FYI
--
cheers,
maning
--
Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden
wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
--
And what a time to celebrate a birthday:
Aug 22 OpenStreetMap 5th Anniversary Birthday party
No edits just celebrate.
On 8/13/09, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI
--
cheers,
maning
--
Freedom is still the most
In my mapping area, I have already added a fairly accurate admin_level
boundaries. I want to use it to update address info of POIs. I need
advice in doing:
1. Extract POI nodes (shop, amenity) in a separate osm file.
2. Extract boundary areas in another OSM file.
3. Add addr:city, addr:village
I tried to search the list archives before posting but couldn't see anything
about this.
The problem is people noticing non-existant streets on other maps and wasting
time to only find out that it doesn't exist, not that it wasn't mapped.
These streets are usually used to prove copyright
Yes, there is a way. You simply need to go to the area.
More seriously, I don't see the point of this question since all data that
we are supposed to collect are based on facts that we collected. Seeing
streets that don't exist should not be a problem in the first place. The
problem arises when
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, there is a way. You simply need to go
to the area.
More seriously, I don't see the point of this question
since all data that we are supposed to collect are based on
facts that we collected. Seeing streets that
On 12 Aug 2009, at 11:16, John Smith wrote:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, there is a way. You simply need to go
to the area.
More seriously, I don't see the point of this question
since all data that we are supposed to collect are based on
facts
On Wednesday 12 August 2009 12:16:44 pm John Smith wrote:
how to mark it in OSM so others will know it
doesn't exist, not that it isn't mapped.
I really don't think marking non-existent stuff in OSM is a good idea. I take
place for nothing and what append if a road is build at the place you
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Vincent MEURISSE wrote:
If you really need such a tool, copy the software used by openstreetbug,
put it on your server and then you can have annotations on the map.
thanks Vincent
that could well be a workable solution
___
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Vincent MEURISSE osm-le...@meurisse.org wrote:
If you really need such a tool, copy the software used by
openstreetbug, put
it on your server and then you can have annotations on the
map.
That's less than I was hoping for, simply because it's hard enough to decide on
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, I understand your point. However, I am not sure that
there is any way to detect if a road exists or not unless
you are going there. You would need a list of existing roads
We are going out there and using GPS' however if
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com
I don't think you fully understood me, we're not trying to work out from
other maps what roads don't exist, we are trying to tell mappers that come
after us that a road they see on a map doesn't exist and don't waste your
time trying to map
John Smith wrote:
The problem is people noticing non-existant streets on other maps and wasting
time to only find out that it doesn't exist, not that it wasn't mapped.
Probably *something* is there in reality. Buildings, walls, hedges, a
park ...? Map these objects (which obviously aren't
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Probably *something* is there in reality. Buildings, walls,
hedges, a
park ...? Map these objects (which obviously aren't
copyrighted), so
people know that someone has visited the area and mapped it
in detail.
If there is no
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Chris Hill chillly...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Write a Wiki page showing the
progress of the area. You can make comments there.
It needs to be spatially recorded, there is literally 100s of non-existing
roads within 50km of here, Australia is 7.7 mill sq km...
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:02 AM, John Smithdelta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote:
I tried to search the list archives before posting but couldn't see anything
about this.
The problem is people noticing non-existant streets on other maps and wasting
time to only find out that it doesn't exist, not
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
Draw a bounding box around it and mark it as all roads
complete in OSM?
What about drawing an area in the approx area that the road is supposed to be?
If you put it across a larger area that complicates things when new roads are
built
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, don't mark them as normal roads if they are in a
degraded state.
It's worst than that in a lot of cases, they were gazetted, but never built.
From discussions on talk-au list today a lot of mapping companies refer to
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com:
One such road went into someone's car port, I don't think we have
barrier=car_port :)
in this case it will not be a road but a highway=service in Europe and
probably access=private (at least for the last few meters), don't know
about the
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, don't mark them as normal roads if they are in a
degraded state.
It's worst than that in a lot of cases, they were gazetted, but never built.
there is also a tagging
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually this is not legal-talk anymore. I think the answer
was:
separate Layer if you run the servers on your own is OK,
but please
don't map nonexisting roads from other maps (and maybe with
tag
easter_egg=foomap) and
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com
That was one opinion there was other contradictory opinions given as well.
We aren't copying from maps but trying to map an observation that will be
very beneficial to others that come after us. It's just a question of how to
do this in the most
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
I think I do now. As Vincent stated, I don't believe
that OSM should contain non existent roads that are actually
way to identify copyrighted data; that would be imported
that said copyrighted data in OSM.
