Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Simon Poole]

Am 10. Mai 2018 18:58:04 MESZ schrieb Oleksiy Muzalyev 
:
>On 5/10/2018 5:43 PM, Jo wrote:
...
>
>Indeed, Swiss German pronunciation differs from the Standard German 
>significantly, but it is written practically the same as the Standard 
>German. 

Just to add a bit of complexity (and to illustrate even more that there are no 
simple answers): what Oleksiy is referring to is the Swiss version of Standard 
German, not Swiss German. Swiss German is an allemanic dialect (actually a 
group of dialects) that is spoken in German speaking Switzerland as the 
everyday language. While this is a diglossia 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diglossia?wprov=sfla1 using Swiss German is 
neither a indication of class or education and you will find it in use even in 
formal situations.  

So now you know what name:gsw is supposed to be if you ever come across the tag 
( there is no real agreed upon written form of Swiss German so it is a bit 
iffy).
Simon

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Tool to change dual carriageway to sinjle preserving route relations?

[Andrew Hain]

Is there a tool that preserves bus route relations properly whlle correcting a 
road currently mapped as dual carriageway to predominantly single carriageway?

--
Andrew
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-es] Más sobre la categorización administrativa de vías en OSM

[yo paseopor]

 Buenas gente

 Al hilo de lo que dije en un anterior correo me gustaría informaros que
estos días en la lista de correo de tagging se está debatiendo sobre las
unclassified (un usuario planteaba que sus unclassified...tenían
referencia, lo que va en contra de la misma definición de "no
clasificada".  Pues bien, al explicar la situación española en la que las
categorías de OSM no encajan exactamente en la clasificación administrativa
en algunos casos se han dado respuestas interesantes que para los que no
seais de la lista de tagging os hago llegar:

 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com via openstreetmap.org

 in Germany and Italy (and probably some more places) the difference is
between a road section without grade level intersections (and with ramps)
vs not. Trunk is used in these areas for roads that are built to a standard
similar to a motorway but not legally designated as motorway. It is not
about access restrictions (there is the orthogonal motorroad=yes property
for this).

 Kevin Kenny kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com via openstreetmap.org

One issue is that we have the "UK English is the language of tagging" rule
- which widely gets interpreted as "highway classification must be
force-fit into the UK system." The US system presents a complex problem for
this, since most highway classification is delegated to the states, and
they all have their own local schemes.

In many counties in the US, rural roads are unnamed and have only reference
numbers. A farm road may be "County Road 2200N" (which is a different
classification from, say, "County Highway 23", and typically shown only on
small blade signs, not banner signs) or "State Farm and Market Road #2134".
As I understand it, it would fit pretty closely with what "unclassified"
roads - which are a formal classification in the UK! - are understood to
be.

Near where I live, numbered 'US', 'State' and many 'County' roads do NOT
reflect the governing body - they are all managed by the state department
of transportation. Historically, they had other structures, but
responsibilities were reallocated. The 'US' highway numbers are coordinated
with neighbouring states, but the administration is by the state.  There
are also numbered but (nearly) unsigned 'reference routes' also maintained
by the state to 'State' highway standards. I say 'nearly' unsigned because
they do often have inconspicuous chaining markers with their numbers.

Rather than labeling the governing body, the 'US', 'State' and 'County'
designations around here reflect the grade of importance, expected level of
traffic and expected quality of maintenance.  Given that the designation
reflects relative importance rather than administrative jurisdiction,
despite the labeling, I'm comfortable with having US, State, and County
numbered roads be 'primary', 'secondary' and 'tertiary' - but in the places
where the counties number virtually every road, there is a need for a tier
below 'tertiary' - and 'unclassified' seems to be it; it's a working
category that might otherwise be 'quaternary.'

Salut i mapes
yopaseopor

PD: Me he mirado un poco el mapa de la "piel de toro" y he "pintado" como
quedaría el mapa de la Red de Carreteras del Estado si se aplicara la
propuesta que propuse. Y ya que estamos os sugiero que hagais lo propio, en
breve podríamos tener un inventario o un mapa del trazado y categoría
"real" que podrían tener las carreteras nacionales en nuestro país. Aquí os
lo adjunto.

https://i.imgur.com/SicS3Gu.jpg
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Rob Nickerson]

Many thanks. Now shared with Richard, Nick and Jerry. Wont share publicly
yet as I wouldn't want to disrupt the project comms plan.

@Dave: Oh yes this is definitely not for OSM import. It's node data for
linear features for a start!! No, instead this can be used to identify
possible missing paths which should then be investigated using ground
survey, aerial imagery and GPS (or Strava) data. See it as a helping hand
to direct you where to look.

Best,
Rob





On Thu, 10 May 2018, 13:54 SK53,  wrote:

> Quick correction, as I uploaded heat map to wrong Flickr account. This is
> the proper link: https://flic.kr/p/JSXgyh.
>
> J
>

On 10 May 2018 1:54 p.m., "SK53"  wrote:

Quick correction, as I uploaded heat map to wrong Flickr account. This is
the proper link: https://flic.kr/p/JSXgyh.

J

On 10 May 2018 at 13:07, SK53  wrote:

> I just checked on the Vision of Britain site: the core data is currently
> released under CC-BY-NC. I presume OSM-UK have a waiver from these terms.
>
> Undoubtedly there will be rights of way which have effectively fallen in
> to abeyance. I noted one the other day which was on NPE maps, but no longer
> visible on the ground nor on modern OS maps, nor in the data available from
> rowmaps. Broadly speaking such paths fall outside the ambit of OSM, but
> finding such things is very valuable.
>
> Note that we have other sources as well. As a quick experiment I spent 15
> minutes quickly tracing paths marked on NPE maps for SE Notts and managed
> just over 200 using JOSM. This is of course what I should have done many
> years ago rather than adding them to OSM (hindsight is a wonderful thing).
> The geometry wont be very good, but can be refined using the 1:25 OOC maps.
> Such data can be more useful than the raw names from GB1900, but could be
> used in conjunction. Furthermore with suitable tagging this can be added to
> OHM (I would suggest start_date=1900-01-01 with end_date=1950-12-31 unless
> one knows path is still in use) which makes it a tad easier for sharing
> (although OHM overpass instance is not working atm).
>
> A couple of other things to note regarding the GB1900 data:
>
>
>- Many current footpaths will be marked as Bridle Roads (B.R.). It
>would be useful to add these names to the available data.
>- footpaths and bridle roads often fall well short of their current
>entry points because the current right of way will have followed farm
>tracks and service roads, which in many cases have disappeared.
>
> Returning to use of rowmaps I have a recent geojson file of missing paths
> in the North Midlands (Staffs, Derbys, Notts, Leics & Rutland) up on
> github: https://github.com/SK53/osm-prow-stats. I intend to add other
> areas as time permits. Unfortunately I've never got my comparison process
> to work on PostGIS so I still use QGIS which is a little unwieldy for
> automation. I process rowmaps data into a fairly standard form in PostGIS
> before making the comparisons. This is a heat
> map of missing footpaths in the East Midlands area as of Autumn 2017, I
> compare length of missing paths with total length in a tetrad (2km grid
> square). It readily shows hotspots of missing paths. This was done to
> identify suitable places for our 2018 New Year footpath mapping. The
> National Forest area in SE Derbyshire still has a lot of outstanding
> mapping to do: it's not too bad as walking country either.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
>
> On 10 May 2018 at 11:34, Nick Whitelegg 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I might be potentially interested in developing something with this data,
>> partly because I already run a site (freemap) which shows OSM maps for
>> walkers and stores them in a PostGIS database - so it should be an easy
>> process to filter out the data to find those points which are not close to
>> an OSM highway. It would also be easy for me to adapt my existing code to
>> visualise these "FP" points. Presumably they are just points with no
>> indication of direction of the path? An "FP" label presumably has
>> orientation so something could possibly be deduced about its course at that
>> point if orientation was available too.
>>
>>
>> I also already visualise the data so visualising the missing ROWs would
>> be easily done too.
>>
>>
>> It would be nice to develop features to find nearby locations where there
>> are lots of these missing paths, e.g. if I am in Southampton, find the
>> nearest village with 10, 20 (or whatever) missing paths within a 5-mile
>> radius.
>>
>>
>> Would be nice to have an app too so you can find these footpaths while
>> you're actually out.
>>
>>
>>
>> So potentially interested in this, yes. I don't want to commit 100% but
>> would be nice to have the data.
>>
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *From:* Richard Fairhurst 
>> *Sent:* 10 May 2018 09:07:49
>> *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org

[Talk-cz] Pozvánka na Druhý liberecký mapathon pro Lékaře bez hranic

[Pavel PETR]

 Přijměte pozvání na druhý liberecký mapathon pro Lékaře bez hranic. Příští
středu 16.5. od 18:00 na Technické univerzitě v budově G. Registrace:
https://goo.gl/QPXjop FB událost: https://lnkd.in/gWPxTrY


Bez
virů. www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

On 5/10/2018 5:43 PM, Jo wrote:

Marc,

I probably shouldn't have mentioned Switzerland. I thought it was 
"nicely" divided into clear language regions, but apparently not. My 
only experience with it was that in the part neighboring Germany they 
spoke something that resembled German somewhat, but once we passed the 
Sankth-Gottard pass, everyone spoke Italian (and hardly any German).


In Belgium, at least, it's completely defined in what language 
official signs should be written in, in each of the regions.


In most parts of the world, I think this is not the case, which makes 
it hard to set this default_language tag, without mentioning all the 
'possible' ones. I guess the best we can achieve is cover the majority 
and then use name:language for the exceptions?


Jo
In towns where there are French, German and Italian linguistic 
communities the signs may be written in two (or three) languages 
simultaneously. Here is, for example, photo of the train stationat the 
town of Sierre in the canton Valais: 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Sierre/Siders_train_station#/media/File:Sierre-Siders_train_station-2.jpg


I've made this photo in December 2016. The name of the town on the sign 
is written as: Sierre/Siders. In French and Italian languages it is 
written the same: Sierre, in German it is: Siders ( 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siders ).


It is the common practice. Here is, as another example, a photo of some 
supermarkets products, which I just shot: 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=18tIzVjiriyHAlDKnRa8veLHaE8TETbxR . One 
can see that the product title is in three languages: German, French ad 
Italian. And it is not only the title, but also a description, a 
preparation recipe, etc., all are in three languages. It is very 
convenient for someone who studies these languages.


Indeed, Swiss German pronunciation differs from the Standard German 
significantly, but it is written practically the same as the Standard 
German. The language in the northern Belgium is called Flemish. Both 
Dutch and Flemish are part of the Dutch Language Union, they both are 
part of the same language group. But I do not know if there are 
significant differences in writing, i.e in orthography.


Best regards,
Oleksiy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Jo]

Marc,

I probably shouldn't have mentioned Switzerland. I thought it was "nicely"
divided into clear language regions, but apparently not. My only experience
with it was that in the part neighboring Germany they spoke something that
resembled German somewhat, but once we passed the Sankth-Gottard pass,
everyone spoke Italian (and hardly any German).

In Belgium, at least, it's completely defined in what language official
signs should be written in, in each of the regions.

In most parts of the world, I think this is not the case, which makes it
hard to set this default_language tag, without mentioning all the
'possible' ones. I guess the best we can achieve is cover the majority and
then use name:language for the exceptions?

Jo

2018-05-10 11:35 GMT+02:00 Marc Gemis :

> Don't you think that Belgians like Jo and the rest of the Belgian
> community know best what the default language is in a certain area ?
> This can be a pretty sensitive topic, which is not always easy to
> understand by outsiders. So please let the Belgian community decide
> the default language without pointing us to our constitution.
>
>
> regards
>
> m. (from Belgium)
>
>
> p.s. Besides those areas you mention we also have Municipalities with
> facilities [1]
>
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipalities_with_language_facilities
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Oleksiy Muzalyev
>  wrote:
> > On 09.05.18 07:46, Jo wrote:
> >>
> >> The whole country has 3 official languages. In the north nl is the
> >> official language, in the south fr. And a small area in the east is de.
> >> Brussels is officially bilingual. Hence all names there will be a
> >> combination of fr - nl.
> >>
> >> Normally I would expect Belgium to not have default_language set. You
> may
> >> have to keep a list of countries where it only makes sense to look at
> the
> >> next smaller geographic regions.
> >>
> >> I expect the same goes for Switzerland (whole country 3-4 official
> >> languages, but at the next geographic level it is clear which language
> is
> >> spoken/official for which region).
> >>
> >> I think in most multilingual countries the regions are not so clearly
> >> defined.
> >>
> >> Jo
> >
> >
> > Hello Jo and Yuri,
> >
> > Here is the text of the article 4 of the Belgian constitution [1]
> >
> > "Article 4
> > Belgium comprises four linguistic regions: the Dutch-speaking region, the
> > French-
> > speaking region, the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital and the
> > German-speaking region.
> > Each municipality of the Kingdom forms part of one of these linguistic
> > regions."
> >
> > In the Swiss constitution [2] it is stated directly that there are four
> > national languages. It is also the article 4:
> >
> > "Art. 4 National languages
> > The National Languages are German, French, Italian, and Romansh."
> >
> > It is not a light question, - which language is the default one for these
> > countries. In my opinion, following these official texts is the best
> > solution.
> >
> > [1]
> > https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/
> constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf
> > [2]
> > https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/
> 19995395/index.html#a4
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Oleksiy
> >
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Marc, Oleksiy, thanks for your insights! And Marc, I agree that it should
always be up to the local community to decide.  The only thing I ask is to
please keep in mind that the "default_language" is simply a reflection of
what local OSM editors have already used for the name tag in the majority
of cases, and the reflection of the OSM naming rules in the area, not the
official language.

