Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Konrad Skeri
Did you read all I wrote? What do you think I mean with "If we want to specify the type you are of course welcome to do that, e.g. bridge=viaduct or electrified=contact_line" and "These are only examples where yes|no could be used. Other descriptive values are still valid, e.g. bridge=viaduct or el

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Russ Nelson
Before we get too far, I want to say that I believe that OSM will NEVER be completely correct or consistent. Its correctness and consistency will fluctuate up and down depending on the expectations of the viewer. That said, I believe it a mistake to NOT have perfect consistency as a goal even tho

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Russ Nelson
Andrew Errington writes: > 1) The street has no name (and you might hum a tune by U2) > 2) The street has a name but it has not been recorded > > Either way, it doesn't matter. E, no, it really does matter. > If I am a map user then I can not intuit whether the name is missing, or > th

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/4 Matt Amos : > no one is advocating for error. you seem to be advocating for a tag > with the sole purpose of not rendering something in a single renderer. > to me, that seems wrong. I use a similar feature in JOSM to show me unnamed streets to know which ones still need to be named, I th

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/4 Russ Nelson : > The OSM community is hostile to leadership even when that leadership > merely renders advice.  Frederick's advice to create a committee to I think the problem here isn't the OSM community, but a vocal minority that don't want anything but the status quo, and while techniq

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/4 Roy Wallace : > Do you realise that the only alternative to voluntary adoption is > enforcement? Do you really want to force your idea on others even if > they "think their idea is better"? /No thanks/. That isn't the only alternative, you always have carrots not just sticks. The carrot

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/4 Konrad Skeri : > boolean values are allowed. Instead of bridge=jomenvisst we should use > bridge=yes, and instead of electrified=naltaseotroligt we should use Bridge isn't listed as boolean only, you can also have bridge=viaduct which I've used a few times. Other values listed on the ma

Re: [OSM-talk] TIGER Addressing Import

2009-10-03 Thread andrzej zaborowski
2009/10/3 Dave Hansen : > On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 02:24 +1000, John Smith wrote: >> 2009/10/4 Dave Hansen : >> > Is this the most up to date way of keeping addresses? >> > >> >         >> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema >> > >> > Well, I have some

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] TIGER Addressing Import

2009-10-03 Thread Shaun McDonald
On 3 Oct 2009, at 17:42, Mike N. wrote: > > It needs to follow the road way to some extent, but it might be > possible > to simplify by reducing node count so that it doesn't exactly follow > the > road. In the samples I have seen, house placement is much > different than > the road path

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-dev] This #petition needs your votes: Vote for legal use of Google's aerial imagery for #OpenStreetMap tracing!

2009-10-03 Thread Thomas Wood
Erm, its been all over the mailing lists about 2 weeks ago, it was featured on the OpenGeoData blog, it has 1,452 positive votes as I write this 2009/10/3 Andreas Kalsch : > I have found this in the OpenStreetMap news, and I wondered why I have > given the first vote for it. > > http://twitter

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Roy Wallace
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 7:45 PM, James Livingston wrote: > > The problem isn't tied to a particular mechanism, it's a social > problem where we currently don't have any form if power structure, This isn't a problem in itself. > and the one mechanism we have for choosing stuff (voting on the wiki)

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Matt Amos
On 10/3/09, Russ Nelson wrote: > Matt Amos writes: > > > I point to the +1 year age of the Noname proposal and recent > > > inactivity and suggest that convergance isn't happening. > > > > maybe there isn't a need for convergence here? we've got a nonames map > > to help mappers decide where

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Roy Wallace
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 2:06 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2009/10/3 Roy Wallace : >> >> Frederik's point is valid - if you want a tagging committee/working >> group/whatever, start one. If you want an international tagging >> committee, start one. If it's better than the current arrangement, >> mappers

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Liz
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009, John Smith wrote: > 2009/10/3 Dave F. : > > John Smith wrote: > >> The third is generally the best option in practise most of the time, > >> it should comprise of no more than 10 people, preferably 5 since the > >> more people involved the less people are going to come to a cons

[OSM-talk] osm funny poster

2009-10-03 Thread ouɐɯnH
hello This is any multi language funny poster for OSM. enjoy http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Poster_osm.jpg salu2 Humano -- http://GaleNUx.com es el sistema de información para la salud --///-- Teléfono USA: (347

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Matija Nalis
On Sat, 3 Oct 2009 09:02:07 +0200, Konrad Skeri wrote: > Time to end this debate > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values I do not think that jumping over "Draft" and "Proposed" stages directly to "Voting" stage for a Proposal is in accordance with http://wiki.opens

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Konrad Skeri
Sorry, I apparently was not clear enough there. I've corrected it on the wiki. I meant to decide what values to use when boolean values are intended. The examples given were not intended as examples when only boolean values are allowed. Instead of bridge=jomenvisst we should use bridge=yes, and ins

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Russ Nelson
Matt Amos writes: > > I point to the +1 year age of the Noname proposal and recent > > inactivity and suggest that convergance isn't happening. > > maybe there isn't a need for convergence here? we've got a nonames map > to help mappers decide where their time might be well-spent. And well-s

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Gervase Markham
On 03/10/09 09:24, James Livingston wrote: > Just do what I and a lot of other people have done - give up on the > wiki being useful, and just go ahead and tag it however you like, > checking tagwatch and similar to see what other people are actually > using. tagwatch tells you what tags people ar

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] TIGER Addressing Import

2009-10-03 Thread Adam Schreiber
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > Is this the most up to date way of keeping addresses? > >         > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema That's the scheme I use when adding addresses. There are presets for it in Potlatche, so I

Re: [OSM-talk] TIGER Addressing Import

2009-10-03 Thread Mike N.
> My goal is to get the addresses imported into OSM this time > around. I agree - most newbies' first usage of openstreetmap.org is to type their street address, then not look further when nothing is found.(I know we aren't serving as a real time reference site, but some of these people d

Re: [OSM-talk] Overlay showing wikipedia links

2009-10-03 Thread andrzej zaborowski
2009/10/2 Dan Karran : > 2009/9/30 andrzej zaborowski : >> It's at http://www.openstreetmap.pl/wp (see caveats below). > > In terms of interface, those circles can get in the way at times so it > can be difficult to see what's under them, especially as they grow in > size when you move your mouse n

Re: [OSM-talk] TIGER Addressing Import

2009-10-03 Thread Dave Hansen
On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 02:24 +1000, John Smith wrote: > 2009/10/4 Dave Hansen : > > Is this the most up to date way of keeping addresses? > > > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema > > > > Well, I have some perl code that will parse the 20

Re: [OSM-talk] TIGER Addressing Import

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/4 Dave Hansen : > Is this the most up to date way of keeping addresses? > >         > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema > > Well, I have some perl code that will parse the 2007/2008 TIGER data > files.  My goal is to get the addresses import

Re: [OSM-talk] 2009 TIGER Shapefiles now available

2009-10-03 Thread Mike N.
> I think the real question is what would importing a new version of the > tiger data do to all the tiger data fixes we've spent so much time on. Good question - I would hope that whatever is done takes maximal consideration for any existing edits - along the lines of OpenJump / RoadMatcher u

[OSM-talk] TIGER Addressing Import

2009-10-03 Thread Dave Hansen
Is this the most up to date way of keeping addresses? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/House_numbers/Karlsruhe_Schema Well, I have some perl code that will parse the 2007/2008 TIGER data files. My goal is to get the addresses imported into OSM this time around. Here

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Dave F.
John Smith wrote: > 2009/10/3 Apollinaris Schoell : > >> On 2 Oct 2009, at 21:06 , John Smith wrote: >> >> >>> You do if you want a consistent data set. >>> >> And what if I don't want? >> There are 1000s of mappers and not everyone thinks like you and agrees with >> you. If you can'

Re: [OSM-talk] Flickr Now Supports OSM Tags

2009-10-03 Thread Dave F.
Dave Stubbs wrote: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 12:58 AM, Dave F. wrote: > >> Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> >>> Elizabeth Dodd wrote: >>> >>> For starters if the maintainers of JOSM Potlatch and Merkaartor encouraged the use of yes/no it would be a way forward.

Re: [OSM-talk] 2009 TIGER Shapefiles now available

2009-10-03 Thread Timothy C Litwiller
I think the real question is what would importing a new version of the tiger data do to all the tiger data fixes we've spent so much time on. On 10/3/2009 2:33 AM, John Mitchell wrote: I believe that open street map includes tiger data, if so how long will the 2009 version be incorporated into

[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - incline up down

2009-10-03 Thread Tobias Knerr
Tagging the general direction of a way as incline=up/down: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/incline_up_down Vote-Start: 2009-10-03 Vote-End: 2009-10-17 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/list

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2009/10/3 Matt Amos : > it has to be said that, according to my german dictionary, the word > "Führer" just means "leader" or "guide". i don't know if there are > pejorative overtones to it in modern german use. no, there aren't, it's the only word for "guide", used in alpine tourism, for tourist

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2009/10/3 Tobias Knerr : > James Livingston wrote: >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values >> >> How precisely is that going to end the debate? >> >> a) Voting isn't the way to do this. It either needs consensus or a >> dictator. > > It will probably demonstrate that

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Matt Amos
On 10/3/09, Russ Nelson wrote: > Matt Amos writes: > > forcing all mappers, editors and renderers to support it? > > Why do people keep saying that I want to use force? From where do > they get this idea? Have I ever suggested the use of force? Gun, > knife, sword, empty hand? Rejection of il

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Dave F.
James Livingston wrote: > b) Lots of people don't care about some stupid vote on the wiki > How do you know that? Did you have a vote on it? Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/3 Dave F. : > John Smith wrote: >> The third is generally the best option in practise most of the time, >> it should comprise of no more than 10 people, preferably 5 since the >> more people involved the less people are going to come to a consensus. >> >> > In my experience it's always bett

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Dave F.
John Smith wrote: > The third is generally the best option in practise most of the time, > it should comprise of no more than 10 people, preferably 5 since the > more people involved the less people are going to come to a consensus. > > In my experience it's always better to have an odd number o

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Ulf Lamping
DavidD schrieb: > If that isn't good enough what other method is there? > How do you get from where OSM is now to the goal? Until someone starts > coming up with ideas that have some connection to reality this will > get nowhere. At the moment it is not much more than a bunch of people > yelling "t

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2009/10/3 Frederik Ramm : > We have, time and time again, debated tagging rules. Some people, > including you, tirelessly (well, more or less) campaigned for stricter > rules, with a tight voting system and all. Others, including me, were of > the laissez-faire disposition. > I think that if some

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2009/10/3 James Livingston : > That mostly works because you're talking about code, not paragraphs of > description of what a tag means. If they're knowledgeable enough to > figure it out, two people reading a chunk of code should come up the > same idea of what it does, which doesn't happen with t

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread DavidD
2009/10/3 Gervase Markham : > On 03/10/09 00:49, DavidD wrote: >> Just start making the decisions and build the thing on top of OSM. It >> wouldn't even be that difficult to start off. Just take planet.osm and >> strip "unapproved" tags and build up from there. > > So OSM is in a state where it onl

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Tobias Knerr
James Livingston wrote: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values > > How precisely is that going to end the debate? > > a) Voting isn't the way to do this. It either needs consensus or a > dictator. It will probably demonstrate that there already *is* a consensus

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Lester Caine
Konrad Skeri wrote: > Time to end this debate > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/boolean_values -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Ulf Lamping
ed...@billiau.net schrieb: > Frederik said >> All this is possible *within* the existing OSM framework and without any >> strong leader telling us where to go. I really do encourage you and all >> those calling for leadership to get together, form your own advisory >> board or tagging committee or

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread Ulf Möller
Roy Wallace schrieb: > On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: >> I really do encourage you and all >> those calling for leadership to get together, form your own advisory >> board or tagging committee or whatever, create the structures you think >> are required, and then offer them f

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread James Livingston
On 03/10/2009, at 4:29 PM, Gervase Markham wrote: > Because sometimes, occasionally, a benevolent dictator (a phrase > used by > lots of open source projects) has to break deadlock and dictate. > Things > are working well when that power is used very, very rarely, but it > needs > to exist. M

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread James Livingston
On 03/10/2009, at 5:54 PM, Konrad Skeri wrote: > Consensus will never happen and we don't have a dictator, which makes > voting the option left. I actually agree that we just need to pick one, and since "yes" seems to be the most commonly used one, that should be it. However, I just don't see

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/3 Peteris Krisjanis : > Actually more important question - why people which love mapping (and > I guess we all do, otherwise we wouldn't be here), are discussing such > simple things as BOOLEAN values in a midday of the Saturday? (ok, for > others it is probably very very early morning). I

Re: [OSM-talk] shop=groceries?

2009-10-03 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 9:07 PM, MP wrote: > I notices few days ago user farlokko changed many shop=groceries into > shop=greengrocer worldwide. > > The changeset is http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/2562959 > > I think this change is wrong, at least for most nodes in czech > republic -

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Peteris Krisjanis
2009/10/3 John Smith : > 2009/10/3 James Livingston : >> On 03/10/2009, at 5:02 PM, Konrad Skeri wrote: >>> Time to end this debate >>> >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values >> >> >> Oh, and this: >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/VotingOnT

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/3 James Livingston : > On 03/10/2009, at 5:02 PM, Konrad Skeri wrote: >> Time to end this debate >> >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values > > > Oh, and this: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/VotingOnTheWikiIsStupid Not that I'm disag

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Konrad Skeri
> How precisely is that going to end the debate? > > a) Voting isn't the way to do this. It either needs consensus or a > dictator. Consensus will never happen and we don't have a dictator, which makes voting the option left. > b) Lots of people don't care about some stupid vote on the wiki Ther

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/3 James Livingston : > On 03/10/2009, at 5:02 PM, John Smith wrote: >> This was not only highly frustrating but demoralising and as a result >> I've not been bothered tagging any more school zones because I don't >> see a point until there is a "One True Way" to tag school zones. > > Just d

Re: [OSM-talk] 2009 TIGER Shapefiles now available

2009-10-03 Thread John Mitchell
I believe that open street map includes tiger data, if so how long will the 2009 version be incorporated into open street map. John On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Kevin wrote: > Released October 1, 2009 > http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2009/tgrshp2009.html > > _

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread James Livingston
On 03/10/2009, at 5:02 PM, Konrad Skeri wrote: > Time to end this debate > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values Oh, and this: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/VotingOnTheWikiIsStupid ___ talk mailin

Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread James Livingston
On 03/10/2009, at 5:02 PM, Konrad Skeri wrote: > Time to end this debate > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values How precisely is that going to end the debate? a) Voting isn't the way to do this. It either needs consensus or a dictator. b) Lots of people don't ca

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread James Livingston
On 03/10/2009, at 5:02 PM, John Smith wrote: > This was not only highly frustrating but demoralising and as a result > I've not been bothered tagging any more school zones because I don't > see a point until there is a "One True Way" to tag school zones. Just do what I and a lot of other people ha

Re: [OSM-talk] shop=groceries?

2009-10-03 Thread Mike Harris
I would agree that it is completely wrong to change =groceries to =greengrocer. It would be nice if farlokko would revert these changes except where (s)he knows that only fruit and vegetables are sold. The descriptions given by Martin are also correct in the UK. I tend to use =convenience, as i

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread James Livingston
On 03/10/2009, at 4:25 PM, Gervase Markham wrote: > Wikipedia has much less need for consistency than we do (e.g. it > doesn't > matter if one article is in American English and another in Australian > English; articles are not machine-parsed) and yet they have all > sorts of > mechanisms for e

Re: [OSM-talk] SteveC should decide

2009-10-03 Thread John Smith
2009/10/3 Gervase Markham : > Two reasons off the top of my head: because we don't want to spend ages > developing consistent tag sets and putting them on the wiki only to have > someone else mess around with them. And because we'd like to get some > sort of consensus before starting off on what wi

[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - boolean values

2009-10-03 Thread Konrad Skeri
Time to end this debate http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/boolean_values regards Konrad ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk