Re: [talk-au] Track route names used to name paths

Hi Warin I would expect the highest order entity, the longest or biggest entity, to be the primary name. For example the Hume Highway will include a lot of High Streets, Station Streets or Main streets of country towns. In my mind its first the Hume Highway and secondly High Street

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Hi Sebastian Thanks for your input but I am not sure what you mean. Can you give a bit more detail please? Tony Please don?t use Strava as your reference as to whether access is permitted on a specific way as a lot of people do the wrong thing. On 23 Apr 2024, at 4:25?PM,

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Quoting Ben Ritter : *Which publications are distributing maps of the areas in question that are encouraging use of paths tagged with `access=no`?* I am interested in collecting any and all examples. Not sure about this one but Way: Road 30 (569541638) access=no Edited 10 months ago by VicWM

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Quoting Ben Ritter : ... *Which publications are distributing maps of the areas in question that are encouraging use of paths tagged with `access=no`?* I am interested in collecting any and all examples. Hi Ben Strava seems to be not respecting private.

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Thanks Adam, well put. There are two groups, both trying to be of service to the wider community. The mappers trying to build better maps and land managers trying to protect and manage public land well. If a land manager sees mappers not respecting their decisions about managing public

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Hi Mark I would not offer Parks the option of a life cycle prefix until Parks recognizes that this comes with an obligation to maintain the ex-path in a disused, deconstructed or demolished state. I don't think that Parks has to be perfect in this, the the path might be illegally

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Hi Its OK by me. The park ranger who appears to be most connected to this has been contacted and invited into our discussion. What more can we do? Its unfortunatee that a slow motion edit war will be the likely outcome. Tony In that case, should I go ahead now with the revert? Mark P.

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

No, nothing that I have heard. Tony Just following up on this - has there been any further input from National Parks regarding these paths? Mark P. On 3 Jan 2024, at 3:28 pm, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote: Hi I was able to talk to the Parks ranger for this park. He identified

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Hi I was able to talk to the Parks ranger for this park. He identified himself as Patrick and I have his calling phone number which I would share off list. He identified himself as having deleted trails from Open Street Map. But that does not necessarily mean they are the same trails

Re: [talk-au] OSM - NSW NPWS liaison

and see if it helps get Parks Victoria to appoint a Liaison Officer. Tony Forster Friends of Lysterfield Park Thanks everybody for your thoughts. As per Steve's comment, here is probably the easiest contact point due to not needing an account, but we'll see what other suggestions are made

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Hi Graeme I have not seen anything indicating Strava removes ways from heat maps. Way 1033069444 was removed by lifecycle prefix on 1 September. Its heat trace is still there. I expect it to fade as it is used less and finally disappear. Tony

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Yes Ewen, I agree The OSM mission statement is at https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Mission_Statement I would like to see it also include something like Google's "don’t be evil"* Or doctors' "first, do no harm" or "primum non nocere" Tony Forster * Google chan

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

Forster Friends of Lysterfield Park Hi Folks, Personally, I believe if the managing agency requests that the tracks be removed from the map then as good corporate citizens we should do everything possible to lower the promotion of such tracks. Track managers also have a responsibility

Re: [talk-au] Routing problem near Albany, WA

Hi I am satisfied that it is a cache issue. The ways have not been edited for 3 days and bicycle (graphhopper) which was doing the little zig zag yesterday is now routing correctly. I think just wait and let the data catch up. Tony Ben, thanks for the suggestions - I'll give them a go.

Re: [talk-au] Routing problem near Albany, WA

Ian Looking again at the routing: 1. Continue onto Menang Drive20m 2. Keep right onto Menang Drive130m 3. Turn sharp left onto Albany Highway20m 4. Turn sharp right onto Menang Drive160m 5. Arrive at destination Its like

Re: [talk-au] Routing problem near Albany, WA

Yes Ian I think you are right. It was showing the cached copy even now with the kink. I just refreshed it. The routing is still wrong 1. Continue onto Menang Drive 20m 2. Keep right onto Menang Drive 130m 3. Turn sharp left onto Albany Highway 20m 4. Turn

Re: [talk-au] Routing problem near Albany, WA

Hi Sorry if this is my misunderstanding but it seems that the same mistake that is made by the routers is being made by some tile rendering engines too. The standard tile has a kink at the end of Menang Drive (1077469021) which is not there. The cycleOSM tile renderer does not do this.

Re: [talk-au] Mapping tracks from Strava heatmap

Hi Am I missing something? I looked at way 952248376 and found a user Pieseczek with 2 changesets and 4 new ways over a year old. If there was any reference to Strava heat maps then I missed it. Is there any indication whether Pieseczek is resident in Australia apart from the likely

Re: [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

Hi Rob A warm welcome to you and the Department of Transport to OSM (just speaking for myself, one of over 8 million contributors.) Its an exciting time for me to be an OSM contributor as OSM is becoming the preferred map for so many. Sorry if I have missed something but this post

Re: [talk-au] What are the best practices for mass updating cycle paths?

Hi Looking further City of Sydney Data Hub is licenced CC By 4.0 but OSM has been waiting on the waiver since 2020 "CC BY 4.0 - waiver sent 01/12/2020, "considering your request" on 03/12/2020" The licence for the cycle network data links to 2 logos, a CC by 4.0 logo and a "Open Data"

Re: [talk-au] What are the best practices for mass updating cycle paths?

Hi First check that its listed at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources If not ykou probably need to get them to sign a release Tony Hi all, I have been looking into cycle paths data in OSM and found that Sydney doesn't seem to have this dataset:

[talk-au] Gravel roads surface tagging

Hi all Gravel was discussed on talk_au back in March 2021. For anybody interested its back in discussion at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/surface-fine-gravel-is-it-for-loose-gravel-or-duplicate-of-surface-compacted/7533/3 Tony ___

Re: [talk-au] power=edge_server

You could contact PhuLai's supervisor Dr Qiang He Associate Professor q...@swin.edu.au +61 3 9214 5431 As these tags are few in number and associated with research as mentioned on the github page I am happy to leave as is and move on. The tag power=edge_server seems reasonable. On 3 Nov

Re: [talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Hi Sebastian It is both frustrating and disappointing to see that you continue to argue your point of view that is incorrect. It is clear that a local council who follows the Victorian road laws has published the permissions of ways within their jurisdiction yet you still try to argue

Re: [talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Hi Sebastian You sent me private message, 15/10/22 20:52:39 EST. In it you agreed that consensus had been achieved even though you thought it was wrong. I was disappointed to then see further tagging changes which in my opinion go against community consensus. Changeset: 127828054

Re: [talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Hi Sebastian I thank you again for your many contributions to OSM. I note your deeply held belief that your tagging is the correct interpretation of Victorian law, however for the purposes of OSM, its the community consensus that ultimately matters. I undertook in Changeset: 126886850 to

Re: [talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Hi The Mapillary is partially processed, it may not appear on the worldmap yet but hopefully this link gives access to the sequence of photos https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/tonyf1?lat=-38.150390215353=145.29166281667995=16.813496063643257=681595696442544=photo Tony Sebastian wrote

Re: [talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Sebastian wrote This was had no visible sign to indicate it was a shared way but it is tagged as a shared way in OSM. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/903736648#map=17/-38.15145/145.29173 I replied I would not change the tags till I had been out on site and I would take Mapillary images.

Re: [talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Hi Sebastian I want to draw you attention to an example I can across today. This was had no visible sign to indicate it was a shared way but it is tagged as a shared way in OSM. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/903736648#map=17/-38.15145/145.29173 Can I get peoples opinion when it is

Re: [talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Sebastian Yes, 3b and 3c are actually signposted. They were intended as hypothetical examples. I asked the question of Ben to get a better undersranding of what he thought rather than to support any particular argument. I should have explained this in more detail and apologise for any

[talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Hi Sebastian Azagra, Thank you for joining in the discussions. Michael Collinson wrote "I continue to welcome him (Sebastian) in our OSM community". I second that. Though I have some problems with your bicycle edits, I am very appreciative of the hard work you do to support OSM. I have

[talk-au] Cycle permissions by a user

Hi I have been monitoring the edits by a user who still "changes shared paths to footpaths as no signs present to indicated bikes are permitted" in Victoria Australia. Most of these changes are small ways where there are unlikely to be serious consequences, its not worth the petrol (or

Re: [talk-au] Parks Victoria - Volunteering Innovation Fund open till 3 October

Hi Brendan Firstly Background: It took a while but I got the OSM attribution right at https://engage.vic.gov.au. In the process a representative of engage.vic said words to the effect that the state government was a strong supporter of open source and open data. I read that that the

[talk-au] Victorian Government and OSM Attribution

Hi all A good news story on OSM attribution. The map at https://engage.vic.gov.au/CardiniaCkParklands now shows copyright OpenStreetMap. They say it will be right on all maps displayed on Engage Victoria. They were glacially slow but we got the results in the end. They stressed the

Re: [talk-au] OSM Attribution Q

And I also reported another attribution error: From: Mapbox Support To: Forster Reply-To: Mapbox Support Subject:Mapbox Support - we received your message Thanks for contacting Mapbox Support! We've received your message. If you have an emergency or see a disruption

Re: [talk-au] OSM Attribution Q

Oops mapbox not matchbox Hi A related case, the Victorian government seems to be using OSM without attribution. Again it is Matchbox. I have written to the government a couple of times, the replies have been polite but no result, i think its just too hard for them. If talking to Matchbox,

Re: [talk-au] OSM Attribution Q

Hi A related case, the Victorian government seems to be using OSM without attribution. Again it is Matchbox. I have written to the government a couple of times, the replies have been polite but no result, i think its just too hard for them. If talking to Matchbox, please mention this one.

[talk-au] Bicycle access tags in Victoria and other edits

Hi list the discussions around the correct modeling of a motorway/divided highway intersection continue at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120498123 If you can offer suggestions, your help is welcome Tony Using the tag the tag highway = cycleway indicates that the route is

Re: [talk-au] Australian Tagging Guidelines Footpath Cycling

Hi Ian I did not edit Bush Walking and Cycling Tracks only Footpath Cycling Bush Walking and Cycling Tracks contains ... controversial information. See the talk page. This page has been archived as part of the Australian wiki cleanup I wonder where that controversial material has gone? Yes

[talk-au] Australian Tagging Guidelines Footpath Cycling

Hi I have edited https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#Footpath_Cycling (1) to record the different international English uses of footpath, pavement and sidewalk (2) to give photographic examples as a base for discussion. Not intending to redefine anything,

Re: [talk-au] Bicycle access tags in Victoria and other edits edits

Hi all I flagged the list of changes below that Sebastian may still dispute, mostly I have reverted his changes without reaching an agreement. Changeset 120382941 MacRobertson bridge is definitely disputed by him. Can I add changeset/120498123, it is early days on this one and Sebastian

Re: [talk-au] Bicycle access tags in Victoria and other edits edits

Hi Kim Can I please clarify "using highway=cycleway should only be used where there are signs allowing"? Does this apply to just sidewalks (US sidewalk, UK pavement, AU footpath) or all paths including paths through parkland, beside freeways, rivers and railway lines? Thanks Tony

Re: [talk-au] Bicycle access tags in Victoria and other edits edits

Hi all I was hoping that Sebastian would post to this list but so far, no. The following may still be disputed by Sebastian. 120963296 what is the information source? 120621671 changes as no signs present but signage exists 120382941 MacRobertson bridge approach - changes as no signs present

[talk-au] Bicycle access tags in Victoria and other edits edits

Hi Sebastian and list Today I did a number of edits relating to whether a lack of bicycle signage, on its own, is sufficient grounds to remove bicycle=yes/designated or cycleway. Most of my edits though relate to cases where there is signage that had not been noticed by an editor. I

