On 21 August 2013 14:44, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:
Banqueting hall seems rather specific.
These types of places may be used for a wide variety of events, so may be
known by different names. eg might be used for conferences, exhibition, live
music etc.
I think a more generic
Something I've noticed is that the British seem to be particularly bad
at entering phone numbers properly, in particular, more than half of
them have been entered in national format; even the Americans seem to
get this one right and so do other countries.
Other common problems are:
- the bogus
On 22 August 2013 08:07, OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 August 2013 14:44, Craig Wallace craig...@fastmail.fm wrote:
That's probably better than banqueting hall. On the other hand, it
needs to be distinguished from the concept exposition centre which
One other possible
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
Banqueting hall seems rather specific.
These types of places may be used for a wide variety of events, so may be
known by different names. eg might be used for conferences, exhibition, live
music etc.
I think a more generic tag for an event hall would be useful.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:35 AM, OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.comwrote:
- no delimiter (+442079460676)
- misplaced delimiter (+44 207 946 0676)
Aren't these unambiguous already?
Oliver
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
On 22 August 2013 08:41, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
specialist market band wagon, 'Banqueting hall' is another use that could be
applied anywhere, but I can see that being a specialist type of restaurant
rather than a 'hall' since essentially it's a place to eat with some form of
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
Incidentally, one common usage I do agree with, and which Ofcom seem
to use, is the space after the director exchange, as 79460676 is a bit
long to remember as one group, and there is a historical, and some
geographic, significance, in this split.
On 22 August 2013 08:43, Oliver Jowett oliver.jow...@gmail.com wrote:
- no delimiter (+442079460676)
- misplaced delimiter (+44 207 946 0676)
Aren't these unambiguous already?
They breach the existing guidelines, which call for the (UK usage)
area code to be delimited. In particular, in
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 9:01 AM, OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.comwrote:
On 22 August 2013 08:43, Oliver Jowett oliver.jow...@gmail.com wrote:
- no delimiter (+442079460676)
- misplaced delimiter (+44 207 946 0676)
Aren't these unambiguous already?
They breach the existing
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_numbers_in_the_United_Kingdom:
For dialling the United Kingdom from overseas, Ofcom and ITU-T
recommendation E.123 states that numbers be written in the form:
Number Location
+44 20 London
+44 29 Cardiff
+44 113
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
In particular, in London, you can dial
this number as 00442079460676, 02079460676 or 79460676. On the other
hand, dialing it as 9460676 will fail.
I'd forgotten that particular reason for grouping the extra 7/8 differently!
Been 25 years since I moved out from
On 22/08/13 09:01, Lester Caine wrote:
Personally I still think of 0207 as Inner London and 0208 as Outer
London, but moving the 7/8 as part of the exchange sort of makes sense
these days.
Well you think incorrectly then, as that has not been the case for some
time, either in theory or in
OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
specialist market band wagon, 'Banqueting hall' is another use that could be
applied anywhere, but I can see that being a specialist type of restaurant
rather than a 'hall' since essentially it's a place to eat with some form of
themed entertainment?
Whilst banqueting
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 08:35:17 +0100
OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.com wrote:
My question is, given that I have good programming skills, and would
manipulate a local .osm file, for JOSM, rather than directly using the
API, are there likely to be any objections to my changing all London,
and
So to dial Portsmouth from Southampton you need only do 92xx ? Not tried it.
Really, to make 023 a Solent area code though in any meaningful sense, you
need Fareham, Gosport, Hedge End, Whiteley etc to all be in the 023 area.
Nick
-Andy Street m...@andystreet.me.uk wrote: -
To:
There are some areas where you must dial the area code, so that there is enough
numbers available in the area. I've always dialled the full number, thus don't
see what the fuss is about area codes.
Shaun
On 22 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote:
So to dial
On 22 August 2013 10:49, Andy Street m...@andystreet.me.uk wrote:
+1 for converting to international format
I wonder if there's any benefit in converting to the tel: URI 01protocol:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3966
(see also http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5341 )
--
Andy Mabbett
Bournemouth (01202)[1] and before long Brighton and Hove (01273),
Aberdeen (01224), Milton Keynes (01908), Bradford (01274) and Cambridge
(01223) which are all running short of numbers[2], require or will
require the 'area code' to be dialled as part of the number, even if you
are inside the
IIRC virtually every round of phone number expansion has not been very
forward looking. I think Ovum did the consultancy on the first
onehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhONEday:
just adding a '1' on the front of each STD code, which was obviously a
kludge. I vaguely remember the London 01 = 071,081
I'm awaiting all the bad jokes, but have just noticed that the IGS National
Borehole database is available under OGL:
http://www.bgs.ac.uk/data/boreholescans/
I've used this before for local history stuff, and a friend who has an
amateur interest in hydrology worked out all sorts of things from
It would be better to separate content from presentation. The database
should contain data in a generic, canonical format; it's the job of the
presentation layer to format that up as required. The key thing is that
a data consumer needs to be able to interpret the data unambiguously. I
would
In the West Midlands we have dozens of these which cater mainly for Asian
weddings and celebrations where large extended families have to be catered
for. Probably the same in most large urban areas. I generally just tag them
as building=yes and with the name on the display board which usually
OSM data are stored in a database, but the data is entered freehand by
mappers: canonical forms (whatever they maybe) are unlikely to be the sort
of thing an ordinary mapper is likely to care about very much, and usually
they can be generated by post-processing.
I have no objections to DBs
What renderers do on the way out, data entry applications do the reverse
on the way in. I.e. when mappers enter data according to their locale
and customs, the data entered must be transformed to the generic
representation. If this fails due to unintelligible input, the mapper
gets the feedback
Colin Smale wrote:
Someone needs to stick up for the data consumers; it's not *all*
about the mappers, and anyway most mappers are not so lazy
that they can't be bothered to conform to conventions.
As a data consumer I wish people would stop sticking up for me and my kin!
IMX more
I am not sure what your issue was with highway=path etc, but do you mean
rationalising as in the sense of reducing the number of tags, thus
losing (subtle) distinctions? I can't see how that is the same as the
phone number format issue.
Calling the transformation from OSM data to international
As the NSA clearly don't process their data according to E.164 (otherwise
how could they confuse Washington DC area code with Egypt), I think we can
skip it too!
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
**
I am not sure what your issue was with highway=path
On 2013-08-22 20:00, sk53.osm wrote:
As the NSA clearly don't process their data according to E.164
(otherwise how could they confuse Washington DC area code with Egypt),
I think we can skip it too!
Yes well they have a habit of being rather parochial in their view of
the world. Everyone
28 matches
Mail list logo