Eventually we could even get iD editor to show the language name next to
the "name" tag  (e.g.  "name in Dutch: []"), or possibly to auto-create
a corresponding name:nl=... tag (at least for the single language areas)

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 12:55 PM Oleksiy Muzalyev <
oleksiy.muzal...@bluewin.ch> wrote:

> This was exactly my point. That it is a sensitive topic. And it may be
> unclear to people who live in a national state with a single official
> language.
> That is why I provided the texts of articles, to illustrate that there
> is a multi-language historical equilibrium reflected it the official
> documents.
> Best regards,
> Oleksiy
>
> On 10.05.18 11:35, Marc Gemis wrote:
> > Don't you think that Belgians like Jo and the rest of the Belgian
> > community know best what the default language is in a certain area ?
> > This can be a pretty sensitive topic, which is not always easy to
> > understand by outsiders. So please let the Belgian community decide
> > the default language without pointing us to our constitution.
> >
> >
> > regards
> >
> > m. (from Belgium)
> >
> >
> > p.s. Besides those areas you mention we also have Municipalities with
> > facilities [1]
> >
> >
> > [1]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipalities_with_language_facilities
> >
> > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Oleksiy Muzalyev
> >  wrote:
> >> On 09.05.18 07:46, Jo wrote:
> >>> The whole country has 3 official languages. In the north nl is the
> >>> official language, in the south fr. And a small area in the east is de.
> >>> Brussels is officially bilingual. Hence all names there will be a
> >>> combination of fr - nl.
> >>>
> >>> Normally I would expect Belgium to not have default_language set. You
> may
> >>> have to keep a list of countries where it only makes sense to look at
> the
> >>> next smaller geographic regions.
> >>>
> >>> I expect the same goes for Switzerland (whole country 3-4 official
> >>> languages, but at the next geographic level it is clear which language
> is
> >>> spoken/official for which region).
> >>>
> >>> I think in most multilingual countries the regions are not so clearly
> >>> defined.
> >>>
> >>> Jo
> >>
> >> Hello Jo and Yuri,
> >>
> >> Here is the text of the article 4 of the Belgian constitution [1]
> >>
> >> "Article 4
> >> Belgium comprises four linguistic regions: the Dutch-speaking region,
> the
> >> French-
> >> speaking region, the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital and the
> >> German-speaking region.
> >> Each municipality of the Kingdom forms part of one of these linguistic
> >> regions."
> >>
> >> In the Swiss constitution [2] it is stated directly that there are four
> >> national languages. It is also the article 4:
> >>
> >> "Art. 4 National languages
> >> The National Languages are German, French, Italian, and Romansh."
> >>
> >> It is not a light question, - which language is the default one for
> these
> >> countries. In my opinion, following these official texts is the best
> >> solution.
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf
> >> [2]
> >>
> https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html#a4
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Oleksiy
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> talk mailing list
> >> talk@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Dave F]

Hi

On 10/05/2018 00:16, Rob Nickerson wrote:

Hi Dave,

Two elements:

- This is GB wide. Prowmaps has a lot now but I think so areas are 
still missing.


True, but there are probably more recent OoC data than c.1900 for the 
few LAs which are missing from PROWMaps.


- Not all footpaths are registered and with a 2026 deadline the race 
is now on to register old footpaths before they are lost forever.


Good, but I see that as a project external to OSM. OSM can only contain 
current PROWs. I'm a little concerned historical "long gone" paths will 
be added.


DaveF.



Thanks,
*Rob*


On Wed, 9 May 2018 at 23:37, Dave F > wrote:


Hi

I'm probably missing something. As we have current data on
prowmaps.co.uk , will using such old data
have any value/accuracy?

DaveF.

On 09/05/2018 21:13, Rob Nickerson wrote:

Hi

Just posted a "challenge" to Loomio for anyone who is interested.
It's a bit beyond me so thought I'd post it here.

Basically we have point data of historic footpaths (some 300k
points) and I think it would be amazing to compare this to OSM to
see if we can find more footpaths to map. Obviously some will be
long gone due to 100 years of urban sprawl, but I'm hopeful we
can still find some missing paths.

https://www.loomio.org/d/pviAOkGR/challenge-footpaths

Thanks,
*Rob*


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-es] [Catastro] Entradas de edificios/garages: combinación «barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=*»

[Javier Sánchez Portero]

El 10 de mayo de 2018, 14:13, dcapillae  escribió:

> Hola, Javier.
>
> Existen situaciones en las que resulta interesante usar la combinación
> «barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=*». Si marcamos un nodo con la etiqueta
> «barrier=gate» [1], estamos indicando que allí existe una verja de entrada
> a
> un recinto limitado por una barrera, pero ésta puede no ser el punto de
> acceso principal a través de la barrrera.
>
> Las casas particulares que cuenta con una barrera en torno a la parcela
> donde se asiente el edificio normalmente van a disponer de una única verja
> de entrada, a veces dos, una verja de entrada para personas y otra para
> vehículos. En recintos más grandes pueden existir incluso más puntos de
> acceso cerrados por verjas. En esos casos me parece correcto usar la
> combinación «barrier=gate» junto «entrance=main» para la verja principal de
> entrada al recinto, y «barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=service» para las
> entradas de servicio (también es posible usar aquí la combinación de
> etiquetas de entrada a garajes que se explica en este hilo, si se trata de
> una verja de acceso para vehículos). Análogamente no me parece incorrecto
> usar «barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=yes», aunque evidentemente se
> entiende que las verjas se ponen para que sirvan de entrada, no para que no
> se pueda acceder a través de ellas.
>

Me parece bien para indicar distintos tipos de entrada, pero si sólo hay un
acceso, no es necesario.



> Del mismo modo es posible usar la combinación «door=*» junto con
> «entrance=*» para indicar el tipo de puerta y el tipo de entrada a un
> edificio, aunque personalmente no he usado nunca esta combinación. Los
> puntos de acceso a edificios los suelo etiquetar simplemente usando
> «entrance=*» [2].


Por supuesto todo esto es opcional, "rizar el rizo", pero en el caso de
edificios públicos puede ser especialmente interesante junto con
wheelchair=*



> Ciertamente no es correcto etiquetar la entrada a un
> edificio usando «barrier=gate». Esta etiqueta se refiere a puertas, verjas
> o
> cancelas situadas en barreras (muros, setos, vallas, etc.).
>
> Tampoco se debe usar «barrier=gate» si la barrera exterior de un recinto
> cerrado tiene huecos por los que se puede acceder. En esos casos se debe
> mapear la barrera dejando huecos donde los haya, o bien usar la etiqueta
> «barrier=entrance» para indicar que existe un hueco [3]. Entiendo que
> también en este caso es posible la combinación con la etiqueta
> «entrance=*».
>

Correcto también



> Aprovecho para mencionar que he añadido cómo mapear una entrada de garaje
> en
> la página «Cómo mapear un» de la comunidad [4], conforme a lo que estamos
> comentando en este hilo.
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:barrier%3Dgate
> [2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entrance
> [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:barrier%3Dentrance
> [4]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Espa%C3%B1a/C%C3%
> B3mo_mapear_un#Entrada_de_garaje
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-br] Nota copyright OpenStreetMap (@cuidando.vc)

[Ricardo Pedro]

Sergio

Estou comecando a fazer alguns testes com a plataforma OSM, para migrar
algumas sitaucoes do meu trabalho que atualmente estão no google earth,
para apos poder compartilhas estes marcadores para as demais pessoas do meu
trabalho.

Agradeco pelo email, salientando que na medida que ir progredindo vou
colocando todos os requisitos para utilizar a plataforma, bem como assim
que tiver os testes concluidos e conseguir colocar todas as situacoes que
preciso, disponibiliza-las para plataforma.

Um abraco

Ricardo



Em qua, 9 de mai de 2018 às 17:14, Sérgio V.  escreveu:

> Olá,
>
> sou membro da comunidade OpenStreetMap Brasil,
>
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Brazil)
>
>
> Vemos com muita satisfação que seu site usa os dados do OpenStreetMap no
> mapa base exibido.
>
>
> Pedimos apenas o seguinte:
>
>
> Como estabelece o copyright do OpenStreetMap,
>
> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright/pt-BR
>
> e
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy_Pt
>
> Ítem 2. Como usar as marcas OSM)
>
>
> e se tratando de página web normal (não versão exclusivamente mobile)
>
>
>
> os créditos devem constar por extenso no pé do mapa, da seguinte forma:
>
> “© contribuidores do OpenStreetMap”
>
>
> contendo link para a página:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright/pt-BR
>
>
> Aguardamos confirmação do recebimento desta comunicação ,
> bem como destas necessárias adequações.
>
> Obrigado, e estamos à disposição para quaisquer outras dúvidas,
>
> nosso canais de contatos em:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
> ___
> Talk-br mailing list
> Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br
>
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

Re: [Talk-es] [Catastro] Entradas de edificios/garages: combinación «barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=*»

[dcapillae]

Hola, Javier.

Existen situaciones en las que resulta interesante usar la combinación
«barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=*». Si marcamos un nodo con la etiqueta
«barrier=gate» [1], estamos indicando que allí existe una verja de entrada a
un recinto limitado por una barrera, pero ésta puede no ser el punto de
acceso principal a través de la barrrera.

Las casas particulares que cuenta con una barrera en torno a la parcela
donde se asiente el edificio normalmente van a disponer de una única verja
de entrada, a veces dos, una verja de entrada para personas y otra para
vehículos. En recintos más grandes pueden existir incluso más puntos de
acceso cerrados por verjas. En esos casos me parece correcto usar la
combinación «barrier=gate» junto «entrance=main» para la verja principal de
entrada al recinto, y «barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=service» para las
entradas de servicio (también es posible usar aquí la combinación de
etiquetas de entrada a garajes que se explica en este hilo, si se trata de
una verja de acceso para vehículos). Análogamente no me parece incorrecto
usar «barrier=gate» junto con «entrance=yes», aunque evidentemente se
entiende que las verjas se ponen para que sirvan de entrada, no para que no
se pueda acceder a través de ellas.

Del mismo modo es posible usar la combinación «door=*» junto con
«entrance=*» para indicar el tipo de puerta y el tipo de entrada a un
edificio, aunque personalmente no he usado nunca esta combinación. Los
puntos de acceso a edificios los suelo etiquetar simplemente usando
«entrance=*» [2]. Ciertamente no es correcto etiquetar la entrada a un
edificio usando «barrier=gate». Esta etiqueta se refiere a puertas, verjas o
cancelas situadas en barreras (muros, setos, vallas, etc.).

Tampoco se debe usar «barrier=gate» si la barrera exterior de un recinto
cerrado tiene huecos por los que se puede acceder. En esos casos se debe
mapear la barrera dejando huecos donde los haya, o bien usar la etiqueta
«barrier=entrance» para indicar que existe un hueco [3]. Entiendo que
también en este caso es posible la combinación con la etiqueta «entrance=*».

Aprovecho para mencionar que he añadido cómo mapear una entrada de garaje en
la página «Cómo mapear un» de la comunidad [4], conforme a lo que estamos
comentando en este hilo.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:barrier%3Dgate
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entrance
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:barrier%3Dentrance
[4]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Espa%C3%B1a/C%C3%B3mo_mapear_un#Entrada_de_garaje



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[SK53]

Quick correction, as I uploaded heat map to wrong Flickr account. This is
the proper link: https://flic.kr/p/JSXgyh.

J

On 10 May 2018 at 13:07, SK53  wrote:

> I just checked on the Vision of Britain site: the core data is currently
> released under CC-BY-NC. I presume OSM-UK have a waiver from these terms.
>
> Undoubtedly there will be rights of way which have effectively fallen in
> to abeyance. I noted one the other day which was on NPE maps, but no longer
> visible on the ground nor on modern OS maps, nor in the data available from
> rowmaps. Broadly speaking such paths fall outside the ambit of OSM, but
> finding such things is very valuable.
>
> Note that we have other sources as well. As a quick experiment I spent 15
> minutes quickly tracing paths marked on NPE maps for SE Notts and managed
> just over 200 using JOSM. This is of course what I should have done many
> years ago rather than adding them to OSM (hindsight is a wonderful thing).
> The geometry wont be very good, but can be refined using the 1:25 OOC maps.
> Such data can be more useful than the raw names from GB1900, but could be
> used in conjunction. Furthermore with suitable tagging this can be added to
> OHM (I would suggest start_date=1900-01-01 with end_date=1950-12-31 unless
> one knows path is still in use) which makes it a tad easier for sharing
> (although OHM overpass instance is not working atm).
>
> A couple of other things to note regarding the GB1900 data:
>
>
>- Many current footpaths will be marked as Bridle Roads (B.R.). It
>would be useful to add these names to the available data.
>- footpaths and bridle roads often fall well short of their current
>entry points because the current right of way will have followed farm
>tracks and service roads, which in many cases have disappeared.
>
> Returning to use of rowmaps I have a recent geojson file of missing paths
> in the North Midlands (Staffs, Derbys, Notts, Leics & Rutland) up on
> github: https://github.com/SK53/osm-prow-stats. I intend to add other
> areas as time permits. Unfortunately I've never got my comparison process
> to work on PostGIS so I still use QGIS which is a little unwieldy for
> automation. I process rowmaps data into a fairly standard form in PostGIS
> before making the comparisons. This is a heat
> map of missing footpaths in the East Midlands area as of Autumn 2017, I
> compare length of missing paths with total length in a tetrad (2km grid
> square). It readily shows hotspots of missing paths. This was done to
> identify suitable places for our 2018 New Year footpath mapping. The
> National Forest area in SE Derbyshire still has a lot of outstanding
> mapping to do: it's not too bad as walking country either.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
>
> On 10 May 2018 at 11:34, Nick Whitelegg 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I might be potentially interested in developing something with this data,
>> partly because I already run a site (freemap) which shows OSM maps for
>> walkers and stores them in a PostGIS database - so it should be an easy
>> process to filter out the data to find those points which are not close to
>> an OSM highway. It would also be easy for me to adapt my existing code to
>> visualise these "FP" points. Presumably they are just points with no
>> indication of direction of the path? An "FP" label presumably has
>> orientation so something could possibly be deduced about its course at that
>> point if orientation was available too.
>>
>>
>> I also already visualise the data so visualising the missing ROWs would
>> be easily done too.
>>
>>
>> It would be nice to develop features to find nearby locations where there
>> are lots of these missing paths, e.g. if I am in Southampton, find the
>> nearest village with 10, 20 (or whatever) missing paths within a 5-mile
>> radius.
>>
>>
>> Would be nice to have an app too so you can find these footpaths while
>> you're actually out.
>>
>>
>>
>> So potentially interested in this, yes. I don't want to commit 100% but
>> would be nice to have the data.
>>
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *From:* Richard Fairhurst 
>> *Sent:* 10 May 2018 09:07:49
>> *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones
>>
>> Rob Nickerson wrote:
>> > Basically we have point data of historic footpaths (some 300k points)
>> and
>> > I think it would be amazing to compare this to OSM to see if we can
>> find
>> > more footpaths to map.
>>
>> Very cool. Could you post the data somewhere?
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> 

Re: [Talk-cz] Chybějící značka informace u samotného tourism=information

[Tom Ka]

GPX zatim ne, ale aspon tabulka:

https://osm.fit.vutbr.cz/OsmHiCheck/gp/?tourism

Bye


Dne 10. května 2018 13:34 Tom Ka  napsal(a):
> Diky, usetril jsi mi praci. Dival jsem se na to a opravdu jsou to
> nevhodne zadana data, ktera by bylo velmi vhodne opravit/doplnit.
> Zkusim nejak zaintegrovat do kontrol rozcestniku, min pro sebe jako
> jedno GPX na stazeni pro offline provoz na miste.
>
> Bye
>
> Dne 9. května 2018 11:49 Milan Keršláger  
> napsal(a):
>> Napsal jsem skript, který takové nedodělky ukáže (nastavte mapu a stiskněte
>> Run):
>> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/yF5
>>
>> overpass turbo jsem neznal a je to zajímavé. Změny z OSM se promítají do cca
>> 5 minut.
>> Skripty si lze uložit na svůj OSM účet. Existují knihovny příkladů a
>> nápověda.
>> Milan Keršláger
>>
>> Dne pondělí 7. května 2018 9:51:45 UTC+2 Jan Skala napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Ahoj, než se na to kouknu detailně tak od stolu říkám, že nelze nastavit
>>> "negativní" pravidla vykreslování. Nelze nastavit pokud má prvek jen
>>> tourism=information, vykreslí se takhle. Tím pádem bude mít i rozcestník
>>> tuhle ikonu, pokud se tak vykreslování z nějakého důvodu rozhodne.
>>> Taky si myslím, že by bylo lepší lépe tagovat.
>>
>> --
>> Tuto zprávu jste obdrželi, protože jste přihlášeni k odběru skupiny „OSM
>> paws“ ve Skupinách Google.
>> Chcete-li zrušit odběr skupiny a přestat dostávat e-maily ze skupiny,
>> zašlete e-mail na adresu osm-paws+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> Chcete-li tuto diskusi zobrazit na webu, navštivte
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osm-paws/de5edb9c-61f8-4510-87cb-9693d7a2eec2%40googlegroups.com.
>>
>> Další možnosti najdete na https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[SK53]

I just checked on the Vision of Britain site: the core data is currently
released under CC-BY-NC. I presume OSM-UK have a waiver from these terms.

Undoubtedly there will be rights of way which have effectively fallen in to
abeyance. I noted one the other day which was on NPE maps, but no longer
visible on the ground nor on modern OS maps, nor in the data available from
rowmaps. Broadly speaking such paths fall outside the ambit of OSM, but
finding such things is very valuable.

Note that we have other sources as well. As a quick experiment I spent 15
minutes quickly tracing paths marked on NPE maps for SE Notts and managed
just over 200 using JOSM. This is of course what I should have done many
years ago rather than adding them to OSM (hindsight is a wonderful thing).
The geometry wont be very good, but can be refined using the 1:25 OOC maps.
Such data can be more useful than the raw names from GB1900, but could be
used in conjunction. Furthermore with suitable tagging this can be added to
OHM (I would suggest start_date=1900-01-01 with end_date=1950-12-31 unless
one knows path is still in use) which makes it a tad easier for sharing
(although OHM overpass instance is not working atm).

A couple of other things to note regarding the GB1900 data:


   - Many current footpaths will be marked as Bridle Roads (B.R.). It would
   be useful to add these names to the available data.
   - footpaths and bridle roads often fall well short of their current
   entry points because the current right of way will have followed farm
   tracks and service roads, which in many cases have disappeared.

Returning to use of rowmaps I have a recent geojson file of missing paths
in the North Midlands (Staffs, Derbys, Notts, Leics & Rutland) up on
github: https://github.com/SK53/osm-prow-stats. I intend to add other areas
as time permits. Unfortunately I've never got my comparison process to work
on PostGIS so I still use QGIS which is a little unwieldy for automation. I
process rowmaps data into a fairly standard form in PostGIS before making
the comparisons. This is a heat map of missing
footpaths in the East Midlands area as of Autumn 2017, I compare length of
missing paths with total length in a tetrad (2km grid square). It readily
shows hotspots of missing paths. This was done to identify suitable places
for our 2018 New Year footpath mapping. The National Forest area in SE
Derbyshire still has a lot of outstanding mapping to do: it's not too bad
as walking country either.

Jerry




On 10 May 2018 at 11:34, Nick Whitelegg  wrote:

>
> I might be potentially interested in developing something with this data,
> partly because I already run a site (freemap) which shows OSM maps for
> walkers and stores them in a PostGIS database - so it should be an easy
> process to filter out the data to find those points which are not close to
> an OSM highway. It would also be easy for me to adapt my existing code to
> visualise these "FP" points. Presumably they are just points with no
> indication of direction of the path? An "FP" label presumably has
> orientation so something could possibly be deduced about its course at that
> point if orientation was available too.
>
>
> I also already visualise the data so visualising the missing ROWs would be
> easily done too.
>
>
> It would be nice to develop features to find nearby locations where there
> are lots of these missing paths, e.g. if I am in Southampton, find the
> nearest village with 10, 20 (or whatever) missing paths within a 5-mile
> radius.
>
>
> Would be nice to have an app too so you can find these footpaths while
> you're actually out.
>
>
>
> So potentially interested in this, yes. I don't want to commit 100% but
> would be nice to have the data.
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> --
> *From:* Richard Fairhurst 
> *Sent:* 10 May 2018 09:07:49
> *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones
>
> Rob Nickerson wrote:
> > Basically we have point data of historic footpaths (some 300k points)
> and
> > I think it would be amazing to compare this to OSM to see if we can find
> > more footpaths to map.
>
> Very cool. Could you post the data somewhere?
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-es] [Catastro] Entradas de edificios/garages

[Javier Sánchez Portero]

Transcribo en voz alta algunos pensamientos adicionales sobre entradas
según voy consultando en la Wiki, ya que he estado haciendo algunas cosas
mal, para que no le pase a más gente y para ponernos de acuerdo.

Si tenemos una parcela con uno o varios edificios aislados dentro, la
parcela está rodeada por un muro de algún tipo dibujado
(barrier=wall/fence/hedge) y vemos en las fotos una puerta de acceso,
habría que etiquetarlo con un nodo como barrier=gate (o lift_gate o lo que
corresponda). En este caso no hace falta añadir entrance=* (ya está
implícito y hay muy pocos usos de esa combinación en taginfo). Si tenemos
un acceso sin puerta entonces si hace falta añadir entrance=*. Lo mismo si
vemos en las fotos aéreas una entrada pero no podemos determinar por foto
si tiene puerta o no.

Si tenemos la entrada a un edificio y queremos indicar que tiene una puerta
de acceso podemos hacerlo con la etiqueta door=*. No usar barrier=gate ya
que es sólo para puertas en muros o vallas (parcelas), no en edificios.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:door

Saludos, Javier
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Nick Whitelegg]

I might be potentially interested in developing something with this data, 
partly because I already run a site (freemap) which shows OSM maps for walkers 
and stores them in a PostGIS database - so it should be an easy process to 
filter out the data to find those points which are not close to an OSM highway. 
It would also be easy for me to adapt my existing code to visualise these "FP" 
points. Presumably they are just points with no indication of direction of the 
path? An "FP" label presumably has orientation so something could possibly be 
deduced about its course at that point if orientation was available too.


I also already visualise the data so visualising the missing ROWs would be 
easily done too.


It would be nice to develop features to find nearby locations where there are 
lots of these missing paths, e.g. if I am in Southampton, find the nearest 
village with 10, 20 (or whatever) missing paths within a 5-mile radius.


Would be nice to have an app too so you can find these footpaths while you're 
actually out.



So potentially interested in this, yes. I don't want to commit 100% but would 
be nice to have the data.


Nick




From: Richard Fairhurst 
Sent: 10 May 2018 09:07:49
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Basically we have point data of historic footpaths (some 300k points) and
> I think it would be amazing to compare this to OSM to see if we can find
> more footpaths to map.

Very cool. Could you post the data somewhere?

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

This was exactly my point. That it is a sensitive topic. And it may be 
unclear to people who live in a national state with a single official 
language.
That is why I provided the texts of articles, to illustrate that there 
is a multi-language historical equilibrium reflected it the official 
documents.

Best regards,
Oleksiy

On 10.05.18 11:35, Marc Gemis wrote:

Don't you think that Belgians like Jo and the rest of the Belgian
community know best what the default language is in a certain area ?
This can be a pretty sensitive topic, which is not always easy to
understand by outsiders. So please let the Belgian community decide
the default language without pointing us to our constitution.


regards

m. (from Belgium)


p.s. Besides those areas you mention we also have Municipalities with
facilities [1]


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipalities_with_language_facilities

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Oleksiy Muzalyev
 wrote:

On 09.05.18 07:46, Jo wrote:

The whole country has 3 official languages. In the north nl is the
official language, in the south fr. And a small area in the east is de.
Brussels is officially bilingual. Hence all names there will be a
combination of fr - nl.

Normally I would expect Belgium to not have default_language set. You may
have to keep a list of countries where it only makes sense to look at the
next smaller geographic regions.

I expect the same goes for Switzerland (whole country 3-4 official
languages, but at the next geographic level it is clear which language is
spoken/official for which region).

I think in most multilingual countries the regions are not so clearly
defined.

Jo


Hello Jo and Yuri,

Here is the text of the article 4 of the Belgian constitution [1]

"Article 4
Belgium comprises four linguistic regions: the Dutch-speaking region, the
French-
speaking region, the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital and the
German-speaking region.
Each municipality of the Kingdom forms part of one of these linguistic
regions."

In the Swiss constitution [2] it is stated directly that there are four
national languages. It is also the article 4:

"Art. 4 National languages
The National Languages are German, French, Italian, and Romansh."

It is not a light question, - which language is the default one for these
countries. In my opinion, following these official texts is the best
solution.

[1]
https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf
[2]
https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html#a4

Best regards,
Oleksiy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Marc Gemis]

Don't you think that Belgians like Jo and the rest of the Belgian
community know best what the default language is in a certain area ?
This can be a pretty sensitive topic, which is not always easy to
understand by outsiders. So please let the Belgian community decide
the default language without pointing us to our constitution.


regards

m. (from Belgium)


p.s. Besides those areas you mention we also have Municipalities with
facilities [1]


[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipalities_with_language_facilities

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Oleksiy Muzalyev
 wrote:
> On 09.05.18 07:46, Jo wrote:
>>
>> The whole country has 3 official languages. In the north nl is the
>> official language, in the south fr. And a small area in the east is de.
>> Brussels is officially bilingual. Hence all names there will be a
>> combination of fr - nl.
>>
>> Normally I would expect Belgium to not have default_language set. You may
>> have to keep a list of countries where it only makes sense to look at the
>> next smaller geographic regions.
>>
>> I expect the same goes for Switzerland (whole country 3-4 official
>> languages, but at the next geographic level it is clear which language is
>> spoken/official for which region).
>>
>> I think in most multilingual countries the regions are not so clearly
>> defined.
>>
>> Jo
>
>
> Hello Jo and Yuri,
>
> Here is the text of the article 4 of the Belgian constitution [1]
>
> "Article 4
> Belgium comprises four linguistic regions: the Dutch-speaking region, the
> French-
> speaking region, the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital and the
> German-speaking region.
> Each municipality of the Kingdom forms part of one of these linguistic
> regions."
>
> In the Swiss constitution [2] it is stated directly that there are four
> national languages. It is also the article 4:
>
> "Art. 4 National languages
> The National Languages are German, French, Italian, and Romansh."
>
> It is not a light question, - which language is the default one for these
> countries. In my opinion, following these official texts is the best
> solution.
>
> [1]
> https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf
> [2]
> https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html#a4
>
> Best regards,
> Oleksiy
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-es] Idiomas por defecto

[Javier Sánchez Portero]

Gracias Joan

Ahora está claro. Te puedo confirmar que el problema también pasa en
Ubuntu+Firefox. Cuando se hace una petición de búsqueda, lleva un parámetro
(Accept-Language) con una lista de los códigos de idiomas configurados en
el navegador para pedir páginas: "ca,es,en". Nominatim busca una name:* con
uno de esos códigos. Cuando encuentra name:es lo devuelve. Si se quita el
español como segunda opción ("ca,en"), no encuentra ninguno y devuelve la
etiqueta name a secas.

