On 26 September 2016 at 11:11, SK53 wrote:
> The second most useful thing would be for people to add postcodes in OSM. We
> have, I think, somewhere between 5 & 10% of postcodes in OSM. Very roughly
> we doubled the number of postcodes in the past 3 years, which if continued
> would suggest 2041
On 25/09/16 21:34, Gervase Markham wrote:
> The end result is that I still can't type UK postcodes into Nominatim,
> the main OSM search engine, and depend on getting useful results back.
The maintainers of Nominatim have kindly explained what would be needed
to finally fix this:
https://github.c
The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 324,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things
happening in the openstreetmap world:
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/8173/
Enjoy!
weeklyOSM is brought to you by ...
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Ava
Dear All,
We are working on creating accessibility maps of cities and trying to
involve greater masses to contribute.
As an example of this we've launched a "mini campaign" this morning - a
puzzle challenge for the wider community to collect accessibility data in
Portsmouth.
Please
On 07/10/2016 13:03, Gregory wrote:
Is the issue/bug reported to Mapnik?
The shared node problem? I don't know. Certainly not by me.
I've become increasingly reluctant to report issues like this. Not
solely to mapnik carto but all data users. But I think that's for a
separate posting.
D
Is the issue/bug reported to Mapnik?
>From the base of Newcastle "Monument",
Greg.
On Oct 7, 2016 12:02 PM, "Dave F" wrote:
> On 07/10/2016 11:54, Jez Nicholson wrote:
>
>> because it's the only *riverbank* section with a name?
>>
>
> Not true.
>
>
>
> __
On 07/10/2016 11:54, Jez Nicholson wrote:
because it's the only *riverbank* section with a name?
Not true.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Fixed
http://osm.org/go/euwo8goAQ?m=
It appears that, for some reason, mapnik render (I think it is just this
one) gets confused when the start/end of a closed polygon shares a node
with another closed polygon. I've moved it & it now renders
Dave F.
On 07/10/2016 11:29, Ian Caldwell wrote:
because it's the only *riverbank* section with a name?the other names
come from the river lines (?)
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016 at 11:29 Ian Caldwell
wrote:
>
> On 7 October 2016 at 11:03, Jez Nicholson wrote:
>
> because it's the only section with a name?
>
>
> The next section to the north also ha
On 7 October 2016 at 11:03, Jez Nicholson wrote:
> because it's the only section with a name?
The next section to the north also has a name and that is rendered.
Ian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/
because it's the only section with a name?
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016 at 10:57 Ian Caldwell
wrote:
> Just noticed that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/72551464 is not being
> rendered on the standard map. It has not been edited for two years and the
> adjoining riverbanks are being rendered. Anybody
Just noticed that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/72551464 is not being
rendered on the standard map. It has not been edited for two years and the
adjoining riverbanks are being rendered. Anybody know why?
Ian
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstre
Fwiw, there is the exact same situation in Ely:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/52.40627/0.25878
David
On Thu, 6 Oct 2016 at 19:19, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 06/10/16 18:56, Christian Ledermann wrote:
> > How to map this?
> The staring point is if you can identify separate buildings. I've ma
13 matches
Mail list logo