On 27/09/2009, at 8:06 AM, Jim Croft wrote:
Given that OSM is a land-based project, the mean high water mark is
probably might be the best to use.
The water cover page[0] suggests that you use water=tidal;surface=sand
for the area between the high and low water marks (assuming it's a
sandy
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009, Ross Scanlon wrote:
Using gpsdrive it's possible to add the SRTM (contour data)
yes, I'll try it one day
currently still on the navit experiment :)
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
2009/9/27 Jim Croft jim.cr...@gmail.com:
I had never really thought of this before, but land traveller and
mariner have quite different concepts of what it means to reach 'the
coast'. For the former it is when you get your feet wet, for the
latter it is when you run into something. And there
2009/9/28 Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au:
As well as gps/GPS being missing, it's interesting that Yahoo is missing
from the Map Features page.
Yahoo could be listed both as a source and an attributation, but
everyone else lists it as a source so it's a go with the flow sort of
thing.
When
2009/9/27 Jim Croft jim.cr...@gmail.com:
I had never really thought of this before, but land traveller and
mariner have quite different concepts of what it means to reach 'the
coast'. For the former it is when you get your feet wet, for the
latter it is when you run into something. And there
Also I think some bot has removed some of the ABS tags, there seems to
be a lot of ways exactly 500 nodes in length, that are missing abs
tags...
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 00:02:50 +1000
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/26 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com:
I don't think that the ABS boundaries change if the roads change.
It'd be worth investigating, especially if other govt bodies can
benefit from it and as a result we
On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:35:05 +1000
terryc ter...@woa.com.au wrote:
Ross Scanlon wrote:
We should not just automatically change the coastline to the ABS data
without at least looking at the sat imagery as well.
What exactly will that tell you?
I would expect that you need to find out
Ross Scanlon wrote:
We should not just automatically change the coastline to the ABS data without
at least looking at the sat imagery as well.
What exactly will that tell you?
I would expect that you need to find out what data the ABS coastline is
based on. From memory, the offical coastline
I had never really thought of this before, but land traveller and
mariner have quite different concepts of what it means to reach 'the
coast'. For the former it is when you get your feet wet, for the
latter it is when you run into something. And there are places where
there is quite a gap
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:24:49 +1000
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Something else worth noting, as I've been doing postcode boundaries
I've noticed some people have wiped some of the ABS tags so they could
do their roads or what not. I've added them back in as it's only fair
to
2009/9/25 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:24:49 +1000
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Something else worth noting, as I've been doing postcode boundaries
I've noticed some people have wiped some of the ABS tags so they could
do their roads or what not.
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:58:14 +1000
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/25 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:24:49 +1000
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Something else worth noting, as I've been doing postcode boundaries
I've noticed some
2009/9/25 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com:
There is no guarantee that the ABS boundary still runs along any road.
I wonder if there would be benefit in moving the ABS boundary to
match, ideally we'd love for the ABS to use us for data in and out,
not just in
2009/9/26 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com:
I don't think that the ABS boundaries change if the roads change.
It'd be worth investigating, especially if other govt bodies can
benefit from it and as a result we end up with more data.
It's probably worth while whoever originally contacted the ABS
@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, 24 September, 2009 2:07:49 PM
Subject: Re: [talk-au] More on the survey tag
If source=GPS (or source=gps) is unallowable, then why is it a preset
in Potlatch?
No idea, whoever wrote the presets for potlatch probably thinks it's a good
idea but did not read
2009/9/24 Dan O#39;Hara detect...@yahoo.com.au:
GPS. I started only using the tag source=survey until Potltach added the
GPS tag. I thought that the Wiki had simply not been updated but that some
I've mailed the main talk list over this, no doubt it'll end up in a
pointless debate, either
I'm still a relative newcomer to OSM (and am still in wonder at the
complexity and enormity of the task!) and have found this discussion quite
interesting. I only use Potlatch as I was advised it was simple, and for
beginners, and it loaded by default in the edit screen. I use an
2009/9/24 Dan O#39;Hara detect...@yahoo.com.au:
From what I've read I now will go back to source=survey and add the tag
survey=gps. I will consider further the advantages of further definition to
GPS type (I think that could well end up in a Commodore/Falcon and
Landcruiser/Patrol debate).
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, John Smith wrote:
You're blowing smoke, it's obvious source=gps is the same thing as
source=survey, however source=survey is a core set of features and
already in wide spread and common usage.
If you think in the Venn diagram
source=survey is a big box
source=gps is a
2009/9/24 Liz ed...@billiau.net:
If you think in the Venn diagram
source=survey is a big box
source=gps is a subset of that box
and then some other subsets of gps would be needed
GPS on it's own isn't more meaningful either, not without knowing the
hardware used, since most surveys will be
On 24/09/2009, at 2:07 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote:
I'd prefer to stick to the guidelines, rather than making up tags -
as
long as I know what the guidelines actually are!
Then RTFW
There's no need to be rude.
The obvious place to look at the wiki is
2009/9/24 Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au:
on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features but it's not exactly the
most obvious place to look.
That should be the first place to look, not the last.
___
Talk-au mailing list
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:11:30 +1000
Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote:
On 24/09/2009, at 2:07 PM, Ross Scanlon wrote:
I'd prefer to stick to the guidelines, rather than making up tags -
as
long as I know what the guidelines actually are!
Then RTFW
There's no need to be rude.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote:
The obvious place to look at the wiki
is http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source - however on this page even
source=survey is missing.
I'm with Mark - this should be cleaned up, preferably by someone who
has a
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
ideas for subsets
gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/
gps_model=
hdop=
pdop=
(precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to see
them on each single node)
May I suggest adding
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Roy Wallace wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
ideas for subsets
gps_chip=antaris/sirfstar3/mediatek/trimble/
gps_model=
hdop=
pdop=
(precision would be some rough figure for the track, i wouldn't want to
see them on
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:02 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
just for fun I've printed out a walking-papers page and am going to see if it
is any use for tagging shops in a suburban strip shopping strip
and then how will I define the survey=
source=survey
survey=observation
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009, Roy Wallace wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:53 AM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
Roy i'm not really suggesting tag forms
but a logical set of the tags
so if we made up a wiki page on how to be obsessional with tagging the
source of data we would need to set
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:58 AM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 8:02 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
just for fun I've printed out a walking-papers page and am going to see if
it
is any use for tagging shops in a suburban strip shopping strip
Something else worth noting, as I've been doing postcode boundaries
I've noticed some people have wiped some of the ABS tags so they could
do their roads or what not. I've added them back in as it's only fair
to attribute the ABS for their data but has anyone else noticed this
at all, or even
2009/9/24 Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au:
In light of the recent discussion on this list, maybe we should decide
on which tag to use prior to making extensive changes like these,
especially as there is so far no agreement on what source=survey
actually means, whereas source=GPS is pretty
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Mark Pulley mrpul...@lizzy.com.au wrote:
In light of the recent discussion on this list, maybe we should decide
on which tag to use prior to making extensive changes like these,
I agree. IMHO extensive, (semi-)automated changes should be limited
*at least* to
Tags that are not VERY clearly defined in the wiki (as a guide) should
be left alone. Given that source=survey and source=GPS are *both not
defined* on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source, these
should have been left alone.
source=survey is in the wiki here:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
Tags that are not VERY clearly defined in the wiki (as a guide) should
be left alone. Given that source=survey and source=GPS are *both not
defined* on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:source, these
should have
2009/9/24 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com:
If Mark wants to use source=gps rather than source=survey, because he
feels it conveys a different meaning, then in the spirit of using any
tags you like, I think he should be free to do so.
Are you intentionally trying to be a troll?
Yes you can
Quoting Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
source=survey is in the wiki here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Annotation
source=gps/GPS/GPS trace is not there at all and should not be used.
If
I wonder if this same silly debate will come up when Galileo receivers
come out, then you have people using GLONASS receivers, and IRNSS
receivers and the chinese system.
Also it says I can use any tag I like on this page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
I think I might start
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:23:01 +1000
Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote:
If Mark wants to use source=gps rather than source=survey, because he
feels it conveys a different meaning, then in the spirit of using any
tags you like, I think he should be free to do so.
Yes, use any tags you
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:20 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/24 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com:
If Mark wants to use source=gps rather than source=survey, because he
feels it conveys a different meaning, then in the spirit of using any
tags you like, I think he should
If source=GPS (or source=gps) is unallowable, then why is it a preset
in Potlatch?
No idea, whoever wrote the presets for potlatch probably thinks it's a good
idea but did not read the wiki.
I'd prefer to stick to the guidelines, rather than making up tags - as
long as I know what the
2009/9/24 Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com:
Good method: Discussion, voting, observing tagwatch, making
So it's good that discussions end up going round in circles with no
clear outcome?
Bad method: Doing (semi)-automated changes of other people's
contributions, which can often be *damaging*
In general, the two are inseparable. If author A says M and means X,
and author B says N and means Y, then changing N to M *does not lead
to consistency*. (note: in this example, M=source=survey,
N=source=gps, B=Mark).
Except where M is already clearly defined as a constant, as in:
source |
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com wrote:
In general, the two are inseparable. If author A says M and means X,
and author B says N and means Y, then changing N to M *does not lead
to consistency*. (note: in this example, M=source=survey,
N=source=gps, B=Mark).
2009/9/24 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com:
These were some of my original entries (2007) along with gpsdrivetrack,
hopefully I've changed them all to source=survey now.
I was just curious if they were still being tagged that way or not.
___
Talk-au
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:35:20 +1000
John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/24 Ross Scanlon i...@4x4falcon.com:
These were some of my original entries (2007) along with gpsdrivetrack,
hopefully I've changed them all to source=survey now.
I was just curious if they were still
46 matches
Mail list logo
