Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
> From: Paul Johnson > Perhaps Richard could shed some more light on this, but relations are > pretty much going to be necessary to properly render route shields given > the huge variety in highway networks in North America and the world. My company has a beta version of a renderer that displays the proper shield, be it interstate, U.S. highway, state, county, or whatnot, without using relations. To do so, it looks for the following tags on a way (i.e., /not/ on its relations): network:country[us]:interstate = 95 network:country[us]:unitedStatesHighway = 1 network:country[us]:state[md] = 99 It also does proper multi-shield rendering of multiplexed routes, be they of the same type... network:country[us]:unitedStatesHighway = 50;301 ...or disparate: network:country[us]:interstate = 70 network:country[us]:unitedStatesHighway = 40 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Phil! Gold [2010-08-08 09:41 -0400]: > SELECT road.highway, route.network, route.ref > FROM planet_osm_line road > JOIN route_members ON road.osm_id = route_members.road_id > JOIN planet_osm_line route ON route_members.postgis_id = route.osm_id I was doing this from memory... Those JOINs should be LEFT JOINs, of course, because most roads are not members of route relations. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- PHP is a minor evil perpetrated and created by incompetent amateurs, whereas Perl is a great and insidious evil, perpetrated by skilled but perverted professionals. -- Jon Ribbens --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Richard Weait wrote: > Let's do a "shields" BoF at Atlanta next weekend. I have some ideas > that make shields much easier and even solve shield concurrency. Hopefully your idea recognizes the silliness of rendering the individual state route shield designs, especially the ones that will either be huge or compress the text to an unreadable size :) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Richard Weait [2010-08-08 07:45 -0400]: > Let's do a "shields" BoF at Atlanta next weekend. I have some ideas > that make shields much easier and even solve shield concurrency. I'm not going to SotM-US, so let me just mention what I've experimented with (unsuccessfully). What I'd like to see with shields is: If a road is a member of a US, Interstate, state, or county route relation, render an appropriately-sheped shield with the route number at zoom levels appropriate to the road's highway= tag. Road ref= tags should only be rendered if the road is not a member of any route relations. If a road is a member of multiple route relations for different routes, it should have all shields rendered, with reasonable spacing. If a road is a member of multiple route relations for the same route (this happens with the per-state relations and super-relations for Interstates and US highways), rendering should be the same as if it were only a member of one relation. (In other words, adding a super-relation shouldn't double the number of shields rendered.) I'm mostly focusing on rendering with Mapnik, since that's what most of the web-based slippy maps use, including the main one. Ignoring the roads' ref= tags completely and only rendering the shields from the route relations is one approach, but it then leaves roads without route relations (like a lot of state and couty roads) without shields, and it loses the ability to decide when to render the shields based on the roads' classifications; you would instead have to pick particular zoom levels at which to start each type of shield. On the other hand, if you render the shields from the route relations with the road information, you run into two main problems. One is that roads may be broken into almost arbitrarily-small pieces, which could result in diplicate shields very close together. The other, more important one, is that the information is now in two places in the PostGIS database, and I have yet to find an SQL query that doesn't get really slow trying to JOIN that information. My best effort has been to generate a link table that contains the OSM IDs of routes, the PostGIS IDs of those routes (just the OSM ID negated), and the OSM IDs of their member roads (which are also the PostGIS IDs). Then you do something like SELECT road.highway, route.network, route.ref FROM planet_osm_line road JOIN route_members ON road.osm_id = route_members.road_id JOIN planet_osm_line route ON route_members.postgis_id = route.osm_id Unfortunately, in my experience, those JOINs get really slow. I've tried working with the query planner to get speed improvements, but haven't achieved much. My next thought, for when I get back to working with shield rendering, is to try making a denormalized table that contains the information from the JOIN that I need. That approach will require some degree of modification to osm2pgsql in order to maintain that table through database updates, but it's the best way I can see forward. Once you have a query that gives you highway= from the road and route= and ref= from the relation, addressing almost everything from my "what I want" paragraph becomes really simple. (I haven't figured out a way to suppress shields from the super-relations yet.) While most of my thought about the actual rendering are basically "make separate images for each network shield for refs of one, two, and three characters long", I've been pondering how to use the symbol= tag on the route relations. Mapnik 1 simply can't, as far as I can tell; its shield images need to be configured statically. I haven't played much with Mapnik2, but apparently it has more dynamism in its renderings, so it might be able to use them, if it can fetch images from URLs (preferably only once; caching the downloads during a run). -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- Don't have good ideas if you aren't willing to be responsible for them. -- Alan Perlis --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:06:52 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: > >> * Paul Johnson >> [2010-07-21 00:19 -0700]: >>> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:15:18 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: >>> > I what way does OpenCycleMap get this right? As far as I can tell, >>> > it doesn't render road shields at all. >>> >>> No, but it does render route relations. >> >> It's the shields I want, and they're harder than just rendering >> relations at all, because the information I need is split between the >> regular roads and the route relations. The relations have the data for >> the shields, but the roads have the highway= tag that indicates when the >> shields need to be rendered. I'd also prefer to be able to say "if this >> road has a ref=, but is not a member of a route relation, render the >> ref=", but that's a giant pain to do. > > Perhaps Richard could shed some more light on this, but relations are > pretty much going to be necessary to properly render route shields given > the huge variety in highway networks in North America and the world. Let's do a "shields" BoF at Atlanta next weekend. I have some ideas that make shields much easier and even solve shield concurrency. I'll see the the SotM-US organizers will put it on the program. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:06:52 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: > * Paul Johnson > [2010-07-21 00:19 -0700]: >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:15:18 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: >> > I what way does OpenCycleMap get this right? As far as I can tell, >> > it doesn't render road shields at all. >> >> No, but it does render route relations. > > It's the shields I want, and they're harder than just rendering > relations at all, because the information I need is split between the > regular roads and the route relations. The relations have the data for > the shields, but the roads have the highway= tag that indicates when the > shields need to be rendered. I'd also prefer to be able to say "if this > road has a ref=, but is not a member of a route relation, render the > ref=", but that's a giant pain to do. Perhaps Richard could shed some more light on this, but relations are pretty much going to be necessary to properly render route shields given the huge variety in highway networks in North America and the world. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:18:43 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> Curious why they use a starburst symbol that looks >> like an explosion for the trailblazer shield, though. > > It's a sunflower :) I like my version better, the mental imagery the K-road signs invoke really break the monotony of driving from Tulsa to Great Bend or Williamsburg. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 06:49:55 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Paul Johnson > wrote: >> The wiki also says to use relations instead of ref= tags on the ways, >> though uptake on that has been slow. > > If it says anywhere to use relations *instead of* ref tags, show me so I > can remove it. I can't find it now, but I recall I had seen it before there. Though using route relations to describe routes would free up the ref= tag for references belonging to the way itself (like county bridge reference numbers). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Paul Johnson [2010-07-21 00:19 -0700]: > On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:15:18 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: > > I what way does OpenCycleMap get this right? As far as I can tell, it > > doesn't render road shields at all. > > No, but it does render route relations. It's the shields I want, and they're harder than just rendering relations at all, because the information I need is split between the regular roads and the route relations. The relations have the data for the shields, but the roads have the highway= tag that indicates when the shields need to be rendered. I'd also prefer to be able to say "if this road has a ref=, but is not a member of a route relation, render the ref=", but that's a giant pain to do. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- All bad precedents begin with justifiable measures. -- Julius Caesar --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:15:18 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: > * Paul Johnson > [2010-07-20 00:51 -0700]: >> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 17:09:35 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: >> >> > In short, I'm okay seeing "ref=K-10" on a road, because that's how >> > people refer to them, and because I'd prefer to be pulling >> > information out of a relation tagged route=road, network=US:KS, >> > ref=10. (Mind you, I still haven't found a good way to actually do >> > that and have it work correctly in terms of rendering; it's just what >> > I want.) >> >> Fix the renderer. The Cyclemap does it right, there's no reason the >> other renderers can't. > > I what way does OpenCycleMap get this right? As far as I can tell, it > doesn't render road shields at all. No, but it does render route relations. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
From: Nathan Edgars II > There's been no standard way of tagging state highways since before I > joined at the beginning of this year. Nor has there been in my four years here. Hell, I was the one who wrote the wiki suggestion to use the USPS state abbreviations. I am completely and utterly stunned that it is still there. One of my four OSM WTFs is overloading the REF tag's value with so much information. We should be "key rich", not "REF value rich". The *keys* should have the "meat", not the *values*: network:country[us]:state[ks] = 10// renderer sees this and renders a sunburst network:country[us]:state[md] = 26// renderer sees this and renders a white rectangle These tags are simply applied to all of the ways that comprise the route. No complicated relations (the second of my four OSM WTFs) necessary. Need all of the ways for a route? It's a simple database query: SELECT * WHERE key = 'network:country[us]:state[md]' AND value = '26'. If you have a state with different classes of networks, you just extend this idea: network:country[us]:state[va]:primary = 7 // renderer sees this and renders a guitar pick thingie network:country[us]:state[va]:secondary = 606 // renderer sees this and renders a circle If you have a way that is on two networks, you just give it both tags: network:country[us]:unitedStatesHighway = 40 network:country[us]:interstate = 70 Oh, yeah: this also gets rid of those asinine arguments about, say, whether there should be a hyphen in the REF tag between the "I" and the digits in interstate designations. Don't like the hyphen? Knock yourself out, and create a *renderer* that shows "I 95" when it encounters network:country[us]:interstate=95. Prefer hyphens? Or a shield? Whatever. The point is, that's the domain of the *renderer*, not the *metadata*. Moving on, if you have a way that comprises two networks of the same class, you hit OSM's third WTF, which is the inability to have two tags with the same key: network:country[us]:unitedStatesHighway = 50 network:country[us]:unitedStatesHighway = 301 So as a workaround, you have to use the infamous semicolon: network:country[us]:unitedStatesHighway = 50;301 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > Curious why they use a starburst symbol that looks > like an explosion for the trailblazer shield, though. It's a sunflower :) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Paul Johnson [2010-07-20 00:51 -0700]: > On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 17:09:35 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: > > > In short, I'm okay seeing "ref=K-10" on a road, because that's how > > people refer to them, and because I'd prefer to be pulling information > > out of a relation tagged route=road, network=US:KS, ref=10. (Mind you, > > I still haven't found a good way to actually do that and have it work > > correctly in terms of rendering; it's just what I want.) > > Fix the renderer. The Cyclemap does it right, there's no reason the > other renderers can't. I what way does OpenCycleMap get this right? As far as I can tell, it doesn't render road shields at all. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it. -- Andre Gide ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > The wiki also says to use relations instead of ref= tags on the ways, > though uptake on that has been slow. If it says anywhere to use relations *instead of* ref tags, show me so I can remove it. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:41:10 -0500, Toby Murray wrote: > I see at least one highway in Kansas has been tagged with "K-10" - I'm > guessing most people would consider that flat out wrong? :) Yes, even though Kansas does refer to state highways as "K roads," even on official signage. Curious why they use a starburst symbol that looks like an explosion for the trailblazer shield, though. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 17:09:35 -0400, Phil! Gold wrote: > In short, I'm okay seeing "ref=K-10" on a road, because that's how > people refer to them, and because I'd prefer to be pulling information > out of a relation tagged route=road, network=US:KS, ref=10. (Mind you, > I still haven't found a good way to actually do that and have it work > correctly in terms of rendering; it's just what I want.) Fix the renderer. The Cyclemap does it right, there's no reason the other renderers can't. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 14:23:28 -0500, Alex Mauer wrote: > On 07/19/2010 01:13 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: >> The problem with using refs to render state shields is that it can be >> difficult to get the right shield. Some states use the state >> abbreviation in the road reference (so Maryland route 26 is generally >> written "MD 26"), but a bunch just use SR (so "SR 10" could be in >> Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Nevada, Ohio, >> Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, or Washington state route 10). At least the >> route relations have the state encoded specifically so the specific >> shield can be used. I think there's more than one that uses "SH", too, >> and so on. > > The wiki says[1] that refs should include US:[two-letter state > abbreviation]. That should make it pretty simple. The wiki also says to use relations instead of ref= tags on the ways, though uptake on that has been slow. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Val Kartchner wrote: > Yes, I've had a dispute with another local mapper in Utah about this > very issue: How to tag state routes. It has been brought up on this > list twice already, with no resolution. The discussion dies rather > quickly This one will go the same way, a lot of talk but no resolution. Until Mapnik starts rendering shields, which Mapquest showed us is possible (and probably not rendering state route shields except as ovals/rounded rectangles, but we'll see). It's usually a good idea to tag correctly for the renderer (as opposed to tagging equally correctly but not in a way the renderer supports). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 18:51 -0400, Richard Welty wrote: > On 7/19/10 4:48 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > > There's been no standard way of tagging state highways since before I > > joined at the beginning of this year. > the US routes page has always called for US: or since i joined > last summer. > > it's all a matter of which wiki pages you find. Yes, I've had a dispute with another local mapper in Utah about this very issue: How to tag state routes. It has been brought up on this list twice already, with no resolution. The discussion dies rather quickly This one will go the same way, a lot of talk but no resolution. Good luck, - Val - ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > The trunk issue is just a matter of selecting one level in the > road-priority hierarchy. Being off by one is not the end of the > world. Get the verifiable parameters right, name, surface, one way, > single or dual carriageway and trunk vs. primary or motorway isn't a > big deal. Sure, one practice is that it's a level in the hierarchy (the most major intercity highways). Another is that trunk means "almost-motorway" and is not part of the hierarchy but (like motorway) dependent on physical characteristics. I've also seen it used for any divided highway (or maybe any divided highway that would otherwise be primary?). > > The original classifications come from English highways so it's no > surprise that things differ elsewhere. Trunk doesn't even mean trunk there :) http://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/228/uk-road-was-detrunked-why-does-osm-still-have-it-tagged-highwaytrunk ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > On 7/19/10 4:48 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: >> >> There's been no standard way of tagging state highways since before I >> joined at the beginning of this year. > > the US routes page has always called for US: or since i joined > last summer. > > it's all a matter of which wiki pages you find. > > same problem with highway=trunk, the wiki page entries (there are a bunch of > them scattered about) are wildly inconsistent. you can always find one that > agrees with you, and it's quite impossible to use the trunk tag and be > consistent > with all the wiki pages. The trunk issue is just a matter of selecting one level in the road-priority hierarchy. Being off by one is not the end of the world. Get the verifiable parameters right, name, surface, one way, single or dual carriageway and trunk vs. primary or motorway isn't a big deal. The original classifications come from English highways so it's no surprise that things differ elsewhere. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On 7/19/10 4:48 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote: There's been no standard way of tagging state highways since before I joined at the beginning of this year. the US routes page has always called for US: or since i joined last summer. it's all a matter of which wiki pages you find. same problem with highway=trunk, the wiki page entries (there are a bunch of them scattered about) are wildly inconsistent. you can always find one that agrees with you, and it's quite impossible to use the trunk tag and be consistent with all the wiki pages. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On 7/19/10 3:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: * Alex Mauer [2010-07-19 14:23 -0500]: The wiki says[1] that refs should include US:[two-letter state abbreviation]. That should make it pretty simple. The wiki says that's optional, and in my experience no one does it (probably because it looks horrid with the current rendering). in upstate NY, it's been done both ways. The wiki also explicitly says that you should use the two-character postal abbreviation for the state the road is in, but that seems to have been disregarded in states where a different prefix (like SR) is normally used. (To be fair, there's a lot of other stuff people have done with the ref tags on state roads, including not having any network identifiers and putting the number in parentheses.) and we should work towards a consistent system; i understand the notion of local convention and all that, but it makes rendering a living hell. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Toby Murray [2010-07-19 15:41 -0500]: > I see at least one highway in Kansas has been tagged with "K-10" - I'm > guessing most people would consider that flat out wrong? :) I suspect that it depends. Given the way refs are rendered currently, I don't mind state-localized ref numbers, though I'm sure there are people would disagree with me. From what I've seen, the route relations are a better place to put route information (I think the semicolon separators are kind of a hack), and the explicit separation of information in the route relations makes it easier to process them. In short, I'm okay seeing "ref=K-10" on a road, because that's how people refer to them, and because I'd prefer to be pulling information out of a relation tagged route=road, network=US:KS, ref=10. (Mind you, I still haven't found a good way to actually do that and have it work correctly in terms of rendering; it's just what I want.) -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- If an advisor says to you, "My liege, he is but one man. What can one man possibly do?", reply, "This," and kill the advisor. -- Evil Overlord's Handbook, entry 46 --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Toby Murray wrote: > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > >> The wiki also explicitly says that you should use the two-character postal >> abbreviation for the state the road is in, but that seems to have been >> disregarded in states where a different prefix (like SR) is normally >> used. (To be fair, there's a lot of other stuff people have done with the >> ref tags on state roads, including not having any network identifiers and >> putting the number in parentheses.) > > I see at least one highway in Kansas has been tagged with "K-10" - I'm > guessing most people would consider that flat out wrong? :) > > I guess that is how people refer to it when speaking but I've been > using ref tags like "KS 10" There's been no standard way of tagging state highways since before I joined at the beginning of this year. A few months ago I talked to http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/blackadder about getting a consensus on one method, and the crux of the response was "If someone tags something one way and someone else tags the same type of object differently then that's fine.". If we can get consensus on one method, I'm all for it. But the standardization should be done in a semi-automated way to avoid errors. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > * Alex Mauer [2010-07-19 14:23 -0500]: >> The wiki says[1] that refs should include US:[two-letter state >> abbreviation]. That should make it pretty simple. > > The wiki says that's optional, and in my experience no one does it > (probably because it looks horrid with the current rendering). Yeah I haven't seen anyone in my area using US:KS in ref tags. I've been putting it in the network tag of the route relations I've started creating but I'm the only one working on that In Kansas right now. > The wiki also explicitly says that you should use the two-character postal > abbreviation for the state the road is in, but that seems to have been > disregarded in states where a different prefix (like SR) is normally > used. (To be fair, there's a lot of other stuff people have done with the > ref tags on state roads, including not having any network identifiers and > putting the number in parentheses.) I see at least one highway in Kansas has been tagged with "K-10" - I'm guessing most people would consider that flat out wrong? :) I guess that is how people refer to it when speaking but I've been using ref tags like "KS 10" ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
> I 70 and US 40 are the same road through most of Kansas. Things get
> kind of confusing when you zoom in. It seems like they may be randomly
> choosing which shield to render or something... At some zoom levels I
> see only US 40 shields on part of the way and only I 70 shields on
> other parts. If you zoom in all the way they are interspersed a little
> more but still seem to clump together at times.
It's certainly random; see this 'hybrid shield':
http://open.mapquest.co.uk/mq/3-_nm8O2RaRCO5sLEyyKr2
They have to be using relations somehow.
Look at I-135: it only has US 81 shields, though it has ref="I 135; US
81" and both relations. But the I-135 relation is network=I ref=135,
while the I-70 relation is network=US:I ref=I 70.
Then look at I-35 east of Emporia: it has US 50 shields only, with
ref="I 35; US 50" and I-35 and US 50 relations. But the I-35 relation
has ref="I 35 (KS)", so it doesn't show up.
Go to I-70 in Maryland. The parts that overlap US 40 are only shown as
US 40. Here the I-70 relation has network=US:I ref=70 (rather than
ref=I 70).
In other words it converts ref="I x" and ref="US x" to shields whether
these refs are on ways or relations. It doesn't use the network tag on
a relation.
Now go to US 169 south of Olathe. Most of their shields show "169; 7"
in an oval. The ref is "US 169; 7" and it has relations with ref="US
169" and ref=7.
And look at Hagerstown, Maryland: US 40 Alternate has "40 AL" in an
oval. The way is tagged ref="US 40 AL" and there's no relation.
>From these examples it looks like it will render "US x" as an oval if
x is too big ("169; 7" or "40 AL"). If this is short enough to display
in an oval it won't fall back on the relations (?).
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Nakor wrote: > FYI just in case it did not come to this list. Are they going to the US > SOTM? Yes, as of right now they're on the schedule to speak. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On 07/19/2010 02:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > The wiki also explicitly says that you should use the two-character postal > abbreviation for the state the road is in, but that seems to have been > disregarded in states where a different prefix (like SR) is normally > used. (To be fair, there's a lot of other stuff people have done with the > ref tags on state roads, including not having any network identifiers and > putting the number in parentheses.) Yeah, if people put in bad data you can’t expect to get good data out. It just means the bad data needs to be corrected. —Alex Mauer “hawke” signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Alex Mauer [2010-07-19 14:23 -0500]: > The wiki says[1] that refs should include US:[two-letter state > abbreviation]. That should make it pretty simple. The wiki says that's optional, and in my experience no one does it (probably because it looks horrid with the current rendering). The wiki also explicitly says that you should use the two-character postal abbreviation for the state the road is in, but that seems to have been disregarded in states where a different prefix (like SR) is normally used. (To be fair, there's a lot of other stuff people have done with the ref tags on state roads, including not having any network identifiers and putting the number in parentheses.) -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- I want to crush and maim my enemies in the dark cold void of space. -- robbie --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Toby Murray [2010-07-19 13:54 -0500]: > I see shields being rendered for ways that have multiple ref values: > http://open.mapquest.co.uk/mq/7-_nm8O2RaRCO5sLEy Huh. I don't see anything in the stylesheet to do that. Perhaps they're splitting the ref during the database import. > Has there ever been any consideration for using the symbol= tag in the > route relationships to dynamically pull in shields from the listed > source? I don't know whether it's been considered for the main slippy map. I had the thought to use it when I started looking at shield rendering, but it's kind of difficult to do with Mapnik. Mapnik needs the image names to be specified explicitly in the stylesheet, so you'd have to add a preprocessing step that downloaded the images and wrote part of the stylesheet with a separate rule for each different shield. In contrast, using the ref tags (either on the ways or the relations) lets you use just one relation for each type of shield, not each individual route. That cuts down on the size of the stylesheet, and speeds up Mapnik, since there are fewer rules to test against. Mapnik 2 (still in development) supports choosing images dynamically, but I don't think it can download SVGs (or PNGs, for that matter) from the Internet, so you'd still need a little more preprocessing to do those downloads before you render. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- People seem to think that the blanket phrase, "I only work here," absolves them utterly from any moral obligation in terms of the public -- but this was precisely Eichmann's excuse for his job in the concentration camps. --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On 07/19/2010 01:13 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > The problem with using refs to render state shields is that it can be > difficult to get the right shield. Some states use the state abbreviation > in the road reference (so Maryland route 26 is generally written "MD 26"), > but a bunch just use SR (so "SR 10" could be in Alabama, California, > Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Nevada, Ohio, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, > or Washington state route 10). At least the route relations have the > state encoded specifically so the specific shield can be used. I think > there's more than one that uses "SH", too, and so on. The wiki says[1] that refs should include US:[two-letter state abbreviation]. That should make it pretty simple. —Alex Mauer “hawke” 1. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#State_Highways signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > I don't see any special cases for multiple route membership, and it looks > like road segments that belong to more than one route don't get any > shields rendered. (That, to me, will be the biggest benefit of > route-relation-based shield rendering, if anyone gets it working > properly.) I see shields being rendered for ways that have multiple ref values: http://open.mapquest.co.uk/mq/7-_nm8O2RaRCO5sLEy I 70 and US 40 are the same road through most of Kansas. Things get kind of confusing when you zoom in. It seems like they may be randomly choosing which shield to render or something... At some zoom levels I see only US 40 shields on part of the way and only I 70 shields on other parts. If you zoom in all the way they are interspersed a little more but still seem to clump together at times. Has there ever been any consideration for using the symbol= tag in the route relationships to dynamically pull in shields from the listed source? I'm not sure if that would really be a good idea or not though... ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Nathan Edgars II [2010-07-18 18:53 -0400]: > I'm not so sure we need to use relations. We can use the following > procedure to generate the correct shields: > 1. split the ref tag at semicolons and drop leading spaces Yeah, that's not hard. > 2. convert I *, US *, and CR/CH/CTH * to shields So you'd suggest doing the Interstates, the US highway network, and county roads, but not state roads? > 3. remove other prefixes, and keep these and non-prefixed numbers in > ovals (there's no reason we need to render the shapes used on signs, > though Virginia and West Virginia may need special rules because their > *secondary* (county-based) routes use circles) Personally, I'd like to see each state's shields used on the map. I suppose there's the argument that someone from, say, Wisconsin might not know what Georgia's shields look like, but I think it should be obvious from context. The problem with using refs to render state shields is that it can be difficult to get the right shield. Some states use the state abbreviation in the road reference (so Maryland route 26 is generally written "MD 26"), but a bunch just use SR (so "SR 10" could be in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Nevada, Ohio, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, or Washington state route 10). At least the route relations have the state encoded specifically so the specific shield can be used. I think there's more than one that uses "SH", too, and so on. > The main benefit of relations seems to be that the shields are > generated not per way but per route, so four adjacent short ways will > be treated as if they were combined. It may be harder to ensure that > all shields on an overlap are displayed, however. No harder than it is when using refs, at least with Mapnik. You tell mapnik, "use a minimum of this many pixels between repetitions of the same shield, and a minimum of this many pixels between this shield and other shields." As long as there's room enough between repetitions, the overlapping shields will fill in the space. -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- When people were in serious trouble, they went to a witch. (Sometimes, of course, to say, "please stop doing it.") -- _Carpe Jugulum_, Terry Pratchett --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > * Toby Murray [2010-07-09 16:19 -0500]: >> Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big >> discussion about that here recently? :) >> >> Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... > > As I've been (kind of) working on US highway shields, I was curious about > this, too. Since they've now put their mapnik stylesheets on github, I > checked it out, and they're not using route relations. Interestingly, they are using relations to put 'shields' on the New York City Subway, but they seem to only show one service where multiple services overlap. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > I don't see any special cases for multiple route membership, and it looks > like road segments that belong to more than one route don't get any > shields rendered. (That, to me, will be the biggest benefit of > route-relation-based shield rendering, if anyone gets it working > properly.) I'm not so sure we need to use relations. We can use the following procedure to generate the correct shields: 1. split the ref tag at semicolons and drop leading spaces 2. convert I *, US *, and CR/CH/CTH * to shields 3. remove other prefixes, and keep these and non-prefixed numbers in ovals (there's no reason we need to render the shapes used on signs, though Virginia and West Virginia may need special rules because their *secondary* (county-based) routes use circles) 4. draw all the shields thus generated near each other The main benefit of relations seems to be that the shields are generated not per way but per route, so four adjacent short ways will be treated as if they were combined. It may be harder to ensure that all shields on an overlap are displayed, however. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
* Toby Murray [2010-07-09 16:19 -0500]: > Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big > discussion about that here recently? :) > > Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... As I've been (kind of) working on US highway shields, I was curious about this, too. Since they've now put their mapnik stylesheets on github, I checked it out, and they're not using route relations. They only support US and Interstate shields (as people have noted) and they just use the ref field, stripping off the 'US' or 'I' at the beginning. (Interestingly, it looks like they took the wiki text about using a space to heart; it doesn't look like refs of the form "I-95", with dashes, will be processed at all, although "I95", with no separator, will.) I don't see any special cases for multiple route membership, and it looks like road segments that belong to more than one route don't get any shields rendered. (That, to me, will be the biggest benefit of route-relation-based shield rendering, if anyone gets it working properly.) -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- He won't hurt me. I'm wearing my magic breastplate. -- Famous Last Words, #937 --- -- ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Jul 10, 2010, at 2:21 AM, Toby Murray wrote: > Well I took a look at the blog post with the technical details. They > are using a vanilla osm2pgsql/mapnik setup, just custom styles from > Cartifact. They mention enhancing mapnik. Have these changes already > made it back upstream or will that happen in the future? Yes, they are in trunk (aka Mapnik2). > In particular > I'm guessing the "multistyle rendering based on polygonal regions" is > of interest for the highway/interstate rendering. I see they don't > (yet?) have state highway shields, just interstates and US highways. > > Overall I think it looks pretty nice though. > > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Richard Welty wrote: >> On 7/9/10 5:57 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Toby Murray wrote: >>> Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big discussion about that here recently? :) Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... >>> >>> Not sure what they are doing, because I-80 near Des Moines has >>> shields, but I-35 doesn't. I was going to take a look later to see if >>> I could figure out what was different between the two cases. >>> >>> >> >> here's a sample in my neighborhood; some NY 43 shields have the NY, some >> don't: >> >> http://open.mapquest.co.uk/mq/4-Vc4rtBI4PAQu >> >> >> >> ___ >> 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 mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
Well I took a look at the blog post with the technical details. They are using a vanilla osm2pgsql/mapnik setup, just custom styles from Cartifact. They mention enhancing mapnik. Have these changes already made it back upstream or will that happen in the future? In particular I'm guessing the "multistyle rendering based on polygonal regions" is of interest for the highway/interstate rendering. I see they don't (yet?) have state highway shields, just interstates and US highways. Overall I think it looks pretty nice though. On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Richard Welty wrote: > On 7/9/10 5:57 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Toby Murray wrote: >> >>> >>> Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big >>> discussion about that here recently? :) >>> >>> Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... >>> >> >> Not sure what they are doing, because I-80 near Des Moines has >> shields, but I-35 doesn't. I was going to take a look later to see if >> I could figure out what was different between the two cases. >> >> > > here's a sample in my neighborhood; some NY 43 shields have the NY, some > don't: > > http://open.mapquest.co.uk/mq/4-Vc4rtBI4PAQu > > > > ___ > 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] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On 7/9/10 5:57 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Toby Murray wrote: Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big discussion about that here recently? :) Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... Not sure what they are doing, because I-80 near Des Moines has shields, but I-35 doesn't. I was going to take a look later to see if I could figure out what was different between the two cases. here's a sample in my neighborhood; some NY 43 shields have the NY, some don't: http://open.mapquest.co.uk/mq/4-Vc4rtBI4PAQu ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On 7/9/10 5:19 PM, Toby Murray wrote: It doesn't seem too far behind. Maybe a couple of weeks. New features I added in early June are there but a few I did more recently aren't. Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big discussion about that here recently? :) Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... whatever it is, it seems a bit spastic. i'm looking at NY state and county routes where i reviewed the tiger data and built the relations, and some shields have NY or CR prefixes, but a lot don't. it looks like it's a couple of weeks out of date at most. richard ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Toby Murray wrote: > > Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big > discussion about that here recently? :) > > Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... Not sure what they are doing, because I-80 near Des Moines has shields, but I-35 doesn't. I was going to take a look later to see if I could figure out what was different between the two cases. -- Jeff Ollie ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
It doesn't seem too far behind. Maybe a couple of weeks. New features I added in early June are there but a few I did more recently aren't. Also, I see they are rendering highway shields. Didn't I see a big discussion about that here recently? :) Wonder if they are using the route relations to render them... Toby On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Nakor wrote: >> FYI just in case it did not come to this list. Are they going to the US >> SOTM? >> >> Mapquest is also planning to spent $1mill to improve OSM data in the US: >> >> http://vector1media.com/spatialsustain/openstreetmap-gains-great-traction-this-week.html > > Neat. Their tile rendering seems pretty decent, except their database > seems to be out of date. Hopefully they'll get a process in place to > keep up-to-date soon. > > -- > Jeff Ollie > > ___ > 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] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
From mapquest's blog post [1]: "AOL also announced today, a $1 million open-source mapping investment fund. This fund will support the growth of open-source mapping in the United States in the local communities that Patch.com covers. More information about the AOL grant application process is available by emailing o...@mapquest.com." Looks like Patch.com only currently operates in parts of 5 NE states and California, but the Mapquest post also put in a plug for mapping parties, so who knows. There's a slightly more "techy" post from mapquest too, if anyone's interested [2] [1] http://blog.mapquest.com/2010/07/09/mapquest-opens-up/ [2] http://devblog.mapquest.com/2010/07/09/mapquest-opens-up-uk/ On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:05 PM, jeremy jozwik wrote: > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Nakor wrote: >> FYI just in case it did not come to this list. Are they going to the US >> SOTM? >> >> Mapquest is also planning to spent $1mill to improve OSM data in the US: > > any info on how they plan on spending the 1 mil? > > ___ > 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] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Nakor wrote: > FYI just in case it did not come to this list. Are they going to the US > SOTM? > > Mapquest is also planning to spent $1mill to improve OSM data in the US: > > http://vector1media.com/spatialsustain/openstreetmap-gains-great-traction-this-week.html Neat. Their tile rendering seems pretty decent, except their database seems to be out of date. Hopefully they'll get a process in place to keep up-to-date soon. -- Jeff Ollie ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Nakor wrote: > FYI just in case it did not come to this list. Are they going to the US > SOTM? > > Mapquest is also planning to spent $1mill to improve OSM data in the US: any info on how they plan on spending the 1 mil? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapquest launches site based on OSM!
FYI just in case it did not come to this list. Are they going to the US SOTM? Mapquest is also planning to spent $1mill to improve OSM data in the US: http://vector1media.com/spatialsustain/openstreetmap-gains-great-traction-this-week.html ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
