Re: [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users
Hey everyone, Just a question which no one seems to have addressed - is there any evidence that Go is actually using a *feed* of OSM data, rather than just a one-off dump? It's really rare, IMHO, for anyone to bother with a feed for a project like this - so much easier to just get a planet extract, process it, and do whatever you want with it. For the Go people to actually constantly update from live OSM data seems like a lot of work, for not much benefit. If they're *not* using live data, then as soon as the Go players realise that, then presumably the vandalism will stop. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] City of Melbourne data
Awesome! I sit with the GIS team, so if you need any information about the spatial data or any questions, don't hesitate. We have quite a few identifiers of various types (asset IDs, property IDs etc), so it may be helpful to import those to facilitate future updates? Another couple of datasets to look at are the bar/tavern/pub and cafe/restaurant ones. They're comprehensive lists of every establishment of those types across the whole municipality, updated on a rolling cycle every 2 years. Steve On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Daniel O'Connor <daniel.ocon...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'll put my hand up for (slowly) importing addresses; have begun sketching > out a plan in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue/ > data.melbourne.vic.gov.au-addresses > > Dataset: > https://data.melbourne.vic.gov.au/Property-Planning/ > Address-Points/a7rp-xtya > > Sent email re explicit permission (all datasets), will add to wiki. > > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Daniel O'Connor < > daniel.ocon...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> A good dataset may be address point data, if available. I know we have >> GNAF, but we've been unable to get the explicit permission needed. >> >> Coverage is OK at the moment, so any import would be better as a >> semi-manual, street by street kind of thing. >> >> >> Public toilets, BBQs, Playgrounds, Park names, etc also spring to mind. >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> I'm a long time contirbutor (user:Stevage) but a bit quiet of late. >>> I'm now working as Senior Open Data Specialist at City of Melbourne (email: >>> opend...@melbourne.vic.gov.au), and have just got approval for our data >>> to be used in OpenStreetMap. >>> >>> So: If someone would like to email that address and formally request >>> permission to use current and future open data in OSM, I'd be very happy to >>> respond in the affirmative. >>> >>> Also: is anyone interested in importing any of our data? You can see >>> most of our public spatial data at maps.melbourne.vic.gov.au (to >>> actually access it, go to data.melbourne.vic.gov.au). If there is >>> interesting data on the maps site that's not on the open data portal, we'll >>> prioritise getting it out. >>> >>> Perhaps some of the street furniture datasets (bike hoops, water >>> fountains etc) would be good starting points? >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> Talk-au mailing list >>> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >>> >>> >> > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] City of Melbourne data
Hi all, I'm a long time contirbutor (user:Stevage) but a bit quiet of late. I'm now working as Senior Open Data Specialist at City of Melbourne (email: opend...@melbourne.vic.gov.au), and have just got approval for our data to be used in OpenStreetMap. So: If someone would like to email that address and formally request permission to use current and future open data in OSM, I'd be very happy to respond in the affirmative. Also: is anyone interested in importing any of our data? You can see most of our public spatial data at maps.melbourne.vic.gov.au (to actually access it, go to data.melbourne.vic.gov.au). If there is interesting data on the maps site that's not on the open data portal, we'll prioritise getting it out. Perhaps some of the street furniture datasets (bike hoops, water fountains etc) would be good starting points? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY -> ODbL negotiators?
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Jukka Rahkonenwrote: > > Have you noticed that there are already quite many Australian datasets > including Victorian Government data listed here: > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Contributor_specific_attribution_and_disclaimer > > Thanks, Jukka. I suspect that "permission" isn't actually valid, as it seems to extend from data.gov.au (Federal government) but most of the datasets there are state or territory (eg, the VicMap Rivers dataset), and are published on the relevant state/territory data portals (data.vic.gov.au, data.act.gov.au) etc. Steve ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY -> ODbL negotiators?
Wow, great responses everyone - much appreciated. Simon Poole: >Before this discussion goes off on a tangent, which version of CC-by are they currently using? http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/ You can see this for instance at: https://www.data.vic.gov.au/data/dataset/vicmap-hydro-connector-watercourse Richard Fairhurst: >In which case they've chosen the wrong licence. >If you license your work under a permissive, attribution-only licence >(CC-BY), then you are automatically giving permission for it to be >relicensed under a share-alike, attribution-only licence (CC-BY-SA). You >can't license under CC-BY and say "no-one may incorporate this data into a >dataset with share-alike restrictions". That would defeat the point of a Thanks for confirming that. I was a bit confused by the term in the CC-BY deed: >You may not apply legal terms or technological measures <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/#> that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. Which could be interpreted to mean you can't apply CC-BY-SA which "restricts others" from using the data and not sharing it, which "the license" (CC-BY) "permits". But CC's wiki explicitly says this is ok: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions#If_I_derive_or_adapt_material_offered_under_a_Creative_Commons_license.2C_which_CC_license.28s.29_can_I_use.3F >When creating an adaptation of material under the license identified in the lefthand column [BY], you may license your contributions to the adaptation under one of the licenses indicated on the top row [BY-SA] if the corresponding box is green [it is]. Richard again: >Where "etc." means "TomTom". There are only four worldwide geodata providers. It's hardly a slippery slope of individual permissions. Good point. Although hypothetically there could be non-worldwide providers. Andrew Turner: >So a simpler route here would be to suggest "upgrading" to use CC-By 4.0? Getting DELWP (and most likely the rest of the Victorian government) to switch to CC-BY 4.0, let alone CC-0, would be a huge task that would probably involve all kinds of bureaucracy, working groups, etc etc. Richard Best: [a long, very helpful email currently stuck in moderation] >Perhaps helpfully, there is a New Zealand Government precedent for the situation you're facing here. Land Information New Zealand licenses a wide range of geospatial data under CC-BY licences. However, it has also allowed data to be made available on OSM under the ODbL. See here for details: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/LINZ >I suggest you draw the Victorian State Government's attention to the approach taken by Land Information in New Zealand, with a view to asking the Victorian State Government to take the same approach. I completely understand their position of not wanting to "get into creating one-off variations for every potential user with a preference" but I think it's important to appreciate that we're talking here about a global project which has decided on the ODbL, that it would be extremely difficult to change the current regime to another one and that there is no real downside to the Victorian State Government dual-licensing its data, once under CC-BY and separately under the ODbL (or, actually, allowing OSMF to license under the ODbL). It's perfectly entitled to do that and people who want to use the data directly from the Victorian State Government's site under CC-BY can always do so. Most significantly, dual-licensing under CC-BY (via a government site) and the ODbL (via OSM) allows the data to be used in a wider range of contexts and for it to be mashed up with other rich datasets already in OSM or that may be added to OSM in the future. Allowing this could result in cultural, environmental, economic or social benefits for Australians. This is all entirely consistent with the rationale for open licensing in the first place. Wow. Hard to believe that New Zealand open licensed their data 7 years ago. Maybe this will be the precedent we need. That's really an excellent, well-worded summary. Would it be alright with you if I CC'ed you in my next response to them (which they have asked to be directed to *their* legal team...)? Steve On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: > > Hi Steve > > Before this discussion goes off on a tangent, which version of CC-by are > they currently using? > > Simon > > > > Am 30.08.2015 um 17:14 schrieb Steve Bennett: > > Hi all, > I've been trying to convince the state government of Victoria (southeast > Australia) to allow their VicMap raw data to be imported into OSM. It's > currently CC-BY, and they've told me they're happy in principle for it to > be used this way, but they're uncomfortable making the recommended > statement
[OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY - ODbL negotiators?
Hi all, I've been trying to convince the state government of Victoria (southeast Australia) to allow their VicMap raw data to be imported into OSM. It's currently CC-BY, and they've told me they're happy in principle for it to be used this way, but they're uncomfortable making the recommended statement DELWP has no objections to geodata derived in part from Vicmap, either traced from Vicmap map products, or directly from spatial extracts, being incorporated into the OpenStreetMap project geodata database and released under a free and open license. Specifically, they don't think ODbL is as free and open as CC-BY, and they don't particularly want to make a one-off statement for OSM. The only other requirement is not to apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. If the ODbL is more restrictive than our CC by Attribution this presents a problem for OSM, not for us. My initial response is that we wouldn't want OSM to apply a more restrictive license than ours, and in respect of the statement Steve wants us to provide, DELWP doesn't want to get into creating one-off variations for every potential user with a preference - Google, HERE, etc. ... We believe the CC by Attribution appropriate to sufficiently and equitably provide our data to all/anyone, and if Steve is concerned he should take it up with OSM. I'll refer it to Legal (not ours, DataVic's) if he wants to pursue it further. It's all getting quite subtle and possibly out of my depth. I'm not sure if the concern is a misunderstanding about the implications of dual licensing, a philosophical objection to free licences that impose share-alike restrictions like ODbL, or something different. I wonder if there are any expert licence negotiators here who might be able to get involved in the discussion. Thanks very much, Steve ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY - ODbL negotiators?
Huh. Really? Did I completely misunderstand this? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/GettingPermission My understanding was that when you import data into OSM, you assign special permission to the OSMF to re-license the data under ODbL, so you need more than just CC-BY licensing to begin with. Did something change, or have I just been mistaken for a long time? Steve On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.de wrote: Hello Steve, On 30.08.2015 17:14, Steve Bennett wrote: I wonder if there are any expert licence negotiators here who might be able to get involved in the discussion. I'm no such expert, but they just require attribution. Did they state any specific way of doing so? If not, then maybe just mentioning in the wiki is fine for them? http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors Right. You don't need DELWP to give you any statement or permission in order to import their data to OpenStreetMap or derive data for OpenStreetMap from their data. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [talk-au] VicMap licensing - help?
That would be great. I randomly, through work, met with some of the VicMap people today, but I'd rather know a bit more of the background before I bring it up. My understanding of the situation is they regard much of the data as open, but they consider the Vicmap API a value-add service, hence not open. But I don't know how they consider using the API to trace from - could depend a bit on exact phrasing. Steve On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Nyall Dawson nyall.daw...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 4 Mar 2015 at 13:33 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, Can someone point me to a clear statement that copying data from VicMap is definitely ok? I can't find anything on the VicMap API that says it's open licensed, and all I can find to go on is this one email thread starting 10/10/13 that's a bit inconclusive and unofficial. As far as I know no-one has been able to obtain this statement. I tried a while back (maybe 12 months or more) and while everyone I could reach was supportive, no-one would make the final call and provide written approval. If you're interested in chasing this up I can dig up the old email chains and forward them on to you... Cheers, Nyall ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] VicMap licensing - help?
Hi guys, Can someone point me to a clear statement that copying data from VicMap is definitely ok? I can't find anything on the VicMap API that says it's open licensed, and all I can find to go on is this one email thread starting 10/10/13 that's a bit inconclusive and unofficial. Thanks, Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Proposed import of 19 bicycle repair stations in au/nz
But if anyone wants to do some armchair mapping there is lots of online info, for example: http://pcs.unimelb.edu.au/traffic-and-parking/bicycle-parking/bicycle-repair-stands.html Fascinating - I work very close to one of those points, had no idea. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycling network tag
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:29 PM, SomeoneElse li...@atownsend.org.uk wrote: The cycle tourism network that I suspect that you're referring to is the National Byway http://www.nationalbyway.org/welcome.asp which is a bit of a one-off - there are other RCNs that suit different cycling styles and needs. Ah, could be. I did ride some parts of the NB. Strangely, in several places it was very different from what was marked on OSM - I kept hitting it at right angles. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycling network tag
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Nicholas Barker nicholasbark...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Steve/Frank [replying back to list, looks like that was your intention] First up IMO I wouldn't be putting the Mawson as an NCN. Any kind of 'cycle network' including a 'national one' implies that it will be negotiable by most, if not all bicycles. This would require a good quality firm surface. The Mawson is sold as a long distance MTB route. Whilst in reality a good proportion of it is on (boring) unsealed roads there are many sections that would be a struggle on anything other than a mountain bike or sturdy hybrid. We had 9 in our group. 4 mountain bikes, 3 touring bikes, 2 cyclocrosses, all pretty heavily loaded. Yes, it's rough in places, and a couple of sections at the far north were genuine mountain biking. But it's so far from anywhere that there's basically no chance of anyone thinking oh I know, I'll just take this beautiful bike path called the Mawson Trail from Blinman to Quorn - OH GOD IT'S SO ROUGH :) I made the mistake of tagging the bicentennial as a NCN a while backooops. Yeah, but large parts of the BNT aren't rideable on *anything*. As for routes i believe that it should only be tagged if its signed as a route or there is other strong evidence of it being a route...Wikipedia entry below A *route* is a customary or regular line of passage or travel, often *predetermined and publicized*. Routes consist of paths taken repeatedly by people and vehicles Sounds good to me. I'd emphasise the presence of some kind of physical signage, even if it's a bit sparse and incomplete. I will only tag a LCN/RCN/NCN route if i either see: Signs Plans from authorities that 'own' the infrastructure (softcopy or hardcopy) - e.g. a councils 'cycling plan' Literature from associations that have the backing of the 'owning authority' - e.g. scenic routes such as the Mawson/Kidman/Goldfields Trek etc. Agreed. I don't agree with LCN/RCN/NCN routes that have been tagged: apparently popular (unless it is publicized) - an example was a local cycling club have tagged their regular road criterium route as an LCNuseless to anyone who isn't in the club. Agreed. for a one off event/bike ride - someone once tagged an 'organised and popular cycle ride' that occurred only once along the route they tagged. This is wrong and just cluttering the map with useless information. The following year the event used a completely different route anyway... just because the tagger thought it was a 'nice route/ride' - had one of these tagged through western Victoria - its still there i think. Yeah, I think we just need to encourage these people to go to more suitable places like bikely, mapmyride, strava... HOWEVER.MTB routes are a whole different kettle of fish i think which needs some more discussion/guidelines as the feature is used in a more 'unofficial' way with route suggestions from users etc. I am guilty of tagging mtb friendly singletracks as 'routes' purely so other MTBers are aware that they are legal, ride-able and fun... Also agreed. mtb=yes is one way of doing that. I would prefer that route=mtb means there is some kind of official backing behind it, including a rating, but I definitely your need, and I don't think it causes many problems. Maybe there needs to be a different tag that isnt a route but shows up in opencyclemap as 'MTB suggested' IMHO, don't be too fixated on OpenCycleMap. The styling is pretty ugly, the maintainer isn't especially open to feedback, and doesn't seem to care all that much about tagging outside the UK. A site I run, http://cycletour.org, does show mtb=yes tags (a pink halo). https://www.dropbox.com/s/b8kjc1h5v0x8mju/Screenshot%202014-12-15%2013.19.46.png?dl=0 Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycling network tag
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Frank sundowne...@optusnet.com.au wrote: The network tag used on cycling routes .. is for example National Cycling Network (ncn) as in from one country to another In Australia we may not use this tag as per the definition .. but the length of the route may mean that in Europe it would be an ncn. So should 'we' adopt the prractice of 'elevation' the network status? A similar practice has been used for highways. It was quite an eye opener for me earlier this year to cycle in the UK to discover that they really do have LCN, RCN, and NCN. And they're slightly different from what I expected: NCN is basically a network that links towns together, LCN and other stuff, but with the same goal of efficiently getting from place to place. RCN is a cycle tourism network, and follows scenic, rather than efficient, routes. (Following an NCN route is often disappointing...) Anyway, the practice I've generally followed (in Victoria at least) and I think others roughly do too is: LCN: local council routes of minor interest, particularly the on-street ones RCN: the main network of off-road paths in Melbourne, and all non-mtb tourism routes (rail trails etc) NCN: major long-distance routes, like the Mawson Trail. For my site, cycletour.org, I only render RCN, and I selectively display a couple of long distance MTB routes. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Moderators password?
Yep, Ben has passed it on, thanks. It turns out the queue was all spam. :) Steve On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Charles Gregory osm.li...@chuq.net wrote: According to the list info page, moderators are: ben.kelley, stevagewp and inas66+osm, all at the same gmail.com address. Hopefully one of the others should have the password? Regards, Charles On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I haven't looked at this list in a while, but I'm getting a lot of moderator request(s) waiting. So I must be a moderator. I don't seem to have the password though. Does anyone know it? Currently seeing 13 requests in the queue. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Railways
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: This particular thing really annoys me. Fair enough if the track is still in place - go nuts mapping it - but there are disused rail lines marked up even when the track hasn't been in place for 30 years, and it's only an historical curiosity. See the Inner Circle railway in Melbourne for example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.78015/144.97908 I've been tempted to nuke this disused railway for ages, especially as the current path doesn't actually reflect where it even use to run with any accuracy. Hi Matt, Didn't we (or maybe it was someone else) argue about this a year or two ago? Please don't nuke it. There are lots of physical traces of the former railway present, like platforms, pieces of rail, stations, infrastructure like a former electrical substation, etc. I don't know what you mean by only an historical curiosity. It is of historical interest to many people, and is as real and concrete as other historical ruins. If you think the current geometry is inaccurate, please improve it if possible. Thanks, Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] City of Melbourne data imports
Hi guys, I'm working with the City of Melbourne on some open data projects. www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/an-open-data-vision-20140818-105d5n.html One thing we could do is import some of their data into OSM. For example: - water fountains - addresses - businesses - trees I haven't done any automated imports before, but I'm sensible enough to go through the procedures, triple check that we're not duplicating existing data etc. Just wanted to check what you think of this idea, and whether anyone has worked with CoM data before? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Vicmap data copying
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: What about this confusing one: http://bit.ly/1hXvwVK The picnic ground/campsite is literally signed No Name, and that's how everyone refers to it. I have no idea what the history is. (And there's a corner on the way up Mount Buller called 'Unnamed corner'). Well if you add the tag source:name then it should be clear that it is a real name? Rather than a description .. like Service Road, No Public Access ... in some ways I don't mind that in the name tag as it does convey information that may not be avaliable otherwise. Yes, it's unambiguous - but still confusing. One of my friends on this recent cycling trip down the Snowy thought the No Name on his GPS was a mistake in OSM. Maybe in a weird case like that we should make it name=No Name (ie, actually include the quotes), or name=No Name Picnic Ground. The tag unsigned come from the wiki http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Noname I don't like the finality of the tag noname as that implys there is no name at all... the sign may be missing .. but it may still have a name. Even just a local name that the locals use to idntify it. Agreed. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Vicmap data copying
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:22 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.netwrote: No, no Steve, I worded my last letter really badly and totally apologise if I unintentionally offended anyone. My comment related specifically to your line - Ok, no worries :) Yeah. I'm still deciding what to do about places where Vicmap shows a track in the bush that can't be seen on any imagery - probably because the vegetation is too dense. I meant leave the 'grey' areas to the survey people. There are many roads (and particularly tracks) that cannot been seen clearly on the imagery, and many more where some parts cannot be seen. I'd rather the people working with imagery or other non (recent) survey data such as Vic Maps did not make educated guesses but go and have a look, or ask some else to go and have a look. Yeah, it's a real issue. Like I said, I'm still trying to work out how best to proceed. My general approach is to be a bit more liberal with roads that don't go through, and more conservative with ones that do. I'm also trying to use fixme=* to express doubt: fixme=unverified from vicmap (ie, I can't see through the vegetation, so I'm taking vicmap's word for it) fixme=verify access (I can see a track, vicmap has a track, but I'm still a little skeptical that it's public access) Sometimes I also use highway=path rather than highway=track if I'm dubious that the public can drive a vehicle down it. My intention in all this is to minimise the chance that someone gets routed down a road that is not publicly accessible, or otherwise impassable. Personally, I think it's ok to show dead-end 4WD tracks that happen to not be driveable, because I think the people that use those kinds of maps expect that. But definitely willing to discuss this point, and open to all opinions... I have had a road (into a new estate) removed, apparently because it did not show up on Bing. Very annoying to a new owner there who was directing tradies via OSM ! But that in no way means I don't value the armchair mappers contribution. I'd suggest adding notes on to the road in question, like note=This road was built in early 2014 and is surveyed. I'd just like them to double check their data, one way or another before committing. To be honest, I go so much faster if I'm not doing any checking - you might be surprised how fast I map :) It doesn't really make sense to spend 10 minutes verifying a road that I created in 10 seconds - I just take the chance that I'm introducing a couple of errors. But mostly I'm doing stuff out in the bush. I'm usually pretty cautious about deleting anything like you describe. I have come across a couple where I just couldn't fathom why someone had drawn a road somewhere, but I'll usually cross-check against a couple of other sources. Example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172612474 Maybe what we need is some sort of register ? The people studying imagery are good at picking up anomalies, differences between image and map. They could log it and have some local go and check ? Better than just jumping in. Are there enough of us to make it worthwhile? Anyway, a better mechanism would probably be through fixme=*, so you can go and look for fixme's in your area at your leisure. You may be amused to know that some years ago, I was shocked to discover I had apparently built my house in the middle of the Bendigo Region National Park. I was waiting to get a letter telling me to move it when I realised someone had just followed the tree line, assuming all was national park. They had swept up the Park it self, the Welsford State Forest, Sugarloaf Conservation Park and a large number of private properties. A very quick check would have prevented that error. Yeah, that seems pretty silly. Although IMHO we need a better approach to maintaining administrative boundaries - it doesn't really make sense for anyone to be able to move them at will, since there is a genuine authority for each. I am pretty sure all we want is for the database to have accurate, relevant data. You left out comprehensive and useful. I think I have a higher tolerance for error because I want OSM to be useful and complete-ish *now*. I use it on a regular basis for planning trips, and I can't wait a few years for all the checking. I'd rather a pretty complete map with a few errors which will be corrected over time. But that's all it is - different priorities. Maybe I think 98% accuracy is enough, whereas you want 99.5% - and someone else might want 99.95%... Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Vicmap data copying
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: Humm .. there are places I've been before GPS... One example: I know the road is there as I've been on it. However it is now closed for vehicles - inside a National Park. I've mapped bits of it into OSM as it may be of use to walkers. The bit I cannot 'see' with imagery I've connected with very apparent straight lines. I do have copyright maps of the area but I'm not looking at those now (they were current when I was there ... many years ago!). I'm not going back there, I've many other (new to me) places to go. Nor would I request someone to go there. Someone probably will go there .. but I'll leave their interest and trip up to them. So I'm adding stuff that I think is of use, an indication rather than accurate in some places .. but those bits are straight lines and anyone who knows the area will know that those are not 'truth'. Yeah, someone (you?) added lots of tracks through the Victorian Alps in very low detail. It was actually incredibly helpful, and really motivated me to go through and improve them all - rather than starting from a blank slate. And in certain areas, I get a real kick out of doing very high quality aerial mapping like this: http://bit.ly/1hXv9KZ I've been deleting the tag name={Unnamed] and adding the tag unsigned=yes, in one case I 'know' the roads name .. but my source I remember as a street directory . So I cannot use it untill the memory fades a bit more. In most cases I've been past some of the roads .. and there is no street sign (indeed most have no power poles nor street lighting). In this case I think it can be changed without 'knowing' as the intent is clear - there is no local sign to get a name from .. at least not when the tag was added. Sounds sensible. What about this confusing one: http://bit.ly/1hXvwVK The picnic ground/campsite is literally signed No Name, and that's how everyone refers to it. I have no idea what the history is. (And there's a corner on the way up Mount Buller called 'Unnamed corner'). Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Vicmap data copying
Hi Nick, From Li Xia's email on 10/10/13: I had a meeting with Vicmap staff today in regards to importing Vicmap data into OSM under the CC license. They are very excited about the community showing interest in their data and are have clarified that importing it is fine. I'm not clear on whether we need to add any attribution tags, but for now when I trace stuff from Vicmap, I just add source=vicmap. IMHO some small scale imports may be useful, but from my comparisons, the VicMap data is not necessarily better than OSM. It often has stuff OSM doesn't, but sometimes that includes spurious stuff like roads that no longer exist, never did, etc. Steve On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.comwrote: Am I correct in saying that it is permissable to copy street names from the VicMap into OSM? Also - what about the house numbers, is that ok as well? I have neither the time, talent or inclination to do an import of house numbers, but would help out in any manual effort to add all house numbers for Victoria into OSM. Is such an import envisaged because, if so, then I wouldn't want to muddy the waters by starting to manually add them. Also - I remember someone saying that Gold Coast roade name data was available. Is this available yet for josm or potlach since I would love to get the rest of the roads named up there? Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Vicmap data copying
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.comwrote: Steve wrote IMHO some small scale imports may be useful, but from my comparisons, the VicMap data is not necessarily better than OSM. It often has stuff OSM doesn't, but sometimes that includes spurious stuff like roads that no longer exist, never did, etc. Thanks Steve, As far as importing goes, I'm only talking about house numbers (since they are so hard to collect by survey). Yeah, house numbers are probably a really good example where in most places we have zero data. I definitely think that road names must NOT be imported but added individually, where current osm data and bing imagery indicate that there really is a road (currently OSM unamed) there. Yeah. I'm still deciding what to do about places where Vicmap shows a track in the bush that can't be seen on any imagery - probably because the vegetation is too dense. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] VicMap in Potlatch2
Hi all, I've just discovered you can add VicMap, Victoria's open data licensed authoritative mapping service, into Potlatch 2. It's not at all obvious how, so here's the answer: In Background, click Edit then add: http://whoots.mapwarper.net:80/tms/$z/$x/$y/WEB_MERCATOR/http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/geowebcacheWM/service/wms?VERSION=1.1.1TILED=true To explain: - Vicmap provides an API which is basically a weird forked version of OpenLayers: http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/index.php/developers-resources/javascript-api - Digging through that you can find their actual WMS endpoint, which is http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/vicmapapi/map/wms - Except, that data is in EPSG 3111 projection, rather than the web standard EPSG 3857. Their documentation says that EPSG 3857 will be available by the end of August 2013, then no more info about it: http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/index.php/product-information/projections-sacles/web-mercator - Anyway it turns out the EPSG 3857 projection is available at http://api.maps.vic.gov.au/geowebcacheWM/service/wms (I assume the WM stands for 'web mercator', aka EPSG 3857) - But still, it's only provided as a WMS service, which isn't directly supported by Potlatch 2. That's why you need to use the whoots.mapwarper.netproxying service which converts WMS to web tiles. Enjoy. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Adding residential properties?
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Daniel O'Connor daniel.ocon...@gmail.comwrote: I started out with buildings, but got a bit excited in my local area; getting down into trees, power lines, fences, driveways etc. http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-34.84928/138.52277 Not super pretty looking. Hi guys, Personally I'm not that into micromapping, but could I make the suggestion that you use (additional) tags to make it easy to filter this stuff out? It makes it hard to render a reasonable map if there's no distinction between, say: * relevant public buildings, vs private houses (use building=house sounds good) * walking paths through parks, vs ordinary footpaths (use sidewalk=yes?) * public or semi-public tennis courts (eg at a sporting facility, vs private tennis courts in backyards (access=private?) * similarly for swimming pools Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Bitcoin Spam
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: However, in the case at hand, it seems that the interest is not to improve OSM but instead we're just a vehicle for people to show up on the coinmap, a business directory for bitcoin-accepting businesses. I don't think we should worry about people's motivations. What's the problem here? That there are business POIs in OSM that are missing tags. It doesn't sound all that different to me from any other data quality problem. Either we fix the missing tags (if possible), or delete them as junk. And if the business in question doesn't deserve a mention in OSM (eg, a mail order place with no shop front), again, just delete it. No? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Long tail challenges - was: Re: Bitcoin Spam
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: There are many businesses where you can't go and buy something, but still they should be in OSM. Think of a car manufacturer, you can't go there and buy a car. Yeah but the difference is a manufacturing plant has a big physical presence that is worth indicating on a map. A person can see it, wonder what it is, and look at the map. And, more pragmatically, factories don't come and go as quickly as businesses run on residential premises. There's no way OSM really wants to be a database of every single registered (or even unregistered!) business, surely? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] Bicentennial National Trail
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, It seems the point of the three relations is to identify which parts of the trail are accessible to which categories of users. How do you intend to encapsulate that info? What is the basis for splitting the trail into state sections, and putting three relations into another reln? I don't think relations of relations is well supported, and I can't see the motivation for it here. Hi guys, I noticed the three-way duplication but assumed it was for a different reason: so that, say, a hiking map that looks for route=hiking relations will show the BNT, a mountain bike map that looks for route=mtb will also show it etc. Unfortunately I think this is basically legitimate: if the same route is a hiking, cycling and mountain biking route (and we haven't even done horse riding yet) then it probably needs those duplicates. (FWIW, that's a bit of an if - most of the Victorian section is pretty useless for cycling, and not great for unsupported hiking either.) Btw you can see both the BNT and AAWT on my map, http://cycletour.org - just zoom in a couple of clicks. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Wednesday December 11th: meetup with VicRoads
Hi guys, I'm helping organise an open data meetup with VicRoads called Meet the data owners: http://www.meetup.com/Datahack-Melbourne/events/152600552/ The idea is to help build relationships between data consumers (particularly developers) and Victorian government data providers, in this case VicRoads. It's not specifically to do with OpenStreetMap, but I thought some people on this list might have a lot to contribute to the question: what could we do if VicRoads made more of their road and traffic data available? Anyway, if you're in Melbourne on Wednesday week, please RSVP and come along. If it's a success there will be more of these in the future with other Vic gov departments and agencies - some spatial, some not. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] data.qld.gov.au explicit permission request
Hi Jason, Nice work - any response? Steve On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Jason Ward jasonjwa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, My apologies if this has already been posted but I've just sent off a request to data.qld.gov.au for explicit permission to incorporate and publish their applicable datasets. I've provided them a link to the SA Government response to the same permission request so I hope it is just a formality that one of their legal eagles can complete. SA Link provided to them: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution/sa.data.gov.au_explicit_permission I'm pretty new to OSM and figured I'd better not waste my effort already expended by not having this type of permission supplied. I know that the whole dataset is CC-BY-3.0 AU so I'm not even sure if my request is required (but I figure there is no harm in seeking it). -- Cheers, Jason ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Bridleways and tagging rail trails
Nick Barker sent me a message through openstreetmap.org - hope you don't mind me replying here: I've just been going through some edits and i noticed you changed the Tyers rail trail back to a path from a bridleway and just was wondering why. The reason i tagged it as a bridleway as apparently on the rail trail website it says horses are allowed. Looking at trail hierarchies i therefore tagged it as a bridleway as walkers only = path walkers and cyclists (obviously path for MTB only but its definitely doable on a hybrid - the rail trail website err well on the side of caution) = cycleway walkers cyclists and horses = bridleway. (note this is a UK/european system as far as i know) i asked this on the forum and people sort of agreed in the absence of any specific aussie system this made the most sense. Likewise for the Walhalla rail trail too. What are you thoughts on this? Thanks for raising this. My thoughts are that the basic tag should be as representative as possible. There are lots of different websites, apps etc that use openstreetmap, so we should tag whatever is most useful. Cycling-focused maps will tend to show highway=cycleway and ignore highway=bridleway. I don't know if there are equestrian-focused maps - horseriding is a pretty fringe activity compared to cycling. A bridleway is not just a path that horse riders can go on, it's a bit unique. Typically the surface is very soft, like grass or sand, and they often have cavalettis to stop other kinds of traffic. Although you might be able to ride bikes on some bridleways, that wouldn't be the default assumption. We do have a few bridleways around the place, mostly in outer outer suburbs with established horse riding areas, like Lysterfield, Victoria. So, the tagging that makes the most sense to me: highway=cycleway: a path that is designed for (non-mtb) cycling (and nearly always caters for pedestrians too). If horses are allowed, then horse=yes highway=bridleway: a path that is specifically designed for horse riders, pretty much to the exclusion of others. highway=footway: a good quality path for pedestrians highway=path: other paths that could be used by hikers or mountain bikers, that aren't of the same quality as a cycleway/footway. Tagging a rail trail as a bridleway doesn't make much sense to me for a few reasons: 1) The number of horse riders is a tiny fraction of the number of cyclists 2) Some rail trails have sections that split between a designated bridleway (off the railway alignment) and the main rail trail. Tagging the main rail trail as highway=cycleway, horse=yes/no (and then a separate highway=bridleway) is clear and makes sense. Switching the main rail trail from highway=bridleway to highway=cycleway would be kind of bizarre. For example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-37.70318/143.63900layers=N Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Who interprets semicolon in tag values?
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:08 PM, NopMap ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote: The original example wasn't mine, but I think it is very common that a pub has much later opening hours than a restaurant. Having both as part of the same enterprise is a british speciality if I remember my visits correctly. And mapping them as separate POIs is the only practical and human readable way we currently have available, that's the point. :-) I have to agree with this. The most common clashes I run into mapping towns in Australia; bakery/cafes (technically you could do amenity=cafe, shop=bakery) general store/cafe general store/fuel general store/post office pub/hotel (I tend to create two nodes, in roughly the right places) pub/restaurant (in the country, I take the restaurant as assumed - every pub serves meals at least some days of the week) cafe/bar A general solution that would solve these and other problems would be a relation to group parts of the same business. That way, you could have the expressiveness of precise tagging (eg, is there a bakery near here? yes. is there a cafe near here? yes) but easy rendering: show one icon, and the renderer can decide whether it's a cafe or bakery icon. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Making iD the default editor on osm.org - some numbers
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 9:36 PM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.ukwrote: In an attempt to put some numbers to to the errors made by new mappers debate, I've done a count-back of new users and editors that they use for they area that I keep an eye on in the UK (England and bits of Wales, not including bits that I'm unfamiliar with such as London and the south-east) Hi, Just wondering what tools you use to keep an eye on that area? I'd love to have a better idea of what other editors are doing in my area. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Slow TileMill rendering - Postgres using 1 core?
Hi Christian, Thanks for the reply. After further investigation the actual problem was a missing index on planet_osm_polygon. (I'm really not sure why.) Steve On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Christian Quest cqu...@openstreetmap.frwrote: As far as I know, Tilemill is using mapnik which is querying postgres. Plain vanilla Mapnik is not doing more than one postgres query at a time (not multithreading queries). A patch made by mappy allows mapnik to multithread its pg queries. Are you using the exact same version of Mapnik as before ? 2013/8/25 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com Hi all, I'm running TileMill on an 8 core Ubuntu VM with 32GB of memory, on an OpenStack cloud. Recently, my VM was destroyed, and I rebuilt it (identically, I thought) on slightly different hardware (same cloud, but different physical infrastructure). The new build is much slower at rendering - a screen worth of tiles at zoom 13 can take around a minute. That is, with virtually the same setup, same data, same styles. You can see some slow tiles here: http://emscycletours.site44.com/mel.html While panning around, the 'top' command shows mostly Postgres processes (different from last time I had performance problems[1], when the bottleneck was in Mapnik). Total CPU usage hangs around 12%: ie, exactly 1 out of 8 cores is being used. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/767553/GIS/Screen%20shot%202013-08-25%20at%2011.15.01%20AM.png top - 11:10:32 up 3 days, 36 min, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.17, 0.22 Tasks: 133 total, 4 running, 129 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie %Cpu(s): 11.5 us, 0.1 sy, 0.0 ni, 88.4 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st KiB Mem: 32950396 total, 7150132 used, 25800264 free, 117864 buffers KiB Swap:0 total,0 used,0 free, 5221356 cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND 2353 postgres 20 0 8510m 640m 635m S 41.2 2.0 23:36.57 postgres 2354 postgres 20 0 8510m 644m 639m S 40.2 2.0 23:24.26 postgres 2350 postgres 20 0 8510m 642m 638m S 14.0 2.0 23:19.19 postgres 2375 postgres 20 0 8510m 643m 639m S 14.0 2.0 23:17.80 postgres 13102 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 13.6 1.7 13:03.21 postgres 2355 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 526m S 13.3 1.7 13:45.15 postgres 2352 postgres 20 0 8510m 640m 636m S 10.0 2.0 23:31.17 postgres 2348 postgres 20 0 8510m 644m 639m S 9.3 2.0 23:41.88 postgres 12420 mapbox20 0 3818m 1.0g 755m S 9.3 3.2 36:48.39 nodejs 2357 postgres 20 0 8508m 530m 526m S 7.3 1.7 13:38.57 postgres 2356 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 526m R 6.3 1.7 13:42.52 postgres 2376 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 6.0 1.7 13:35.51 postgres 13195 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 5.3 1.7 12:33.65 postgres 3027 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m R 3.3 1.7 13:29.06 postgres 2349 postgres 20 0 8508m 530m 526m S 3.0 1.6 13:38.19 postgres 2358 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 3.0 1.7 13:44.59 postgres 26 root 20 0 000 S 0.3 0.0 0:08.64 ksoftirqd/5 2335 postgres 20 0 8489m 2732 1340 S 0.3 0.0 1:00.48 postgres So, wondering if anyone has any suggestions what the problem is, or how to fix it? Why is Postgres apparently using only one core, even though it has many processes? What tools could I use to further diagnose? My changed Postgres settings are as follows: shared_buffers = 8GB autovacuum = on effective_cache_size = 8GB work_mem = 128MB maintenance_work_mem = 64MB wal_buffers = 1MB checkpoint_segments = 10 The server is set up as described here: http://steveko.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/tilemill-server/ I'm not yet using any tile cache. I will do that next, but the problem I'm trying to solve at the moment is very slow tile generation, not slow serving of rendered tiles. Many thanks in advance, Steve [1] http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/TileMill-performance-td5751158.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Slow TileMill rendering - Postgres using 1 core?
Hi all, I'm running TileMill on an 8 core Ubuntu VM with 32GB of memory, on an OpenStack cloud. Recently, my VM was destroyed, and I rebuilt it (identically, I thought) on slightly different hardware (same cloud, but different physical infrastructure). The new build is much slower at rendering - a screen worth of tiles at zoom 13 can take around a minute. That is, with virtually the same setup, same data, same styles. You can see some slow tiles here: http://emscycletours.site44.com/mel.html While panning around, the 'top' command shows mostly Postgres processes (different from last time I had performance problems[1], when the bottleneck was in Mapnik). Total CPU usage hangs around 12%: ie, exactly 1 out of 8 cores is being used. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/767553/GIS/Screen%20shot%202013-08-25%20at%2011.15.01%20AM.png top - 11:10:32 up 3 days, 36 min, 1 user, load average: 0.06, 0.17, 0.22 Tasks: 133 total, 4 running, 129 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie %Cpu(s): 11.5 us, 0.1 sy, 0.0 ni, 88.4 id, 0.0 wa, 0.0 hi, 0.0 si, 0.0 st KiB Mem: 32950396 total, 7150132 used, 25800264 free, 117864 buffers KiB Swap:0 total,0 used,0 free, 5221356 cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND 2353 postgres 20 0 8510m 640m 635m S 41.2 2.0 23:36.57 postgres 2354 postgres 20 0 8510m 644m 639m S 40.2 2.0 23:24.26 postgres 2350 postgres 20 0 8510m 642m 638m S 14.0 2.0 23:19.19 postgres 2375 postgres 20 0 8510m 643m 639m S 14.0 2.0 23:17.80 postgres 13102 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 13.6 1.7 13:03.21 postgres 2355 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 526m S 13.3 1.7 13:45.15 postgres 2352 postgres 20 0 8510m 640m 636m S 10.0 2.0 23:31.17 postgres 2348 postgres 20 0 8510m 644m 639m S 9.3 2.0 23:41.88 postgres 12420 mapbox20 0 3818m 1.0g 755m S 9.3 3.2 36:48.39 nodejs 2357 postgres 20 0 8508m 530m 526m S 7.3 1.7 13:38.57 postgres 2356 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 526m R 6.3 1.7 13:42.52 postgres 2376 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 6.0 1.7 13:35.51 postgres 13195 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 5.3 1.7 12:33.65 postgres 3027 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m R 3.3 1.7 13:29.06 postgres 2349 postgres 20 0 8508m 530m 526m S 3.0 1.6 13:38.19 postgres 2358 postgres 20 0 8508m 531m 527m S 3.0 1.7 13:44.59 postgres 26 root 20 0 000 S 0.3 0.0 0:08.64 ksoftirqd/5 2335 postgres 20 0 8489m 2732 1340 S 0.3 0.0 1:00.48 postgres So, wondering if anyone has any suggestions what the problem is, or how to fix it? Why is Postgres apparently using only one core, even though it has many processes? What tools could I use to further diagnose? My changed Postgres settings are as follows: shared_buffers = 8GB autovacuum = on effective_cache_size = 8GB work_mem = 128MB maintenance_work_mem = 64MB wal_buffers = 1MB checkpoint_segments = 10 The server is set up as described here: http://steveko.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/tilemill-server/ I'm not yet using any tile cache. I will do that next, but the problem I'm trying to solve at the moment is very slow tile generation, not slow serving of rendered tiles. Many thanks in advance, Steve [1] http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/TileMill-performance-td5751158.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Bringing new life to the OSM.org front page
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Rob Nickerson rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com wrote: Finally, a few other things to note: * With over 1 million registered users it is impossible to please everyone. Please put things into perspective before replying with negative comments. Also consideration of the amount of development time is always appreciated. * OSM has numerous communication channels (too many maybe). Where would you stop if it was decided to post announcements to the community. Furthermore as the OSM Foundation did not ask for permission to send email to registered users they cannot therefore push notifications to all users (rather users will need to read the communication channels that interest them). My suggestion: when big, highly visible changes are coming, that non-dev community members might have an interest in, consider just dropping a line to talk@ like this: Hi, we're working on some cool new map controls for the front page. Check out the discussion here: link. (I don't think it's practical for non-developers to lurk on development mailing lists on the off-chance that something interesting will pop up.) Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Application error at openstreetmap.org
-- Application error The OpenStreetMap server encountered an unexpected condition that prevented it from fulfilling the request (HTTP 500) Feel free to contact the OpenStreetMap community if your problem persists. Make a note of the exact URL / post data of your request. This may be a problem in our Ruby On Rails code. 500 occurs with exceptions thrown outside of an action (like in Dispatcher setups or broken Ruby code) Surprised not to see anything about it on this mailing list. Can anyone explain? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] Historic stations and rail
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Nathan Van Der Meulen natvan...@yahoo.com wrote: I use name=Thompson (disused) as the map user sees immediately that the station is no longer in use. This may not be such a drama where the track is out of use as well, but when you map a station out of use on a running line if the station appears just like any other station it becomes confusing. This is also consistent with the method used by various map makers. Yeah, that maybe makes sense if a station is temporarily out of use - can you think of an example? But generally, any renderer that supports historic:railway=station is going to render it sufficiently different from railway=station that it's not needed. The main mapnik style doesn't support historic:railway=station, so currently it will just disappear - which isn't really such a bad thing. PS If you're replying to digest emails, would you mind trimming off all the other bits? That was quite a wall of text... Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Historic stations and rail
Hi all, I've been working on some old train lines and stations, mostly around Victoria, and have finally settled on a tagging scheme, based on what's popular in taginfo. The current tagging has been pretty inconsistent, with lots of variations like railway=station, disused=yes, railway=station, name=Foo (former), railway:historic=station, historic:railway=station, building=station... Thought I'd check whether anyone has any comments/disagreements: Active stations (whether tourist, regional, commuter or freight): railway=station Disused/abandoned stations, with buildings present: railway:historic=station Abandoned, former station site, no buildings, little to see: railway:historic=station_site In all cases, the name of the station object should just be, eg, Thompson. Not: Thompson (former) Not: Thompson (disused) Not: Thompson Railway Station In addition, a station building may be tagged as: building=station (But one of the above should also be present - either on the building polygon or not.) Active rail (commuter, freight, regional): railway=rail Tourist rail railway=preserved Disused, but tracks still present and conceivably services could return: railway=disused Tracks removed, or state is pretty far gone. railway=abandoned Thoughts? To see where we're at, I've done a quick replica of this well known rail map of Victoria: http://i.imgur.com/ohXHwsk.png http://emscycletours.site44.com/rail.html Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Vicmap data released on data.gov.au
Hi Nyall, Yeah I'm quite interested to know more about this. I gather the Spatial DataMart has been around a while, so is the difference that they've published it on data.vic.gov.au and made it accessible to the public? Or is it the licensing that has changed? Might be worth having a meetup to discuss what we can do with all this data. Steve On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Nyall Dawson nyall.daw...@gmail.com wrote: All we need from them is a statement that a notice associated with the Produced Work reasonably calculated to make any Person that uses, views, accesses, interacts with, or is otherwise exposed to the Produced Work aware that Content was obtained from the Database, Derivative Database, or the Database as part of a Collective Database, and that it is available under this License (ODbL 4.3) meets the requirements of a notice reasonable to the medium. Basically, that the attribution required by the ODbL is enough. Some cities have viewed CC BY's reasonable to the medium to mean every data source needs to be credited directly on a web map. Great -- this is exactly what I needed to know. I've attempted to get in contact with the appropriate person at data.vic.gov.au, I'll report back here how this goes. Cheers, Nyall Dawson ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] surface=unsealed in 4wd/dirt road tagging
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 8:42 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Just a thought here, we'd really like the renderers to show unpaved/unsealed/whatever roads differently from sealed ones. In particular, the mapnik rendered slippery map on the OSM website FYI, the map style I'm working on for cycle touring does make this distinction: http://emscycletours.site44.com/map2.html#egrt Also a quick stat for you. 165,000 highways in Australia have a surface tag. 718,000 don't. They show little interest I must admit but will show even less if we point to a whole range of surface= tags that need that treatment. So might be better agreeing on one term rather than being very specific and saying 'dirt', 'gravel' etc. As I have mentioned before, this is a road safety issue as much as a presentation one. You might be right - but on a technical front, it's no more burdensome to show all of [unsealed, unpaved, gravel, dirt] as a dashed line rather than just, say, unpaved. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] surface=unsealed in 4wd/dirt road tagging
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Surprising stat. Especially considering paved is considered the default. Yeah - I try to specify it wherever possible though, outside cities. I really like multi-level tags. natural=water water=lake surface=unpaved unpaved=gravel surface=paved paved=asphalt It makes it easy for people two write simple parsers without enumerating the options, but people who are want to parse the details to do so. There are a number of instances when OSM uses this type of multi-level tagging scheme, but it lacks any form of consistency. Agreed on all counts. There are a lot of people who still think the best thing to do is make up new tags on the fly and to encourage others to do the same. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] park vs nature reserve
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Andrew Elwell andrew.elw...@gmail.com wrote: Can someone point me to guidelines for where the .au distinction between the two lies? Great question. For my part, I'm pretty lazy and just tag everything as leisure=park, and hope that someone else will clean it up :) Within cities, it will be hard to come up with clear guidelines to apply the tags: nature reserves that are called X park, parks that are called X reserve, parks that contain conservation reserves within them, and vice versa. There is some not-very-enlightening text here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#.28National.2C_State_etc.29_Parks If you come up with any guidelines it would be great to document them there. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Two cycling maps I made
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au wrote: Looks great. Nice to see the output from a lot of mapping effort by everyone in the Melbourne/Victoria area. Yeah, we're getting to a really good level of completeness now. The biggest shortcoming I'm noticing for this project is a lot of towns with few/no amenities marked, including a few major ones like Wonthaggi and Tallangatta. Only thing I have noticed is on the http://emscycletours.site44.com/map2.html the wording for the Great Divide Rail Trail appears twice, super imposed over each other. Might be that the tittle is rendered twice? Thanks, I've made some styling changes that have cleared that up. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Rivers that have dams on them
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Brett Russell brussell...@live.com.au wrote: I used OSM on a nine day Overland Track Wall and found it very good with the Garmins that I was using. Used the routable maps and found they were about a one kilometre in ten understated on distance due to fewer nodes recorded in OSM compared to the distance tracked by the GPSs. Still very impressive compared to the expensive and poor quality Garmin maps. Need to work with someone to get OSM bushwalking maps going as walking tracks, mountains and huts need to be zoomed in a long way to see thus you get “lost” in the trees finding them. Also the search feature on the Garmin can be rather “broken”, by that items do not appear in the all POI lists but can be found in sub lists. Bit more work needed by my to refine the tracks and the features but gradually working my way south to north refining the track. Glad to hear it - I added the Overland Track a couple of years ago, with the major side trips. From memory, I just beat someone else who had also recorded the trace but hadn't uploaded it yet. Regarding use of 'correct' tags like alpine shelters etc, I tend to get very pragmatic and use tags like place=locality instead so they show up. And pretty much a place like Pelion Hut *is* a locality - it's a major landmark and navigational reference point. What exactly do you mean by Need to work with someone to get OSM bushwalking maps going? Going where? On a GPS? On a custom website? In the default mapnik rendering on openstreetmap.org? Static printed maps? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Two cycling maps I made
Hi all, Thought you might be interested to see to see two cycling maps I've made with TileMill and OSM data: 1) Bike map of Melbourne. It really highlights the major bike routes. The Capital City Trail is shown as a pattern of yellow dots. http://emscycletours.site44.com/map.html 2) Cycle touring map of Victoria and rail trails. Villages/hamlets are only shown if they have at least one pub/cafe/restaurant/bakery/supermarket/convenience store within a 5km radius. The size of the purple circle shows how many of those amenities are present. http://emscycletours.site44.com/map2.html Happy to answer any questions about them. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Australia licence change redaction recovery..
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: So, my summary would be that we've probably comprehensively remapped he motorways and trunk roads across the country. We've got significantly more tracks, paths and residential/unclassified roads than we had before. There would seem to be artifacts of extensive aerial remapping, with the lower percentage overall of named roads, and what I'm thinking could be a consequent tendency to underrate what passes for a secondary road in Australia. I'd also attribute greater mapping outside of urban areas to the more extensive bing imagery coverage, and possibly the focus of the redaction process on urban areas. Thanks very much for doing this - I've been quite curious about where we're up to. I had guessed we were about on par - so this is good news. I've been doing a fair bit of aerial mapping lately - not sure whether remapping or not. I tend to be pretty conservative with road classifications on a first pass. Later, I might look at the area and upgrade a couple of the roads. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] iD, exclusive use of tags
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Right now when you click on other in this menu, the other tag that is considered principal by iD gets silently removed (e.g. if you click on a highway on other, the highway-tag is removed). Yeah, this was/is a limitation of Potlatch2 that was never solved. It's a messy reality of OSM tagging. To those that think the answer is well, don't map like that! - just...no. That style of mapping is perfectly appropriate in many places and has some real advantages for data consumers (eg, identifying roads that have tramtracks, which are a real hazard for cyclists). I'd consider both of these bugs, but would like to open a discussion what others think about exclusive tags. IMHO the solution is to essentially duplicate the GUI when more than one primary tag is found. But there are some unsolved ambiguities in the tagging, like which tag name= refers to. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] source=Google
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: What do you propose to do with source tags found on an object when you modify this object based on a different source? Speaking for myself, I either replace it (if I'm replacing virtually all the geometry) or supplement it: source=gps;Bing. If I'm tweaking something that had no source before, I sometimes use source=unknown;Bing. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap in Government
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: But your overall point is surely that as long as we have the basics, if some group of people want the extra information and are willing to gather it, and some other group of people want to use the information and are willing to render/route it, then all is good. Yeah, absolutely. As long as we have the basics, which I'm assuming means a couple of tags with a couple of well defined meanings (like 2WD, 4WD etc). Then people can go nuts adding extra information, as long as it doesn't conflict. Sometimes people think that it's better to slice up information into lots of little objective facts, like (in the case of mountain bike trails), width, surface, grade, etc, rather than a subjective fact like trail rating. But in practice, it's impractical to collect that much information, and it's impractical to combine it back into a usable form for data consumers, so we lose twice. We're here to use our data in new an innovative ways, right? Absolutely :) Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Major 4WD tracks
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com wrote: Major 4wd tracks such as Birdsville track Old telegraph track Wonagatta rd Etc Hi Li, Still not clear on what you mean by major. Do you mean important, significant, famous...or do you mean big,well-maintained etc? If the former, I'd think a route relation (as I described earlier), but you'd need an authoritative source for what the route is. PS Don't forget to reply-all. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap in Government
Hi all, This is a really interesting discussion, and thanks for the insights about Australia vs Europe vs US. A few comments: 1) I think TileMill/MapBox will be a game changer for the rendering guys won't listen to us problem. I suspect it will soon be much, much easier to have lots of different map views out there, and we can create Australian-specific maps easily. So we should continue to work out the best tagging system and use that - even if it's not currently supported by any rendering styles. 2) If we do use tags that are essentially unique to Australia, we should consider still doubling up with standard tags where convenient. If 4wd_only means you shouldn't attempt this track without a 4 wheel drive, even if this particular section is ok, then we can still add track_type tags to the relevant sections, if known. 3) There are decades of practice in cartography to learn from. We might as well go with existing practice in current 4WD maps. The standard distinctions seem to be something like 4WD/2WD/dirt/sealed, and sometimes one more category indicating something like possibly impassable. So no need for the 10 point roughness/tracktype scale - it's too hard. 4) And yes, we should have simple tags that correspond to existing cartography practice: MVO, (subject to seasonal closure) and 4WD only. Steve On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:48 PM, David dban...@internode.on.net wrote: Kristy, you have spotted the problem, no clear acceptance of any one standard when it comes to 4wd tracks. And while its being done a number of different ways (or not done at all) we have little chance of getting the rendering people to listen to us. In western Europe, little interest, complete lack of understanding of the need. The US does have some great 4wd tracks but they are more recreational in nature, you go somewhere, drive a great track and then go home. They also don't understand our model of using these tracks to get to somewhere really interesting ! Asia, (far) eastern Europe, get it but don't seem to want to support the ideas. I believe (strongly) we need a multi level tag that indicates a track is somewhere between a bit dodgy right through to Oh wow. That, by its very nature means its subjective, you and I might well disagree with at what stage a typical SUV and inexperienced driver should be warned off. We cannot help that, 4wds are all different, drivers are different in their skills and willingness to take risks. The 4wd_only tag is 'official' and was a good try. But not used very much outside of Oz. And its a yes/no and life is never a yes/no situation. Further, so much OSM data ends up in a psql database, one column per tag. Believe it or not, psql does not like having column names start with numerals. It can be worked around but I suspect that's one reason mapnik (or more correctly, its slippery map) won't show 4wd_only. I prefer an extension to the tracktype= tag, its already widely used internationally and, somewhat, rendered on the slippery map. We can add three more levels to it (grade6, grade7, grade8) being possibly not suitable for conventional car, 4wd stuff and 4wd extreme. I currently use both 4wd_only= and tracktype= But I would support any new, sufficiently flexible proposal. I don't really this a physical meet up is necessary, be surprised if we could agree on a convienant location ! David . Kristy Van Putten kristy.vanput...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Matt, I think your conclusions is right, that we need to put an Australian standard together. It sounds like the ground work has been done (maybe even multiple times) but there has not been a clear acceptance of any particular schema. How do you think we should go forward with this? My suggestion is that we make a weekend of it, where we come together - where there are plenty of different types of 4WD tracks - and try and test the schema already made. I know I am still living outside of the country, so for me this maybe hard over the next couple of months. I am home in July for a couple of weeks and I am sure I could convince someone to lend me a 4WD. However it is winter, so it won't be the warmest weather! Maybe we could wait till summer? Would anyone be keen? Cheers On 06/05/2013, at 4:22 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: I'm also very interested in 4wd trails - it's what 80% of my mapping consists of I think (that, and house numbers in the inner north of Melbourne) The current 4wd_only tag was one of the tags I proposed a few years ago - there was a massive barney at the time over the smoothness=* and surface=* tags, and all I wanted to do was mark roads that were clearly tagged as 4wd only (proper 4wd as in low range, high clearance). The surface/smoothness debate was interesting, but got in the way of the larger problem. I've come to the conclusion that the Australian mappers pretty much have to go it alone in this area - what the
Re: [talk-au] Major 4WD tracks
Can you give examples of major 4WD tracks? Do you mean the 4WD route classification scheme? (I've seen some 4WD tracks near Mt Stirling that had official signage, difficulty ratings etc). Probably you'd use a relation like: type=route route=4wd network=??? name=... But I haven't done any research on this subject. Steve On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Li Xia lisxia1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Mappers, Is there a tag that's officially recognised that can be used to highlight major 4WD tracks. Similar tags for hiking, cycling existing under route:xx Li. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap in Government
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 7:29 PM, kristy van putten kristy.vanput...@gmail.com wrote: On a personal note I would be interested in hearing more about the OSM Australia activities, and people current goals with OSM. I have read about the Bicentennial National Trail team, has anyone thought of 4WD trails in OSM? I would also be keen to find out if there are any Ozzy teaching OSM to schools or scout groups etc? Hi Kristy, For my part, I've done a lot of mapping in and around Melbourne, but am now shifting attention to rural areas, particularly since Bing imagery has improved a lot. I do a lot of cycle touring, and a bit of hiking, and have quite an interest in having good data in OSM to support those activities. There's also a big crossover between the needs of 4WD-ers and the kind of cycle touring I like to do, so I'm interested in the issues David Bannon raised. Right at the moment, though, I'm remapping some areas along the Goulburn (southwest of Shepparton) that got lost in the licence change. My take on where the Australian OSM community is at is that we're still a bit scarred from the hugely disruptive licence changeover, and the leaving of some of the rather abrasive individuals in the process. I'd love to see more discussion about goals for the community, individual projects etc. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[OSM-talk] What to do with failed (Potlatch) save changeset?
