Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
On 19 May 2010 19:38, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: plus a note=Regularly reassess the position after a significant tectonic plates movement, like once every million years or after an earthquake While earth quakes will allow the plates to shift suddenly, all of the plates are constantly moving, the Australian plate alone is moving about 5cm per year, combined with relative shift of other plates the relative speed increases to between 7 and 10cm NNE per year, but different parts of the same plate are moving in different directions and at different rates. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Garden specification)
On 18/05/2010 21:56, Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote: maybe even landuse=allotments if anyone wants to tag each property separately. Nope. That would be allotment=plot or something. Each plot is not a separate garden, but just the parcel of land allocated to a tenant. -- Jonathan (allotment holder) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
Le 19/05/2010 06:35, John Smith a écrit : NASA has a list of 421 of these sites located world wide: http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/network/list.html The IGS is a voluntary federation of many worldwide agencies that pool resources and permanent GNSS station data to generate precise GNSS products. In general, you can think of the IGS as the highest-precision international civilian GPS community. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging Hi, Interesting site list. How about importing it into OSM ? Best regards, Jean-Guilhem ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
On 19 May 2010 20:05, Jean-Guilhem Cailton j...@arkemie.com wrote: Interesting site list. How about importing it into OSM ? I'm working on parsing the data at present, should have something completed soon. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Landuse border alignment
Liz napsal(a): On Sat, 15 May 2010, Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote: and the last, most puzzling is landuse=basin An area of water that drains into a river wow, there are some pretty huge ones of those like the Amazon basin the Lake Eyre basin the Mississipi basin the fill_in_any_large_river basin so that would colour in most of the map really quickly if that was rendered That's where I'm confused, because if I understand correctly in hydrology it's an area from which the rain water drains into a river or lake, in that case what is this doing in landuse? This should be imho marked with boundary tag, furthermore mapnik renders this as a water (blue areas). What the heck is this tag for? Do we need it? And the rest of water tags is also in conflict with common sense, which tells me that the natural=water should be for lakes and non man-made ponds, the landuse=reservoir for all of the man-made bodies of water. But the wiki page [1] says something different. [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwater Regards, Petr Morávek signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] odd Fences { was Re: Landuse border alignment}
Why would there be a fence within an unmaintained woodland? Fences are commonly used to demarcate ownership. unmaintained unowned +1 1) Fences indicate a FORMER or CURRENT ownership (thus plot) boundary, OR current or former landuse boundary within one ownership, eg planted field or pasture from meadow or woods, or between separate crops. 2) A woodland may be maintained without it being obvious to the untrained eye. Certain tax classes of maintained woodlot require(d) Tree Farm signage, but not all. Sensitive selective harvesting may enhance the natural beauty of the trees left to mature without leaving scars on the land beyond the access 'roads' (tracks) needed by fire services anyway. 3) Hereabouts, a lot of fences (including loose field-stone walls as well as wire) meander through seemingly otherwise pristine woodland, because they are older than the woodland. In colonial times, there were few acres not under cultivation, as Crown policy or French forces prevented westward expansion. Every tilled field was surrounded by a rock wall composed of every stone heaved up by the frost or turned up by the plow. Rocks have ever been our greatest crop. Later, many a farm in the stony glacial till of New England was abandoned for better land when it became available e.g., the Louisiana Purchase, or for jobs in the once expanding urban manufacturing services sectors. There is reportedly in Massachusetts *one* stand of actual pre colonial, never-cut forest left. The slope prevented cultivation, and a mapping error saved it from commercial logging clearcut : it was the boundary parcel between two contracts, and each firm though it was reserved for the other so left it stand. Bio-/Eco-logists were thrilled to find this natural experiment. There may be similar outliers in northern New England also, especially in State National Parks and Forests, but much of the never-cultivated land was logged at least once. -- Bill n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote: * Anthony o...@inbox.org [2010-05-18 20:47 -0400]: On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: Almost all of these types of parking lots will have some kind of notice that tow-away is enforced for unauthorized parking. So the general idea is you're free to park there, ONLY if you're visiting the businesses serviced by the lot. Access=destination? No, the public has no right of access. I thought the description of access=destination matched this scenario fairly well. You're saying that it only applies if the road is publicly owned? (i.e. a strict reading of right of access rather than you're allowed to be here if...) I do think access=destination should only be used where people have a right of access. But furthermore, you're allowed to be here if isn't the same as there aren't any signs saying you're not allowed to be here if. If there were a sign which said anyone may use this parking lot if this is their destination, maybe access=destination is appropriate. But I've never seen such a sign. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] FW: Parking for businesses..
