletal
>  
> From: Ian Dees <mailto:ian.d...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2018 9:06 AM
> To: Martijn van Exel <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>
> Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap <mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Add street names from TIGER
>  
> Minneapolis/St. Paul, please!
> 
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 9:02 AM Martijn van Exel  <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
> We’re down to 128 as of just now!
>  
> Any requests for other cities?
>  
> Martijn
> 
> 
> On Nov 9, 2018, at 3:36 PM, Martijn van Exel  <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>  
> There’s currently a total of 1303 tasks in these challenges
>  
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
> <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] Add street names from TIGER

[Martijn van Exel]

We’re down to 128 as of just now!

Any requests for other cities?

Martijn

> On Nov 9, 2018, at 3:36 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> There’s currently a total of 1303 tasks in these challenges

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

Re: [Talk-us] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

User 25or6to4 contacted me offline mentioning that he has been working on 
improving boundaries based on newer TIGER for the past months now. That, taken 
together with the boundless (ha) energy exuding from this thread, makes me have 
a very happy boundary-positive attitude! I’m not much of a boundary editor 
myself, but fortunately we all have our favorite topics. This community is 
awesome. 

Martijn 

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 1:02 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea  
> wrote:
> 
> Carl Anderson is correct:  what is in the map from TIGER about LSAD is true 
> and affords the possibly to derive geo data about incorporated entities (in 
> some cases, where they haven't been deleted), although the data (being 
> somewhere between 11 and 13 years old) may not be accurate, given 
> annexations, etc.  However, OSM's community, through exhaustive consensus 
> (much of it right here on talk-us, many of these discussions are ref'd in a 
> wiki I noted earlier) agree that what the US Census Bureau says is not 
> necessarily what OSM does or should use to document such entities.  In other 
> words, the Census Bureau is not authoritative.  For what we agree to put into 
> OSM, the OSM community's consensus IS authoritative.  We have agreed that 
> census boundaries of CDPs are statistical, not administrative (what 
> admin_level attempts to denote).  We correctly document how to do this.  
> However, MUCH old TIGER data remain.
> 
> Martijn, your OT link is helpful, here is a visual version:  
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/DG5 (although that does not allow "census.gov" to 
> appear as often as your text-based version does, so thank you for that 
> formatting).  What this shows is that the importation of much Census Bureau 
> data as CDPs in Utah (and elsewhere in the USA) continues to have MUCH work 
> to do:  our wiki suggests admin_level=8 tag be removed from these, and the 
> boundary=administrative tag be changed to boundary=census.  This is correct, 
> it has achieved wide consensus in OSM (via these talk-us pages) and has been 
> documented in our wiki for some time.  And not simply in Utah, this is true 
> in all 50 states, except Alaska, where the state works closely with the 
> Census Bureau to "organize" (not in the legal sense) the Unorganized Borough 
> of Alaska (bigger than any other state, even Texas).  Carl offers a clever 
> way for us to sharpen up how we might do this:  choose admin_level=8 tagged 
> relations which have tiger:LSAD=57 (e.g. Mona, Utah), change 
> boundary=administrative to boundary=census, and delete the admin_level=8 tag. 
>  Import script, anyone?  (Whew, that's a loaded question!)
> 
> However, I disagree with Martijn (or perhaps I do not understand his 
> intention) as he says about our US_admin_level wiki 
> "United_States_admin_level is really not correct... CDPs should be tagged 
> boundary=census, ideally without an admin_level=* tag."  I believe that IS a 
> correct statement, it is simply that Utah (and many other states, again, not 
> Alaska) have never had this "clean up" done.
> 
> Martijn's assertion that "state municipalities: cities, towns, villages and 
> hamlets (infrequent)” is an incorrect description of what we INTEND to denote 
> with admin_level=8 in the USA is also incorrect.  Simply said, hoary old 
> TIGER data contradicts this true statement on a fairly large scale, in Utah, 
> yes, but in most other states, too.
> 
> Let's not confuse what's in the map (from a noisy TIGER import) as correct, 
> when what really is correct is what we have achieved consensus about and 
> wiki-documented:  CDP data are boundary=census, not boundary=administrative 
> (and so, should have NO admin_level key, with any value).
> 
> And, I'd much rather have "too much" wiki than "not enough."  Wiki can be 
> ignored if too verbose, however, the consensus such wiki express is not 
> easily conjured.
> 
> Where I agree with Martijn is "I guess we have some work to do."  "Clean the 
> catbox" indeed!
> 
> SteveA
> California


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

Re: [Talk-us] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois

[Martijn van Exel]

Hmm.

I guess https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level> is really not 
correct then where it says: "Census Designated Places (CDPs) are boundaries 
maintained by the Census Bureau for statistical purposes. CDPs should be tagged 
boundary=census, ideally without an admin_level=* tag.”

Almost all Utah admin8 are in fact TIGER CDP boundaries: 
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/DFS <http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/DFS> 

Also, 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=administrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=administrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries>
 is incorrect where it states that admin8 are "state municipalities: cities, 
towns, villages and hamlets (infrequent)”

Furthermore, 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/Boundaries 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States/Boundaries> is 
also incorrect and suggests "Census-designated places (CDPs) are statistical, 
not administrative areas. Project TIGER fixup deletes outdated CDPs and retags 
relevant ones from boundary=administrative admin_level=8(or 7) to 
boundary=census, no admin_level=*.”

Finally, there seem to be too many wiki pages covering this :) But that’s not 
unique for this topic.

I guess we have some work to do! 

Martijn

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 8:54 AM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> 
> A friendly reminder that Census's TIGER data we have previously imported as 
> admin8 polygons aren't actually official city boundaries. They're "Census 
> Designated Places <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census-designated_place>" 
> which are just named "concentrations of people". In some cases the Census may 
> have gone to the trouble of incorporating city boundary information, but my 
> guess is that the majority of cases are just "Census blocks that look like 
> they're part of the city".
> 
> Having said that, there really isn't a good national-level dataset of city 
> boundaries and Google uses CDP boundaries for their search results...
> 
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 9:49 AM Martijn van Exel  <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
> Sorry that link is bad. https://cloud.rtijn.org/s/ZLen9D8M3tYaAgj 
> <https://cloud.rtijn.org/s/ZLen9D8M3tYaAgj> 
> 
>> On Nov 14, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Martijn van Exel > <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> I looked at a few place boundaries in Utah and compared with current TIGER 
>> files.. Definitely needs work.. 
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/e1113me8y9t1my5/Screenshot%202018-11-14%2008.42.30.png?dl=0
>>  
>> <https://www.dropbox.com/s/e1113me8y9t1my5/Screenshot%202018-11-14%2008.42.30.png?dl=0>
>>  (colored = current OSM, grey = TIGER places shape file 2018)
>> 
>> Martijn
> ___
> 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] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois

[Martijn van Exel]

Sorry that link is bad. https://cloud.rtijn.org/s/ZLen9D8M3tYaAgj 
<https://cloud.rtijn.org/s/ZLen9D8M3tYaAgj> 

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 8:44 AM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> I looked at a few place boundaries in Utah and compared with current TIGER 
> files.. Definitely needs work.. 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/e1113me8y9t1my5/Screenshot%202018-11-14%2008.42.30.png?dl=0
>  
> <https://www.dropbox.com/s/e1113me8y9t1my5/Screenshot%202018-11-14%2008.42.30.png?dl=0>
>  (colored = current OSM, grey = TIGER places shape file 2018)
> 
> Martijn
> 
>> On Nov 14, 2018, at 8:35 AM, Kerry Irons > <mailto:irons54vor...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> And let’s never forget College Corner, OH/IN.  It is in three counties and 
>> two states.  It has two different zip codes.  But really, it is two separate 
>> towns  -College Corner OH and West College Corner IN.  And of course Delmar 
>> and Mardel along the Delaware/Maryland state line.  Just to keep things 
>> interesting.
>>  
>>  
>> Kerry Irons
>>  
>> From: Brad Neuhauser > <mailto:brad.neuhau...@gmail.com>> 
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 10:18 AM
>> To: Clifford Snow mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us>>
>> Cc: wambac...@posteo.de <mailto:wambac...@posteo.de>; 
>> talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois
>>  
>> Minnesota has around 40 cross-county cities, most of which have just a small 
>> portion in the second county. St. Cloud is notable for being in three 
>> counties! https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/137238 
>> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/137238>
>>  
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 9:01 AM Clifford Snow > <mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us>> wrote:
>>> Yes - a city can cover more than one county in the US. I'm not familiar 
>>> with your example, but we have Bothell, WA which is in both King and 
>>> Snohomish County. 
>>>  
>>> Best,
>>> Clifford
>>>  
>>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 5:47 AM >> <mailto:wambac...@posteo.de>> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> are there cities (admin level 8) in the USA which  part of two counties?
>>>> see: https://wambachers-osm.website/images/osm/snaps_2018/lee.png 
>>>> <https://wambachers-osm.website/images/osm/snaps_2018/lee.png>
>>>> left: Lee County
>>>> right: DeKalb County
>>>> there are some more, but i would like to know if that is ok. In Germany 
>>>> this is impossible.
>>>> Regards
>>>> walter/Germany 
>>>> -- 
>>>> My projects:
>>>> 
>>>> Admin Boundaries of the World <https://wambachers-osm.website/boundaries>
>>>> Missing Boundaries 
>>>> <https://wambachers-osm.website/index.php/projekte/internationale-administrative-grenzen/missing-boundaries>
>>>> Emergency Map <https://wambachers-osm.website/emergency>
>>>> Postal Code Map (Germany only) <https://wambachers-osm.website/plz>
>>>> Fools (QA for zipcodes in Germany) <https://wambachers-osm.website/fools>
>>>> Postcode Boundaries of Germany <https://wambachers-osm.website/pcoundaries>
>>>> ___
>>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
>>>> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us>
>>> 
>>>  
>>> -- 
>>> @osm_seattle
>>> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us <http://osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us/>
>>> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>>> ___
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
>>> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us>___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
>> <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] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois

[Martijn van Exel]

