Hi!
Is there any (planned) project out there, where one can upload
geotagged photos, maybe view them on a map and use them directly in
JOSM? I was thinking about the same way as GPS traces are now uploaded
to OSM and JOSM can download and display them.
I know openstreetview but is seems not that
2012/5/9 Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net:
At 2012-05-09 12:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I'd like to note for pubs, cafes, bars, restaurants and similar if
they offer draught beer.
Seems like there some discussion about detailed tagging, including
micro-breweries etc. I'm thinking
2012.05.10. 10:29 keltezéssel, Martin Vonwald írta:
Is there any (planned) project out there, where one can upload
geotagged photos, maybe view them on a map and use them directly in
JOSM? I was thinking about the same way as GPS traces are now uploaded
to OSM and JOSM can download and display
On 10/05/12 10:30, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/9 Alan Mintz alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net:
At 2012-05-09 12:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I'd like to note for pubs, cafes, bars, restaurants and similar if
they offer draught beer.
Seems like there some discussion about detailed
2012/5/10 Ferenc Veres l...@netngine.hu:
OpenStreetView is for presenting nice photos if nice places, isn't it?
It looks so. Not for boring photos of opening hours tables and such
SURVEY INFO. :-) What's your aim?
That's exactly my aim: survey info.
I would also like to know if there is
On 10/05/12 12:42, Martin Vonwald wrote:
2012/5/10 Ferenc Veres l...@netngine.hu:
OpenStreetView is for presenting nice photos if nice places, isn't it?
It looks so. Not for boring photos of opening hours tables and such
SURVEY INFO. :-) What's your aim?
That's exactly my aim: survey info.
On 10/05/12 10:16, Martin Vonwald wrote:
Hi!
On the wiki page of junction=roundabout the Junctions proposal
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Junctions) is
mentioned and it is claimed, that we have to use a relation in case
the way of the roundabout is split up. Is this
2012/5/10 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com:
In germany I did tag the major beer_brand=* for some pubs/restaurants. I also
came along drink:*=yes/no.
We could use drink:*=yes/draught/bottled/no. Many pubs offer different
kinds/brands where some are draught and other are bottled.
yes, something
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:56 AM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 10/05/12 10:16, Martin Vonwald wrote:
Hi!
On the wiki page of junction=roundabout the Junctions proposal
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Junctions) is
mentioned and it is claimed, that we have to
I have uploaded a lot of pictures to openstreetview (everything from
Missouri to Idaho is mine) in the hopes that it will some day become a
useful service like this... but alas, nothing has happened with it in
a few years.
Most of my pictures are from highway driving and I usually take a
straight
As expected the user NE2 tries to rewrite the wiki so that it fits his
personal view of the world:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundaboutaction=history
He constantly ignores the fact, that a small roundabout is not a
mini-roundabout as different rules apply
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
As expected the user NE2 tries to rewrite the wiki so that it fits his
personal view of the world:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundaboutaction=history
He constantly ignores the
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Outside of areas where mini roundabouts actually exist (the UK)
Add France in your areas list.
Pieren
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Well as I pointed out in the previous discussion, it isn't just his
view. Outside of areas where mini roundabouts actually exist (the UK)
his edit does reflect how users have actually used this tag.
Maybe this isn't
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Outside of areas where mini roundabouts actually exist (the UK)
his edit does reflect how users have actually used this tag.
This also isn't an exclusively UK object, there's at least one in the
US as well (and probably
On 5/10/2012 11:05 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
mini_roundabout is by definition a traversible object, but one with a
hard median isn't.
A mini-roundabout may be by definition traversable, but that doesn't
mean highway=mini_roundabout is, any more than a highway=trunk is a
trunk road or a
Martin,
He constantly ignores the fact, that a small roundabout is not a
mini-roundabout as different rules apply to them and they are
differently constructed. He also ignores the fact the e.g. routers are
unable to generate correct routes for large vehicles.
I therefore reverted his changes
Nathan,
formally you are correct, but it has been OSM practice to base its tags on
UK definitions. Why should we abandon this practice in this case. In
addition, to my knowledge, they invented the mini-roundabout there and
defined it with a traversable centre piece.
Volker
(Italy)
On 10 May
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Martin Vonwald imagic@gmail.com wrote:
As expected the user NE2 tries to rewrite the wiki so that it fits his
personal view of the world:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundaboutaction=history
I've made some significant
2012/5/10 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Well as I pointed out in the previous discussion, it isn't just his
view. Outside of areas where mini roundabouts actually exist (the UK)
his edit does reflect how users have
On 5/10/2012 11:21 AM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Nathan,
formally you are correct, but it has been OSM practice to base its tags
on UK definitions.
Nope. In the UK, not all highway=trunks are trunk roads. Some have been
detrunked but remain in the primary route network.
On 5/10/2012 11:30 AM, Josh Doe wrote:
I've made some significant edits to this article to improve the
overall quality, as well as hopefully provide text which satisfies
both concerned parties.
Nope - you said that it's erroneous to use the tag as many mappers have,
for a miniature roundabout
On 10/05/12 17:07, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:55 AM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
Outside of areas where mini roundabouts actually exist (the UK)
his edit does reflect how users have actually used this tag.
