Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Editing road geometry Australia

[Marc Gemis]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 10:53 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be tagged, 
> the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on ?
>

A combination of turn:lanes (through|through|right|right) and
change:lanes (yes|only_left|only_right|yes) and lanes=4 before the
split and lanes=2 on both ways after the split, should be enough.

AFAIK routers do not handle the change:lanes at this moment, but do a
good job based on the turn:lanes.

regards

m.

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] La carte Près de Chez Nous PDCN

[Stéphane Péneau]

Bonjour Vincent,

Je viens de regarder par chez moi, et il ne semble pas qu'il y ait de 
rapprochement entre les poi Osm et leurs couches de données. Osm est 
bien meilleur.


Le pire que j'ai vu concerne une boutique nommée Casavrac :
https://presdecheznous.fr/annuaire#/fiche/Casavrac/D6h/@47.080,-1.272,13z?cat=Alimentation
En réalité elle est à plusieurs km :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5959789630

Stf

Le 11/01/2019 à 18:31, Vincent Bergeot a écrit :

Bonjour,

nous en avions parlé sur cette liste il y a quelques temps et le 
développeur principal de Près de Chez Nous est venu au dernier SotM-fr 
à Bordeaux, pour rencontrer un peu mieux OSM, les contributeurs, ...


Il vient de me dire qu'un certain nombre de POI d'OSM sont utilisés et 
mis à jour de manière hebdomadaire (magasin bio et hackerspace).


C'est par ici : 
https://presdecheznous.fr/annuaire#/carte/@46.77,1.80,6z?cat=all


Bonne exploration de cette carte qui agrège beaucoup beaucoup de 
données !






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

Re: [talk-au] Editing road geometry Australia

[iansteer]

I also agree with the Telenav approach for the WA intersection (the other is 
unnecessarily complicated).

Ian


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

Re: [Talk-ca] Business Improvement Area tagging

[Corey Burger]

Here in BC they are set by municipal bylaw and renewed every 5 years. Very
much stable enough to map in OSM.

Corey

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 2:27 PM Bernie Connors 
wrote:

> I can confirm the BIA boundaries are modified very infrequently in New
> Brunswick.  I am not aware of any changes during the 10 years in my current
> job disseminating GIS data for for the province.
>
> Bernie.
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019, 2:45 PM Matthew Darwin 
>> Hi Harald,
>>
>> Thanks for your thoughts on this.
>>
>> From my point of view BIAs are just as (just as not) verifiable on the
>> ground as a municipality boundary.  Typically there are gateway signs to
>> welcome you to the area, which makes them more concrete then say a census
>> area. eg
>> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=45.331875926798006=-75.892906002273=19.36453946996015=RopOOODg6gMzdE5gHeicfA=photo=0.4894869294322967=0.5003=0
>> or
>> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=45.397102=-75.7423=17=pEs0qv8z4ielD2jmRpJhqw=photo=0.11741761625032077=0.5560308877526301=2.639780018331806
>> so just like a municipality boundary there is some physical info, but of
>> course doesn't tell you the exact boundary area.
>>
>> In my experience BIA boundaries don't change much one they are
>> created but of course I am not familiar of what happens outside of
>> Ontario certainly I wouldn't expect them to change more than the
>> boundaries we already have in OSM for municipalities and the wards within
>> them which seem to change change every decade or so in a growing/changing
>> municipality.
>>
>>
>> On 2019-01-09 12:34 p.m., Harald Kliems wrote:
>>
>> To me this is a clear case of something that doesn't belong in OSM. It
>> sounds like the boundaries aren't verifiable on the ground and may change
>> frequently. Therefore any data in OSM would go stale quickly and the only
>> verification of accuracy would be to go back to the source.
>> Yes, we have deviations from the "verifiable on the ground" rule, but
>> we've had similar discussions for census boundaries, ridings/election
>> districts, and on the the talk-us list recently about Bureau of Land
>> Management boundaries.
>>
>> For your analysis of businesses within a BIA, you can just download the
>> OSM and BIA boundary data separately and do the analysis in the GIS
>> application of your choice.
>>
>>  Harald.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:32 PM Matthew Darwin  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if this applies to other provinces or not, so I thought I
>>> would ask here.
>>>
>>> In Ontario there is a concept of "Business Improvement Area" ("BIA" for
>>> short) that has the power to tax businesses within their zone  (see
>>> http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1529.aspx for details).
>>>
>>> I want to tag these in OSM, so then you can run a query to find all
>>> businesses within a BIA. Sometimes the boundaries of the BIA are very tight
>>> and just cover things that are actual businesses, and sometimes the
>>> boundaries of a BIA are very loose and cover lots of area including
>>> residential... and when a new business comes up later in that area it
>>> automatically is a part of the BIA.
>>>
>>> I am thinking that the *relation type=boundary,
>>> boundary=local_authority *might be applicable here, and define either a
>>> Canada specific definition maybe just Ontario, depending if the concept
>>> exists elsewhere.
>>>
>>> I would like to get people's opinion on this idea  Or please suggest
>>> something else.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aboundary%3Dlocal_authority
>>>
>>>- type =boundary
>>>
>>>- boundary =
>>>local_authority
>>>- name =*
>>>- local_authority:CA
>>>
>>> 
>>>=BIA
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-ca mailing list
>>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Please use encrypted communication whenever possible!
>> Key-ID: 0x34cb93972f186565
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Editing road geometry Australia

[John Berkers]

Warin,

I agree with your point about being able to tag the turn restrictions, and
the solid white line.

I think the main issue is that the node where the ways diverge is a
significant distance from where the line become solid.  If fact, the node
is near the beginning of the dashed line.

If the divergence of the ways was placed nearer to the commencement of the
solid white line, this would maintain the ability to implement turn
restrictions, and clean up the intersection.  Lane tagging is also
recommended, prior to the divergence of the ways, so that supporting
navigation aids can advise the driver appropriately.

Does this work for you, Petra/Telenav?

Also, Petra, your image of the WA intersection is more in-line with what I
believe should be mapped in that instance, and is in line with my earlier
comments.

Does anyone else have further suggestions on the Canberra intersection?

Regards,

JohnB

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 8:53 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11/01/19 19:51, John Berkers wrote:
>
> Long time lurker, some time editor.
>
> It is my understanding that marked "turn right only  lanes" are not cause
> to create divergent ways.  These should be tagged using the "lanes" key as
> per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes
>
> Creating divergent ways is considered "Tagging for the renderer" as the
> documented separation is not physically there.
>
>
> I disagree. But then I could be wrong.
> In the second (Canberra) example:
> Where a solid line exists between the two groups of lanes there is a
> 'legal barrier' that you cannot legally cross between the two groups of
> lanes (2 go right and 2 continues
>  straight on).
> Using the tag lanes does not convey this 'legal barrier'.
> Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be
> tagged, the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on ?
>
>
> The first one, in WA, appears less of an issue to me.  Perhaps the
> separation nodes could be closer to where the ways actually diverge,
> somewhere around the mid-point of the dashed lines, rather than at the
> start of them.
>
> The second one, near Canberra, has clearly diverged ways most of the way
> along the bridge.
>
> This intersection in Melbourne could potentially serve as an example:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-37.93265/145.15653
>
> Where there are actual medians between lanes, the ways separate,
> otherwise, they do not.
>
> Hope I haven't spoken out of turn.  The views expressed above are my
> understanding of the guidelines with respect to mapping what is actually
> there.
>
> Regards,
>
> JohnB
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:15 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
>> Resend to include list :-(
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message -
>> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
>> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 17:12
>> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Editing road geometry Australia
>> To: Petra Rajka - (p) 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 16:19, Petra Rajka - (p) 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I’m Petra and I am part of the mapping team at Telenav.
>>>
>>> Since January we started to work on road geometry in Canberra, Perth and
>>> Melbourne and we came across some intersections where roads (turn lanes)
>>> are mapped separately even where there is no physical divider or chevron
>>> markings.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, Petra, but you've got me, at least, a bit confused?
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/-32.09137/116.01315 certainly
>> appears to show traffic islands (better view with Esri Clarity)
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/-35.34078/149.16289 has marked
>> "turn right only" lanes.
>>
>> Sorry, can't see a problem with either of them, unless you're looking at
>> something I'm not seeing? :-)
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>> ___
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing 
> listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
> ___
> 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-cz] [Talk-cz] Mapy.cz a OSM data v CZ (a jinde)

[majka]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 23:22, Pavel Machek  wrote:

>
> Neumel by pomoci zakon o svobodnem pristupu k informacim? Proste si o
> ta "verejna" data zazadame s tim ze je chcem dal sirit, a oni bud musi
> rict ze jo, nebo vysvetlit proc to nejde.
>
> ...a vzhledem k tomu ze uz verejna jsou, budou tezko vysvetlovat ze to
> nejde :-).
>
> Maji tusim mesic na odpoved... a tohle uz by se nemuseli bat podepsat,
> protoze podle zakona nemaji moc volbu...
>

Tady si nerozumíme: České Budějovice otevřená data nikdy nikde neposkytla,
a jako nějaký uspořádaný soubor informací taky nikde nejsou. Samozřejmě ty
údaje v různých formách existují, netvrdím že to opravdu nijak nemají.

Na to obeslání dopisem se chystám, ale bude to zase jen a pouze první krok
k tomu, začít jednat. Nic z toho do 30 dní rozhodně nebude - maximálně jen
informace o tom, že otevřená data nemají.


Ohledně (nejen) zmapování sítí souhlasím s Honzou - kdokoli měl co dělat se
stavební firmou ví, jak "přesně" jsou ty sítě zakreslené. Těch překopnutých
kabelů / nabouraných potrubí na místě, kde podle správce sítě nic není,
případně je údajně naprosto jinde než ve skutečnosti, takových už bylo
nepočítaně. O posledním překopnutém kabelu z tohohle důvodu vím z doby tak
před dvěma měsíci, a to se ke mě většina těchhle záležitostí vůbec
nedostane.

Co k dispozici je, jsou zatím jakási data na jejich stránkách, informace
rozstrkané porůznu na jejich webu, stránkách dopravního podniku, stránkách
k modrým zonám, případně ve více či méně přístupné mapové aplikaci. Všude s
tisícem varování o zákazu použití těchhle údajů, vše v rámci "informací pro
občany". Takže například existuje je seznam dětských hřišť ve městě, ať už
v jakékoli kvalitě, ke kterému by se dalo vcelku bez problémů dostat
parsováním jejich stránek. Na tohle se ale budu těžko odvolávat, že to
"takhle" chceme, a vytahovat to zaručeně nikdo nebude. Seznam lamp
veřejného osvětlení s čísly měli (a mají) hasiči, veřejně to nikde není.

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

[Talk-cr] Eliminar 51 puntos extraños

[Jaime Gutiérrez Alfaro]

Hola,

Hace unos días me encontré un punto en el mapa (
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5694007726) que me pareció muy raro, por
una parte no hay ninguna agencia de viajes en ese lugar y por otra el
nombre que se le asigna es sospechoso. Revisé el conjunto de cambios (
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59886637#map=17/10.01819/-84.21136)
y para mi sorpresa habían otros 3 puntos igual de sospechosos, así que le
dejé un comentario al usuario pero no obtuve respuesta alguna.

Haciendo una consulta más amplia (http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/F9t) veo que
hay 51 puntos con estas dos características (nombre sospechoso y etiqueta
de agencia de viajes), todos editados por el mismo usuario.

Yo creo que esos puntos deben haber subido a osm por error y no deberían de
estar ahí, así que propongo eliminarlos todos. ¿qué opinan?

Pura vida,
Jaime.
___
Talk-cr mailing list
Talk-cr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cr

Re: [OSRM-talk] Install OSRM on MacOs

[Daniel Patterson]

Hi Didier,

  I mean, can you include the *full command* you ran?  At a minimum, I'd
expect `osrm-extract somemap.osm`.

  By default, `osrm-extract` will look for a file called `profiles/car.lua`
relative to the directory in which you invoke it.

  I would verify a few things:

1. Are you somehow accidentally using a different version of
`osrm-extract` from somewhere else on your system PATH (like /usr/local/bin
?)
2. Are you passing a `-p profiles/car.lua` parameter explicitly, or are
you depending on the default.

  Also note that modifying the `maxspeed_table_default` and `fr:urban`
values will only affect those road types.  This will only affect roads that
have `maxspeed=fr:urban` - other road types will not be affected (
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed#Values).

  If the area you're testing routes in doesn't have those tags, then there
will be no effect.

daniel

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 3:14 PM Didier Doumerc  wrote:

> I tried :
>
> osrm-extract
>>
>
> osrm-partition
>>
>
> osrm-customize
>>
>
> osrm-contract
>>
>
> That does not work.
>
> And I tried
>
> osrm-extract
>>
>
> osrm-contract
>>
>
> That does not work too.
>
>
> (iP) Didier
>
> Le 11 janv. 2019 à 18:45, Daniel Patterson  a écrit :
>
> What were the *exact* commands you ran?
>
> daniel
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:06 AM Didier Doumerc 
> wrote:
>
>> So I have modified car.lua file : maxspeed_table_default (all values
>> fixed to 50) and maxspeed_table ["fr:urban"] = 10 etc...
>>
>> I have
>> re-runned `osrm-extract/osrm-partition/osrm-customize/osrm-contract` and it
>> changes nothing. I get the same result.
>>
>> I must do something wrong...
>>
>> Didier
>>
>> Le mer.09/01/19 à 18:18, Daniel Patterson a écrit :
>>
>> Hi Didier,
>>
>>   The `car.lua` file are all the rules for deciding which OSM ways to
>> import, and what speeds to assign to them.  If you modify the Lua script,
>> you need to re-run `osrm-extract/osrm-contract`.
>>
>>   The OSRM demoserver at `router.project-osrm.org` *also* has traffic
>> data imported (using this mechanism:
>> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Traffic), supplied by
>> Mapbox, so travel times and routes may differ from datasets you generate
>> yourself just using the `car.lua` profile locally.
>>
>> daniel
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:47 AM Didier Doumerc 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for your answer Daniel. It works fine !
>>>
>>> I'm not sure to understand exactly the reason of "-p profiles/car.lua".
>>> Does the file car.lua contain speed limits ?
>>>
>>> Then, if I change a speed, I must run another osrm-extract ?
>>>
>>> In my exemple, the following request  :
>>>
>>>
>>> 10.168.221.144:5000/route/v1/driving/2.590291,44.360367;2.627096,44.980478?overview=false
>>>
>>> returns :
>>> 1:45 and 100,6 km
>>>
>>> The same request on
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car=44.3604%2C2.5903%3B44.9805%2C2.6271#map=10/44.6713/2.4894
>>> 
>>>
>>> returns :
>>> 1:50 and 103 km
>>>
>>> The second result is better than the first. Is it because of the car.lua
>>> file ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks+++
>>>
>>> Didier
>>>
>>> Le ven.04/01/19 à 18:52, Daniel Patterson a écrit :
>>>
>>> Check out the Wiki page at:
>>> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Running-OSRM
>>>
>>> With OSRM 5.x, the names of some of the tools changed.  You will now
>>> want to run `osrm-extract -p profiles/car.lua yourmap.osm` then
>>> `osrm-contract yourmap.osrm`
>>>
>>> daniel
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 9:33 AM Didier Doumerc 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 Since I can't upgrade whith a new map (crash when running
 osrm-prepare), I try to reinstall OSRM.

 Once I have reinstalled ORSM, I can extract the new map, but I don't
 find osrm-prepare anymore. I don't know what to do before running
 osrm-routed.

 Is someone can give me a link please to a clear and complete install
 method ?

 Thanks and happy new year...

 Didier

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

>>> ___
>>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>>
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>
>>
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>
> ___

Re: [OSRM-talk] Install OSRM on MacOs

[Didier Doumerc]

I tried :
>> osrm-extract

>> osrm-partition

>> osrm-customize

>> osrm-contract

That does not work. 

And I tried

>> osrm-extract

>> osrm-contract

That does not work too. 


(iP) Didier 

> Le 11 janv. 2019 à 18:45, Daniel Patterson  a écrit :
> 
> What were the *exact* commands you ran?
> 
> daniel
> 
>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:06 AM Didier Doumerc  wrote:
>> So I have modified car.lua file : maxspeed_table_default (all values fixed 
>> to 50) and maxspeed_table ["fr:urban"] = 10 etc...
>> 
>> I have re-runned `osrm-extract/osrm-partition/osrm-customize/osrm-contract` 
>> and it changes nothing. I get the same result.
>> 
>> I must do something wrong...
>> 
>> Didier
>> 
>>> Le mer.09/01/19 à 18:18, Daniel Patterson a écrit :
>>> 
>>> Hi Didier,
>>> 
>>>   The `car.lua` file are all the rules for deciding which OSM ways to 
>>> import, and what speeds to assign to them.  If you modify the Lua script, 
>>> you need to re-run `osrm-extract/osrm-contract`.
>>> 
>>>   The OSRM demoserver at `router.project-osrm.org` *also* has traffic data 
>>> imported (using this mechanism: 
>>> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Traffic), supplied by 
>>> Mapbox, so travel times and routes may differ from datasets you generate 
>>> yourself just using the `car.lua` profile locally.
>>> 
>>> daniel 
>>> 
 On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:47 AM Didier Doumerc  wrote:
 Thanks for your answer Daniel. It works fine !
 
 I'm not sure to understand exactly the reason of "-p profiles/car.lua". 
 Does the file car.lua contain speed limits ?
 
 Then, if I change a speed, I must run another osrm-extract ?
 
 In my exemple, the following request  :
 

 10.168.221.144:5000/route/v1/driving/2.590291,44.360367;2.627096,44.980478?overview=false
 
 returns :
1:45 and 100,6 km
 
 The same request on 
 https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car=44.3604%2C2.5903%3B44.9805%2C2.6271#map=10/44.6713/2.4894
 
 returns :
1:50 and 103 km
 
 The second result is better than the first. Is it because of the car.lua 
 file ?
 
