Hi all,
this proposal [place=land/water + size_level=1 to 10] is now open for
voting. Please vote at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Geographical_Places
I have made two changes to the original proposal:
1) place_level tag changed to size_level
2) Proposal extended to
for most intersections
having synchronized signals. And the extra effort is minimal.
polderrunner
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Proposal for tagging land areas covered by greenhouses used for growing
plants.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/greenhouse_horticulture
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
This proposal for tagging land covered with greenhouses is now open for
voting. Please visit the proposal and cast your vote at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/greenhouse_horticulture
Polderrunner
___
talk mailing list
talk
We certainly can't beat Google here!
http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=15lat=52.00686lon=4.32042layers=B0TF
(use the slider to blend the osm map in and out)
Google Maps are years ahead of reality in this new construction area.
All the streets 'missing' from OSM are also non-existent in the
Dave F. wrote:
It might be worth contacting the developer. They might have plans that
they can let you copy.
Not sure you got my point (I should have used a smiley). I don't want to
put anything into osm that is just lines on a blueprint in a drawer at
the municipality. I map
There is a need for a better way of labeling geographical features such
as seas, peninsulas, mountain ranges etc. The current options of either
associating a name=* tag directly with the natural=* tag or using
place=locality with a name tag do not address the problems of selecting
proper zoom
in a gpx file, prune undesired
parts of tracks and optionally view them in Google Maps or OSM! You'll
have to edit each track individually, unfortunately. No batch mode. But
there is a long weekend ahead with no mapping..
Ole / polderrunner
___
talk
Valent Turkovic wrote:
There are some valid ideas that don't need much cpu processing or some
fancy coding. Just tag bot accounts as bots and offer to remove them from
history list.
Why bother whether the changeset was created by a bot or not. Simply
offer the user the choice not to
mvg
Ole/Polderrunner
___
Talk-nl mailing list
Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
Zijn er nog lieden in de streek Den
Haag-Rotterdam-Bergschenhoek-Zoetermeer
leiden die zin hebben om wat fiestroutes compleet te maken.
Dit voorjaar zijn er 2 netwerken (rotterdam en haaglanden) geopend, en
die
mogen nu best worden
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
Dat nieuwe schema is zeker beter, maar heeft een paar nadelen:
-Flink wat meer dom werk
Zoals Lennard zegt: Weinig extra werk.
-Aan de netwerk relatie kan je niet zien welke knooppunten deelnemen,
anders dan de interne node nummers.
iemand (cetest?) de veranderingen van
'cetest' aan #2816 toevoegen en dan #1021790 verwijderen?
Ole / polderrunner
Ronald wrote:
Ik hoop dat iemand tijd heeft om naar LF2 bij Moerkapelle (plaatsje bij
Zoetermeer) te kijken.
Ik zie hem daar 3x over elkaar staan.
Ronald
som i Holland.
Ole/polderrunner
___
Talk-dk mailing list
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk
Freek wrote:
On Friday 20 November 2009, Morten Bek Ditlevsen wrote:
Skyggeveje eller ej har jeg ikke nogen stærk holdning til - MEN mht. til
omstrukturering af data, der allerede findes i OSM ville jeg mene, at det
kun bør gøres -hvis det tilfører ny information til projektet-.
1. Så i mine
Morten Kjeldgaard wrote:
Før jul gennemgik jeg derfor så mange rundkørsler jeg kunne finde her i
kortet her i Århus området, og mange af dem var ligeledes forkerte i
omløbsretning. Enkelte var ellipse eller bananformede.
Tjekkede lige mine rundkørsler og fandt sandelig en 'wrong way', ups.
Er
Opgrader til en nyere (development) version af JOSM. Jeg bruger i
øjeblikket version 2877 som viser veje med et 'cycleway=*' tag stiplede,
f.eks. secondary med lane some orange/violet.
Kiggede iøvrigt på et stykke af rute 161 i JOSM. Der skal da ikke både
være en 'cycleway=lane' på
Well, jeg bruger normalt gadenavnsskiltet på vejen som reference. Og det
er altid med apostrof ved veje med allé-navne. Ud fra princippet med at
man mapper what's on the ground så har jeg korrigeret adresser på de
pågældende gader til at stemme overens med selve gadenavnet.
Carsten Nielsen
Peter Brodersen wrote:
Hej,
... og så er opdateringen kørt igennem.
Gennem XAPI hentede jeg alle noder med addr:postcode=7130. Jeg trækkede
så alle ids ud på noder, som havde polderrunner som seneste bruger
(2.540 noder), og dem har jeg så tvunget min bot til at tygge igennem i
de
Rasmus Vendelboe wrote:
Hej,
Blå prikker betyder access=destination
F.eks. veje skiltet med Ærindekørsel tilladt eller lignende. Kun
adgang, hvis det er den eneste rute til destinationen.
Grønne prikker betyder access=permissive
Privat vej, men lodsejeren giver offentligheden generel
20 matches
Mail list logo