We're not trying to
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Probably *something* is there in reality. Buildings, walls,
hedges, a
park ...? Map these objects (which obviously aren't
copyrighted), so
people know that someone has visited the area
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com:
We're not trying to put copyrighted information in the database, we're
recording an observation, no different then recording the name on a street
sign,
no, it's not the same. Because you're gonna write that there is
nothing. Why there? Why don't
The original point remains: this observation is based on
easter eggs of copyrighted data. IANAL but it seems that it
is very similar to the conclusions that were reached that
data obtained from Google Maps is not valid.
I'm not sure how I can make this clearer, but virtually no map online
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
It sounds as good as the Map_Features defined values (and
even better
than smoothness=very_horrible), so yes, I think this
works. Even a
single node saying note=no road here or perhaps note=no
turn here
where the supposed
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
There is no consent on which way to go to express the
strict use case.
Does there need to be?
Not that this implies that I agree or disagree but strictly from a technical
point of view all you have to do is create/get an extract of a bounding
On 12/08/2009, at 3:51 PM, Nop wrote:
There is no consent on which way to go to express the strict use case.
I think the only two solutions are to either have this be country-
specific (at which point routers/renderers have to start knowing these
kinds of things), or we have highway=cycleway
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
Going the other way and not having highway=footway imply
any value for
bicycle would mean that people like me could tag something
as a
footway and say that I don't know whether it's suitable for
cycling on
by leaving the
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
In the strict (German) use case, you need to distinguish between
bicycle=allowed/suitable and bicycle=road sign. This is not about
marking a default, this is about describing the real situation precise
enough to make deductions
On 12 Aug 2009, at 07:02, John Smith wrote:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
There is no consent on which way to go to express the
strict use case.
Does there need to be?
Not that this implies that I agree or disagree but strictly from a
technical point of view all you
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Nop wrote:
This is a rather lenient definition that is unsuitable to depict the
German use case. That is exactly the reason for the confusion we are
having. If something is tagged as a cycleway and I am planning to walk
on foot, I need
to know whether it is an unsigned
Roy Wallace wrote:
I have no idea what you would consider suitable for the common
cyclist. Please, at least write the criteria down.
Since it's the not signposted ways that are not evident and a common
cyclist is not looking for mountain bike trails, I'll try: shout if you
disagree.
Absolute
John Smith schrieb:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
There is no consent on which way to go to express the strict use
case.
Does there need to be?
YES!!!
Not that this implies that I agree or disagree but strictly from a
technical point of view all you have to do is
Hi!
James Livingston schrieb:
On 12/08/2009, at 3:51 PM, Nop wrote:
There is no consent on which way to go to express the strict use case.
I think the only two solutions are to either have this be country-
specific (at which point routers/renderers have to start knowing these
kinds of
Hi!
Gustav Foseid schrieb:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de
mailto:ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
In the strict (German) use case, you need to distinguish between
bicycle=allowed/suitable and bicycle=road sign. This is not about
marking a default, this is about
Nop ekkehart at gmx.de writes:
But the opposing argument works just the other way: If I look up
designated in a dictionary it means marked with a sign and it is the
only/most fitting tag for the purpose anyway, so in Germany
bicycle=designated must mean foot=no, so it cannot be the same
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
Well basically your approach is a variant of the path+acess
tags. You
just leave cycleway alone and use it like path, expressing
all the
important information in access tags. This is a possible
way to go if we
can achieve consent on it,
Shaun McDonald wrote:
... Are you
really trying to force cyclists on to major roads?
As a pedestrian, I can see advantages with this...
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Hi Jochen,
Could you please comment on this thread:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-July/039217.html
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-July/039259.html
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2009-August/039847.html
since you created the 'T-junction'
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
Well basically your approach is a variant of the path+acess
tags. You
just leave cycleway alone and use it like path, expressing
all the
important information in access tags. This is a possible
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Tobias Knerro...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Tom Chance wrote:
- Tags are proposed on the wiki, no change to current practice
- If the proposal throws into question existing, accepted tags, defer the
proposal to small working groups
- These working groups study
2009/8/11 PB p...@osgeo.org
Hi,
I'm PB from Cuba, and I would like to share an idea to extend the use
of Walking-Papers. The intention is to reach all those people whom do
not have an e-mail or Internet access, and in many cases not even a
computer.
We are proposing use the postal mail to
Hi!
