On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> If you are sick of what you call stupid flamewars, then you should think more
> and write less.
Yes, this is very much the approach I intend to take. We could
probably all heed the advice. A moderator on the list probably
wouldn't go astray eith
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Felix Hartmann
wrote:
> Network=mtb makes not much sense in my eye (and was never discussed,
> approved, proposed...) as we can't differentiate then anymore between
> local and regional mtb routes.
> The question therefore is, what values do we want to use for net
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> If renderer XYZ renders amenity=llibrary with a library icon (to catch
> a "common" typo), then we could document that somewhere on a page about
> renderer XYX. However we definitely should not document this as a valid tag
> on the amenity page.
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Felix Hartmann
wrote:
> I took it out again. I will be too confusing to have network=mtb.
> a) there are also networks for mtb routes. (e.g. Alpentour Austria, a 21 day
> mtb route going from Vienna, over Lower Austria into Styria )
> b) route=mtb is already in wi
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Nick Black wrote:
>
> As of this week, we are updating routing every 24 hours which should
> help with checking mapping and finding errors.
Awesome, this is a big help.
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.o
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Daniel Neugebauer
wrote:
> I heard about TED only recently and what I've read and seen about it so far
> seems like an insult - conspirative pseudo-open meetings for well-paying
> members of that strange elitist association. Talks seem to be only held by
> those me
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Anthony wrote:
> But in the end, people are going to map what they want to map. The best we
> can do is give them a set of tags which are easily ignored.
Go stand in a corner.
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstr
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Daniel Neugebauer
wrote:
> 1. Am I free to choose any other icon at my own decision or should I open a
> draft/RFC/vote in the wiki (or elsewhere) and post a few alternative icons?
> This is not about necessity but about organizational stuff since there was
>
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 3:13 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> You also have the fact that a "licensed professional" may work elsewhere than
> at an office. For example, a medical doctor may work at an office; the same
> doctor may also work at a hospital.
At that point we're really straying beyon
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Stephen Hope wrote:
> If I go to a tattooist, he doesn't sell me any goods, he provides a
> service. But I would call that shop, not an office. On the other
> hand, I can buy stuff at places that I would consider to be offices.
> My vet sells medicines, special do
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
>
> I disagree. The most important thing is that different people using the
> same tag use it for the same kind of thing.
>
> Its a matter of seconds to replace all amenity=vet with
> amenity=veterinary once you have noticed that there are two
Same thing as a Tuk-Tuk (Thailand) or a moto-remorque (Cambodia)? If not the
same, close enough to be worth rendering the same?
> We also have tags for vegetarian/non-vegetarian - also useless outside
> India.
Hardly!
> So these things render on our server - but not on the official osm
> serv
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
> On Monday 11 Jan 2010 6:03:49 am Steve Bennett wrote:
> > For example, in this case, imagine that lots of people are using
> > amenity=vet or service=veterinarian or something, which never gets
> > supported. That
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Joseph Reeves wrote:
> >The most important thing, imho, is that different people who set out to
> tag the same thing do it the same way.
>
> +1
>
> Which is why keep right! OSM Doc, tagstat, tagwatch, et al. are all so
> important.
>
>
Yes, but they should feed in
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Craig Wallace wrote:
> Most Garmins are limited to 500 points in a saved track. Though this is
> usually plenty, unless it is a rather long journey.
>
The newer ones, including mine, are 2000 I think.
>
> You could turn off autorouting. ie set it to "off road" i
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
> The first case is "just" garbage in the database - not nice but doesn't
> really hurt. But how do you know that it will "never" get rendered?
>
Obviously you'd only know retrospectively. But when I say that unrendered
tags are harmful, I mean
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Joseph Reeves wrote:
> >You currently have this chicken-and-egg situation where you don't know if
> it's worth using a tag because you don't know if it will ever be
> implemented.
>
> But now you're just mapping for the renderer.
Not by the usual interpretation o
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> > I would have said it's something like
> > "to establish that the tag is part of the official OSM tag set" or
> > something. And once established, it should be rendered (or explicitly
> not
> > rendered, if inappropriate) by the official OS
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Roy Wallace wrote:
>
> There's a difference between establishing that a tag is 1) a useful
> way to model some aspect of physical reality, and 2) that it should
> show up in a particular renderer.
>
> Use a tag if it is 1). If you want 2), that's a separate issue.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> So you're overworked. How can we help?
>
>
Oops, missed point 6.
Ok, so how about this: proposals for new tags should include patches for
OSMarender and Mapnik. Seem reasonable?
Steve
__
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Patrick Kilian wrote:
> If enough flying rhinoceros' are mapped I'll add it to osmarender. The
> interesting part here is the "enough".
>
If this is the standard process, could it be documented? It's extremely
unclear at the moment what the process is for getting
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Andrew Errington <
a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> I don't know what a "course" is, and I haven't looked.
>
Courses are supported by training/racing-oriented Garmin devices and add
timing information, to allow better time estimates, and to give the user a
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Andrew Errington <
a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk> wrote:
> Just done this myself, but only for a very short route.
>
> 1) Use JOSM
> 2) Download the map data for area of interest
> 3) Create a new layer
> 4) Draw route on new layer using downloaded layer as guide.
> 5
Hi all,
I want to plot a route tonight to load in GPX format onto my GPSR.
Normally I'd have done this using Google-based stuff (like bikely.com), but
I can honestly say the OSM data is a lot better, and the nearmap imagery a
lot more recent. I just can't think of a way to do this - can someone
s
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Anthony wrote:
> If not, the first step in avoiding such a lawsuit would be to reincorporate
> in another state with sane laws.
>
FFS. "Sane laws"? Think a little before you post, please.
Steve
___
talk mailing list
ta
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:42 AM, Pieren wrote:
> I suggested some time ago to use a new general key for such things
> (when it's not really an amenity, a shop or a leisure like for
> lawyers, architects, designers, etc) : office=notary
>
>
Yeah, I agree amenity is overused. Also perhaps business=n
Just a thought - I haven't thought this through - could relation be used to
form a close relationship between a road and a track? Create a highway,
create a track, then link both with a relation. You could even have a role
for the track like "left_cycleway" or something. An approach like this might
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:47 AM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
> P.S: All that time it was - for me - simply out of question to copy map
> data from Google or other alike sources to get free and open map data
> that will remain free and open.
>
Ok, let's use the word "consult" rather than "copy". Did you eve
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Anthony wrote:
> And I fail to see how carrying out a pilgrimage to the street in question
> changes anything.
>
>>
> It certainly builds confidence that the names you're entering are correct.
>
A couple of people have tried to sneak this argument in. Physically v
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:54 AM, Anthony wrote:
>
> I don't know if that's what Steve was asking about. In fact, I get the
> sense that he was planning on being somewhat systematic about things, which
> would be more of a clear violation of the law of some jurisdictions (whether
> or not his juri
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Richard Mann <
richard.mann.westoxf...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> But I'd also like there to be an open, straight Mapnik (ie no contour
> overlay and no neat transparent route overlays) cycle-oriented map, to be
> improved by the crowd. (Ditto a public transport map)
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Anthony wrote:
> How so? If it's such a big financial burden, and isn't providing any
> benefit to whoever is incurring the financial burden, then that's even more
> the reason to take it off the main map.
>
OCM is providing plenty of benefit to plenty of people.
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Claus Hindsgaul
wrote:
> Just rewind a bit; in the start of this thread, I cited a guideline
> developed on talk-dk to aid the choice between separate and tagged
> cycle-tracks/lanes on a street with the aim of getting the best map
> description in the end. In the f
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Anthony wrote:
> There is plenty of public domain high resolution imagery in the United
> States (see http://seamless.usgs.gov/wms_services.php?layerid=15).
>
Ah. Well, the US is its own special case because of TIGER. I believe the
question was "why are there so m
I'd like to thank Andy for his very useful input into this discussion.
Although I don't think I've posted in this thread, I did have some of the
misconceptions he referred to. It would probably be worth documenting some
of this stuff - a simple "why is it called OpenCycleMap", for instance. And
per
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Cartinus wrote:
> From this and several earlier discussions I get the impression that the
> group
> of Australians currently so active on the mailing list isn't lazy but they
> are certainly impatient.
>
>
Yes, perhaps :) Probably the big difference between here an
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Roy Wallace wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 1:46 AM, Richard Fairhurst
> wrote:
> >
> > There is no point endangering the
> > genuinely collected data for the sake of some lazy copying.
>
> This is not fairly worded. In Australia (and other sparsely populated
> ar
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote:
> That would be using a map as an item in a to-do list. It would look ugly
> to me and I doubt that many people would support that use. Better keep
> the todo list separate - in another layer if you want it represented
> geographically.
>
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 4:46 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> 2010/1/2 Lester Caine
>
>> Provided that this does not result in REMOVING ways that are mapped - or
>> prevent
>>
>> adding the REAL fine detail of ways that do not actually physically form
>> part of
>> the 'accompanying' road. This so
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Craig Wallace wrote:
> But I'd still agree with Shaun - a single GPS trace is not really
> accurate enough for adding ways to OSM IMO.
>
Hmmm...is there consensus on this view? My approach so far has been "any
information that is approximately correct is better th
n the OSM database too. It's hard
to see what they could use that to claim, other than that we copied *that
street*. So we delete it, where's the harm?
>
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>
>> But if I was going to be doing ground surveys, there a
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Shaun McDonald
wrote:
> You still need to go and visit the streets. With the London mapping parties
> last year after most of London was traced from the Yahoo imagery, what was
> found was:
> * Many places the imagery was out of date, and the road layout had change
Traditionally, mapping streets in OSM has relied on physically visiting the
streets to get a GPS trace, and noting the names of streets while you're at
it. But now with the advent of high quality aerial photography that we can
trace from (I'm thinking of nearmap, in australia), you don't have to vi
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
> Provided that this does not result in REMOVING ways that are mapped - or
> prevent
> adding the REAL fine detail of ways that do not actually physically form
> part of
> the 'accompanying' road. This sort of 'shorthand' should not replace
> ma
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> But doesn't that happen with GMM a lot as well? Or that your edit is
> rejected altogether? Do we really have reason to believe that the
>
Heh, that happened to me. I made an experimental edit, tracing some road in
Malaysia (iirc). I got a
Thanks for the comments, everyone. In all my playing with nearmap, I have
little reason to doubt their accuracy. There are a couple of little seams
here and there, but nothing more than a couple of metres. Giving the way
this trace here meanders all over the place, I'm pretty confident that the
nea
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 9:15 AM, Claus Hindsgaul
wrote:
>
>
> The outcome of the discussion was by default to represent bicycle
> tracks/lanes with "cycleway=track/lane" tags in the accompagning road
> instead of separate "cycleway=highway". The following expressed exceptions
> were agreed upon and
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Aun Johnsen wrote:
> The accuracy shown on your GPS unit is not necessary the actual accuracy,
> but just a calculated accuracy depending on the signals your unit is
> receiving. You can experience athmospheric disturbance, plasma-effects,
> signals reflected off t
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Shaun McDonald
wrote:
> It is very common for GPSs to give errors for whatever reason. Interference
> is very common from things like buildings. Newer units are less likely to
> have an issue. You simply need to go along that track again a few times to
> get an ave
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Dave F. wrote:
> I don't why he feels the need to do this, it seems a pointless task, but
> why do you think it reduces accuracy to remove trailing zeros?
>
> 2m =2.0m
>
>
It reduces *indication of accuracy*.
There's a difference between "I measured that bridge,
I've got a trace from today which is significantly out of sync with a path I
traced from Nearmap:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=-37.880138&lon=145.193417&zoom=19&gpx=594988
The trace looks like I was wandering through the grassy paddock, but I was
actually following exactly that northern
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Jason Cunningham wrote:
> This document implies UNICEF doesn't even know OSM exists, which is just as
> worring as them funding Google's map making
>
>
Well, has anyone from OSM spoken to them? Is there any kind of outreach
program?
Steve
___
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Dave F. wrote:
> Is this just me or widespread?
>
> When editing in Potlatch any bridges that I, or others, have tagged in
> the last 3-4 weeks don't display with the heavier black border lines.
> Any that were tagged before display fine.
>
> All bridges display c
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:45 AM, David Carmean wrote:
> What I still like about ExpertGPS is the ease of editing GPX tracks, and
> I also use it to download the waypoints directly from my eTrex Vista hcx.
> Easy to trim the traces, and more importantly, easy to "simplify" them down
> to few enoug
What software do people use to manage their GPX files? Mainly I want to be
able to upload sections of GPX – rather than the whole thing – to Potlatch.
And it might be nice to be able to combine a couple of traces into one long
trace.
Thanks,
Steve
___
ta
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Pieren wrote:
> But it is documented in
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway since a while and is
> about 100 times in osmdoc. The problem with cycleway=lane is that the
> wiki never says clearly if it is for both sides and both directions or
> if it
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Liz wrote:
> Pieren
> I like the page
> but what is amenagements?
> It translates roughly to "amenities" but that's not necessarily the best
> English word
>
>
"Features"
Steve
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.o
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 10:25 AM, MP wrote:
> > But what if that population then consists entirely of Map Maker users?
> > Is that really beneficial for OSM? I know what you're saying, but it
> > is reasonable to expect Map Maker users to jump ship to OSM? Is that
> > even what we should be ho
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Anthony wrote:
>That said, I personally find the highway tagging guidelines difficult to
apply anyway. In states without formal legal road classifications we might
as well mark everything except motorways and service roads as "road" for all
I can tell. Anything
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Pieren wrote:
> Could some cycleway experimented mappers check and complete this wiki
> page that I enhanced with new pictures and examples :
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle#Cycle_amenagements
>
>
The structure looks really good.
A few random comm
I gather the convention is to mark any unsurveyed road which one has some
information as simply "highway=road", on the basis that you know nothing
else about it. But what about when the information comes from high quality
imagery (like nearmap in australia)? I've been mapping these as
"highway=resi
2009/12/26 Steven Le Roux
> Maybe we could have an english translation ? which seems quite obvious by
> being posted on talk@ ...
>
> thx
>
>
Why so snarky? Max put in a one sentence translation at the top. Failing
that, Google Translate gives this:
Hello, is it already available or possible
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 1:36 AM, John Smith wrote:
> Your account may be able to do relatively little damage, but what
> about someone who has more access?
>
Fair point.
> Then you also have the possibility of collecting large amounts of
> account details, since almost everything is still sent
I don't mean to troll, but why is security important for OSM exactly? My
bank details, yes. My email, yes. But OSM? What am I afraid of, that someone
will ruin my reputation by making edits under my account? Edits that can
subsequently be reverted...?
Steve
A couple more updates:
- added links to OSMdoc so you can see the currently used values for each
tag
- I now show certain* OSMdoc tags that aren't supported by any tool
- I fixed wiki tags that were effectively "max_speed=*" but are listed in
the wiki as "max_speed=Speed".
http://wiki.openstreetma
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> this is already tried at the editor level (e.g. JOSM Presets), but also has
> some limits:
> - there is not an English word for all words in all other languages (an
> example we had some time ago on the German
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Nick Whitelegg <
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Would most casual users even notice though?
I think it's important here to separate technically rational arguments like
"one update per week is enough" from emotional/social/visceral factors like
"omg, I m
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 1:54 PM, John Smith wrote:
> In a way that probably happens to an extent, the renderers stop
> rendering a tag(s) so people start tagging differently as a result so
> their data continues to render.
>
But whatever they do, they never "tag for the renderer"...
I think it's
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 1:58 PM, John Smith wrote:
> Most of them might not have the technical skills or the inclination
> since someone else has already made something "good enough"
>
Of course. I think very few users have the technical skills. But I want
those who do, to be able to help the oth
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 1:41 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
> You're not the first to notice this either, came up a feww weeks/month ago.
>
Yeah, I see that one post on the mailing list, but no followup. Where are
the keen cyclists of OSM clamouring for an *open* cyclemap?
Steve
___
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> There are no deprecated tags in OSM because that would require an authority
> to deprecate them and we neither have nor want that.
>
> There are tags being used less in favour of other tags; there are tags
> slowly being replaced by other t
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Lennard wrote:
> This is completely separate from the rendering of nodes, where it will
> (as mentioned before) only render barrier=gate, nor of the completely
>
Also barrier=bollard.
>
> > Probably - I'll have a look. It's just a different stylesheet for Mapn
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Dave F. wrote:
> This is looking useful.
>
> One thing it doesn't pick up on (& I'm not sure if it's possible) is to
> distinguish how a particular renderer deals with rendering areas.
>
> For instance pubs in Mapnik are rendered as POI's even if is mapped as an
>
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Lars Francke wrote:
> Another limitation is that the data is from sometime in August 2009.
> I'm currently rewriting OSMdoc to be continuously updated and to
> include historical data.
>
> Cool, what do you mean by "historical data" though? Do you mean slices at
di
Incidentally, I'm keen to get this information included in the map features
table. I did a mockup of what it would look like for one group of features:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Stevage/cycleway
I picked cycleway because it was short :) It would be more interesting for
other feature
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Cartinus wrote:
>
> What this is also very good for, is pointing out all the "broken" stuff in
> the
> default Osmarender rules. Like the values for shop tags under amenity and
> the
> values for religion tags under denomination.
>
> They are redlinked, not suppo
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
>
> There seems to be a bug, e.g.: shop=tailor is existing 62 times in the DB:
>
> http://www.informationfreeway.org/api/0.6/node[shop=tailor]
>
> but the corresponding row in your table shows no value.
>
Whoops, forgot to mention the third lim
Hi all,
Thanks to Lars' help, my table of cross-renderer tag support now includes
stats from OSMdoc. This is a huge step forward in understanding not only
which tags are recognised by the various renderers and editors, but how much
they're actually used in the database. A count of distinct values
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 7:34 PM, John Smith wrote:
> This is a documentation issue, not a viewing issue,
Buh?
> the OSM website is
> a bit disjointed, once a local entity is sorted out I'm planning to
> get a localised a website setup and from there we can start to
> implement our own idea on
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
> We map what is on ground ( with some exceptions like boundaries)
>
> And powerlines, and opening hours, and bus/tram/bike routes, and
proposed/planned/demolished buildings/roads, and ski runs, and culturally
interesting places that are
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 3:57 PM, John Smith wrote:
> The reduce the map frame size and put the ad along the bottom of the
> map, also when taking a screen shot of this they also add ads on the
> left hand pane.
>
> http://img193.imageshack.us/i/googleadsc.png/
>
Hmm, I can't get that bottom ad to
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 4:29 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
> While it's a noble pursuit to help a specific demographic I think it's
> important not to exclude others in the process, most areas I've lived
> in in the last 12 months have no NearMap coverage, there is some
> coverage with the Qld property
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 4:02 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
> There would come a point where you will run out of things to
> learn/care about, or are you planning to become so knowledgable on
> subjects that you would specilise in things to write out information
> to the nth degree?
>
I've written artic
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 3:04 PM, John Smith wrote:
>
> since working this out have you tried to improve the documentation
> that would have made it easier for you?
>
I think I made one or two tiny changes. Wasn't game to make any major
changes at that stage, though I have made suggestions on talk
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:58 PM, John Smith wrote:
> I've pondered about this before but I came to the conclusion that
> mapping is a little different than adding knowledge to a wiki. You can
> always add map details by travelling about, or based on new sets of
> data imported, or new aerial imag
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 3:34 PM, John Smith wrote:
> list of break through technologies. If I had to put a number on it
> it'd be about a 2 or 3 out of 10, the map data itself is obviously a
> 10 because once you have that you can do many many more things with
>
Ok, that explains that bit then.
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 3:00 PM, John Smith wrote:
> You said they gave it away for free, but in the process your privacy
> is being eroded, mind you people give their passwords away for pens so
> most people probably will never understand or care about the
> consequences until it effects them per
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Erik Lundin wrote:
> Yeah! Maybe we have to increase our efforts to announce that we exist? I
> joined OSM in May 2008, but would have done it earlier if I had found
> out about it before.
>
> I would have joined a long time ago if I had known that Potlatch existe
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 2:43 PM, John Smith wrote:
> That is one aspect of maps, but not the only aspect. The real worth is
> in the data, by hoarding they limit what you can do with the
> information underlying the tiles.
>
Uh...you're preaching to the choir, dude. Of course they hoard, of cours
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 4:53 AM, John Smith wrote:
> 2009/12/18 Kevin Peat :
> > If it is because of the license then we should take the opportunity to
> make
> > sure our new license is friendly to these kind of applications and uses
> as
> > what is the point of creating a free map if only a min
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 6:16 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> that, and that would be appropriate for reserves, too. But some other
> renderer might write "park" all over the area or do something else that
> makes the rendering completely inappropriate for the feature. What if I
> use "beach" as the fal
First, thanks for the thoughtful replies, everyone. I'll reply to all in one
email.
>It is just that I dont see your solution as a scalable one
What's not scalable about it - presumably that you have to tag a fall back
every time you use the tag? What's an alternative that's more scalable, for
so
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Nick Whitelegg <
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> wrote:
> In any case, we are supposed to be open. Trying to trademark names merely
> similar to our own is one of the most closed, monopolistic actions that
> it's possible to take. The idea of OSM is to collect and ma
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 1:47 AM, John Smith wrote:
> Or if he were really serious about this he'd come up with a suitable
>
Was this mailing list always like this? I don't get it. I make a sincere
suggestion for a tag that I think would be useful, and just look at the
response. Where does it all
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:47 AM, John Smith wrote:
>
> You only want to tag stuff that renders, so update the render style
> sheet then tag it, if you don't care about it rendering first just tag
> it but your comments are specifically about wanting them to render
> first.
>
>
>I actually offered
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:15 AM, John Smith wrote:
> Don't tag it until your feature request to update mapnik's style sheet
> is put into production...
>
That's completely at odds with standard OSM advice: tag however you want.
> So file a feature request against mapnik's style sheet...
>
I n
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Joseph Reeves wrote:
> This seems like a confusing proposal to ensure that a tiny fraction of
> a percentage of the whitespace on OSM.org gets *something* rendered in
> it.
>
>
No, it's a proposal to encourage people to tag for the future and to smooth
transitions
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Shalabh wrote:
> Anyway, for this approach to even start making sense, there has to be TAG
> FAMILY TREE covering each known tag such that each has fallback options
> going up to a certain level. And then each renderer should follow the TAG
> TREE. Not sure how f
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Peter Körner wrote:
> Tagging for and only or the renderer is a bad idea. Better sind in a
> patch to the mapnik xml,
With respect, "fix the renderer" is not a solution to "how do I tag in such
a way that current and future renderers will produce an acceptable r
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Steve Bennett wrote:
>
>> Solution: tag it like this:
>> landuse=reserve
>> fallback:leisure=park
>>
>
> This makes only sense if there are certain landuse=reserve areas that you
301 - 400 of 535 matches
Mail list logo