I looked at a few place boundaries in Utah and compared with current TIGER 
files.. Definitely needs work.. 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/e1113me8y9t1my5/Screenshot%202018-11-14%2008.42.30.png?dl=0
 

 (colored = current OSM, grey = TIGER places shape file 2018)

Martijn

> On Nov 14, 2018, at 8:35 AM, Kerry Irons  wrote:
> 
> And let’s never forget College Corner, OH/IN.  It is in three counties and 
> two states.  It has two different zip codes.  But really, it is two separate 
> towns  -College Corner OH and West College Corner IN.  And of course Delmar 
> and Mardel along the Delaware/Maryland state line.  Just to keep things 
> interesting.
>  
>  
> Kerry Irons
>  
> From: Brad Neuhauser  
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 10:18 AM
> To: Clifford Snow 
> Cc: wambac...@posteo.de; talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois
>  
> Minnesota has around 40 cross-county cities, most of which have just a small 
> portion in the second county. St. Cloud is notable for being in three 
> counties! https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/137238 
> 
>  
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 9:01 AM Clifford Snow  > wrote:
>> Yes - a city can cover more than one county in the US. I'm not familiar with 
>> your example, but we have Bothell, WA which is in both King and Snohomish 
>> County. 
>>  
>> Best,
>> Clifford
>>  
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 5:47 AM > > wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> are there cities (admin level 8) in the USA which  part of two counties?
>>> see: https://wambachers-osm.website/images/osm/snaps_2018/lee.png 
>>> 
>>> left: Lee County
>>> right: DeKalb County
>>> there are some more, but i would like to know if that is ok. In Germany 
>>> this is impossible.
>>> Regards
>>> walter/Germany 
>>> -- 
>>> My projects:
>>> 
>>> Admin Boundaries of the World 
>>> Missing Boundaries 
>>> 
>>> Emergency Map 
>>> Postal Code Map (Germany only) 
>>> Fools (QA for zipcodes in Germany) 
>>> Postcode Boundaries of Germany 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> -- 
>> @osm_seattle
>> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us 
>> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>> ___
>> 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] Strange city boundary: Lee, Illinois

[Martijn van Exel]

Thanks for pointing it out, Walter.

As others have said, local admin boundaries and their hierarchies are weird 
from a European perspective. I am still trying to understand it.

The boundary may still be wrong. Many (all?) of the admin8 boundaries were 
imported almost 10 years ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if many have not been 
updated to reflect boundary updates. Time to put in an effort to re-check them? 
(Potentially a lot of work, in Utah alone there’s 295 admin8 relations.)

Martijn



> On Nov 14, 2018, at 7:58 AM, Clifford Snow  wrote:
> 
> Yes - a city can cover more than one county in the US. I'm not familiar with 
> your example, but we have Bothell, WA which is in both King and Snohomish 
> County. 
> 
> Best,
> Clifford
> 
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 5:47 AM  > wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> are there cities (admin level 8) in the USA which  part of two counties?
> 
> see: https://wambachers-osm.website/images/osm/snaps_2018/lee.png 
> 
> left: Lee County
> 
> right: DeKalb County
> 
> there are some more, but i would like to know if that is ok. In Germany this 
> is impossible.
> 
> Regards
> 
> walter/Germany 
> 
> -- 
> 
> My projects:
> 
> Admin Boundaries of the World 
> Missing Boundaries 
> 
> Emergency Map 
> Postal Code Map (Germany only) 
> Fools (QA for zipcodes in Germany) 
> Postcode Boundaries of Germany 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us 
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> ___
> 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] Add street names from TIGER

[Martijn van Exel]

Mike — 
Perhaps we should post a challenge based on that data then. Ping me if you want 
to work on that.
We’re going to have public leaderboards for challenges on MR soon so it can be 
a fun competition, who can fix the most names.
Martijn

> On Nov 9, 2018, at 4:19 PM, Mike N  wrote:
> 
> On 11/9/2018 5:36 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> As an experiment my colleagues from the Telenav map team churned out some 
>> local MapRoulette challenges for adding missing street names from TIGER. The 
>> tasks were created by comparing TIGER (2017) to existing OSM data using our 
>> conflation tool Cygnus, which outputs ways with no names in OSM but that 
>> have names in TIGER.
> 
> Looks like a great list of challenges!
> 
>  Considering that there are a number of counties in my region (Upstate South 
> Carolina) where we plan on synchronizing to the newest official data and 
> verifying against imagery, a TIGER compare challenge would be 
> counter-productive.   There were a great many name changes and street 
> additions and deletions compared to 2007 TIGER and probably even recent TIGER.
> 
>  Of course there's always the chance in the future if all local mappers go 
> inactive, it would make sense to have a TIGER challenge to add the new and 
> growing areas.
> 
> ___
> 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] Add street names from TIGER

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

As an experiment my colleagues from the Telenav map team churned out some local 
MapRoulette challenges for adding missing street names from TIGER. The tasks 
were created by comparing TIGER (2017) to existing OSM data using our 
conflation tool Cygnus, which outputs ways with no names in OSM but that have 
names in TIGER.

The task is simply to go in and add the name to OSM unless common sense tells 
you not to. I wrote a diary post that talks about these challenges a little 
more: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/46879 
 

We have a few of them currently active:
* New Orleans https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3086 
 
* Albuquerque / Santa Fe https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3066 
 
* Albany https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3088 
 
* Tucson https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3068 
 
* Tulsa https://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/3067 
 

There’s currently a total of 1303 tasks in these challenges. Just imagine how 
many tasks there could be nationwide. I will send an updated completion number 
for these challenges next week. Please give MapRoulette (another) try and let 
me know any issues or wishes at https://github.com/osmlab/maproulette3/issues 
 

Thanks and happy mapping — 
Martijn___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Review named junction nodes

[Martijn van Exel]

I found a case[0] where the name is definitely legitimate, so I added a warning 
to double check with available street level imagery, plus an example to the 
challenge instructions.

Martijn

[0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/33991781 
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/33991781>, and see 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo=shRl1-KeI59im7hZSmsJig=40.21940429158758=-79.60234247987415=17=0.6058084012090132=0.35483101059177824=2.2895309990765194
 
<https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo=shRl1-KeI59im7hZSmsJig=40.21940429158758=-79.60234247987415=17=0.6058084012090132=0.35483101059177824=2.2895309990765194>
 

> On Nov 6, 2018, at 1:17 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Hi, 
> 
> I created a MapRoulette challenge to review named junction nodes. Since named 
> junctions are very uncommon, most of these should probably be edited. There’s 
> only a few hundred of them so we should be able to review these together 
> pretty quickly.
> 
> https://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3253/task/5881462 
> <https://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3253/task/5881462> 
> 
> (I also wrote a post on how to create challenges in the new MapRoulette 
> because some things have changed / are new: 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/46863 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/46863> )
> 
> Let me know if this makes sense to review!
> 
> Martijn

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

[Talk-us] Review named junction nodes

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi, 

I created a MapRoulette challenge to review named junction nodes. Since named 
junctions are very uncommon, most of these should probably be edited. There’s 
only a few hundred of them so we should be able to review these together pretty 
quickly.

https://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3253/task/5881462 
 

(I also wrote a post on how to create challenges in the new MapRoulette because 
some things have changed / are new: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/46863 
 )

Let me know if this makes sense to review!

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

Re: [Talk-us] USPS Post Boxes

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi Leif,

> On Sep 26, 2018, at 7:16 AM, Leif Rasmussen <354...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Martijn,
> I have very little opinion in which value of operator should be used, as long 
> as they are consistent.  I think that basing the 'preferred' values on what 
> can be found printed on the post boxes, however, is a good idea.  This 
> methodology produces the following:
> * UPS
> * FedEx
> * DHL
> * United States Postal Service
> This system makes the most sense to me, as it reduces the amount of possible 
> confusion.  DHL, as a matter of fact, can't be expanded, because it is the 
> initials of the three founders: Adrian Dalsey, Larry Hillblom, and Robert 
> Lynn.
> "United Parcel Service" is rarely seen on post boxes - only the text "ups" is.
> FedEx is the same.  The company rebranded from "Federal Express" to "FedEx" 
> in January 2000, making "FedEx" the correct value to use.
> For the United States Postal Service, the text "United States Postal Service" 
> is always displayed on the post boxes, which seems like a good argument to go 
> with the expanded version.

I see your point. If that’s what folks think is best, I certainly won’t take 
issue with it.

> 
> I think that the above values are the best, but would be happy to adopt any 
> other values.
> 
> Regarding a MapRoulette challenge, how would that work?  Would all post boxes 
> be converted to "United States Postal Service" before or after the challenge, 
> or would me changing operator tags be completely unnecessary?
> 

Right now, folks would need to edit manually, and it would be in place of an 
automated cleanup. The task would highlight an existing post_box with its 
original value and ask mappers to change it to the proposed value. The 
advantage of doing it this way is a) we can keep updating the challenge to 
re-capture ‘wrong’ tagging, so the challenge would be an ongoing one, and b) it 
encourages people to really look at the situation with a human eye which 
captures the spirit of OSM. Similar challenges exist to normalize phone numbers 
across Europe.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Yet more about USA Rail: now, wiki

[Martijn van Exel]

I pinned it for Nov 17-18 weekend. Add your city and plan a mapping party!
Martijn

> On Sep 18, 2018, at 1:27 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
> Okay there we are! 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Fall_Mapathon_2018 
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Fall_Mapathon_2018> 
> 
> Sometime in November? Earlier?
> 
>> On Sep 18, 2018, at 1:03 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea > <mailto:stevea...@softworkers.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> No hijack seen as actual or intended:  great idea, Martijn!
>> 
>> Trains, transit,  our map:  these really do keep getting better and better.
>> 
>> SteveA
>> 
>>> On Sep 18, 2018, at 12:01 PM, Martijn van Exel >> <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> To branch out a little bit — sorry to hijack the thread Steve — it would be 
>>> nice to do a nationwide transit mapathon around transit. We used to run 
>>> nationwide coordinated mapathons and I miss them. I think they are fun to 
>>> connect communities. Who’s in and who wants to help coordinate?
>>> 
>>> Martijn
>> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Yet more about USA Rail: now, wiki

[Martijn van Exel]

Okay there we are! 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Fall_Mapathon_2018 
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Fall_Mapathon_2018> 

Sometime in November? Earlier?

> On Sep 18, 2018, at 1:03 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea  <mailto:stevea...@softworkers.com>> wrote:
> 
> No hijack seen as actual or intended:  great idea, Martijn!
> 
> Trains, transit,  our map:  these really do keep getting better and better.
> 
> SteveA
> 
>> On Sep 18, 2018, at 12:01 PM, Martijn van Exel > <mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> To branch out a little bit — sorry to hijack the thread Steve — it would be 
>> nice to do a nationwide transit mapathon around transit. We used to run 
>> nationwide coordinated mapathons and I miss them. I think they are fun to 
>> connect communities. Who’s in and who wants to help coordinate?
>> 
>> Martijn
> 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Yet more about USA Rail: now, wiki

[Martijn van Exel]

To branch out a little bit — sorry to hijack the thread Steve — it would be 
nice to do a nationwide transit mapathon around transit. We used to run 
nationwide coordinated mapathons and I miss them. I think they are fun to 
connect communities. Who’s in and who wants to help coordinate?

Martijn

> On Sep 18, 2018, at 11:23 AM, OSM Volunteer stevea 
>  wrote:
> 
> Yes, I've been beating the drums rather loudly about USA Rail recently, yet 
> there is so much that OSM can (and should, imo) do about this.  OSM's actual 
> rail data (imported from TIGER a decade ago) do slowly improve, and for that 
> I am grateful, even as a lot of the work is both mine and many others.
> 
> However, our wiki regarding rail is, um, "messy" for reasons that are largely 
> historical.  In short, there is a distinct trend towards "statewide" rail 
> pages that rather comprehensively describe both freight/industrial rail (in 
> terms of major Class I and smaller railroads), then as things cleave from 
> freight to passenger, link to our Amtrak page (which remains quite 
> respectable) where applicable, AND describe the rapidly growing passenger 
> rail networks/systems in cities large, medium and small in the USA.  
> (Suburban/commuter trains, light rail systems, trams, monorails around 
> airports, tourism/heritage/historic/museum rail, etc.)
> 
> Unfortunately, there are also many rail wiki (most written by the 
> banned-from-OSM-years-ago infamous NE2) which, while seemingly 
> well-intentioned, are mere "dead end" histories of defunct rail from a 
> century ago, rather than the becoming-more-vibrant-daily rail network that I 
> (and others) want to see both properly mapped in OSM and documented in our 
> wiki in a sane, comprehensive way.
> 
> For example, (precede all of these with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/) 
> here are some of these "defunct" pages I'd like to see "re-purposed" and 
> eventually go away:
> 
> Southern_Pacific_Transportation_Company
> Missouri_Pacific_Railroad
> Atchison,_Topeka_and_Santa_Fe_Railway
> Southern_Railway_(U.S.)
> Illinois_Central_Railroad_(pre-1972)
> 
> and I'm sure that isn't a complete list.  These railroads haven't existed for 
> decades and while I have great respect for how disused and abandoned 
> railroads both are and should be "in" OSM (and "properly" documented in our 
> wiki), this really isn't "today's" way to do it.  There are "cross-links" 
> with Wikipedia which likely make sense here, I'd like to focus OSM's wikis on 
> useful structure/organization of an entire states rail networks and providing 
> links to the actual underlying relation data that make our data so useful. 
> Wikipedia isn't going to do that, but it can (and should) capture 
> centuries-old history where we shouldn't.
> 
> Of course, there are wiki pages about USA Rail which must remain, including 
> the worldwide https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Metro_systems 
> which has a USA section that is "fair to good" and more than one absolutely 
> charming wiki like 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Walt_Disney_World_Monorail_System which I 
> find delightful and shouldn't change a byte (unless they need updates).
> 
> In short, I'm asking this talk-us list if "rail wiki cleanup in the USA" is 
> on the right track (so, chime in with your consensus additions, please).  Is 
> the "trend" towards statewide rail wikis correct?  (It seems so to me).  Can 
> the NE2-authored "old stuff" (many of these wiki haven't been touched in 7+ 
> years) be repurposed and then deleted?
> 
> Please contact me on-list or off if you want to see rail data and rail wiki 
> continue to improve in OSM and we can talk about how — there is a great deal 
> to do!
> 
> SteveA
> California
> ___
> 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] Shaped highway shields - trying to revive

[Martijn van Exel]

Agreed. I think it's really nice to have active thinking and work around this. 
The key is to get the rendering stack people involved. Perhaps Paul Norman can 
function as a liaison?

Martijn

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2018, at 12:06, Evin Fairchild  wrote:
> 
> Really glad to see that someone is reviving this and actually taking the step 
> to get it rendered. Frankly, I never understood why Phil didn't do this in 
> the first place. I even mentioned this to him at the time (can't remember his 
> response though).
> 
> -Evin (compdude)
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018, 2:21 PM Kevin Kenny  wrote:
>> (I apologize in advance to the tile-serving community if this message
>> is inappropriate. I see that traffic on that list is largely limited
>> to highly specific technical discussions, but couldn't see a more
>> appropriate forum.)
>> 
>> For several years now, I've been using the support code for shaped
>> shields in OSM, originally developed by Phil! Gold and Richard Weait,
>> to render North American-style maps. A typical example can be found at
>> https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.4143=-74.4233=14
>> In that view, you can see distinct shields for Interstate, US, New
>> York, and county routes, and at least one concurrence (New York 17M
>> aligned with US 6). Incidentally, Phil's is the only renderer that
>> I've seen that can make sense of cases like West Virginia's bizarre
>> double route numbers, as seen in
>> https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test4.html?la=41.4143=-74.4233=14
>> .
>> 
>> The visual distinction among highway shields is really necessary in
>> North America, where there are so many different route networks
>> overlaid.
>> 
>> In the course of working with the code, I've made a number of changes
>> and become seriously out of sync with the main development line, which
>> appears to be moribund. (Phil! and Richard have not answered recent
>> queries; I suspect that I have obsolete contact information, but the
>> messages also have not been returned undelivered.)
>> 
>> Accordingly, I've (quite reluctantly) created my own repository -
>> https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields - with material from the
>> project. The shield templates to be found there are mostly those of
>> Phil! (I added only a handful), but the code to manage shields is
>> almost entirely new. Some significant changes are:
>> 
>> The list of shields to be rendered is obtained from the database
>> itself, rather than being predetermined by a configuration file for
>> each network. This has the disadvantage that refs that are known to be
>> problematic may be rendered (but in most cases they ought to be
>> unsigned_ref). On the other hand, it has the distinct advantage that
>> as mappers continue to create the route relations, the corresponding
>> shields appear virtually automatically.
>> 
>> The composition of shield clusters, rather than being handled by a
>> stored procedure in the database, is done using a GroupSymbolizer in
>> Mapnik. I suspect, given the dearth of discussion that I find in a
>> Google query, that I'm the first user to attempt to use
>> GroupSymbolizer with actual open-ended shield clusters, and therefore
>> that I've trodden new ground in the path from database to renderer. I
>> encourage developers who are interested in the GroupSymbolizer to read
>> at least 
>> https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/wiki/Using-the-GroupSymbolizer
>> - it has a number of tricks to structure the results in a way that the
>> GroupSymbolizer can consume and that renders well. The disadvantage to
>> using the GroupSymbolizer is that Phil!'s shield clusters were rather
>> more attractive visually, since they were aligned to lie in the
>> direction of a way. The advantage is that the current approach can run
>> on an unpatched Mapnik, as opposed to Phil!'s original, which requires
>> at least patching Mapnik to use a read/write connection to the
>> database.
>> 
>> Managing, reliably, the association between ways and the routes in
>> which they participate requires a couple of database tables that a
>> stock osm2pgsql does not produce. I would very much appreciate any
>> commentary from developers of osm2pgsql and Mapnik, particularly,
>> about the issues discussed in
>> https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/wiki/Maintaining-the-association-between-ways-and-routes
>> What I'm currently doing works well for my own use, which is driven by
>> daily updates to extracts at Geofabrik, but will obviously not scale
>> to a whole planet and minutely updates.
>> 
>> Finally, I'd really like to invite anyone with the necessary SVG
>> skills to contribute shield graphics for the missing networks. If
>> you're also a programmer and want to take a whack at the rest of the
>> procedure in https://github.com/kennykb/osm-shields/wiki/Adding-new-networks,
>> and give me a pull request or ask for help, that would be even better,
>> but even the artwork would be a time-saver.
>> 
>> If you've got this far in reading, 

Re: [Talk-us] ref=* tags on links

[Martijn van Exel]

Agree with that, Evin. Unfortunately I think there are still quite a few 
countries where route relations are not as widely used / accepted (I remember 
the UK bring among them? Perhaps someone can do an overpass query to visualize) 
so unless we get everyone on board with them we're likely stuck with 
redundancy. 

Martijn

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2018, at 12:02, Evin Fairchild  wrote:
> 
> The only way you can get people to stop putting reg tags on ways and only put 
> them on relations is if the renderer actually rendered reg tags from 
> relations. Currently it doesn't do this, so it's impractical for people to do 
> what you're suggesting. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know, don't tag for the renderer, 
> but I'd you don't have route numbers show up at all, them this really reduces 
> the usability of the map. It's such an important thing that there's no way 
> you can get people to stop putting the reg tags on ways unless the renderer 
> rendered the ref tags for the whole relation.
> 
> -Evin (compdude)
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018, 9:56 AM Paul Johnson  wrote:
>> The ref=* tag on ways is already 100% redundant if the way is already a part 
>> of the appropriate route relations and should be phased out so ref can be 
>> used to actually describe the way's ref, where applicable.
>> 
>> Also, can we kill this dinosaur entirely already?  Route relations have been 
>> a widely accepted thing for a decade now, if you're not using route 
>> relations for your primary source of route information (instead of expecting 
>> tags on some other non route object to tell you), then you're doing it wrong 
>> and you don't matter.
>> 
>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018, 07:38 Mihai Iepure  wrote:
>>> Hey everyone!
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> We’re looking for your opinion on the existence of ref tags on links – 
>>> should it be there? Is it redundant if the link is already in a route 
>>> relation that has the ref tag?
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> We’ve created a Github ticket to let us know what you think, so feel free 
>>> to post your thoughts there.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Thanks in advance!
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Mihai Iepure
>>> Map Analyst
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> www.telenav.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 mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Food delivery services: Move-fast-and-break-trust

[Martijn van Exel]

A bit of a tangent perhaps, but I sometimes will carry a digital audio recorder 
to quickly take a voice note instead of a picture or paper note. It’s very 
inconspicuous and JOSM can load them in the actual location if they are 
properly time stamped. 

