Clifford Snow wrote:
> I did learn from Toby Murray this morning that you can add
> tiger:reviewed to the list of discarded tags in JOSM by going
> to preferences->Advanced Preferences and adding
> tiger:reviewed to tags.discardable. Then just reload
> JOSM for the changed to be active.
Just
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Basically we have point data of historic footpaths (some 300k points) and
> I think it would be amazing to compare this to OSM to see if we can find
> more footpaths to map.
Very cool. Could you post the data somewhere?
Richard
--
Sent from:
Philip Barnes wrote:
> I wouldn't invent a type tag, it's maxspeed = 20 mph
> because that's what the sign says. There is nothing special
> about these areas.
No, 20mph zones and roads with 20mph limits are different legal concepts and
are signed differently. A 20mph zone must have physical
Paul Norman wrote:
> If there's agreement that there is a problem here, I could look
> at preparing a mechanical edit or MapRoulette challenge to add
> name:* tags, e.g. adding name:en to objects in the US with
> other name:* tags, and adding name:zh in China. As an
> estimate, this would be
Jack Burke wrote:
> Keep in mind that OSM apparently uses "compacted" to refer to
> macadamized roads, which is a specific process for building roads.
surface=compacted in OSM, following British English usage, is traditionally
as described on pages 18-20 of this document:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> * you have developed a certain way to map certain objects, that might
> be a little out of touch with what is considered the "right" approach
> elsewhere in the project, but you don't notice or care
Adding to which...
I think half the problem is that the wiki
Chau Nguyen wrote:
### Maneuver Override Relations:
Sometimes road geometries of complicated intersections do not give enough
information on how a suitable guidance should look like. OSRM is now
supporting the `maneuver override` tag in OSM to detect such intersections
and choose better
Great to see so much attention being paid to rural TIGER fixup. The majority
of my editing these days is that, and it's a massive but rewarding job.
I put together a view a while back which superimposes unreviewed rural
residentials onto the Strava heatmap. The idea is that you look for
The previous ESRI imagery has just been restored to the imagery list (by
ESRI, so 100% legit) under the name “Clarity”.
Richard
--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/USA-f5284732.html
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
Dave F wrote:
> To double check - CC BY-SA 2.0 is compatible with OSM?
It isn't, but in this case it doesn't matter: this is what's sometimes
described as a "thin copyright". Reproducing the photograph itself is an act
restricted by copyright, but deducing information from it isn't. (Of course,
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> A few months ago I spotted an edit where a company employee was
> moving height restriction data from nodes to ways. This in itself is
> not wrong
Absolutely - the restriction is much better tagged on the way. It's a
property of the road just like a speed limit or
joost schooupe wrote:
> It doesn't help that it was worded as "people are
> saying", but then the last part of the sentence seems more
> like their own opinion.
Worth noting that WeeklyOSM is produced alongside and seeded by the German
Wochennotiz. I don't sprechen sufficient Deutsch to be
Sheesh, you lot are hilarious sometimes.
Publications have an inviolable duty to be impartial? That’s great. Very
interesting attitude in 2017. Tell me when you’ve found one such.
WeeklyOSM writes what WeeklyOSM wants. If you don’t like it, contribute or
start your own. It saddens me that the
Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Look at Wikipedia, or any large social organization for that matter. At
> the village/startup level, you have very few codified rules, but as the
> group grows to a city/corporation size, it becomes more and more
> bureaucratic. We may not like it, but clear rules help
Sean Lindsey wrote:
> I do want to produce something that is useful for
> open source and OSM/its community
Let me join in the thanks for making this available.
Even though it might not be suitable for direct import into OSM (for legal
and/or community reasons), I wonder whether it might be
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> Can that tool not be repurposed, and thereby avoid the friction
> that imports like this seem sadly to cause?
It was implemented as part of Potlatch 2, so sadly probably not appropriate
for general consumption in a post-Flash age:
Ilya Zverev wrote:
> Please help me review the data. Here is the updated map:
> http://bl.ocks.org/Zverik/raw/ddcfaf2da25a3dfda00a3d93a62f218d/
Eek, this still looks a bit sketchy.
Choosing one of the two nearest affected petrol stations to me, the one on
Woodstock Road, Yarnton looks like it
I agree absolutely. Time to ban verdy_p for continually disruptive behaviour
and an unwillingness to work with the community.
Richard
--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html
___
talk mailing list
Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> For example, RU community wants to convert amenity=sanatorium
> -> leisure=resort + resort=sanatorium. Clicking on a dot shows a
> popup with the suggested edit. If you think the edit is correct, simply
> click Save.
I've been a bit loth to get involved with this one
Bradley White wrote:
> The UK/Canada system and the central Europe system both adopt
> the tag in a way that makes sense for the road network they
> have. We are trying to shoehorn the central European tagging
> system into our country when, to me, it makes more sense to
> use the UK/Canada
Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Do you see any improvements I should make to this query / am I missing
> important features?
Shoulder information is good, especially on rural roads. A simple
shoulder=yes/no suffices. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shoulder
Surface information is good on rural
Hi all,
I've just added support for a couple more tags to cycle.travel's
directions and thought it worth mentioning here - everyone likes seeing
their mapping being used. :)
First up, cycle.travel now includes 'knooppunten' (cycle node networks)
in turn-by-turn directions. These are found
Matt Ellery wrote:
> I agree with the idea that living_street isn't appropriate for the
> town centre roads identified here. I did notice that New Road
> in Brighton (mentioned in the shared space Wikipedia article)
> has also been changed to living_street by Pete Owens, although
> he has
Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Also, what about the location where data is combined? E.g. if wikidata
> is in public domain, and US courts agree with that statement, anyone
> in the US can combine it with OSM data? What about UK? In any
> case, i suspect nothing we decide has any merit until the
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> in different parts of the world
IIRC OSM stores spatial information. I might be wrong.
Richard
--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I'd invest the available brainpower in steps needed to achieve
> this goal, even if it's a year or two in the future.
Which means vector tiles... which we should be looking at anyway.
But that needs to be a separate project really, rather than a facet of
I've fixed the wiki to reflect Chris's comments, given that he's a resident
of Wales and has a long pedigree in creating the Welsh-language rendering so
is better qualified than the rest of us to pronounce on this.[1] The much
shorter text should hopefully also be easier for new mappers to follow.
Brian Prangle wrote:
> You have raised a subject which needs attention but we don't
> have an active community in Wales, just individual mappers
I don't find that a helpful distinction. Aside from a few places (London,
Birmingham, Edinburgh, the North-East Midlands), OSM in the UK doesn't have
Roland Olbricht wrote:
> This makes clear that neither the file name extension "osm" is
> jeoparday. Or you do not want to discourage people from using
> "osmium", "osmosis" or a range of other software.
I see your point there, but conversely I am really uncomfortable with the
OsmAnd situation.
Marc Gemis wrote:
I wonder whether it is interesting to know the difference between
concrete, asphalt and pervious concrete. All three have different
characteristics whether it be comfort for the cyclist or being
dangerous under icy conditions or durability under heavy loaded
trucks. What do you
Kevin Kenny wrote:
> Fair enough. I will confess that I'm a little lackadaisical about
> tagging the surface on hard-surfaced roads. It appears that
> some sort of hard surface is more or less assumed by default.
> I do tag 'gravel', 'compacted', 'shale', 'sand', 'ground'
> assiduously, and
Bryan Housel wrote:
> We haven’t discussed automatic removal of any other tiger tags.
> (I don’t have a strong opinion for either keeping or removing them.)
I have a really strong opinion _against_ removing tiger:reviewed tags where
the road type and surface have not been manually reviewed!
Hi Manfred,
Maybe
http://maxheight.bplaced.net/overpass/map.html
can help. ;-)
It can indeed - I mentioned it in my diary entry! :)
cheers
Richard
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Hi all,
It would be great to get bridge height data into OSM, to stop those
embarrassing truck-vs-bridge-deck interface moments.
It turns out that with the advent of open street-level imagery (e.g.
Mapillary, OpenStreetCam, and of course Geograph) it's really easy to
find and tag bridge
Kevin Kenny wrote:
> Is there *anyone* that actually can speak to what *is* common
> practice in the US? When I've asked, I've always drawn a lot of
> replies and come away more confused than before.
I've been doing vast amounts of rural TIGER fixup over the past couple of
years and this is
Albert Pundt wrote:
> This seems like a way overboard change.
I've just received a changeset message back from someone else who had made a
few unusual reclassifications, in this case highway=secondary for dirt roads
in Nebraska. The user explained that they had been working from this wiki
page:
Bryan Housel wrote:
> What’s an acceptable amount of time to wait for a response before I
> just start reverting?
I commented on another of granpueblo's changesets on 21st May and have also
not had a response yet. Given that, you probably only need to wait just a
couple of days before embarking
maning sambale wrote:
> While our team is working on Jacksonville, we found unreviewed
> TIGER (v1, tiger:reviewed:=no) in some areas.
I don't want to dismay you too much, but 90%+ of the US is like that...
(...though don't take v1 as an important signifier: it's possible for a way
to be at v3
Ilya Zverev wrote:
> I think that would fall into the "fair use" clause.
There is no "fair use" clause in UK copyright law, which is important not
just because OSM is hosted in England & Wales but also because this is
presumably a dataset in part containing materials with an E copyright
holder.
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> saying "your privacy goes down the drain if you do anything
> online anyway, so why should we at OSM take steps to protect
> it more".
>
> Perhaps: because we can, and because it's a good thing?
...or perhaps it isn't quite that black and white.
OSM, at its best, is a
Spencer Gardner wrote:
> The tool uses OSM for routing and uses information such as speed
> limits, number of vehicle lanes, the presence and type of bicycle
> facilities, and the types of treatments at intersections/crossings
> for determining whether a particular way is acceptable for
Florian Schäfer wrote:
> I'm not an expert on borders and how disputed borders are handled
> in OSM, so I forward this to the talk-list, because this probably
> needs more discussion.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf
Richard
--
View this
Hello talk-ie,
I see you have a lovely new cycle route, the Waterford Greenway:
http://www.independent.ie/life/travel/ireland/green-light-irelands-longest-greenway-opens-in-waterford-35562434.html
The mapping is a bit, shall we say... confused?
Quite a lot of the route in OSM seems to be ways
On 19/03/2017 21:29, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
Or is your post simply a request for all people to follow *your* rules?
Wow. Stay classy.
I'm not sure why I'm even bothering to reply to that, but there's an
extensive debate about that sentence in the mailing list archives a
propos of the
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Mailing list posts drift off topic way too easily any it's never clear
> when "consensus" is found. Richard F did the right thing in 2013
> when he quit them and I encourage others to do the same
However, just because I no longer spend my time batting back and forth to
Joshua Houston wrote:
> It occurred to me that "man_made" is an outdated term that should be
> phased out from OpenStreetMap language.
FWIW, the lingua franca of OSM tagging is British English: so, colour rather
than color, and so on.
British English does of course have different cultural
Joost Schouppe wrote:
> Well the annoyance with spam does pop up often enough. The usual
> answer to things like this in the OSM ecosystem is "why don't you
> do it yourself". I've not seen this answer for spam. Is there no easy
> way for people to become spam-police if they like to do so?
Marco Boeringa wrote:
> There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost
> no changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems
> to me these are editors working professionally for some OSM
> related company.
Thanks for the detective work and for persisting with
Greg Troxel wrote:
> Around me (amusingly as we discuss British influence on tagging)
> is "Minuteman National Historic Park". This is not a "National Park",
> but it has the same kind rangers in the same uniforms, the same
> kinds of rules, and is managed to preserve the historic landscape
Martijn van Exel wrote:
> Here I thought I was asking a simple question.
On an OSM mailing list? You must be new round here.
(More seriously, there were rumours of an event in Italy, but I've not heard
anything concrete.)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Mikel Maron wrote:
> Reverts should be held to the same standard as imports (outside
> of obviously urgent problems).
Where a revert of an import (or other automated edit) is done by DWG because
an import did not follow the rules, reverting that import just goes back to
the status quo ante.
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> If anyone is holding off from doing something just because the OSM UK
> company is "coming", please don't. For one, you can make a great start
> before OSM UK, but also there is no guarantee that OSM UK will work
> on your specific idea.
The main issue is that there are
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> No, the first steps are to get people signed up as members (more
> shortly when I have had a chance to speak with Gregory) and then
> to host a first meeting.
I see your point and it's great that so much work has gone into pre-thinking
the incorporation and such like...
voschix wrote:
> The answer is definitely NO.
> You can find detailed PDF maps of all NHS Routes, state-by-state at a
> web page of the Federal Highway Administration [1]. On these maps
> you will find plenty of NHS roads that are definitively not trunk roads.
> Just two examples in Arizona: [2]
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> I'd like to float the following ideas for quarterly projects, and see
> what folk think.
> [...]
> What are your thoughts?
I'll throw one in early for Q2: campsites, hostels and bunkhouses. OSM
coverage is oddly patchy and it would be great to encourage better coverage
at
Sebastian Arcus wrote:
> Well, looking at the map, it looks like each and every parcel of
> land and section of field has a locality tag associated with it.
It's very common in the UK, too, for uninhabited sections of woodland and
hillside to have placenames.
> it still seems a bit odd - and
Minh Nguyen wrote:
> The entire state of West Virginia -- no exaggeration. The original data
> imported from TIGER is badly misaligned throughout this state
> and rarely resembles the road network at all.
*shudders*
Yes. Genuinely the worst geometry I've encountered anywhere in the US, and
Markus Fischer wrote:
> I am new to this and the area where I live is very well
> mapped (probably due to high density of tech workers).
> Where do I go to start mapping areas that are less well
> mapped (me aimlessly poking at this does not sound
> like a good approach)?
Possibly the biggest
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> This is hardly surprising, and not unreasonable (there's no
> "Ford Beetle" or "Volkswagen Mini", nor a "BurgerKing
> Happy Meal". for example).
Though there is Ordnance Survey Street View, which pre-dates Google Street
View by several years. (It's soon to be replaced by
Michał Brzozowski wrote:
> The rules for routing appear to be mostly global for popular
> routers. There is very little magical sauce, if any.
I wouldn't say that. Obviously the demo instances for OSRM and GraphHopper
use their own vanilla profiles, but other routers very often have customised
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> I understand this to be "easy" for data consumers
It is indeed easy. There are 442,133 instances of foot=* in the UK and 748
of access:foot=*. That makes it a nice easy decision for the data consumer
not to bother supporting access:foot. ;)
cheers
Richard
--
View this
David Woolley wrote:
> So I would say that highway=path was equivalent to highway=path;
> foot=yes; bicycle=yes; horse=yes; motor_vehicle=no (spellings may
> be wrong). highway=footway would imply yes to just foot. Renderers
> and routers will, I think follow this policy.
I can't speak for
Frederik Ramm quoted Mr Angry:
> "NONE of the paths indicated on the map that proceed north through
> Upper Booth Farm are public footpaths"
And indeed they're not tagged as such: they are tagged as the perennially
useless highway=path, some of them with highway=permissive, while the
Pennine Way
Andy Townsend wrote:
> ** many "names" on OS OpenData aren't names at all (for example,
> search for "poultry houses" in OSM and you'll get lots of things
> "named" that).
On the hillside above the Crawnon Valley (up from Llangynidr in the Brecon
Beacons) OS StreetView has helpfully marked
Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
> it would be interesting to know what routers make of highway=no.
From
https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/blob/master/profiles/foot.lua:
elseif access and access_tag_whitelist[access] then
-- unknown way, but valid access tag
Luke Smith wrote:
> If anyone has comments or advice for us, it would be gratefully received.
This is terrific. I've been waiting to see what you do with this since you
first posted some sample images in 2011, so it's good to see it finally come
to fruition. Lovely clear cartography and a
Andy Townsend wrote:
> What does everyone else think?
I would tend to think that if - 12 years into the life of a project that was
started in Britain and much of which is still run out of Britain - you are
radically changing the way Britain is tagged, you should probably reflect on
why no-one has
Colin Smale wrote:
> I was hoping that we could find some middle ground by allowing
> the relations to persist but outside the admin boundary regime
Yes, I would agree with this. If there's no administration then they're not
admin boundaries.
> If I'm honest I am beginning to doubt whether the
Johan C wrote:
> It's quite simple: as long as MAPS.ME operates in either the white or
> the grey area of the license it's perfectly fine what they are doing.
Um, no, that's precisely what "grey area" _doesn't_ mean.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Ilya Zverev wrote:
> Let's consider another use case. An application that shows OSM map,
> and on top of it shows 1 mln of user points. A users has an option to
> hide the OSM map underneath proprietary points, with a radius of 1
> km. Does in that moment when a user clickes the options, the
>
Victor Grousset wrote:
> On 14/07/2016 17:35, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> > The person proposing the automated edit isn't the best placed
> > person to weigh that up: they're already convinced of the desirability
> > of the edit (which is why they're proposing it).
>
>
Éric Gillet wrote:
> However I'd believe that there is (in Europe for the example's sake) a
> very low number of restaurant really named McDonalds and not part
> of the franchise. So if the changeset correct 300 restaurants but 2
> are "damaged" by the automated edit, would the edit be bad
Éric Gillet wrote:
> That would be slightly faster to execute than the first approach I was
> suggesting, but then how would you prove that you checked every
> and all features ?
Well, the best way to prove that you checked everything is not to fuck
things up, which of course you won't, because
Éric Gillet wrote:
> In contrary to the Contributor Terms, these rules :
> - Doesn't seem to have been voted on before their "establishment"
The Code of Conduct is a document enforced and revised by DWG, with the
intention of codifying long-standing principles in OSM (principally,
"respect the
Greg Troxel wrote:
> When converting to garmin format with mkgmap, and I think with osmand,
> I will tend to hear both the name and the ref. That's a big lengthy, but
> there's no real pattern on which to leave out.
For cycle.travel's directions in the US, I've started post-processing the
name
Eric Sibert a écrit:
> highway=path
> bicycle=yes/designated
> foot=yes/designated
> segregated=yes
Ajoutez un tag 'surface', svp :)
Il y a trop de voies vertes en France sans 'surface'...
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Andreas Vilén wrote:
> Post codes are also a little dubious, since those aren't open
> data in Sweden and can normally only be figured out through
> local knowledge
Perish the thought that people might add their local knowledge to OSM. I
thought it was all imports, armchairing and tagwanking
Jeff Medaugh wrote:
> MapQuest is moving to a 100% cloud solution - the new
> infrastructure dictates that all tile access will require a key.
> Details on how to get keys, SDKs and general migration
> information is below:
Thanks for posting this.
Will there still be specific 'MapQuest Open'
Patrick Niklaus wrote:
My solution for that would remove vias if the way through them is a
shortest (duration) path. Technically shortest paths are not unique
(think of grid cities). So this might lead to some route modifications
that don't change the duration of the route but maybe the actual
Two similar via-points-related questions I'd like to hear people's
opinions on. I realise that out-of-the-box OSRM might not be able to
solve these efficiently, but I'd be interested to hear ideas how one
might build a plugin (or other code) to solve these.
1. Sometimes users of cycle.travel
Madeline Steele wrote:
> What do you all think about this?
The sine qua non for me is that the absence of a tiger:reviewed= tag (or one
set to =yes) means that you can trust the value of the highway= tag.
This is especially true of rural areas where unreviewed highway=residential
covers a
Hi all,
There is an old railway from Wednesfield to Walsall, starting hereish:
http://cycle.travel/map?lat=52.5944=-2.0743=16
and continuing east to the northern edge of Walsall.
I believe some of it is a path, particularly to the west of the M6. At
present it's just in OSM as
Mauro Constantini wrote:
Two hours later someone edited [4] the wiki page removing the
difference between a station and a halt, writing that the difference
is only in German speaking countries (of course it's false: English
has station/halt, Italian has stazione/fermata, French has
gare/halte,
David Woolley wrote:
> For canal towpaths, bicycle=designated is misleading, as it tends
> to imply a public right of way, whereas these are normally
> access=permissive, and privately owned by the Canal and River
> Trust.
Again, Scotland is different. :)
Scotland's canals didn't go to CRT:
Craig Wallace wrote:
> Maybe the consensus in England.
> In Scotland, where paths can be used on foot, bicycle, horse etc,
> then highway=path makes sense. And that is how they are
> generally tagged in OSM.
Yes, access laws are indeed different in Scotland to England & Wales.
However, the
On 10/05/2016 20:59, Eric Grosso wrote:
What do you think? Do we, OSM contributors, tag all the highways part of
a NCN as cycleways? What to do when in some cases, a highway is both
part of a NCN route and a hiking route (e.g the John Muir Way)?
Please don't use highway=path:
David Woolley wrote:
> I'm not sure of the likely sources (assuming they have missed
> the reference in the existing mapping) but Sustrans have a no
> commercial use restriction, that is incompatible with OSM.
I wouldn't assume bad faith in this or indeed any NCN-related case. As I
thought was
SteveA wrote:
> [Great Divide Mountain Bike Route]
> where MountainAddict keeps setting this to network=ncn
> when clearly it is network=icn (as it crosses the Canadian
> border in Alberta). A partial compromise/consensus
> solution has emerged: keep a duplicate relation synced as
>
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> We'd have to explain to Wikipedia users that what they see on our
> maps might not be what they expect, and that we do *not* want
> them to fix it...
I've just created a quick, friendly wiki page to explain that and other
differences:
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> The poll we did last year (?) suggested that the OpenStreetMap UK
> community want to be involved in decision making. My suggestion is
> that, if this is the culture we want to breed then the Articles should
> reflect this.
I'm the chairman of a community-owned
Rob Nickerson wrote:
1. Would there be any cases where merging open data in OSM would reduce
end user challenges (e.g height restrictions on bridges, traffic
calming, cafes from the food hygiene data*)?
End-user merging any of those is reasonably easy - these datasets are
point data, which
Martijn van Exel wrote:
> The web site has always been about the map primarily,
> not the people. I am curious if there are any ideas out
> there to change that.
Groups!
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Slack-tp5870718p5870933.html
Sent from
Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Is it OK to leave it to the data users to merge the open data with OSM
> or is that burden too large for them to bother (at which point the
> pressure of OSM in the UK reduces)?
>
> The reason I ask is because I don't have the answers. Hoping some
> of the data users on
Colin Smale wrote:
> As we are not copying the content from Wikipedia/Wikidata, but just
> a reference
Unfortunately it's not quite that simple.
The matching is done by co-ordinates. The co-ordinates in Wikidata could be
held to be information copyrighted by Google. Consequently you could argue
Hi all,
Without wanting to be a rotten party-pooper, could I just raise the licence
issues with this?
Wikidata co-ordinate information is chiefly sourced from Wikipedia, which
claims to be CC-BY-SA licensed.
Wikipedia co-ordinate information is chiefly sourced from Google Maps[1].
Google
sk53.osm wrote:
> We are meeting at Ipstones because the lunch spot Black Lion pub is deep
> in the valley of the Churnet and reached by a rather tortuous road.
Quite a direct canal, though. Unfortunately it's a bit of a long way from
Worcester or I'd use it to join you...
cheers
Richard
--
Jerry Clough wrote:
> However, when it's end comes it's likely to be swift as flash gets
> eliminated by major browsers.
I think that remains to be seen. There's a number of alternative options for
running Flash apps, either in-browser (Shumway, FlexJS) or on Mac/Windows
desktop (AIR). There's
Hi all,
I was slightly surprised to find that bus lane tagging in London is very
patchy!
Bus lanes are easy to spot, even from imagery:
1. They are on roads with bus routes (see Andy's Transport map)
2. They have thick white lines separating them from the general lanes
3. They are often
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> David Woolley wrote:
> > Are you really asking if anyone is prepared to fund the tile server,
> > and donate time to any georeferencing needed?
> I'm asking what the *potential* is for that, or any other necessary
> steps, to be done.
For individual sheets like this, I
Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> I am not claiming that there are quick & easy ways to reduce
> complexity - but complexity has some real negative consequences.
The cycleway tagging mess has come about because a bunch of wikifiddlers
keep inventing ever more spurious and unnecessary tags -
101 - 200 von 1720 matches
Mail list logo
