Re: [Talk-ca] Alaska / BC border

> From: Connors, Bernie (SNB) [mailto:bernie.conn...@snb.ca] > Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 7:20 PM > To: Bruno Remy; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Alaska / BC border > > You can get the boundary coordinates from the IBC - International > Boundary Commission. I also chec

Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

> From: Dan Charrois [mailto:d...@syz.com] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts > > Usually, in remote areas of the north that I've dealt with, there is > often little else already there than the Landsat lakes. And usually, in > a given tile, there is usually just a handful of lakes

Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

> From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom.taylor.s...@gmail.com] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts > > I've just performed my first edits, in our neighbourhood. One thing I > noticed was that some of the buildings are duplicates. I assume this is > part of what you are talking about when you

Re: [Talk-ca] Import Canvec : micro-tâches / Canvec imports micro-tasking

@openstreetmap.org Cc: Paul Norman; Nicolas Gariépy Subject: Import Canvec : micro-tâches / Canvec imports micro-tasking Data import is essential to cover all of Canada, But it is complex to import Canvec files in areas were data already exist. Both unexperienced and experienced people may make errors. Import

[Talk-ca] CanVec bug - splitting of long riverbank ways?

I appear to of found a CanVec 10 bug in 094P13.0.osm There is a waterway=riverbank way (Dilly Creek) that is split in two at 59.7728641, -121.9806992. One way is 2k nodes, the other is 457 nodes. Ideally this would be split in two to form two separate areas. An alternate solution would be to not

Re: [Talk-ca] New Subdivisions

> From: Steve Roy [mailto:st...@ssni.ca] > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 2:58 PM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-ca] New Subdivisions > > What is the best was of adding a new subdivision like this one east of > Kelowna? I've only used Potlatch. > > http://www.openstreetmap.org

[Talk-ca] BC Resource Roads

I was importing some CanVec in northern BC and came across a resource road on bing, which I also added, but I realized I wasn't positive on the best tagging. A typical example is http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.395&lon=-122.074&zoom=16 These roads exist for forestry and oil and gas use. In t

Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

> From: Bryan Crosby [mailto:azubr...@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 8:33 AM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts > This will be my first and only response to this. If the Canadian OSM > community feels we need to check every stream, i

[Talk-ca] Internal CanVec conflicts

CanVec data comes from multiple sources and this can lead to internal inconsistencies. A common case is a new development where there used to be trees. The tree data in CanVec might be older and show an area as forested while there is newer road data indicating that the area has been developed. An

Re: [Talk-ca] Edmonton / Strathcona boundary limits

> From: James Ewen [mailto:ve6...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 5:54 PM > To: talk-ca > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Edmonton / Strathcona boundary limits > > There may be places where a city can be part of a county (ie. Spokane, > Washington is part of Spokane County), but that is not th

Re: [Talk-ca] Bing Map of Guelph, Ontario is poor

I have no idea when Bing would be updating their imagery but if someone can get imagery from some level of government under a suitable license I (or someone else) can host it. Of course someone could always purchase imagery, but that can get pricey. From: James Mast [mailto:rickmastfa...@ho

[Talk-ca] =?iso-8859-1?Q?RE:_=5BTalk-ca=5D Demande_de_v=E9rification=2C_question_co?= ncernant name=

Wow, that’s a lot of conflicting signage. Normally you’d put the appropriate name:en and name:fr values in and use whatever is on the ground for name, but there’s no good answer for when a street is signed in multiple places in different languages. I know it’s come up in other countries but the

Re: [Talk-ca] Suivi OSM / OSM Monitoring

> From: James Ewen [mailto:ve6...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 9:22 PM > To: talk-ca > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Suivi OSM / OSM Monitoring > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Paul Norman wrote: > > I don't know how it works in the rest of the count

Re: [Talk-ca] Suivi OSM / OSM Monitoring

> From: James Ewen [mailto:ve6...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 5:22 PM > To: talk-ca > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Suivi OSM / OSM Monitoring > > I see that Canada is pretty good at the admin2 (Country) level, and the > admin4 level (Regions) except for a few islands in the Hudson and Ja

Re: [Talk-ca] Limites administratives, municipalités, MRC et régions du Québec

Just a reminder, if you’re proposing to import the admin boundaries, you need to follow the steps in http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines, which includes not just talk-ca@ but the imports@ mailing list. My recollection is that boundaries for statscan purposes sometimes differ fr

Re: [Talk-ca] Canvec 10 and landcover issues

> From: Harald Kliems [mailto:kli...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 11:04 AM > To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap > Subject: [Talk-ca] Canvec 10 and landcover issues > > Hi everyone, > I've done some OSMInspector debugging of areas around Montreal and I've > come across a number of newly impor

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] Importing CanVec better?

> From: Maury Markowitz [mailto:maury.markow...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 1:28 PM > To: impo...@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Imports] Importing CanVec better? > > Newb here, so I hope this is the right place to ask. I also posted on > one of the wiki talk pages, but I didn't kno

Re: [Talk-ca] Surrey 2012 imagery

I'm getting it from the City of Surrey. If you get imagery under a compatible license I could look at hosting it. City GIS departments generally have imagery but they may be reluctant or unable to release it. Surrey releases their data and imagery under the PDDL

Re: [Talk-ca] BC: New Port Mann bridge partly open

The surrey2012 should have some more from the south side. I'm thinking about going and driving back and forth a few times with my GPS and my camera set to auto so that I can get all of the exits. Anyone interested in a driving mapping party? Of course I'd get to redo it all in a couple

[Talk-ca] Surrey 2012 imagery

I added the new Surrey 2012 imagery to my TMS server. This imagery was flown around April 2012 and has a spatial accuracy of <10cm. Unfortunately I've only got the 40cm resolution version right now, but this is still the most recent imagery available for the area. When your imagery is more recent

Re: [Talk-ca] US-Canada Border between BC and Washington State

tive areas that don't match up with the actual border. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.9803 <http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.9803&lon=-121.7579&zoom=12&layers=M> &lon=-121.7579&zoom=12&layers=M Paul Norman wrote: On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Pa

[Talk-ca] Canada and US Imagery bounds

I've gone and updated the imagery bounds and bboxes for both Potlatch 2 and JOSM for the North American imagery sources. JOSM should now only suggest a source if it actually covers the area. Potlatch 2 will still suggest sources even if they don't cover the area because potlatch 2 only supports bb

Re: [Talk-ca] New Lower Mainland Imagery sources

Good news: I figured out why I couldn't layer the imagery properly to make one good layer for the entire region so hope to have the combined layer running this week. Bad news: I found out I need to recache everything to fix a quality problem. > From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...

Re: [Talk-ca] New Lower Mainland Imagery sources

I've changed the text, hopefully it's clearer now. From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 8:11 PM To: 'Matthew Buchanan' Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] New Lower Mainland Imagery sources You're supposed

Re: [Talk-ca] Canvec import issues

I see the problem as being the importing of everything as being the problem, not the geometric model :) From: Daniel Begin [mailto:jfd...@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 1:49 PM To: 'Pierre Béland'; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Canvec import issues Bonjour P

Re: [Talk-ca] New Lower Mainland Imagery sources

You're supposed to copy and paste the URL from the table or click on the link, not copy the link. I'll see if I can clarify that in the documentation. From: Matthew Buchanan [mailto:matthew.ian.bucha...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 8:01 PM To: Paul Norman C

Re: [Talk-ca] New Lower Mainland Imagery sources

, 2012 1:46 PM To: Paul Norman Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] New Lower Mainland Imagery sources Paul I haven't been able to get this to work. I add it to my list of layers in Preferences, Imagery Preferences. It shows up in the Imagery menu, but then I get multiple l

[Talk-ca] New Lower Mainland Imagery sources

After some technical and legal work, I now have a number of imagery layers hosted on a rented server. These layers cover from Vancouver to Hope in 20cm or better and Lions Bay to Pemberton as 40cm or better. 10cm imagery is available for Vancouver, Richmond, Ladner, West Delta, the North Shore, Wh

Re: [Talk-ca] Proposed mechanical edits: GeoBase/CanVec Service Surface and GeoBase/CanVec name spaces

ec City and I noticed that there are still lots of streets (and > house number interpolations) with the double blanks. And can somebody > please tell me how to do a search and replace in JOSM to deal with this > semi-manually? > Best, > Harald. > > On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at

Re: [Talk-ca] Disgardable NHN and NRN tags

> From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2012 8:14 PM > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Disgardable NHN and NRN tags > > > I think the ways tagged with sub_sea would need to be deleted, not > > just the tag itself. These tend to be hydrological topolo

Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] Discardable TIGER tags

> From: Toby Murray [mailto:toby.mur...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 6:40 PM > To: talk-us > Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Discardable TIGER tags > > I was unaware of the TLID bug and the fact that TIGER has changed their > data model although I kind of wondered about this because I didn't s

Re: [Talk-ca] Disgardable NHN and NRN tags

> From: Adam Dunn [mailto:dunna...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2012 5:57 PM > To: Steve Singer > Cc: Paul Norman; Toby Murray; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Disgardable NHN and NRN tags > > I'd keep the accuracy:meters around. I've used

[Talk-ca] Disgardable NHN and NRN tags

This is based on http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2012-July/008830.html, a recent talk-us@ discussion about TIGER tags. Parts of this message are a copy/paste from there. Some people may not even be aware of this but JOSM silently discards the created_by tag if it exists on any obj

Re: [Talk-ca] Fixme Files

A few comments: I downloaded 092P02 listed as being part of Vancouver. The Fixme_092G02 is, but the other data in the file isn’t remotely close. I think there was a packaging error. I see a lot of what are highway=service in OSM showing up on here as well as some highway=unclassified F

Re: [Talk-ca] CanVec imports allowed again?

> From: David E. Nelson [mailto:denelso...@yahoo.ca] > Subject: [Talk-ca] CanVec imports allowed again? > > Now that the redaction bot has apparently finished its sweep of Canada, > is it safe for CanVec imports to be resumed?  I want to try my hand at > importing a few tiles around where I live.

Re: [Talk-ca] redaction bot coming soon!

The logs (linked from that square) say which way it was. It looks like the maritime boundary was large enough that two instances of the bot tried to delete it at the same time From: Bruno Remy [mailto:bremy.qc...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 7:43 PM To: Paul Norman Cc: Talk-CA

Re: [Talk-ca] redaction bot coming soon!

> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Subject: [Talk-ca] redaction bot cbbboming soon! > > Dear All, > > The redaction bot is now in North America. You can watch the progress > here: > > http://harrywood.dev.openstreetmap.org/license-change/botprocessing.php > > Each area starts f

Re: [Talk-ca] Grand Manan Coastlinesb

Looks like another botched CanVec coastal import. Tracing out who broke what is more trouble than it's worth, but it looks like the506 did the import and then willsiddall did some edits which revealed the problems. I think I've fixed the worst of the problems. There were a lot of ways in one-me

Re: [Talk-ca] Tr : [OSGeo-qc] Données ouvertes : gouvernement du Québec...

> -Original Message- > From: Fabian Rodriguez [mailto:magic...@member.fsf.org] > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 4:16 AM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Tr : [OSGeo-qc] Données ouvertes : gouvernement > du Québec... > > On 06/30/2012 03:51 AM, Frank Steggink wrote:

Re: [Talk-ca] Proposed import: Service New Brunswick address data

> -Original Message- > From: webmas...@the506.com [mailto:webmas...@the506.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 10:51 AM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-ca] Proposed import: Service New Brunswick address data > > Hello...long time reader, first time poster. You may know

[Talk-ca] FW: [Talk-us] City boundaries on the Canada/US border

Whoops - forgot to include talk-ca@ in this -Original Message- From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 1:50 PM To: 'Toby Murray'; talk...@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] City boundaries on the Canada/US border I started working my

Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?

> From: Bégin, Daniel [mailto:daniel.be...@rncan-nrcan.gc.ca] > Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad? > > Steve, Paul, > > I was on the impression that the consensus was more about using Canvec > where it is the best available source and, when it is not, the data > could be import

Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?

> 2. There is not a consensus among the community that CanVec data can be > imported without verifying the data for internal consistency and where > possible against imagery. If no one disagrees with the fact there is not a consensus that importing CanVec without minimal verification is acceptable

Re: [Talk-ca] OSM Publicly available WMS server?

Websites normally use TMS for backgrounds, not WMS. WMS is generally a lot slower than TMS. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WMS might help with finding a WMS server for OSM data. To make your own WMS server you could either use a program that turns tiles to WMS or renders directly to WMS. There'

Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?

> From: Ian Bruseker [mailto:ian.bruse...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2012 9:31 PM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad? > > On 2012-04-15, at 6:37 PM, Steve Singer wrote: > > > I also feel that not of all data sources are equal. Even w

Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad?

> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Subject: [Talk-ca] Canadian imports: good or bad? > > Dear All, > > Let's talk about it again. How do we feel about the bulk copying of > information from a permitted source into OpenStreetMap in Canada? > > To be clear, I'm not suggesting that

Re: [Talk-ca] coastline or water polygon

> From: Andrew Allison [mailto:andrew.alli...@teksavvy.com] > Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2012 6:55 PM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-ca] coastline or water polygon > > Hello: > I'm removing red dots on the north coast of Nova Scotia at the > moment with canvec data. The canv

Re: [Talk-ca] [Imports] tiff, dwg and nad83

Cc'ing talk-ca@ on this > From: Frank Cox [mailto:thea...@melvilletheatre.com] > Subject: [Imports] tiff, dwg and nad83 > > I live in a small city that is currently just a dot or blob on the > OpenStreetMap. I discussed this matter with the guy at City Hall who is > in charge of engineering, mapp

[Talk-ca] OSRM coverage in Canada

The OSRM routing instance at project-osrm.org now covers the world, including Canada For example, to leave the center of the world to somewhere with nice winter weather, you can follow the route http://map.project-osrm.org/if You can add via points to force it to route a particular way. ___

Re: [Talk-ca] upcoming Canadian press coverage and your local group

> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Subject: [Talk-ca] upcoming Canadian press coverage and your local group > > Dear all, > > I expect that OSM will be getting some press coverage in the Canadian > media in the near future. This is a wonderful opportunity to launch > your long-an

Re: [Talk-ca] Canvec.osm Product - Running!

Just as a note, the coastline for most of the remote parts of BC is from GeoBase and should be equivalent to CanVec. It’s outdated, but it beats PGS. The coastlines in other parts are generally traced and more recent as well as more accurate than the GeoBase NHD product. From: Daniel Begin [mai

Re: [Talk-ca] Proposed mechanical edits: GeoBase/CanVec Service Surface and GeoBase/CanVec name spaces

Since no one has objected (or commented) I'll go ahead with this if I can get it in before the rebuild starts. > -Original Message- > From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] > Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 12:04 AM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re

[Talk-ca] City boundaries on the Canada/US border

There are a significant number of cities in BC and Washington which have borders that in practice[1] coincide with the Canada/US border. Currently in OSM these are represented with many nearly-overlapping ways. The Canada/US border here consists of the BC-WA border, BC-ID border, BC-MT border, AB-

[Talk-ca] Township of Langley roads background layer

I have finished my translation file for the Township of Langley roads data. The resulting output is available at http://maps.paulnorman.ca/langley/Roads-201204.zip Included are the shapefiles, ogr2osm translation file, and .osm output file. This file is not to be blindly imported, but used as an

Re: [Talk-ca] Wind farm access roads that really shouldn't be in OSM

> -Original Message- > From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Wind farm access roads that really shouldn't be > in OSM > > On 12-03-19 19:45 , Paul Norman wrote: > > > > I'd just retag as highway=service, bu

Re: [Talk-ca] Wind farm access roads that really shouldn't be in OSM

> -Original Message- > From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 4:22 PM > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: [Talk-ca] Wind farm access roads that really shouldn't be in > OSM > > I've notice a few ways in OSM like this one: > > http://www.op

Re: [Talk-ca] Proposed mechanical edits: GeoBase/CanVec Service Surface and GeoBase/CanVec name spaces

Not listed in this message was the area this would be over. This would only be over the lower mainland unless requested for another area. > -Original Message- > From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] > Subject: [Talk-ca] Proposed mechanical edits: GeoBase/CanVec Service >

[Talk-ca] Proposed mechanical edits: GeoBase/CanVec Service Surface and GeoBase/CanVec name spaces

The GeoBase and CanVec imports in the lower mainland suffered from two tagging errors I propose fixing with two one-time mechanical edits. 1. surface=unpaved service ways GeoBase and CanVec highway=service ways are mis-tagged with surface=unpaved regardless of if they are paved or not. I propose

[Talk-ca] Bug in canvec street names

In 092G03.2.2.1.osm I noticed streets named "East 51st Avenue" with two spaces between East and 51st. Additionally most of the lanes are tagged highway=service lanes=1 surface=unpaved but are paved, and should also have service=alley. They're also over-noded. This may be an issue with the underly

Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] The vandalism has begun

Frederik, can we get these reverted? I'd do it myself but I'm not confident enough with the revert tools and I doubt this changeset will revert cleanly. In the particular example of way 44925685, a quick look shows no tags that could not be recovered with TIGER and odbl=clean. As an aside, wasn't

Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup

> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Paul Norman wrote: > >> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > >> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 5:42 AM > >> Subject: Re: [T

Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup

> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 5:42 AM > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup > > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:10 AM, Paul Norman wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Richard Weait > wrote: > >> I suggest that w

Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup

> -Original Message- > From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 5:56 PM > To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Richard Weait > wr

Re: [Talk-ca] Closed Road Tagging

If they were doing work on it I’d suggest highway=construction. If they’ve just closed it indefinitely then I’d say access=no is the best way, but is it really a primary if it’s closed until further notice? Access=no should likely be rendered at lower zooms when on major road types From: Da

[Talk-ca] Coastline in 082L10.0.1

Aside from the usual oddities, the coastline in 092L10.0.1.osm seems odd up in unique ways. There's a multipolygon with natural=coastline and the coastline is ways in the MP with the role inner. If you were to try to interpret this, it would be an area with the inside being the water. ___

[Talk-ca] BC Highway tagging

In BC we have remarkably consistent road tagging. Unfortunately, it bears little resemblance to what the wiki suggests. Being familiar with the tagging, I propose changing the wiki to match practice. Call it anti-wiki-fiddling. I've drafted what I propose using at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wik

Re: [Talk-ca] Aboriginal Lands

opose not to include aboriginal lands in the next Canvec.osm > release. > > I would like to have more feedback from the community before excluding > it :-) Regards, > > Daniel > > -Original Message- > From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] > Sent: Februar

Re: [Talk-ca] Administrative Boundary

administrative; admin_level=6 > Municipality:boundary=administrative; admin_level=8 From: Bégin, Daniel [mailto:daniel.be...@rncan-nrcan.gc.ca] Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 12:07 PM To: Paul Norman; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Administrative Boundary

Re: [Talk-ca] Administrative Boundary

>From the wiki, those look consistent with what I’ve seen locally, although naturally I can’t comment about Quebec. From: Bégin, Daniel [mailto:daniel.be...@rncan-nrcan.gc.ca] Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 5:54 AM To: Paul Norman; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: RE: [Talk

Re: [Talk-ca] British Columbia Coastlines

ate data, the province doesn't have any. > -Original Message- > From: Bégin, Daniel [mailto:daniel.be...@rncan-nrcan.gc.ca] > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 6:00 AM > To: Paul Norman; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] British Columbia Coastlines

Re: [Talk-ca] Aboriginal Lands

> From: James A. Treacy [mailto:tre...@debian.org] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Aboriginal Lands > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 08:37:17AM -0600, Tyler Gunn wrote: > > With wooded areas and lakes I've noticed we tend to just leave them > > un-merged. I can imagine for boundaries we'd like to have them >

Re: [Talk-ca] Aboriginal Lands

Then I don't think they should be included in canvec.osm > -Original Message- > From: Bégin, Daniel [mailto:daniel.be...@rncan-nrcan.gc.ca] > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2012 6:04 AM > To: Paul Norman > Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Aborig

Re: [Talk-ca] Aboriginal Lands

Does this mean that they would form closed areas split like large lakes are? If so, this makes them unsuitable for importing into OSM without significant work. Can we see an example area so that we know what you are proposing? > -Original Message- > From: Bégin, Daniel [mailto:daniel.be..

[Talk-ca] British Columbia Coastlines

For the last couple of weeks I have been replacing the portions of the BC coastline which were PGS or CT-dirty imports with the latest CanVec/GeoBase data. I elected to use GeoBase since it's coastlines require less manual processing to get into workable form. This process is now finished, with the

Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian Municipal Open Data Licenses

I make extensive use of the data from Surrey and Langley and consider them to be models of the best practice for open data licensing, with all their data licensed under PDDL. > -Original Message- > From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 1:55 PM > T

Re: [Talk-ca] Clean up - natural coastline

, 2012, at 7:55 PM, Paul Norman wrote: >> From: James A. Treacy [mailto:tre...@debian.org] >> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Clean up - natural coastline >> >> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:33:09AM -0500, Andrew Allison wrote: >>> Hello: >>>I'm in the proce

Re: [Talk-ca] Administrative Boundary

Can you give an example of a municipal regional or upper municipality? Looking at the global usage, admin_level=5 is seldom used. I would think that Municipal Regional would be 6 and upper municipality would be 7, but I can’t really say without examples. I would also suggest that these features

Re: [Talk-ca] Aboriginal Lands

If the aboriginal lands are the same as were previously imported in BC I don't think they're really suitable for use. A single reserve is split up into much smaller areas at each of the roads. While I'm sure this is legally correct, it's not much use for mapping. I think boundary=aboriginal_land i

Re: [Talk-ca] Clean up - natural coastline

> From: David Groom [mailto:revi...@pacific-rim.net] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Clean up - natural coastline > - Original Message - > From: "Andrew Allison" > Subject: [Talk-ca] Clean up - natural coastline > > > > Hello: > > I'm in the process of recreating non-ct data. > > > > Any gotc

Re: [Talk-ca] Clean up - natural coastline

> From: James A. Treacy [mailto:tre...@debian.org] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Clean up - natural coastline > > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:33:09AM -0500, Andrew Allison wrote: > > Hello: > > I'm in the process of recreating non-ct data. > > What areas need to be replaced? > I know that some PGS

Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup

> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 10:24 AM > To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap > Subject: [Talk-ca] Cleanup > > Most of the Canadian data that needs cleaning is very low impact. > > Two of the high-volume decline accounts are primarily imports that have >

Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian-specific boundary tweaks for MkGMap

rnaby, Vancouver, Richmond and Delta are all incomplete I believe. From: Samuel Longiaru [mailto:longi...@shaw.ca] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 3:56 PM To: Paul Norman Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: RE: [Talk-ca] Canadian-specific boundary tweaks for MkGMap Ah... well that could be the

Re: [Talk-ca] Canadian-specific boundary tweaks for MkGMap

The administrative boundaries in the lower mainland are not complete. I've been looking for a source for the rest of them, but haven't found one. From: SAMUEL LONGIARU [mailto:longi...@shaw.ca] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 1:42 PM To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-ca] Canadian-spe

Re: [Talk-ca] Canvec 7 and lanes=-1 / surface=unpaved

lanes=* and surface=* are present in BC (e.g. 092G02) surface=unpaved is wrong for the most part - they're generally paved back lanes. From: Begin Daniel [mailto:jfd...@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 7:33 PM To: rich...@weait.com; harald.kli...@mail.mcgill.ca Cc: talk-ca@op

Re: [Talk-ca] new goodies on OSM --> Canvec artifacts

> From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 12:43 AM > To: 'Frank Steggink'; talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Cc: gravityst...@gmail.com; impo...@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] new goodies on OSM --> Canvec artifacts

[Talk-ca] Surrey Imagery

Thanks to iandees, the imagery from Surrey BC is now mirrored with an OSM US server. It can be accessed with an imagery URL of tms[10,20]:http://{switch:a,b,c}.tile.osm.osuosl.org/tiles/bc_surrey_2011/{z oom}/{x}/{y}.png in JOSM, or http://a.tile.osm.osuosl.org/tiles/bc_surrey_2011/$z/$x/$y.png in

Re: [Talk-ca] new goodies on OSM --> Canvec artifacts

> From: Frank Steggink [mailto:stegg...@steggink.org] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] new goodies on OSM --> Canvec artifacts > > Due to the use of Natural Earth (?) as a base layer, certain artifacts > from the Canvec import become more visible, especially at the lower (<= > 7) zoomlevels. See for examp

[Talk-ca] Surrey Roads Data

I have updated my Surrey roads data, available at http://maps.paulnorman.ca/surrey/SurreyRoads2011Nov.zip New in this release: - Updated source tagging - gritting (snowplough) information added I find the data most useful for importing to replace unnamed roads and clear naming mistakes. Known d

Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: [OSM-talk] Argh, Canvec imports

> From: James Ewen [mailto:ve6...@gmail.com] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Fwd: [OSM-talk] Argh, Canvec imports > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Richard Weait > wrote: > > > I do bimonthly runs of the worldwide coastlines > > (http://metro.teczno.com/#coastline), and Canada seems to be a > > recu

[Talk-ca] network=* tags

I'm writing this late at night so hopefully everything make sense. Currently there are two competing schemes for the network=* tag. The first of these is ca_bc_primary and the second is CA:BC. (Using the example of a numbered route in BC) I propose moving to one standard. I do not know whic

[Talk-ca] Surrey Open Data Hackathon

Surrey, BC is holding an Open Data Hackathon on Sunday November 20th. More details are at http://www.surrey.ca/city-services/10036.aspx I will be attending and looking at writing some new conversion scripts. Does anyone have suggestions for any printed OSM materials to bring? _

Re: [Talk-ca] Calgary Area Trail Mapping Project

> From: si...@mungewell.org [mailto:si...@mungewell.org] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Calgary Area Trail Mapping Project > > > > I ran across some trails from the project when out on a week long > > horseback riding camp... > > > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.0671916007996&lon=-115.968310832

[Talk-ca] Calgary Area Trail Mapping Project

I was looking at the new truck rendering layer at http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=160 and ran across an import called the Calgary Area Trail Mapping Project. This is, as far as I can tell, the only significant use of hgv=* between Vancouver and Toronto. Does anyone know anyth

[Talk-ca] Proposal: Removing imported aboriginal land

In 2010 acrosscanadatrails imported Aboriginal reserves. An example is http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1016901 These are viewable all the way out to z4. I propose removing these for a few reasons. 1. From what I've seen, no one has edited these to improve them. 2.

Re: [Talk-ca] [Talk-us] High-visibility Vests

They look like this: http://schaaltreinen.nl/openstreetmap-hi-viz-vest If it looks a little wrinkly, that's because I brought them from Europe ;) Martijn On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Paul Norman wrote: > In another thread, the subject of high-visibility vests came up and I was > wo

[Talk-ca] High-visibility Vests

In another thread, the subject of high-visibility vests came up and I was wondering if there were any of these in North America. The wiki says the existing ones are sold by the OpenCycleMap shop, but they are listed as "temporarily unavailable". In any case, shipping clothing from Europe is likely

[Talk-ca] BC muncipial borders

I've been looking at finishing up the BC municipal borders in the lower mainland. Currently some are fairly approximate while others are missing entirely. A few are in accurately. Is anyone aware of a good usable source? ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@

Re: [Talk-ca] Motorways tagging at ferry terminals/boarders

> From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Motorways tagging at ferry terminals/boarders > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Matthew Buchanan > wrote: > > I prefer the Swartz Bay scheme because it is more reflective of the > > reality on the ground. > > The "what

Re: [Talk-ca] Old CanVec versions

42 AM To: Paul Norman Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Old CanVec versions I've got a copy of v6 on my network. Did you want one sheet or all of it? Best Regards, Brent Fraser On 10/15/2011 2:06 AM, Paul Norman wrote: Does anyone know where I can find old CanVe

[Talk-ca] Motorways tagging at ferry terminals/boarders

There are two different and conflicting ways of tagging motorways at ferry terminals. The first of these, as shown at the Horseshoe Bay terminal http://osm.org/go/WJQnahqdV- is of having one way where there are many lanes and tagging as highway=motorway. The second, shown at Swartz Bay http://osm.o

<    1   2   3   >