On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Sven Geggus li...@fuchsschwanzdomain.dewrote:
It is avaliable on:
http://brewpubs.openstreetmap.de/
Nice. I just added three brewpubs.
How often is the map updated?
- Gustav
___
talk mailing list
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Something that is available from an official online source but not
verifiable on the ground should not - in my personal opinion - be
included in OSM.
No borders? No national parks? No nature reserves? No voltage on
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
No borders? No national parks? No nature reserves? No voltage on power
lines? No named farms (unless the owner puts up a sign)? No names for peaks?
Except for borders, all of those things are verifiable on the ground. I
How do, on the ground, you verify the name of a peak?
You look at the sign. Talk to the hikers you passed on the way up with your
GPS.
Just out of curiosity, where do you live and who is putting signs on the
peaks there?
- Gustav
___
talk
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
In the US, most of the peaks are marked at the trailhead you use to get to
them.
I think you will find that most of the peaks in the world are not accessible
from trails. Try places like the Himalayas, Greenland, Antarctica,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.comwrote:
A former cafe can be helpful as a landmark as well. Especially when it's
a free standing building (e.g. in a forest) near a larger city, which is
not that uncommon in germany.
Is it a cafe? No. Should it be tagged
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
what are your thoughts?
I have a hard time seeing how any of these usecases can be anything other
than insubstantial extractions. The database directive (article 15) says
that Any contractual provision contrary to Articles 6
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.comwrote:
That would mean that Mapnik needs to be checking a secondary field to
determine what to display. If the renderer doesn't do that, you will end up
with a map that is poorer in the end. In your case, that would mean
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:13 AM, David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't that defined as territorial waters, different from national border?
It would be better to have both drawn -- but the territorial waters marked
as boundary=maritime, or the such?
Some info on tagging here:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:48 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/9/29 Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com:
Todo: Clean up to proposal and support in the most common renderers.
Why do you want these to render exactly?
They are rendered today, but visually the same as land
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:00 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/9/29 Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com:
They are rendered today, but visually the same as land borders. I would
Ummm they are?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-24.622lon=153.677zoom=10
Centre of the map
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com
wrote:
do you know which kind of grid the coordinates are in?
My guess would be ED50.
- Gustav
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Jukka Rahkonen
jukka.rahko...@mmmtike.fiwrote:
Will all contents of OSM year 2009 database be in public domain first of
January, 2025?
The database directive gives 15 years of protection for a dump of a
database. As long as the database is updated, the
2009/9/28 Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es
Better? :-)
:-)
- Gustav
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Andrew Errington
a.erring...@lancaster.ac.uk wrote:
Actually, the convention is that objects should be tagged with four names.
The 'name=*' tag is Hangul followed by English in brackets. This is the
most important, as it is the 'fallback' tag for rendering a
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
It isn't legal, because the locations are derived from Google Maps.
This is basically a mashup based on Google Maps. I was unaware that Google
have claimed any rights over POIs added in such mashups (Google My Maps
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Joel joelheeth...@gmail.com wrote:
They do hold the rights to the location of the POIs when based on Google
maps.
I have tried to find something in their terms that verifies this, but have
not found anything. Could you please be a bit more specific?
Even if
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
In the strict (German) use case, you need to distinguish between
bicycle=allowed/suitable and bicycle=road sign. This is not about
marking a default, this is about describing the real situation precise
enough to make deductions
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de wrote:
highway=footway (not suitable)
bicycle=yes (but allowed)
bicycle=dedicated (signed)
A footway for cycling is not a valid combination to me.
In Norway you are allowed to cycle on all footways, unless explicitly
forbidden.
-
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
Those eight people can only do this if not even 0.1% of the other 1
care enough to oppose the proposal. If that's the case, then apparently
the proposal isn't so bad, is it? Why didn't all those people who
2009/8/11 Nop ekkeh...@gmx.de
This is a rather lenient definition that is unsuitable to depict the
German use case. That is exactly the reason for the confusion we are
having. If something is tagged as a cycleway and I am planning to walk
on foot, I need to know whether it is an unsigned way
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 12:17 AM, Jason Cunningham
jamicu...@googlemail.comwrote:
Looking at the discussion Mike Harris has already suggested the tags I
would suggest, but I may as well repeat them
natural=woodland land covered with trees (Minimum Crown Cover = 20%)
Sounds like a good idea
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 7:21 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
isn't the issue here that radioactivity is like height, i.e. a
smoothly-varying value that exists everywhere and is typically
represented as gridded data (which gets converted to contours for
display).
Average yearly
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:40 AM, John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm proposing not to replace highway=unclassified but to clarify it's
meaning to be one thing, that is it has higher volumes of traffic than
residential, but not enough to be considered tertiary.
Then I propose to
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 3:07 AM, Aun Johnsen (via Webmail)
skipp...@gimnechiske.org wrote:
Ok, I am revisiting this. Both me and Gustav F (original writes of the
proposal) was not satisfied with the outcome of the last vote (about 50/50),
so I have rewritten the proposal based on many of the
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote:
On Tuesday 21 Jul 2009 19:37:15 Gustav Foseid wrote:
I would prefer a combination of natural=trees for smaller areas covered
with trees, typically within urban areas, and natural=forest for larger
forests or areas
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote:
Of course, determining whether your average bit of woodland in the UK is
landuse or natural is fun, given that pretty much all of it has been
carefully managed at soem stage over the past few hundred years! Why do we
care
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 4:41 PM, John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com wrote:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cricketbatwillow/825730972/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sequella/425687849/in/photostream/
Ummm is it just me or do they both look like plantations used for logging?
The only
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Tom Chance t...@acrewoods.net wrote:
Surely the basic, universal need is there are some trees here, they're
called Sherwood Forest? Evoke natural=wood (lakes and beaches also fall in
between managed and unmanaged land but are marked as natural)
Some trees
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 8:10 PM, David Lynch djly...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm also thinking that deprecating both landuse=forest and
natural=wood might be a good idea if this goes forward. Replace it
with natural=trees, which is just as self-explanitory, and which (to
this particular mapper)
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 9:04 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Great stuff! I've been using keepright in London for a while now.
The most common form of error is an almost-junction. It seems that many of
these could be fixed automatically, subject to manual confirmation. Is
there
any
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
For over a
hundred years, English courts have held that a significant expenditure of
labour is sufficient - that's, er, Wikipedia saying that.
Has there been any sweat of the brow cases after the database directive
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:54 PM, Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com wrote:
*I* see OSM as an API for all possible geodata: everything that
doesn't move, and a few things that do. There are arguably many
things currently in OSM which should not be edited. For example,
political boundaries at
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:24 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
What's needed here is not an immutable=yes tag but rather a couple of tags
source=DEC and accuracy=definitive which will give GPS toting mappers the
information they need to know that the data in OSM is likely to be more
accurate
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 3:07 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Over IM and email I've had some really positive replies. There are a
lot of you out there who personally responded that you liked my posts.
You don't like the crappy negative tone of a lot of people.
You think
the license
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22crown+copyright+and+database+right%22
Heh. My maps are too old to have this.
That would be an uphill battle, but there is a chance you might win. If you
have old digital map data, you might
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:38 PM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.comwrote:
They used the map to pin the locations - the points did not come from
some other map. Therefore it is derived (this is precisely the problem
with pinning pictures on a Google or OSM map). So if they put the data
in a
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Dave Stubbs osm.l...@randomjunk.co.ukwrote:
If you were able to extract coordinates then this could be regarded as
reverse engineering the Produced Work, in which case it's covered by
4.7
It is not done by You or on Your behalf. So you cannot make a map and
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:13 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
except that the ODbL does represent a fundamental change in licensing
of map images - previously they were sharealike, but with ODbL it will
only require attribution?
That is hos the license is understood by most people,
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:22 PM, wer-ist-roger juwelier-onl...@web.dewrote:
The only thing I'm missing right now is a little more explenation on the
wiki
page. For example why needs the database a license at all? The database is
nothing without the data init. So first of all why dose the
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote:
There has been some discussion of adding a tag into the planet.osm
header detailing that the data is licensed.
Also adding some contract text on http://planet.openstreetmap.org/ to
cover our non-eu-database-right
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Quoting 4.2 (b)
[You must] Include a copy of this Licence [...] or
its Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) [...] both in the Database [...]
and in any relevant documentation
Sorry, overlooked that.
If this is in the
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.comwrote:
The ODbL says that one can release Produced Works under any license.
The Factual Information License says that You must include a copy of
this Licence with the Work in a location reasonably calculated to make
others
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:10 PM, John Wilbanks
wilba...@creativecommons.orgwrote:
If Big Company decides to run a mechanical turk contest on Amazon to
extract facts from your DB one at a time, do they violate the license
without having ever signed it - can they possibly be bound by it if they
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:03 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Not so, it turns out; the Produced Work freedom allows us to combine
OSM data *only* with other data whose license does not prohibit the
addition of constraints, because ODbL mandates that we add the reverse
engineering
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Not on the map per se, but if you use the map to re-create the original
database then - at least that's what I was thinking! - you are not using
your own database but you are (again) using the database compiled by the
The Licensor (as defined below) and You (as defined below) agree as
follows: reads the beginning of ODbL. The Licensor is the natural or legal
person the that offers the Database under the terms of this Licence. Who
will be the licensor (owner) of the database for OSM?
For the factual information
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Robert Vollmert
rvollmert-li...@gmx.netwrote:
I've had a look at tagwatch (unfortunately not terribly up-to-date)
and documented this suggestion and current use at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:designation
. Please flesh the page out! It'd be nice to
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
I think it's pretty unarguable that, in the UK, your tracing of the
Peruvian
lakes would merit copyright or similar protection (as sweat-of-the-brow).
Both the UK sweat-of-the-brow and the Norwegian (and Dutch?)
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Mike Harris mik...@googlemail.com wrote:
Nick
Again I find myself in almost complete agreement with you. I found
highway=cycleway a particularly difficult concept given that bicycle rights
are somewhat ill-defined in rights-of-way lore (notwithstanding the
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.netwrote:
Is the architect an attribute of the building or is the building an
attribute of the architect?
From a mapping perspective, I would say that the architect clearly is an
attribute of the building. From an art history
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:18 AM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Because 80n knows the answers Frederik, this is called politics.
But I, and many others, don't know the answer. I was asking a question.
- Gustav
___
talk mailing list
After discussions on both the mailing list and the wiki we (that is myself
and Skippern) have opened the proposed boundary=maritime for voting at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders
We think this is the best way suggested to tag the whole hiearchy of
maritime borders, in a way
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
I would suggest that maritime borders are not tagged the same way as land
borders. Should we have a new tag for maritime borders? Stop tagging them?
Ignore the problem?
The proposal authored by Aun (Skippern) is now
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:43 PM, GIS g...@asiaq.gl wrote:
Asiaq Greenland Survey holds a repository of digital geodata:
orthorectified imagery of towns and villages and overview maps with streets,
buildings, footpaths, shoreline, lakes etc. They can be seen on
http://en.nunagis.gl by
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:17 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
As you both know several years of work went in to that blog, and not
just by me. Maybe you should both think twice before dismissing it all.
For those of us who don't know...
Who contributes to the news blog? What is the
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you show me how to make rendering rules (I am mostly interested in
Mapnik, but any renderer will do as a proof of concept), which does not draw
a border line along the coastline of Germany and at the territorial waters
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
Actually the best we have is the actual tagging in the database. Works
wonderfully.
I disagree.
Can you show me how to make rendering rules (I am mostly interested in
Mapnik, but any renderer will do as a proof of
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:07 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Tagging the appropriate parts with maritime=yes or something would add
valuable semantic information about these borders. It would also then make
it very easy for renderers to suppress them or render them differently.
One of the
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
You have probably not read the posting to which Jochen refers. It is here:
Read, but not understood (even if I did try...)
It distinguishes between boundary=administrative (which would denote the
political
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
Simple rendering without need for the relation has been taken care of
in the comprehensive proposal by tagging the ways with admin_level. What
else do you need?
You have taken care of the wrong part of rendering. It is easy
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
But! There always is a but, isn't there. :-) When I look at popular
maps, a very common thing is to only paint part of the map boundaries in
the water. Normally only out from the coast for a few kilometers and
maybe
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not intended to solve all problems with tagging of maritime
borders, just as a temporary way to tag these borders without causing
bubbles around all coastlines in all general purpose renderers.
Some more progess
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Sam Vekemans
acrosscanadatra...@gmail.comwrote:
I think the page needs to be put back to the regular map features standard.
I disagree.
There are a number of features listed as approved without being on map
features. This should alse be tha case for
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 3:43 PM, sylvain letuffe li...@letuffe.org wrote:
A tag should be IMHO on the feature page as long as it's potential use
covers
a lot of object in the database where a lot of mapper might be in touch
with.
Should we have a page detailed mapping of roads or something
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Disagree strongly - it depends entirely where you're mapping. I doubt I've
ever come across anywhere where smoothness= might be relevant while mapping
Burton-on-Trent (well, maybe one road which the flipping Gas
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Erik Johansson e...@kth.se wrote:
Landsat also produces images outside of the visibile light spectrum,
perhaps looking at these others could help? (How to access these, and
if it really works I don't know).
I downloaded Landsat images of Banjul from
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Ugh. Can we (ping steve8) get some way of tagging this differently so it
_doesn't_ show? It looks really, really ugly.
As a temporary solution, I suggest that until a proper tagging scheme for
maritime borders are
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Thomas Wood grand.edgemas...@gmail.comwrote:
In other news, I've converted the 12nm line around the UK and Ireland
to be fully tagged, so it's now showing in its own bubble on the
mapnik render.
In my mind, these halos around al islands, are in itself a good
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout klep...@gmail.comwrote:
boundary=maritime?
or something like:
boundary=administrative
admin_maritime=territorial
?
- Gustav
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 1:37 AM, Rory McCann r...@technomancy.org wrote:
Some land borders, e.g. between Ireland and the UK are like that. No
border control.
It is not exactly the same. Anyone (say a person from Morocco or Colombia)
is not allowed to walk across Ireland on his way to the UK
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 1:26 PM, D Tucny d...@tucny.com wrote:
I'm not exactly up on laws, rules, treaties and agreements etc regarding
borders and controls, but, is this not about politics? If Someone from,
using your example, Morocco, flies to the UK via Ireland, they also won't
need to go
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
ava...@gmail.comwrote:
Have they been tagged as national borders or just as
boundary=administrative? If it's the latter why is this an
inappropriate use of the boundary=administrative tag? Exclusive
economic zone and territorial waters
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Simon Ward si...@bleah.co.uk wrote:
Hard validation wasn't the point. The point was to make the user think
twice, just as with Richard's comment on using GPSBabel to convert KML
to GPX, then having to munge it to add timestamps. You can bypass such
a check
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 1:37 AM, Karl Newman siliconfi...@gmail.com wrote:
That's the sort of thing automated renderers have difficulty sorting out.
Maybe we need a tag for cultural value :-P
(I would hazard a guess that San Jose has a larger economic impact,
though.)
I have suggested that
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Karl Newman siliconfi...@gmail.com wrote:
You're still missing the point about San Jose--it's larger in both area and
population (and probably in economic activity as well), and is located
within an hour's drive of San Francisco, but San Francisco is better
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Karl Newman siliconfi...@gmail.com wrote:
Sure it is. If a lot of people want to live in a place, in general that
should make it more notable. Besides, I was only suggesting using population
as a tiebreaker for equal place key values. It's not the final answer,
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
Perhaps something could be done similar to boundary with so many
admin_levels and some sort of default mapping from the existing 4
places to their new numeric equivalent (a bit like footway and some
combination of tags
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se wrote:
Can someone who speaks Norwegian and is familiar with the map data
copyright situation in Norway please take a look at this user talk
page, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jensens#Kart
He claims that they
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Temporary files (or information arranged in memory) in your computer are
considered databases, so I'd go with option 1.
To be protectec under the database directive, you need to make a
significant investment for the
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would it be possible for CC to offer a licence transition clause for
large scale open geodata projects in the same way the FSF has
offered an FDL - BY-SA get out for Wikipedia in the current minor FDL
revision?
Well... If I
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
That would entail arguing that map data is uncopyrightable while at
the same time transitioning the OSM map data to a new copyright
license. It's not feasible.
Database protection can exists even if copyright
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Ed Loach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know Norwegian, but the best translation of Gråsonen that I can
come up with is grey zone.
Gråsonen or grey zone is a disputed area between the (undisputed)
exclusive economic zones of Norway and Russia. In my
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Pieren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. What I suggest is to keep the current place key as a first
argument to prioritize places and use either population or
admin_level as a second argument in case the first is equal. So if
Paris is declared twice as a place=town
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Ben Laenen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a very bad idea IMHO. This is just trying to fix what's wrong with
the town/city/village tags with more of the same tags.
In my opinion, the main problem is that it lacks granularity. I have no way
to say this town is
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Pieren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The question is coming because the name finder gives the same
importance to Paris, USA and Paris, France (or something like that).
Instead of making more artificial granularity on the place hierarchy
which is just moving the
2008/12/2 Miriam Tolke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mapping some areas here I came across some barriers in several places which
in my opinion don't fit in those described in [[Map Features]]. I've
uploaded a photo to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Image:Unknown_barrier.jpg.
How do you tag this?
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:43 PM, Miriam Tolke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tagged it as bollard before and yes, it comes near. But I think at least
from the meaning of traffic_calming=chicane mentioned in the other answers
it might even better.
I would say that a chicane is designed to slow
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Sebastian Hohmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Even if the tag is horrible, it has been voted on and should thus stay
on Map Features. Or should just everyone edit the wiki without regard
for others.
The tag is, in my opinion, very_horrible, but that is besides
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Ralf Zimmermann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
As for the tags that are being rendered by Mapnik or [EMAIL PROTECTED], if
somebody makes a list of those I would put them on the wiki somewhere close
to the renderer. This is because of two reasons:
a) If a tag is not
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 9:13 PM, Tim Waters (chippy)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
This website may help?
http://spatialreference.org/ref/epsg/?search=Pulkovo
Thank you for the link.
It seems Pulkovo 1942 variants are much more used, than 1932. The main
difference seems to be that they changed
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 1:14 PM, David Earl [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
and the letter from OS which provoked it:
http://www.freeourdata.org.uk/docs/use-of-google-maps-for-display-and-promotion.pdf
To me it seems that OS is broadening it's business into the seriously
overstating rights trade...
I got the official coordinates for all the border stones and markers along
the Norwegian-Russian border. The points are taken from the official
protocol, and are in Pulkovo 1932 coordinate system.
Does anyone have experience in working with this coordinate system or know
how to transform the
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Andy Allan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in that case we better find
another solution which can tell what tags programs will try to support.
Actually, a page like map features which documented such things would
be good. But the current craze on the wiki is to
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:21 AM, SteveC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a) Would you like OSM to always be inferior to TeleAtlas and Navteq
and probably die (PD license)
b) Would you like OSM to be the best map on the planet (viral license))
c) This requires more than 90 seconds thought, please let
Could someone take a look at lake Østensjøvannet near Oslo, and tell me how
to fix the mulitpolygons, so both Osmarender, Mapnik and the Cycle Map
understand them?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.8815lon=10.8767zoom=14layers=0B00FTF
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Bernt M. Johnsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Østensjøvannet seems ok, but Nøklevannet is missing on the Mapnik
rendering. Is that the problem?
Sorry, my mistake. Yes, the problem is Nøklevannet.
- Gustav
___
talk
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:28 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
With two seperate relations I presume, one for the wood, one for the
lake. Offhand I think osm2pgsql should get this right in slim mode
(non-slim has its own problems). Do you have an example?
It is reported as
Is there anywhere I can find the stylesheet used for the main Mapnik layer?
- Gustav
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:00 PM, bvh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apple
I think we have heard enough of what Apple have done, might have done,
probably would have done and have not done for a while.
Could we again start focusing on a license for the OSM database?
- Gustav
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