 
 Thanks+++
 
 Didier
 
> Le ven.04/01/19 à 18:52, Daniel Patterson a écrit :
> 
> Check out the Wiki page at: 
> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Running-OSRM
> 
> With OSRM 5.x, the names of some of the tools changed.  You will now want 
> to run `osrm-extract -p profiles/car.lua yourmap.osm` then `osrm-contract 
> yourmap.osrm`
> 
> daniel
> 
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 9:33 AM Didier Doumerc  
>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Since I can't upgrade whith a new map (crash when running osrm-prepare), 
>> I try to reinstall OSRM. 
>> 
>> Once I have reinstalled ORSM, I can extract the new map, but I don't 
>> find osrm-prepare anymore. I don't know what to do before running 
>> osrm-routed.
>> 
>> Is someone can give me a link please to a clear and complete install 
>> method ?
>> 
>> Thanks and happy new year...
>> 
>> Didier
>> 
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
 
 ___
 OSRM-talk mailing list
 OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>> ___
>>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>> 
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
___
OSRM-talk mailing list
OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk

Re: [talk-cz] [Talk-cz] Mapy.cz a OSM data v CZ (a jinde)

[Jan Dudík]

Druhý problém bude stav dat, respektive formát, který jsou schopni
poskytnout.
Z vlastní praxe vím, v jakém stavu jsou data o inženýrských sítích. Velké
podniky typu Cetin nebo Eon mají a poskytují digitálně, ale přesnost (i
nadzemního vedení) bývá někdy dost špatná.
Vodovody a kanalizace mají někde digitálně, jinde jen na papíře, někde
vlastně neví nic.

Takže abychom se pak nedivili, když na žádost dostaneme dva papíry A4 s
černobílou okopírovanou ortofotomapou a na nich zvýrazňovačem pět teček
(parkovací automaty, aneb jak vypadá typický podklad od obce ke stávajícímu
veřejnému osvětlení)

JAnD







pá 11. 1. 2019 v 23:22 odesílatel Pavel Machek  napsal:

> Ahoj!
>
> > > Krome toho zrejme na komunitu (a/nebo spolek) budou smerovat jednani o
> > > vyuziti otevrenych dat ruznych mest, zmineny byly Ceske Budejovice a
> > > parkovaci automaty, takze to muze byt motivace pro nas zkusit se v
> > > tomto angazovat a do OSM patricna data dostat.
> > >
> >
> > Koukala jsem, že se můj mail z mobilu nějak nepovedl, takže shrnutí:
> >
> > České Budějovice jsou na hrozně dlouhé lokty. Otevřená data nikde nemají.
> > Informací je poměrně dost, jenže to na mě působí dojmem, že by jim nejvíc
> > vyhovovalo, abychom si to potichu okopčili, aby se pod souhlas nikdo z
> > magistrátu nemusel podepsat.
>
> Neumel by pomoci zakon o svobodnem pristupu k informacim? Proste si o
> ta "verejna" data zazadame s tim ze je chcem dal sirit, a oni bud musi
> rict ze jo, nebo vysvetlit proc to nejde.
>
> ...a vzhledem k tomu ze uz verejna jsou, budou tezko vysvetlovat ze to
> nejde :-).
>
> Maji tusim mesic na odpoved... a tohle uz by se nemuseli bat podepsat,
> protoze podle zakona nemaji moc volbu...
>
>
> Pavel
> --
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures)
> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
> ___
> talk-cz mailing list
> talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-cz] Praha zveřejnila otevřená data o MHD

[Pavel Machek]

On Fri 2019-01-11 23:26:56, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Ahoj!
> 
> > Chtěl jsem napsat, že je to starý, že to dávno znám. (Mám rozepsaný program
> > na zobrazování jízdních řádů - viz
> > https://github.com/severak/margarita4)
> 
> Jinak... na timetab.sf.net je historicky projekt pro praci s jizdnimi
> rady. Chvili na tom par studentu delalo...
> 
> Uz se na nej nejakou dobu nesahlo, ale ma to celkem jednoduchy format
> dat, umi to vyhledavat, a umi to i ruzne filtrovani...

A dokonce to ma i nejaky import z gtfs :-).

Aktualni verse je tady.

https://gitlab.com/tui/tui/tree/master/timetab

Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [Talk-ca] Business Improvement Area tagging

[Bernie Connors]

I can confirm the BIA boundaries are modified very infrequently in New
Brunswick.  I am not aware of any changes during the 10 years in my current
job disseminating GIS data for for the province.

Bernie.

On Wed, Jan 9, 2019, 2:45 PM Matthew Darwin  Hi Harald,
>
> Thanks for your thoughts on this.
>
> From my point of view BIAs are just as (just as not) verifiable on the
> ground as a municipality boundary.  Typically there are gateway signs to
> welcome you to the area, which makes them more concrete then say a census
> area. eg
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=45.331875926798006=-75.892906002273=19.36453946996015=RopOOODg6gMzdE5gHeicfA=photo=0.4894869294322967=0.5003=0
> or
> https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=45.397102=-75.7423=17=pEs0qv8z4ielD2jmRpJhqw=photo=0.11741761625032077=0.5560308877526301=2.639780018331806
> so just like a municipality boundary there is some physical info, but of
> course doesn't tell you the exact boundary area.
>
> In my experience BIA boundaries don't change much one they are created
> but of course I am not familiar of what happens outside of Ontario
> certainly I wouldn't expect them to change more than the boundaries we
> already have in OSM for municipalities and the wards within them which seem
> to change change every decade or so in a growing/changing municipality.
>
>
> On 2019-01-09 12:34 p.m., Harald Kliems wrote:
>
> To me this is a clear case of something that doesn't belong in OSM. It
> sounds like the boundaries aren't verifiable on the ground and may change
> frequently. Therefore any data in OSM would go stale quickly and the only
> verification of accuracy would be to go back to the source.
> Yes, we have deviations from the "verifiable on the ground" rule, but
> we've had similar discussions for census boundaries, ridings/election
> districts, and on the the talk-us list recently about Bureau of Land
> Management boundaries.
>
> For your analysis of businesses within a BIA, you can just download the
> OSM and BIA boundary data separately and do the analysis in the GIS
> application of your choice.
>
>  Harald.
>
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:32 PM Matthew Darwin  wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I'm not sure if this applies to other provinces or not, so I thought I
>> would ask here.
>>
>> In Ontario there is a concept of "Business Improvement Area" ("BIA" for
>> short) that has the power to tax businesses within their zone  (see
>> http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1529.aspx for details).
>>
>> I want to tag these in OSM, so then you can run a query to find all
>> businesses within a BIA. Sometimes the boundaries of the BIA are very tight
>> and just cover things that are actual businesses, and sometimes the
>> boundaries of a BIA are very loose and cover lots of area including
>> residential... and when a new business comes up later in that area it
>> automatically is a part of the BIA.
>>
>> I am thinking that the *relation type=boundary, boundary=local_authority
>> *might be applicable here, and define either a Canada specific
>> definition maybe just Ontario, depending if the concept exists elsewhere.
>>
>> I would like to get people's opinion on this idea  Or please suggest
>> something else.
>>
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aboundary%3Dlocal_authority
>>
>>- type =boundary
>>
>>- boundary =
>>local_authority
>>- name =*
>>- local_authority:CA
>>
>> 
>>=BIA
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>
>
> --
> Please use encrypted communication whenever possible!
> Key-ID: 0x34cb93972f186565
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [talk-cz] Praha zveřejnila otevřená data o MHD

[Pavel Machek]

Ahoj!

> Chtěl jsem napsat, že je to starý, že to dávno znám. (Mám rozepsaný program
> na zobrazování jízdních řádů - viz
> https://github.com/severak/margarita4)

Jinak... na timetab.sf.net je historicky projekt pro praci s jizdnimi
rady. Chvili na tom par studentu delalo...

Uz se na nej nejakou dobu nesahlo, ale ma to celkem jednoduchy format
dat, umi to vyhledavat, a umi to i ruzne filtrovani...

Jo a ma to fajn fotku jako logo :-).

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-cz] [Talk-cz] Mapy.cz a OSM data v CZ (a jinde)

[Pavel Machek]

Ahoj!

> > Krome toho zrejme na komunitu (a/nebo spolek) budou smerovat jednani o
> > vyuziti otevrenych dat ruznych mest, zmineny byly Ceske Budejovice a
> > parkovaci automaty, takze to muze byt motivace pro nas zkusit se v
> > tomto angazovat a do OSM patricna data dostat.
> >
> 
> Koukala jsem, že se můj mail z mobilu nějak nepovedl, takže shrnutí:
> 
> České Budějovice jsou na hrozně dlouhé lokty. Otevřená data nikde nemají.
> Informací je poměrně dost, jenže to na mě působí dojmem, že by jim nejvíc
> vyhovovalo, abychom si to potichu okopčili, aby se pod souhlas nikdo z
> magistrátu nemusel podepsat.

Neumel by pomoci zakon o svobodnem pristupu k informacim? Proste si o
ta "verejna" data zazadame s tim ze je chcem dal sirit, a oni bud musi
rict ze jo, nebo vysvetlit proc to nejde.

...a vzhledem k tomu ze uz verejna jsou, budou tezko vysvetlovat ze to
nejde :-).

Maji tusim mesic na odpoved... a tohle uz by se nemuseli bat podepsat,
protoze podle zakona nemaji moc volbu...

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Warin]

On 11/01/19 21:45, Markus wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:

On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:


See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:

   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206

Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
Albany Highway.

 and
 form a double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png


I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.

+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
like that on site.


   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891

Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
mapped with turn:lanes.

+1


-1

I disagree. But then I could be wrong.

In the above (Canberra) example:

Where a solid line exists between the two groups of lanes there is a
'legal barrier' that you cannot legally cross between the two groups of
lanes (2 go right and 2 continues

 straight on).

Using the tag lanes does not convey this 'legal barrier'.

Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be
tagged, the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on ?

Note: this is also raised on the Australian list too.. so I have said the same 
thing there too.


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

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Editing road geometry Australia

[Warin]

On 11/01/19 19:51, John Berkers wrote:

Long time lurker, some time editor.

It is my understanding that marked "turn right only lanes" are not 
cause to create divergent ways.  These should be tagged using the 
"lanes" key as per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes


Creating divergent ways is considered "Tagging for the renderer" as 
the documented separation is not physically there.


I disagree. But then I could be wrong.
In the second (Canberra) example:
Where a solid line exists between the two groups of lanes there is a 
'legal barrier' that you cannot legally cross between the two groups of 
lanes (2 go right and 2 continues

 straight on).
Using the tag lanes does not convey this 'legal barrier'.
Also using the tag lanes how can the turn restrictions that exist be 
tagged, the right 2 must turn right and the left 2 must go straight on ?


The first one, in WA, appears less of an issue to me. Perhaps the 
separation nodes could be closer to where the ways actually diverge, 
somewhere around the mid-point of the dashed lines, rather than at the 
start of them.


The second one, near Canberra, has clearly diverged ways most of the 
way along the bridge.


This intersection in Melbourne could potentially serve as an example:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-37.93265/145.15653

Where there are actual medians between lanes, the ways separate, 
otherwise, they do not.


Hope I haven't spoken out of turn.  The views expressed above are my 
understanding of the guidelines with respect to mapping what is 
actually there.


Regards,

JohnB



On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:15 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Resend to include list :-(

Thanks

Graeme


-- Forwarded message -
From: *Graeme Fitzpatrick* mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 17:12
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Editing road geometry Australia
To: Petra Rajka - (p) mailto:petra.ra...@telenav.com>>



On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 16:19, Petra Rajka - (p)
mailto:petra.ra...@telenav.com>> wrote:

Hi everyone,

I’m Petra and I am part of the mapping team at Telenav.

Since January we started to work on road geometry in Canberra,
Perth and Melbourne and we came across some intersections
where roads (turn lanes) are mapped separately even where
there is no physical divider or chevron markings.


Sorry, Petra, but you've got me, at least, a bit confused?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/-32.09137/116.01315
certainly appears to show traffic islands (better view with Esri
Clarity)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/-35.34078/149.16289 has
marked "turn right only" lanes.

Sorry, can't see a problem with either of them, unless you're
looking at something I'm not seeing? :-)

Thanks

Graeme
___
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



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

Re: [Talk-es] Participación en Jornadas SIG Libre 2019

[Miguel Sevilla-Callejo]

La propuesta la acabamos de enviar a las Jornadas y a quedado de la
siguiente manera (corto y pego de la salida del formulario de envío):

Formulario de talleres

El formulario se ha enviado correctamente

*Nombre:*
Miguel

*Apellidos:*
Sevilla-Callejo

*Empresa:*
Comunidad española de editores de OpenStreetMap y Grupo Mapeado
Colaborativo / Geoinquietos Zaragoza

*Correo electrónico:*
mig...@mapcolabora.org

*Resumen:*
Nuestra propuesta de taller tiene como objetivo realizar una introducción a
la edición y el trabajo de datos en OpenStreetMap adaptándolo a la
inclusión de elementos de accesibilidad aprovechando la línea de los
trabajos que diversas personas de la comunidad española de OSM vienen
realizando. El objetivo de esta propuesta es hacer que OpenStreetMap sea
una herramienta útil para un colectivo ignorado por la mayoría de mapas:
las personas con diversidad funcional, mediante la introducción de
información relativa a la accesibilidad de peatones a nivel urbano. Para
ello planteamos una sesión teórico práctica estructurada en los siguientes
apartados: a) OpenStreetMap y la toma de datos sobre el terreno
organización y estructura de los datos en OpenStreetMap, herramientas y
funcionamiento para el trabajo de campo: FieldPapers, Mapillary,
StreetComplete, Vespucci y OSMAnd. b) “Mapping party” de toma de datos de
accesibilidad de la zona contigua a los talleres c) Introducción de los
datos de campo a OSM a través del editor avanzado JOSM d) Consultas básicas
a OSM (Overpass API) y visualización sencilla de los datos de accesibilidad
del espacio de estudio. e) Monta tu propio grupo de mapeado La organización
horaria podría variarse para adaptarse mejor a las jornadas y poder hacer
participar a los asistentes en la parte de toma de datos sobre el terreno.
Por ejemplo, se podría realizar la toma de datos el día anterior tras las
comunicaciones, abierta a todo el público asistente. En este caso, el
taller podríamos reorientarlo profundizando en el aspecto teórico, tratando
con más detalle la preparación de la toma de datos, su procesado y la
visualización.

*Modalidad:*
Taller

*Nivel del taller:*
Medio

--
*Miguel Sevilla-Callejo*
Doctor en Geografía


On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 22:01, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo 
wrote:

> Hola,
>
> Para agilizar el tema y ala vista de que hay que decir algo en poco menos
> de dos días estamos moviendo el tema varias personas en un grupo de
> Telegram y escribiendo fuera de esta lista. Si alguna persona quiere estar
> informada y/o quiere participar que lo diga y la incluimos.
>
> Por el momento estamos Lanxana, José Luis Infante, algunas personas de
> Zaragoza y otras de Barcelona.
>
> Aún no hemos decidido nada en concreto, cuando haya algo claro lo
> comentaremos.
>
> Un saludo
>
> --
> *Miguel Sevilla-Callejo*
> Doctor en Geografía
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 at 19:46, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo 
> wrote:
>
>> Hola,
>>
>> Reboto este correo que he enviado a la lista Talk-es de OSM por si
>> hubiera alguien interesado en el tema, especialmente, en lo referente a
>> estudios de accesibilidad y OpenStreetMap, y que quiera sumarse a un
>> potencial taller + mapping party y/o una comunicación en las jornadas.
>>
>> Un saludo y FELIZ AÑO!
>>
>> --
>> *Miguel Sevilla-Callejo*
>> Doctor en Geografía
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message -
>> From: Miguel Sevilla-Callejo 
>> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 at 19:40
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-es] Participación en Jornadas SIG Libre 2019
>> To: Discusión en Español de OpenStreetMap 
>>
>>
>> Hola a todos
>>
>> Mi intención era ir a las jornada de SIG Libre de este año y claro está,
>> me encantaría poder llevar algo de OpenStreetMap, ya fuera de la comunidad
>> en general, como lo que propone Lanxana del catastro o algo propio de lo
>> que estamos haciendo en el grupo de Mapeado Colaborativo en Zaragoza, o
>> algo en conjunto y mixto.
>>
>> Personalmente me había planteado la posibilidad de llevar, al menos una
>> comunicación sobre el tema de la accesibilidad usando OpenStreetMap, al
>> hilo del trabajo que presentó y que sigue haciendo Nacho Orte [1] pero me
>> gustaría ir más allá si hay más gente interesada de la comunidad y preparar
>> no solo una comunicación si no también un taller sobre el tema que, además
>> incluyera una mapping party en Girona en los días de las jornadas. Así, de
>> paso aprovechamos para coordinarnos todas las personas interesadas en este
>> interesante tema. ¿Alguien interesado?
>>
>> Con lo del tema del catastro, ya sea solo para una comunicación y/o más
>> un taller usando JOSM me presto ayudar e incluso impartir la presentación
>> pero yo/nosotros en Zaragona no me/nos he/hemos metido aún con lo de la
>> importación del Catastro y mi/nuestra experiencia es reducida al respecto.
>>
>> Creo que la cosa es saber quien vamos a ir, qué intereses tenemos y hasta
>> dónde podemos llegar. Por el momento creo que solo hemos confirmado nuestra
>> intención firme de asistir Lanxana, Nacho y yo
>>
>> ¿Quién se une?
>>
>> 

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Warin]

A left turn there would be legal, unless there is a local sign.
So I would not place a turn restriction on it base on satellite imagery.



On 12/01/19 07:47, Jem wrote:
Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn 
restriction here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeline.


I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does that form part 
of the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of whether there is a sign 
present.



On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 22:53, Marc Gemis > wrote:


If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen mailto:md...@xs4all.nl>> wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more
looking to
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but
I also
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless
because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> >

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the
past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus
mailto:selfishseaho...@gmail.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen mailto:md...@xs4all.nl>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> 
>  See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> 
>        * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >>  and
> >>  form a
> >> double-rectangle,
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> >>
> >>
> >

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway
Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed
> >> like that on site.
> >>
>        * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like
that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Jem]

Spot on. Although the routing engine data could impose a turn restriction
here based upon geometry as part of their data pipeline.

I wonder if it is legal to turn there and, if not, does that form part of
the ground truth IRT OSM, regardless of whether there is a sign present.


On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 22:53, Marc Gemis  wrote:

> If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
> router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
> you turn left at the traffic signals.
>
> m.
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >
> > I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
> > the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
> > don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> > The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> > drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
> >
> > I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> > you never get that route anyway.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Maarten
> >
> > On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> > >> I'd map that place like that:
> > >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> > >
> > > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> > > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> > >
> > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> > >>>
> > 
> >  See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> > 
> >    * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> > >>>
> > >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> > >> Coming from
> > >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> > >> to the
> > >>> Albany Highway.
> > >>
> > >>  and
> > >>  form a
> > >> double-rectangle,
> > >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> > >>
> > >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> > >> are
> > >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> > >> The two
> > >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> > >>
> > >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> > >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> > >> signed
> > >> like that on site.
> > >>
> >    * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> > >>>
> > >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> > >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> > >>
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >>
> > >> Markus
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> 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
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap at CES

[François Lacombe]

Hi all

As the CES ends by the end of today, I'd find great to list any interesting
insight or uses some of you may have seen during this week there.

I wasn't in Las Vegas and I didn't notice many reuse of renders nor data.

What about you?

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Mise à jour du rendu "hydro"

[François Lacombe]

Merci Christian, ce rendu est super utile.

Comme je vois les réservoirs visibles sur la carte, il faudrait que je
fasse des demandes d'opendata à tous les services de l'eau pour avoir plus
d'infos.
Est-ce que c'est facile de faire une extraction de ces points depuis la BD
Carthage ?
Quels sont les attributs disponibles ?

Bonne soirée

François

Le jeu. 10 janv. 2019 à 09:29, Christian Quest  a
écrit :

> J'ai mis à jour hier soir les données de la couche "Hydro" qui combinent
> la BD Carthage (un peu ancienne maintenant) et la couche hydro de la BD
> Topo (en licence ouverte depuis déjà quelque temps).
>
> Infos ici:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Serveurs/tile.openstreetmap.fr#Hydro
>
> Vue directe:
> https://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=16=48.81578=2.40922=00B00FT
>
> En bleu: source BD Carthage
> En Mauve: source BD Topo Hydro (octobre 2018)
>
> --
> Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSRM-talk] Install OSRM on MacOs

[Daniel Patterson]

What were the *exact* commands you ran?

daniel

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:06 AM Didier Doumerc  wrote:

> So I have modified car.lua file : maxspeed_table_default (all values fixed
> to 50) and maxspeed_table ["fr:urban"] = 10 etc...
>
> I have
> re-runned `osrm-extract/osrm-partition/osrm-customize/osrm-contract` and it
> changes nothing. I get the same result.
>
> I must do something wrong...
>
> Didier
>
> Le mer.09/01/19 à 18:18, Daniel Patterson a écrit :
>
> Hi Didier,
>
>   The `car.lua` file are all the rules for deciding which OSM ways to
> import, and what speeds to assign to them.  If you modify the Lua script,
> you need to re-run `osrm-extract/osrm-contract`.
>
>   The OSRM demoserver at `router.project-osrm.org` *also* has traffic
> data imported (using this mechanism:
> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Traffic), supplied by
> Mapbox, so travel times and routes may differ from datasets you generate
> yourself just using the `car.lua` profile locally.
>
> daniel
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:47 AM Didier Doumerc 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your answer Daniel. It works fine !
>>
>> I'm not sure to understand exactly the reason of "-p profiles/car.lua".
>> Does the file car.lua contain speed limits ?
>>
>> Then, if I change a speed, I must run another osrm-extract ?
>>
>> In my exemple, the following request  :
>>
>>
>> 10.168.221.144:5000/route/v1/driving/2.590291,44.360367;2.627096,44.980478?overview=false
>>
>> returns :
>> 1:45 and 100,6 km
>>
>> The same request on
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car=44.3604%2C2.5903%3B44.9805%2C2.6271#map=10/44.6713/2.4894
>> 
>>
>> returns :
>> 1:50 and 103 km
>>
>> The second result is better than the first. Is it because of the car.lua
>> file ?
>>
>>
>> Thanks+++
>>
>> Didier
>>
>> Le ven.04/01/19 à 18:52, Daniel Patterson a écrit :
>>
>> Check out the Wiki page at:
>> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Running-OSRM
>>
>> With OSRM 5.x, the names of some of the tools changed.  You will now want
>> to run `osrm-extract -p profiles/car.lua yourmap.osm` then `osrm-contract
>> yourmap.osrm`
>>
>> daniel
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 9:33 AM Didier Doumerc 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Since I can't upgrade whith a new map (crash when running osrm-prepare),
>>> I try to reinstall OSRM.
>>>
>>> Once I have reinstalled ORSM, I can extract the new map, but I don't
>>> find osrm-prepare anymore. I don't know what to do before running
>>> osrm-routed.
>>>
>>> Is someone can give me a link please to a clear and complete install
>>> method ?
>>>
>>> Thanks and happy new year...
>>>
>>> Didier
>>>
>>> ___
>>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>>
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>
>>
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>>
> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>
>
> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>
___
OSRM-talk mailing list
OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk

[OSM-talk-fr] La carte Près de Chez Nous PDCN

[Vincent Bergeot]

Bonjour,

nous en avions parlé sur cette liste il y a quelques temps et le 
développeur principal de Près de Chez Nous est venu au dernier SotM-fr à 
Bordeaux, pour rencontrer un peu mieux OSM, les contributeurs, ...


Il vient de me dire qu'un certain nombre de POI d'OSM sont utilisés et 
mis à jour de manière hebdomadaire (magasin bio et hackerspace).


C'est par ici : 
https://presdecheznous.fr/annuaire#/carte/@46.77,1.80,6z?cat=all


Bonne exploration de cette carte qui agrège beaucoup beaucoup de données !


--
Vincent Bergeot


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

Re: [Talk-de] Tag zu Id-referenzierten Ways zufügen?

[Jochen Topf]

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 05:30:51PM +0100, Holger Bruch wrote:
> Mit welchem Werkzeug könnte ich für ca. 1000 über Id identifizierte Ways
> einer pbf-Datei ein Tag hinzufügen?
> 
> Ich dachte an Osmosis, dessen tag-transform allerdings noch kein
> Matching per Id unterstützt.

Da gibts viele Möglichkeiten. Z.B. ein kleines PyOsmium-Skript. Oder Du
schreibst ein kleines Skript, was mit "osmium getid" die Ways
rausfriemelt, als OPL speichert und darin den Tag ändert und alles
wieder zusammensetzt. Ein bischen programmieren wirst Du aber schon
müssen.

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  joc...@remote.org  https://www.jochentopf.com/  +49-351-31778688

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

[OSM-talk-fr] OSM hack week-end à Karlsruhe

[Christine Karch]

Bonne année à toutes et tous!

Il y a un OSM hack week-end à Karlsruhe en février:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Karlsruhe_Hack_Weekend_February_2019

Comme toujours vous êtes invité!

Christine

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

[Talk-de] Tag zu Id-referenzierten Ways zufügen?

[Holger Bruch]

Mit welchem Werkzeug könnte ich für ca. 1000 über Id identifizierte Ways
einer pbf-Datei ein Tag hinzufügen?

Ich dachte an Osmosis, dessen tag-transform allerdings noch kein
Matching per Id unterstützt.

Danke und Grüße,
Holger


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

[OSM-talk] OSM and Urban planning

[john whelan]

In my mind I'd always thought about using OSM for urban planning to be
something for places with little money such as the third world but it
appears that in many places the economic boundaries of a city do not
coincide with the political boundaries and different levels of government
are involved in transport planning for example.

Locally in Ottawa we have two city councils, two provinces, federal
government and something called the NCC all involved in transportation
projects.

Rail lines and bus lines are justified by how many households are on the
line and how many businesses.

So how does this impact OpenStreetMap?

We are seeing a lot of buildings either being imported or mapped currently
across the world.  I'm not sure what the percentage of buildings and
building tags are but I suspect it is an increasing part of the database.

An apartment block has a lot of households so I can see an interest in
adding the number of apartments.

NGOs want to minimise the number of things such as clinics but at the same
time maximise the number of people who can access them.

Some groups are questioning city planners and using open source tools to
draw up alternative plans.  In Ottawa for example with at least six sources
of data it makes sense to use something like OSM to get everything in the
same format.

Commerical companies such as UrbanSim are using open data and use
OpenStreetMap in their presentations.  UrbanSim is a University spin off so
not quite a conventional commercial company and the same University does
provide a number of free open source programs to do planning on github.

Locally a mapper is interested in adding BIAs or Business Improvement Areas.

Land use by local city planners is divided into zones with local names such
as IP4 or TD3.

I'm not sure we should do anything at all but I think we should at least be
aware that OSM will start to see more urban planning related input and it
might be time to think about what the implications are.

Do we need some sort of standardised names in place of IP$ and BIA for
example?

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

Re: [talk-cz] Mapy do videa

[xkomc...@centrum.cz]

Asi úplně nechápu, co máš za data a co s nimi chceš udělat. Máš 
vektorová data, ze kterých chceš udělat (vektorové) dlaždice, ty dát 
jako overlay, nastylovat a použít v mapě?


Vygeneruj z vektorových dat vektorové dlaždice pomocí MapTiler Desktopu 
- https://support.maptiler.com/i237-simple-vector-tiles-generating


Ty nahraj na MapTiler Cloud a tam si je nastyluj - 
https://support.maptiler.com/i23-host-own-geodata


A máš z toho normální mapu. Nebo jde o jiný use-case?

Případně tam chceš mít i něco navíc, třeba postupný vývoj v čase - viz 
třeba https://timemachineatlas.eu/ ? (datový model jsme použili stejný 
jako je OpenStreetMap, akorát rozšířený o start_date a end_date)


On 11. 01. 19 16:29, Mikoláš Štrajt wrote:

Zdar,
budu dělat takové krátké video o vývoji železniční sítě v Praze.

Víte někdo, jakým programem pro to vyrenderovat mapy?

V podstatě mi v praxi asi bude stačit screenshot + úprava v malování, 
akorát třeba zoomování na mapu pak bude vypadat nekvalitně. Proto se 
ptám, zda někdo nezná nějaký specializovaný nástroj.


--
Severák

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Lees Footpath mapping: results

[Nick Whitelegg]

Not related to the mapping party... but have just found a bug in MapThePaths 
which prevented the permalink feature working correctly, so the link in Jerry's 
message didn't take you to the right area.


I've fixed this now, so the link should take you to the area Jerry's talking 
about.


Apologies for the bug!


Nick


From: SK53 
Sent: 09 January 2019 21:17:18
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Lees Footpath mapping: results

Dear All,

I think we had a successful day last Saturday. I've added various snippets on 
the wiki page of what was surveyed and what has got into 
OSM
 so far:

If you look at Map the 
Paths,
 there is still a big patch of virgin territory to the immediate W of the area 
we focused on this time. I think I'm right is saying that this is the largest 
patch of unmapped footpaths near the big cities of the East Midlands.

I may suggest another day perhaps in March. There is a pub in Long Lane which 
is a bit closer as a meeting point, and maybe The Ostrich is still open too. A 
couple of people asked about public transport, but I'm afraid the area has next 
to no bus service which is probably one reason it hasn't been explored by 
OSMers. However, lifts can be arranged from Derby station (and possibly others) 
from one of the regular participants.

Regards,

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

[talk-au] Editing signposts in Australia

[Ioana Moldovan - (p)]

Hi everyone!

This is Ioana and I am part of the mapping team at Telenav.

To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, our mapping team 
is planning to start editing signposts in Australia. We have done some research 
regarding the tagging guidelines and came across a few cases that we would like 
to hear your opinion about.

  1.  We observed that the non-alphanumeric highway shields (eg. NR, NH, S) do 
not appear as information at destination:ref but rather at destination:network 
(Perth and Brisbane) and network (rest of country). For example, please take a 
look at the signpost tags of the motorway_link from -37.7150366, 144.8349989 
(https://openstreetcam.org/details/1314639/589/track-info ). It has the 
following tags of interest:

network=S
ref=40

According to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Destination_details, we 
would join them into destination:ref=S40. What do you think about adding the 
ref number that appears on signpost in this format?
  2.  Also, please take a look here: -32.0463458, 115.8528017 
(https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo=rW9JCy0hWN4nmwQK0pVHAg=-32.046444=115.853194=17).
 We would add the information from this signpost on the motorway_link from OSM 
as following:

destination:ref=NR1;S2
destination=Perth City

What do you think about this format? How would you add Fwy NORTH in OSM as it 
is not a specific destination:street but a cardinal direction?

Looking forward for your opinions!

Best wishes,
Ioana
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-cz] Fantom schránka 41007:221

[majka]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 15:57, Marián Kyral  wrote:

> Jinak: hodně zajímavá náves :-D
>

Netuším, co se Ti nelíbí. Vždyť je to uprostřed vsi a mají tam ze všech
stran "spoustu" místa pro odstavení auta. Náves jak vyšitá :)
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [talk-cz] Mapy do videa

[majka]

Jestli to chápu dobře:
Což takhle zneužít GpxAnimator? Podstrčit mu to, co chceš zobrazit jako
gpx, které vytvoříš v nějakém externím programu.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 16:29, Mikoláš Štrajt  wrote:

> Zdar,
> budu dělat takové krátké video o vývoji železniční sítě v Praze.
>
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[talk-cz] Mapy do videa

[Mikoláš Štrajt]

Zdar,

budu dělat takové krátké video o vývoji železniční sítě v Praze.




Víte někdo, jakým programem pro to vyrenderovat mapy?





V podstatě mi v praxi asi bude stačit screenshot + úprava v malování, akorát
třeba zoomování na mapu pak bude vypadat nekvalitně. Proto se ptám, zda
někdo nezná nějaký specializovaný nástroj.




--


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Google deletes map of Kurdistan - can we do better?

[Andreas Vilén]

Yes, obviously, but is there anything that marks a certain area as Kurdistan? I 
haven’t found anything.

Google maps doesn’t delete the entire map area but aren’t allowed to show which 
area is normally called Kurdistan for Turkish citizens since Turkey denies its 
existance.

/Andreas

Skickat från min iPhone

> 11 jan. 2019 kl. 07:52 skrev Frederik Ramm :
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> On 10.01.19 22:36, Andreas Vilén wrote:
>> However there
>> doesn't seem to be any map that covers the entire area.
> 
> I don't know what you mean. Of course OSM covers the entire area?
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
> 
> -- 
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> 
> ___
> 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-cz] Fantom schránka 41007:221

[Marián Kyral]

Díky.

Opraví to i v datech že?




Jinak: hodně zajímavá náves :-D

https://mapy.cz/zakladni?x=14.3113934=50.6389111=20=1=ophoto;
pid=28713442=0.189=1.257=-0.078=addr=3337




Marián



-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Miroslav Suchy 
Komu: talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
Datum: 11. 1. 2019 14:39:17
Předmět: Re: [talk-cz] Fantom schránka 41007:221
"Dne 10. 01. 19 v 22:54 Marián Kyral napsal(a):
>
> *41007;Depo Lovosice 70;221náves12:05;1-5 - pracovní dny (pondělí
až pátek)**
> *


Odpoved:

schránka SLI č. 221 se nachází v obci Úštěk, část obce Třebín a nachází se
na
návsi u informační tabule u č. E24.


Mirek Suchy

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Petra Rajka - (p)]

On this post you can find an image about how we would edit these cases: 
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/AU-NZ_mapping_projects/issues/5

Regards,
Petra
-Original Message-
From: Marc Gemis  
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 2:51 PM
To: Maarten Deen 
Cc:  
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a router can 
recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let you turn left at the 
traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen  wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking 
> to the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I 
> also don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually 
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because 
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.091
> > 4374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a 
> > no-left-turn restriction from 
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fosm.org%2fway%2f
> > 581948344=E,1,W8BdLprvnr_q3VoE2HKm-GlIytkKYQULG3mOBHiBI8vG2y5JXAoN
> > LEY8-fMtwYvRkBnGK0ch4-IOcbB3wzWup37kJNoeevnkcy6X0VuERw,,=1 at
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fosm.org%2fnode%2f5680879176=E,1,ZxAUpmFrwYlftR9DaOw1l5vhNAXqhinLqXEffS-6crFbK-1zCIBJ5LeOZYHo8m0zosxwukjDFb90XhhDZf5gTIPak1Wh1_nyaqJLJ6dQrUMx7UXqf3d6b8pFnw,,=1
> >  I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already 
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> 
>  See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> 
>    * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >>  and 
> >>  form a 
> >> double-rectangle, but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that 
> >> place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.091
> > 4374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are 
> >> signed like that on site.
> >>
>    * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but 
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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

___
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-au] Fwd: Editing road geometry Australia

[Petra Rajka - (p)]

On this post you can find an image about how we would edit these cases: 
https://github.com/TelenavMapping/AU-NZ_mapping_projects/issues/5

Regards,
Petra
From: John Berkers 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 10:51 AM
To: OSM-Au 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Editing road geometry Australia

Long time lurker, some time editor.

It is my understanding that marked "turn right only  lanes" are not cause to 
create divergent ways.  These should be tagged using the "lanes" key as per 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes

Creating divergent ways is considered "Tagging for the renderer" as the 
documented separation is not physically there.

The first one, in WA, appears less of an issue to me.  Perhaps the separation 
nodes could be closer to where the ways actually diverge, somewhere around the 
mid-point of the dashed lines, rather than at the start of them.

The second one, near Canberra, has clearly diverged ways most of the way along 
the bridge.

This intersection in Melbourne could potentially serve as an example:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-37.93265/145.15653

Where there are actual medians between lanes, the ways separate, otherwise, 
they do not.