Re: [talk-au] Bicycle access tags in Victoria Was: Re: HighRouleur edits

Hi Sebastian, You say "The re-tagging of ways I have been undertaking aligns with the Australian Tagging guidelines". I think you are referring to the words "Cycling is not permitted on footpaths in NSW or Vic., and highway=footway should be used in general circumstances." I think you

[talk-au] Bicycle access tags in Victoria was HighRouleur edits

Thanks Warin, pedantic mode is appreciated, but what position do you support? Presumably leave a path as a path and do not change it to a footway? Tony Bicycles are allowed on footpaths in Victoria   .  .  . if rider has a medical or other exemption allowing them to ride on the

Re: [talk-au] HighRouleur edits

Hi Sebastian Thanks for participating in this discussion. You say "Hence by definition in Victoria, bikes aren't explicitly permitted without signage". This is the area where we disagree and I believe you are out of step with the consensus. There are many places where bikes are implicitly

Re: [talk-au] HighRouleur edits

Hi Sebastian and list I went out to Changeset: 118627943 and took photos. It is my belief that a short section of bike route through park should be cycleway. Sebastian disagrees, his changeset comment follows. Comment from HighRouleur about 5 hours ago From the Mapillary info provided,

Re: [talk-au] HighRouleur edits

Hi Sebastian and list, 2) are cycle routes cycleways or footways, specifically Changeset: 118627943 I have provided a link to my photos and labeled the main ones at Changeset: 118627943 I believe that way 671174716 should be split in 2, the eastern part appears to be the footpath, there

[talk-au] HighRouleur edits

Hi Sebastian There are 4 issues in play 1) changing to footway when not signed otherwise 2) are cycle routes cycleways or footways, specifically Changeset: 118627943 3) access=destination 4) Way: 679145843 1) Sebastian, your changing shared ways and cycleways to footways when there are no

Re: [talk-au] access=destination was [Ticket#2021093010000048] HighRouleur

Dear list Im tired and muddled. I think Sebastian posted swapped the 2 issues when he posted, sorry if its my mistake Quoting fors...@ozonline.com.au: Hi Sebastian A quick reply now, its late, and maybe more considered tomorrow its tagged highway=track I can see no "access all=yes" so

Re: [talk-au] access=destination was [Ticket#2021093010000048] HighRouleur

Hi all, I see Sebastian has posted to the list now background to this: Way History: 679145843 about a year ago Sebastian had bicycle=no, highway=track as part of the DWG sanctioned revert I deleted the bicycle=no Hi Sebastian a bit more, If I wanted to add tags I would go on site have a look

Re: [talk-au] access=destination was [Ticket#2021093010000048] HighRouleur

Hi Sebastian access=privateAccess is only with permission on an individual basis access=destinationTransit traffic forbidden access=permissive open to general traffic until such time as the owner revoke the permission My inclination is that if you are not sure, don't use the

Re: [talk-au] "Road names" around airports

Hi Sound like destinations, not road names. Is destination=* suitable? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destination Tony Have spotted 2 notes concerning what names should be added to functional roads around airports (& other places would have similar).

Re: [talk-au] access=destination was [Ticket#2021093010000048] HighRouleur

Hi I have left a changeset comment alerting him to the talk-au discussion. Tony On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 at 10:22, wrote: Then there are networks that are clearly signed indicating Transit traffic is forbidden. These are the only places I would use the access=destination tag. Have I got it

Re: [talk-au] access=destination was [Ticket#2021093010000048] HighRouleur

oops, forgot to add these Multiple entrances with restricting signage https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-37.83471/145.03179 (Scotch College) Multiple entrances gated and signed (Museum, Carlton Gardens) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/209893402 Multiple entrances gatedand signed

[talk-au] access=destination was [Ticket#2021093010000048] HighRouleur

Hi all Up to now I have only questioned Sebastian (HighRouleur) on his information sources and reasoning on the use of access=destination First going to the wiki: "Transit traffic forbidden, all non-transit traffic to a given element allowed." But I am aware that the wiki does not trump

[talk-au] [Ticket#2021093010000048] [OpenStreetMap] HighRouleur

Hi Andrew. Here is a summary of HighRouleur's edits since your DWG ruling of Mon Oct 4. Can you, representing the DWG, please persuade HighRouleur to conform to community mapping practices. Thanks Tony Changeset: 112406847 12 October. Footpath incorrectly identified as shared path. Changed

Re: [talk-au] "Illegal", & "asked to be closed" tracks?