On 20 May 2010 06:28, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: One problem I have with the concept of access=destination, even beyond the fact that it says right of access, is that parking lots quite often aren't connected to the places they serve. Something like access=customer is therefore *more general*. The parking lot might be across the street from the destination. Is access=destination accurate then? I did make a comment about access=customer/access=destination the other day, in both cases you would nearly need a relation to link the car park to the shop that has claim to 1 or more parking spaces. As for your example above, the car park is the destination by car for going to certain shops, after that you need to walk, if you are walking or any other form of transport you most likely don't need to care about the car park. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] FW: Parking for businesses..
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:55 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: On 20 May 2010 06:28, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: One problem I have with the concept of access=destination, even beyond the fact that it says right of access, is that parking lots quite often aren't connected to the places they serve. Something like access=customer is therefore *more general*. The parking lot might be across the street from the destination. Is access=destination accurate then? I did make a comment about access=customer/access=destination the other day, in both cases you would nearly need a relation to link the car park to the shop that has claim to 1 or more parking spaces. As for your example above, the car park is the destination by car for going to certain shops, after that you need to walk, if you are walking or any other form of transport you most likely don't need to care about the car park. The car park is the destination by car for going anywhere, if what you are doing is parking there. Access=destination would be for a public parking lot with a sign that says no through traffic. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] FW: FW: Parking for businesses..
Yes, exactly. I couldn't have put it better myself!! From: tagging-boun...@openstreetmap.org[mailto:tagging-boun...@openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Sent: 19 May 2010 21:36 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Subject: Re: [Tagging] FW: Parking for businesses.. On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com wrote: I'm looking at a city centre I'm going to visit, I'm lookingout for blue Ps. I don't really care if they're commercial car parks or not. So you want access=public (publicly owned parking) or access=permissive(commercial car parks which allow general access, possibly for a fee). Mapping the areas around shopping centres? Just make themyellow! I know they'll have car parking, they always do. Does the sports club I'm visiting have a car park? It goes without saying theyare for members and visitors. Just make them yellow! Access=private works fine, then (along with access=public andaccess=permissive). Preferably with an additional tag (or relation) withsome indication of who is allowed to park there. Maybe access=customer isn't needed after all. -- ___ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] FW: Parking for businesses..
On 20 May 2010 07:01, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote: The car park is the destination by car for going anywhere, if what you are doing is parking there. You can only park there if that is your allowed destination. Access=destination would be for a public parking lot with a sign that says no through traffic. Most car parks don't allow through traffic in any case, so we can repurpose this already commonly used term to mean shopping destination. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] FW: FW: Parking for businesses..
Access=private works fine, then (along with access=public andaccess=permissive). Preferably with an additional tag (or relation) withsome indication of who is allowed to park there. Maybe access=customer isn't needed after all. How about something like: access=private permitted=patron/permit_holder/staff There's probably other valid permitted types, but this organization would handle the following types of situations quite well: - Public parking lot (ie you come here and pay to park, regardless of where you're going): access=permissive - Store parking lot for customer: access=private, permitted=patron - Store parking lot for staff only: access=private, permitted=staff - Parking lot for monthly parkers: access=private, permitted=permit_holder A relation to define what businesses are served by the lot could be something like: type=parking_use Where you'd have member roles: lot: a parking lot(s) for_use_by: the business(es) that the parking is intended for. I think in most circumstances it is probably pretty clear which business a parking lot is intended for though. Tyler ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] FW: FW: Parking for businesses..
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: I think in most circumstances it is probably pretty clear which business a parking lot is intended for though. Agreed, although the situations in which it's not so clear are the ones where OSM could really get an advantage over the competition. So many times I'm directed by Google Maps to a location quite a distance away from the parking lot I'm trying to get to. It's especially annoying when there are one-way streets or divided highways which cause significant routing differences between a route directly to the location and a route to the correct parking lot. I'll smile when my GPS tells me to drive to X, park, walk across the pedestrian bridge etc. Even moreso if it's done using OSM data. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Garden specification)
2010/5/19 Petr Morávek [Xificurk] xific...@gmail.com: landuse=recreation_ground OR landuse=residential - do you know any garden that is outside those two areas? Formal gardens/landscaping around commercial and public buildings? The gardens at a parliament house, library etc may be considered recreational by stretching a point, but I can think of many commercial buildings with formal gardens on their grounds that are not open to the public, but are not residential either. They are just there either for the staff or just to look pretty for those passing by. So industrial, commercial, educational - I've seen both public and private gardens in all of those. Stephen ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Garden specification)
Stephen Hope napsal(a): 2010/5/19 Petr Morávek [Xificurk] xific...@gmail.com: landuse=recreation_ground OR landuse=residential - do you know any garden that is outside those two areas? Formal gardens/landscaping around commercial and public buildings? The gardens at a parliament house, library etc may be considered recreational by stretching a point, but I can think of many commercial buildings with formal gardens on their grounds that are not open to the public, but are not residential either. They are just there either for the staff or just to look pretty for those passing by. So industrial, commercial, educational - I've seen both public and private gardens in all of those. Stephen Oh thanks, that did not cross my mind. I take that statement back ;-) Petr signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
On 19 May 2010 20:21, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting site list. How about importing it into OSM ? I'm working on parsing the data at present, should have something completed soon. I'm still tweaking the script to deal with the log files, there is some small differences between the files, which are perfectly easily human readable, but not very computer readable friendly. Also, some of the sites also monitor GLONASS signals, so instead it might be better to use: man_made=monitoring_station gps=yes/no glonass=yes/no etc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
On 20 May 2010 10:42, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: man_made=monitoring_station There are other types of monitoring stations, if you visit the webtrak site it shows noise monitoring stations: http://www331.webtrak-lochard.com/webtrak/bne3 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] FW: FW: Parking for businesses..
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: Access=private works fine, then (along with access=public andaccess=permissive). Preferably with an additional tag (or relation) withsome indication of who is allowed to park there. Maybe access=customer isn't needed after all. How about something like: access=private permitted=patron/permit_holder/staff There's probably other valid permitted types, but this organization would handle the following types of situations quite well: - Public parking lot (ie you come here and pay to park, regardless of where you're going): access=permissive - Store parking lot for customer: access=private, permitted=patron - Store parking lot for staff only: access=private, permitted=staff - Parking lot for monthly parkers: access=private, permitted=permit_holder A relation to define what businesses are served by the lot could be something like: type=parking_use Where you'd have member roles: lot: a parking lot(s) for_use_by: the business(es) that the parking is intended for. I think in most circumstances it is probably pretty clear which business a parking lot is intended for though. Rather than permitted=*, why not use parking_use=*? That would then be consistent with your proposed relation. Though permitted is more general and might be able to be generalised to other features... I suggested a similar solution a couple of days ago: Alternatively, for parking, use the key use (as a noun) instead of [or in addition to] access, as in use=public/customer/private. There are then a few options for defining the values of parking_use, e.g. my public/customer/private or your patron/staff/permit_holder, or some combination thereof... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmonitoring_station ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Fixed position GPS receivers
Here's a sample generated from NASA site log files: node id='-1' visible='true' lat='44.4639' lon='26.12573889' tag k='fixme' v='not_reviewed' / tag k='man_made' v='monitoring_station' / tag k='monitoring:gps' v='yes' / tag k='monitoring:glonass' v='yes' / tag k='iers_domes_number' v='11401M001' / tag k='antenna' v='LEIAT504GG LEIS' / tag k='receiver' v='LEICA GRX1200GGPRO' / tag k='name' v='Bucuresti / Romania' / tag k='ele' v='143.2' / tag k='source:url' v='http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/igscb/station/log/bucu_20100503.log' / /node Just to make things more interesting, the lat/lon given for some/all sites are in country or region specific datums, eg Australian locations use GDA94, but the site log file can't automatically be parsed for which datum is used. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