Lets use the mailing lists and the wiki. Thats much more inclusive for a
diverse group like this. Especially for this issue where there are people
from many countries in different time zones involved and where many will
not speak English well enough to feel comfortable voicing their opinions
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
No. You should use highway=cycleway;bicycle=no if you have a cycle
path that you cannot walk on. Routing software already supports this.
They don't support routing cyclists over the highway=path. Are you
really trying to force cyclists on to
Hi!
I have amended the bridge and tunnel pages with the reason for those rules:
Rendering breaks if you have different layers on junction nodes. But whats
more important, in real life bridges don't start in the *middle* of junctions
so there *is* a little bit of non-bridge roads between the
On 12 Aug 2009, at 10:51, Liz wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Shaun McDonald wrote:
No. You should use highway=cycleway;bicycle=no if you have a cycle
path that you cannot walk on. Routing software already supports this.
They don't support routing cyclists over the highway=path. Are you
really
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Ulf Lamping wrote:
There was a discussion on this list about doctors vs. doctor and the
conclusion was to use doctors, as this was more natural for native
speakers.
I don't regard this as purely chaotic ...
Regards, ULFL
doctors is a contraction of doctor's
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:55 AM, John Smithdelta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
Well basically your approach is a variant of the path+acess
tags. You
just leave cycleway alone and use it like path, expressing
all the
important information in access
Ulf Lamping wrote:
Liz schrieb:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Nop wrote:
You cannot force anything but you can discourage putting presets for
disputed tags in editors (if it is frowned upon as some sort of indirect
vandalism and rolled back) and you can make an organised effort to bring
a newly
On Wednesday 12 August 2009 11:59:36 Jochen Topf wrote:
Hi!
Thanks for your quick input.
I have amended the bridge and tunnel pages with the reason for those rules:
Rendering breaks if you have different layers on junction nodes.
This is tagging for the renderer which I thought was generally
This is a rather lenient definition that is unsuitable to depict the
German use case. That is exactly the reason for the confusion we are
having. If something is tagged as a cycleway and I am planning to walk
on foot, I need to know whether it is an unsigned way assumed to be
suitable for
DavidD wrote:
Mapping is enough work as it is without having to frequently check
proposals in the wiki.
A proposal should be be announced on the mailing lists, so you don't
need to check the wiki. That doesn't help people who don't read the
mailing lists, but the lack of a central communcaition
In my opinion, suitability is a whole new topic that should'nt be
represented by *mode_of_transport*=yes/no, as it's highly subjective.
yes/no should solely describe the legal status.
Agreed. One can use the surface tag to do this together with SAC_scale
etc (with which I'm not 100% familiar but
Hi!
Nick Whitelegg schrieb:
I have not got round to marking these up yet, but my intention (German
users, please feel free to tell me otherwise!) would be to tag the
waymarked paths as
highway=path|track; foot=designated
and the unwaymarked tracks as
highway=track; foot=permissive
On 12/08/2009, at 8:14 PM, Pieren wrote:
Note that in France, pedestrians are not allowed on cycleways. I don't
see why we should add foot=no now in all cycleways in France. I read
somewhere that some motorways in US gives access to bicycles. Does it
mean that we have to add bicycle=no to all
At the last DC mapping party in Silver Spring, Maryland, I came across
a giant acorn that should be marked on OSM, but not sure the best way
to tag it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kmf164/3814667470/
Also, how we should tag attractions like the world's largest
strawberry in Strawberry Point,
Hi,
I usually tag it as:
tourism=attraction
name=...
description=
Some other annotations (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Annotation) can also be
useful.
Regards,
Igor
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Kate maps2w...@gmail.com wrote:
At the last DC mapping party in
John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com writes:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
Going the other way and not having highway=footway imply
any value for
bicycle would mean that people like me could tag something
as a
footway and say that I don't know whether it's
On 12 Aug 2009, at 10:13, Emilie Laffray wrote:
It is really an excellent idea. I was planning to organize a walking
paper mail out in my home town in a few months to see how it could
work out. I was planning in my case to contact the mayor office to
see if I could coordinate with
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.ukwrote:
The path proposal could have been successful long ago if
applications were pushing it instead of refusing to use it (see
CycleMap).
It's on the todo list.
It screws up the stylesheets in horrible ways due to
2009/8/12 John McKerrell j...@mckerrell.net
I printed out two copies each of six areas in Liverpool and left them
in two cafés. On the other side of the paper I put some text briefly
describing the project and asking that people either hand it in to one
of the cafés or scan it in and email
[waymarked paths in Schwarzwald, Germany]
If you use designated for the waymarked ways without legal impact, then
you need yet another tag (e.g. official) for the real cycleways with
roadsigns and legal impact.
Thanks! In that case I'll just use permissive. Are there any
Germany-specific tags
Greg Troxel wrote:
John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com writes:
It's most likely going to have to be jurisdiction specific, not just
country specific in some instances. Going the other way and dealing
with footway for example, NSW Vic doesn't allow cyclists on
footpaths, but ACT does.
Ok, taken out the OSM-F list. Thanks for updating the wiki - I'm going to
take a look over it tomorrow and make sure all the info the community needs
is on there. From there I will propose a set of steps towards getting Local
Chapters set up, along with any remaining questions. The community
John Smith wrote:
The cost of a home made Geiger counter is about $100-200 in parts, and if you
combine that with a gps logger you could log points combined with the rads,
chances are you will end up with areas of the same values.
Cheap radiation measurement tools suck. A homemade
2009/8/12 Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net:
except on paper. the road reserve may exist but it could be completely
overgrown with trees, or be impassable with natural features - a cliff, a
water feature
you could map this as track and tracktype=grade5, or invent a tag for
even more overgrown
On 08/12/2009 05:14 AM, Pieren wrote:
see why we should add foot=no now in all cycleways in France. I read
somewhere that some motorways in US gives access to bicycles. Does it
mean that we have to add bicycle=no to all other motorways in the
world ?
No, that would make no sense because most
On 12 Aug 2009, at 14:02, Emilie Laffray wrote:
Thank you for the PDF. I was thinking of something along those
lines. It is nice to see that someone already has written some
explanation on why it matters.
I don't have time right now to start this project as I want as many
streets as
The highway=footway is IMHO an alias for the more complex highway=path
foot=yes surface=paved etc. construction. I think aliases are
perfectly legitimate constructs when dealing with very common
situations, and furthermore, much easier for newbies to remember and
deal with.
Perhaps, but I
I had the idea of printing a map and taking it to a local Parish
(Village) Meeting and see if I can drum up some interest there. In our
village I would like to put in all the houses and postcodes because
many of the delivery drivers get lost around here.
Posting maps is a good idea for getting
In the US, the Post Office offers something called Business Reply Mail.
You print out postcards of a certain size with special markings on them (in
addition to your content). When someone drops them in the mail the post
office charges the sender and ships the card back to you.
I wonder if a few
2009/8/12 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
in real life bridges don't start in the *middle* of junctions
so there *is* a little bit of non-bridge roads between the junction and
the bridge.
+1
For canals in Dutch cities, I'd consider not tagging the roads special but
giving the canals a
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Martin
Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/12 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
in real life bridges don't start in the *middle* of junctions
so there *is* a little bit of non-bridge roads between the junction and
the bridge.
+1
That's a stange
2009/8/12 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
as it is already suggested in the wiki
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath/Examples) (and
btw: there is at least two tracks on the path-page as examples:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/images/0/07/Path-motorcarnohorseno.jpg
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
highway=footway (not suitable)
bicycle=yes (but allowed)
bicycle=dedicated (signed)
A footway for cycling is not a valid combination to me.
In Norway you are allowed to cycle on all footways, unless explicitly
forbidden.
-
2009/8/12 Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
highway=footway (not suitable)
bicycle=yes (but allowed)
bicycle=dedicated (signed)
A footway for cycling is not a valid combination to me.
why not? In Germany: sign footway + additional
Shaun McDonald schrieb:
They don't support routing cyclists over the highway=path. Are you
really trying to force cyclists on to major roads?
Huh? Which ones would that be? mkgmap and OpenRouteService certainly do.
___
talk mailing list
Nick Whitelegg schrieb:
I would apply a similar approach to paths too. I have no idea of exactly
what the German law is on this, but when I was in the Schwarzwald last
month, the paths/tracks in the forest were either waymarked by
yellow/red/blue diamonds, or not waymarked at all (apart
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Kate maps2w...@gmail.com wrote:
At the last DC mapping party in
Silver Spring, Maryland, I came across
a giant acorn that should be marked on OSM, but not sure
the best way
to tag it:
tourism=viewpoint ?
Also, how we should tag attractions like the world's
largest
On Wednesday 12 August 2009 20:36:54 Jochen Topf wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:18:03PM +0200, Pieren wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Martin
Koppenhoeferdieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/12 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
in real life bridges don't start in the *middle*
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Craig Wallace wrote:
I would tag that as tourism=artwork
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dartwork
Along with an appropriate name, description, artwork_type etc
Now we can discuss artwork for the next two weeks
:-)
John Smith schrieb:
--- On Wed, 12/8/09, Kate maps2w...@gmail.com wrote:
At the last DC mapping party in
Silver Spring, Maryland, I came across
a giant acorn that should be marked on OSM, but not sure
the best way
to tag it:
tourism=viewpoint ?
To qoute Map Features about viewpoint:
A
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Ulf Lamping wrote:
I don't know, how a giant acorn therefore qualifies as a viewpoint ;-)
the one in the picture doesn't
but these sorts of roadside kitsch are quite popular in australia, although
some have been demolished, sadly
the Big Pineapple had a viewing platform, so
Hi!
Martin Koppenhoefer schrieb:
highway=footway (not suitable)
bicycle=dedicated (signed)
A footway for cycling is not a valid combination to me.
why not? In Germany: sign footway + additional sign: Fahrräder frei
That's yes, not designated.
bye
Nop
Lambert Carsten wrote:
sense. Even though the smaller road ends at the edge of the larger road
not the middle of the road.
Inside the crossing area the roads overlap, neither ends there - you're
on both roads. But you're not on the bridge that starts only several
meters away - or inches away if
On 12/08/2009 01:41, Sam Vekemans wrote:
This is where my national headache begins. (surface=smoothISH)
If we simply have the default options to list 'gravel' 'dirt'
'concrete', because 'unpaved' is rather ill-defined. It just indicates
'paved_ash_fault=no', but doesn't go further.
2009/8/13 Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de:
Hi!
Martin Koppenhoefer schrieb:
highway=footway (not suitable)
bicycle=dedicated (signed)
A footway for cycling is not a valid combination to me.
why not? In Germany: sign footway + additional sign: Fahrräder frei
That's yes, not designated.
Your
Hello OSM folks
For the integration of osm into the wikipedia there will be localized
maps in all languages that have their own wikipedia. The problem is,
that a lot of countries are not translated yet.
To get an overview over the status and make translating those countries
more easy, I
2009/8/12 Lambert Carsten lhc@solcon.nl:
There *is* nothing. It is all an abstraction and *this* abstraction is not
helpfull or get us anywhere. As I stated before a crossing between a big road
and a (much) smaller road does not either get little bits of road inserted
in the smaller road
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason schrieb:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Peter Körnerosm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote:
Hello OSM folks
For the integration of osm into the wikipedia there will be localized
maps in all languages that have their own wikipedia. The problem is,
that a lot of countries are
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Peter Körnerosm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote:
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason schrieb:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Peter Körnerosm-li...@mazdermind.de
wrote:
Hello OSM folks
For the integration of osm into the wikipedia there will be localized
maps in all
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason schrieb:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Peter Körnerosm-li...@mazdermind.de wrote:
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason schrieb:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Peter Körnerosm-li...@mazdermind.de
wrote:
Hello OSM folks
For the integration of osm into the wikipedia there
On 08/12/2009 12:46 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
so the routers don't send the ambulances that way if it's shorter?
That's meant to be interpreted as emergency=destination. As far as I
know, emergency vehicles are pretty much allowed to go where they need
to; this gets back to the idea of
Peter Körner wrote:
To get an overview over the status and make translating those countries
more easy, I created a tool that can be found at
http://cassini.toolserver.org/~mazder/multilingual-country-list/
Useful. Will the page invalidate translations if the base name is changed?
--
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:
On 12/08/2009 01:41, Sam Vekemans wrote:
This is where my national headache begins. (surface=smoothISH)
If we simply have the default options to list 'gravel' 'dirt'
'concrete', because 'unpaved' is rather
2009/8/13 Peter Körner osm-li...@mazdermind.de:
To get an overview over the status and make translating those countries
more easy, I created a tool that can be found at
http://cassini.toolserver.org/~mazder/multilingual-country-list/
I'd like to encourage everyone to spend some time making
Thread: Sam Vekemans (12/08/2009) Craig Wallace (12/08/2009) Sam
Vekemans (12/08/2009)
Regarding excerpt:
Yes, that is exactly what i am referring too.
We ALSO need to have a special wiki page (that lists each of these things,
and how they are rendered, and used. This will alleviate the
Hoi,
Zoals jullie wellicht gisteren hebben gezien is de productie server
verplaatst van KVM naar VMware. Het kostte even wat tijd, maar het is
over. In voorbereiding van het opschonen van de dev server is het wellicht
handig om te weten wat er draait. (En wat wellicht beter naar een andere
1 - 100 of 281 matches
Mail list logo