Hi Graeme "Illegally constructed trail bike tracks", so possibly just tagging it as motor_vehicles=private, foot & bikes=yes, would solve it? No, I don't think so. Its a trail bike track so its probably too narrow for cars, motor_vehicles=private seems irrelevant foot & bikes=yes, It sounds

Re: [talk-au] "Illegal", & "asked to be closed" tracks?

Graeme https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2788602#map=15/-33.7227/150.6317 Contact the land manager, if the land manager can make a serious job of closing the track to traffic then it might be OK to use a lifecycle prefix, there are a few to choose from.

Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

case. There is a lot of discussion on talk-au regarding your edits. I suggest you read it and respond. Please let us know whether you agree with the 6 step process and if you do not agree, your reasons. Thanks Tony Forster __ Yep

Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

Hi community I have written to Aaron by changeset comment, wiki user_talk page and through this list. I am awaiting his reply. 1 get community support from talk au for this process 2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement 3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state 4 Dian tidies up the

Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

/pipermail/talk-au/ This is your opportunity to put your case. There is a lot of discussion on talk-au regarding your edits. I suggest you read it and respond. Please let us know whether you agree with the 6 step process and if you do not agree, your reasons. Thanks Tony Forster

Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

Hi all Can I suggest the following 1 get community support from talk au for this process 2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement 3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state 4 Dian tidys up the wiki 5 Aaron does not edit the wiki until Dian has finished 6 we do not call for DWG intervention

Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap Wiki page Australian Tagging Guidelines has been changed by Aaronsta

Thanks Phil, speaking for myself, I am very happy for you to take the lead. The reason I suggest writing aaronsta a letter is that the DWG would prefer us to exhaust all avenues of engagement before calling them in. I don't think we (the OSM community) have been particularly good at

Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap Wiki page Australian Tagging Guidelines has been changed by Aaronsta

Hi I'm riding my bike in country Vic and can't do it but Can someone please write him a polite letter outlining our concerns and requesting that he agree to a revert and undertake to provide adequate changeset descriptions and to reply to comments and consult before large edits. If we

Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap Wiki page Australian Tagging Guidelines has been changed by Aaronsta

Graeme Yes, he has made big changes to the documentation and the map. The same 2 issues apply to both, some of the changes are contrary to community expectations and changes of such scale should be made after consultation. I believe he is acting in good faith but his balance between

Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap Wiki page Australian Tagging Guidelines has been changed by Aaronsta

Sorry, The 2 examples I mentioned, river side and on ramps were not deleted. Tony Hi I am looking at the map as if a cyclist visitor to Perth. I am using Osmand with the bike routes highlighted feature turned on. I presume the highlighted routes are the same ones that are being talked about. I

Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap Wiki page Australian Tagging Guidelines has been changed by Aaronsta

Hi I am looking at the map as if a cyclist visitor to Perth. I am using Osmand with the bike routes highlighted feature turned on. I presume the highlighted routes are the same ones that are being talked about. I can't be sure. The highlights look useful and I would use them. They pick

Re: [talk-au] OpenStreetMap Wiki page Australian Tagging Guidelines has been changed by Aaronsta

Probably https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aaronsta Who is Aaronsta? Is it anyone participating in this mailing list? Have any of these changes been discussed somewhere? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

Overpass query for Cradle Mountain National Park It all just appears to show orange path, with no red footway? No, Phil's query works for me, there is very little footway so its hard to see at low zoom. I changed the colours from red and orange to blue and green and its a bit better Tony

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

Mmm, certainly bikes are banned on walking tracks (they are classified as vehicles in tas and need to stick to 'roads') Hi This sounds a bit like the issue a couple of months ago with the User who wanted to tag all footpaths in Victoria with bicycle=no and the community consensus was that

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

Hi Out in the middle of nowhere I would use path unless there was an explicit prohibition of bicycles. But I could be wrong Tony Thanks folks, OK ? It would be good to clarify that as the vast majority of the ?bushwalking? track network in Tasmania is path but I am also seeing

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

ighway> highway= <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath> path, but the walking track page mentions that tag regularly ? what is the differentiation? From: Andrew Harvey Sent: Monday, 24 January 2022 10:54 PM To: talk OSM Australian List Cc: Tony Forster ; n

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

thanks for compiling the walking tracks page ... It would be good to extend this later on to have separate pages for walking tracks, vehicle tracks and MTB paths, since these issues keep coming up on the forum. Good idea, ... Vehicle tracks should be less controversial and easier. MTB paths is

Re: [talk-au] Deletion of walking tracks/paths

Hi Nev I am encouraged by Guy's response. If Parks NSW can be persuaded to funnel all/most such map changes through one person like Guy it could be good. Invite him to join talk-au so he can understand why illegal tracks are such a difficult problem for Parks and OSM. Eventually it

Re: [talk-au] New blogs on unsealed roads in Victoria

Ian I showed my friends, their response was: "when do we start?" Tony Hi folks, for everyone interested in OpenStreetMap's fantastic road data… I've just posted a series of blogs about unsealed roads in Victoria. I've pitched it at cyclists rather than mappers to widen the audience, but

[talk-au] Wanderer.Earth

Hi all You may recall our discussions with HighRouleur and tagging bicycle=no. I have noticed another user flushmainac with a similar editing pattern. flushmainac is quite open that they are editing as part of a quest, Wanderer.Earth I checked 3 of flushmainac's edits this afternoon that

Re: [talk-au] Unconnected ways

Hi all A similar problem with a nature walk, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/360672204 it appears to be unconnected to anything. In reality it is leading off a mown picnic area. What is rendering green there is the natural=wood. Maybe that wood should be converted to a relation with

[talk-au] Emergency markers licence?

Hi If you have rights to that photo and you are going to tag highway=emergency_access_point its worth putting the photo on the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Demergency_access_point As you say with a 3 letter prefix PBM010 it looks like it was intended at some stage

Re: [talk-au] Importing 200 emergency markers?

Phil Good idea, totally off topic but, go to https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=-37.9088066=145.3647858=17=246259583949249=photo and press play you get an animation of Puffing Billy crossing the historic trestle bridge at Selby. Sorry I didn't see any markers but someone with more

Re: [talk-au] Importing 200 emergency markers?

Further If the marker looks the same as the bottom photo of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Demergency_access_point then the dataset is https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/esta-emergency-markers/resource/44add10f-a478-4ab0-a6fa-227493663b28 Tony Hi This subject was discussed

Re: [talk-au] Importing 200 emergency markers?

Hi This subject was discussed in October. The dataset they are sharing is likely to be https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/esta-emergency-markers/resource/44add10f-a478-4ab0-a6fa-227493663b28 and it was determined that we do not have the right licence to use this data. I say likely to be the same

Re: [talk-au] Proposed features/Snow chains

Hi My impression in Victoria is that the chain fitting and chains required locations move up and down the mountain with the weather and that there's very little that can be mapped. Tony Hi all, For the NSW and Victorian snowfield mappers, user Trapicki has submitted a comprehensive snow

Re: [talk-au] Suburbs: Nodes, Areas, or both?

Quoting Simon Poole : PS: wondering why Gruyere has that name. Good question. The town is named for a variety of cheese, as the area's history is in the dairy industry. Cahillton Post Office first opened on 20 August 1892. It was renamed Gruyere in 1950 and closed in 1960 Wikipedia Tony

Re: [talk-au] Fwd: : Re: "Removing closed or illegal trails."

Displaying a closed trail on a map (like OSM) does NOT cause people to navigate that trail. Such behavior is completely up to the individual who "concludes" from reading said map "hey, I'm going to hike that closed trail anyway." (Bzzzt; fail, human logic). OSM is not responsible for

Re: [talk-au] "Removing closed or illegal trails." (in Nerang National Park)

Thanks Dian Your tagging suggestion might work, I'll suggest it to Parks Vic, Lysterfield next week. Tony I think you've struck the central issue here: if it is on the ground, it will get mapped again, and again and again by editors who think that the path is merely missing, not

Re: [talk-au] "Removing closed or illegal trails." (in Nerang National Park)

Hi Frederik, Thorsten 1. "a park manager would prefer them not to, and therefore deletes the track in order to keep people from exercising their rights". Does this happen, has it ever happened? I would be surprised if it happened here. Anyway its not what I thought we were talking about,

Re: [talk-au] "Removing closed or illegal trails." (in Nerang National Park)

Hi all This also came up in 2015, https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2015-July/010619.html The consensus, which I was not happy with, was "if it exists then map it". I volunteer with a park Friends Group and see things more from a Parks Service perspective. There are usually

Re: [talk-au] Vic State Forest Boundary Files

Hi Is there any chance, or point, of including https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/esta-emergency-markers in an ambit request? Tony Hi Andrew, yes, happy to take it on. Is there a template for data requests online somewhere that explains why the waiver is needed, that I can use as an

Re: [talk-au] Emergency markers licence?

Not sure how much we can trust any of these. I assume these markers are visible signs/posts at the roadside and can be surveyed? Adam Adam Sorry for the delay. Yes, they are visible signs/posts at the roadside and can be surveyed. I have put a photo of one in Victoria Australia at

Re: [talk-au] Emergency markers licence?

Hi I think that, because its a emergency marker, its important to get it right. Its a HighRouler edit so we will have to decide what, if anything, to do with it. Its been at London Bridge for 12 years, recently moved to a point 100m north. But I am not allowed to "know" that the two

[talk-au] Emergency markers licence?

Hi I want to put the emergency marker MOR507 where I think it belongs MOR507 node=429407299 not London Bridge (in either of its two recent locations)but LATITUDE-38.473502 LONGITUDE 144.92752 Bushrangers Bay car park Is

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

PS https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue Thanks Ben Where can we get source material for Victorian State Forests, National Parks etc? Regards Andrew Parker ?Get BlueMail for Android ? On 18 Oct 2021, 09:23, at 09:23, Ben Kelley wrote: Hi. We need to be very

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

Hi "Where can we get source material for Victorian State Forests" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Resources https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Imports Tony Thanks Ben Where can we get source material for Victorian State Forests, National Parks etc?

Re: [talk-au] Source material.

Hi Andrew Speaking as another relatively inexperienced editor, don't be too disheartened. "I used MapShareVic" It takes a bit of getting used to but OSM is very fussy about allowable sources. There are good arguments for why. It can be frustrating when you have a perfectly good source

Re: [talk-au] Cycling on Victorian paths

Yes Andrew I would be happy to work with you. We are still under a 15km limit, probably going to a 25km limit in 2 weeks. I can get to maybe half of the area now for ground truthing and probably 90% in 2 weeks. Tony I guess there would be nearly 0% chance that you would be able to cleanly

Re: [talk-au] Cycling on Victorian paths

Hi all There are 15,000 changes to consider over 651 changesets Does this sound OK? Start reversions at his #641 Revert in this order: Sebastian's Changeset #comment 641 112030682#Changing shared paths to foothpaths 640 111889860#updates to cycling permission 639 111889673

Re: [talk-au] Cycling on Victorian paths

Adam Spotting these and knowing how far back to revert to might be tricky I guess? eg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/47771844/history Yes. I have never been involved in a reversion so complex and it worries me too. I presume they should be reverted in reverse date order, ie most recent

Re: [talk-au] Cycling on Victorian paths

Hi Sebastian wants to assist with correction of his tagging errors, I recommended the JOSM reverter plugin. However at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111016252 he writes: "I tried to install JOSM but it’s not signed for the latest Mac OSX so won’t let me install it" Can a

  1   2   >