While trying to save a changeset in Potlatch2, I got an error message about version conflicts, and was left with a big chunk of XML. Potlatch appears not to be able to do anything with it, but maybe I can still salvage something from it. I put it here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/767553/OSM/failedupload.osm Assuming I'm happy to simply lose any changes where there really is a version conflict (which I am), what can I do with it? (I don't use JOSM at all, so would prefer to avoid that hurdle if possible...) Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] What to do with failed (Potlatch) save changeset?
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: The couple of times I've encountered this situation, I've manually edited out the conflicting element and then used upload.py to upload it to OSM. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Upload.py Excellent, thanks. I'll try that. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Why do we have so many registered users with zero edits ?
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: Just a further data point. As of the end of last month we had edits from 324'152 unique UIDs, not quite 30% of all accounts (some of the changesets are likely to be empty, but the number is still quite a bit larger than the often quoted 200'000). Is there (or could there be?) a graph of contributions against number of u-el-? Might be interesting also to see whether the number of users on zero is vastly different to the number of users on one edit, two edits etc. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenSnowMap.org
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 8:33 PM, yvecai yve...@gmail.com wrote: - could it be more obvious which is the start of each (downhill) run? Unless there a tag on the node, it would be hard. Emphasizing each way start node wouldn't be nice, as pistes can be made from several ways. Well, you can already compute gradient profiles, so maybe you could use that. And isn't there a convention that downhill routes are mapped in the downhill direction? - would be great to have a summer/winter mode button (in summer mode, show the mountain bike trails, hiking routes etc) Then it's not opensnowmap anymore :) Yeah, it's even more useful. Seriously though, most ski resorts (around here at least) have a green and white mode. Many of the functions of your site would also be useful for other activities at the resort. What I try to achieve is controls with left clic only. Ok, but why? All the other sites use left click to place markers, and right click context menu to delete them. Don't reinvent GUIs if you don't have to :) I take it that more guidance would be appreciated. Nah, just more familiar experience. Trying to teach users how to use your novel interface is the wrong approach, IMHO - just stick with what they already know. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Imagery Boundary?
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Dave Sutter sut...@intransix.com wrote: Creating another instance of the OSM database and server is a very good idea. I would propose we make the purpose of this database to allow people post ANY geo data that is NOT part of the base map. It would be an open database for general GIS data. Some examples of random things people could do with this database: - The high resolution imagery outlines discussed in this thread - Migratory patterns of birds (I can't find the post where someone was requesting where to do this...) - GPS tracking for running, hiking, cycling and other recreation, similar to Strava or MapMyRun (see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenSportMap) - GIS Management for operations like Haiti OSM team There are very many use cases for GIS data that is useful to OSM but doesn't meet the current OSM criteria. Perhaps so many that one database wouldn't be enough. Some that come to mind: - everything that fails the on the ground test (flight paths, boundaries, designations, etc) - statistical/population/demographic data - project metadata like the zzz team is working within this boundary area - subjective data (preferred cycle routes) - historical data (explorers' routes, defunct bus routes, demolished buildings...) Probably some of these already have good homes (OpenAviatianMap?). Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] OpenSnowMap.org
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 7:56 AM, yvecai yve...@gmail.com wrote: Pistes informations with a single clic:No more 'vector mode'. Lighter, better compatibility with browsers. Search for pistes by names:Nominatim results are augmented with a selection of ski pistes and lifts. Multi-modal routing and elevation profiles:You can climb dowhnills, take a lift downward and a shortcut in snowshoes. Yes ! Forum:Yet another channel. It's more dedicated to newcomers, and aim to ensure the site viabilty in the long-term. Excellent! Some feedback: - the terrain shading is distracting and not useful at higher zoom levels (16+, maybe 15+) - why not show the names of the runs? (rather than having to click on them) - the interactive mode button is not intuitive at all. I had no idea it was a button until I happened to click Settings. Why not leave interactive mode on all the time? - in the mountains I looked at, the chairlift icons are often upside down... - could it be more obvious which is the start of each (downhill) run? - would be great to have a summer/winter mode button (in summer mode, show the mountain bike trails, hiking routes etc) - at low zooms (10), it's hard to find the ski resorts - they could be much more prominent - suggest changing mapkey to legend (or just key. Or at least put a space in it :)) - what is the profile button meant to do? It just gives this one tip about clicking the interactive button... - I find the whole interactive mode clunky and not intuitive. Why not follow the established conventions of direction finding, using a similar interface to Google Maps, Bing Maps, or hell, OSRM? It's pretty confusing: it took me a while to work out that it's even doing routing. All I wanted to do was click on a run to find out more about it. - the mapkey doesn't explain what the little warning signs ( /!\ ) are for. Steepness? - I also see two different coloured XC trails, but I can't see anything in the legend that explains why? - I love the elevation profile - would be great to be able to click on a single run/track and see the profile for it. - the wiki page that is linked to to explain the colour coding of ski runs doesn't actually explain them: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:route%3Dpiste (Suggest you just include text descriptions, like easy, difficult etc) - would be great to use bezier smoothing on the ski runs if at all possible - they look very sharp and jagged. Anyway, overall it looks great! Don't be put off my feedback :) Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Imagery Boundary?
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: It's not only for outdated outlines. As said, it is not a map feature, it's just for some comfort during edition (would consider the same for mapping party cakes). What was the easiest and most pratical solution can be tolerated if it is temporary or until editors provide other means like the plugin mentioned earlier. Hi Pieren, For our information, would you mind explaining how it helps to have these boundaries in the database? I just don't get it - if I'm editing, and I see one of these boundaries, either: a) it lines up with the edge of the imagery, in which case it tells me nothing new (ie: I can already see there's no imagery!), or b) it's wrong. I usually delete it if b :) I'm sure I'm missing something though - what's the use case where it's helpful? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Imagery Boundary?
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: I think this boundaries can be useful, but should be in some other database. Are there any other appropriate databases? That is, something with the same form (an OSM database) for stuff related to the OSM project, but not containing actual OSM content. I'm thinking Wikipedia has talk pages, project pages, and meta.wikimedia.org; Stack Overflow has meta - would some kind of meta OSM database be appropriate? Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Osm2pgsql/TileMill - how to detect whether way is in a route?
Hi, I'm trying to render a mountain bike map with TileMill. Some trails are in route relations, eg: 3xWay: highway=path, mtb=yes 1xRelation: type=route, route=mtb, name=My Cool Trail Osm2pgsql converts those to 4 rows: the relation is the complete trail. What I want to do is not render any way that is also part of a route relation - in that case I just want to render the route. One way to fudge this is to render the way, then render the route relation over the top, obscuring it. But that doesn't work if you want to use line smoothing (eg, line-smooth:0.6). The route relation will form a smooth bezier curve the intersection of two ways, but the way rendering will form a sharp point. So I'm just wondering if there is a way around this - some setting in osm2pgsql, some SQL magic I could play with. The ultimate goal would be to be able to write rules like: #trails[highway=path][mb=yes][in_mtb_route=no] { ... } Thanks, Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TileMill performance
Hi again, I've now moved to an 8-core VM with 32Gb of RAM, which has made certain operations faster, but processing the stylesheets and beginning rendering still seems to be very slow. Some numbers: from the moment I hit 'save' at zoom 13 in the centre of Melbourne: 1. at 1:05 , the spinning icon stops (I assume this means the stylesheets have been saved and processed) 2. at 2:15, the first tile appears 3. at 2:35, all visible tiles are rendered . During this process, there's almost no database activity - all queries are handled very quickly. Turning off every layer (so just rendering background-color): 1 0:48, spinning icon stops (tilemill-ui at just over 100% until now) 2. 1:45, first tile appears, (tilemill-tile around 100% until now). 3. 1:46 all tiles This cluster has had problems with slow file I/O in the past, so wonder if that's the likely result? By contrast, a simple project with simple stylesheet saves and renders almost instantly (1s). The styles are here: https://github.com/stevage/stevebikemap What I'd love to know: 1) What is happening for the first 50 seconds? Does TileMill really take that long to parse 5 smallish stylesheets and convert them into mapnik styles? If it sounds like a bug, I'm happy to investigate further... 2) What exactly is happening in step 2? I don't know Mapnik at all, so I'm just guessing that it's doing pre-computation like loading all the objects and their styles, computing z-orders, resolving conflicts between labels etc. Still this seems slow? 3) Why is step 2 so slow even when every layer is invisible? 4) Is there any way to increase the number of threads/processes, to get more advantage from the 8 cores? Hmm, with further investigation, it seems almost all the time is going into the 'areas.mss' style. Commenting it out reduces the whole save/render cycle to just 7 seconds (from 155!) As an example: #areas[zoom13][leisure=pitch], #areas[zoom13][leisure=golf_course], #areas[zoom13][landuse=cemetery] { line-color:darken(green,5%); line-width:1; line-opacity:0.2; polygon-fill:#bdb; } Rendering that one rule takes an additional 7 seconds (ie, 14 seconds instead of 7, including saving/processing time), even at zoom 13, when it's not even being applied. Making the #areas layer invisible had no effect on rendering time. I guess I can further decompose these db queries (#landuse, #leisure...), but is there anything else I can do to speed them up? Is this normal? Thanks again for any information, Steve On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, (First - is this the right list to discuss using TileMill? I can only find the MapBox support form, or gis.stackexchange.) I'm having some problems with TileMill rendering very slowly. Sometimes it seizes up altogether, until I restart it or reboot the server. This seems to happen particularly when I frequently interrupt rendering by saving the stylesheet again. My setup is a 2-core, 8Gb Ubuntu VM running on an OpenStack cluster. PostGIS (with Melbourne city data from bbbike.org), nginx for auth, and one shapefile. Pretty vanilla. I have a few questions about how to improve speed in TileMill/Mapnik: 1) In general, what kinds of rendering rules are slow? Does the way you specify a rule affect the speed? (eg, is [zoom13] { #ways[...] } slower/faster than #ways[...][zoom13] ?) 2) How does caching take place? It seems to me that when saving a stylesheet with changes, there's a long delay before anything renders, then subsequent small changes aren't too slow. So some layers are computed once then reused? 3) Are there any easy tips for tuning the database? 4) Or tuning TileMill/Mapnik? 5) Watching 'top' during a render, it doesn't look like much memory is being used. Is there a way to trade memory for speed? 6) Does setting a layer invisible definitely prevent it being computed? Sometimes I think I'm going mad... 7) Lastly,will adding cores lead to a proportional increase in speed? Thanks very much in advance, Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TileMill performance
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: effect on rendering time. I guess I can further decompose these db queries (#landuse, #leisure...), but is there anything else I can do to speed them up? Is this normal? Ok, yes, that's apparently what you need to do - with 21 layers, I'm now under 7 seconds for a full render. I wish there was a more elegant way though :/ Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TileMill performance
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es wrote: On Miércoles, 27 de febrero de 2013 12:03:30 Steve Bennett escribió: I'm having some problems with TileMill rendering very slowly. I suggest to have a look at Dane's slides about How to make slow maps: http://dbsgeo.com/foss4g2011/foss4g2011-lecture2-how-to-make-slow-maps.pdf Nice. Couple of questions about how to avoid certain of those traps: 1) How do you control multithreading? It looks like I'm getting access to some 8 core VMs. How should I configure TileMill/Postgres for best performance then? 2) How do I know whether reprojection is happening? At least I have fixed the query more than you render problem - that did indeed improve performance significantly. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] (Off topic) Apple hiring OSM contributors in Australia?
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: Why hire *away*? As noted by the OP, this story is indeed completely off-topic, and has nothing to do with OpenStreetMap. Apple's maps team is hiring new staff. To pitch this as some kind of head-hunting attack on OSM is...creative. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TileMill performance
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es wrote: On Jueves, 28 de febrero de 2013 09:57:34 Steve Bennett escribió: Nice. Couple of questions about how to avoid certain of those traps: 1) How do you control multithreading? It looks like I'm getting access to some 8 core VMs. How should I configure TileMill/Postgres for best performance then? Tilemill is not a map server. Set up a propar map server which is able to configure proper multithreading. Again, I'm not trying to serve up static tiles to the public. I'm just trying to get quicker performance for styles under development. If that's not possible, then ok. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] TileMill performance
Hi, (First - is this the right list to discuss using TileMill? I can only find the MapBox support form, or gis.stackexchange.) I'm having some problems with TileMill rendering very slowly. Sometimes it seizes up altogether, until I restart it or reboot the server. This seems to happen particularly when I frequently interrupt rendering by saving the stylesheet again. My setup is a 2-core, 8Gb Ubuntu VM running on an OpenStack cluster. PostGIS (with Melbourne city data from bbbike.org), nginx for auth, and one shapefile. Pretty vanilla. I have a few questions about how to improve speed in TileMill/Mapnik: 1) In general, what kinds of rendering rules are slow? Does the way you specify a rule affect the speed? (eg, is [zoom13] { #ways[...] } slower/faster than #ways[...][zoom13] ?) 2) How does caching take place? It seems to me that when saving a stylesheet with changes, there's a long delay before anything renders, then subsequent small changes aren't too slow. So some layers are computed once then reused? 3) Are there any easy tips for tuning the database? 4) Or tuning TileMill/Mapnik? 5) Watching 'top' during a render, it doesn't look like much memory is being used. Is there a way to trade memory for speed? 6) Does setting a layer invisible definitely prevent it being computed? Sometimes I think I'm going mad... 7) Lastly,will adding cores lead to a proportional increase in speed? Thanks very much in advance, Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TileMill performance
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Tom MacWright t...@macwright.org wrote: TileMill is not designed for that kind of application (running as a live server with no cache), though it will work 'a bit'. So: it doesn't do caching - you'll want a cache. Look at CloudFront, nginx's cache, varnish, squid, and so on. I might have been a bit unclear: I'm not trying to serve up pre-computed tiles to the public. I'm just doing style development, so rendering tiles to see what it looks like. So I don't think caching of pre-rendered tiles is an issue? Tuning the database: check that you have all possible indexes installed and the data is in EPSG:900913. Can you elaborate on all possible indexes? :) Where can I read up on this stuff? The long-term answer is switching to something designed to be a live-server (mod_tile, TileStache) or rendering your tiles and serving them from MBTiles (with TileStache or TileStream). Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TileMill performance
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 4:09 AM, AJ Ashton aj.ash...@gmail.com wrote: (eg, is [zoom13] { #ways[...] } slower/faster than #ways[...][zoom13] ?) Does your layer setup actually looks like this? ie. one 'ways' layer pulling in the entire planet_osm_ways table? If so this will be problematic. Unlike MapCSS, filtering out objects with CartoCSS will not prevent them from being loaded. With Mapnik/TileMill you should be querying specific thematic subsets of the database for each layer. Ah. Yes, #ways is the whole table - although it's just one city. That's probably my problem. So, I guess I should set up individual queries (#bikepaths, #parks, ...) using PostGIS to do the filtering rather than Mapnik. That makes sense, thanks! Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Tagging Live indoor music venues
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: I don't think separating rock music venues and concert halls is a good idea. They are basically the same thing, a big room where music is played. Agreed. There are too many tags as it is. Excessive distinctions causes a lot of pointless hair splitting arguments (should I tag this as a concert hall or a music venue?) OTOH, if amenity=concert_hall, amenity=music_venue and leisure=music_venue are all in pretty similar usage, we're pretty much free to pick one to support. I'd take amenity=music_venue, as the term is the broadest (and happily encompasses concert halls - the reverse isn't true). leisure=* seems wrong - those tags are generally about sports and recreation outdoors. Well, when you think of it there is a difference, concert halls usually have chairs. Is that a good separator of the two? Not at all - lots of other venues do too. You could argue that concert halls are designed for the performance of classical music, but even that will break down. It's not a distinction that needs to be made. Can you imagine a map that has different icons for concert halls vs music venues? Maybe we could invent a tag like music=rock;classical;popular that differentiates those halls, and tag them all with amenity=music_venue. Sounds ok...I think in practice there will be an awful lot of fuzzy sets. Rock music at classical venues and vice versa. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] How to obtain a small coastline polygon for TileMill?
Hi all, I'm learning TileMill with a project to render my home town of Melbourne, which is on the southeastern coast of Australia. The only problem I'm having is the coastline. I've tried a few things, and nothing has really worked: 1) The default 'countries' shape that comes with TileMill - not enough detail, misaligned with OSM data (maybe the wrong projection) 2) Cloudmade's Victoria coastline (http://downloads.cloudmade.com/oceania/australia_and_new_zealand/australia/victoria) - I think it's just a way, not a closed polygon. As a result, applying a fill to it doesn't really work - bits of water don't get filled, and bits of land do. 3) Cloudmade's victoria.poly (http://downloads.cloudmade.com/oceania/australia_and_new_zealand/australia/victoria/victoria.poly) - not in a format that TileMill recognises. 4) Cloudmade's whole Australia coastline: http://downloads.cloudmade.com/oceania/australia_and_new_zealand/australia/australia.coastline.osm.bz2 - aligns perfectly, but seems to be broken: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/767553/broken-coastline.png 5) openstreetmapdata.com's land/sea polygons (http://openstreetmapdata.com/data/land-polygons) - very slow to render (because it's the whole world?) - it's off by ~25km south of the other OSM data. I used the Mercator projection I'm using TileMill installed on an Ubuntu VM with PostGIS. The OSM data I'm using came from here: http://osm-metro-extracts.s3.amazonaws.com/melbourne.osm.pbf Can someone advise the best way to get a simple coastline polygon into TileMill? For this project, I really only need a single polygon of Port Phillip Bay (or alternatively, a single land polygon covering greater Melbourne). Sorry for the newbie questions. Thanks, Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to obtain a small coastline polygon for TileMill?
Thanks - that's perfect. I hadn't noticed the SRS box. Works great now. Steve On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM, AJ Ashton aj.ash...@gmail.com wrote: On Feb 25, 2013 11:22 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: 5) openstreetmapdata.com's land/sea polygons (http://openstreetmapdata.com/data/land-polygons) - very slow to render (because it's the whole world?) - it's off by ~25km south of the other OSM data. I used the Mercator projection I would recommend these files (they are what we use at MapBox). TileMill's projection auto detection is a bit off for these files - make sure to set the SRS explicitly to '900913'. As for speed, make sure the file has been indexed with the 'shapeindex' command line utility that comes with Mapnik. This should speed up rendering noticeably. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Question about copyrighted hiking routes in France
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote: More philosophically the idea of someone claiming copyright on walking routes seems completely at odds with the nature of countryside walking, which to my mind has similar free and open values to open source software and data (the landowners and their Keep out signs being similar to proprietary licencing) And pragmatically, there are real problems when an organisation that establishes a route also seeks to derive income from selling information about it. It seems logical, until your realise that the organisation's two goals (promoting a route by disseminating information about it; and gaining income to achieve the primary goal) are completely contrary to each other. The Tasmanian Trail is completely obscure because the only information about it is in a mail-order paperback. To walk/ride the Great Dividing Trail requires paying for four really crappy maps. (Hopefully in two weeks' time it will be 90% OSM'ed.) Rail Trails Australia was heading in a similar direction, but I helped convince them that sharing information about the trails *is* their mission. Maybe the FFRP could be persuaded eventually? Convince them to give up claims of copyright on the route geography, and focus on prose descriptions, subjective details etc? Steve ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Question about copyrighted hiking routes in France
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:22 PM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: First issue : it is the hiking route names themselves. For all of them created by the FFRP, the names are registered trademarks and cannot be used without permission (see question below). Second issue : the routes themselves are copyrighted. Hi Pieren, I am also not a lawyer, but here's my two cents. First, it would be really said if we lost the GR routes. I recently hiked about half of the GR20, using the OSM route of course. So I don't think we should give up easily - they're so valuable. On the trademark front, it should be easy to establish if they have a genuine complaint. If they do, I think we can change the names without losing too much - even if had to call them French hiking route 20 or something. Second issue : it is maybe a more specific French issue here because the routes themselves can be copyrighted when they are considered as original work. A famous case confirmed this with the IGN (publishing the FFRP maps) sueing a guidebook editor [5] and confirmed by the highest court in France (1ere chambre de la cour de cassation de Paris, decision of 30 june 1998 [8]. I don't know if this is the same in other countries but a significant part of the OSM community in France would consider deleting the FFRP hiking routes completely (and not only the trademarks mentionned in Q1). On what basis do they claim ownership of the routes, exactly? As I understand it, many of these routes link up lots of little trails that had been around for decades. How did copyright get transferred from the people who created the trails to the FFRP? Or do they claim ownership only over new sections? Or only over a particular representation? Are they aware that all the data has been created independently, by surveying the trail - not by actually copying their data? I wonder where the exact line would be drawn - what if we didn't have routes, but just the trails marked. But then, how would you label such a trail - often they have no other name other than the GR number, plus the name of the next landmark. Presumably someone has sought French legal advice? What was it? Steve ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [talk-au] Google copying from OSM maps
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Barker, Nicholas nbar...@pb.com.au wrote: Not at all, it just seemed a bit of a double standard that we are diligent not to copy from other maps and only map what is on the ground...then this appears on Google on their 'cycle track' layer. If they had mapped it from the ground properly then they would know that it is a very difficult mountain bike course with big jumps and drops, not a paved bike path and i doubt they would have used it in the cycle routing. Just pointing out the obvious here - in case anyone isn't aware. Google now supports crowdsourced mapping with the MapMaker tool, so it's totally possible that either: - a member of the public mapped it legitimately - a member of the public mapped it by copying OSM Obviously if we copied from Google then that's bad and illegal and we should be punished with big law suits...if Google copies from OSM well then that's OK as it furthers the mapping cause... Yeah that's my view - I map with the intention of helping the widest possible range of users. Sometimes I even add stuff to Google Maps directly! It's not everyone's view though, so we do need to respect that. (IMHO much better to spend time mapping than fighting Google though...) Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Cycle routes and MTB routes
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Barker, Nicholas nbar...@pb.com.au wrote: As many of you will know we have a few well known long distance (100km+) cycle routes, some of which cross state boundaries. These routes are also rugged and designed to be ridden on mountain bikes or hybrids only. A few examples of these are: The Bicentennial (VIC/NSW/QLD) The goldfields track (VIC) The Mawson Trail (SA) The Munda Biddi (WA) Hi Nick, Like John, I can only know one of these well - the Great Dividing Trail (aka goldfields track). It's extremely rough, and very little of it could be sensibly ridden by anything less than a mountain bike. So, definitely MTB route only. I'm actually intending to ride (and hence map) the entire thing in a bit less than a month. As these are extended bicycle routes (albeit for MTBs or tough hybrids) are of national significance do they constitute a national cycling network and should they be mapped as such? They would constitute a national mountain biking network, if such a thing existed. But LCN/RCN/NCN are clearly for cycling in the sense of a practical way of getting from A to B. Indeed if they do not cross state borders are the only of state significance and to be mapped as a RCN? That's a harder problem. I don't think crossing state borders is relevant. In the case of walking routes, I think the most nationally significant routes (eg, the Overland, the Lara Pinta...) should be NWN in order to show up prominently on route maps. If a cycle route is rough enough to be MTB only (an unsurfaced rail trail for example) does that relegate it from the LCN, RCN or NCN to just being a MTB route only? Yes. Should these routes carry two relations, NCN and MTB routes? I think you'd only see that situation where a section of track is part of two distinct routes, like where a mountain bike route temporarily uses a rail trail or something. If a significant section of an MTB route is suitable for normal cycling, it might be worth creating an extra relation - discuss maybe? Could happen on the BNT. The easiest way to think of it is that MTB and cycling are two completely distinct activities. If you can't ride a hybrid with panniers along it, it's not a cycle route. I haven't done it, but I understood the Mawson Trail to be dirt roads rather than mountain biking, so would be a better candidate for an RCN tag. Similarly, I'm pretty sure the Munda Biddi trail is intended for all kinds of cycling. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Adding only part of a road to a route relation (was: network and route tags)
Also (if using Potlatch), a useful shortcut you may not know about is Shift-R. That will copy all the relations from the last selected way to the current one. Steve On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:59 AM, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: On 03/02/2013 12:22, David Clark wrote: ie I have a route (The Mawson trail) that passes along a section of a fire road, but it doesn't pass along the full length of the fire road. How do a I select only a section of the fire road (not the full length of it) so I can make the relationship to the route? You'd need to cut the fire road into 2 (or perhaps 3) and then add the relation to only the relevant bit. In Potlatch (the online editor on the OSM website) you can do this by clicking on the node that you want to split it at and pressing x. Here's an example (not in Australia, but the same principle applies): http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.13304lon=-1.78357zoom=16layers=C Here Highfield Lane is split into two. The eastern part is added to the relation for cycle route 54; the western part isn't. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[OSM-talk] Which renderer for high quality, printed cycle map?