Martijn van Exel

> On Aug 21, 2018, at 17:20, Clifford Snow  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 1:24 PM Ian Dees  wrote: 
>> It'd be great to have smaller, shorter versions that could be handed out 
>> like business cards to handle this case in particular, where business owners 
>> are curious and law enforcement or other interested parties might express 
>> concern.
>  
> I picked business cards because people are familiar with them, they are easy 
> to carry and not that expensive.
> 
> Having information on both sides, which I don't do, would allow us to include 
> tips to help owners add info to OSM. Anyone want to take a stab at creating 
> one?
> 
> -- 
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> ___
> 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] admin_level=8 boundaries in Parker County, TX

[Martijn van Exel]

When it comes to strange boundaries, I always like to refer to this situation: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/53137#map=15/51.4390/4.9341

Baarle-Hertog is a Belgian enclave (actually some 20 enclaves) in the 
Netherlands. The main town inside the county is functionally one town together 
with (Dutch) Baarle-Hertog. Before the Schengen treaty, this led to weird 
situations with lots of checkpoints and people paying property taxes in two 
countries.
Some more info here: https://brilliantmaps.com/baarle-hertogbaarle-nassau/
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018, at 08:41, Kerry Irons wrote:
> There are some "famous" court cases where it needed to be determined 
> where someone lived.  First the courts decided that the bedroom would 
> determine which jurisdiction applied, and then it came down to where the 
> bed was in the bedroom, and then finally where the person's head was 
> when they slept.  Indeed, boundaries do go through buildings.
> 
> 
> Kerry Irons
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Troxel  
> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 10:02 AM
> To: Frederik Ramm 
> Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap 
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] admin_level=8 boundaries in Parker County, TX
> 
> 
> Frederik Ramm  writes:
> 
> > I've recently traced a little bit of stuff in Annetta, TX. The area I 
> > looked at had a lot of potential for someone interested in mapping 
> > from aerial imagery (houses, tracks, driveways, parking missing; some 
> > driveways tagged as highway=residential etc.) and I did what I could 
> > in the small area I worked on, but there was one thing I didn't dare 
> > touch and that's admin boundaries. The ones I encountered often cut 
> > straight through residential buildings and I thought that can't be 
> > right, but I know too little about boundaries in the US to fix any of 
> > it. I am specifically talking of
> 
> Not commenting on that boundary (which others say needs help), but the logic
> 
>   admin-8 bounadry goes through houses
> -->
>   boundary must be wrong
> 
> is incorrect in the US.  Around me, there are multiple houses where the 
> boundary line indeed goes through them (where I've seen the boundary 
> markers, seen the houses, and talked to the occupants who pay taxes to 
> two towns).
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] admin_level=8 boundaries in Parker County, TX

[Martijn van Exel]

Frederik,

These boundaries are often very outdated. I don't know which TIGER vintage they 
were imported from. I have been replacing them piecemeal from current TIGER as 
I work, but we should probably replace them altogether and have a plan to keep 
them updated. I don't think they interfere with other features much, but 
obviously that should be researched.

As for this specific case, current boundary from TIGER 2017 in brown, OSM in 
green: https://cloud.rtijn.org/s/bpxPffp6ycm8rF7 

-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Mon, Jul 9, 2018, at 05:10, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've recently traced a little bit of stuff in Annetta, TX. The area I
> looked at had a lot of potential for someone interested in mapping from
> aerial imagery (houses, tracks, driveways, parking missing; some
> driveways tagged as highway=residential etc.) and I did what I could in
> the small area I worked on, but there was one thing I didn't dare touch
> and that's admin boundaries. The ones I encountered often cut straight
> through residential buildings and I thought that can't be right, but I
> know too little about boundaries in the US to fix any of it. I am
> specifically talking of
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/114418
> 
> and
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33245202
> 
> - maybe someone local wants to give them a closer look. Maybe it's ok
> the way it is. The Annetta North boundary is relatively straight but has
> one wobbly bit, is there maybe a waterway missing in OSM?
> 
> 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

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2018-07-03

[Martijn van Exel]

Also, if Garmin can sell OSM maps for US/Canada for $50 there is a clear 
business opportunity there.
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, at 12:13, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
> I frequently download Dave's Garmin images for my (fairly ancient, yet 
> still trusty!) Garmin GPS 60 CSx.  (The fact that it runs on two AA NiMH 
> rechargeable cells I can rotate into a pocket-sized solar charger while 
> I'm in the wilderness has something to do with this).  Yes, I have 
> noticed that as the CPU in my Garmin GPS 60 CSx remains the same 
> (obviously), yet the density of OSM data from the SDHC card gets denser 
> (especially in urban areas at medium-zoom), it REALLY slows down screen-
> drawing on the Garmin.  This is problematic, but only during initial 
> draw or re-draw as I change zoom.  Basically it means I shouldn't fiddle 
> Garmin zoom levels (In OR Out) while in dense urban areas unless I'm 
> prepared to wait maybe 30 seconds for a full screen refresh, possibly 
> missing upcoming navigation cues.  Otherwise, navigation and "the map 
> moving along with me" (whether ped, bike or car) work just fine once the 
> screen draws at any particular zoom level, even in dense urban areas.
> 
> As an aside, if Garmin (a well-respected GPS developer/manufacturer) has 
> "switched" to using OSM (even if only ONE of its products!), that says a 
> great deal of "wonderful" for the quality of and confidence in our data.  
> (Which have for some time found their way into Telenav's Scout products, 
> too).
> 
> I also appreciate learning about alternatives (I didn't know about the 
> Fenix link either, thanks, Martijn), and also didn't know that Garmin's 
> own map is OSM-based.  Are we sure about that?  Garmin's "built-in" maps 
> didn't used to be OSM-based (obviously), when did that change?  (Yes, it 
> may be that different maps — some OSM, some not — are used for different 
> car/bike/hike/golf/fitness/whatever products by Garmin).  If anybody 
> knows this Garmin map history, I'm eager to hear it.
> 
> SteveA

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

Re: [Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2018-07-03

[Martijn van Exel]

There is a lightweight alternative at
http://www.gmaptool.eu/en/content/maps-garmin-fenix but that is really
more geared towards Fenix watches.. Still may be usable / nice for other
low-memory / small screen contexts. Actually I just blogged about
putting OSM maps on my 10 year old etrex..It can still be done :) -->
https://ma.rtijn.org/2018/07/02/right-to-upload-maps.html
Interesting, I didn't know that the default Garmin map is now OSM based.
Is that also true for the car products? Edge is a bicycle device, right?--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, at 11:19, Elliott Plack wrote:
> Question about these extracts: I’ve tried loading some on these on my
> Edge 820 but the maps are too detailed to render. This is most often a
> problem in city areas where mapping detail is dense. I usually run off
> the edge of the rendered map before it has a chance to reload. The
> Garmin default map is also OSM-based, so is there any advantage to
> using these extracts.> 
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 07:37 Dave Hansen  wrote:
>> These are based off of Lambertus's work here:
>> 
>>  http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl
>> 
>>  If you have questions or comments about these maps, please feel
>>  free to ask.  However, please do not send me private mail.  The
>>  odds are, someone else will have the same questions, and by
>>  asking on the talk-us@ list, others can benefit.
>> 
>>  Downloads:
>> 
>>  http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2018-07-03>> 
>>  Map to visualize what each file contains:
>> 
>>  
>> http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2018-07-03/kml/kml.html>>
>>   
>> 
>>  FAQ
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  Why did you do this?
>> 
>>  I wrote scripts to joined them myself to lessen the impact
>>  of doing a large join on Lambertus's server.  I've also
>>  cut them in large longitude swaths that should fit
>>  conveniently>>  on removable media.  
>> 
>>  http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2018-07-03>> 
>>  Can or should I seed the torrents?
>> 
>>  Yes!!  If you use the .torrent files, please seed.  That web>>  
>> server is in the UK, and it helps to have some peers on this>>  
>> side of the Atlantic.
>> 
>>  Why is my map missing small rectangular areas?
>> 
>>  There have been some missing tiles from Lambertus's map (the>>  
>> red rectangles),  I don't see any at the moment, so you may>>  
>> want to update if you had issues with the last set.
>> 
>>  Why can I not copy the large files to my new SD card?
>> 
>>  If you buy a new card (especially SDHC), some are FAT16 from>>  
>> the factory.  I had to reformat it to let me create a >2GB
>>  file.
>> 
>>  Does your map cover Mexico/Canada?
>> 
>>  Yes!!  I have, for the purposes of this map, annexed Ontario>>  
>> in to the USA.  Some areas of North America that are close
>>  to the US also just happen to get pulled in to these maps.
>>  This might not happen forever, and if you would like your
>>  non-US area to get included, let me know. 
>> 
>>  -- Dave
>> 
>> 
>>  ___
>>  Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> -- 
> Sent from iPhone; kindly excuse tyops.
> _
> 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] [Utah / Salt Lake City] Summer events schedule

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

Summer is here, and so is OpenStreetMap SLC's summer schedule, including our 
popular outdoor "Survey and Map" events. Here's an overview:

* Mappy Hours every 2nd Tuesday of the month. Map geeks get together for 
drinks! Next one: July 10.
* Outdoor Survey and Map mornings, 3rd Saturday in July, August and September. 
Next one: July 21.
* Indoor map nights and Presentations suspended until October.

See here for a list: https://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Utah/events/

Join us! If you are from elsewhere and travel takes you to Utah, message me and 
we can plan something ad hoc as well.

Martijn

-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

[Talk-us] Propose a session for State of the Map US

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi everyone,
I know there is a lot of energy in the US community. Interesting mapping 
projects you have embarked on. Local meetups you have been to, or even 
organized. Tools you are excited about. People you have met. I would really 
like to hear about all these things at State of the Map US in Detroit later 
this year. So I am asking you to submit a proposal to present.

If you think: 'neh, that's not for me', please still give it some thought. 
Perhaps you have never done a public presentation before. That's okay, about 
half of SOTM US presenters are in the same boat as you. People are just as 
interested in your OSM project /   experience as you are in theirs. If you need 
advice, or you are not sure about what to submit or how, email me directly. The 
board is happy to help as well, bo...@openstreetmap.us. 

Some interesting talks from last year for your inspiration:
* Building community in South Florida 
https://2017.stateofthemap.us/program/building-community-in-south-florida.html 
* A survey of Mapping Parties 
https://2017.stateofthemap.us/program/survey-of-mapping-parties.html
* Mapping sidewalks for pedestrian navigation 
https://2017.stateofthemap.us/program/mapping-sidewalks-for-pedestrian-routing.html

Many more talks to watch there.

July 1 is around the corner, don't wait! Submit your proposal at 
https://openstreetmap-us.forms.fm/state-of-the-map-us-2018/forms/4823

Martijn

PS... Here are some things I am thinking about submitting a proposal about. Let 
me know which of these you would be interested in.
* Bus routes and the crazy public transport tagging scheme
* The new version of MapRoulette
* Slack, mailing lists, forums, IRC, enough is enough?
* Something about TIGER cleanup
* The OSM Foundation and You
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Martijn van Exel]

That would be something to file on github as an issue so we can look into it. 
May be a bug or something to do with your browser environment.

Martijn van Exel

> On Jun 21, 2018, at 22:40, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> Looks like my points aren't sticking and I can't set a default editor.
> 
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 22:15 Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>> Most of it is taken from OSM. If you change things there, MapRoulette will 
>> pick it up. What did you want to change?
>> 
>> Martijn van Exel
>> 
>>> On Jun 21, 2018, at 20:43, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Is it normal to not be able to update your user profile in MapRoulette?
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Horea Meleg  
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi everyone!
>>>> 
>>>> First, a big thank you for all contributors who finished our first 
>>>> MapRoulette Challenges.
>>>> 
>>>> Second, as we promised, we prepared 4 more challenges like the others, but 
>>>> in different areas. You can find them here:
>>>> 
>>>> Tulsa, Oklahoma http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3067
>>>> Tucson, Arizona http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3068  
>>>> Albuquerque, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3066
>>>> El Paso, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3065
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
>>>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>>>> 
>>>> We'd love any input and advice!
>>>> 
>>>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> From: Horea Meleg 
>>>> Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 10:02 AM
>>>> To: talk-US@openstreetmap.org
>>>> Subject: New MapRoulette challenges
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Hi everyone!
>>>> To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav 
>>>> mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it with 
>>>> the community using MapRoulette Challenges.
>>>> As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways 
>>>> which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We 
>>>> made two challenges, for two different areas:
>>>> Jacksonville, Florida 
>>>> http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
>>>> San Antonio, Texas 
>>>> http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042
>>>>  
>>>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
>>>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>>>> We'd love any input and advice!
>>>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ___
>>>> 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] New MapRoulette challenges

[Martijn van Exel]

Most of it is taken from OSM. If you change things there, MapRoulette will pick 
it up. What did you want to change?

Martijn van Exel

> On Jun 21, 2018, at 20:43, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> Is it normal to not be able to update your user profile in MapRoulette?
> 
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Horea Meleg  wrote:
>> Hi everyone!
>> 
>> First, a big thank you for all contributors who finished our first 
>> MapRoulette Challenges.
>> 
>> Second, as we promised, we prepared 4 more challenges like the others, but 
>> in different areas. You can find them here:
>> 
>> Tulsa, Oklahoma http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3067
>> Tucson, Arizona http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3068  
>> Albuquerque, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3066
>> El Paso, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3065
>>  
>> 
>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>> 
>> We'd love any input and advice!
>> 
>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Horea Meleg 
>> Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 10:02 AM
>> To: talk-US@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: New MapRoulette challenges
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Hi everyone!
>> To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav 
>> mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it with 
>> the community using MapRoulette Challenges.
>> As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways 
>> which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We 
>> made two challenges, for two different areas:
>> Jacksonville, Florida 
>> http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
>> San Antonio, Texas 
>> http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042
>>  
>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>> We'd love any input and advice!
>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>> Thanks!
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] OSM US Camera lending program update

[Martijn van Exel]

I don't think you can because both the hardware and the software are
customized to work with OSC. Of course you are free to get one through
the program. Have two Waylens cameras side by side on your windshield :)
The custom one also has all the standard Waylens functions as far as I
know, but it has different optics to better support the quality of still
images needed for OSC and specifically feature detection.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, at 11:20, Paul Johnson wrote:
> For those of us who have our own Waylens, what's the best way to
> collect imagery for OSC?  I haven't been able to get an answer out of
> Telenav or Waylens support (even an autoresponse acknowledging that
> they got the message).> 
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018, 12:13 Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>> Hi all, 
>> 
>>  You may have seen that OSM US has started a camera lending program
>>  in partnership with Telenav[1]. You can borrow a camera for up to 3
>>  months to capture street level imagery while driving. The camera
>>  uploads the imagery to OpenStreetCam automatically.>> 
>>  When we introduced the program, we offered an additional perk: if
>>  you collect more than 400,000 OSC points using the camera while you
>>  have it, the camera would be yours to keep.>> 
>>  Well, we are only a few weeks in and we underestimated the amount of
>>  driving mappers will do to collect OSC points :) To make sure that
>>  the program is sustainable, and we don't run out of cameras
>>  altogether, we are raising the point amount needed to keep the
>>  camera to 1,000,000. This amount should still be attainable within 3
>>  months, but it will also allow us to have more people enjoy this
>>  benefit of OSM US membership :)>> 
>>  The new limit will apply to any new applicants, and anyone who has
>>  applied but has not been sent a camera yet.>> 
>>  Oh, if you're not a member of OSM US yet, this is one of the great
>>  reasons to join. Do so here today: http://www.openstreetmap.us/join/>> 
>>  Thanks!
>> 
>>  [1] http://www.openstreetmap.us/2018/05/camera-lending-program/
>>  -- 
>>Martijn van Exel
>>m...@rtijn.org
>> 
>>  ___
>>  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] OSM US Camera lending program update

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

You may have seen that OSM US has started a camera lending program in 
partnership with Telenav[1]. You can borrow a camera for up to 3 months to 
capture street level imagery while driving. The camera uploads the imagery to 
OpenStreetCam automatically.

When we introduced the program, we offered an additional perk: if you collect 
more than 400,000 OSC points using the camera while you have it, the camera 
would be yours to keep.

Well, we are only a few weeks in and we underestimated the amount of driving 
mappers will do to collect OSC points :) To make sure that the program is 
sustainable, and we don't run out of cameras altogether, we are raising the 
point amount needed to keep the camera to 1,000,000. This amount should still 
be attainable within 3 months, but it will also allow us to have more people 
enjoy this benefit of OSM US membership :) 

The new limit will apply to any new applicants, and anyone who has applied but 
has not been sent a camera yet.

Oh, if you're not a member of OSM US yet, this is one of the great reasons to 
join. Do so here today: http://www.openstreetmap.us/join/ 

Thanks!

[1] http://www.openstreetmap.us/2018/05/camera-lending-program/
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

Re: [Talk-us] Slack: Do we need an Alternative (was Planning an import, in Price George...)

[Martijn van Exel]

Doug, 

I think we should / can rely on OSM US and community members who are on both 
Slack and email  to relay information to this list as well. I for one 
appreciate the fact that Slack and other social media are not for everyone. I 
will keep following the list as I have for years and post questions and 
announcements on here.

As a matter of fact I have something to say, I'll start another thread.
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018, at 15:22, Doug Hembry wrote:
> I stand with Greg Morgan and Rihards on this one (and I think, Steve, if 
> I remember rightly). I watch my email, and read the messages and digests 
> from the talk lists. I'm old-fashioned and don't even use a smart phone 
> or any social media (probably the only person in California who 
> doesn't). I'd noted what seemed to be a drop-off in talk-us messages, 
> and wondered where everyone had gone, but I'm not signing up for Slack 
> or any other apps just to keep in touch. If the talk-us community is 
> migrating to Slack, then I'll just get used to being out of the loop. A 
> pity, but I don't have time to change my habits, and like some other 
> correspondents I have a gut suspicion of for-profit corporations.
> 
> ___
> 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] Slack: Do we need an Alternative (was Planning an import in Price George...)

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi Simon,

> > * everyone is on it
> That's a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy after you've essentially
> force migrated everybody there and then cut the ties with any other
> competing media (in OSM) so that you can have your nice walled garden.

I would argue that it is a good thing that people converge on one platform to 
talk about OSM. Whether Slack remains the right choice is something we can 
debate. It was really the only feasible choice that was available to us at the 
time we (OSM US) felt the need for a better platform for conversations. Slack 
has done its job as a for-profit non-open company well in the sense that we're 
somewhat locked in now. I dislike the fact that it is a walled garden, and 
becoming more so, as much as anyone who values free and open data and software. 
If there is a practical way to improve that situation, we should pursue it.

Finally, please stop your unpleasant trolling, it has no place in OSM.

Martijn

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

Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Martijn van Exel]

Just to clarify, the links below are the challenge admin links, the
actual challenges would be accessed athttp://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3041 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3042 

We can easily prepare more of these challenges so we are interested in
your feedback and suggestions for other areas to do this in.
The challenges are based on output from the Cygnus conflation tool which
has a web interface here: http://cygnus.improve-osm.org/ , in case
you're interested in working with it yourself.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, at 01:02, Horea Meleg wrote:
> Hi everyone!


> To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav
> mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it
> with the community using MapRoulette Challenges.> As a starting point we 
> processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted
> ways which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in
> Tiger. We made two challenges, for two different areas:


>  * Jacksonville, Florida
>http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
>  * San Antonio, Texas
>http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042>  


> All necessary information can be found in challenges description.
> Also, description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.> We'd love any 
> input and advice!


> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.


> Thanks!


>  


> _
> 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] Drop the tiger:reviewed tag from roads

[Martijn van Exel]

Very true Mike. There is still some value in detecting TIGER roads that
are in 'original' state. For example, if you can detect a cluster of
'unmodified' TIGER roads, that would point to an area entirely untouched
by human editors.
I write 'original' and 'unmodified' in quotes, because a number of
bots have touched most TIGER imported ways, so TIGER ways having
version=1 are rare.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 11:44, Mike Thompson wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Martijn van Exel
> <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:>> __
>>  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.>> -
> Just because a TIGER road has been modified doesn't mean it has been
> verified, for example if you add a side street you will probably have
> to add a shared node at its intersection with the road in question,
> and that would bump the version - meaning it is now "modified" even
> though the mapper may not have reviewed the entire length of the TIGER
> road.  Conversely, just because a TIGER road is still at version 0,
> doesn't mean it hasn't been verified as existing nodes that make up
> the way can be moved without bumping the version on the way.> 

___
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

[Martijn van Exel]

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
  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
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> _
> 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] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Martijn van Exel]

I'd like to learn more about that massive mess and how we can prevent
that in the future, Paul.To my mind, most TIGER clean up consists of atomic 
tasks, which is where
MapRoulette would typically come in really handy. (Remember the 70,000
connectivity errors we fixed in 2013/4, and the 100,000+ missing
railroad crossings which were also attributable to TIGER .) But perhaps
you have something different in mind. I'd like to think MapRoulette can
help, also because not everybody prefers the same style of working on
large projects.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Mon, May 7, 2018, at 21:12, Paul Johnson wrote:
> MapRoulette really made a massive mess of the lanes situation that a
> more systematic and big-picture effort is starting to get a handle on
> in Oklahoma.  I think MapRoulette works well for smaller-picture
> stuff, and is more complimentary to StreetComplete and not terribly
> great at directing more complicated projects.> 
> I've restarted my efforts at a county level to avoid having a huge
> number of tasks that fall largely in Texas, since it seems that the
> tasking manager is ultimately only capable of dealing with rectangular
> project areas even if you feed it a more complicated polygon via JSON.> 
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:>> 
> I’d like to see how TM and MapRoulette could be complementary in this
>> effort. I know Clifford has set up a TIGER related challenge on
>> MapRoulette, and I have done this in the past as well.>> 
>>  I feel that TM can be good for a general ask like ‘check all TIGER
>>  residential roads in rural areas in this cell, demote to track /
>>  unclassified or delete as needed’ whereas MapRoulette may be useful
>>  for more specific TIGER cleanup related tasks?>> 
>>  Thoughts?
>> 
>>  Martijn
>> 
>> > On May 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org>
>> > wrote:>>  > 
>>  > I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on
>>  > eventually handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER
>>  > cleanup and enrichment.  Ideally, I'd like to do the whole state
>>  > at once (just for variety's sake and for even coverage), but
>>  > county by county works, too.  If there's a limit for the number of
>>  > times an area can be split, this could really use some work, too,
>>  > since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or 5000
>>  > task limit should be sufficient for a single county (though
>>  > definitely won't start off with that many tasks, and almost
>>  > certainly won't hit that many tasks over the life of a project) if
>>  > the split limit is increased (like, at least 5, possibly higher
>>  > just to be on the safe side).>>  > 
>>  > The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per
>>  > task just to keep it manageable (item count based on the resulting
>>  > selection when using JOSM search to replace selection and
>>  > searching for highway=* type:way).>>  > 
>>  > On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com>
>>  > wrote:>>  > I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to
>>  > increase it.>>  > 
>>  > On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson <ba...@ursamundi.org>
>>  > wrote:>>  > What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US 
>> tasker, and
>>  > is it possible to change that?>>  > 
>> ___
>>  > 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] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Martijn van Exel]

I’d like to see how TM and MapRoulette could be complementary in this effort. I 
know Clifford has set up a TIGER related challenge on MapRoulette, and I have 
done this in the past as well. 

I feel that TM can be good for a general ask like ‘check all TIGER residential 
roads in rural areas in this cell, demote to track / unclassified or delete as 
needed’ whereas MapRoulette may be useful for more specific TIGER cleanup 
related tasks? 

Thoughts?

Martijn

> On May 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on eventually 
> handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER cleanup and enrichment.  
> Ideally, I'd like to do the whole state at once (just for variety's sake and 
> for even coverage), but county by county works, too.  If there's a limit for 
> the number of times an area can be split, this could really use some work, 
> too, since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or 5000 task 
> limit should be sufficient for a single county (though definitely won't start 
> off with that many tasks, and almost certainly won't hit that many tasks over 
> the life of a project) if the split limit is increased (like, at least 5, 
> possibly higher just to be on the safe side).
> 
> The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per task just to 
> keep it manageable (item count based on the resulting selection when using 
> JOSM search to replace selection and searching for highway=* type:way).
> 
> On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to increase it. 
> 
> On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson  wrote:
> What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US tasker, and is it 
> possible to change that?
> ___
> 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] Announcing New MapRoulette beta

[Martijn van Exel]

All, 

The Georgia Motorway exit destination challenge is DONE.
I featured a similar challenge for Tennessee. Have at it :)
http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2936 

-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, at 13:24, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> It was brought to my attention that the 'direct links' to individual 
> challenges, below, do not reliably work yet. Let that be an invitation 
> to use the search / filter functions to find these Challenges in 
> MapRoulette while we fix this[1] :)
> 
> [1] https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette3/issues/224
> -- 
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, at 12:13, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > Hi all, 
> > 
> > A brand new MapRoulette is now in public beta and I would very much like 
> > for you to start using it and let me know what you think! You can go to 
> > http://maproulette.org/mr3 right now to try it.
> > 
> > If you're not familiar with MapRoulette, it's a micro-tasking tool that 
> > serves up small tasks to improve OpenStreetMap in <1 minute. The tasks 
> > are grouped in challenges which anyone can create. Some examples are 
> > below.
> > 
> > Here is an overview of MapRoulette and the new features in this release: 
> > https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette3/wiki/What's-new-in-MapRoulette-3
> >  
> > 
> > Some examples of US based challenges that you may enjoy working on:
> > * Fix TIGER roads in Washington: 
> > http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2871
> > * A similar challenge for LA County: 
> > http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/237 
> > * Add Georgia Motorway Exit Destination Information: 
> > http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2939 (there are 'sister' 
> > challenges for other states, use the search to locate those.)
> > 
> > There are challenges worldwide in case you prefer to help folks abroad.
> > 
> > Anyone can create challenges! You can use a GeoJSON file or an Overpass 
> > query. The Challenge wizard is much improved compared to the previous 
> > version. Your feedback on that is especially welcome. If you need help, 
> > holler.
> > 
> > Please let me know your feedback and ideas!
> > -- 
> >   Martijn van Exel
> >   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> ___
> 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] Announcing New MapRoulette beta

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

It was brought to my attention that the 'direct links' to individual 
challenges, below, do not reliably work yet. Let that be an invitation to use 
the search / filter functions to find these Challenges in MapRoulette while we 
fix this[1] :)

[1] https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette3/issues/224
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, at 12:13, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Hi all, 
> 
> A brand new MapRoulette is now in public beta and I would very much like 
> for you to start using it and let me know what you think! You can go to 
> http://maproulette.org/mr3 right now to try it.
> 
> If you're not familiar with MapRoulette, it's a micro-tasking tool that 
> serves up small tasks to improve OpenStreetMap in <1 minute. The tasks 
> are grouped in challenges which anyone can create. Some examples are 
> below.
> 
> Here is an overview of MapRoulette and the new features in this release: 
> https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette3/wiki/What's-new-in-MapRoulette-3 
> 
> Some examples of US based challenges that you may enjoy working on:
> * Fix TIGER roads in Washington: 
> http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2871
> * A similar challenge for LA County: 
> http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/237 
> * Add Georgia Motorway Exit Destination Information: 
> http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2939 (there are 'sister' 
> challenges for other states, use the search to locate those.)
> 
> There are challenges worldwide in case you prefer to help folks abroad.
> 
> Anyone can create challenges! You can use a GeoJSON file or an Overpass 
> query. The Challenge wizard is much improved compared to the previous 
> version. Your feedback on that is especially welcome. If you need help, 
> holler.
> 
> Please let me know your feedback and ideas!
> -- 
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org

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

[Talk-us] Announcing New MapRoulette beta

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

A brand new MapRoulette is now in public beta and I would very much like for 
you to start using it and let me know what you think! You can go to 
http://maproulette.org/mr3 right now to try it.

If you're not familiar with MapRoulette, it's a micro-tasking tool that serves 
up small tasks to improve OpenStreetMap in <1 minute. The tasks are grouped in 
challenges which anyone can create. Some examples are below.

Here is an overview of MapRoulette and the new features in this release: 
https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette3/wiki/What's-new-in-MapRoulette-3 

Some examples of US based challenges that you may enjoy working on:
* Fix TIGER roads in Washington: 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2871
* A similar challenge for LA County: 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/237 
* Add Georgia Motorway Exit Destination Information: 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/browse/challenges/2939 (there are 'sister' 
challenges for other states, use the search to locate those.)

There are challenges worldwide in case you prefer to help folks abroad.

Anyone can create challenges! You can use a GeoJSON file or an Overpass query. 
The Challenge wizard is much improved compared to the previous version. Your 
feedback on that is especially welcome. If you need help, holler.

Please let me know your feedback and ideas!
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

[Talk-us] Can you design a logo for SOTM US 2018?

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all, 

I am part of the SOTM US planning team. We're looking for a great logo design 
for this year's event. We are talking to a few designers, but we would also be 
excited to consider your designs! I don't have a full design brief, but have a 
look at the previous years' logos for some guidance as to design quality and 
theme. Let the destination, Detroit, be your inspiration. 

The timeline for this is short, we need a finished logo by the end of the 
month. You can send your designs (and questions) to sot...@openstreetmap.us. 

Look for a formal announcement of this year's SOTM US in the next weeks. 
Thanks!
-- 
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org

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

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

[Martijn van Exel]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Kevin Broderick 
wrote:

> ...
> Downgrading some ways to tracks without doing so to a whole localized
> network creates the appearance of a higher level of data accuracy than
> actually exists, which IMO is more likely to bite someone in the ass than
> having a localized network of roads that are mislabeled. I know it would
> make some of the exploring I've done via on/off-road motorcycle more
> difficult.
>
> I'd also suggest that leaving tiger:reviewed at no is appropriate if you
> haven't been able to travel the road/track in question and determine
> whether it is really an unclassified road or a track, so it remains flagged
> for further review if someone has the time and proximity to do so.
>
>
Agreed on that point. Leaving reviewed=no in place seems like a sensible
approach to avoid the suggestion of higher data accuracy.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

[Martijn van Exel]

I am very happy to see this rekindled interest in TIGER cleanup!

Having done a fair amount of backcountry exploring, I know that there is a
wide range of road grades and aerial imagery alone is not enough to decide
how navigable a roads is for a particular type of vehicle. Or, for that
matter, what its access limitations are. I do agree with Clifford that
leaving them as poorly aligned 'residential' roads is the worst possible
situation. Yes, worse than deleting the road altogether. What I usually do
is mark the road as track without a track grade tag. This seems to me to be
the most acceptable generic solution for a remote mapper: acknowledging
that something that could potentially be navigated by a 4 wheeled vehicle
exists, without being more specific. Local knowledge can then come to the
rescue to upgrade to unclassified if appropriate.

Another note on the MapRoulette side of things: I would very much
appreciate your feedback on the new MapRoulette version Clifford linked to.
Just email me, join #maproulette on slack, or file an issue at
https://github.com/maproulette/maproulette3/issues.

Martijn

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:08 PM, Kevin Kenny 
wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Kevin Broderick 
> wrote:
>
>> Please, please, please don't convert rural roads to tracks based on
>> imagery alone unless it's incredibly clear (and that would exclude anything
>> with forest cover).
>>
>> While many of them should definitely be unclassified, not residential,
>> downgrading the main rural routes to tracks doesn't match local usage nor
>> the functional topology of the road network in such places. There are a lot
>> of USFS and BLM roads around here that are the only way to access
>> significant areas, that commonly see normal passenger-car traffic and that
>> can be traveled at reasonable speed in a sedan (or at 30+ MPH with a little
>> ground clearance and driving skill),. Having these differentiated from true
>> tracks (where even a stock 4x4 is likely going to be operating at 15 MPH or
>> less) is incredibly helpful for routing and visual use of the map, and it's
>> a lot easier to recognize what I'd call "areas of questionable data" when
>> they haven't been aggressively armchair-mapped. Also, the smoothness key is
>> really helpful for tracks and impossible to map from orthoimagery.
>>
>>
> Yes, yes, yes.
>
> In the rural areas that I can travel to readily, TIGER is downright
> hallucinatory (and there are few enough mappers that cleanup has been
> agonizingly slow). TIGER has roads in places where no road is, ever was, or
> even ever could be. (I've seen one going up a series of cliffs totalling
> about 2000 feet of ascent!) But even in 'leaves down' images, it's nearly
> impossible to see the forest roads, much less trace them, and there is
> definitely a wide variation in quality. Some of them are well-compacted
> sand and shale, that once they've been rolled in the spring, support
> driving at 30+ MPH. Others, I wouldn't bring my Subaru on. (Although I've
> been on a few of those in the ancient Ford Explorrer that the Subaru
> replaced.)  Some are gated, some, you simply have to decide for yourself
> that they're not drivable.
>
> The 'dirt roads' range from 'highway=path abandoned:highway=track
> smoothness=impassable' to 'highway=tertiary surface=compacted
> smoothness=intermediate', with no way for an armchair mapper to tell among
> them.
>
> The old road maps that they used to give out at gas stations had, on many
> of these roads, "inquire locally for conditions," which is still good
> advice. The signage may say, "LIMITED PURPOSE SEASONAL-USE ROAD: No
> maintenance November 1-April 15" - but in practice, they'll keep it open
> later in the Autumn unless the snow comes early, and when they open it in
> the spring depends on when the crews can get it clear - it could be weeks
> late if there's been a bad washout or rock slide. There's absolutely no way
> to tag and encode that sort of thing. Inquire locally for conditions.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] iD news: v2.5.0, OpenStreetCam, and request for translation help..

[Martijn van Exel]

Fantastic, Bryan. Many many thanks for your continued efforts to move the iD 
project forward!
Martijn

> On Dec 7, 2017, at 07:34, Bryan Housel  wrote:
> 
> Happy December!  We have lots moving in the iD editor project.  
> 
>   OpenStreetCam
> 
> Last month, I released iD v2.5.0 (November 10, 2017), which includes support 
> for OpenStreetCam.  If you haven’t tried it yet, you should really check out 
> how easy it is to work with street level imagery in iD.  
> 
> Read more here:
> 
> https://blog.mapbox.com/openstreetcam-support-for-the-id-editor-12934de61fa 
> 
> 
> Please share:
> https://twitter.com/Mapbox/status/931288819277578240 
> 
> https://twitter.com/bhousel/status/929116316614692864 
> 
> 
> 
> ‍ New Help text coming soon
> 
> I recently merged a big pull request to iD, contributed by Manfred Brandl, to 
> overhaul the internal help texts.  The good news is that it replaces those 
> giant blocks of markdown text with short headings and texts which will be 
> much easier to translate and maintain going forward.  The bad news is that it 
> means all of that old help text needs to be translated again…
> 
> If you can translate, I need your help!
> 
> You don’t need to be a programmer - if you speak another language in addition 
> to English, you can do this!  Please log into the iD project on Transifex, 
> https://www.transifex.com/openstreetmap/id-editor/dashboard/ 
>  and check the 
> languages that are available for translation.  And share this info with 
> *anyone* who you know that might want to get involved!  
> 
> Please share:
> https://twitter.com/bhousel/status/933778248105910272 
> 
> 
> 
> As always, follow me on Twitter https://twitter.com/bhousel 
>  for the latest iD news.  More great features 
> coming soon...
> 
> Thank you!
> ❤️ Bryan, and the rest of the  team.
> ___
> 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] Highway exit renumbering

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi, 

To my mind it’s completely optional to preserve this information unless it’s 
somehow still used on signage. I’ve seen old_ref=… used here in Utah and that 
tag seems to be in wide use: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/old_ref#map 
 

Martijn

> On Nov 28, 2017, at 1:56 PM, d w  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm a bit new to mapping on OSM. A highway in Rhode Island (I-295) is getting 
> renumbered, and I have no idea how to tag the old exit numbers. I looked for 
> guidance on the wiki and some mailing list archives, but couldn't find it. My 
> assumption that old exit numbers should be tagged with k=old_ref. Is this 
> right?
> 
> Thanks!
> ___
> 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] Many Mappy Minutes 2

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

It's time for the second Many Mappy Minutes, the monthly online hangout for
chatting about all things OSM. We'll start at 5:30 PT[1]

Details in my diary: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/42393

Sorry for the late notice!

Martijn

[1]
https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Many+Mappy+Minutes=20171115T1830=220
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Trunk

[Martijn van Exel]

Okay folks. Coming back from not even 48 hours camping and this thread has
exploded. I don't think it benefits anyone to continue in this way.
Valuable insights get lost in the sheer volume of email; arguments are
being repeated.

I am dedicating the next Many Mappy Minutes (our monthly-ish online
hangout) to discuss road classification. I proposed November 15 5:30 PT in
an earlier email to this group. I invite you all to join then.

In the mean time, if you would like to have a more interactive discussion,
please join IRC or Slack and continue the discussion there.

Martijn

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Nathan Mills  wrote:

> In the US, we've always treated primary/secondary/tertiary as a way to tag
> importance to the road network, while physical construction was secondary.
> Motorway, of course, was and still is treated differently. Trunk has always
> been stuck in the middle between people who like me and Paul want to use it
> more like motorway but for divided highways and people who want it to mean
> more primary than primary.
>
> That's why we're still taking about it now, long after the usage of other
> highway tag values has long been settled. The closest thing to a decision
> that was ever made was NE2's unilateral mass edit, some of which has been
> reverted, some of which hasn't. Without consensus that the tagging is wrong
> and not just the unilateral decision, I'm not going to go out of my way to
> revert his trunk changes on ways I'm not otherwise editing large portions
> of. It's not a nice thing to do. It's got nothing to do with thinking that
> things should be that way and everything to do with not being a jackass who
> unilaterally imposes their will on the whole community.
>
> -Nathan
>
> On October 15, 2017 1:40:16 AM EDT, Bradley White <
> theangrytom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If we can determine importance (which is what the 'highway=' tag
>> fundamentally represents per the wiki) solely by what's on the ground,
>> why not just tag what's physically there, ditch the 'highway' tag
>> altogether, and let the renders handle it with their own algorithms?
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 12:19 AM, Paul Johnson  
>> wrote:
>>>

  The US is pretty well known for overbuilding highways.  Are we trying to
  document how things are on the ground or how things are actually
  connected?  If we're going for the former, then yeah, only Bend Parkway 
 and
  a brief streak through Klamath Falls is a trunk part of US 97.  If we're
  going for the latter, then go ahead with NE2's idea and smash almost
  everything into trunk.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Keep hitting send too soon.  Personally, I find what's on the ground to be
>>> more useful than the connections.  Game theory and any routing engine can
>>> figure out the connections.  But knowing what's a stupid rural road with an
>>> overly generous speed limit and what's almost but not quite a freeway is
>>> more useful.  If I'm driving a big rig going from southwestern Canada or
>>> Alaska to somewhere in Nevada, I don't give two shakes what some toolbag
>>> things is the most prominent road.  I care more about what *actually is a
>>> big road*.  Calling a two leg segment of US 97 30km outside of East
>>> Butthump, Oregon a trunk is a great disservice when it's basically on par
>>> with County Road Number Who Even Cares tracing off to Outer
>>> Smalltownsville, other than the fact that it goes through.  Calling it a
>>> trunk when it's not is going to set an unreasonably high expectation for
>>> what is otherwise an overtravelled, glorified two digit National Forest
>>> route through the east Cascades frontier.  Primary is definitely ample for
>>> that road, even if you're going a more obscure minor haul route like Salem
>>> to Reno.
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
> --
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
> ___
> 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] Trunk

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

I haven't abandoned this thread or thinking about it. It has just taken me
a while to read through all the diary comments + what is being said in this
thread. I intend to follow up with another diary post where I try to
collect this smart crowd's thoughts and suggestions, but it will probably
not until after State of the Map US that I get to this.

In the mean time, I decided to test some of the ideas posted here on a real
case: The part of Michigan SR 10 northwest of the I-696 interchange:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/252973#map=13/42.5132/-83.3168

Since 1) this road does not seem to serve an important connecting role in
the long distance road network 2) the density of abutters and related
driveway / parking exits I judged a downgrade warranted. Please discuss
here or on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52903464 .

On the topic of tagging for the renderer, two things: 1) A US-specific
rendering would be really neat 2) Trunk 'appendices' like the one I just
downgraded do make rendering at low zooms tricky -- you end up with short
segments that seem to end in nothing.

Martijn

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Greg Troxel  wrote:

>
> Kevin Kenny  writes:
>
> > Perhaps we could reach consensus more easily if we were
> > to first try to agree that the goal is to tag both physical character
> > and regional importance, and recognize that the two serve
> > different needs, and are (in the US) often grossly mismatched?
> > Then the discussion could revolve around the question of what
> > tagging is for physical character, what tagging is for regional
> > significance, and what are objective criteria for assessing
> > significance. (It's somewhat subjective, and therefore
> > contrary to the OSM spirit of "tag what is visible only on the
> > ground", but it's so necessary to getting mapping and routing
> > right that I think we have to grasp that particular bull by
> > the horns.)
>
> I think that would be a great step forward.
>
> The elephant in the room, though, is that the behavior of the default
> render is considered extremely important, and I think a lot of the
> debate is at least somewhat tied to controlling how that comes out.
>
> ___
> 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] Trunk

[Martijn van Exel]

Thanks all for your input. With this advice in mind, and my own thinking /
opinion, I wrote the a diary entry which I hope will spark further debate
:) https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/42450

Best
Martijn

On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Kevin Kenny 
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Richie Kennedy
>>  wrote:
>> > Perhaps I should make it clear that I am willing to pull a **full NE2
>> > defense** of the position that a controlled-access Super 2 is properly
>> > tagged as motorway.
>>
>> Do we have differing definitions of a Super Two?
>>
>
> I believe we're all on the same page that a super-two type situation is a
> controlled access, single carriageway, where that single carriageway
> operates in both directions, typically two lanes (though there may be
> additional lanes for short distances to facilitate merging, exiting or at
> toll plazas).
>
> My personal threshold for 'motorway' is that potential conflicting traffic
>> is
>> grade separated.
>>
>
> Would you consider oncoming traffic as conflicting?  That's the crux on
> the super-two debate.  I would consider at least two lanes each way,
> free-flowing, controlled access, and at least two carriageways as the
> minimum threshold for motorways.  Limited access, at-grade intersections,
> single carriageway, this all would be more characteristic of trunks to me.
>
>
>> I'm not comfortable with tagging as 'motorway' any road that has
>> at-grade opposing
>> traffic. (Example: US 7 in between Arlington and Rutland, Vermont.
>> Access is fully controlled, but there is
>> no grade separation between opposing lanes. Climbing lanes are provided on
>> steep grades, but passing in the oncoming lane is lawful in some straight
>> and
>> level sections.)
>>
>
> I've made a one-off exception in the case of US 412 on Diamond Head,
> mostly because a single, lone, relatively unused junction remains at grade
> out of over 160 km of motorway largely due to terrain limitations.  There's
> a few similar situations with driveways and the occasional extremely minor
> road going directly into bona-fide interstates in Utah.  And of course, the
> traffic lights to let ships through the drawbridge on I 5, literally the
> only traffic light on that road for it's entire three state run.  So there
> is an edge case to motorways where every attempt has been made to ensure
> traffic is free flowing and conflict-free, but some single point couldn't
> be properly eliminated.
>
> I'm not planning to tag or retag anything; I don't have a dog in this
>> particular
>> fight. I write this message as a data consumer. But I think that the
>> tagging seen
>> in http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/41.88704/-73.76900 is utterly
>> nonsensical. What the Sam Hill does it mean to have a 'motorway' that
>> you tag as 'trunk' for barely the width of the intersection so that you
>> can
>> put a grade crossing on it? It might silence a warning about placing
>> a grade crossing on something as a motorway, but there's no useful
>> information to a driver.
>>
>
> It's worse than useless - it raises the false expectation that the road is
>> a
>> motorway when it is not. It has grade crossings; it has narrow shoulders
>> (not
>> necessarily a disqualifier); it has the same speed limit as primary roads
>> in its vicinity. It's a trunk road, or would be if we had designated trunk
>> roads in the US. Tagging it as a motorway encourages unsafe driving,
>> and at the threshold of an intersection is not sufficient notice to
>> drivers
>> of a downgrade.
>>
>
> This reminds me of WA 500 between I 5 just north of Officer's Row in
> Vancouver, WA; and Fourth Plain near the Sifton neighborhood. It really
> should be trunk for that whole length due to the mix of at-grade and grade
> separated intersections and abrupt end on a surface street (and even after
> the last intermediate intersections at 42nd and at Stapleton get grade
> separated, I'd still be wary of calling any part of that a motorway until
> something's done about the end at Fourth Plain, because it does
> significantly interrupt traffic coming from the expressway part, literally
> opposite what you would expect out of a freeway, particularly when it's so
> short).
>
> Trunk is basically everything that's more freeway-like than a boulevard,
> but not quite a freeway.
>
> ___
> 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] Trunk

[Martijn van Exel]

Question for you all:

What make Michigan state routes 5 and 10[1] trunks rather than primaries?

To my mind these are highway=primary mainly because of at-grade
intersections.. I am still confused about what makes a trunk road in the
US. To my mind it's roads with no at-grade intersections but not built to
interstate standards / not having an interstate designation... I'm not
looking to open up a can of worms but I would really like to understand.

Martijn

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/42.5188/-83.3982
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Bicycle infrastructure

[Martijn van Exel]

I also exported the data to geojson.io:
http://bl.ocks.org/anonymous/raw/77da9f9103fcbf5c8382a316b7f22ef5/

Martijn

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am holding a bike mapping party for our local OSM group this Thursday.
> We want to complete the bicycle infrastructure of Utah. I designed this
> Overpass query: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/s99 to extract most of the
> bicycle data. Now I have two questions:
>
> 1) Do you see any improvements I should make to this query / am I missing
> important features?
> 2) How can I best use this result for my bike mapping party?
>
> Any help appreciated! If you're in the area, please stop by:
> https://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Utah/events/243371717/
>
> If you don't want to click, this is the query at the time of writing:
>
> area[name="Utah"]->.a;
> (
>   node[amenity=bicycle_rental](area.a);
>   node[amenity=bicycle_parking](area.a);
>   way[highway=cycleway](area.a);
>   way[cycleway](area.a);
>   way["cycleway:right"](area.a);
>   way["cycleway:left"](area.a);
>   way[bicycle=yes][highway!=motorway](area.a);
>   way[bicycle=designated](area.a);
> );
> out meta;
> >;
> out skel qt;
>
> Martijn
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Center turn lane mapping

[Martijn van Exel]

I agree. Isn't there a hidden preference to make that setting stick?

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com> wrote:

> I switched from using the centre_turn_lane tag to using the turn:lanes
> tagging when I discovered the turn lanes plugin for JOSM. Between that
> plugin and the change:lanes plugin I think it is much easier and clearer to
> tag lanes, including center turn lanes, that it was not too long ago.
>
> Only real complaint I have with the turn lanes plugin is that I prefer to
> have tag values of the form “left|none|none|right” rather than
> “left|||right” as it is easier for a human to read. Or at least easier for
> me to read. You need to check a box that does not stay checked between
> editing sessions for it to use “none". And it doesn’t put “none” in all the
> lanes if there are more than a couple of lanes in the same direction.
>
> Tod
>
>
> On Oct 3, 2017, at 11:49 AM, Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I had a discussion about center turn lane mapping with my team this
> morning, and I wrote a diary about it proposing one consistent scheme to
> tag them. Not a new scheme, but using the existing lanes / turn:lanes
> schema as already implemented by the JOSM plugin, in favor of the
> centre_turn_lane tag. The diary is here: https://www.
> openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/42432
>
> If you could take the time to share your opinion there I would surely
> appreciate it!
>
> Thanks,
> Martijn
> ___
> 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] Center turn lane mapping

[Martijn van Exel]

Oh, and the corresponding team ticket:
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/mapping-projects/issues/28
Martijn

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I had a discussion about center turn lane mapping with my team this
> morning, and I wrote a diary about it proposing one consistent scheme to
> tag them. Not a new scheme, but using the existing lanes / turn:lanes
> schema as already implemented by the JOSM plugin, in favor of the
> centre_turn_lane tag. The diary is here: https://www.
> openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/42432
>
> If you could take the time to share your opinion there I would surely
> appreciate it!
>
> Thanks,
> Martijn
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Center turn lane mapping

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi all,

I had a discussion about center turn lane mapping with my team this
morning, and I wrote a diary about it proposing one consistent scheme to
tag them. Not a new scheme, but using the existing lanes / turn:lanes
schema as already implemented by the JOSM plugin, in favor of the
centre_turn_lane tag. The diary is here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/42432

If you could take the time to share your opinion there I would surely
appreciate it!

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