El 10 de mayo de 2018, 7:50, Joan Montané  escribió:

>
>
> 2018-05-09 18:09 GMT+02:00 Joan Montané :
>
>>
>>
>> El dc., 9 maig 2018, 17:34, Javier Sánchez Portero 
>> va escriure:
>>
>>> Como sea, pero la experiencia es que mejor duplicar la información.
 Porque los usuarios (el navegador o programa que usen) muchas veces no
 piden la información de forma ideal, y hay que "facilitar" que obtengan
 aquello que realmente quieren. Además, el uso de "default_language" siempre
 será opcional, por lo que, en mi opinión, mejor tenir la info duplicada en
 el name:xx que toque.

>>>
>>> Hola Joan.
>>>
>>> Me puedes dar un ejemplo concreto (una calle o un pueblo) en el que esté
>>> duplicado y consideres que es necesario. No termino de verlo.
>>>
>>
>> Tardaré horas en estar frente a PC, pero ya indicaba que pasa si *no*
>> está duplicado.
>>
>
> Ejemplo práctico:
>
> Carrer de Sant Joan, en Sant Joan de Vilatorrada, Barcelona [1]. Tiene
> definidos "name" (en catalán) i "name:es", pero no "name:ca" (porque
> coincide con "name).
>
> Si busco "Carrer de Sant Joan, Sant Joan de Vilatorrada" en OSM [2], que
> usa nominatim [3], encuentra la calle (gracias a "name"), pero los datos
> que verá el usuario dependen de las lenguas declaradas por el navegador del
> usuario.
>
> Si tiene el navegador en inglés, verá: Carrer de Sant Joan (name)
> Si tiene el navegador en español, verá: Calle San Juan (name:es)
> Si tiene el navegador en catalán, verá, casi seguro: Calle San Juan
> (name:es). Por què? Porque la gran mayoría de usuarios que tienen el
> Windows configurado en catalán tienen también el español configurado como
> segunda lengua. Por eso Nominatim usa el "name:es" e ignora el "name" para
> presentar los datos.
>
> La mejor solución (pero costosa) es duplicar los datos de "name" en
> "name:ca". Si alguien puede facilitar documentación sobre como hacer
> ediciones massivas (con bots), pues lo agradeceré, :)
>
> Sobre la discrepancia entre mayúscula inicial en los nombres de vías en
> "name" vs. "name:ca". La realidad es que la comunidad catalana no hemos
> llegado a ningún consenso sobre este tema. Algunos usan mayúscula inicial
> (Carrer de...), otros minúscula inicial (carrer de...) y otros usan ambas
> (name con mayúscula i name:ca con mínuscula). Como es un tema menor, no
> parece que tengamos prisa en uniformar :_)
>
> Saludos,
> Joan Montané
> [1] https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=83267713
> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=carrer%20de%
> 20sant%20joan%2C%20sant%20joan%20de%20vilatorrada#map=19/41.74218/1.80492
> [3] https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/search.php?
> q=carrer+de+sant+Joan%2C+Sant+Joan+de+Vilatorrada_
> geojson=1=
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Simon Poole]

Am 09.05.2018 um 07:46 schrieb Jo:
> 
>
> I expect the same goes for Switzerland (whole country 3-4 official
> languages, but at the next geographic level it is clear which language
> is spoken/official for which region).
> 
This not correct, while there are regions (as this is not strictly
hierarchical and my differ at a municipality level) that have one
official language there are numerous which are (not only) officially
bi-lingual.

Simon



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

On 09.05.18 07:46, Jo wrote:
The whole country has 3 official languages. In the north nl is the 
official language, in the south fr. And a small area in the east is 
de. Brussels is officially bilingual. Hence all names there will be a 
combination of fr - nl.


Normally I would expect Belgium to not have default_language set. You 
may have to keep a list of countries where it only makes sense to look 
at the next smaller geographic regions.


I expect the same goes for Switzerland (whole country 3-4 official 
languages, but at the next geographic level it is clear which language 
is spoken/official for which region).


I think in most multilingual countries the regions are not so clearly 
defined.


Jo


Hello Jo and Yuri,

Here is the text of the article 4 of the Belgian constitution [1]

"Article 4
Belgium comprises four linguistic regions: the Dutch-speaking region, 
the French-
speaking region, the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital and the 
German-speaking region.
Each municipality of the Kingdom forms part of one of these linguistic 
regions."


In the Swiss constitution [2] it is stated directly that there are four 
national languages. It is also the article 4:


"Art. 4 National languages
The National Languages are German, French, Italian, and Romansh."

It is not a light question, - which language is the default one for 
these countries. In my opinion, following these official texts is the 
best solution.


[1] 
https://www.dekamer.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf
[2] 
https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html#a4


Best regards,
Oleksiy

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Footpaths - search for the missing ones

[Richard Fairhurst]

Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Basically we have point data of historic footpaths (some 300k points) and 
> I think it would be amazing to compare this to OSM to see if we can find 
> more footpaths to map.

Very cool. Could you post the data somewhere?

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Great-Britain-f5372682.html

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-au] poor business listing edits

[Philip Mallis]

Agreed. Spent a lot of time removing spam business edits in and around 
Federation Square in Melbourne. They are fairly obvious spam accounts and I 
don't see benefit from trying to engage with them.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 10 May 2018, at 17:18, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> 
>> On 10 May 2018 at 10:29, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In reverting, OSM looses the information that these new people made. 
>> OSM also looses a potential new mapper, as I doubt they will return 
>> following their attempted addition being removed.
>> 
>> There are large additions in some parts of the world being made from 
>> commercial firms - eg petrol stations. These too are a form of 'spam'. 
>> I have no problem with a firm adding their details to the map... spam? Yes, 
>> it is a form of advertising... but they can only add facts .. no flummery. 
>> So I am for it. 
> 
> These edits are hallmark seo spam, likely all done by the same organisation, 
> following the same instructions. They all have the same traits (new username 
> for each edit they make, named after the company, abuse the changeset comment 
> with spam, never use a primary key to describe what it is they are adding, 
> never use the correct format for phone, never reply to changeset comments, 
> always have spammy description, and sometimes add business which don't have 
> any on the ground presence where they add the node. The organisation(s) 
> behind these systematic edits have had enough time to learn and work with the 
> community but they have shown no interest in doing that.
> 
> Honestly given they don't take changeset comments into account, I think it's 
> a waste of time to try to help them edit better, we've tried and it hasn't 
> changed the way they work with OSM.
> 
>> On 10 May 2018 at 11:34,  wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> I have attempted to define SEO spam at 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Spam#SEO_Spam
>> 
>> It would be good to have guidelines on what to do with SEO spam, I am often 
>> unsure when to revert. My thoughts are that it can be immediately reverted 
>> if it looks like SEO spam and it either:
>> a)breaks existing features
>> b)is impossibly located, post office, school, park etc.
>> or
>> c)is not matched by contact details on their website
>> 
> 
> I think that's fair, when it's hallmark of the same SEO spam we've been 
> seeing, they aren't new to OSM and aren't genuine in what they are doing.
> 
> If it doesn't match and there is a chance it's a real person, I think we 
> should be do what we'd normally do if it was a local mapper who's just new 
> and try to help them out. If it's just someone mapping their own business, 
> they're much more likely to reply to a note about their recent edit.
>  
>> Case (c) is the more controversial, most of these SEO spam entries are for 
>> home based businesses with no verifiable office or shop. In accepting these 
>> listings its reasonable to expect a physical location which is supported by 
>> the addr:housenumber and addr:street and the contact details on their 
>> website. (If they don't want to publicise the location of their business on 
>> their website there is very unlikely to be anything verifiable on the 
>> ground).
> 
> I agree, ideally it should be verifiable.
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] poor business listing edits

