Hi, I'm from Sherwood Park, Alberta.
I just joined talk-ca, so I'll start getting more informed on what's
going on.
I've been thinking about how I'll start on some trails that I'm
interested in uploading. And I thought that some projects may be quite
large to undertake. Imagine walking the ent
Cool,
i'll start a bug report list for geobase2osm, with all the notes and
FAQ as they happen. ... And if they get caught before escaping to the
deep archives of my inbox :-)
Sam
On 4/14/09, Steve Singer wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Sam Vekemans wrote:
>
>> Thanks,
>> 1 option is to use canvec
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Sam Vekemans wrote:
> Thanks,
> 1 option is to use canvec since is only these few routes.
> What about 'blocked passage' has this been spotted in alberta?
>
> I'll add it as a bug anyway.
The number of routes is small enough that I don't think it matters where
they come from
this is great work, signs could be a bit smaller tough.
why not stick with the symbol tag? see
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
the symbols tagging should be transparent to the mappers not only to
some internal notation of a renderer.
and tags should be human readab
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 04:39 -0500, Joseph Jon Booker wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 01:54:12 -0500
>> Ian Dees wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Nicholas Vetrovec
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Posted on the US Page to help coor
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> network=us_i_2 # Interstate (2 digit) us_i_3 for 3 digit
> network=us_us_2 # US Route us_us_3 for 3 digit
> network=us_ny # NY State Route
> network=us_ny_county #
>
> That looks great to me, except that us_i_2 vs us_i_3 seems like taggi
On 12 Apr 2009, at 9:01 , Adam Schreiber wrote:
>
> Probably because the mapper can easily identify the type of road (i.e.
> Interstate, US Hwy, etc.). I'm not sure that the mapper should be
> specifying the URL of the sign since it requires extra work to find it
> and any renderer should be able
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Apollinaris Schoell
wrote:
> this is great work, signs could be a bit smaller tough.
>
> why not stick with the symbol tag? see
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
> the symbols tagging should be transparent to the mappers not only to
Richard Weait writes:
> On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 16:55 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
>> > It contains all you need to pick the correct sign. But you need the
>> > whole knowledge about signs for all states, county ...
>> > as an example California uses different signs
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Apollinaris Schoell
wrote:
>
> On 13 Apr 2009, at 5:36 , Adam Schreiber wrote:
>
>>
>> What about:
>>
>> addr:country=us
>> addr:state=ca
>> network=us
>>
>> or
>>
>> addr:country=us
>> addr:state=ca
>> network=i
>>
>
> network should be US, I,
> all signs us
Hi
In an email from fellow OSMer when when causally mentioned that he was using
city maps, paper maps and google to get street names for OSM in Winnipeg. I
replied and pointed out the policy regarding this but after several days of
waiting for a reply have got none. What fo I do. I would like help
network=us_i_2 # Interstate (2 digit) us_i_3 for 3 digit
network=us_us_2 # US Route us_us_3 for 3 digit
network=us_ny # NY State Route
network=us_ny_county #
That looks great to me, except that us_i_2 vs us_i_3 seems like tagging
for the renderer, and something that would be easy for the
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> The US highways in California are really (I think) regular US highways,
> but CA uses a different kind of sign. So tagging then us_us_ca seems
> again like tagging for the renderer. This is sort of OK, perhaps, but
> it bothers me perhaps bec
13 matches
Mail list logo
