Re: [Talk-us] wtsp.com using OSM for detour maps

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Nick,

That bloke is me ;)

Would be happy to talk about Depiction but it's not really a viable solution 
right now as they are actively seeking a buyer and currently not maintaining 
the software. It is still usable for some things but as much as I endorse the 
idea it just isn't something I would tell people to consider purchasing at the 
moment.

Best,
=Russ

> On Sep 14, 2017, at 9:45 PM, Nick Hocking  wrote:
> 
> Some while back, at the Denver SOTM, a bloke gave a presentation about 
> depiction.
> 
> This software is all about dynamic changes to the map due to natural hazards 
> like flood, fire, etc and has the ability to incorporate immediate changes to 
> routability by marking roads closed or marking certain areas as flooded.
> 
> I think that OSM is not a good place for rapidly changing data but when used 
> as a basemap for a layer like depiction, it would be a godsend, in emergency 
> situations.
> 
> http://blog.depiction.com/w/about/
> 
> ___
> 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-Colorado Mappy Hour Denver Buildings Import Discussion

[Russell Deffner]

Greetings all, this is a cross-post :)

 

For some of you this may be old news/reminder.  Last spring the Denver
Regional Council of Governments approached our local group, OSM-Colorado
<https://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/> , to discuss if and how a ton of
planimetric data that they have collected and released as public domain
could also be added to OpenStreetMap.  Since then we've been discussing with
the local mappers and working together with DRCOG to prepare a pilot import
for their building dataset and we're very close to that goal. This email is
mainly a 'last call' for the local/US community to review what we have
outlined on the wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Denver_Planimetrics_Import before we send
notice to the main imports list.

 

The other thing this email is, and why I'm cross-posting, is because we'd
love to have you come discuss the import and other OSM stuff at a Mappy Hour
tomorrow the 25th; details:
https://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/events/237116910/ 

 

Of course if you can't make mappy hour please email me any comments,
thoughts, suggestions or advice; thank you!

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

russdeff...@gmail.com

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Cold Springs Fire

[Russell Deffner]

Local Disaster Declaration just made, as well as road network project:
http://tasks.openstreetmap.us/project/52 

 

Please consider mapping some this weekend, appreciated for OSM-CO in general
as well! More info/projects to come,

=Russ

 

From: Russell Deffner [mailto:russell.deff...@hotosm.org] 
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2016 4:51 PM
To: OSM US Talk
Cc: activat...@hotosm.org
Subject: [Talk-us] Cold Springs Fire

 

Hello all,

 

This is an informational message that I am monitoring/beginning size-up for
the Cold Springs Fire near Nederland, Colorado. Although relatively small at
the moment, it is hot and dry in Colorado, so the fire has the potential to
become a major incident. Also proximity to population, the local office of
emergency management has initiated mandatory evacuations (following them at
http://www.boulderoem.com/emergency-status/ and
https://twitter.com/BoulderOEM).

 

It is anticipated that as usual with US response, OSM probably won't be used
for firefighter response, but I'm actually part of the GIS Activity for the
local Red Cross chapter, so if I'm called to make maps for Disaster
Assessment planning, etc. I may leverage OSM and the community. Therefore,
stay tuned as I might go ahead and create a mapping project for buildings
and roads in the area (there are probably lots of 'untouched' TIGER roads,
so cleaning up geometry, etc.) - Nederland is pretty well mapped, but not
the area this fire is moving towards.

 

Thank you,

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

russell.deff...@hotosm.org

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT) 

http://hotosm.org <http://hotosm.org/> 

 

russdeff...@gmail.com 

OSM-Colorado and Wyoming

http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/

http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Wyoming/

 

 

 

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

[Talk-us] Cold Springs Fire

[Russell Deffner]

Hello all,

 

This is an informational message that I am monitoring/beginning size-up for
the Cold Springs Fire near Nederland, Colorado. Although relatively small at
the moment, it is hot and dry in Colorado, so the fire has the potential to
become a major incident. Also proximity to population, the local office of
emergency management has initiated mandatory evacuations (following them at
http://www.boulderoem.com/emergency-status/ and
https://twitter.com/BoulderOEM).

 

It is anticipated that as usual with US response, OSM probably won't be used
for firefighter response, but I'm actually part of the GIS Activity for the
local Red Cross chapter, so if I'm called to make maps for Disaster
Assessment planning, etc. I may leverage OSM and the community. Therefore,
stay tuned as I might go ahead and create a mapping project for buildings
and roads in the area (there are probably lots of 'untouched' TIGER roads,
so cleaning up geometry, etc.) - Nederland is pretty well mapped, but not
the area this fire is moving towards.

 

Thank you,

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

russell.deff...@hotosm.org

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT) 

http://hotosm.org <http://hotosm.org/> 

 

russdeff...@gmail.com 

OSM-Colorado and Wyoming

http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/

http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Wyoming/

 

 

 

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

[Talk-us] OSM-US Summer Mapathon

[Russell Deffner]

Greetings everyone,

 

Hopefully you've recovered from the long holiday weekend and are ready for
some mapping! And forgive the short notice but this coming weekend is the
quarterly mapathon. Several events are already listed on the wiki-page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Summer_Mapathon_2016  - If
you're hosting an event, please add the details to that page.

 

Happy Mapping!

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

russdeff...@gmail.com

OSM-Colorado and Wyoming

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

Re: [Talk-us] What should we do for wildfires?

[Russell Deffner]

Yes Val,

Maybe I sounded a bit too discouraging in my first reply, so in my opinion 
there's really only two things we need to do to get OSM used in US disaster 
response:
1. Keep mapping and doing all the things we do to continually improve OSM; the 
more 'complete'/up-to-date the map is before the incident, the more useful it 
will be.
2. Keep up outreach - both to agencies and individuals...

Getting general awareness to individual firefighters/responders is easier and 
may be more successful; however, myself and a few others from HOT recently 
worked with folks from FEMA to generate data in OSM for the Mariana Islands; as 
there wasn't really any public source. And HOT helped support Hurricane Sandy, 
but not exactly/directly via the typical OSM mapping projects. So we have made 
some progress and of course there's lots of folks in local, state and federal 
government on this list who are working on this stuff. Specific to this fire, 
or any incident, if we do want to set-up a mapping project; I can help there.

=Russ

-Original Message-
From: Valerie Anderson [mailto:vale...@andersongeospatial.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 9:37 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] What should we do for wildfires?

Hey all,

I'm a current wildland firefighter but all I do are prescribed fires
here in Florida. In terms of getting ICs using OSM your best bet would
be to get they guys who do fire every week to start using and
contributing to OSM. They're usually the ones tapped for local and
remote wildfires. They also have a ton of data for firelines, land
cover, escape routes, and wetlands. I think you probably won't be able
to get anyone to use OSM for incidents in the US until it's a lot
better, but a better first step would be to get local governments to
quit using their own data/proprietary programs to manage their roads,
streetlights, and routing emergency vehicles and get a few to switch to
OSM. That would make an IC much more likely to rely on OSM for a future
wildfire, particularly if a local burn boss was already familiar with
it.

Cheers,

Val


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

Re: [Talk-us] What should we do for wildfires?

[Russell Deffner]

Hi all,

 

I coordinated that Colorado Wildfire mapping effort in 2013. I am also a HOT
voting member and volunteer coordinator for our Disaster Mapping program.
Would be happy to talk directly with folks about this stuff. To try and put
the key points in an email - it can be something HOT does, but as with most
response efforts in the United States, Canada and Europe - those response
agencies (such as the USFS) typically are not going to use OpenStreetMap.  I
had some minimal success talking with the Incident Command team for the
Waldo Canyon fire in 2012 and that's what inspired my efforts in 2013.
However, as Incident Command teams are 'temporary' and change with each
incident, not sure those talks/efforts ever made it 'up the chain'.

 

Of course getting and keeping the map up-to-date is ideal and as a former
wildland firefighter I can say, it's really only helpful to those
'on-the-line' if the map is ready in advance; but of course the aftermath is
helpful for insurance, recovery, etc.  I was just looking over the Waldo
Canyon burn area a few weeks back as I noticed Mapbox imagery had been
updated in the area (now I think Bing has as well), but I was completely
surprised because almost every one of the 346 homes destroyed have been
built back, exactly the same as before - wasn't sure I was seeing things
correctly until I did find a few lots that are empty and 1 or 2 homes that
were built back slightly different. 

 

Guess my main point here is that we can and should map as much as we can,
but unless there are some locals who want to survey once the area is safe,
then tracing the buildings pre-disaster is maybe all that needs done.  I do
notice however it seems the imported landuse around Lake Isabella has an
offset to Bing and road network.

 

=Russ

 

From: Jonathan Schleuss [mailto:jschle...@me.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 10:53 PM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-us] What should we do for wildfires?

 

The Erskine Fire   [1] has burned
more than 46,000 acres and killed two. It destroyed 200 structures. The
perimeter of the fire is huge. 

 

What's the right response from OpenStreetMap?

 

Should we go in and check roads? Add buildings? What if they've been
destroyed? Addresses? Shelters? Other items? Is this more a role for the HOT
group? I checked the talk-us archives, but didn't find a lot of "wildfire"
discussion and I'd love to know what you all think is an appropriate
response. There's some good background on the 2013 Colorado Wildfire Season
[3]. There's also a preemptive take with Portuguese Wildfire Mapping [4]. We
could probably find places inside the U.S. that are at a high risk and task
those areas out. California has a shapefile. [5] 

 

I figured I'd open it up for discussion. Please reply with your thoughts.

 

cheers,

Jon Schleuss

 

I'm a reporter and graphic artist at the Los Angeles Times. I got into
OpenStreetMap about a year ago thanks to at MaptimeLA event taught by
techlady   and Data411
 . I use maps in my work almost
every day. Currently, hacking on the Great L.A. County Building Import
  [5].

 

[1] http://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/4806/

[2]
http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fire_prevention_wildland_statewide

[3] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2013_Colorado_Wildfire_Season

[4] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Portuguese_Wildfire_Mapping

[5] http://labuildingsimport.com/

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed import cleanup: NYSDEClands

[Russell Deffner]

Just making sure, as I know people have confused Russ's before:

"Russ has expressed concern ...
Russ says that he did it ...
Russ intended..."

I believe you're talking about RussNelson 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson)

From the other Russ (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/russdeffner), 
=Russ


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

[Talk-us] Summer Mapathon Schedule

[Russell Deffner]

Greetings everyone,

 

I noticed the blog-post for 2016 quarterly mapathons is 'missing something':
https://openstreetmap.us/2016/02/mapathons-2016/ - I can guess that should
be July for summer, can someone confirm? 

 

FYI, we're looking at a weekend in August for MapCamp!
http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/events/231491637/ - so if you really want
to come this year and have an 'ideal weekend' reply directly to me, thanks!

 

=Russ

Russell Deffner

russdeff...@gmail.com 

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

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

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Kevin, I'll try to add some context. Here's a neat use for the new OSM 
Analytics tool developed by HOT: 
http://osm-analytics.org/#/compare/polygon:~lwbS}lpoFipQYwJawGbnQxD/2008...now/highways
  

If you don't see 'blue' roads, zoom in until you do and then swipe left/right - 
you can see the original TIGER roads were 'relatively accurate', i.e. you can 
follow X road, turn left on Y, etc, etc. but position and geometry is 
'horrible'. And yes, there's many 'ghost roads', etc. which maybe once was a 
track that the power company or someone used to 'get back into the 
woods/cut-across/etc.' but are not 'roads' as the average reasonable person 
would consider. Definitely take a look at Wandcrest Park for a 'what the heck 
happened there' that took a drive back in there to figure out.

FYI, of course anyone is welcome to critique (and several have) my 'home area'; 
i.e. I realized from day 1 I would probably be one of, if not the only, OSM-er 
in Park County, Colorado: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/439376 - I am 
basically working it from north to south, but as Wolfgang said - some of the 
things/ways I mapped early on, I do very differently now and it will forever be 
a work in progress. One of those things was my first focus was on cleaning up 
road geometry; so no, I didn't add surface or smoothness, etc. tags. Around 
here I can show you a paved road that you might not want to drive your 
high-clearance vehicle down, and a dirt road that people drive their 
low-clearance 'race cars' down at high speeds. Point being, it's not a 'simple' 
equation to show 'quality' of roads. 

=Russ 


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

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

[Russell Deffner]

Yes, ok – so ‘aging myself’ a bit – but I did all my locale TIGER cleanup with 
P2, so my practice was to review/almost always fix geometry, then look at 
‘function’/classification of the roadway, then just delete the reviewed tag and 
automagically those uid tags and such would go away. So it seems now we are 
talking that even more original TIGER tags are ‘useless’ and should be removed, 
which I have no problems with, I’m sure there were several dozen I just deleted 
everything (sometimes the entire way) because the road was actually a driveway 
or otherwise completely wrong.

=Russ

 

From: Harald Kliems [mailto:kli...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 10:03 AM
To: Steve Friedl; Russell Deffner; Adam Franco; talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for dealing with old TIGER tags?

 

 

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:52 AM Steve Friedl <st...@unixwiz.net> wrote:

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

 

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

Russell is probably referring to this: 
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/7915 

I think most of these are gone by now.

 

 Harald.

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

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

[Russell Deffner]

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

 

My thoughts:

 

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

 

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

 

=Russ 

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

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




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

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

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Charlotte, good to hear from you, hope all is well!

Essentially, yes to all that (except I'm not sure on landuse=conservation); 
looks 'depreciated' via http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse 

As far as how to 'properly tag' the various types of 'National' protected 
areas, I think this table has the most recent/good conceptually schema:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area#Protect_classes_for_various_countries
 

Then we can get back to 'what is a forest/tree/scrub/etc.' :)  On a serious 
note, yes - I think it's going to take some 'micro-mapping' to accurately show 
usage of our natural resources. Back to the Ski Resort/Piste mapping, yep - 
Breck and Copper and about 1/2 dozen other ski resorts are 'inside White River 
NF' with agreement/contracts with USFS, but we don't tag the whole forest 
winter recreation area - which it seems someone deleted my polygon around 
Copper :(

=Russ

-Original Message-
From: Charlotte Wolter [mailto:techl...@techlady.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 4:22 PM
To: Talk-US@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

Russ,

 I think you have come closest to a good 
general description of something with multiple 
uses. Yes, above all, U.S. national forests are protected.
 So, does that mean that tagging is 
boundary=protected_area and landuse=conservation, 
along with, of course, tagging of individual 
features/uses, such as campground, fishing, archaeological site, etc.?

Charlotte


At 05:07 AM 5/11/2016, you wrote:

>Hi Greg and all,
>Sorry, I either need a refund on that Forestry 
>degree or have to call this out as incorrect:
>Perhaps the problem here is the multiple roles 
>that the the US Forest Service plays. Note that 
>that name is from the olden days. Now the 
>service is know as the National Park Service.
>The National Park Service and National Forest 
>Service are too very different things (i.e. 
>branches of government, US Department of 
>Interior versus Department of Agriculture respectively).
>I think we need to return to that "basic 
>question" – what is the main "service"/function 
>of these services – Protection! The only reason 
>we have National Forests, Parks, etc. is to 
>protect them, not use – although yes, usage is 
>allowed under the various rules/regulations of the particular unit.
>=Russ
>___ 
>Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org 
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Charlotte Wolter
927 18th Street Suite A
Santa Monica, California
90403
+1-310-597-4040
techl...@techlady.com
Skype: thetechlady



___
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] Tagging National Forests

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Greg and all,

 

Sorry, I either need a refund on that Forestry degree or have to call this out 
as incorrect:

 

Perhaps the problem here is the multiple roles that the the US Forest Service 
plays.   Note that that name is from the olden days.  Now the service is know 
as the National Park Service. 

 

The National Park Service and National Forest Service are too very different 
things (i.e. branches of government, US Department of Interior versus 
Department of Agriculture respectively).

 

I think we need to return to that ‘basic question’ – what is the main 
‘service’/function of these services – Protection! The only reason we have 
National Forests, Parks, etc. is to protect them, not use – although yes, usage 
is allowed under the various rules/regulations of the particular unit.

 

=Russ

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

[Russell Deffner]

Just to bring in some ‘ground verification’, here are the signs you find around 
Pike:



 

Just a few minute detour from going to the Post Office :)

=Russ

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Steve and all,

 

I think you are correct that we’re trying to build consensus, I think this is a 
good time to review the ‘OSM best practices/rule(s) of thumb’.  I would 
counter-argue that a ‘blanket use of landuse=forest’ does not meet the 
‘verifiable rule/guideline’ [1]; it’s not something you can easily observe when 
there is not active timber harvesting. Also, we know that not only is National 
Forest land used for timber production, but also mushroom/berry harvesting, 
hunting, recreation, etc., etc. – so we also should not ‘blanket’ national 
forest with other tags, but try to accurately/verifiably show things. If you 
look at the discussion page for the proposed landcover features [2] it is a 
good representative of many of these ‘natural’ vs. landuse vs. vegetation 
cover, etc. As I have said in previous threads on this topic – please have 
patience with Pike National Forest – I’ve been working on this and have 
verified that Pike does not allow timber harvesting except by permit in very 
small designation sub-sections of the forest, which rotate/change frequently, 
so unless we are talking about ‘importing those boundaries’ then I’m slowly 
working on tagging ‘forested’/areas with trees as natural=wood (i.e. that I 
believe meets ‘verifiability’ – i.e. you can pretty well see forest edge/tree 
line in imagery).

=Russ

 

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

[2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/landcover 

 

From: OSM Volunteer stevea [mailto:stevea...@softworkers.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 3:29 PM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

 

Mike Thompson writes:

1) I don't know how anyone would able to tell this from simple on the ground 
observation.

 

Granted:  from an on-the-ground observation, a landuse=forest might look very 
much like a natural=wood.  However, if you saw that part of the area had some 
stumps, you could safely conclude it is not natural=wood (unless there was 
"illegal logging” going on, and that DOES happen) but rather that it is 
landuse=forest.  THEN, there is where you know for a fact (from facts not 
on-the-ground, but perhaps from ownership data, signage like “Welcome to Sierra 
National Forest” or other sources) that THIS IS a real, live forest, in the 
sense OSM intends to mean here (landuse=forest implies timber harvesting now or 
at some point in the future).

 

2) While the English word "natural" might suggest this, we use "natural" for 
other things that man has a hand in creating or modifying, e.g. natural=water 
for a man made reservoir.

 

Again, I’ll grant you this, but it only shows that OSM’s tagging is not always 
internally consistent.  I can live with that.  What is required (and “more 
clear" in the case of natural=water) is the understanding that consensus has 
emerged for natural=water:  this gets tagged on bodies of water which are both 
natural and man-made, and that’s OK, and we don’t lose sleep over it or look 
for more consistency.  It’s like an exception to a rule of grammar:  you just 
learn it, and say “shucks” that there are such things as grammatical exceptions.

 

I’m doing my very best to listen, and it seems many others are, too.  Listening 
is the heart of building consensus.  Let us not also become entrenched in minor 
exceptions or established conventions adding further confusion when identifying 
them as such actually can help us achieve more clarity.

 

SteveA

California

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

[Russell Deffner]

Hey Elliot and all,

 

Thanks for this notice, I think it is two separate issues. One is the use of 
the landuse=forest tag which has been discussed many times on many lists. The 
other is the rendering, I think this is ‘just’ a rendering issue as you can see 
where ‘meadow/grass/scrub’ coloring is ‘overlaid on-top’ of the forest/green, 
but the tree icon stays.  Of course this can be ‘mitigated’ with relations, but 
that’s part of why I haven’t made progress in ‘my neck of the woods’.  There’s 
actually some great momentum in several directions with our local meetup[1] so 
I might try to bring this up/make an effort to ‘clean-up’ forests here.