This also isn't an exclusively UK object, there's at
On 5/10/2012 11:52 AM, fly wrote:
Why should we have two tags for roundabouts which differe only in size.
We do not do this with other objects/tags.
waterway=ditch/canal and stream/river?
(By the way, we don't currently have two node tags for roundabouts.
Hence the current situation.)
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/10/2012 11:52 AM, fly wrote:
Why should we have two tags for roundabouts which differe only in size.
We do not do this with other objects/tags.
waterway=ditch/canal and stream/river?
(By the way, we don't
2012/5/10 Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com:
I propose we start accepting junction=roundabout to be used on nodes.
you can do this but it will always be preliminary and worse than
explicit geometry
This shouldn't produce any problems for data consumers, is logical,
and would save a lot of time for
On 5/10/2012 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/10 Josh Doej...@joshdoe.com:
I propose we start accepting junction=roundabout to be used on nodes.
you can do this but it will always be preliminary and worse than
explicit geometry
Why?
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/5/10 Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com:
I propose we start accepting junction=roundabout to be used on nodes.
you can do this but it will always be preliminary and worse than
explicit geometry
Hmm, this is like
2012/5/10 Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com:
On 5/10/2012 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
you can do this but it will always be preliminary and worse than
explicit geometry
Why?
Because it gives you more information (e.g. the radius of the circle,
or a more detailed shape in case it
On 5/10/2012 12:35 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2012/5/10 Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com:
On 5/10/2012 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
you can do this but it will always be preliminary and worse than
explicit geometry
Why?
Because it gives you more information (e.g. the radius
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/10/2012 11:52 AM, fly wrote:
Why should we have two tags for roundabouts which differe only in size.
We do not do this with other objects/tags.
On May 10, 2012 10:32 AM, Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com wrote:
From a quick unscientifically-randomish
review of nodes tagged as highway=mini_roundabout,
On 10/05/12 18:31, Josh Doe wrote:
For those interested, you can download all current nodes
as a zipped OSM file
(http://joshd.dev.openstreetmap.org/all_mini_roundabouts_20120510.zip),
A *very* quick look at that against Bing imagery in JOSM reveals a
pretty broad selection of things around
On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 21:11 +0100, Graham Jones wrote:
There was a similar discussion on the UK list last year when we were
making our BrewMap.
I think we settled on real_ale=yes, but I suspect that was more on the
basis that draught beer was an expectation and we wanted to know if it
was
2012/5/10 Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk:
Is providing detailed information on pubs possibly over-stretching us?
Things change rapidly, beers in pubs can change daily and sometime
quicker than that, we would need to maintain this data and I think it
would rapidly become stale.
in many
Okay, well for a quick and dirty, but hopefully fairly randomized
approach to randomly sampling and classifying the data against Bing
imagery, I wrote a short interactive bit o' Python:
https://gist.github.com/2655895
If you're bothered about the data for mini-roundabouts, could you give
I've started tagging local mini_roundabouts with mountable=yes/no. Most
have trees and are obviously not. But I'm not exactly sure where the
line is. Should one with a low curb, more like a gutter, be considered a
true mini-roundabout or not? For example, this one in Kissimmee:
On 5/10/2012 5:31 PM, Andrew Chadwick (lists) wrote:
19 tc (turning circle at the end of a road, with or without a
solid centre)
Careful - there was a recent dispute over whether a turning circle with
an island is really a turning_circle, very reminiscent of this
mini_roundabout
I just went through the mini_roundabouts in east central Florida. I
found one definitely mountable (in an industrial park), 202 definitely
not mountable (including some culs-de-sac), 3 that I'm not sure about,
and 4 mistagged turning_circles. Obviously this says a lot about
roundabout
On 10.05.2012 17:35, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 5/10/2012 11:30 AM, Josh Doe wrote:
I've made some significant edits to this article to improve the
overall quality, as well as hopefully provide text which satisfies
both concerned parties.
Nope - you said that it's erroneous to use the tag
As a UK mapper the main problem as I see it is one of language. When I drive
over a mini roundabout I know what I have done, when I drive around a small
roundabout I understand the difference. Maybe the problem is that the word
'mini' gets confused with 'small' which in any other context is
On 10 May 2012 23:26, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Now the real question is whether we should change the definition. If we
did allow using junction=roundabout on nodes, as has been suggested in
this thread, would there be any reason left to prefer mini_roundabout
for roundabouts
On 5/10/2012 6:47 PM, Andrew Chadwick (lists) wrote:
Might solve the
problem of people not making the distinction between flat mini
roundabouts and the bigger sort, or not making the distinction in the
definitively correct place.
You're conflating size of intersection with height of center.
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Well, according to the definition it _is_ erroneous.
Amen.
Now the real question is whether we should change the definition.(...)
would there be any reason left to prefer mini_roundabout
for roundabouts that are not
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Jaakko Helleranta.com
jaa...@helleranta.com wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
[snip]
After reading through the thread that brings out various good points I think
that we should:
1) Allow tagging of small-ish
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com wrote:
Agreed on all points. I've been fixing up westendguy's
mini_roundabouts, as almost all of his 1300 are actually
turning_circle.
I should mention that the todo list plugin in JOSM is great for this:
just add a hundred or so
46 matches
Mail list logo
