Speaking from personal experience as only one participant over many years
(between say, 2012 with some agreement in 2015 and some refinement 2020) in a
big country with a lot of states and dozens of their idiosyncrasies, getting
admin_level values "right" can be a true, multi-year-long wrangle
On 8/4/22 21:57, Dian Ågesson wrote:
Hey Andrew,
I don’t believe anything was decided with regards to ACT districts.
However, after looking into the details I don’t think they actually fit
in the administration boundary set up at all; seems closer to
parishes/counties on other states than a
Thanks Richard, we'll check them out.
Thanks
Graeme
On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 02:29, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> There appear to be a _lot_ of bogus rail stations on the map in Queensland:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/-21.0650/148.8397=T
>
I am not local, but just my two cents: I agree with Andrew that such
specific state-wide rules (or exceptions to the rules) should be tagged
as a single regional default, and highway features should have generic
tags (unless there are relevant signage and routes, obviously),
especially since
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 18:44, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just try things out, control+Z to undo the last command .. you can even
> press it a few times to go back a bit further.
>
Oh yes, ctrl+Z has had lot's of use! :-)
Thanks
Graeme
___
To be sure everyone reading knows, JOSM's buffer has amazing undo capacity, I
believe "all the way back to the beginning of the session." And there's the
fact you can edit, edit, play with things all day and night long, then you
simply do not upload to the OSM servers (and into the fabric of
> (Personally I do have a whole bunch of country, state and even
> county-specific adaptions for cycle.travel's routing, but I'm very aware
> that I'm the outlier. And I've never even heard of "def:*" tags.)
>
For example https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2316593
has
Hey Andrew,
I don't believe anything was decided with regards to ACT districts.
However, after looking into the details I don't think they actually fit
in the administration boundary set up at all; seems closer to
parishes/counties on other states than a "council" or locality.
Dian
On
Andrew Harvey wrote:
> Well your router would need to look up the specific default whether
> that's something in the routing engine configuration, pulled from
> the OSM wiki, or pulled from the Victoria state relation def:* tags.
With the best will in the world, that's not going to happen.
I can
On 08/04/2022 06:31, Andrew Harvey wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 14:53, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 at 12:50, Andrew Harvey
wrote:
I think this is getting too much into mapping regulations, we
could just have no bicycle tag and leave it to data
The complete download for the coastline of Australia takes ages.
The India Pacific train line takes a little less.
That is why only 'parts of interest' are downloads automatically - save
time and load on the servers.
The great thing about computers is you can play with them, provided you
I am not across the arguments, nor am I local so I cannot asses them. So
I will not hazard a 'guess'.
Highway=path/footway/sidewalk can all have the same tags so the
differences are perceptions as to what the main tag is. That perception
is up to the render not the tag nor the mapper. When I
Hi Graeme,
Having downloaded the full relation, the boundary is completely closed and
there is nothing wrong with it. It's simply a warning to say that JOSM has
not downloaded the whole relation. Unless you right-click > Download
members, JOSM only has the tags of the relation and the members
13 matches
Mail list logo
