2009/10/10 OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com:
multiple plans would overlap each other and look weird?
look weird where? I guess these would not be rendered in standard maps
(or just in advanced planning phases and for main plans like
motorways, airports, etc.).
I made a proposal:
2009/10/9 Bráulio Bezerra da Silva brauliobeze...@gmail.com:
I agree with you. Every single map of my city I've seen has some planned
roads where in reality we have a forest or something else. These roads are
in the oficial map of the city plan made by the authorities and are
promptly copied
Dave F. wrote:
It might be worth contacting the developer. They might have plans that
they can let you copy.
Not sure you got my point (I should have used a smiley). I don't want to
put anything into osm that is just lines on a blueprint in a drawer at
the municipality. I map
carriage way where it's not built yet
Sent: Oct 8, 2009 1:56 PM
Dave F. wrote:
It might be worth contacting the developer. They might have plans that
they can let you copy.
Not sure you got my point (I should have used a smiley). I don't want to
put anything into osm that is just lines
Polderrunner wrote:
Dave F. wrote:
It might be worth contacting the developer. They might have plans that
they can let you copy.
Not sure you got my point (I should have used a smiley). I don't want to
put anything into osm that is just lines on a blueprint in a
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
It might be worth contacting the developer. They might have plans that
they can let you copy.
How much permission do we need for stuff like that? I have this map:
http://warper.geothings.net/maps/preview/1474
... where
I agree with you. Every single map of my city I've seen has some planned
roads where in reality we have a forest or something else. These roads are
in the oficial map of the city plan made by the authorities and are
promptly copied to comercial maps. I think we should map only things that
are
Maybe google is feeling a little intimidated by all the announcements
of new roads turning up on OSM as soon as construction finishes!
In this case they've jumped the gun and show dual carriage way where
it's still under construction:
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?ll=-26.186039,152.654761z=18
On Wednesday 07 Oct 2009 2:12:19 pm John Smith wrote:
Maybe google is feeling a little intimidated by all the announcements
of new roads turning up on OSM as soon as construction finishes!
In this case they've jumped the gun and show dual carriage way where
it's still under construction:
2009/10/7 Kenneth Gonsalves law...@au-kbc.org:
they still cannot compete - we had katipara junction clover leaf flyover on
our
map at least six months before it was completed ;-)
I just find it funny that they've upgraded their data well before it's
completed :)
We certainly can't beat Google here!
http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=15lat=52.00686lon=4.32042layers=B0TF
(use the slider to blend the osm map in and out)
Google Maps are years ahead of reality in this new construction area.
All the streets 'missing' from OSM are also non-existent in the
seems G don't have the tag for under construction then? In Bedford
they've left the map as it was before development was started:
http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=15lat=52.11093lon=-0.51451layers=B0TF
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
Polderrunner wrote:
We certainly can't beat Google here!
http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=15lat=52.00686lon=4.32042layers=B0TF
(use the slider to blend the osm map in and out)
Google Maps are years ahead of reality in this new construction area.
All the streets 'missing' from OSM are
13 matches
Mail list logo
