Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Proposed Import of West Mids VMS Locations

I've examined the data againnst aerial imagery and the Highways England positional data for VMS signs is so poor it really precludes an import which is sad. Signs are up to an estimated 10m away from their gantries and signs on the same gantry don't even line up. The Birmingham data might be

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

Andy Mabbett wrote: > Can that tool not be repurposed, and thereby avoid the friction > that imports like this seem sadly to cause? It was implemented as part of Potlatch 2, so sadly probably not appropriate for general consumption in a post-Flash age:

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

On 6 November 2017 at 15:45, Andy Mabbett wrote: > On 3 November 2017 at 09:55, Ilya Zverev wrote: > >> You might remember a few months ago I discussed here importing of Shell fuel >> stations. The data provider is Navads, which has a contract with

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

On 3 November 2017 at 09:55, Ilya Zverev wrote: > You might remember a few months ago I discussed here importing of Shell fuel > stations. The data provider is Navads, which has a contract with Shell for > putting their stations on the map. They asked me to proceed with the

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Balti resturants

Checking possible venues for our Christmas curry, I noticed that we have balti houses tagged "cuisine=indian". I'm sure many Balti lovers will be affronted by this; as an "Indian restaurant" and a "balti house" are very different beasts Should we perhaps use "cuisine=kashmiri" or

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Christmas curry

On 5 November 2017 at 16:35, Brian Prangle wrote: > Sounds good to me. It's in my diary. Likewise. > Anyone got any preference for a good curry house? I can recommend Manzils, next to Digbeth police station, if a central venue is wanted: http://www.manzils.co.uk/

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Christmas curry

On 5 November 2017 at 16:35, Brian Prangle wrote: > Sounds good to me. It's in my diary. Likewise. > Anyone got any preference for a good curry house? I can recommend Manzils, next to Digbeth police station, if a central venue is wanted: http://www.manzils.co.uk/

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

On 6 November 2017 13:45:15 GMT+00:00, Andy Townsend wrote: >On 06/11/2017 13:34, Philip Barnes wrote: >> I don't believe that the type is needed as it can be derived from the > >> designation tag. > >... provided that someone hasn't caused that to be lost somehow >(perhaps

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

On 6 November 2017 at 13:23, Mike Evans wrote: > On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 12:46:34 + > Rob Nickerson wrote: > >> Mike wrote: >> >> > A typical code is "PB|SP29|4/1" >> >> Be warned, this is not the format that Pembrokeshire use on the pdf scans >>

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

On 06/11/2017 13:34, Philip Barnes wrote: I don't believe that the type is needed as it can be derived from the designation tag. ... provided that someone hasn't caused that to be lost somehow (perhaps by merging ways by mistake).  :) Also there are examples of paths on the border between

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

On 6 November 2017 at 11:13, Dave F wrote: > I'm unsure why or how often "altered reference format" happens, but would be > a LA internal matter & irrelevant to OSM. I haven't looked in detail at that many Authorities, but I would guess that if you see a numeric

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

I don't believe that the type is needed as it can be derived from the designation tag. As a regular user of rights of way references to report problems to my local highway authority I can vouch that the parish code based GIS reference is far easier to use than the colloquial reference

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 12:46:34 + Rob Nickerson wrote: > Mike wrote: > > > A typical code is "PB|SP29|4/1" > > Be warned, this is not the format that Pembrokeshire use on the pdf scans > on their website. It seems to be GIS data only and may be a format Barry >

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

Mike wrote: > A typical code is "PB|SP29|4/1" Be warned, this is not the format that Pembrokeshire use on the pdf scans on their website. It seems to be GIS data only and may be a format Barry made. PB is "Pembrokeshire"! As Pembrokeshire don't use parish names I'd go for prow_ref="FP

[Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

Dave, I think the point was that nobody has a common format. Some LAs use a different style when they refer to the same path in the definitive statement when compared to the GIS data. Of course we can manipulate OGL data. That's included in the licence. If we do change then it should be obvious

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 11:51:48 + Philip Barnes wrote: > On 6 November 2017 11:13:23 GMT+00:00, Dave F > wrote: > > > >On 05/11/2017 10:42, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote: > >> On 4 November 2017 at 17:49, Dave F

Re: [Talk-GB] Prow_ref format

On 05/11/2017 12:42, Rob Nickerson wrote: >I recommended BY for consistency with the other two-letter >abbreviations (FP, BR, RB) that were more universal. +1 Given that there is little internal consistency within each LA and that these are rarely even marked on the ground, my preference

Re: [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Proposed Import of West Mids VMS Locations

Thanks for this Rob I might parse the short description to split the identifiers and type_description I've asked Andy Radford in BCC for an explanation of acronyms etc As for placing as nodes on the highway - I'm torn - I can see why it would be useful for data users but it doesn't always