Hope I haven't spoken out of turn.  The views expressed above are my 
understanding of the guidelines with respect to mapping what is actually there.

Regards,

JohnB



On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:15 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Resend to include list :-(

Thanks

Graeme

-- Forwarded message -
From: Graeme Fitzpatrick mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 17:12
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Editing road geometry Australia
To: Petra Rajka - (p) mailto:petra.ra...@telenav.com>>


On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 16:19, Petra Rajka - (p) 
mailto:petra.ra...@telenav.com>> wrote:
Hi everyone,

I’m Petra and I am part of the mapping team at Telenav.
Since January we started to work on road geometry in Canberra, Perth and 
Melbourne and we came across some intersections where roads (turn lanes) are 
mapped separately even where there is no physical divider or chevron markings.

Sorry, Petra, but you've got me, at least, a bit confused?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/-32.09137/116.01315 certainly appears 
to show traffic islands (better view with Esri Clarity)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/-35.34078/149.16289 has marked "turn 
right only" lanes.

Sorry, can't see a problem with either of them, unless you're looking at 
something I'm not seeing? :-)

Thanks

Graeme
___
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-es] "Guía de edición organizada" en OSM publicada

[dcapillae]

Hola.

Creo que las directrices de edición organizada se refieren sobre todo a
empresas u organizaciones independientes de OpenStreetMap que desean editar
el mapa a través de actividades grupales organizadas específicamente a tal
efecto. No son directrices de aplicación para la edición en general ni para
nosotros en particular como comunidad de mapeadores, salvo actividades muy
concretas. El ámbito de aplicación de las directrices se especifica en la
sección «Ámbito» y también en la página «Edición organizada» [1]. En esa
página se indica además dónde encontrar algunas empresas y organizaciones
que cuentan con equipos de edición organizada [2].

De aplicación a nuestra comunidad de mapeadores individuales son las ya
conocidas, por otra parte, comunes a las actividades de edición organizada y
que también se especifican en dicha página: «Cómo mapeamos», «Buenas
prácticas», «Código de conducta de ediciones automatizadas» y «Directrices
de importación». Si alguien organiza una actividad grupal coordinada para
mapear algún aspecto sustancial del mapa, por supuesto debe tener en cuenta
esas directrices que le son de aplicación. No suponen un mayor esfuerzo, son
más bien un recordatorio de que debemos documentar lo que hacemos cuando
trabajamos en grupo, algo que ya deberíamos tener asumido.

Respecto a la importancia de documentar las actividades, los progresos y
toda la información del proyecto mediante el wiki, incluidos los trabajos de
traducción, ya conocéis mi opinión. Si la lectura de estas directrices sirve
para que empecemos a darle un mejor y mayor uso al wiki, pues tanto mejor,
aunque creo que se orientan en otra dirección.


[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Edici%C3%B3n_organizada
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Organised_Editing_Teams




-
Daniel Capilla 
OSM user: dcapillae 
--
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: [OSRM-talk] Install OSRM on MacOs

[Didier Doumerc]

So I have modified car.lua file : maxspeed_table_default (all values fixed to 
50) and maxspeed_table ["fr:urban"] = 10 etc...

I have re-runned `osrm-extract/osrm-partition/osrm-customize/osrm-contract` and 
it changes nothing. I get the same result.

I must do something wrong...

Didier

Le mer.09/01/19 à 18:18, Daniel Patterson a écrit :

> Hi Didier,
> 
>   The `car.lua` file are all the rules for deciding which OSM ways to import, 
> and what speeds to assign to them.  If you modify the Lua script, you need to 
> re-run `osrm-extract/osrm-contract`.
> 
>   The OSRM demoserver at `router.project-osrm.org` *also* has traffic data 
> imported (using this mechanism: 
> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Traffic), supplied by 
> Mapbox, so travel times and routes may differ from datasets you generate 
> yourself just using the `car.lua` profile locally.
> 
> daniel 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:47 AM Didier Doumerc  wrote:
> Thanks for your answer Daniel. It works fine !
> 
> I'm not sure to understand exactly the reason of "-p profiles/car.lua". Does 
> the file car.lua contain speed limits ?
> 
> Then, if I change a speed, I must run another osrm-extract ?
> 
> In my exemple, the following request  :
> 
>   
> 10.168.221.144:5000/route/v1/driving/2.590291,44.360367;2.627096,44.980478?overview=false
> 
> returns :
>   1:45 and 100,6 km
> 
> The same request on 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car=44.3604%2C2.5903%3B44.9805%2C2.6271#map=10/44.6713/2.4894
> 
> returns :
>   1:50 and 103 km
> 
> The second result is better than the first. Is it because of the car.lua file 
> ?
> 
> 
> Thanks+++
> 
> Didier
> 
> Le ven.04/01/19 à 18:52, Daniel Patterson a écrit :
> 
>> Check out the Wiki page at: 
>> https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/wiki/Running-OSRM
>> 
>> With OSRM 5.x, the names of some of the tools changed.  You will now want to 
>> run `osrm-extract -p profiles/car.lua yourmap.osm` then `osrm-contract 
>> yourmap.osrm`
>> 
>> daniel
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 9:33 AM Didier Doumerc  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Since I can't upgrade whith a new map (crash when running osrm-prepare), I 
>> try to reinstall OSRM. 
>> 
>> Once I have reinstalled ORSM, I can extract the new map, but I don't find 
>> osrm-prepare anymore. I don't know what to do before running osrm-routed.
>> 
>> Is someone can give me a link please to a clear and complete install method ?
>> 
>> Thanks and happy new year...
>> 
>> Didier
>> 
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
>> ___
>> OSRM-talk mailing list
>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
> 
> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk

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

Re: [talk-cz] Fantom schránka 41007:221

[Miroslav Suchy]

Dne 10. 01. 19 v 22:54 Marián Kyral napsal(a):
> 
> *41007;Depo Lovosice 70;221náves12:05;1-5 - pracovní dny (pondělí až 
> pátek)**
> *


Odpoved:

schránka SLI č. 221 se nachází v obci Úštěk, část obce Třebín a nachází se na
návsi u informační tabule u č. E24.


Mirek Suchy

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Marc Gemis]

If you miss the on-ramp and are waiting for the traffic signals, a
router can recalculate the route in the meantime and still try to let
you turn left at the traffic signals.

m.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maarten Deen  wrote:
>
> I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to
> the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also
> don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
> The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually
> drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.
>
> I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because
> you never get that route anyway.
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:
> >> I'd map that place like that:
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >
> > I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
> > no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
> > https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
> > But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
> > passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >>>
> 
>  See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> 
>    * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >>>
> >>> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.
> >> Coming from
> >>> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects
> >> to the
> >>> Albany Highway.
> >>
> >>  and
> >>  form a
> >> double-rectangle,
> >> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
> >>
> >>
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
> >>
> >>> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They
> >> are
> >>> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.
> >> The two
> >>> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
> >>
> >> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> >> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
> >> signed
> >> like that on site.
> >>
>    * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >>>
> >>> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> >>> mapped with turn:lanes.
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Markus
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Maarten Deen]

I agree that Markus' solution is more elegant (and I was more looking to 
the offramp itself). I would normally also map it like that but I also 
don't go out of my way to correct situations like that.
The way it is mapped now is more organic, more as you would actually 
drive. As such I don't see it as wrong.


I would not add a turn restriction. For routers it is useless because 
you never get that route anyway.


Regards,
Maarten

On 2019-01-11 13:23, Jem wrote:

I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past.
But to be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already
passed the slip lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus 
wrote:


On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:


On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:



See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:

  * -32.0914374, 116.0129206


Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there.

Coming from

the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects

to the

Albany Highway.


 and
 form a
double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:



https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png



I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They

are

mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link.

The two

bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.


+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are
signed
like that on site.


  * -35.3409195, 149.1616891


Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
mapped with turn:lanes.


+1

Regards

Markus

___
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] Editing road geometry Australia

[Markus]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 13:23, Jem  wrote:
>
> I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a no-left-turn 
> restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at 
> https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past. But to 
> be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already passed the slip 
> lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

I would only add a no-left-turn restriction if there is a sign on site.

A routing app would likely not lead via this node onto the motorway
anyway, since  is the
more direct way.

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

Re: [talk-cz] Pomoc s editací - Blažejský rybník

[Jan Macura]

Ahoj,

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 12:55, Pavel Machek  wrote:

> Byl by odkaz? Pro neco tak dlouhyho jako je D1 mam pocit ze highway na
> relaci je celkem rozumny reseni. Nechcem mit rozkopirovanou informaci
> "tohle je d1" po vsech tech malejch kouscich...
>

však taky že ne, akorát správný typ relace pro označení silnice nějakého
čísla/názvu je type=route + route=road. Stačí se podívat na tu D1:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1749436 nebo na jakoukoliv jinou
silnici: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3267622

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Jem]

> I'd map that place like that:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

I agree. And a supplementary question... would you also add a
no-left-turn restriction from https://osm.org/way/581948344 at
https://osm.org/node/5680879176? I would, and have done in the past. But to
be honest, I'm not sure if a turn like that (having already passed the slip
lane designated for the turn) is legal or not.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 20:47, Markus  wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
> >
> > On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> > >
> > >   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
> >
> > Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
> > the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
> > Albany Highway.
>
>  and
>  form a double-rectangle,
> but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png
>
> > I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
> > mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
> > bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.
>
> +1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
> Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
> like that on site.
>
> > >   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
> >
> > Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> > mapped with turn:lanes.
>
> +1
>
> Regards
>
> Markus
>
> ___
> 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-cz] Pomoc s editací - Blažejský rybník

[Pavel Machek]

On Wed 2019-01-09 15:47:28, majka wrote:
1;2802;0c> Tak ještě úprava toho dotazu zde .
> Může někdo kouknout, jestli jsou správně ty relace autobusových zastávek,
> co to taky vyhazuje?
> A minimálně dvě dálnice také neodpovídají tomu co je psáno ve wiki, tedy že
> highway by nemělo být na relaci.

Byl by odkaz? Pro neco tak dlouhyho jako je D1 mam pocit ze highway na
relaci je celkem rozumny reseni. Nechcem mit rozkopirovanou informaci
"tohle je d1" po vsech tech malejch kouscich...
Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[talk-cz] Prevod domen na spolek dokoncen

[Tom Ka]

Ahoj,

byl dokoncen prevod domen osmap.cz a openstreetmap.cz na spolek! Jeden
z duvodu zalozeni spolku je tedy jiz naplnen.

Diky Michale a Lado!

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Can we use PLOS materials?

[Sérgio V .]

>Please see https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/
>...
>Simon

Ok, so not compatible, clarified, thanks


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk-be] Wikipedia editathon: search for coaches (and participants)

[Pieter Vander Vennet]

Hi Everyone,

Civic Labs Brussels is hosting a Wikipedia-editathon, with a focus on
articles about women (because men are described significantly more).

The evening itself (29th january) will be the editathon. Edits will be made
in small groups (of about 20ppl), with a coach to help then.

We are however *searching those coaches. *If you want to coach, you can
participate in the training session the 15th of january (starting at 18:15,
in BeCentral - above Brussels Central Station). So if you ever wanted to
get started with Wikipedia, this is your chance!

For more information, contact ma...@hackyourfuture.be

Met vriendelijke groeten,
Pieter Vander Vennet

Met vriendelijke groeten,
Pieter Vander Vennet
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk] Can we use PLOS materials?

[Simon Poole]

Please see https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/


And really, besides all the other problems with the wiki, deducing
anything from the membership of an article in one of the multiple 10'000
essentially random categories is not a good idea.


Simon


Am 11.01.2019 um 12:01 schrieb Sérgio V.:
> Hi, please, just to confirm if yes or no:
> The Scientific journal PLOS is told Open Access, as they say:
> "REPRODUCTION OF ARTICLES - Articles and **accompanying materials**
> published by PLOS on the PLOS Sites, unless otherwise indicated, are
> licensed by the respective authors of such articles for use and
> distribution by you subject to citation of the original source in
> accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license"
> (https://www.plos.org/terms-of-use).
> According to
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Licenses_compatible_for_OSM_data_imports
> CC BY is compatible with OSM requirements.
> So, if following those quoted conditions, can we use those
> **accompanying materials** (like some SHP of interesting places) to
> import to OSM according to their licence?
> Thanks for more info.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

[OSM-talk] Can we use PLOS materials?

[Sérgio V .]

Hi, please, just to confirm if yes or no:
The Scientific journal PLOS is told Open Access, as they say:
"REPRODUCTION OF ARTICLES - Articles and **accompanying materials** published 
by PLOS on the PLOS Sites, unless otherwise indicated, are licensed by the 
respective authors of such articles for use and distribution by you subject to 
citation of the original source in accordance with the Creative Commons 
Attribution (CC BY) license" (https://www.plos.org/terms-of-use).
According to
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Licenses_compatible_for_OSM_data_imports
CC BY is compatible with OSM requirements.
So, if following those quoted conditions, can we use those **accompanying 
materials** (like some SHP of interesting places) to import to OSM according to 
their licence?
Thanks for more info.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-ja] opening_hours の日本における祝日について

[Miura Hiroshi]

三浦です

2019年1月9日(水) 午後6:15、surgical21 さん（surgicalmask...@gmail.com）のメッセージ:

>
> こんにちは。surgical21です。早速本題に入ります。
>
> https://github.com/opening-hours/opening_hours.js/issues/278
> において定義ファイルの追加を依頼していますが,
> 日本の祝日には2つはあらかじめ日付を指定されていないものがあります(i.e.
> 春分の日,
> 秋分の日)。その2つの祝日の扱いについての諸君の見識を伺いたいのでありますから,
> GitHub上での議論に参加を
>


チケットにコメントしました。解決にむけ
進みはじめているように見受けました。

osmで国民の休日は閉店とかのタグに対し、アプリケーションが正しく動作するには大切ですね

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

Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Apartment

[Tadeusz Cantwell]

Thanks. Yes, not all the doors are numbered and the numbering are not in a
simple sequence. That's a good tip to label them apartments.

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 16:15, Colm Moore  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> That level of mapping is quite detailed. :) Are some apartment numbers
> missing?
>
> This is how I have mapped some apartment blocks. Each has a nuance in its
> numbering.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/353877339
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/271494230
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/353877335
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/229475222
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/353958506
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109246513
>
> Note that you can say building=apartments, so that people can tell it
> apart(!) from terraced houses.
>
> Colm
>
>
> ---
> Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can
> change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. Margaret Mead
>
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 18:36:28 +
> From: Tadeusz Cantwell 
> To: Discussion of OpenStreetMap in Ireland 
> Subject: [OSM-talk-ie] Apartment
> Message-ID:
>  mq0-3yundwxrftrdpcaevm8kx3v4+t...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> I was mapping an apartment style building, Ballynoe Court, but each one had
> there own doors. Does this look like the best way to achieve it.
>
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.openstreetmap.org%2F%23map%3D19%2F53.18983%2F-6.12670data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf2784ae6978d4366b12208d665a9e36a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636808177663878763sdata=VkqZAge0Q74UMkdoMGtH6QXhUYef4iaQLSP1kyn7H2o%3Dreserved=0
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ie mailing list
> Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
>
___
Talk-ie mailing list
Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie

Re: [OSM-talk] Editing road geometry Australia

[Markus]

On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 07:40, Maarten Deen  wrote:
>
> On 2019-01-11 07:16, Petra Rajka - (p) wrote:
>
> >
> > See below two cases where we would simplify the geometry:
> >
> >   * -32.0914374, 116.0129206
>
> Is seen no big problem in how the roads are layed out there. Coming from
> the motorway there is a clear divider where the offramp connects to the
> Albany Highway.

 and
 form a double-rectangle,
but there isn't such a divider. I'd map that place like that:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ID_Screen_Shot_from_-32.0914374,_116.0129206.png

> I have more problems with the tags of the on- and offramp. They are
> mapped as motorway when they should be mapped as motorway_link. The two
> bridges in the on- and offramp are mapped as motorway_link.

+1. I'd also delete the descriptions like Tonkin Highway Southbound
Ramp off to Albany Highway in the name tag unless the ramps are signed
like that on site.

> >   * -35.3409195, 149.1616891
>
> Ways 77001149 and 77000891 should IMHO not be mapped like that but
> mapped with turn:lanes.

+1

Regards

Markus

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

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: Editing road geometry Australia

[John Berkers]

Long time lurker, some time editor.

It is my understanding that marked "turn right only  lanes" are not cause
to create divergent ways.  These should be tagged using the "lanes" key as
per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes

Creating divergent ways is considered "Tagging for the renderer" as the
documented separation is not physically there.

The first one, in WA, appears less of an issue to me.  Perhaps the
separation nodes could be closer to where the ways actually diverge,
somewhere around the mid-point of the dashed lines, rather than at the
start of them.

The second one, near Canberra, has clearly diverged ways most of the way
along the bridge.

This intersection in Melbourne could potentially serve as an example:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-37.93265/145.15653

Where there are actual medians between lanes, the ways separate, otherwise,
they do not.

Hope I haven't spoken out of turn.  The views expressed above are my
understanding of the guidelines with respect to mapping what is actually
there.

Regards,

JohnB



On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:15 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> Resend to include list :-(
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 17:12
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Editing road geometry Australia
> To: Petra Rajka - (p) 
>
>
>
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 16:19, Petra Rajka - (p) 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m Petra and I am part of the mapping team at Telenav.
>>
>> Since January we started to work on road geometry in Canberra, Perth and
>> Melbourne and we came across some intersections where roads (turn lanes)
>> are mapped separately even where there is no physical divider or chevron
>> markings.
>>
>
> Sorry, Petra, but you've got me, at least, a bit confused?
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/-32.09137/116.01315 certainly
> appears to show traffic islands (better view with Esri Clarity)
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/-35.34078/149.16289 has marked
> "turn right only" lanes.
>
> Sorry, can't see a problem with either of them, unless you're looking at
> something I'm not seeing? :-)
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> 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