[Andrew Harvey]

On 10 May 2018 at 10:29, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> In reverting, OSM looses the information that these new people made.
> OSM also looses a potential new mapper, as I doubt they will return
> following their attempted addition being removed.
>
> There are large additions in some parts of the world being made from
> commercial firms - eg petrol stations. These too are a form of 'spam'.
> I have no problem with a firm adding their details to the map... spam?
> Yes, it is a form of advertising... but they can only add facts .. no
> flummery. So I am for it.
>

These edits are hallmark seo spam, likely all done by the same
organisation, following the same instructions. They all have the same
traits (new username for each edit they make, named after the company,
abuse the changeset comment with spam, never use a primary key to describe
what it is they are adding, never use the correct format for phone, never
reply to changeset comments, always have spammy description, and sometimes
add business which don't have any on the ground presence where they add the
node. The organisation(s) behind these systematic edits have had enough
time to learn and work with the community but they have shown no interest
in doing that.

Honestly given they don't take changeset comments into account, I think
it's a waste of time to try to help them edit better, we've tried and it
hasn't changed the way they work with OSM.

On 10 May 2018 at 11:34,  wrote:

> Hi
>
> I have attempted to define SEO spam at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org
> /wiki/Talk:Spam#SEO_Spam
>
> It would be good to have guidelines on what to do with SEO spam, I am
> often unsure when to revert. My thoughts are that it can be immediately
> reverted if it looks like SEO spam and it either:
> a)breaks existing features
> b)is impossibly located, post office, school, park etc.
> or
> c)is not matched by contact details on their website
>
>
I think that's fair, when it's hallmark of the same SEO spam we've been
seeing, they aren't new to OSM and aren't genuine in what they are doing.

If it doesn't match and there is a chance it's a real person, I think we
should be do what we'd normally do if it was a local mapper who's just new
and try to help them out. If it's just someone mapping their own business,
they're much more likely to reply to a note about their recent edit.


> Case (c) is the more controversial, most of these SEO spam entries are for
> home based businesses with no verifiable office or shop. In accepting these
> listings its reasonable to expect a physical location which is supported by
> the addr:housenumber and addr:street and the contact details on their
> website. (If they don't want to publicise the location of their business on
> their website there is very unlikely to be anything verifiable on the
> ground).
>

I agree, ideally it should be verifiable.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-es] Idiomas por defecto

[Joan Montané]

2018-05-09 18:09 GMT+02:00 Joan Montané :

>
>
> El dc., 9 maig 2018, 17:34, Javier Sánchez Portero 
> va escriure:
>
>> Como sea, pero la experiencia es que mejor duplicar la información.
>>> Porque los usuarios (el navegador o programa que usen) muchas veces no
>>> piden la información de forma ideal, y hay que "facilitar" que obtengan
>>> aquello que realmente quieren. Además, el uso de "default_language" siempre
>>> será opcional, por lo que, en mi opinión, mejor tenir la info duplicada en
>>> el name:xx que toque.
>>>
>>
>> Hola Joan.
>>
>> Me puedes dar un ejemplo concreto (una calle o un pueblo) en el que esté
>> duplicado y consideres que es necesario. No termino de verlo.
>>
>
> Tardaré horas en estar frente a PC, pero ya indicaba que pasa si *no* está
> duplicado.
>

Ejemplo práctico:

Carrer de Sant Joan, en Sant Joan de Vilatorrada, Barcelona [1]. Tiene
definidos "name" (en catalán) i "name:es", pero no "name:ca" (porque
coincide con "name).

Si busco "Carrer de Sant Joan, Sant Joan de Vilatorrada" en OSM [2], que
usa nominatim [3], encuentra la calle (gracias a "name"), pero los datos
que verá el usuario dependen de las lenguas declaradas por el navegador del
usuario.

Si tiene el navegador en inglés, verá: Carrer de Sant Joan (name)
Si tiene el navegador en español, verá: Calle San Juan (name:es)
Si tiene el navegador en catalán, verá, casi seguro: Calle San Juan
(name:es). Por què? Porque la gran mayoría de usuarios que tienen el
Windows configurado en catalán tienen también el español configurado como
segunda lengua. Por eso Nominatim usa el "name:es" e ignora el "name" para
presentar los datos.

La mejor solución (pero costosa) es duplicar los datos de "name" en
"name:ca". Si alguien puede facilitar documentación sobre como hacer
ediciones massivas (con bots), pues lo agradeceré, :)

Sobre la discrepancia entre mayúscula inicial en los nombres de vías en
"name" vs. "name:ca". La realidad es que la comunidad catalana no hemos
llegado a ningún consenso sobre este tema. Algunos usan mayúscula inicial
(Carrer de...), otros minúscula inicial (carrer de...) y otros usan ambas
(name con mayúscula i name:ca con mínuscula). Como es un tema menor, no
parece que tengamos prisa en uniformar :_)

Saludos,
Joan Montané
[1] https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/details.php?place_id=83267713
[2]
https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=carrer%20de%20sant%20joan%2C%20sant%20joan%20de%20vilatorrada#map=19/41.74218/1.80492
[3]
https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/search.php?q=carrer+de+sant+Joan%2C+Sant+Joan+de+Vilatorrada_geojson=1=
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [OSM-talk] Local language help

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. May 2018, at 01:34, Jo  wrote:
> 
> Where problems actually do occur is in streets which have a different name on 
> both sides (only in Belgium, I guess. It happens on streets that form the 
> border between two 'villages'). Anyway, then the name tag can contain up to 4 
> variants.


This is not completely unseen in other parts of the world as well, the common 
solution are name:right and name:left tags.

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk