Re: [Talk-dk] Københavnsvej U-turn

[Uffe Kousgaard]

Hej,

Ja, den er god nok, men efter afkørsel 11 kom til for snart en del år 
siden, er det nok ret begrænset, hvor meget den bruges.
Google Streetview har nyere og bedre billeder af stedet med tydelige 
slidmærker fra dæk.


mvh
Uffe Kousgaard

On 24-12-2019 01:53, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:

Den her rutning ville jeg godt nok ikke være tryg ved at følge.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car=55.64403%2C12.13471%3B55.64457%2C12.13471#map=19/55.64429/12.13513

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=55.644018198415324=12.134390445437475=17=photo=true=qShU8olPgHuaj81P9O7kyA=0.46234242134218306=0.5925420046262054=1.1020408163265307

Det ser ud som om den faktisk bliver brugt.
Men det ser også ud til at de fleste kører op over græsset, hvilket nok også er 
lidt
mindre uforsvarligt.

Er der nogen, der kender Københavnsvej?
Er der virkelig meningen at man skal køre den vej, eller det lavet af hensyn 
til fx
politi og ambulancer? For så er det ikke en secondary link.
Måske kan vi tagge det som highway=service.








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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

[Marc Gemis]

I would assume that something like cycle.travel will compute a
bicycle-friendly route for the missing parts if all streets are mapped
properly with max speed, cycleways, surfaces, etc. There is indeed no
need/justification to map personal preferences/suggestions.

If the routes calculated by dedicate cycle routers are not taking the
best route, why not discuss this with the developers and see whether
they can improve their algorithms or perhaps they can suggest you to
add additional info that has an impact on routes. I did that in the
past for my home-to-work itinerary.

regards

m.

On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 12:50 AM Jo  wrote:
>
> Go ahead, they are not important to me. I was trying to create itineraries 
> that get you from one place to another today, instead of in 5 or 10 years.
>
> I like to see bicycle routes that are continuous. That is usually not 
> possible today on any of the fietsnelwegen.
>
> Jo
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 23:40 EeBie  wrote:
>>
>> I agree with the remarks of Stijn. Only the parts of the "Fietssnelwegen" 
>> that are realized and “Befietsbaar” on the website of Fietssnelwegen and/or 
>> marked in the field as such, should be on OSM as cycle route.
>> During the past 2 years I suffered several times from the unreliable 
>> information on OSM as a user of OSM based bike route planners. Planned cycle 
>> highways were put on the map as realized and existing. A bike routeplanner 
>> makes a route with preference to cycle routes that are on OSM. I supposed to 
>> follow a cycle highway but landed on a single track path of 30 cm wide with 
>> surface of soft sand that I had to walk. On another spot I was following a 
>> paved footway and had to squeeze my brakes at once because the paved footway 
>> went over in a stairs downwards where a bridge will be build in the future. 
>> Luckily it was in daylight and feasible; users of cycle highways are 
>> supposed to take these routes before and after work when it is dark.The 
>> proposed routes on OSM are dangerous.
>>
>> I have given that cycle highway relation the state proposed=yes that makes 
>> that they are not taken in account on bike routeplanners and on 
>> https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org (those proposed relations are visible on 
>> the Bike Map layer on OSM cycle map layer ). There was a fixme or incomplete 
>> remark on those relations of planned cycle highways but those doesn’t make 
>> that they are neglected by routeplanners.
>>
>> I have put the proposed state on other cycle highways that were mapped as 
>> going through fences over private industrial premises and others where 
>> biking was not permitted or where even was no path at all.
>>
>> I have deleted parts of cycle highways in the route relation where bike 
>> riding wasn’t possible as for example on railway bridge where the bridge 
>> wasn’t ready a few months back (maybe it is meanwhile, but I wasn’t there 
>> recently).
>>
>> A few years back I have mapped parts of cycle highways that where ready and 
>> marked and put on the website as “Befietsbaar” in a route relation but I had 
>> to notice that parts that weren’t ready were added to those relations.
>>
>> I also don’t like the “alternative cycle highways” because they only exist 
>> in the head of one person and their quality is (in a lot of cases) very poor 
>> and dangerous. Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17298358 If you 
>> take this path riding on modal electric bike style downwards from the 
>> embankment of the canal over a small unpaved path to a narrow bridge over a 
>> ditch, you are death. And that should be highway for bikes.
>>
>> I propose to delete all what is “alternatief Fietssnelweg” because they are 
>> non existing and they make OSM unreliable because those routes are put as 
>> preferred by routeplanners.
>>
>> For the F Fietswegen I propose to delete the parts that are not ready from 
>> the route relations and leave the parts that are ready and “Befietsbaar” as 
>> on the on Fietssnelwegen website (putting the “proposed” status to a 
>> complete F relation isn’t a solution any more because parts of them are 
>> released as “Befietsbaar”).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Eebie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Op 23/12/19 om 21:10 schreef Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't understand why nobody else objects to the 'alternatives'. They're 
>> just somebody's personal inventions, but they do not exist. If we allow Jo's 
>> alternatives, then we have to allow anybody's alternatives, suggestions , 
>> etc. for cycle highways or any other kind of hiking, cycle, ... routes. E.g. 
>> the cycle highway between Diest and Hasselt has been deleted: can I add to 
>> OSM a good alternative that I use daily? I hope the aswer is no. I don't 
>> mind that somebody suggests on some website alternatives for the cycle 
>> highways which do not yet exist. It's even a very good idea, but please keep 
>> them out of the OSM database.
>> In my opinion, only those parts which are already waymarked should be in 

Re: [Talk-us] Marking a wiki page for deletion?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

In this case redirect seems better.

Replace entire page text by 
#REDIRECT [[target page]]


You can also add delete template 
to request deletion:

{{Delete|reason for deletion}}

24 Dec 2019, 01:18 by stevea...@softworkers.com:

> I goofed in our wiki by not moving (renaming) an old page to a new one, but 
> by instead and mistakenly creating the new one from scratch.  So, the old 
> wiki page ("Tren Urbano," a subway/metro in Puerto Rico) needs to be deleted, 
> as "Puerto Rico/Railroads" encompasses / supersedes it).
>
> Is there a way for me to delete a wiki page (without special wiki privileges, 
> which I have not) or a place / method to "mark" a wiki page for deletion?
>
> Thank you in advance for any answers / action,
> SteveA
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Have they responded with anything
(except automatic reply) ?

Is there an assigned issue id?

23 Dec 2019, 21:32 by nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com:

> I sent this situation to Mapbox 10 months ago. 
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2019, 17:00 joost schouppe, <> joost.schou...@gmail.com> > 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> As an xmas bonus, here's another Facebookcompany (via Mapbox), 
>>> Snapchat that is using OSM withoutattribution requirements (funnily 
>>> there's plenty of space for areasonable and visible calculated 
>>> mapbox logo and text). Theyprobably don't know, nor that they have 
>>> been asked to complyover a year ago, nor have agreed with the 
>>> license in everyaspect of it when stated using OSM data, nor read 
>>> Mapbox TOS, orMapbox been informed on these repeated offenders, nor 
>>> read themultiples reports in mailing lists, nor that they had a 
>>> employeethat ran for OSMF board.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://map.snapchat.com/
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's continue to be hypocrites and pretendnothing is going on for 
>>> over a year with these two companiesthat are corporate members of 
>>> OSMF and should be the first onesto give examples. Enough with 
>>> excuses. 
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The Snapchat case is a pretty clear example of how not to do things. If 
>> there's space for Mapbox, there's space for OpenStreetMap. But I don't think 
>> Snapchat has anything to do with Facebook.
>>
>> Phil, I hope you contacted them directly and not through Facebook.
>>___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] aggiungere immagini 360° a OSM

[Francesco Ansanelli]

Buongiorno

Il lun 23 dic 2019, 22:20 Maria Prontera  ha
scritto:

> Salve
> sono nuova nell'uso di OSM.
> Un cliente mi ha commissionato la creazione di 13 percorsi pedonali con
> immagini 360° e punti di interesse su di esse.
>

I punti di interesse si possono inserire in OpenStreetMap, se sono
effettivamente di interesse pubblico, così come i percorsi, purché siano
manutenuti ufficialmente da un ente e segnalati con le apposite paline.
Non è previsto il caricamento di immagini direttamente su OSM.

>
> Ho letto su wikipedia di Open Trail View:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenTrailView
>
> Non mi è chiaro se posso inserire punti di interesse con icone
> personalizzate ed elementi multimediali: immagini, testi, audio e video.
>
Le consiglio di provare uMap:

https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/it/

Che consente di creare livelli di dati sopra la mappa OSM ed inserire
marker con icone personalizzate se ha un hosting dove appoggiarsi.
Su ogni marker è possibile inserire anche dei link. Che potrebbero
reindirizzare l'utente verso i contenuti (sempre necessario un hosting), le
suggerisco di fare una pagina HTML (con foto, descrizione, audio)...


> Ci sono esempi in rete? Eventualmente anche tutorials?
>
> Grazie
> Maria Prontera
>
> cell 338 4189383
>
>   --
> *Maria Prontera*
>
>
> *Certified Photographer Street View | Trusted*
>
> *Web Consultant, Web Designer, Web Master*
>
> *cell +39 380 3448430 - Tel +39 0833 1695535*
> *www.ilweb360.com* 
> *Maria Prontera | LinkedIn  *
> *Walkinto* 
>
> *skype mariap1294*
>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER-completeness visualizer?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 12/23/19 18:42, stevea wrote:
> One more thing we might potentially learn from our (OSM-US')
> experience (of the TIGER import of 2007-8), would be to insist upon a
> high bar for such large-scale imports in the future (this was our
> largest, without a doubt):  the proposers of the import must
> "pre-load for the back-end" a renderer that will both display and
> foster such goal-oriented tools to "finish the job with high-quality
> AFTER the import."  Import proposers would be required to author and
> maintain this renderer / server for as long as satisfactory
> QA-completion of the import takes.

I agree that we needed and still need a way to clean up all the
remaining untouched TIGER data. However, without the TIGER import, the
same 11-12 years would have been spent surveying and naming the roads
one by one and tracing them from (sometimes outdated) satellite/aerial
photos and we would probably still be way behind where we are with the
TIGER import. If it had been on me to trace my neighborhood from a blank
slate when I first started mapping, I might well have given up on OSM at
that point.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

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

[Talk-dk] Københavnsvej U-turn

[Niels Elgaard Larsen]

Den her rutning ville jeg godt nok ikke være tryg ved at følge.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car=55.64403%2C12.13471%3B55.64457%2C12.13471#map=19/55.64429/12.13513

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=55.644018198415324=12.134390445437475=17=photo=true=qShU8olPgHuaj81P9O7kyA=0.46234242134218306=0.5925420046262054=1.1020408163265307

Det ser ud som om den faktisk bliver brugt.
Men det ser også ud til at de fleste kører op over græsset, hvilket nok også er 
lidt
mindre uforsvarligt.

Er der nogen, der kender Københavnsvej?
Er der virkelig meningen at man skal køre den vej, eller det lavet af hensyn 
til fx
politi og ambulancer? For så er det ikke en secondary link.
Måske kan vi tagge det som highway=service.





-- 
Niels Elgaard Larsen

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

Re: [Talk-us] TIGER-completeness visualizer?

[stevea]

On Dec 22, 2019, at 11:34 AM, Greg Morgan  wrote:
> ... I think the challenge for the U.S. project is that most of these maps 
> have been maintained outside the U.S.  If implemented, I am not sure how long 
> OSMOSE would provide the service.

One more thing we might potentially learn from our (OSM-US') experience (of the 
TIGER import of 2007-8), would be to insist upon a high bar for such 
large-scale imports in the future (this was our largest, without a doubt):  the 
proposers of the import must "pre-load for the back-end" a renderer that will 
both display and foster such goal-oriented tools to "finish the job with 
high-quality AFTER the import."  Import proposers would be required to author 
and maintain this renderer / server for as long as satisfactory QA-completion 
of the import takes.

True, we might not be sure "how long such services would be provided" (nobody's 
good intentions or crystal balls are absolutely perfect), but it certainly is 
worth considering insisting upon something like this for large-scale imports.  
(Should we ever again risk them).

Our Import Guidelines seem a happy medium right now, though for something huge, 
a similarly huge commitment to having the technical chops and providing 
(renderer server) resources to finish the job well seems fair.  We have good 
examples of tools that help us "how," we might agree to require these "if and 
when again."

Still seeking a good TIGER reviewer / visualizer, though I can get some things 
done with OT.

SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Marking a wiki page for deletion?

[stevea]

I goofed in our wiki by not moving (renaming) an old page to a new one, but by 
instead and mistakenly creating the new one from scratch.  So, the old wiki 
page ("Tren Urbano," a subway/metro in Puerto Rico) needs to be deleted, as 
"Puerto Rico/Railroads" encompasses / supersedes it).

Is there a way for me to delete a wiki page (without special wiki privileges, 
which I have not) or a place / method to "mark" a wiki page for deletion?

Thank you in advance for any answers / action,
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

[Jo]

Go ahead, they are not important to me. I was trying to create itineraries
that get you from one place to another today, instead of in 5 or 10 years.

I like to see bicycle routes that are continuous. That is usually not
possible today on any of the fietsnelwegen.

Jo

On Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 23:40 EeBie  wrote:

> I agree with the remarks of Stijn. Only the parts of the "Fietssnelwegen"
> that are realized and “Befietsbaar” on the website of Fietssnelwegen and/or
> marked in the field as such, should be on OSM as cycle route.
> During the past 2 years I suffered several times from the unreliable
> information on OSM as a user of OSM based bike route planners. Planned
> cycle highways were put on the map as realized and existing. A bike
> routeplanner makes a route with preference to cycle routes that are on OSM.
> I supposed to follow a cycle highway but landed on a single track path of
> 30 cm wide with surface of soft sand that I had to walk. On another spot I
> was following a paved footway and had to squeeze my brakes at once because
> the paved footway went over in a stairs downwards where a bridge will be
> build in the future. Luckily it was in daylight and feasible; users of
> cycle highways are supposed to take these routes before and after work when
> it is dark.The proposed routes on OSM are dangerous.
>
> I have given that cycle highway relation the state proposed=yes that makes
> that they are not taken in account on bike routeplanners and on
> https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org (those proposed relations are visible
> on the Bike Map layer on OSM cycle map layer
> 
> ). There was a fixme or incomplete remark on those relations of planned
> cycle highways but those doesn’t make that they are neglected by
> routeplanners.
>
> I have put the proposed state on other cycle highways that were mapped as
> going through fences over private industrial premises and others where
> biking was not permitted or where even was no path at all.
>
> I have deleted parts of cycle highways in the route relation where bike
> riding wasn’t possible as for example on railway bridge
> 
> where the bridge wasn’t ready a few months back (maybe it is meanwhile, but
> I wasn’t there recently).
>
> A few years back I have mapped *parts* of cycle highways that where ready
> and marked and put on the website as “Befietsbaar” in a route relation but
> I had to notice that parts that weren’t ready were added to those relations.
>
> I also don’t like the “alternative cycle highways” because they only exist
> in the head of one person and their quality is (in a lot of cases) very
> poor and dangerous. Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17298358
> If you take this path riding on modal electric bike style downwards from
> the embankment of the canal over a small unpaved path to a narrow bridge
> over a ditch, you are death. And that should be highway for bikes.
>
> I propose to *delete all what is “**alternatief Fietssnelweg” *because
> they are non existing and they make OSM unreliable because those routes are
> put as preferred by routeplanners.
>
> For the F Fietswegen I propose to *delete the parts that are not ready*
> from the route relations and leave the parts that are ready and
> “Befietsbaar” as on the on Fietssnelwegen website (putting the “proposed”
> status to a complete F relation isn’t a solution any more because parts of
> them are released as “Befietsbaar”).
>
> Regards,
>
> Eebie
>
>
>
>
> Op 23/12/19 om 21:10 schreef Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't understand why nobody else objects to the 'alternatives'. They're
> just somebody's personal inventions, but they do not exist. If we allow
> Jo's alternatives, then we have to allow anybody's alternatives,
> suggestions , etc. for cycle highways or any other kind of hiking, cycle,
> ... routes. E.g. the cycle highway between Diest and Hasselt has been
> deleted: can I add to OSM a good alternative that I use daily? I hope the
> aswer is no. I don't mind that somebody suggests on some website alternatives
> for the cycle highways which do not yet exist. It's even a very good idea,
> but please keep them out of the OSM database.
> In my opinion, only those parts which are already waymarked should be in
> OSM as cycle highways (and shown on e.g.
> https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org). The fact that there is a road or a
> cycle path which might be turned into a cycle highway, doesn't mean that
> there is a cycle highway. So, all the rest: state=proposed. [As it is
> already difficult enough to keep OSM a bit up to date, adding things which
> might be realised in some distant future seems to me a bit of a waste of
> time. But that's just my opinion. Anyone is free to do so.]
>
> Regards,
>
> StijnRR
>
> Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 16:23:51 CET schreef Jo 
> :
>
>
> Hi Pieter,
>
> You are right, that is an 

Re: [Talk-it] aggiungere immagini 360° a OSM

[Volker Schmidt]

Maria,
Concordo con Alfredo. Mapillary è al momento molto più avanti.
E ci sono persone in Italia che hanno esperianza con 360 gradi.

A Verona è attivo l'utente giubar,
socio CAI e FIAB secondo la sua
pagina utente. Non lo conosco, l'ho appena trovato e lo contatterò fra
breve.

Attorno al Lago di Como: kaitu 

A Carrara cxc 

Io sono potenzialmente interessato, am non ho mai trovato il tempo per
cominciare

Se prendi l'iniziativa, forse ne vien fuori un gruppetto.
Sarebbe bello.

Volker

(Padova)





On Mon, 23 Dec 2019 at 23:32, Alfredo Gattai 
wrote:

> Prova Mapillary, ad occhio e croce mi sembra piu' avanti come progetto
>
> Alfredo
>
> Il Lun 23 Dic 2019, 22:20 Maria Prontera  ha
> scritto:
>
>> Salve
>> sono nuova nell'uso di OSM.
>> Un cliente mi ha commissionato la creazione di 13 percorsi pedonali con
>> immagini 360° e punti di interesse su di esse.
>>
>> Ho letto su wikipedia di Open Trail View:
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenTrailView
>>
>> Non mi è chiaro se posso inserire punti di interesse con icone
>> personalizzate ed elementi multimediali: immagini, testi, audio e video.
>>
>> Ci sono esempi in rete? Eventualmente anche tutorials?
>>
>> Grazie
>> Maria Prontera
>>
>> cell 338 4189383
>>
>>   --
>> *Maria Prontera*
>>
>>
>> *Certified Photographer Street View | Trusted*
>>
>> *Web Consultant, Web Designer, Web Master*
>>
>> *cell +39 380 3448430 - Tel +39 0833 1695535*
>> *www.ilweb360.com* 
>> *Maria Prontera | LinkedIn  *
>> *Walkinto* 
>>
>> *skype mariap1294*
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-it mailing list
>> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

[EeBie]

I agree with the remarks of Stijn. Only the parts of the 
"Fietssnelwegen" that are realized and “Befietsbaar” on the website of 
Fietssnelwegen and/or marked in the field as such, should be on OSM as 
cycle route.
During the past 2 years I suffered several times from the unreliable 
information on OSM as a user of OSM based bike route planners. Planned 
cycle highways were put on the map as realized and existing. A bike 
routeplanner makes a route with preference to cycle routes that are on 
OSM. I supposed to follow a cycle highway but landed on a single track 
path of 30 cm wide with surface of soft sand that I had to walk. On 
another spot I was following a paved footway and had to squeeze my 
brakes at once because the paved footway went over in a stairs downwards 
where a bridge will be build in the future. Luckily it was in daylight 
and feasible; users of cycle highways are supposed to take these routes 
before and after work when it is dark.The proposed routes on OSM are 
dangerous.


I have given that cycle highway relation the state proposed=yes that 
makes that they are not taken in account on bike routeplanners and on 
https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org 
 (those proposed relations are 
visible on the Bike Map layer on OSM cycle map layer 
 
). There was a fixme or incomplete remark on those relations of planned 
cycle highways but those doesn’t make that they are neglected by 
routeplanners.


I have put the proposed state on other cycle highways that were mapped 
as going through fences over private industrial premises and others 
where biking was not permitted or where even was no path at all.


I have deleted parts of cycle highways in the route relation where bike 
riding wasn’t possible as for example on railway bridge 
 
where the bridge wasn’t ready a few months back (maybe it is meanwhile, 
but I wasn’t there recently).


A few years back I have mapped _parts_ of cycle highways that where 
ready and marked and put on the website as “Befietsbaar” in a route 
relation but I had to notice that parts that weren’t ready were added to 
those relations.


I also don’t like the “alternative cycle highways” because they only 
exist in the head of one person and their quality is (in a lot of cases) 
very poor and dangerous. Example: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/17298358 If you take this path riding 
on modal electric bike style downwards from the embankment of the canal 
over a small unpaved path to a narrow bridge over a ditch, you are 
death. And that should be highway for bikes.


I propose to *delete all what is “**alternatief Fietssnelweg” *because 
they are non existing and they make OSM unreliable because those routes 
are put as preferred by routeplanners.


For the F Fietswegen I propose to *delete the parts that are not ready* 
from the route relations and leave the parts that are ready and 
“Befietsbaar” as on the on Fietssnelwegen website (putting the 
“proposed” status to a complete F relation isn’t a solution any more 
because parts of them are released as “Befietsbaar”).


Regards,

Eebie




Op 23/12/19 om 21:10 schreef Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be:

Hi,

I don't understand why nobody else objects to the 'alternatives'. 
They're just somebody's personal inventions, but they do not exist. If 
we allow Jo's alternatives, then we have to allow anybody's 
alternatives, suggestions , etc. for cycle highways or any other kind 
of hiking, cycle, ... routes. E.g. the cycle highway between Diest and 
Hasselt has been deleted: can I add to OSM a good alternative that I 
use daily? I hope the aswer is no. I don't mind that somebody suggests 
on some website alternatives for the cycle highways which do not yet 
exist. It's even a very good idea, but please keep them out of the OSM 
database.
In my opinion, only those parts which are already waymarked should be 
in OSM as cycle highways (and shown on e.g. 
https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org). The fact that there is a road or 
a cycle path which might be turned into a cycle highway, doesn't mean 
that there is a cycle highway. So, all the rest: state=proposed. [As 
it is already difficult enough to keep OSM a bit up to date, adding 
things which might be realised in some distant future seems to me a 
bit of a waste of time. But that's just my opinion. Anyone is free to 
do so.]


Regards,

StijnRR

Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 16:23:51 CET schreef Jo :


Hi Pieter,

You are right, that is an odd way of tagging them. cycle_highway seems 
better indeed. I don't know who started doing it that way, I simply 
continued the practice, without giving it enough thought.


Most of these cycle highways can't be cycled from beginning to end, 
they continue over large distances (for bicycles). This means they are 
all tagged with state=proposed. Some of them are mostly 

[Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2019-12-21

[Dave Hansen]

These are based off of Lambertus's work here:

http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl

If you have questions or comments about these maps, please feel
free to ask.  However, please do not send me private mail.  The
odds are, someone else will have the same questions, and by
asking on the talk-us@ list, others can benefit.

Downloads:

http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2019-12-21

Map to visualize what each file contains:


http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2019-12-21/kml/kml.html


FAQ



Why did you do this?

I wrote scripts to joined them myself to lessen the impact
of doing a large join on Lambertus's server.  I've also
cut them in large longitude swaths that should fit conveniently
on removable media.  

http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2019-12-21

Can or should I seed the torrents?

Yes!!  If you use the .torrent files, please seed.  That web
server is in the UK, and it helps to have some peers on this
side of the Atlantic.

Why is my map missing small rectangular areas?

There have been some missing tiles from Lambertus's map (the
red rectangles),  I don't see any at the moment, so you may
want to update if you had issues with the last set.

Why can I not copy the large files to my new SD card?

If you buy a new card (especially SDHC), some are FAT16 from
the factory.  I had to reformat it to let me create a >2GB
file.

Does your map cover Mexico/Canada?

Yes!!  I have, for the purposes of this map, annexed Ontario
in to the USA.  Some areas of North America that are close
to the US also just happen to get pulled in to these maps.
This might not happen forever, and if you would like your
non-US area to get included, let me know. 

-- Dave


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

Re: [Talk-it] aggiungere immagini 360° a OSM

[Alfredo Gattai]

Prova Mapillary, ad occhio e croce mi sembra piu' avanti come progetto

Alfredo

Il Lun 23 Dic 2019, 22:20 Maria Prontera  ha
scritto:

> Salve
> sono nuova nell'uso di OSM.
> Un cliente mi ha commissionato la creazione di 13 percorsi pedonali con
> immagini 360° e punti di interesse su di esse.
>
> Ho letto su wikipedia di Open Trail View:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenTrailView
>
> Non mi è chiaro se posso inserire punti di interesse con icone
> personalizzate ed elementi multimediali: immagini, testi, audio e video.
>
> Ci sono esempi in rete? Eventualmente anche tutorials?
>
> Grazie
> Maria Prontera
>
> cell 338 4189383
>
>   --
> *Maria Prontera*
>
>
> *Certified Photographer Street View | Trusted*
>
> *Web Consultant, Web Designer, Web Master*
>
> *cell +39 380 3448430 - Tel +39 0833 1695535*
> *www.ilweb360.com* 
> *Maria Prontera | LinkedIn  *
> *Walkinto* 
>
> *skype mariap1294*
>
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabouts one piece or segregated

[Dave F via Talk-GB]

On 23/12/2019 18:28, David Woolley wrote:

On 23/12/2019 18:15, Nick Allen wrote:
I may be missing something here, but 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099 looks okay to me.




The OP was proposing that 
, 
, and 

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Contributions folklo

[Philippe Verdy]

Dommage pourtant que le site officiel de Rennes-le-Chateau s'affiche encore
sur une carte Google... Pour la motiver à passer à OSM, détailler son
patrimoine naturel et culturel serait pas mal. quant à Rennes-les-Bains,
elle affiche une bien pauvre carte Mappy, et son site web date des années
1990; avec 160 habitants elle a certainement peu de moyens pour mieux faire
mais c'est dommage qu'elle ne se fasse pas mieux aider par son département
ou sa région, et n'a certainement pas voulu s'aventurer chez Google avec le
prix qu'il demande, eu égard à sa renommée qui peut intéresser du monde...

Le lun. 23 déc. 2019 à 22:44,  a écrit :

> Précisons que la première contribution était mal faite (corrigée par moi
> et Rainer) mais voulait créer une vraie clairière et Philippe a créé une
> autre clairière à bon escient.
>
> Jean-Yvon
> Le 23/12/2019 à 22:34, Philippe Verdy - verd...@wanadoo.fr a écrit :
>
> c'est fait avec une deuxième clairière ajoutée un peu plus à l'ouest
>
> Le dim. 22 déc. 2019 à 19:14, rainerU  a écrit :
>
>> J'utilse osmcha avec un feed RSS pour identifier les changesets fait par
>> des
>> novices. Cela m'a signalé celui-là qui essaie de "faire un foutu trou
>> dans une
>> foret" :
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78651839
>>
>> C'est en dehors de mon périmètre et je connais peu iD, alors si quelqu'un
>> veut
>> s'en occuper avant qu'il fasse des dégâts...
>>
>> On 20.12.19 17:31, Eric wrote:
>> > Bonjour,
>> >
>> > Je ne connaissais pas l'outil mentionné récemment par Marc
>> > http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/newestosm?c=France#6/46.800/1.989
>> >
>> > C'est cool pour identifier les nouveau utilisateurs et les guider mais
>> là, c'est
>> > n’importe quoi. Je fais des corrections mais c'est long et usant. Ca
>> sent
>> > l'humour ... euh ... de collégiens (rue de la Moule, "villa a kelig,
>> celui qui
>> > s'approche je l'**" et des tas de truc rigolos, y'en a des pages).
>> > Ou encore
>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757252001
>> >
>> > Fatiguant
>> >
>> > Eric [Blueberry]
>> >
>> > ___
>> > 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
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing 
> listTalk-fr@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
> ___
> 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: [OSM-talk-fr] Contributions folklo

[Philippe Verdy]

Il ne faut pas s'arrêter là, il y en a des tas qui manquent un peu partout,
surtout que ce coin de Rennes-les-Bains et Rennes-le-Château est magnifique
(connu aussi des Bretons de Rennes puisque les villes sont amies et Rennes
la grande bretonne présente ses petites soeurs occitanes) et haut lieu de
tourisme à faire connaitre pour les balades.

Le lun. 23 déc. 2019 à 22:44,  a écrit :

> Précisons que la première contribution était mal faite (corrigée par moi
> et Rainer) mais voulait créer une vraie clairière et Philippe a créé une
> autre clairière à bon escient.
>
> Jean-Yvon
> Le 23/12/2019 à 22:34, Philippe Verdy - verd...@wanadoo.fr a écrit :
>
> c'est fait avec une deuxième clairière ajoutée un peu plus à l'ouest
>
> Le dim. 22 déc. 2019 à 19:14, rainerU  a écrit :
>
>> J'utilse osmcha avec un feed RSS pour identifier les changesets fait par
>> des
>> novices. Cela m'a signalé celui-là qui essaie de "faire un foutu trou
>> dans une
>> foret" :
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78651839
>>
>> C'est en dehors de mon périmètre et je connais peu iD, alors si quelqu'un
>> veut
>> s'en occuper avant qu'il fasse des dégâts...
>>
>> On 20.12.19 17:31, Eric wrote:
>> > Bonjour,
>> >
>> > Je ne connaissais pas l'outil mentionné récemment par Marc
>> > http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/newestosm?c=France#6/46.800/1.989
>> >
>> > C'est cool pour identifier les nouveau utilisateurs et les guider mais
>> là, c'est
>> > n’importe quoi. Je fais des corrections mais c'est long et usant. Ca
>> sent
>> > l'humour ... euh ... de collégiens (rue de la Moule, "villa a kelig,
>> celui qui
>> > s'approche je l'**" et des tas de truc rigolos, y'en a des pages).
>> > Ou encore
>> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757252001
>> >
>> > Fatiguant
>> >
>> > Eric [Blueberry]
>> >
>> > ___
>> > 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
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing 
> listTalk-fr@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
> ___
> 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: [OSM-talk-fr] Contributions folklo

[osm . sanspourriel]

Précisons que la première contribution était mal faite (corrigée par moi
et Rainer) mais voulait créer une vraie clairière et Philippe a créé une
autre clairière à bon escient.

Jean-Yvon

Le 23/12/2019 à 22:34, Philippe Verdy - verd...@wanadoo.fr a écrit :

c'est fait avec une deuxième clairière ajoutée un peu plus à l'ouest

Le dim. 22 déc. 2019 à 19:14, rainerU mailto:ra...@sfr.fr>> a écrit :

J'utilse osmcha avec un feed RSS pour identifier les changesets
fait par des
novices. Cela m'a signalé celui-là qui essaie de "faire un foutu
trou dans une
foret" :

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78651839

C'est en dehors de mon périmètre et je connais peu iD, alors si
quelqu'un veut
s'en occuper avant qu'il fasse des dégâts...

On 20.12.19 17:31, Eric wrote:
> Bonjour,
>
> Je ne connaissais pas l'outil mentionné récemment par Marc
> http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/newestosm?c=France#6/46.800/1.989
>
> C'est cool pour identifier les nouveau utilisateurs et les
guider mais là, c'est
> n’importe quoi. Je fais des corrections mais c'est long et
usant. Ca sent
> l'humour ... euh ... de collégiens (rue de la Moule, "villa a
kelig, celui qui
> s'approche je l'**" et des tas de truc rigolos, y'en a des
pages).
> Ou encore
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757252001
>
> Fatiguant
>
> Eric [Blueberry]
>
> ___
> 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


___
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: [OSM-talk-fr] Contributions folklo

[Philippe Verdy]

c'est fait avec une deuxième clairière ajoutée un peu plus à l'ouest

Le dim. 22 déc. 2019 à 19:14, rainerU  a écrit :

> J'utilse osmcha avec un feed RSS pour identifier les changesets fait par
> des
> novices. Cela m'a signalé celui-là qui essaie de "faire un foutu trou dans
> une
> foret" :
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78651839
>
> C'est en dehors de mon périmètre et je connais peu iD, alors si quelqu'un
> veut
> s'en occuper avant qu'il fasse des dégâts...
>
> On 20.12.19 17:31, Eric wrote:
> > Bonjour,
> >
> > Je ne connaissais pas l'outil mentionné récemment par Marc
> > http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/newestosm?c=France#6/46.800/1.989
> >
> > C'est cool pour identifier les nouveau utilisateurs et les guider mais
> là, c'est
> > n’importe quoi. Je fais des corrections mais c'est long et usant. Ca
> sent
> > l'humour ... euh ... de collégiens (rue de la Moule, "villa a kelig,
> celui qui
> > s'approche je l'**" et des tas de truc rigolos, y'en a des pages).
> > Ou encore
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757252001
> >
> > Fatiguant
> >
> > Eric [Blueberry]
> >
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-it] aggiungere immagini 360° a OSM

[Maria Prontera]

Salve
sono nuova nell'uso di OSM.
Un cliente mi ha commissionato la creazione di 13 percorsi pedonali con
immagini 360° e punti di interesse su di esse.

Ho letto su wikipedia di Open Trail View:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenTrailView

Non mi è chiaro se posso inserire punti di interesse con icone
personalizzate ed elementi multimediali: immagini, testi, audio e video.

Ci sono esempi in rete? Eventualmente anche tutorials?

Grazie
Maria Prontera

cell 338 4189383

  --
*Maria Prontera*


*Certified Photographer Street View | Trusted*

*Web Consultant, Web Designer, Web Master*

*cell +39 380 3448430 - Tel +39 0833 1695535*
*www.ilweb360.com* 
*Maria Prontera | LinkedIn  *
*Walkinto* 

*skype mariap1294*
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update

[Nuno Caldeira]

I sent this situation to Mapbox 10 months ago.

On Mon, 23 Dec 2019, 17:00 joost schouppe,  wrote:

>
> As an xmas bonus, here's another Facebook company (via Mapbox), Snapchat
>> that is using OSM without attribution requirements (funnily there's plenty
>> of space for a reasonable and visible calculated mapbox logo and text).
>> They probably don't know, nor that they have been asked to comply over a
>> year ago, nor have agreed with the license in every aspect of it when
>> stated using OSM data, nor read Mapbox TOS, or Mapbox been informed on
>> these repeated offenders, nor read the multiples reports in mailing lists,
>> nor that they had a employee that ran for OSMF board.
>>
>> https://map.snapchat.com/
>>
>> Let's continue to be hypocrites and pretend nothing is going on for over
>> a year with these two companies that are corporate members of OSMF and
>> should be the first ones to give examples. Enough with excuses.
>>
>
> The Snapchat case is a pretty clear example of how not to do things. If
> there's space for Mapbox, there's space for OpenStreetMap. But I don't
> think Snapchat has anything to do with Facebook.
>
> Phil, I hope you contacted them directly and not through Facebook.
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabouts one piece or segregated

[Nick Allen]

Hi,
Yes, but the way it is currently mapped is the way I would chose, and
have utilised on many roundabouts for public transport &  cycle
routes. 
Has something changed? If so I wasn't aware?
Regards
NickTallguy
On Mon, 2019-12-23 at 18:28 +, David Woolley wrote:
> On 23/12/2019 18:15, Nick Allen wrote:
> I may be missing something here, but 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099 looks okay to me.
> 
> 
> The OP was proposing that <
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099>, <
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757674481>, and <
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/757543147 should be merged into a,
> single, closed loop.
> ___Talk-GB mailing
> listtalk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Tagging proposal for cycling highways (Fietssnelwegen)

[Stijn Rombauts via Talk-be]

 Hi,
I don't understand why nobody else objects to the 'alternatives'. They're just 
somebody's personal inventions, but they do not exist. If we allow Jo's 
alternatives, then we have to allow anybody's alternatives, suggestions , etc. 
for cycle highways or any other kind of hiking, cycle, ... routes. E.g. the 
cycle highway between Diest and Hasselt has been deleted: can I add to OSM a 
good alternative that I use daily? I hope the aswer is no. I don't mind that 
somebody suggests on some website alternatives for the cycle highways which do 
not yet exist. It's even a very good idea, but please keep them out of the OSM 
database.In my opinion, only those parts which are already waymarked should be 
in OSM as cycle highways (and shown on e.g. 
https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org). The fact that there is a road or a cycle 
path which might be turned into a cycle highway, doesn't mean that there is a 
cycle highway. So, all the rest: state=proposed. [As it is already difficult 
enough to keep OSM a bit up to date, adding things which might be realised in 
some distant future seems to me a bit of a waste of time. But that's just my 
opinion. Anyone is free to do so.]
Regards,
StijnRR

Op dinsdag 10 december 2019 16:23:51 CET schreef Jo :  
 
 Hi Pieter,
You are right, that is an odd way of tagging them. cycle_highway seems better 
indeed. I don't know who started doing it that way, I simply continued the 
practice, without giving it enough thought.
Most of these cycle highways can't be cycled from beginning to end, they 
continue over large distances (for bicycles). This means they are all tagged 
with state=proposed. Some of them are mostly done though, like F1 or F3, but 
the parts that are missing from them will take several years to complete. Do we 
want to keep them with state=proposed?
What I started doing is to also map alternatives that can be cycled from start 
to end today. I recently learned this is not really appreciated by some 
official instances. They don't control what we do, so it's not extremely 
important, but still maybe something to keep in mind.
One thing I was considering to do, is to divide them in subrelations. Such that 
the parts that are finished would go into both the 'official' relation and into 
the alternative one. If you would like, I'll do this for F3, to show what I 
mean.
Then there is also sometimes  a difference between what is shown on 
fietsnelwegen.be and what is actually visible in the field. I'm thinking about 
the situation in Veltem, where F3 has a leg on the southern side marked in the 
field, but it is actually meant to go through the center of Veltem, north of 
the railway it generally follows.
Most cycle highways are not yet visible in the field. The signs aren't  placed 
yet. For example F203 from Sterrebeek to Sint-Stevens-Woluwe. It passes through 
Kraainem over 2 cycleways of 50cm, with no separation to motorized traffic that 
is allowed to go at 70km/h there. Then it goes through the center with lots of 
crossings. This is a bit odd, as there is the possibility to pass through 
Molenstraat, wich is a lot safer and has a far better experience for the 
cyclist.
The alternative route relations I was creating, are meant to disappear after a 
few years, but that point, I might be tempted to keep it, even when the 
official instances decide to keep the less suitable itinerary.
One general problem with the cycle highways, today, is that it's next to 
impossible to apply 'ground truth'  to them, except if we would only map the 
parts that are actually already finished and marked in the field.
Those are my thoughts on the subject. If I find some more time, I might 
continue mapping the official ones, with the projected parts, like I did it 
here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/691027464/history
But for longer stretches. I have no idea if they are planning to add those 
dedicated cycleways in the next 2 years, or in the next 15 years though.
For the ones that I audited over the past year, there are many pictures on 
Mapillary.
Polyglot
On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 10:53 PM Pieter Vander Vennet  
wrote:

Hello everyone,

As we (Anyways BVBA) are making a route planner which takes
'Fietssnelwegen' into account, we would like to have some uniform
tagging into place for this.

Some of them are already tagged with `cycle_network=Fietssnelweg`, which
sounds very Flemish.

I'm going ahead with adding them to other existing fietssnelwegen, but
would like to document them on the wiki and to have some more thought
put into them. First of all, the dutch term is something very
inconsistent with the rest of OSM - perhaps "cycle_highway" is a better
fit. Secondly, maybe we should prefix them with "BE:". Thirdly, OSM tags
are mainly written in lowercase, which this tag is not.

Any more thoughts on tagging? I'm especially looking looking forward to
input from polyglot who is very familiar with them.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Pieter Vander Vennet

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update

[Mateusz Konieczny]

23 Dec 2019, 17:59 by joost.schou...@gmail.com:

>
>
>>
>> As an xmas bonus, here's another Facebookcompany (via Mapbox), 
>> Snapchat that is using OSM withoutattribution requirements (funnily 
>> there's plenty of space for areasonable and visible calculated 
>> mapbox logo and text). Theyprobably don't know, nor that they have 
>> been asked to complyover a year ago, nor have agreed with the 
>> license in everyaspect of it when stated using OSM data, nor read 
>> Mapbox TOS, orMapbox been informed on these repeated offenders, nor 
>> read themultiples reports in mailing lists, nor that they had a 
>> employeethat ran for OSMF board.
>>
>>
>> https://map.snapchat.com/
>>
>>
>> Let's continue to be hypocrites and pretendnothing is going on for 
>> over a year with these two companiesthat are corporate members of 
>> OSMF and should be the first onesto give examples. Enough with 
>> excuses. 
>>
>>
>
> The Snapchat case is a pretty clear example of how not to do things. If 
> there's space for Mapbox, there's space for OpenStreetMap. But I don't think 
> Snapchat has anything to do with Facebook.
>
> Phil, I hope you contacted them directly and not through Facebook.
>
It is quite hard to find place where one
may report this kind of info using email.

I used pr...@snap.com - is anyone aware 
of any better email address for this kind of reports?___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabouts one piece or segregated

[David Woolley]

On 23/12/2019 18:15, Nick Allen wrote:
I may be missing something here, but 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099 looks okay to me.





The OP was proposing that , 
, and 

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabouts one piece or segregated

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I may be missing something here, but 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/477263099 looks okay to me. 

The wiki at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route#Public_transport_routes
 didn't give me any clues either.

Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)

On Mon, 2019-12-23 at 14:08 +1100, Warin wrote:
> I'm looking at Wivenhoe B1028 way 477263099.
> This is a segment of a roundabout.
> 
> Would it not be better for the way to be a single feature in OSM?
> 
> I think the route relations now handle roundabouts so there should be no 
> problem there.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] osmose rétabli

[Yves P.]

> c'est rétablit.
Merci Marc.

Et au passage, merci à Fred et Olyon pour la mise en ligne des supports de 
l’ANFR.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Attribution guideline status update

[joost schouppe]

> As an xmas bonus, here's another Facebook company (via Mapbox), Snapchat
> that is using OSM without attribution requirements (funnily there's plenty
> of space for a reasonable and visible calculated mapbox logo and text).
> They probably don't know, nor that they have been asked to comply over a
> year ago, nor have agreed with the license in every aspect of it when
> stated using OSM data, nor read Mapbox TOS, or Mapbox been informed on
> these repeated offenders, nor read the multiples reports in mailing lists,
> nor that they had a employee that ran for OSMF board.
>
> https://map.snapchat.com/
>
> Let's continue to be hypocrites and pretend nothing is going on for over a
> year with these two companies that are corporate members of OSMF and should
> be the first ones to give examples. Enough with excuses.
>

The Snapchat case is a pretty clear example of how not to do things. If
there's space for Mapbox, there's space for OpenStreetMap. But I don't
think Snapchat has anything to do with Facebook.

Phil, I hope you contacted them directly and not through Facebook.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-tr] weeklyOSM #491 2019-12-10-2019-12-16

[weeklyteam]

OSM ile ilgili haberlerin haftalık derlemesi, sayı 491 Türkçe olarak çevrimiçi, 
ve her zamanki gibi OpenStreetMap dünyasında olan pek çok şeyin özetini size 
sunuyor:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/tr/archives/12659/

İyi okumalar!

weeklyOSM'e sizin de içerik önerisi yapabileceğinizi biliyor muydunuz? Sadece 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login adresine OSM hesabınızla giriş yapmanız 
yeterli.

Makale eklemekle ilgili daha detaylı bilgi almak için burayı okuyun: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM?
kim: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
nerede: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-tr mailing list
Talk-tr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tr

Re: [OSRM-talk] Bicycle routing, crossing large roads: how to get information on the roads crossed

[Michal Palenik]

I've tried it as well. no success...

similar case is for pedestrian (crossing a major, unroatable road; or
a railway; or a river with no bridge)
wheelchair users, strollers
or nordic skiing users crossing a car road

a next step would be to have a custom penalty on a node, toll booth,
stop sign, kerb (or any semi accessible barrier, stile),..
https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/issues/3862


michal
On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 07:42:44AM -0800, Spencer Gardner wrote:
> Unfortunately, I don't have a good solution to offer, but I wanted to add
> my two cents. I did a ton of research on this exact problem a couple of
> years ago and virtually none of the open source routing platforms I came
> across were properly equipped to handle it. It seems to be an issue that
> only bicycle-oriented folks think about. The solution for my problem was to
> implement in pgRouting where I can do additional processing to assign costs
> as you've described. It's not the way I'd prefer to do it but until bicycle
> routing becomes more sophisticated on other routing platforms that's what
> I've settled on.
> 
> I don't have the technical expertise to contribute code to OSRM but I'd be
> more than happy to share my experience with bicycle network planning with
> anyone looking to improve OSRM's handling of bicycles on this and other
> questions.
> 
> Spencer
> 
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 6:35 AM Richard Fairhurst 
> wrote:
> 
> > Jeroen Hook wrote:
> >
> > Is there another way to find out what type of road(s) I am crossing?
> >
> >
> > I think the easiest solution would be to allow bicycles on your
> > highway=primary, but set it to be a restricted access road (or just to have
> > a really high cost). That way you’d still call process_turn, but in reality
> > the primary road wouldn't be used for routing.
> >
> > My private cycle.travel fork does something like this in its equivalent
> > of process_turn (e.g.
> > https://cycle.travel/map?from=51.7546,-1.2612=51.7554,-1.2616), though
> > it’s a (pretty extensive) fork of 4.9.x so not directly comparable.
> >
> > Alternatively, you could do some preprocessing to mark intersections,
> > depending on the size of your source data. For a different project I wrote
> > https://github.com/systemed/intersector which identifies junctions in an
> > .osm.pbf. If you were to patch it to output node IDs, then look up those
> > node IDs in process_node, you could assign crossing penalties that way.
> >
> > Richard
> > ___
> > 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


-- 
michal palenik
www.freemap.sk
www.oma.sk

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] osmose rétabli

[marc marc]

c'est rétablit.

Le 23.12.19 à 16:01, Marc M. a écrit :
> Bonjour,
> 
> osmose est ko.
> info de freed :
> une grosse migration
> ça devait être sans coupure mais ça a coupé quand même
> ça va prendre plusieurs jours :/
> 
> on regarde ce qu'on peux faire pour rétablir au + vite
> 
> Cordialement,
> Marc
> 

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

Re: [OSRM-talk] Bicycle routing, crossing large roads: how to get information on the roads crossed

[Spencer Gardner]

Unfortunately, I don't have a good solution to offer, but I wanted to add
my two cents. I did a ton of research on this exact problem a couple of
years ago and virtually none of the open source routing platforms I came
across were properly equipped to handle it. It seems to be an issue that
only bicycle-oriented folks think about. The solution for my problem was to
implement in pgRouting where I can do additional processing to assign costs
as you've described. It's not the way I'd prefer to do it but until bicycle
routing becomes more sophisticated on other routing platforms that's what
I've settled on.

I don't have the technical expertise to contribute code to OSRM but I'd be
more than happy to share my experience with bicycle network planning with
anyone looking to improve OSRM's handling of bicycles on this and other
questions.

Spencer

On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 6:35 AM Richard Fairhurst 
wrote:

> Jeroen Hook wrote:
>
> Is there another way to find out what type of road(s) I am crossing?
>
>
> I think the easiest solution would be to allow bicycles on your
> highway=primary, but set it to be a restricted access road (or just to have
> a really high cost). That way you’d still call process_turn, but in reality
> the primary road wouldn't be used for routing.
>
> My private cycle.travel fork does something like this in its equivalent
> of process_turn (e.g.
> https://cycle.travel/map?from=51.7546,-1.2612=51.7554,-1.2616), though
> it’s a (pretty extensive) fork of 4.9.x so not directly comparable.
>
> Alternatively, you could do some preprocessing to mark intersections,
> depending on the size of your source data. For a different project I wrote
> https://github.com/systemed/intersector which identifies junctions in an
> .osm.pbf. If you were to patch it to output node IDs, then look up those
> node IDs in process_node, you could assign crossing penalties that way.
>
> Richard
> ___
> 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-GB] East Midlands New Year Footpath Mapping Social 2020

[SK53]

I was planning to close the poll tomorrow, but as it is clear that Friday
this week (27th Dec) is the best date for everyone I thought I'd close it
now to enable planning for the day.

I will update the wiki in detail this evening, but I have reserved a table
at The Horseshoes for 12:30 on Friday. If anyone else fancies joining us on
the day, you are more than welcome. The area is not well-served by public
transport at the best of times, so if someone fancies coming along but does
not use a car, do get in touch, one of us may be able to arrange a pick-up
somewhere more convenient for you. For drivers from most directions the
best way is to turn off the A52 either just before Kirk Langley or at Kirk
Langley and then follow Long Lane to the village of the same name. Long
Lane follows the course of the former Roman Road between Rocester & Little
Chester. From the A50, the junction at Hilton provides access to the area.

I hope I'll have time to prepare more detailed missing maps paths, but
MapthePaths is a good start

.

Now that a date is fixed, I think it's reasonable to start adding detail
from aerial imagery. One thing we can do is have a good look at the various
types of farmland and do some of the sub-tagging recently discussed.

Jerry







On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 12:55, SK53  wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Provisional details for a planned mapping event around the new year are
> now on the wiki:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nottingham/Mapping_Meetup/New_Year_2020
> .
>
> There's masses to be done in the area just to the West of where we visited
> last year. Similar type of terrain. Once a date is firmed up then there's
> ample scope for some arm-chair mapping which can be refined by the ground
> survey.
>
> A Doodle poll to select a date most convenient for as many as possible
> (unfortunately New Year Plant Hunt dates rule out 1st-4th Jan for me):
> https://doodle.com/poll/2edmmyvi9yeeip3q
>
> I'm anticipating the 11th or 18th Jan are likely to be most convenient.
>
> Hope people might be able to make it,
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Jerry
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Poll results: New Year Footpath Mapping 2020

[SK 53 (via Doodle)]

Hi,

SK 53 has chosen the following final date in the poll New Year
Footpath Mapping 2020:

Time zone: London

* Friday, 27 December 2019 10:30 – 12:30

Hi,
  Thanks, everyone who participated in this poll. To my surprise
Friday this week (27th) is the date which suits most people, so I've
closed the poll to give enough notice for planning.
  
  I've booked a
table for 12:30 in a room with tiled floors, just in case we get very
muddy.
  
  Cheers,
  
  Jerry
  
  PS. Will add a bit more direct to
talk-gb

Go to poll
http://link.e.doodle.com/wf/click?upn=8dNs8i4ZDyStMeI1Sn5r9JSbK59YEKy2D80mjr9TQq6aiDK-2FrJaZBStsK4BaCwrnx0PNwb2wt20Fy572Ko2lcQ6k-2F9EV4geR71qLURabGPYQo2iasLPcfeM-2FUHHc7Oi3-2B8-2B80pAHpB6hr7GbsPNVmgiF7C1RlZ6wX6INXnxxp6prHHzbuBI1IaapeJ464jJdqqFuJwXgzWXqfkPqlpSuhlEWKQ62-2FgufkHB17KgmTDU-3D_59iWORz-2FosSuBdb8QFmnU0IGcgyBR7wFTpywioyK-2Fi1S67TGUhtDRrlFUgikK6NUoZKZn1qQLXlZIRg4MzHGqz2zj-2BsEaMnT0WiUI1H0yfXRlfDnwob5XbnGC45kfj0uhFf8uRXLz-2BxGc-2B1kA55-2BgpSpggUAEqlwGdX6TC3mQOnPnrwaO0INgAGvEQb71nzThHqYt9cx1BEZa-2BpQ-2FBQJ2nE0RS07bpxzjcmw5dahWrh2kDPu4WdAwx4eWaCs0UKflfSvu1BQq7g3SUyVLisOinRznhvFkPITqTyQmWwCTdM6JPhJxSywB75XHdq-2B5CPyaRJtSj6PeiyLLxIwzcwbspzsAmJPx-2FYYjYnxBiWp3c5Bm-2BOXQjsn-2BIKmlk0zZ9n2EVEE-2F8r-2FMf8DRFEboVhf9iNM-2FaESDzi5LHGHoDmUO28-3D

--

You have received this e-mail because SK 53 has invited you to
participate in the Doodle poll New Year Footpath Mapping 2020.





Doodle is also available for iOS and Android


Doodle AG, Werdstrasse 21, 8021 Zürich
BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Doodle AG//Doodle//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
X-WR-TIMEZONE:Europe/London
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER:MAILTO:mai...@doodle.com
SUMMARY:New Year Footpath Mapping 2020 [Doodle]
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:BUSY
URL:https://doodle.com/poll/2edmmyvi9yeeip3q
LOCATION:Horseshoes Long Lane Derbyshire
DESCRIPTION:Initiated by SK 53\nSee details on wiki under Nottingham/Mapping_Meetup/New_Year_2020\n\n\nParticipants:\n- trigpoint\n- Andy\n- SK 53\n- John Stanworth\n- tomhukins\n- dudone\n\n\nhttps://doodle.com/poll/2edmmyvi9yeeip3q
DTSTAMP:20191223T151540Z
UID:157744260-1889123...@doodle.biz
DTSTART:20191227T103000Z
DTEND:20191227T123000Z
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] osmose ko

[François Lacombe]

Bon courage à vous
C'est que l'outil évolue et sera encore mieux après !

François

Le lun. 23 déc. 2019 à 16:01, marc marc  a
écrit :

> Bonjour,
>
> osmose est ko.
> info de freed :
> une grosse migration
> ça devait être sans coupure mais ça a coupé quand même
> ça va prendre plusieurs jours :/
>
> on regarde ce qu'on peux faire pour rétablir au + vite
>
> Cordialement,
> Marc
> ___
> 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

[OSM-talk-fr] osmose ko

[marc marc]

Bonjour,

osmose est ko.
info de freed :
une grosse migration
ça devait être sans coupure mais ça a coupé quand même
ça va prendre plusieurs jours :/

on regarde ce qu'on peux faire pour rétablir au + vite

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Chambres d'agriculture, syndicats ouvriers

[Eric Brosselin - Osm]

Bonjour,

/Rien ne semble convenir comme attributs pour les chambres 
d'agriculture et autres chambres consulaires 
. //


//Que mettriez vous ? social_centre ne semble pas convenir car c'est 
un organisme semi-public (certains syndicats agricoles l'ont oublié ;) 
). //


//.office=government me semble trop orienté... gouvernement. /
Il est dit sur https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chambre_consulaire que ce 
sont des établissements publics d'État.

government semble être la solution.

Je pense qu'il faut utiliser office=government + government=* + 
admin_level=* pour le niveau administratif local, régional, national


Voir les exemples ici => 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:government





/De même, pour les syndicats ouvriers (CGT, CFDT, FO, CFTC, Sud, etc.) 
je mettrais amenity=social_centre mais j'ai trouvé de tout sur OSM. /


Sur le wiki OpenStreetMap sur la page "amenity=social_centre" (version 
en anglais) on parle bien d'associations,  organisations et "union 
halls" , syndicats donc.
Le lien Wikipédia de la page redirige "Social centre" vers "Community 
centre" en anglais et son équivalent français est "Centre social" 
(https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_social)
Là on n'a plus trop de précisions sur ce qui peut être hébergé dans ce 
type de centre (animations, services ...)


Si c'est un regroupement de syndicats en « maison des syndicats » comme 
il en existe alors pourquoi pas amenity=social_centre pour le bâtiment 
et pour les bureaux « isolés » un office=union pourrait convenir.



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

Re: [OSRM-talk] Bicycle routing, crossing large roads: how to get information on the roads crossed

[Richard Fairhurst]

Jeroen Hook wrote:
> Is there another way to find out what type of road(s) I am crossing?

I think the easiest solution would be to allow bicycles on your 
highway=primary, but set it to be a restricted access road (or just to have a 
really high cost). That way you’d still call process_turn, but in reality the 
primary road wouldn't be used for routing.

My private cycle.travel fork does something like this in its equivalent of 
process_turn (e.g. 
https://cycle.travel/map?from=51.7546,-1.2612=51.7554,-1.2616), though it’s 
a (pretty extensive) fork of 4.9.x so not directly comparable.

Alternatively, you could do some preprocessing to mark intersections, depending 
on the size of your source data. For a different project I wrote 
https://github.com/systemed/intersector which identifies junctions in an 
.osm.pbf. If you were to patch it to output node IDs, then look up those node 
IDs in process_node, you could assign crossing penalties that way.

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

Re: [Talk-se] NMD 2018 Import delområden Gällivare

[Karl-Johan Karlsson]

Fast jag kanske ska tillägga att det är min åsikt. Det här är ju ett
opensource projekt så det finns ingen som direkt bestämmer. Den första
prioriteten när man ritar kartan ska inte vara att den ska se snygg ut när
man sitter vid datorn och tittar på den, utan att den ska vara användbar
när man står i verkligheten och använder kartan. Står man i en skog och ser
på kartan att det är skog markerat oavbrutet mil efter mil utan avbrott, så
är troligtvis inte kartan så användbar.
Sedan är det givetvis så att kartan byggs i små små steg, där flera
användare bygger vidare på vad som redan finns. Så länge som man hela tiden
gör små förbättringar som andra kan bygga vidare på så är det ju bra. Det
som stoppat NMD importen är att många uppfattar att NMD importen gör kartan
svårare att bygga vidare på.

Den mån 23 dec. 2019 kl 14:32 skrev Hans K :

> Aha, okej. Då förstår jag. Ytorna i Gällivare är lite för stora för att
> hanteras manuellt tyvärr. Får fixa det som är närmast samhället och låta
> resten vara.
>
> För på wiki-sidan står det att importen ännu är aktiv "The import is
> currently (2019-08-01) at the active stage".
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/NMD_2018_Import_Plan
>
> Hans
>
> --
> *From:* Karl-Johan Karlsson 
> *Sent:* 23 December 2019 14:14
> *To:* OpenStreetMap Sverige mailinglista 
> *Subject:* Re: [Talk-se] NMD 2018 Import delområden Gällivare
>
>
>
> Den mån 23 dec. 2019 kl 13:18 skrev :
>
> Hej Hans
> Kul att du vill hjälpa till. Tyvärr är NMD import i dagsläget stoppad
> eftersom underlaget är för dålig kvalitet och innebär mera arbete än det är
> värt.
> Om du vill kartera manuellt rekommenderar jag at du manuellt lägger in LMs
> flygfotolager i josm och kör.
>
>
> Om du vill kartera manuellt så var noggrann d.v.s gör inte så att du
> skapar gigantiska areor och markerar allt som skog (för att det mesta är
> skog), för det ger ännu sämre karta än den "NMD import" som för tillfället
> är stoppad. Det finns tyvärr inga snabba lösningar om man vill ha en
> användbar karta.
>
>
> Mvh
> pangoSE
>
> On December 23, 2019 11:29:19 AM GMT+01:00, Hans K 
> wrote:
>
> Hej!
>
> Jag är från Gällivare och tänkte att det vore roligt om det fanns lite
> bättre bakgrundsdata i området. Det är ju lite tomt här uppe. Jag har
> lyckats att hitta till NMD importen men området för Gällivare är ju väldigt
> stort och det stod att man skulle vända sig till denna listan för att fråga
> om någon kan dela upp området Gällivare i tiles. Det skulle uppskattas
> mycket och göra jobbet like enklare.
>
> Hans
>
> ___
> Talk-se mailing list
> Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
>
> ___
> Talk-se mailing list
> Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
>
___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] NMD 2018 Import delområden Gällivare

[Hans K]

Aha, okej. Då förstår jag. Ytorna i Gällivare är lite för stora för att 
hanteras manuellt tyvärr. Får fixa det som är närmast samhället och låta resten 
vara.

För på wiki-sidan står det att importen ännu är aktiv "The import is currently 
(2019-08-01) at the active stage".

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/NMD_2018_Import_Plan

Hans


From: Karl-Johan Karlsson 
Sent: 23 December 2019 14:14
To: OpenStreetMap Sverige mailinglista 
Subject: Re: [Talk-se] NMD 2018 Import delområden Gällivare



Den mån 23 dec. 2019 kl 13:18 skrev 
mailto:pang...@riseup.net>>:
Hej Hans
Kul att du vill hjälpa till. Tyvärr är NMD import i dagsläget stoppad eftersom 
underlaget är för dålig kvalitet och innebär mera arbete än det är värt.
Om du vill kartera manuellt rekommenderar jag at du manuellt lägger in LMs 
flygfotolager i josm och kör.

Om du vill kartera manuellt så var noggrann d.v.s gör inte så att du skapar 
gigantiska areor och markerar allt som skog (för att det mesta är skog), för 
det ger ännu sämre karta än den "NMD import" som för tillfället är stoppad. Det 
finns tyvärr inga snabba lösningar om man vill ha en användbar karta.

Mvh
pangoSE

On December 23, 2019 11:29:19 AM GMT+01:00, Hans K 
mailto:kobbe_...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Hej!

Jag är från Gällivare och tänkte att det vore roligt om det fanns lite bättre 
bakgrundsdata i området. Det är ju lite tomt här uppe. Jag har lyckats att 
hitta till NMD importen men området för Gällivare är ju väldigt stort och det 
stod att man skulle vända sig till denna listan för att fråga om någon kan dela 
upp området Gällivare i tiles. Det skulle uppskattas mycket och göra jobbet 
like enklare.

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

Re: [Talk-se] NMD 2018 Import delområden Gällivare

[Karl-Johan Karlsson]

Den mån 23 dec. 2019 kl 13:18 skrev :

> Hej Hans
> Kul att du vill hjälpa till. Tyvärr är NMD import i dagsläget stoppad
> eftersom underlaget är för dålig kvalitet och innebär mera arbete än det är
> värt.
> Om du vill kartera manuellt rekommenderar jag at du manuellt lägger in LMs
> flygfotolager i josm och kör.
>

Om du vill kartera manuellt så var noggrann d.v.s gör inte så att du skapar
gigantiska areor och markerar allt som skog (för att det mesta är skog),
för det ger ännu sämre karta än den "NMD import" som för tillfället är
stoppad. Det finns tyvärr inga snabba lösningar om man vill ha en användbar
karta.


> Mvh
> pangoSE
>
> On December 23, 2019 11:29:19 AM GMT+01:00, Hans K 
> wrote:
>>
>> Hej!
>>
>> Jag är från Gällivare och tänkte att det vore roligt om det fanns lite
>> bättre bakgrundsdata i området. Det är ju lite tomt här uppe. Jag har
>> lyckats att hitta till NMD importen men området för Gällivare är ju väldigt
>> stort och det stod att man skulle vända sig till denna listan för att fråga
>> om någon kan dela upp området Gällivare i tiles. Det skulle uppskattas
>> mycket och göra jobbet like enklare.
>>
>> Hans
>>
> ___
> Talk-se mailing list
> Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
>
___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [OSRM-talk] OSRM-talk Digest, Vol 82, Issue 4

[qinggang wang]

How could I take part in the talk? 

> 在 2019年12月23日，下午8:01，osrm-talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org 写道：
> 
> Send OSRM-talk mailing list submissions to
>   osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   osrm-talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   osrm-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of OSRM-talk digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Bicycle routing, crossing large roads: how to get information
>  on the roads crossed (Jeroen Hoek)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2019 19:01:59 +0100
> From: Jeroen Hoek 
> To: osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: [OSRM-talk] Bicycle routing, crossing large roads: how to get
>   information on the roads crossed
> Message-ID: <0f2fa4b0-8d2c-19fe-58e3-a3017fd62...@jeroenhoek.nl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I am looking into a bicycle routing problem and need some help on how to
> access certain information from within the bicycle profile.
> 
> The routing problem may be summarized as follows. Two routes are
> available; one of these crosses a large road (say, highway=primary),
> with an uncontrolled and unmarked crossing; the other is slightly
> longer, and crosses no roads at all, instead passing under the same road
> via a tunnel.
> 
> The second route should be preferred if the detour is fairly brief. That
> is, in routing terms the level crossing should be penalized in certain
> cases, such as crossing higher priority roads (i.e., secondary and
> upwards), and additionally, penalized for having unmarked or
> uncontrolled crossings. The number of lanes may further penalize this route.
> 
> This would let the bicycle profile prefer safer routes if reasonable in
> terms of delay incurred. It could apply to the foot profile as well.
> 
> Example with the undesirable, but legal crossing:
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_bike=53.20425%2C5.77589%3B53.20565%2C5.77266#map=19/53.20525/5.77427=N
> 
> The preferred route would start like this:
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_bike=53.20425%2C5.77589%3B53.20528%2C5.77433#map=19/53.20506/5.77455=N
> 
> Looking at the API provided I can see that I can get at the crossing-tag
> (if any) in process_node, but it looks like the information I need to
> conclude that a route crosses a large road is not available. The
> process_turn method has it, but that method seems to be only called when
> the a node marks a point where permissible routes branch.
> 
> However, in my sample case there is no branching for the bicycle route:
> the highway=primary being crossed does not allow bicycles, so at the
> crossings with this road there are no alternative paths, and thus
> process_turn is not called at that node.
> 
> Is there another way to find out what type of road(s) I am crossing?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Jeroen Hoek
> (GitHub: jdhoek, OpenStreetMap: JeroenHoek)
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> ___
> OSRM-talk mailing list
> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
> 
> 
> --
> 
> End of OSRM-talk Digest, Vol 82, Issue 4
> 


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

Re: [Talk-se] NMD 2018 Import delområden Gällivare

[pangose]

Hej Hans
Kul att du vill hjälpa till. Tyvärr är NMD import i dagsläget stoppad eftersom 
underlaget är för dålig kvalitet och innebär mera arbete än det är värt.
Om du vill kartera manuellt rekommenderar jag at du manuellt lägger in LMs 
flygfotolager i josm och kör. 
Mvh
pangoSE 

On December 23, 2019 11:29:19 AM GMT+01:00, Hans K  
wrote:
>Hej!
>
>Jag är från Gällivare och tänkte att det vore roligt om det fanns lite
>bättre bakgrundsdata i området. Det är ju lite tomt här uppe. Jag har
>lyckats att hitta till NMD importen men området för Gällivare är ju
>väldigt stort och det stod att man skulle vända sig till denna listan
>för att fråga om någon kan dela upp området Gällivare i tiles. Det
>skulle uppskattas mycket och göra jobbet like enklare.
>
>Hans
___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Chambres d'agriculture, syndicats ouvriers

[marc marc]

Bonjour,

Le 23.12.19 à 12:18, Alain Rpnpif a écrit :
> chambres d'agriculture et autres chambres consulaires
> .
> 
> Que mettriez vous ?

office=government me semble convenir puisque c'est un établisement
de droit public.
sinon tu as aussi la valeur administration

> De même, pour les syndicats ouvriers (CGT, CFDT, FO, CFTC, Sud, etc.) je
> mettrais amenity=social_centre mais j'ai trouvé de tout sur OSM.

suppose être office=association
il y a aussi des office=union et labor_union

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Roundabouts one piece or segregated

[David Woolley via Talk-GB]

On 23/12/2019 03:08, Warin wrote:

I'm looking at Wivenhoe B1028 way 477263099.
This is a segment of a roundabout.

Would it not be better for the way to be a single feature in OSM?


It is rarely a good idea to revert from more concrete to more abstract, 
so I would say no.


Incidentally, many things mapped as roundabouts aren't legally 
roundabouts, but rather traffic circles.


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

[OSM-talk-fr] Chambres d'agriculture, syndicats ouvriers

[Alain Rpnpif]

Bonjour,

Rien ne semble convenir comme attributs pour les chambres d'agriculture 
et autres chambres consulaires 
.


Que mettriez vous ? social_centre ne semble pas convenir car c'est un 
organisme semi-public (certains syndicats agricoles l'ont oublié ;) ).


.office=government me semble trop orienté... gouvernement.


De même, pour les syndicats ouvriers (CGT, CFDT, FO, CFTC, Sud, etc.) je 
mettrais amenity=social_centre mais j'ai trouvé de tout sur OSM.


Qu'en pensez-vous ?

--
Rpnpif


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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] SPAM, Re: SPAM, Re: Contributions folklo

[Arnaud Champollion]

Merci à tous pour vos réponses.

Je vais d'abord essayer de me former aux relations et aux 
multipolygones, ensuite je relirai la discussion. Là je sens que j'ai 
une marche à franchir :) avant de comprendre.




Le 23/12/2019 à 02:51, Philippe Verdy a écrit :
En principe il faudrait d'une part qualifier le trou de la clairière 
et d'autre part l'exclure (membres "inner") du polygone extérieure de 
la forêt. Il est parfois possible de ne pas faire ça selon les types 
de surface, ça marche pour le rendu car certains types d'objets sont 
sysmétatiquement ordonnés et dessinés pardessus d'autres, et c'est 
souvent le cas d'objets petits (les batiments par exemple, mais aussi 
les linéaires comme les routes, voies ferrées et cours d'eaux ou les 
frontières); cependant entre deux "landuse" ou "natural" il n'y a pas 
d'ordre garanti (dont en cas de conflit on pourrait avoir un objet 
masquant l'autre); et il vaut mieux faire explicitement les exclusions 
("inner") pour les surfaces qui ne s'appliquent pas simultanément que 
de compter sur le rendu.


Attention car certaines surfaces peuvent aussi se combiner de façon 
valide (et le rendu les affiche en transparence l'une de l'autre: 
zones de marais ou forêt débordant sur l'eau par exemple).



___
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: [Talk-GB] Disused or empty apartments

[Gareth L]

Thank you all for your contributions to this discussion. There does appear to 
still be a bit of a trick here as the disused tag for areas/buildings is still 
expected to be used with regards to an amenity tag, and building=apartments is 
a description of the construction/building but also indicates its use.

The towers in question are due to be demolished in 2020. I’ve made them 
building=yes and kept the building level tags, and name, as they’re still 
visible. The landuse has been changed from residential to brownfield.
Additionally, i’ve added a note and a source indicating their expected 
demolishion date.

Fwiw, building=disused with disused=apartment *does* render differently (dashed 
lines, like construction) in the ID editor at least... but that’s just one 
render, so i’ve held back.

Gareth


From: Warin
Sent: 18 December 2019 23:47
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Disused or empty apartments

On 19/12/19 00:41, Mike Baggaley wrote:
> Perhaps setting both building=yes and disused: building=apartments
> would fulfill all the needs.

Err no. Having both tags on the one object is contradictory.

How is it determined which tag to render?


A building=* is rendered one way.
A disused:building=* is rendered another.

So .. is it a "building" or a "disused building"???



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

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

[Talk-se] NMD 2018 Import delområden Gällivare

[Hans K]

Hej!

Jag är från Gällivare och tänkte att det vore roligt om det fanns lite bättre 
bakgrundsdata i området. Det är ju lite tomt här uppe. Jag har lyckats att 
hitta till NMD importen men området för Gällivare är ju väldigt stort och det 
stod att man skulle vända sig till denna listan för att fråga om någon kan dela 
upp området Gällivare i tiles. Det skulle uppskattas mycket och göra jobbet 
like enklare.

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

[OSM-talk-be] Réunion des contributeurs - Arlon - 13 janvier 2020

[Pierre Parmentier]

À vos agendas !

Ci-après l'invitation à la prochaine réunion des contributeurs
OpenStreetMap à Arlon. Chacun est le bienvenu : curieux, acharné ou
dilettante. Le but est d'échanger et de s'informer !

Date : lundi 13 janvier 2020 à 19.30 h.
Lieu : club house du Tennis Club Garisart dit L'Espelette, Parc d'activités
économiques de Weyler 30, 6700 Arlon,  tél. +32 63 22 74 40,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=49.6498=5.8241#map=11/49.6498/5.8241

Au programme : bilan de l'année écoulée, dernières réalisations des
contributeurs, activités OSM dans les diverses communes de la région,
échanges d'idées, projets personnels et collectifs, bavardages.

===

Mark your calendars!

Below is the invitation to the next OpenStreetMap contributors meeting in
Arlon. Everyone is welcome: curious, relentless or dilettante. The goal is
to exchange and learn!

Date: Monday 13 January 2020 at 19.30.
Location: Club house of the Tennis Club Garisart dit L'Espelette, Parc
d'activités économiques de Weyler 30, 6700 Arlon, phone +32 63 22 74 40,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=49.6498=5.8241#map=11/49.6498/5.8241

On the program: review of the past year, latest achievements of
contributors, OSM activities in the various municipalities of the region,
exchange of ideas, personal and collective projects, chatter.

===

Web: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Pays_d%27Arlon

===

Pierre Parmentier
aka foxandpotatoes
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapillary

[Guy Vanvuchelen]

Inderdaad. Enkele dagen geleden heb ik dat nog ervaren.  Ik dacht dat op een 
stuk weg mijn smartphone was uitgevallen en wilde een paar dagen later  daarom 
terug gaan.  Toon bleek ineens dat het wel opgenomen was. Geduld is dus 
blijkbaar een goede deugd.

 

Guy Vanvuchelen

 

Van: joost schouppe [mailto:joost.schou...@gmail.com] 
Verzonden: maandag 23 december 2019 10:35
Aan: OpenStreetMap Belgium
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapillary

 

Dag Guy,

In mijn ervaring duiken de foto's rapper op in iD en JOSM dan in de website van 
Mapillary zelf. Gaat het om een relatief nieuwe sequentie?

 

Op do 19 dec. 2019 om 15:40 schreef Guy Vanvuchelen :

Bedankt voor de info, maar……..

Na nog wat proberen denk ik dat als je één foto selecteert de hele sequentie, 
waar die foto deel van uitmaakt, blauw kleurt en zo blijft tot je een foto uit 
een andere sequentie selecteerdt

Hier in de buurt zijn door minstens drie personen opnames gemaakt: Polyglot, 
Filipc en ikzelf (GuyVV) en ze kleuren allemaal blauw als je ze selecteert.

Maar ik begrijp niet hoe het kan dat in Mapillary de foto’s niet getoond worden 
en in JOSM wel  (Driebek, Tienen) terwijl JOSM ze uit Mapillary haalt.

 

 

Guy Vanvuchelen

 

Van: Georges De Gruyter [mailto:zors1...@gmail.com] 
Verzonden: donderdag 19 december 2019 13:40
Aan: OpenStreetMap Belgium
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapillary

 

Blauwe lijnen zijn je eigen foto’s, Guy.

 

 

Op 19 dec. 2019, om 13:14 heeft Guy Vanvuchelen  het 
volgende geschreven:

 

Kan iemand me vertellen hoe het komt dat ik bepaalde stukken uit een  fotoserie 
niet zie op Mapillary en wel in JOSM. (zie bijlage)

Wat is het verschil tussen blauw en groen?

 

Guy Vanvuchelen

 

 

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

 

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



-- 

Joost Schouppe

OpenStreetMap   | Twitter 
  | LinkedIn 
  | Meetup 
 

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

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapillary

[joost schouppe]

Dag Guy,
In mijn ervaring duiken de foto's rapper op in iD en JOSM dan in de website
van Mapillary zelf. Gaat het om een relatief nieuwe sequentie?

Op do 19 dec. 2019 om 15:40 schreef Guy Vanvuchelen <
guy.vanvuche...@gmail.com>:

> Bedankt voor de info, maar……..
>
> Na nog wat proberen denk ik dat als je één foto selecteert de hele
> sequentie, waar die foto deel van uitmaakt, blauw kleurt en zo blijft tot
> je een foto uit een andere sequentie selecteerdt
>
> Hier in de buurt zijn door minstens drie personen opnames gemaakt:
> Polyglot, Filipc en ikzelf (GuyVV) en ze kleuren allemaal blauw als je ze
> selecteert.
>
> Maar ik begrijp niet hoe het kan dat in Mapillary de foto’s niet getoond
> worden en in JOSM wel  (Driebek, Tienen) terwijl JOSM ze uit Mapillary
> haalt.
>
>
>
>
>
> Guy Vanvuchelen
>
>
>
> *Van:* Georges De Gruyter [mailto:zors1...@gmail.com]
> *Verzonden:* donderdag 19 december 2019 13:40
> *Aan:* OpenStreetMap Belgium
> *Onderwerp:* Re: [OSM-talk-be] Mapillary
>
>
>
> Blauwe lijnen zijn je eigen foto’s, Guy.
>
>
>
>
>
> Op 19 dec. 2019, om 13:14 heeft Guy Vanvuchelen 
> het volgende geschreven:
>
>
>
> Kan iemand me vertellen hoe het komt dat ik bepaalde stukken uit een
>  fotoserie niet zie op Mapillary en wel in JOSM. (zie bijlage)
>
> Wat is het verschil tussen blauw en groen?
>
>
>
> Guy Vanvuchelen
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>


-- 
Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap  |
Twitter  | LinkedIn
 | Meetup

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

Re: [OSM-talk] iD as default editor

[Tom Hughes]

Indeed - it has been the default since August 2013.

Tom

On 23/12/2019 07:15, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:

check your OSM settings. AFAIK, iD is the default editor.

On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 2:10 AM Sören Reinecke via talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:


Hello,

so far I know currently Postlatch is the default editor on osm.org
 . Since it needs Flash to run and most users do not
have Flash anymore, clicking on the "Edit" button leads to almost
blank page. Without knowing that you need to change Postlatch to iD
in settings, you're lost as newbie. This is not very beginner friendly

Are they any plans to make iD the default editor or is iD already
the default editor?

Cheers

Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram



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


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




--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

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