As for the proposal, I agree that a slow and steady approach is required.
Although I do think we should set a target date. A date by which we are
happy to start the conflation or have agreed that it is not viable. Would
be a shame to see it just drag out. Happy to help as much as I can to
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
(1)
I would suggest also generating big OSM file with this data (without
conflation, just what would be imported into unmapped area) and running
JOSM validator on it.
It may find bugs in data, proposed conversion and in JOSM itself.
That's
(1)
I would suggest also generating
big OSM file with this data (without conflation,
just what would be imported into unmapped area)
and running JOSM validator on it.
It may find bugs in data, proposed
conversion and in JOSM itself.
(2)
I would advise also consulting
OSM community
Martin wrote:
> e.g. JOSM Conflation, Hootenanny, OpenStreetMap Live Conflation
OK, a few I am aware of, one i'm not. Suspect others won't know them all
either. For those interested:
JOSM Conflation:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Conflation
Hootenanny:
I've been looking at the various tools available, e.g. JOSM Conflation,
Hootenanny, OpenStreetMap Live Conflation, etc.
Whatever tool is best, a process is needed. May I seek comments on this
proposal which would be put to TfL in my report to them:
A proposed process for
Just to say that I've turned all the comments (here and on Twitter) into
issues and replies at:
https://github.com/cyclestreets/tflcid-conversion/issues
I'll merge the changes into the conversion webpage shortly.
Martin, ** CycleStreets - For Cyclists, By Cyclists
Bike riders may like to read about the latest mess concerning cycle lanes:
https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/underhand-law-change-undermines-mandatory-cycle-lanes?fbclid=IwAR1oqOMvD9XjMFrLwKAr65Jw-8ifm0qXSNshRe7yhbKiZ2h7-sVlxsXLbyU
DaveF
On 22/09/2019 15:45, Mike Baggaley wrote:
I would prefer
Apart from on motorways!
Sent from my iPhone
> On 2 Oct 2019, at 09:37, Andy Allan wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 05:22, Wulf4096 wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> in Germany we've got "Radfahrstreifen" (solid line) which are
>> additionally marked by bicycle signs. Only cyclists may use those, and
On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 at 05:22, Wulf4096 wrote:
> Hello,
> in Germany we've got "Radfahrstreifen" (solid line) which are
> additionally marked by bicycle signs. Only cyclists may use those, and
> the sign forbids cyclists to use the main carriageway, unless they've
> got a reason to.
>
> And we've
On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, Martin - CycleStreets wrote:
What are people's thoughts about these suggested new tags?
Thanks so much everyone for all the great comments.
I'll be replying on these as soon as I get a chance later this week and
merging the changes in, after a busy week following
I would prefer not to see cycleway:lane=mandatory as this suggests that
cyclists have to use the lane when set. In the UK, the significance of the
solid white line separating a cycle lane and main carriageway is that motor
vehicles are not allowed to use the cycle lane, but cyclists can use
Hi Martin, all,
I have finished reviewing the proposal for all sections except from signage
(will let someone else review them). I've opened issues and pull requests
on the GitHub for the other things I spotted but have not reported here.
https://github.com/cyclestreets/tflcid-conversion/issues
>I'm not sure how representative the associated picture is.
Wonder no more: the cyclestreets website lets you filter for the TfL
category and look at all the photos not just the one that was selected as
representative.
See:
I have had a quick look at the cycle parking too. A few comments:
- You suggest "bicycle_parking=stands" for 3 cases of the TfL data:
Stands, "M stands" and "P stands". I shall let others comment on whether we
want to introduce new OSM tags for these. Perhaps cyclists have an interest
> • Two-tier cycle parking: This is unfortunately becoming more and more
> present in the UK, but bizarrely OSM does not have a representation in
> widespread use currently, with only 6 instances worldwide of
> bicycle_parking=two_tier. It is proposed this be used, which will hopefully
> then
Hi Martin,
A few comments from a non-cyclist:
• Cycle parking on/off carriageway:
Suggest location=carriageway could be invented instead?
• Two-tier cycle parking:
There's also bicycle_parking=double_decker/double_deck/double_deck_stands
in use combined total of 6 instances. I don't have a
Hi Martin,
I've started to look at this but only got as far as Advanced Stop Lines
(ASL) and Crossings. I've raised issues on the GitHub:
https://github.com/cyclestreets/tflcid-conversion/issues
So far of the new tags I have only reviewed ASL position
(left/right/center). I'm not a fan of the
https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/tflcid/conversion/
I'll shortly e-mail again with more detailed commentary on various
aspects of what is shown, in particular cases where new tags are
suggested.
As shown on that webpage, most of the data in the CID can be represented by
OSM tags through
I will shortly be circulating a proposed mapping of CID -> OSM
attributes, reflecting the published schema of the finalised version of
the dataset, for comment.
A proposed mapping of the data is here:
https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/tflcid/conversion/
I would very much welcome comments
On Fri, 2 Aug 2019, Martin - CycleStreets wrote:
I've sent a follow-up e-mail to the OSMF Licensing Working Group, which
compiles all the various statements from Transport for London, and
includes various e-mails where these statements were originally made, so
that the LWG will hopefully be
I've sent a follow-up e-mail to the OSMF Licensing Working Group, which
compiles all the various statements from Transport for London, and includes
various e-mails where these statements were originally made, so that the
LWG will hopefully be able to give a clear judgement now.
In
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019, Rob Nickerson wrote:
The email below is from TfL announcing the release of the cycle data. I'm
copying in Martin to this email as he was working on this Talent
Directory project so can hopefully provide a comment on the licence.
Thanks - Rob. Will be e-mailing tomorrow
Hi all,
The email below is from TfL announcing the release of the cycle data. I'm
copying in Martin to this email as he was working on this Talent Directory
project so can hopefully provide a comment on the licence.
Taking a look myself it is an OGL v2 licence which is good. TfL muddy the
water
23 matches
Mail list logo
