Hi,
> Maplint data seems to indicate tons of duplicated nodes in the area.
My fault, due to interrupted uploads of buildings. I have been editing them
accordingly.
Bear with them for a couple of days as I finish the editing.
cheers,
maning
___
talk
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Norbert Hoffmann schrieb:
> maning sambale wrote:
>
>> More work cleaning up some missing ways due to GML linestring errors.
>> Still, BEAUTIFUL!
>
> Looks really nice. But there seems to be something in the data, that
> prevents rendering since the
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 7:09 AM, maning sambale
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At zoom level 4, placenames for major cities appear, but no country
> names at any level.
> Perhaps, there should be one for levels 4-6.
FWIW, the coastline checker shows countrynames. That way you still had
an idea of
Andy Allan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> But that only addresses one small 'problem' and misses the bigger one of
>> finding 'all the golf courses in England' or 'all the Islands in the
>> Philippines'. A single lookup to find ALL the bo
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But that only addresses one small 'problem' and misses the bigger one of
> finding 'all the golf courses in England' or 'all the Islands in the
> Philippines'. A single lookup to find ALL the boundaries you are currentl
Lester Caine wrote:
> But that only addresses one small 'problem' and misses the bigger one of
> finding 'all the golf courses in England' or 'all the Islands in the
> Philippines'.
No, not necessarily. Because the boundary data is freely available,
whether in raw planet.osm form or in post-pro
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
>
>> I suggest setting up a server dedicated to grabbing a planet every week,
>> processing it for boundaries, and automatically generating the is_in tags.
>
> Server and boundary-processing is great; don't think we should
> automatically ad
On Thu, April 10, 2008 12:15, Andy Allan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Hakan Tandogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>> I don't doubt your reasoning that borders would be far better than
>> is_in, but sometimes you have to resort to "kludges" to get something
>> off the ground *toda
Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
>
>
>> Something that has already been discussed is an information box for the
>> corner of a map with reference data, but without information accessible
>> quickly from the data how do you populate that box? Cached data on a tile
>> by tile basis may be possible, but i
Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
> I suggest setting up a server dedicated to grabbing a planet every week,
> processing it for boundaries, and automatically generating the is_in tags.
Server and boundary-processing is great; don't think we should
automatically add is_in tags, though. If (as you, And
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:05 AM, Hakan Tandogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't doubt your reasoning that borders would be far better than is_in,
> but sometimes you have to resort to "kludges" to get something off the
> ground *today*
Sure.
> instead of some at future date when we hav
Andy Allan wrote:
>> Something that has already been discussed is an information box for the
>> corner
>> of a map with reference data, but without information accessible quickly
>> from
>> the data how do you populate that box? Cached data on a tile by tile basis
>> may
>> be possible, but
On Thu, April 10, 2008 11:33, Andy Allan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> Looking at the growing mess of wiki pages relating to
>> place/is_in/boundary/relations and the rest I think that I would not be
>> wasting my time now putting together
Andy Allan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Looking at the growing mess of wiki pages relating to
>> place/is_in/boundary/relations and the rest I think that I would not be
>> wasting my time now putting together a 'proposal' for good practi
> Something that has already been discussed is an information box for the
> corner of a map with reference data, but without information accessible
> quickly from the data how do you populate that box? Cached data on a tile
> by tile basis may be possible, but it still requires access to the raw
To make it more complex for the Philippines:
- has 7,100 (more or less) islands
- Administrative boundaries are country, region, province,
municipality/city/town, barangay
- some administrative jurisdiction are covered by a number of islands
- some administrative jurisdiction are partially wit
Lester Caine wrote:
> How come it's not the same problem?
> Where do you get the information from as to WHICH Naga City or even which
> country you are looking at?
Er, by looking at the map, that's what maps are designed to tell you.
cheers
Richard
_
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Indeed they haven't. But "making OSM fully relational" is not at all
> > the same as "adding place labels to countries on small scale maps".
> > Being able to find out where Naga City is only requires the latter.
>
>
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Lester Caine wrote:
>
>> Richard - I have been banging on about the complete anarchy in
>> relational data
>> for over three years now and I don't think that any of the proposals to tidy
>> things up have been accepted.
>
> Indeed they haven't. But "making OSM fully
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Lester Caine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Looking at the growing mess of wiki pages relating to
> place/is_in/boundary/relations and the rest I think that I would not be
> wasting my time now putting together a 'proposal' for good practice for
> handling the si
Lester Caine wrote:
> Richard - I have been banging on about the complete anarchy in
> relational data
> for over three years now and I don't think that any of the proposals to tidy
> things up have been accepted.
Indeed they haven't. But "making OSM fully relational" is not at all
the same
maning sambale wrote:
> At zoom level 4, placenames for major cities appear, but no country
> names at any level.
> Perhaps, there should be one for levels 4-6.
This is part of the missing hierarchy of identification data. We do need the
data before it can be rendered.
> I do remember that we ad
At zoom level 4, placenames for major cities appear, but no country
names at any level.
Perhaps, there should be one for levels 4-6.
I do remember that we added a node tagged as country and name
Philippines. Do I need to add an is_in tag for every island (7100 +
high tide or low tide)?
maning
O
Lester Caine wrote:
> I repeat - WHERE are you getting that information by zooming out.
> Nothing says that this group of islands is the Philippines
They're just right and down a bit from Hong Kong, which is where the
Philippines are generally to be found.
The easy way to distinguish them f
Chris Hill wrote:
> Lester Caine wrote:
>> Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
The map looks nice. But once again it took some detective work to
establish WHERE in the world we were looking :(
>>> By "detective work" you mean, like, zooming out? :-P
>>>
>>
>>
Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
>
>> The map looks nice. But once again it took some detective work to
>> establish WHERE in the world we were looking :(
>
> By "detective work" you mean, like, zooming out? :-P
No - where do you get the information on which Naga city we are looking at by
zooming ou
> The map looks nice. But once again it took some detective work to
> establish WHERE in the world we were looking :(
By "detective work" you mean, like, zooming out? :-P
--
Iván Sánchez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Un ordenador no es un televisor ni un microondas, es una herramienta
compleja.
maning sambale wrote:
> Beautiful!
> http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=13.62397052773088&lon=123.18169016162223&zoom=17&layers=B000F000F
>
>> > > http://gis.naga.gov.ph/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Data
>
> Thanks to IvanSanchez and the NAGA City GIS team!
>
> More work cleaning up some missing
Also, this is quite a powerful comparison:
http://geo.topf.org/comparison/index.html?mt0=googlemap&mt1=mapnik&lon=123.1866717&lat=13.6237576&z=15
way to go Google !
maning sambale wrote:
Beautiful!
http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=13.62397052773088&lon=123.18169016162223&zoom=17&layers=B
maning sambale wrote:
>More work cleaning up some missing ways due to GML linestring errors.
>Still, BEAUTIFUL!
Looks really nice. But there seems to be something in the data, that
prevents rendering since the 4th.
There must have been hundreds of tries until now.
>From http://tah.openstreetmap
bdn.ac.uk/cartographers08/
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of maning sambale
> Sent: 09 April 2008 11:53
> To: Iván Sánchez Ortega; talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [OSM-talk] Naga City in OSM Re: GML to OSM
>
Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of maning sambale
Sent: 09 April 2008 11:53
To: Iván Sánchez Ortega; talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] Naga City in OSM Re: GML to OSM
Beautiful!
http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=13.623970
Beautiful!
http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=13.62397052773088&lon=123.18169016162223&zoom=17&layers=B000F000F
> > > http://gis.naga.gov.ph/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Data
Thanks to IvanSanchez and the NAGA City GIS team!
More work cleaning up some missing ways due to GML linestring errors.
St
33 matches
Mail list logo