Hi all, We'd like to produce a high quality bike map, to be printed. I'm looking at the various renderers and wondering if anyone has a recommendation? Requirements - looks good (eg, labels on wiggly labels aren't too wiggly, some ability to avoid label clashes) - customisable rendering (MapCSS would be a bonus) - some nice bike-friendly styles already available? - rendering to SVG would be very useful, would give us a chance to hand-edit the final rendering. - Python-based is a bonus I'm open to the idea of using existing online services, if any are customisable enough. Something like MapOSMatic doesn't work, as the style is fixed, and it can't render a big enough area. Contenders so far, from glancing through the wiki: - Mapnik, obviously. Doesn't support MapCSS, but Komap might help? - Maperitive, also no MapCSS. - Ceyx. Still no stable release? Hard to tell what state it's in. Pros/cons of each? Are there others to look at? I can't find a good list anywhere (there's http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Renderers_feature_list but lots of those seem old, abandoned, etc). Thanks, Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] network and route tags
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:33 PM, David Clark dbcl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: Ok I've changed route=mtb to mtb=yes for the trail itself. That fixes the issue I had with the route side of this so that's great. Using this approach an mtb trail (singletrack) looks the same as a cycle path (paved commuter path). Is this correct? Looks the same in what? Mapnik? I'm not sure - mapnik may treat highway=path; bicycle=yes as equivalent to highway=cycleway. They'll probably look different in opencyclemap, if and when that ever gets updated again. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] network and route tags
Hi David, Where is this, btw? In general: - route=lcn are for bike paths that get you somewhere useful in the local vicinity. (We still debate exactly what LCN means in Australia) - route=mtb are for all mountain bike trails. Don't get hung up on any connotations you might have with a word like route, as a native English speaker. The benefit to using route=mtb is that they show up specially highlighted on mountain biking map styles, which is useful and appropriate. So, for each trail, I would: - a route relation with route=mtb, and name=xx, and other tags as appropriate - tag the trail itself with highway=path, name=xx, surface=dirt/gravel, and add the route relation Steve On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:33 PM, David Clark dbcl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: Hi All, I am interested in a small area of trails. There are about 10 trails in a local reserve, all the trails are sign posted and named etc, but there is no actual marked route you just pick which trails you want to use to get to where you want to go. However the tagging used in OSM to me seems wrong. (1) network=lcn Is this correct to use? Should there be other tags associated with this such as network:name=x etc? (2) route=mtb All the trails are tagged with route=mtb. However there is no marked or recognised physical route associate with these trails. Each trails is short approximately 200m to 500m long so it seems to me the route tag is not applicable. Etiquette: If the above tags are wrong, is it ok to just delete them? These tags have been used in this trail area and 2 others. Thanks, David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Being more like Wikipedia (was: OpenStreetMap Future Look)
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I'm very much an outsider to Wikimedia but if I look at how much money they have spent on development and how little has changed for the contributing user - adding a table to an article is practically as difficult now as it was five years ago. You sit there and wonder: How hard can it be? Hundreds of man-years of developer time... and still a person with average computer literacy cannot add a table to an article! Hi Frederik, Before getting into OSM, I did a lot of work with Wikipedia: writing articles, developing policies and guidelines, moderating the mailing lists, various cleanup etc, mostly in 2006-8. As noted, your example is poorly chosen: the goal of Wikipedia is to diseminate a high quality encyclopaedia to the world's people. Letting punters create tables easily is a low priority (and hard!), compared to all the infrastructure of actually serving up the content, making translations work, zillions of plugins, bots, browser support, the monster that is the wikitext parser etc. All the developer time has produced an enormous amount: a stable, high quality encyclopaedia that it's in the top 10 web sites, looks good, is searchable etc etc. It is too simplistic, to say things like everyone wants OSM to be more like Wikipedia in terms of X, because you can't always separate the good from the bad. It's easy to say I'd like to have the kind of money that Wikimedia have or the popularity that Wikipedia enjoys but none of this can be had without a downside. I can't speak for the money side, but I'd like OSM to be more like Wikipedia in terms of the maturity of its community and its attitude towards content development. Wikipedia took a firm stand that the healthy hothouse attitude of the early days was just a passing phase: things had to settle down, standardise, become more process driven in order to produce high quality content. OSM has been around enough years now for something similar to have happened, but it hasn't. Newcomers are still encouraged to invent tags, and to ignore the wiki, because that's just wikifiddling. Whereas Wikipedia takes policies and guidelines seriously, has large numbers of highly successful wikiprojects, has people who take responsibility for pretty boring things like stub and category management, and it works. Whereas one look at taginfo.openstreetmap.org will show you the complete chaos that we have - and it's not getting better. Wikipedia strives for high quality content, at the expensive of the contributor. OSM strives for ease of use for contributors, at the expense of content consumers. After all these years we still have no agreement about exactly what highway=path means, dozens of very common tags, or even sets of tags that consumers should support. For example, Wikipedia being as well known as it is has lead them to create relevance criteria - you can't create an article on a living person or a geographic feature, for example, unless that person or feature fulfills certain criteria. Wikipedians felt that this was necessary because they were swamped with data they considered irrelevant and un-encyclopedic. Many people left Wikipedia because of that (and indeed many of them are to be found in the ranks of OSM nowadays). Notability. People leave Wikipedia for all kinds of reasons. Those that leave because the content they were interested in creating wasn't within the scope of Wikipedia were obviously on the wrong project. You make this sound like a bad thing. I've heard other OSMers make fun of the tons of WP:xxx rules that Wikipedia has but I am sure they are not there because Wikipedians terribly enjoy rule-making - they probably had to be created in response to problems. They were created in pursuit of a goal, and they work. Best of all they focus debates, and move them forward. You can debate whether a given course of action fits within existing policies and guidelines, or you can debate whether the policy/guideline is right. But you don't start from scratch every single time like we do in OSM debates. Probably one reason that there are more policy/guidelines on Wikipedia is policy writing is a closer fit with encyclopaedia writing. Whereas geospatial types get frustrated quickly with writing text, I think. Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] Pressing Issues (Was: Re: cities changed to towns)
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: We also need a review of those areas mapped in the shadow of the redaction. I was using my Edge 800 to do cycle navigation from Ryde to Manly on the weekend, and quite frankly it sucked big time. I was directed over 10 metre cliff drops, driveways, against one-way streets, the lot. I'd be still there if I hadn't pulled out Google Maps and backtracked. (Where the maps were good, the Edge 800 bicycle navigation is great, BTW). Heh, same thing just happened to me, riding over Mt Buninyong (near Ballarat). Mt Buninyong Rd turned out to be a private driveway, and the only way out was down a steep, overgrown firetrail on my road tyres. No idea if the error was related to the redaction process. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] cities changed to towns
I would want place=city to refer to an urban populated area of at least 100,000 people as per http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place#Values I've taken to fixing errors from Geofabrik OSMI and have changed places to match the schema above. Whilst I find hamlet village grate on me as words, they are merely code for an object to be mapped. It's only really issue because I speak English (Australian) and the OSM schema was developed in English (United Kingdom) that there is an issue. If we all spoke Finnish or Swahili we wouldn't be having this discussion now. Ok, well what might be an obvious error to you is correct to someone else. There are many OSM tags that have different meanings in different parts of the world. It would be good to be consistent within Australia, but it's not important whether our meaning precisely matches the meaning in the UK or some other country. Looking at the wiki page you cite, it's clear that those definitions are intended as rules of thumb: Populations of villages vary widely in different territories but will nearly always be less than 10,000 people, often a lot less.; [Cities s]hhould normally have a population of at least 100,000 people and be larger than nearby towns. Normally, in densely populated areas, that is. Applying that cut off in Victoria would lead to only Melbourne and Geelong qualifying, with Bendigo and Ballarat just missing out. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Blind obedience following routing tools.
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 5:48 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.netwrote: I guess people are aware of this story, people in trouble for following badly constructed maps - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-10/apple-maps-strands-motorists-looking-for-mildura/4418400 Looks like its to be the lead story on the abc news tonight. I bet we could all find examples in OSM that could cause similar problems. Yep. For better or worse, OSM doesn't inspire the same trust (or blind faith) that Apple does. I discovered this weird error on Bing Maps yesterday: ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Blind obedience following routing tools.
(whoops, wrong button) The weird error on Bing Maps: http://binged.it/RlH1PC The real Mt Buller can be seen 50km to the north. This error means if you route from Mansfield to Mt Buller (less than a 1 hour drive) it takes all the way back to Melbourne then via Licola - over 7 hours. Steve On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 5:48 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.netwrote: I guess people are aware of this story, people in trouble for following badly constructed maps - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-10/apple-maps-strands-motorists-looking-for-mildura/4418400 Looks like its to be the lead story on the abc news tonight. I bet we could all find examples in OSM that could cause similar problems. Yep. For better or worse, OSM doesn't inspire the same trust (or blind faith) that Apple does. I discovered this weird error on Bing Maps yesterday: ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] cities changed to towns
Hi Chris, Interesting topic - sadly the wiki just acknowledges the lack of an answer. My take is that the distinction between village/town/city really only matters for the purpose of rendering anyway - any more sophisticated use of the data is going to use population figures to make its own decision about how to classify towns. So I think it's ok to be a bit loose and subjective with our definitions. Hard for me to comment on the QLD ones. The Victorian ones are Warrnambool, Sale and Mildura. W and M definitely sense as cities than towns. They're major regional centres, and much more significant than towns nearby. Sale is more lineball (although Wikipedia counts it) - nearby Bairnsdale should be a city though. You see the effect it has on Mapnik here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.74lon=145.31zoom=8layers=M It's definitely wrong having Sale show up at that zoom but not Bairnsdale. But the more I look at the Wikipedia list (counting 18 cities outside Melbourne), the more I think it would make sense to mark all of those as city. None of them seem out of place subjectively to me. I'm not clear on where the list on Wikipedia was derived from though. If you compare the list by population against the ones designated city, some omissions are Echuca, Warragul, Bacchus Marsh, Ocean Grove-Barwon Heads. Not a big deal though. Steve On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Chris Barham cbar...@pobox.com wrote: Hi, some Australian places have changed from cities to towns on; changeset was: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/14217241 I've emailed to the editor to ask the source for the change as I believe some are now incorrect. I really do think Gympie, Maryborough, Warwick and Charters Towers are cities, and should have remained tagged as such. Are there others, in other states, within this changeset that should have stayed as is? Wikipedia is not the best reference material I know, but they have the Qld ones I mentioned as cities: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Australia Additionally, I think some of the others should to be tagged cities, even if not officially, under the Aus tagging guidelines at: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#City.2C_Town_or_Village.3F So looking at the tagging guidelines, haven't we agreed to tag by population size or significance in remote areas? Here is a populated list of places by population for Qld that could be useful any discussion: http://www.bonzle.com/c/a?a=fsc=lgst=3cmd=sp Cheers, chas ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] When is a road a cycle route?
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Yes! we are overloading the cycle route to not simply mean this is a way to get from A to B but also to mean a good way to cycle there. So, yes, we are giving two meanings to the same tag. Yours is simply navigational, and mine assures a minimum level of amenity in urban areas. I'd argue my use adds substantial value to a router. Your use adds little value over a pure shortest route algorithm. Hi Ian, I'm all in favour of recording subjective information about the rideability of individual streets - in fact there are several other projects out there doing this already. I don't think misusing the LCN/RCN tags is the right way to do this though. A few reasons: - You can't record anything about *why* this is a good route - You can't record different levels of goodness - You can't distinguish between this is a good route and this is actually a signed cycle route Using an existing tag which has an existing tag, for a novel purpose, purely so that existing routing software will behave a certain way is exactly the definition of tagging for the router. (Not that I believe in chanting slogans instead of actually spelling out the argument, which is why I've done so above.) And yes, my use adds little value over a pure shortest route algorithm - it was never my understanding (or intention) that LCN/RCN tags would be used by routers. But they're used by renderers of various kinds. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] When is a road a cycle route?
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Ben Kelley ben.kel...@gmail.com wrote: I think this one is an edge case. I know the sign Ian means, and in my judgement it does not indicate a route. Oh, can you elaborate? I think the more common case (that is currently not well defined) is where some other map indicates a route, but there is nothing on the ground to show it. If we map it in OSM, are we copying the map, or mapping a known fact (but one that is only known from the other map)? Apart from copyright (which is significant here) part of the problem is government bodies (local and state) mapping optimistically in that they plan to mark out a route in some way, but didn't actually do it. In general I would say that map only routes are not routes in the OSM sense. Possibly they are suggestions. I think we should not map such routes in OSM due to the copyright issue alone, but at what point does the existence of the map imply the existence of the route? If we're worried about copyright, I would be very curious to know why it's ok to copy information from street signs, but not from other sources. Ultimately, a bicycle route is a creative work (in a way that a street name isn't): it wouldn't be hard to demonstrate creativity in the selection of streets, bike paths etc that go into a route. So if we think that it's not ok to contain such routes in OSM (IIRC the French OSM reached that conclusion) then it doesn't matter whether they come from surveying street signs and markings, or from maps. Has anyone actually contacted any councils about this? I find it hard to believe they would intentionally consider their routes copyright and have a problem with their being copied in OSM, but they may never have considered the issue. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] When is a road a cycle route?
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Fundamentally, I think it is a continuous set of navigational signs that should be the primary indicator of a bicycle route, preferably agreeing with some documentation from the relevant authority. Ok, great - we do agree then. However, we need to take care we don't get to the point where blue bicycle sign implies bicycle route in OSM. I'm still not sure what these blue bicycle signs are - can you find an example on Google Streetview? So, there are several reasons we should not tag these official routes in OSM.. 1. If they are wholly unsuitable for cycling of any form. An example? I've never seen such a thing, so I'm finding it hard to relate. 2. If it is a cyclists get the hell outta here situation. Implemented to remove cyclists from a way rather than give them a positive route. Like this? http://goo.gl/maps/C0ysv I think I'd agree. Maybe. I'm not sure. Are there many? 3. If it is only a planned route. Agreed. 4. If it is outdated and a newer route has been implemented (and the old signs just happen to be still in place). Agreed. I can only see one reason where we should tag an section that is not part of an official route, and that is where it logically connects two signposted sections, and it would be obvious to the reasonable cyclist after consulting any available documentation that the signs for the intermediate section are just omitted. Hmm, what about this one: http://osm.org/go/uG4JzSmmU--?layers=C In this case, there are two bike routes (both rail trails, by coincidence) that come within 100m of meeting each other. But the signage for these things is in general terrible, so it's not surprising there's no signage linking the two. It just seems logical to show a link on the map (up Poath Rd then down the little service road). I don't think this is an issue with routes like railtrails. They are put together with care. However, this is very applicable to RTA routes and council routes. Some of the RTA maps are decades old, and are really bad. Some of the council signposts are downright crazy. RTA as in the NSW version of VicRoads? (Somewhat confusingly, RTA could also be Rail Trails Australia...) In 95% of cases, I'm sure we would agree with what should be a cycle route and what shouldn't be. Sounds like it. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] When is a road a cycle route?