 

Cheers,

=Russ

[1] OSM-Colorado: http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/ 

 

From: Elliott Plack [mailto:elliott.pl...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 11:03 AM
To: stevea; kenn...@acm.org
Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

 

Looping back to this. I was looking at the town of Breckenridge, Colorado, and 
the whole things is covered by trees. On some renders, it is just a big green 
blob over the town. Here it is: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3724941

 

This is not right. "landuse" implies that the *land* has a *use*, which is 
whatever follows the = sign. I am fine if we want to say that landuse = timber 
production (or whatever) in general, but to render the tag landuse=forest with 
little trees or a bold green color does not give the right impression to the 
viewer. I think we should be encouraging users to trace the forests more 
precisely, rather than with big blocks.

 

Also I've noticed these Colorado imports are not being done by a user with an 
_import account, so it makes me wonder if these folks importing forest cover 
are following the import rules. These forests also have a national park tag, 
which they are not.

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

Re: [Talk-us] New OSM Meetup - "OSM Wyoming"

[Russell Deffner]

P.S. For those who are using Meetup, this is something that they seem to not 
‘publicize’ but, so far, they haven’t asked me for any more money creating 
OSM-WY under my existing plan for OSM-CO; and it seems to be confirmed in their 
‘internal documents’ that Organizers can have 3 groups: 
http://help.meetup.com/customer/portal/articles/464989-organizing-more-than-one-meetup
 - so I already offered Martijn to create a ‘three corners’ alliance group; 
sorry New Mexico and Arizona – but we can’t have four :)

 

P.S.S. I’ll take this opportunity to thank OSM-CO’s several year sponsor, 
Telenav – when the next billing cycle comes around we’ll chat about how many 
groups you might be sponsoring :)

 

=Russ

 

From: Russell Deffner [mailto:russell.deff...@hotosm.org] 
Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 12:38 PM
To: 'Clifford Snow'; 'Mike Thompson'
Cc: 'Chen Xu'; 'Open Street Map Talk-US'
Subject: RE: [Talk-us] New OSM Meetup - "OSM Wyoming"

 

Hi Clifford and all, it’s been there – for now I’m ‘running’ (i.e. doing the 
books) for both OSM-CO and WY; so Mike and Chen, feel free to add yourselves as 
contacts, but I snuck the group just under CO for my sake.

=Russ

 

From: Clifford Snow [mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us] 
Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 12:28 PM
To: Mike Thompson
Cc: Chen Xu; Open Street Map Talk-US
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] New OSM Meetup - "OSM Wyoming"

 

Mike,

Thanks for getting the meetup going. Next time I'm headed through Wyoming I'll 
check to see if you have a meetup scheduled.

 

Can you add your group to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States 

 

Thanks,

Clifford

 

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Mike Thompson <miketh...@gmail.com> wrote:

We now have a Meetup for "OSM Wyoming"[1].  If you live, work, attend school, 
or otherwise spend time in Wyoming; or if you are close to Wyoming, please 
consider joining.   Suggestions for events are welcome in any part of the state 
 You can post them yourself, or send them to me and I will post.

 

Also, we are holding a mapathon at the University of Wyoming in Laramie on 
March 9th[2]. The event is sponsored by the the University's Department of 
Geography and GTU/Geography Club. 

 

Mike

 

[1] http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Wyoming/

[2] http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Wyoming/events/229160292/


___
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

Re: [Talk-us] New OSM Meetup - "OSM Wyoming"

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Clifford and all, it’s been there – for now I’m ‘running’ (i.e. doing the 
books) for both OSM-CO and WY; so Mike and Chen, feel free to add yourselves as 
contacts, but I snuck the group just under CO for my sake.

=Russ

 

From: Clifford Snow [mailto:cliff...@snowandsnow.us] 
Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 12:28 PM
To: Mike Thompson
Cc: Chen Xu; Open Street Map Talk-US
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] New OSM Meetup - "OSM Wyoming"

 

Mike,

Thanks for getting the meetup going. Next time I'm headed through Wyoming I'll 
check to see if you have a meetup scheduled.

 

Can you add your group to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States 

 

Thanks,

Clifford

 

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Mike Thompson  wrote:

We now have a Meetup for "OSM Wyoming"[1].  If you live, work, attend school, 
or otherwise spend time in Wyoming; or if you are close to Wyoming, please 
consider joining.   Suggestions for events are welcome in any part of the state 
 You can post them yourself, or send them to me and I will post.

 

Also, we are holding a mapathon at the University of Wyoming in Laramie on 
March 9th[2]. The event is sponsored by the the University's Department of 
Geography and GTU/Geography Club. 

 

Mike

 

[1] http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Wyoming/

[2] http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Wyoming/events/229160292/


___
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

Re: [Talk-us] Map Roulette Idea - GNIS "parks"

[Russell Deffner]

Mike and all,

 

>There is also a "North Park" (on CO 14 West of Cameron Pass).

Yep and Middle Park which is maybe replicated in other states and I’m sure 
there are these geographic parks in many mountain ranges.

 

>I have always considered these "parks" to have no hard boundary (sort of like 
>a valley), and so was unsure of how to map them.  

Agree, this is the main challenge; it’s similar to the mountains themselves a 
bit where they actually do have an area but we typically only map the peak. 
However in the case of these geographic “parks” it may be easier to treat them 
like other natural features such as lakes and wooded areas, where we loosely 
trace their border. Unless people think we should rather try to determine a 
center point (i.e. import those GNIS points for ‘flats’)?

 

>I don't know about "natural=grassland", by definition a "park" is "mostly 
>open", and that openness could be tundra, marsh or bare rock as well as 
>grassland. On the other hand I see "natural=park" creating confusion, as 
>people will start using it for recreation areas.

Agree, in the case of South Park, it is mainly grassland; but yes I would think 
not all “parks” will be very consistent in vegetation, etc. I will continue to 
ponder and welcome any tagging suggestions that makes sense for these features; 
“natural=flat” seems like it would also create confusion as people might use it 
to tag any area that is relatively flat.

 

=Russ

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

Re: [Talk-us] Map Roulette Idea - GNIS "parks"

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Mike,

 

I’m just going to through my hat in here, nothing concrete, just suggestions. I 
am sure you probably know this, but maybe others on the list do not – if you’ve 
seen/heard of the cartoon “South Park” – it’s actually named after one of those 
geographic features described in that second definition; this one: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3387601#map=10/39.1482/-105.8945 – which 
is my handy work, and no, it’s not ‘complete’ and yes it is a bit hard to 
define; but ask any local and they’ll know the general area that is ‘South 
Park’ the ‘flat part’ surrounded by mountains. I’m actually mapping the 
‘interior features’ first (such as residential and smaller forested areas) 
before ‘stretching the park polygon over top.’

 

I have the relation tagged with name=South Park and natural=grassland because 
in my opinion that is what is ‘most common’ as far as a ‘defining map feature’ 
besides the relatively – but definitely not consistent – elevation. However, 
now I wonder if creating natural=park or a similar tag might be better.

 

Cheers,

=Russ

 

From: Mike Thompson [mailto:miketh...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 3:25 PM
To: Open Street Map Talk-US
Subject: [Talk-us] Map Roulette Idea - GNIS "parks"

 

A subset of the the US Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) data was 
imported into OSM [2]. I have discovered a systematic error in the GNIS. In the 
US there are at least two different meanings for the word "park" when it comes 
to things we might map in OSM. The first is a recreational facility 
(leisure=park), the second is  “a broad, flat, mostly open area in a 
mountainous region"[1].  In many cases the GNIS classified features with "park" 
in their name as recreation facilities, when in fact they fit the second 
definition. For example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/356504183.  
Examining these features against the USGS topo maps usually makes their true 
classification obvious. What do you think about a Map Roulette challenge to fix 
these?

 

Proposed selection criteria:

* Part of original GNIS import.

* No manual edits 

* Tagged leisure = park

* Name contains "Park"

* Name does not contain "national" "state", "county", "city" or "recreation" 
(these are likely to really be a recreation facilities).

 

Map Roulette Instructions to Mappers:

* Examine USGS topo maps for the area where the feature is located.

* Examine Bing and/or other imagery

* If not correct classification isn't clear from above sources, consult city 
and county websites to see if they have a recreation facility with the given 
name in the given location.

 

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a OSM tag to describe  “a broad, flat, 
mostly open area in a mountainous region", yet I feel that these names are 
important pieces of information that should be preserved in OSM.  Does anyone 
have any suggestions? GNIS classifies these "parks" as "flats", but "flats" 
were not part of the import [3]

 

 

Mike

 

[1]   
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/park?s=t 

 

[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue

 

[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/USGS_GNIS#Feature_Class

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

[Russell Deffner]

-Original Message-
From: stevea [mailto:stevea...@softworkers.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 11:22 PM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Cc: John Firebaugh
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

Well, perhaps we have a happy compromise here.  Tell you what:  I'll 
start with the assumption that a forest should be tagged forest. 
(That's fair, and/or I'm listening to your alternative proposition). 
WHEN, WHERE and IF you know a particular area to be expressly NOT a 
forest, you are perfectly welcome to exclude that subset from said 
polygon.  I'm fine with that.

SteveA
California


Hello,

I have another suggestion, how about we do not assume. We seem to be in 
agreement (vast majority) about boundary=protected_area being the only tag that 
should for sure be applied to every National Forest. Please don't tag Pike 
National Forest with landuse=forest because some subsets have already been 
tagged (where you can see timber harvesting 'scars' in the imagery) and I have 
ground verified - by seeing signs (sorry don't have a picture) - but 
(paraphrased) they say fuel wood gathering by permit only and if you'd like 
you can contact the districts for the designated areas where it is allowed but 
shouldn't be mapped the other way around because it is a very small subset of 
Pike.

Cheers,
=Russ


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

Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

[Russell Deffner]

Hi everyone,

Disclaimer - I do have a degree in forestry, but only loosely continue to 
follow the field.  I would agree with the camp that says 'no' to landuse=forest 
broadly used for all National Forests.  I think someone said 'because you can 
pick up sticks, etc. for campfires' but this is not true across all National 
Forests; here is what the USFS says about it: 
http://www.fs.fed.us/specialuses/special_products.shtml - basically it is up to 
the unit; so taking the example of Pike National Forest near me, they do 
require a permit and only allow fuelwood collection (and other harvesting, like 
Christmas trees) in designated areas: 
http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/psicc/passes-permits/forestproducts/?cid=fsm9_032545
 - also get more restrictive when you consider the 'wilderness' designations 
that are contained within Pike.

In general, I suggest we use protected area and only mark designated areas 
where timber harvesting is allowed as landuse=forest.

=Russ

-Original Message-
From: James Umbanhowar [mailto:jumba...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 1:25 PM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Tagging National Forests

I've used natural=woods for areas formerly in agriculture that were not
naturally growing in with trees.  This seemed more appropriate than
forest as they are not really being managed for harvest.

I could go either way on the National Forest tagging issue.  While
technically they are managed as forests, they are certainly internally
quite heterogenuous in terms of the landuse to the point where many
areas are not actually being managed as tree growing areas.

James

On Mon, 2015-08-17 at 21:06 +0200, Wolfgang Zenker wrote:
 
 Assuming we keep landuse=forest for the National Forests, what would
 you suggest we use to tag the areas that are actually covered by 
 trees?
 And how should we render these so they can be seen as different from
 areas without trees that happen to be part of a National Forest?
 
 Wolfgang
 
 ___
 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] Join us for summer mapathon BINGO - weekend of Aug 1

[Russell Deffner]

Happy Mapping Everyone!

 

I hope you all have a wonderful and successful OSM-US Quarterly Mapathon!

 

OSMCO MapCamp! South Park was a huge success, check out some details here (more 
to come): http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/events/223668240/ 

 

Cheers,

=Russ

 

From: Eleanor Tutt [mailto:eleanor.t...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 3:28 PM
To: talk-us
Subject: [Talk-us] Join us for summer mapathon BINGO - weekend of Aug 1

 

Hello!

 

We've got our next OSM US quarterly mapathon coming up the weekend of August 
1st - obviously you can host a mapathon in your area any time of the year, but 
it's also pretty awesome to know that people are mapping across the country at 
the same time. :)


If you want an idea for a theme, we created an OpenStreetMap mapathon BINGO 
card (https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/439/18875377873_968818d547_z.jpg) that 
includes images of (and tagging conventions for) summery things to add to OSM. 
Ice cream shops! BBQ pits! Car washes! Swimming pools! Let's get 'em all 

into OpenStreetMap. You can read more on our blog post here: 
http://openstreetmap.us/2015/07/summer-mapathon-bingo/

 

If you're organizing a mapathon, please add it to the wiki page here so that 
everyone knows about it: 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Summer_Mapathon_2015

 

We also have a new OSM US slack channel for current  future mapathon 
organizers to informally chat about ideas/outreach strategies/successes/etc. - 
send me your email (elea...@openstreetmap.us) if you would like an invite. 

 

Thanks!

Eleanor

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

Re: [Talk-us] OSM-CO MapCamp! (was: Join us for summer mapathon BINGO - weekend of Aug 1)

[Russell Deffner]

Of course copycats are welcome! Provided Martijn doesn’t retaliate for me 
copycatting ‘mapternoons’ J

 

I’ll defer to the community but think having the quarterly mapathons spread 
over a full week with two weekends might be good in future practice.

=Russ

 

From: Gmail [mailto:eleanor.t...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 4:43 PM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: talk-us
Subject: Re: OSM-CO MapCamp! (was: [Talk-us] Join us for summer mapathon BINGO 
- weekend of Aug 1)

 

So...MapCamp sounds *amazing* and should definitely be on the wiki and I 
totally encourage MapCamp copycat events as well, provided you are OK with 
that. :)

 

They are only one week apart, so I think maybe we should extend our mapathon 
dates to include either weekend or the week in between. Or we could move the 
weekend back to match yours if there are a number of organizers who prefer the 
earlier date - I just worry if folks don't have something in the works already 
they might need an extra week?

 

Eleanor

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

[Talk-us] OSM-CO MapCamp! (was: Join us for summer mapathon BINGO - weekend of Aug 1)

[Russell Deffner]

Well hello Eleanor!

 

Dang, a bit of schedule conflict as us in the centennial state were already 
planning an event for the weekend before and I personally have a long-standing 
commitment that weekend preventing us from pushing back 
OSM-Colorado-MapCamp!-South Park.

 

But I added it to the wiki anyhow, and was planning on posting something to the 
list this week; so if you’re in CO or want to come camping and mapping the 
weekend of July 24-26, head on over to our meetup page (thanks to our meetup 
sponsor Telenav): http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/events/223668240/ 

 

We’re still very much planning details, but I will probably need to make a 
rough estimate of tent and car counts to reserve campsites by early next week – 
will be calling/exploring/maybe reserving a few this weekend.

 

Cheers,

=Russ

 

P.S.

You can email me at either russdeff...@gmail.com or russell.deff...@hotosm.org 
if you have questions – or preferably, join the chat on the meetup event.

 

From: Eleanor Tutt [mailto:eleanor.t...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 3:28 PM
To: talk-us
Subject: [Talk-us] Join us for summer mapathon BINGO - weekend of Aug 1

 

Hello!

 

We've got our next OSM US quarterly mapathon coming up the weekend of August 
1st - obviously you can host a mapathon in your area any time of the year, but 
it's also pretty awesome to know that people are mapping across the country at 
the same time. :)


If you want an idea for a theme, we created an OpenStreetMap mapathon BINGO 
card (https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/439/18875377873_968818d547_z.jpg) that 
includes images of (and tagging conventions for) summery things to add to OSM. 
Ice cream shops! BBQ pits! Car washes! Swimming pools! Let's get 'em all 

into OpenStreetMap. You can read more on our blog post here: 
http://openstreetmap.us/2015/07/summer-mapathon-bingo/

 

If you're organizing a mapathon, please add it to the wiki page here so that 
everyone knows about it: 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapathon/US_Summer_Mapathon_2015

 

We also have a new OSM US slack channel for current  future mapathon 
organizers to informally chat about ideas/outreach strategies/successes/etc. - 
send me your email (elea...@openstreetmap.us) if you would like an invite. 

 

Thanks!

Eleanor

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

Re: [Talk-us] hgv=designated in US National Park

[Russell Deffner]

Mike, 

 

Highway 34 has a bit different rules, I remember when I was living in Fort 
Collins and working in Granby we could pass through the park for free and 
actually drove our ‘commercial pickup trucks and wood chippers in tow’ (which 
is a whole other story with potential tree pest/disease spread potential).  But 
I do not know the ‘complete rules’; I would think the other roads follow normal 
park rules.

 

=Russ

 

From: Mike Thompson [mailto:miketh...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 6:36 PM
To: Open Street Map Talk-US
Subject: [Talk-us] hgv=designated in US National Park

 

I am finding roads in Rocky Mountain National Park tagged as hgv=designated 
in spite of the fact that on the ground it is clearly posted No Commercial 
Vehicles in RMNP.  While hgv doesn't exactly equal commercial it would be 
improper to route a commercial vehicle through the park.  Can this tagging be 
correct? 

 

Mike

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

Re: [Talk-us] hgv=designated in US National Park

[Russell Deffner]

Dang, sorry; just caught my typo, hgv=private may NOT be the proper tag.

 

From: Russell Deffner [mailto:russell.deff...@hotosm.org] 
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 8:02 PM
To: 'Mike Thompson'
Cc: 'Open Street Map Talk-US'
Subject: RE: [Talk-us] hgv=designated in US National Park

 

Hi again Mike, I should have specified – the entirety of Trail Ridge Road J

 

I think we did actually come in (from the east, i.e. FC to Granby) via 36.  I 
would say hgv=private is the ‘correct’ tag; in this case the ‘highway’ is 
actually ‘State controlled w/ agreements of the Park Service’, maybe Jim or one 
of them have a better answer, but it seems more like “this is a State Highway” 
if you ‘know the rules’ and have a valid ID you can use it accordingly. (in our 
case we just had to have a Fort Collins address and say “we’re on our way to 
work in Granby” – this was in either our work trucks or my personal vehicle).

 

Anyway, hope this helps find proper tagging for 34/36/Trail Ridge Road; cheers!

=Russ

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

Re: [Talk-us] National Forest nature_reserve?

[Russell Deffner]

Hi Mike, 

 

Sorry I don’t follow this topic more closely but I would think with the 
mixed-used of national forests, it is best to use boundary=protected_area[1] 
but I know it has been discussed a bunch, so someone might have an even better 
answer.

 

=Russ

 

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area 

 

From: Mike Thompson [mailto:miketh...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 3:45 PM
To: Open Street Map Talk-US
Subject: [Talk-us] National Forest nature_reserve?

 

Some US National Forests, such as the Arapaho National Forest in Colorado[1] 
are tagged  leisure=nature_reserve is this correct?  National Forests per say 
are not nature reserves.  In most cases logging, grazing, fishing, hunting, 
shooting and off road vehicle use are allowed, hardly a nature_reserve.  
Roosevelt national Forest [2] does not have the leisure=nature_reserve tag, 
so at the very least we are probably being inconsistent.

 

Mike

 

 

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/396026#map=9/39.9687/-105.8148

[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/395767

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

Re: [Talk-us] CloudMade's ambassadors

[Russell Deffner]

Thanks Russ, Dirk, Sarah, Thea, and Hurricane!

 

I’ll second a thanks to all those great ambassadors – Hurricane introduced me 
to OpenStreetMap via OSM-Colorado, first mapathon I attended was mapping Idaho 
Springs, CO – one Saturday spent field mapping then the next we uploaded and 
edited.  Now Jim and I co-organize OSM-CO with the Coasts.

 

(From not Russ Nelson – I think we agreed I’d go by Russell on the mailing 
lists :)

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Dirt Roads (formerly: Abandoned railway)

[Russell Deffner]

Well, the road your referring to sounds like a track, if it has no other 
significant use than a beautiful and adventurous way to travel between the two 
towns.  However, the road I live on is well maintained (graded, plowed in 
winter, etc. – FYI I drive a Nissan Maxima/low clearance 2WD) but basically has 
only one function – to get to the residences along it – which fits residential 
much more than track.  I think this is a case where there is not a one size 
fits all for road classification, in my opinion my local knowledge suggests 
there is a big difference between the residential dirt road I live on and the 
(typically 4X4) tracks that are in the area.

 

From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] 
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 1:29 PM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: Mike N; OpenStreetMap talk-us list
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway

 

What about track grade?  Seems like we've got this whole unpaved situation 
solved with track.  I mean, you can get from Telluride to Lake City in ~35 
miles, but I wouldn't consider that a viable option to anybody who isn't 
adventurous.

 

 

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org 
wrote:

One good reason to tag a dirt road different than a track is it’s utility.  I 
happen to live on a dirt road in rural Colorado with about a thousand 
neighbors, there are 2 paved roads in our neighborhood, however the remaining 3 
or 4 dozen are properly tagged residential, i.e. residential dirt roads.  There 
are real tracks around here as well and if all dirt roads were converted to 
track then the map would be seriously degraded in usefulness.

 

Russell Deffner

 

From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] 
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 1:00 PM
To: Mike N
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk-us list


Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway

 

 

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:

 Landing on the high plains desert in the west does not make a good case that 
OSM in the US is broken.  Desert imagery cues do not match those of 
conventional climates.   Those roads likely do exist, but are barely visible in 
contrast to the surroundings.  We city-folk would classify them as tracks, but 
a desert prospector or park ranger would consider them secondary.


NO!  We would still classify them as tracks!  Because there's no good reason to 
classify them as more major, given consistency.  We're trying to not break the 
routers, after all.  Yes, I realize that the vast majority of county roads are 
not paved in my region.  But to classify them as more major is a sickening 
choice, and would actually make OSM much worse than Yahoo Maps, given the 
situation that actually killed a Yahoo founder.  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kim

 

Just because it's a county road doesn't stop it from being a track.  It might 
be a grade1 track, but that's still a track.  Even on the most major tracks, 
even if they're capable of letting you hit the default speed limit in most 
counties (45 mph), I'd still consider them a track.  Mostly because if it's not 
paved at all, there's a good chance that 1) it floods regularly, 2) it's not 
always the grade reported in OSM and therefore not always possible in all 
vehicles, and 3) completely irresponsible to represent them as something people 
unfamiliar are going to want to take.  My comfort level in taking a Chevy 
Malibu over dozens of miles of county track, even if it's the shortest or 
fastest way, is going to be completely different from someone unfamiliar with 
the territory, and unfamiliar with the map's foibles in the region.

 

At least in North America, I'm willing to go so far as to say as tagging any 
unpaved road as anything higher than track is Considered Harmful.

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Dirt Roads (formerly: Abandoned railway)

[Russell Deffner]

Um, you lost me Paul J

 

Back to the original point that drew me into the conversation – I do not agree 
with switching every road that has surface=dirt to highway=track.  Using 
highway=track with tracktype=* would not fully describe the significance of 
roads around here because there are some ‘residential’ roads – those being 
roads that only have the function of reaching residences – that get washed out, 
are very steep, etc. and would probably earn a higher grade than some of the 
4WD/OHV ‘tracks’ in the National Forest around here – those being roads only 
used for recreation or timber harvesting, but sometimes are very smooth and 
easy to travel.

 

In conclusion, I don’t think any one feature (surface, smoothness, tracktype, 
lanes, speed, etc.) can be used to define or redefine the 
importance/significance of a road and sometimes only local knowledge can tell 
you that.

 

Happy Mapping!

 

From: Paul Johnson [mailto:ba...@ursamundi.org] 
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 2:12 PM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: Mike N; OpenStreetMap talk-us list
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Dirt Roads (formerly: Abandoned railway)

 

Likewise, I consider WA-500 a trunk west of WA-503 to it's terminus at I-5, 
even though it's largely grade separated, due to it's very short length (not 
even all the way across Vancouver, WA) and multiple at-grade intersections, 
including it's intersection with WA-503, and low speed (45 MPH).

 

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:

 

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org 
wrote:

Well, the road your referring to sounds like a track, if it has no other 
significant use than a beautiful and adventurous way to travel between the two 
towns.  However, the road I live on is well maintained (graded, plowed in 
winter, etc. – FYI I drive a Nissan Maxima/low clearance 2WD) but basically has 
only one function – to get to the residences along it – which fits residential 
much more than track.  I think this is a case where there is not a one size 
fits all for road classification, in my opinion my local knowledge suggests 
there is a big difference between the residential dirt road I live on and the 
(typically 4X4) tracks that are in the area.

 

If it's well maintained year-round, I'd be willing to call that a 
highway=unclassified at best.  I tend to reserve higher classifications for 
paved roads that have centerlines, at a dead minimum.  Paved with centerlines 
and fog lines, even if they don't have a paved shoulder, is definitely tertiary 
at a minimum (though I would consider BC 17 between Port Renfrew and Victoria, 
BC as secondary due to it's nature as a provincial highway, despite at least a 
dozen one lane bridges, due to the prevailing nature of the highway, much the 
same way I consider US 412 between the Cimarron Turnpike and downtown Tulsa a 
motorway, even though there's one at-grade intersection on a spit just east of 
Keystone Lake on that highway).

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Rural Montana - can we find local mappers?

[Russell Deffner]

Wolfgang,

Lots of rural United States, as well as many places do not currently have a
local mapping community.  We are working on it, and a good chance to
'recruit' help is at the State of the Map - US (stateofthemap.us) coming up
in a couple of weeks.  I am also co-organizer for OSM-Colorado ('unofficial'
meetup.com group) and have been slowly spreading the message into Wyoming
(which I believe is the least populous state); so I appreciate any
suggestions, contacts, etc.

Thank you,
=Russ

russdeff...@gmail.com
http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/ 

-Original Message-
From: Wolfgang Zenker [mailto:wolfg...@lyxys.ka.sub.org] 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 2:20 PM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-us] Rural Montana - can we find local mappers?

Hi,

for the last two years I have been cleaning up TIGER data and adding
named waterways in Lincoln County, Montana. This work is now finished.
This doesn't mean our map there is now in any way complete, just that
the data that we DO have is no longer obviously horribly wrong.

While there are still a few things that could be done by an armchair
mapper, having local mappers would be a lot easier. Only the fact
that the county has an average population density of 5 people per
square mile might make it a bit unlikely that a lot of locals find
OSM accidently. So some outreach to local groups and institutions
like hiking clubs, tourist associations, boy and girl scouts,
chambers of commerce etc. could be helpful.
My problem here is that I'm living on a different continent, in
a different cultural environment with a different native language
and 8 time zones away, so I'm probably not the best choice to try
connecting with local people in that area.
Any US mappers that want to help? Please speak out.

Wolfgang

___
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] FW: Report of Explosion, Building Collapse in Manhattan

[Russell Deffner]

Just dropping the global HOT community from the thread; please continue
amongst yourselves... and reach out to me or HOT if needed.
=Russ

-Original Message-
From: Serge Wroclawski [mailto:emac...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 9:18 AM
To: Ian Dees
Cc: Russell Deffner; hot; OSM US Talk
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] FW: Report of Explosion, Building Collapse in
Manhattan

Ian, are you going to manually survey the location to see if there's
any secondary damage?

- Serge

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Russell Deffner russdeff...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Anyone want to individually figure out the building and update in OSM?


 Did it in this changeset:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/21065388

 Buildings:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/265792217 and
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/265792216

 ___
 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] Is the distinction between path and track dependent upon...

[Russell Deffner]

Sorry Martin, you seem to be better at describing the existing tags than I, so…

 

Can we use motor_vehicle=restricted ?

 

Thanks,

=Russ

 

From: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 9:40 AM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: Richard Welty; osm
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Is the distinction between path and track dependent 
upon...

 

 

2014-03-10 16:36 GMT+01:00 Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org:

should we just add access=non_motorized , or similar (not looking at
the wiki to see if that's an actual tag).



the actual tagging is motor_vehicle=no / private (in the case of authorized 
only). If different access restrictions apply to different modes of transport 
it is generally better to tag the single restrictions and leave the literal 
access-key void.

cheers,
Martin

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

[Talk-us] Interesting read regarding UAS/UAV

[Russell Deffner]

Hello OSM'ers,

 

Here is an interesting read regarding Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) in the
United States:
http://geospatial-solutions.com/faa-commercial-drones-are-illegal-public-so-
what/ 

 

Enjoy and Happy Mapping,

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

russell.deff...@hotosm.org

The Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team

http://hot.openstreetmap.org/ 

 

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Feature Proposal - RFC - Marijuana

[Russell Deffner]

-Original Message-
From: mve...@gmail.com [mailto:mve...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martijn van Exel

I would look at how these places are already tagged in, say,
Amsterdam. I know, I should know, having lived there for 20 years, but
I don't :p

I was hoping you might have some insight Martijn; however my understanding is 
that these places are not allowed to let you consume marijuana there; much like 
a liquor store - some may do wine tasting, etc. but it is majority only for 
retail.  I checked taginfo and marijuana is used only as a value and currently 
less than 20 times, mostly in a name.  I assume most of the places you can buy 
marijuana in Amsterdam are considered more a café where an auxiliary tag would 
work, but for these 'only' retail stores it wouldn't make since to use any 
existing shop tag; hence why I thought we needed the new tag.


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

[Talk-us] Feature Proposal - RFC - Marijuana

[Russell Deffner]

Happy New Year,

 

Maybe more so if you are in Colorado, as sales of Marijuana to adults (for
recreation/any use) began the morning of the first.  Therefor I propose the
usage of shop=marijuana for this new business, have created a wiki-page for
the proposal -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Marijuana, and will
leave it open for a commenting period of no shorter than two weeks.

 

Cheers,

=Russ

 

russdeffner on OSM  

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

Re: [Talk-us] Tags to use for chain stores in the United States

[Russell Deffner]

Seems the stores you listed are going to have different tags, example the
'dollar' stores are probably best tagged shop=variety_store, the wiki has a
pretty extensive list/description of the shop tags here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop 

However, I would say that K-Mart, Target, and Wal-Mart (especially the
'super' kind) maybe don't fit any of the documented tags; I think there was
some talk about adding a big_box or superstore, maybe hit up the tagging
talk-list to see if that's still in the works.

=Russ

-Original Message-
From: Will Skora [mailto:skorasau...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 8:49 AM
To: talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-us] Tags to use for chain stores in the United States

Hi,

At past OSM meetups that I've organized, new mappers have asked me
what shop=* tags to use for several chain stores in the USA and I had
not found any clear or consistent practices of what tags to use for
these stores and even as a relatively experienced mapper, I wasn't
sure what tags to encourage them to use.

I am writing to hear what you've used, which ones are most popular,
and perhaps the US community could build a consensus on them (gasp!).

For example, several chain stores that we have wondered about include:
K-Mart, Target, Wal-Mart, Dollar General, Dollar Tree, Family Dollar,
'Bed, Bath, and Beyond'; TJ Maxx; Marshall's; Radio Shack; Meijer's;
Kohl's; Costco; BJ's; and Big Lots.

I know there's taginfo (including one for the US!
taginfo.openstreetmap.us) but unfortunately, it doesn't let you find
out what tag combinations are being used with a name=* (For example,
finding what tag is used most often with name=Dollar-General).

Regards,
Will Skora

___
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] Mark your calendars for the #BirthdaySprint! (Now with snazzy website!)

[Russell Deffner]

Kathleen,

 

I’m coordinating the Denver, CO event – but we’re not doing a sprint (at
least not for our in person event).  I’ll be doing an OSM Basics for the ½
dozen or so new mappers that have joined:
http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/ - details are there if you (or others)
do want to add us to webpages, etc.

 

Thanks,

=Russ

 

From: Kathleen Danielson [mailto:kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 8:22 AM
To: Jason Remillard
Cc: OpenStreetMap US Talk
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Mark your calendars for the #BirthdaySprint! (Now
with snazzy website!)

 

Hi Jason--

 

That's awesome! Can you help me get in touch with the organizers of those
events? I'd love to see if they'd be ok with us adding their events to our
Locations page. http://osmlab.github.io/birthday-sprint/locations/ 

 

 

 

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Jason Remillard remillard.ja...@gmail.com
wrote:

Hi,

Also, it looks like we have some actual locations for some US events
this weekend too. San Francisco, Denver, Nashua, NH.

Thanks
Jason




On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Kathleen Danielson
kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com wrote:

 As you all know, in honor of OpenStreetMap's 9th birthday, we are holding
a
 Birthday Sprint next weekend, August 10th - 11th. Since we can't all be in
 the same room (this time), this will be a distributed code sprint, so you
 won't even need to get off the couch! All you'll need to do is get online,
 and all you'll need to bring is your enthusiasm!

 Whoever has an OSM project they are working on is invited to rally their
 communities to do a dedicated push over those two days. We already have a
 LOT of great projects signed up, so if you want to help, but don't know
 where to get started, check out our projects page, where you can find
 contact info, code repositories, discussion lists and more.

 We're working to identify tasks for non-developers as well, so keep
checking
 back as we get closer to the date of the sprint if you don't see anything
 you feel comfortable contributing to just yet.

 These are the projects that are signed up so far:

 OSM Groups
 HOT Website updates
 HOT cross-site toolbar
 Complete iD integration into tasking server
 WikiMaps
 Historical OSM
 Hashtag Aggregation
 Social Feature Planning (UX workshop)
 DC Building Import

 We're excited about all of the enthusiasm that we've heard so far, but
this
 list isn't done yet! If you've got a project you'd like to add feel free
to
 hit me up, or fork the github page. All we ask is that someone take
 ownership for the sprint, you provide a place where contributors can find
 tasks and ongoing discussion, and bring a lot of enthusiasm!

 Finally, even though this is a distributed code sprint, there are a few
 in-person events popping up (in DC, SF, and Salt Lake City). Find details
 here, and let us know if you're planning an in-person event too!

 KD



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


 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Steady increase in the number of mappers in the US

[Russell Deffner]

 

Maybe we need to ask people, what got them interested in OSM and what keeps
them active. Maybe one of the activities we should undertake is to collect
that data to help develop plans go active mappers. 


I'll jump in on this quickly, I first saw OSM as a background in Depiction
http://www.depiction.com/affiliate/886/  - went and looked at my local
area and was completely overwhelmed by how bad it was (TIGER desert to the
max).  If I had not have found OSM-Colorado
http://www.meetup.com/OSM-Colorado/  (I think just by searching around the
wiki, or web search) I may not have even tried to start mapping, I thought
'they' might be the answer and help me map.  That didn't happen, but more
importantly I learned how to map, and that there were people I could talk to
if I had questions.  I stay active because there is a done of mapping left
to do and I also enjoy 'stewarding' my area looking for edits by others
(especially new mappers) and reach out to invite them to the local group and
answer questions.

 

=Russ

russdeff...@gmail.com

russdeffner on OSM

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

Re: [Talk-us] Lake Powell

[Russell Deffner]

Thanks for jumping in to fix Lake Powell!  And Brad, I agree - beautiful
landscape (still mixed feeling about it being converted to a lake).

 

This was another reminder of a slogan I was working on if you don't feel
part of a community - you aren't OSM-ing right or something along those
lines.

 

=Russ

 

From: Toby Murray [mailto:toby.mur...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2013 12:55 AM
Cc: OSM US Talk
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Lake Powell

 

 

There was a gap in the two ways that now join at this node:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/599459023

 

Easy to spot in JOSM's relation editor after ordering the relation members
correctly.

 

Toby

 

 

On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 10:56 PM, Elliott Plack elliott.pl...@gmail.com
wrote:

This warrants a wiki article!

 

On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhau...@gmail.com
wrote:

Gave it a go, but still hasn't rendered correctly.  Looks like there
might've been a separate relationship for each state's part of the lake and
they got broken somehow, probably in June.  I deleted one relation (370016)
and consolidated ways into http://www.openstreetmap.org/?relation=370015
The relationship looks good to me, but there must be something wrong still.
Unless someone else figures it out in the meantime, I'll try to look at it
OSM Inspector once it refreshes and identify what the remaining issue is.

Cheers, 
Brad (aka neuhausr)

ps--really fun topography to view!

 

On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Russell Deffner russdeff...@gmail.com
wrote:

Hello OSM-US,

 

I was looking at notes and saw one over by Lake Powell, I think someone was
trying to adjust the shoreline and broke the relationship.  Anyone listening
who wants to try and fix?  Here's the general location:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.9979190826416
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.9979190826416lon=-111.31210327148438;
zoom=11 lon=-111.31210327148438zoom=11 

 

Thanks, I don't spend much time with water features and relationships;

=Russ

 

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

 


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





-- 

Elliott Plack

http://about.me/elliottp


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

 

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

[Talk-us] Lake Powell

[Russell Deffner]

Hello OSM-US,

 

I was looking at notes and saw one over by Lake Powell, I think someone was
trying to adjust the shoreline and broke the relationship.  Anyone listening
who wants to try and fix?  Here's the general location:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.9979190826416
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=36.9979190826416lon=-111.31210327148438;
zoom=11 lon=-111.31210327148438zoom=11 

 

Thanks, I don't spend much time with water features and relationships;

=Russ

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

[Talk-us] Colorado Wildfire Update

[Russell Deffner]

Dear HOT and OSM-US communities,

 

I was really hoping to send an up-beat, up-date regarding the Colorado, USA
wildfire situation and had just successfully posted a light-hearted diary
entry.  Almost immediately after posting that, I heard horrible news.

 

I am once again saddened to report more wildfire fatalities, this time
Firefighters battling the Yarnell Hill Fire in Arizona, USA; see story in
BBC[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23123817  .  In Colorado,
the situation has improved for the eastern half of the state but not much
for the west in what's going on a fourth week of extreme fire conditions.

 

On behalf of myself, with the support of HOT; I will continue to work on
communication with emergency services personnel to see if/how HOT volunteers
(and general contributors to OSM) can assist firefighters and other first
responders perform their daily heroism.  I cannot say that we will ever
prevent a tragic event, and only the beginnings of conversations are
underway to work toward making that happen; however if I can do anything to
prevent another life lost, I will try.

 

Wildfires may not be humanitarian disaster on the scale of other current
events, but I believe they are also those which are relatively escapable by
people (to the degree that any rapidly developing disaster can be); and I
think maps are an incredibly valuable tool and can assist in that (not to
mention how maps can help with mitigation and preparedness).  However, I'm
getting spent myself having spent a lot of time mapping and coordinating the
Colorado mapping response[2]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2013_Colorado_Wildfire_Season  over the
last nearly three weeks; it's actually very late here as I write this, so my
apologies for typos and rambling such as this.

 

That said, and to inform Hotties of another suggestion that came out of the
Activation working group meeting, we came up with the notion of a
'coordinator', separate but would work with 'liaisons', that would
coordinate launching or up-grading a humanitarian mapping project to an
activation and be a point of contact for interested parties.  I would
volunteer to be a 'coordinator trainee' if there maybe becomes a 'US West
Fire Season' activation request (details in AWG wiki[3]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team/Working_groups/Act
ivation ).

 

Lastly, any Arizona or other fire prone region, based mapper(s) who want to
use the CO coordination wiki as a template, please feel free.  Or contact me
as I'd be willing to expand the current wiki to include your areas/fires of
concern; which we don't necessarily need an official Activation for.  I'd
also be willing to remain as the general contact, etc. as long as you can
update the specifics of the additional fires.

 

Sincerely,

Russell Deffner

russdeff...@gmail.com

 

[1]Firefighters die battling Arizona Blaze
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23123817 

[2]2013 Colorado Wildfire Season
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2013_Colorado_Wildfire_Season 

[3]HOT Activation working group wiki-page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team/Working_groups/Acti
vation  

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Onboarding new mappers | Keeping track of changes

[Russell Deffner]

Charlotte,

 

I don't disagree with:


If an organization doesn't reach out to people in a positive way,
they won't stay, and they won't do their best when mapping



But the key here is, this is different.  What organization is/represents
OSM?  And beyond, how can any organization say they 'are' OSM?  If you think
the OSM-US (or international) Foundation(s) should be doing more, I think
they're always looking for volunteers to work with the Communications
Working Group
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Communication_Working_Group .

 

In a nutshell, I do my best to gently reach out to new mappers if I think
they may need some guidance; but never say 'you need to tag this
differently' (without an explanation of a better way).

 

=Russ

russdeff...@gmail.com

russdeffner on OSM

 

 

From: Charlotte Wolter [mailto:techl...@techlady.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:17 PM
To: Bryce Nesbitt; Talk-US@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Onboarding new mappers | Keeping track of changes

 

Bryce,

Yes, most people sign up and never hear from OSM again. So they go
about their mapping as best they can until, perhaps, they join the Newbies
list (which often has highly technical discussions that many don't
understand) or they get told they are doing something wrong.
If an organization doesn't reach out to people in a positive way,
they won't stay, and they won't do their best when mapping
It would be better if there were some kind of regular, positive
communication from OSM. That could come in several forms:
--a newsletter (monthly or bimonthly), which is something most
volunteer organizations have (so, why don't we?)
 --occasional emails about new developments in OSM mapping.
MapRoulette and LearnOSM are prime examples.
--outreach from OSM veterans to mappers in their geographical
area. This could be as simple as, Hello, I'm mapping in (your area). If you
have a question, don't hesitate to contact me. Of course we would need to
set up some way to send new mappers email addresses to seasoned mappers.
As for tests, the idea itself is not bad, in the proper context.
But, unless we have a rapport with people, and have given them clear
direction and learning resources (something we don't do now), a test will
just drive them away. 
A better way to do testing might be to let people know from the
beginning that we want to make sure everyone is mapping the right way, so at
some point (after a month?) we will be asking them to take a quick quiz on
OSM principles. The carrot is that the one with the best score (each month?)
gets a prize (SOTM t-shirt? OSM hat? OSM pin?). Rewards keep people around,
not criticism.
Now all we have to do is come to some agreement on what is the right
way to tag. :-)

Charlotte


At 10:41 AM 6/26/2013, you wrote:



Moved from another thread:

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:51 AM, stevea  stevea...@softworkers.com
mailto:stevea...@softworkers.com  wrote:

OSM has a peer review process in place right now.  It is called watch the
map, help it evolve, grow it as you can, if somebody does something
odd/wrong/different, dialog with them.  And then, take it from there.

We're all grown ups here.


There may be a few children mixed in. But mostly, coming to OSM, signing up,
and mapping can be a very lonely experience.
In most cases nobody greets you or talks to you unless you make a mistake.

Changing that culture could change the participation or retention rate,
particularly among non-grownups (meaning the generations of children growing
up with social networking as a given).  OSM outside of mapping parties is
only barely social to a new mapper.

The tools could help:
1) After the first edit from a new user, the tools could present a list of
rules (chief among them don't copy from unapproved sources!).
2) A new users could be required to take a small quiz, like certain dating
sites do, prior to finalizing the edit.
3) A first edit could go in a queue for an experienced mapper to look at and
comment on.  Hopefully that comment is great job, welcome to the
community!
4) Editing a feature connected to a relation could bring up education on
route relations.  Perhaps even there is a skill level threshold: you must
have 25 peer reviewed edits prior to deleting a way that's part of a route
relation.  It becomes a goal a new mapper might strive to reach.
5) New users could be given 10 free edits, prior to needing to provide more
contact information and/or pass an editing quiz.
6) New users could be given their choice of a mapping challenge, where the
correct results are known,.
7) etc.

With all this effort to get new mappers in the USA we should be thrilled a
mapper wants to contribute...
... and put in the work to ensure such new users be onboarded and brought
into OSM culture.

Note that:
Wikipedia has a strong reasons to allow completely anonymous edits. OSM I
think not so much.  We could ask
more of people 

[Talk-us] Colorado Wildfire Coordination

[Russell Deffner]

Hello fellow OSM-ers,

 

Well, I really wish I had some better news; I've been meaning to do a
write-up/re-cap of SOTM-US, work with the HOT Activation group (and other
HOT things), and a re-cap/case study of the Black Forest Fire mapping
response.  Unfortunately all that will continue to be on hold, while I hack
away at coordinating what has become a multiple fire mapping event.
Reminder, this is remote mapping only and lots of the new fires are in TIGER
deserts (or literally the middle of nowhere); so all the help you can lend
will be appreciated, please refer (and return frequently to) this page[1]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2013_Colorado_Wildfire_Season  for
information; I'll be updating as much as possible, when I'm not mapping.

 

Cheers,

=Russ

 

russdeff...@gmail.com

russdeffner on OSM

 

1. Colorado Wildfire Season 2013 Coordination Wiki:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/2013_Colorado_Wildfire_Season 

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

Re: [Talk-us] [HOT] Black Forest Fire Update

[Russell Deffner]

For areas inside what you can assume is private property, landuse=forest is
what I typically use. 'Managed Forest'? Maybe needs to be a little more.

From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 2:27 AM
To: 'OSM US Talk'
Cc: 'hot'
Subject: Re: [HOT] [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update

 

What do you think we should do with what I would normally tag natural=wood?
There's plenty of woods in the residential areas that aren't mapped, but I'm
not sure how to handle them.

From: Russell Deffner [mailto:russdeff...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 8:21 PM
To: OSM US Talk
Cc: hot
Subject: [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update

 

Again, only remote mapping is suggested at this time.  Local knowledge to
interpolate addressing would be an absolutely amazing advantage of OSM
versus other mapping platforms, please refer to the wiki[2]; and if
'mentors' are available, please look at the changesets and you should see
the 'newbies' who are doing their best but could use some guidance.

 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update

[Russell Deffner]

Just for the record, I don't disagree with Murry's suggestion and he and I
have talked about this face-to-face.  And I think you'd be the most local
expert on this one, please feel free to change my tags.

 

Thanks!

 

From: Murry McEntire [mailto:murry.mcent...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 9:07 AM
To: Paul Norman
Cc: hot; OSM US Talk
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update

 

 

 

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:

What do you think we should do with what I would normally tag natural=wood?
There's plenty of woods in the residential areas that aren't mapped, but I'm
not sure how to handle them.

 

 

I was hoping long time users and experts would jump on this question. It
bothers me a little that land_use=forest is used in the area of the Black
Forest community as there hasn't been any real managed forest in the area
for decades. Historically it was the area that was logged to build early
Colorado Springs, and was over harvested so was no longer a forest. Then it
was replanted and brought back - but was also largely subdivided, so it is
now largely woodland covering residential lots. The lots are large, many 5
acres and up. It now does not seem to fit the definition of landuse=forest
of Managed forest or woodland plantation.

The land cover is definitely trees in much of the area so natural=wood
certainly fits and doen't conflict with landuse=residential but can
complement it. natural=wood Woodland where timber production does not
dominate use.
 

How landuse=forest is presented on renderers makes a resident of the Western
United States think of National Forest land, as that is what other maps do.
It might lead some, rightly or wrongly, to think of hikes and camping can be
done there, but it is mostly peoples yards. The parks and open space of the
area have been marked very well (and are mostly forested). The county
contains much actual National Forest, just not in this area.

I am also aware that the tags can be badly defined, I'm trying to change
that elsewhere now, but landuse=forest and natural=wood look to be good
definitions. So experts, what is the proper way to map this?  I'm just a
casual mapper in OSM since April :-)

Murry

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

Re: [Talk-us] [HOT] Black Forest Fire Update

[Russell Deffner]

Thank you Harry, no - sorry - the landuse was mainly me; afterward I can
explain why it's beneficial to mash landuse on the map for response
purposes.  Yes, it will need cleaned up and Murry and others are making good
progress.

=Russ

 

From: Harry Wood [mailto:m...@harrywood.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 11:45 AM
To: Tom Taylor; Russell Deffner
Cc: 'OSM US Talk'; 'hot'; 'Murry McEntire'
Subject: Re: [HOT] [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update

 

Here's a wiki page for coordination. Please feel free to edit

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Black_Forest_Fire_2013

 

Eugghh! The landuse data around here is a mess. Government data import I
presume On the plus side. There's plenty to get stuck in and work on. I
recommend JOSM for dealing with kind of tangled mess.

 

Harry

 

 

  _  

From: Tom Taylor tom.taylor.s...@gmail.com
To: Russell Deffner russdeff...@gmail.com 
Cc: 'OSM US Talk' talk-us@openstreetmap.org; 'hot'
h...@openstreetmap.org; 'Murry McEntire' murry.mcent...@gmail.com 
Sent: Friday, 14 June 2013, 16:55
Subject: Re: [HOT] [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update


natural=wood is the obvious way to me. It's what I use here in Ottawa, 
Canada.

On 14/06/2013 11:19 AM, Russell Deffner wrote:
 Just for the record, I don't disagree with Murry's suggestion and he and I
 have talked about this face-to-face.  And I think you'd be the most local
 expert on this one, please feel free to change my tags.



 Thanks!



 From: Murry McEntire [mailto:murry.mcent...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 9:07 AM
 To: Paul Norman
 Cc: hot; OSM US Talk
 Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update







 On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:

 What do you think we should do with what I would normally tag
natural=wood?
 There's plenty of woods in the residential areas that aren't mapped, but
I'm
 not sure how to handle them.





 I was hoping long time users and experts would jump on this question. It
 bothers me a little that land_use=forest is used in the area of the Black
 Forest community as there hasn't been any real managed forest in the area
 for decades. Historically it was the area that was logged to build early
 Colorado Springs, and was over harvested so was no longer a forest. Then
it
 was replanted and brought back - but was also largely subdivided, so it is
 now largely woodland covering residential lots. The lots are large, many 5
 acres and up. It now does not seem to fit the definition of landuse=forest
 of Managed forest or woodland plantation.

 The land cover is definitely trees in much of the area so natural=wood
 certainly fits and doen't conflict with landuse=residential but can
 complement it. natural=wood Woodland where timber production does not
 dominate use.


 How landuse=forest is presented on renderers makes a resident of the
Western
 United States think of National Forest land, as that is what other maps
do.
 It might lead some, rightly or wrongly, to think of hikes and camping can
be
 done there, but it is mostly peoples yards. The parks and open space of
the
 area have been marked very well (and are mostly forested). The county
 contains much actual National Forest, just not in this area.

 I am also aware that the tags can be badly defined, I'm trying to change
 that elsewhere now, but landuse=forest and natural=wood look to be good
 definitions. So experts, what is the proper way to map this?  I'm just a
 casual mapper in OSM since April :-)

 Murry




 ___
 HOT mailing list
 h...@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


___
HOT mailing list
h...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot



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

Re: [Talk-us] [HOT] Black Forest Fire Update

[Russell Deffner]

Sorry, again my take is to go ahead and trace - a little background, I would
like to be able to suggest to fire/all emergency services that OSM is/can be
the best 'situational awareness' tool/map.  So although we will be creating
more work to 'fix' - when I started it was a blank white area with horrible
TIGER roads.

Thank you everyone for helping out!
=Russ

-Original Message-
From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 1:28 PM
To: 'hot'; 'OSM US Talk'
Subject: Re: [HOT] [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update

To clarify, my question was not around what tags to use for the areas with
trees, it was on how to handle the fact that the forest in many cases is
presumably burnt out.

If it weren't for the fire I'd be tracing a lot of natural=wood in the
region.

 -Original Message-
 From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom.taylor.s...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 8:56 AM
 To: Russell Deffner
 Cc: 'Murry McEntire'; 'Paul Norman'; 'hot'; 'OSM US Talk'
 Subject: Re: [HOT] [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update
 
 natural=wood is the obvious way to me. It's what I use here in Ottawa,
 Canada.
 
 On 14/06/2013 11:19 AM, Russell Deffner wrote:
  Just for the record, I don't disagree with Murry's suggestion and he
  and I have talked about this face-to-face.  And I think you'd be the
  most local expert on this one, please feel free to change my tags.
 
 
 
  Thanks!
 
 
 
  From: Murry McEntire [mailto:murry.mcent...@gmail.com]
  Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 9:07 AM
  To: Paul Norman
  Cc: hot; OSM US Talk
  Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Black Forest Fire Update
 
  On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:26 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote:
 
  What do you think we should do with what I would normally tag
 natural=wood?
  There's plenty of woods in the residential areas that aren't mapped,
  but I'm not sure how to handle them.
 
  I was hoping long time users and experts would jump on this question.
  It bothers me a little that land_use=forest is used in the area of the
  Black Forest community as there hasn't been any real managed forest in
  the area for decades. Historically it was the area that was logged to
  build early Colorado Springs, and was over harvested so was no longer
  a forest. Then it was replanted and brought back - but was also
  largely subdivided, so it is now largely woodland covering residential
  lots. The lots are large, many 5 acres and up. It now does not seem to
  fit the definition of landuse=forest of Managed forest or woodland
 plantation.
 
  The land cover is definitely trees in much of the area so natural=wood
  certainly fits and doen't conflict with landuse=residential but can
  complement it. natural=wood Woodland where timber production does not
  dominate use.
 
 
  How landuse=forest is presented on renderers makes a resident of the
  Western United States think of National Forest land, as that is what
 other maps do.
  It might lead some, rightly or wrongly, to think of hikes and camping
  can be done there, but it is mostly peoples yards. The parks and open
  space of the area have been marked very well (and are mostly
  forested). The county contains much actual National Forest, just not
 in this area.
 
  I am also aware that the tags can be badly defined, I'm trying to
  change that elsewhere now, but landuse=forest and natural=wood look to
  be good definitions. So experts, what is the proper way to map this?
  I'm just a casual mapper in OSM since April :-)


___
HOT mailing list
h...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


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

[Talk-us] Black Forest Fire

[Russell Deffner]

Hello OSM-US community (and Hotties),

 

First I had a blast at SOTM-US and it was great to meet so many of you!

 

Unfortunately I am emailing these lists with terrible news.  The Black
Forest Fire in Colorado is now being called 'the most destructive' in our
state's history; that phrase is getting old as some of you are probably well
aware that the previous 'most destructive' fire was just last year, the
Waldo Canyon which destroyed approx. 346[1] homes.  I'm not going to try and
give any facts on the BFF as it's still a very active situation.

 

If I haven't had a chance to meet you, I do GIS work mainly in the
emergency/disaster services world.  I and other mappers (thank you for those
who have already jumped in) have done a pretty good job getting the road
network fixed up and are beginning to add detail to the BFF area[2].  I
would suggest there is and will continue to be a desire for building
outlines; I know there can be some debate to map structures that may have
already, or could potentially, be destroyed soon; my take is that I've heard
the firefighters are obtaining a survival/save percentage as high as 80%
even in the worst of scenarios.  So in my opinion it is still advantageous
to trace buildings (from Bing, etc.) and will be easier to come back later
and mark appropriately those destroyed.

 

I copy this message to HOT just in case someone would like to set up the
Tasking Manager for tracing buildings; and to see if potentially Mapmill
will be activated once the smoke clears enough for imagery.  Email me or I
watch the talk-us and HOT mailing lists.

 

Thank you in advance for anyone who pitches in mapping this tragic event.
See [2] below for the general area, I've basically outlined the area of
concern with the (yes, rough, please improve) landuse polygons.

 

Russell Deffner

russdeffner on OSM

russdeff...@gmail.com

 

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldo_Canyon_fire 

2. http://osm.org/go/TzfAkq99- 

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

Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow

[Russell Deffner]

I think this is a good idea but have some suggested considerations.

If I remember correctly, MapRoulette 2 has the ability to localize the 
challenge, correct?  If/when is that available I think that would be a great 
challenge, just a simple “verify this is the proper neighborhood name and 
appropriate value”.  However, I have not seen a real good reference for 
correlating the place values in the US (although I haven’t looked); does 
someone know of one? or maybe a good first step is to try and create one.  Also 
I don’t think this will get us anywhere near complete as we get into rural 
areas we don’t know and that don’t have local mappers (and those using MR), so 
we may need to further do some sort of ‘challenge’ (that may not work with MR) 
to ‘import’/cross-reference another data set.

=Russ
russdeffner on OSM

From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:58 PM
To: OSM US Talk
Subject: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow

Hiya,

OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 
place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class 
P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both 
these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either 
Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I 
am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where 
people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or 
something along those lines.

Martijn
--
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow

[Russell Deffner]

I mean deciding what place value to use, i.e. is this a hamlet, neighborhood, 
etc.  So I guess more of a guideline for tagging places in the US is what I’d 
like to have for a MR challenge.  As far as rural, in my rural CO area very few 
of what I’d call ‘neighborhoods’ exist in OSM; I’ve added the ones I know right 
around me and that was about 1/2 dozen.  I would guess that these could make up 
for a relatively significant number across the entire US.

From: mve...@gmail.com [mailto:mve...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martijn van Exel
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:56 PM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: OSM US Talk
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow

Russ -- Yes, MR2 will have the ability to work on a specific location (likely 
to be specified as a point + radius, or bbox).
What do you mean by correlating place values, correlating with what?
Rural areas are not as important for neighborhood coverage I would say.

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Russell Deffner 
russ...@russelldeffnerconsulting.commailto:russ...@russelldeffnerconsulting.com
 wrote:
I think this is a good idea but have some suggested considerations.

If I remember correctly, MapRoulette 2 has the ability to localize the 
challenge, correct?  If/when is that available I think that would be a great 
challenge, just a simple “verify this is the proper neighborhood name and 
appropriate value”.  However, I have not seen a real good reference for 
correlating the place values in the US (although I haven’t looked); does 
someone know of one? or maybe a good first step is to try and create one.  Also 
I don’t think this will get us anywhere near complete as we get into rural 
areas we don’t know and that don’t have local mappers (and those using MR), so 
we may need to further do some sort of ‘challenge’ (that may not work with MR) 
to ‘import’/cross-reference another data set.

=Russ
russdeffner on OSM

From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.orgmailto:m...@rtijn.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:58 PM
To: OSM US Talk
Subject: [Talk-us] Neighborhoods / Zillow

Hiya,

OSM has pretty poor neighborhood coverage in the US. We have around 1100 
place=neighbo[u]rhood. Geonames has ten times that at 11,000 (feature class 
P.PPLX - not sure if all of those are neighborhoods) and Zillow has 7,000. Both 
these data sets are provided under (different) CC licenses. Could we use either 
Geonames or Zillow to drive improvement to neighborhood name coverage in OSM? I 
am not proposing an import, but a local MapRoulette challenge might work where 
people with local knowledge accept / reject proposed neighborhood points, or 
something along those lines.

Martijn
--
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/



--
Martijn van Exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/
http://openstreetmap.us/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us