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: Generally the case, but not always. My bicycle sign on Parramatta road being my best example so I'm sticking with it. A cycle route down a narrow three lane road, carrying trucks who'd soon as take you out as look at you Well, I guess I'm focussed on being alive when I get to B. These use cases are handled by routing software making good use of data such as cycleway=lane. Using the lcn/rcn tagging system to mark safety/suitability is simply incorrect. In your example, there's a signed bicycle route - so we map it. To do otherwise would be like not mapping a car park because we don't think people should park there, or not mapping a school because we don't think it's a good one. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Hi Matt, It seems we've reached the point of simply restating our views. I don't think yours represents consensus - but please discuss it on the main OSM talk list if you want. Steve On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Abandoned makes it sounds like there are tracks in place for the length of the line, just no trains running on it. But that's not the case - in the 4km the line used to run on there are 11 remaining artifacts, the largest being a station building (old North Carlton station), the smallest being a single 4 metre track section in Edinburgh gardens, or the one remaining concrete pylon base. They are the vestigial traces that need to be mapped. As for the rest, it's a mostly a park now with a bike track along it (the bits that aren't are houses) ... and that's what it should be mapped as. On 30/11/2012 6:23 PM, Mark Rennick wrote: Matt ** ** I believe abandoned railway lines should be mapped. ** ** If it is necessary to have a current physical feature to justify mapping, then the railway formation (cut and fill earth works) generally remain, particularly if the railway reserve has been retained as a rail trail, road or linear park. ** ** *From:* Matt White [mailto:mattwh...@iinet.com.au mattwh...@iinet.com.au] *Sent:* Friday, 30 November 2012 7:31 AM *To:* 'talk-au' *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines ** ** Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Matt On 29/11/2012 4:46 PM, Paul Norman wrote: Actually, the slope is slippery. People have made it about old roads. There are people who have mapped old roads where they have been completely developed over and no trace remains. Mapping the traces of an old rail line isn’t historical mapping. If there are currently traces there then it’s mapping the present. *From:* Steve Bennett [mailto:stevag...@gmail.com stevag...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2012 7:02 PM *To:* Matt White *Cc:* talk-au *Subject:* Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Admin boundaries are a slightly different thing - they may be intangible on the ground, but they are also current. We don't keep historical versions of admin boundaries either The problem with the historical thing is that to my mind, it is a slippery slope. There's a park near me that is currently, well, a park. But I know that it was previously a quarry, and then a rubbish tip/landfill, cos there is a sign saying so. But I certainly wouldn't tag the parks as a quarry or landfill, because it isn't. It's a park IMHO this slope is not slippery. Every time the do we map historical stuff debate comes up, it's always about train lines. That is, we're still at the top of this supposedly slippery slope, waiting to slide down. Somehow, train lines are different. They just are. To reiterate what I said before in different words: we're not mapping the 1890 route of a long forgotten train line. We're mapping the vestigial traces of a former line. And I'm absolutely not proposing to record any information about when lines opened or closed, or were re-routed or whatever. Steve ** ** ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] When is a road a cycle route?
Hi Ben, Thanks very much for starting this conversation - yes, it's a messy one. Mostly because the European (and particularly UK) concept of cycle route hasn't really existed here. But it's still worth trying to fit into because lots of tools (especially OpenCycleMap) do support that concept. * Normal residential street. No road markings. No signs. No maps listing this street as a cycle route. I would say this is not a cycle route. * As above, but where I think this is a handy street to ride down. I would say this is not a cycle route. * As above, but where some other people also think this is a handy street to ride down (and in fact I saw some just the other day). Again, not a cycle route in the OSM sense. Agreed. * As above, but there is a council map that says this street is a cycle route. (The map also lists other streets as cycle routes, and other streets do have signs, but this street does not.) I have found this to be fairly common. I would say this is not a cycle route. Disagree. If it's a designated cycle route - it's a cycle route. Could you elaborate on your reasoning? Tricky ones: * A council map says this is a cycle route, but there are no markings. In fact the council does not use road signs or paint to mark any of its cycle route. This is tricky, but I would not mark this in OSM, as the (copyright) map cannot be verified on the ground. I'm not sure of the difference between this and the previous one. Is it that in this case, there are no markings *anywhere* for the route? * A section of street that does not have any markings connects other streets that do have markings (e.g. bike symbols painted on the road). Cyclists commonly use this street to connect. Maps show this street as a cycle route. This also is tricky. I generally mark these, because it makes the map more useful. I think it's pedantry to leave little gaps in the map because those particular streets don't happen to have the markings shared by the rest of the route. Unhelpful pedantry, at that. * A shared use path that does not connect to any other known cycle routes. I would probably not mark this as a cycle route, but it depends on where it is. Yeah. Sometimes I mark these as LCN, sometimes I don't. If I can infer some sort of route thinking (ie, a series of streets or paths that connect), I'm more likely to. * A section of road has a cycle lane (where the law requires cyclists to ride in it), but the section of road does not connect to any other known cycle routes. Again tricky, and it probably depends on where it is. Personally, I don't equate bike lane with cycle route in the way that others (notably John Henderson, below) do. Bike lanes are infrastructure. Cycle routes are, well, routes. Quiet streets can be part of a bike route, but not have bike lanes because they're quiet. Similarly, busy roads can have bike lanes without being part of a bike route. Easier ones: * In states where riding on footpaths is normally not allowed, a shared use path that connects known (marked) cycle routes. Yes this is a cycle route. What do you mean by connect here? Simply that one path joins the other two? But yeah, probably. * A number of other maps show this as a cycle route. It has bikes painted on the road. Signs every 500m saying Cycle Route. Signs at every intersection with a picture of a bike, and showing the destination. Yes this is a cycle route. Again, I'm not really fussed what's painted on the ground. The indication of a cycle route, in my local council areas, is generally signs with a little bicycle, possibly the words bicycle route and an arrow. They frequently point down streets with no other bicycle infrastructure. Example: http://goo.gl/maps/M7FB9 I can think of more tricky edge cases, but in general I am more concerned with whether some physical presence on the ground is required, as opposed to I thought this might be a nice street to ride my bike down. To me, a bicycle route is much more about navigability than desirability for cycling. That is, when you follow a bicycle route, it should be easy to follow - based on signs, or good external (and official) documentation. Whether it has painted bike lanes is irrelevant. One of complications that arises, though, in inferring a route from signs is how far you allow between signs. What if the signs are far enough apart that there is ambiguity about which choice of streets in between is intended? etc... Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] When is a road a cycle route?
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 9:34 AM, John Henderson snow...@gmx.com wrote: I take a simplistic approach to this. A road is a bicycle route if and only if it has a bicycle lane (lanes if a two-way road). Simple, but not very helpful IMHO. cycleway=lane already captures that information. lcn=* and route relations should capture something beyond simple infrastructure. Incidentally, another case for discussion: Someone a while ago added the Golden Trail to OSM: marking a huge series of roads from near Adelaide to Ballarat (or Castlemaine - I forget) with a route relation and rcn_ref=The Golden Trail. There was never going to be any on the ground signage or painting, but at the time at least there was a website and plans for brochures etc. So I was a bit ambivalent about it. Since then, the website has gone, and the whole concept seems to have disappeared, so I've been progressively removing them. Still a fair chunk remains: http://osm.org/go/uGTLrE?layers=C I assume we're all agreed that we wouldn't want this kind of thing in OSM? What if there was good external documentation? What if there were signs but no bike lanes? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.com.au wrote: Right. So if I delete the mapped rail line that doesn't exist, then remap the individual pieces of track, the remaining point and weighbridge, three overhead pylon mounts, one remaining station and one cutting that remains as historical artifacts, then everyone is cool? Not me. If it exists on the ground now, it will get mapped. Otherwise, it won't. Your line of reasoning basically goes we will only map individual historical artefacts that are each worth mapping. The reason (IMHO) that we map a train line like railway=abandoned is to connect lots of little artefacts and landscape features that individually are too trivial to map. For example, a slight embankment (normally not something we'd map), in the context of other abandoned rail features makes sense under a railway=abandoned. Similarly, a line of trees, or simply the absence of development. Frequently, the corridors in which abandoned rail lines lie are still owned by the state. Mapping the railway line makes sense, and is meaningful to many people: Our house is on Station St, just the other side of the old rail line - even if strictly speaking there is nothing on the ground. I have no objections to removing sections that have been built over. So maybe my position is: If the former rail line still plays a part as a landmark or in planning and development, it should be mapped. Similarly, I'm ok with removing former stations that have completely gone and been built over, but if their former presence is preserved in some way, they should be mapped. It seems we both agree on mapping *the present* but differ in how to interpret that. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [OSM-talk] Recommendations for OSM mobile app?
Hi Jo, Yeah, OsmAnd does everything - but it's pretty complicated. Switching between offline and online maps (a pretty basic task) is really hard (and very hard to remember). To go to online maps you seem to have to: 1) Menu | Settings | Offline data (Download) 2) Expand Offline maps (vector) 3) Hold down on each offline map until 'deactivate' appears, which you choose. 4) Back out to Settings, select Online maps 5) Select Online and tile maps To then choose which one actually shows: 6) Menu | Define view | Map source... 7) Pick one Hmm...written out it doesn't sound that bad, but it took quite a lot of fumbling around to get that far. (I guess the problem is the OsmAnd authors think of vector and tile maps as completely different functions, implemented completely differently, but for the user, they're just two variations on a theme.) Steve On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote: I wanted to tell you a few days ago that OsmAnd does all you want. Maybe write a small manual page for it, for the subset of features your users need. I didn't do it then, hoping somebody else would have a better suggestion. Polyglot 2012/11/24 Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com Hi all, I'm looking for a recommendations of mobile apps to recommend, for people visiting rail trails in Australia. What we* need is: Must have: 1) It has to be simple to use. There are lots of powerful apps like OSMand, Locus etc, but they're incredibly complex, with lots of features we don't need. 2) Should by default use bicycle rendering (OpenCycleMap or other), or be very easy to change to that. 3) We'll need a recommendation for both iPhone and Android. Nice to have: 4) Easy-to-use offline tile downloading/use would be a bonus. (Personally I find it pretty complex switching between offline vector rendering and online tiles in the apps I mentioned before). 5) Features like food/drink near here would be a bonus. 6) Ability to also choose Google Maps would be a bonus. 7) Ability to route along bike paths (ie, rail trails) would be nice. Once we've chosen an app, we're going to have to give instructions like download the app, push this button to change to cycle mode, push this button to download tiles etc, so the simpler the better. Thanks, Steve * we = Rail Trails Australia ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
Hi Matt, The question about mapping old, historical features is much wider than just the Australian context. I'm pretty sure the current consensus is that we old rail lines should be mapped - even if there is not much to see on the ground. There might be more than you think - there's a station building (now a community hall, I think), other things too, perhaps. There are probably other former railways about with much less to see (the Rosstown Railway comes to mind) - at least with this one there are physical remnants such as tracks. So, yes, I object. Feel free to raise the issue on the main OSM talk list though. Steve On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Matt White mattwh...@iinet.net.au wrote: A question for the list regarding historical/disused rail lines. The old inner circle rail line in Melbourne is mapped in OSM, and I'm unconvinced of it being a good thing. Here's a little bit of it that I can talk about with some local knowledge of: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?** lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887**zoom=18layers=Mhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-37.780512lon=144.982887zoom=18layers=M Given that there is pretty much no trace of the rail line left, why are we mapping it? It was on the ground 30 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. (That said, there are some small pieces of the track remaining - where it crosses Rae St and Brunswick St Nth, two or three 15 metre sections + a set of points just north of the end of Birkenhead St (including what appears to be an old rail weighbridge), and a short three metre section in Edinburgh Gardens, and the old North Carlton station building is still there) If there are no complaints, I'm going to remove it. It's historical, and appears on old maps, but does not exist today. Matt __**_ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-auhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach
* Unpaved roads are difficult to really classify the surface in terms of anything other than dirt/sand/rock. The surface state changes over time from smooth immediately after grading, to possibly deep ruts/corrugations/mud after rain and wear. In this case, my personal opinion would be to use some sort of tag like surface condition (options being something like: maintained | uneven | degraded | corrugated | rocky | rutted | deep_rutted, but even those change immediately after track maintenance), with perhaps a best/worst case tag or similar One thought that occurs here would be to tag the *maintenance* of a track rather than its *current state*. Some tracks are essentially never maintained, while others are graded frequently. That, combined with the season that you're travelling (eg, late summer vs early spring) might be enough to make an informed decision. * Overall, it seems like Australia has both the special conditions requiring some extensions to the current 4WD/dirt road mapping data and the active mapping community to back it up. I don't see why we shouldn' agree on a handful of tagging rules for the AU conditions on this list and use them (assuming that they are well thought out etc). Document them nicely so the rest of the world can take them up, and make the rendering changes etc ourselves (how hard can a casing change be in the renderer? If we can do it an submit it to the trac system...) AFAIK the major issue with rendering changes is resources to implement them. So, if someone writes the code to do it, much greater chance of it happening. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Historical rail lines
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Ian Sergeant inas66+...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty sure we've reached consensus in the past that if there is absolutely no evidence of it on the ground - no tunnels - no cuttings - no tracks. In other words there was a railway line, but now it is a shopping mall, then it doesn't get mapped. We don't maintain layers of history in OSM right now. Here's what the wiki says: Abandoned - The track has been removed and the line may have been reused or left to decay but is still clearly visible, either from the replacement infrastructure, or purely from a line of trees around an original cutting or embankment. Use railwayhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:railway =abandoned https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dabandoned. Where it has been reused as a cycle path then add highwayhttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway =cycleway https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway For the case of the Inner Circle line, there is ample evidence: - some track, buildings etc - large sections of reserved land (according to our map, the Linear Park Reserve) - a bike path (the Inner Circle Rail Trail): https://www.railtrails.org.au/trail?view=trailid=133 I agree that where a rail line has been completely removed and sold off, and built over, the story is a bit different. But in this case, great effort has been expended to retain it as a feature of the landscape: hence the park, bike path, etc. Its presence lives on much more than some abstract representation on a map. It's completely plausible that people would want to follow the old train line on the map - in a way that wouldn't be the case if it had been built over by houses or shopping malls. There are other abandoned railways that perhaps shouldn't be mapped, but the case is pretty good for this one. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Tagging dirt and 4x4 roads - new approach
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 9:07 PM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.netwrote: Issue really is these guys will have some pretty heavy change controls in place. And there will be some pressure to not add anything unless its really proved essential, every extra bit of processing slows each refresh. So, we need a really good case rather than clever coding I'm afraid. Thanks, I stand corrected. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[OSM-talk] Recommendations for OSM mobile app?
Hi all, I'm looking for a recommendations of mobile apps to recommend, for people visiting rail trails in Australia. What we* need is: Must have: 1) It has to be simple to use. There are lots of powerful apps like OSMand, Locus etc, but they're incredibly complex, with lots of features we don't need. 2) Should by default use bicycle rendering (OpenCycleMap or other), or be very easy to change to that. 3) We'll need a recommendation for both iPhone and Android. Nice to have: 4) Easy-to-use offline tile downloading/use would be a bonus. (Personally I find it pretty complex switching between offline vector rendering and online tiles in the apps I mentioned before). 5) Features like food/drink near here would be a bonus. 6) Ability to also choose Google Maps would be a bonus. 7) Ability to route along bike paths (ie, rail trails) would be nice. Once we've chosen an app, we're going to have to give instructions like download the app, push this button to change to cycle mode, push this button to download tiles etc, so the simpler the better. Thanks, Steve * we = Rail Trails Australia ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk