On 8/30/13 6:12 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
You may want to double-check with the Post Office, to find out whether
there is the possibility that there may legitimately be outliers in
some cases. I don't think the US Post Office guarantees that zip codes
will always define a single polygon with
On 8/17/13 2:19 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
county route shields are not rendered in California. What is required to get
them in? I have checked relations are following the same style as in New York
where shields are currently rendered.
California uses the standard county shield and it
one notable omission from the list of openstreetmap mailing lists is
something like
jobs or talk-jobs. other communities have such lists.
is this something worth trying to get set up? i suspect that
jobs/consulting discussion
would seem out of place on talk or talk-us even though they are
i've been on the postgresql jobs list a long time, it's low traffic but very
useful.
who owns the mailman installation? i'd be happy to ask them to set up a
list,
and happy to keep an eye on it.
richard
On 8/8/13 9:10 AM, a...@mapbox.com wrote:
+1 for trying a jobs list. I'd be just curious
On 8/6/13 10:49 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Strangely, the Oklahoma Turnpikes that have relations aren't showing
up on the osm.us http://osm.us tile server.
there are a number of things still to be resolved in many places. the
thing to do is identify problems
and then pitch in fixing them. a
there are some NYS routes where we want to build relations, but we don't
actually want any sort of ref tag or shield rendering, at least not by
default.
these are the NYS reference routes, generally numbered 9xx followed by
a letter. four of these routes have signs posted, none of the others
On 8/4/13 4:21 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
there are some NYS routes where we want to build relations, but we don't
actually want any sort of ref tag or shield rendering, at least not by
default.
these are the NYS reference routes, generally numbered 9xx followed by
a letter. four of these routes
On 8/4/13 8:25 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
unsigned_ref is currently used on 31,578 ways and 381 relations. [1]
That's what I'm using for counties that only post their route numbers
on mileposts, since you can't navigate by these numbers. [2][3]
i can certainly move to that although the more i
On 8/3/13 9:55 AM, Evan Robohm wrote:
Hello all,
I was just browsing the map this morning and discovered that a
majority of the Interstates in the Virginia Beach, VA Metro area have
been changed to highway=primary status. I thought it would be
pertinent to report this immediately. The changes
On 8/2/13 9:12 AM, Ian Dees wrote:
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
how frequently do the tiles get updated right now? i'm treating this
as a reason to fix the network tags for county routes in upstate NY
On 7/30/13 2:48 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Phil! Gold writes:
I would not at all object if people put together similar references for
other states with diverse county sign styles. :)
Wikipedia to the rescue?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_routes_in_New_York
helpful but perhaps not
the board is currently 5 members. i don't off the top of my head recall
if that's
in the bylaws or part of the standing rules (things specified in the
standing rules
are much easier to change.)
On 7/30/13 1:56 PM, Kathleen Danielson wrote:
Hi Martijn (and other board members),
Can you talk
for all practical purposes, anyone with an OSM wiki account. seconds are
not a
requirement, merely a way to show support, so the times i've run the
election i
have not actually done any verification of seconds.
it appears i'll be running this election, and i wasn't planning to
change much of
On 7/22/13 9:24 PM, Thomas Colson wrote:
This draws me back to my original E911 discussion: Many calls we get start
with I just passed MM 9... Thus MMs have value. And yes, each DOT has
their own MM scheme. Maddening to follow, even more maddening when
numerous mappers have a different
On 7/11/13 4:20 PM, James Mast wrote:
Just so you know Phil, I've fixed up US-21 and it's children in the Elkin/Jonesville
area a few minutes ago. I removed US-21's relation from the US-21 Bypass route and added a
note=* tag explaining the gap. Hopefully that will prevent anybody else from
On 7/10/13 9:14 AM, Phil! Gold wrote:
Also, I note that someone has added ref=NJTP to the New Jersey Turnpike,
which breaks my rendering there. I do support ref=initials tags for
some New York parkways, because that's basically how the signs look, but
I'm not sure how reasonable it is for the
On 6/25/13 10:40 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'm under the understanding that the consensus for a motorway would be
fully multiple (at minimum 2) carriageway with limited access, whereas a
trunk would be any motorway that doesn't meet that criteria (intersections,
single carriageway, etc). Could I
On 6/25/13 8:49 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
It's not the number of lanes that makes the distinction, but the character
of the road. People don't expect an undivided motorway, but describing it
as a trunk will cue most renderers to go for something motorway-like but
not quite there. A super-two
On 6/22/13 11:42 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
On 06/21/2013 08:07 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
The map should reflect ground reality, so unless there are hamlets in
these places, we should strive to fix them. By sharing our
experiences, we can have a better sense of how others are doing that,
and we
On 6/22/13 9:04 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
...lots of good points...
Something else worth noting is this isn't an either-or situation for
geocoding. There is no reason you can't have both the street address and
postal address geocode to the same physical location. It is common to have
multiple
On 6/21/13 9:17 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
During the TIGER import, small neighborhoods were imported as hamlets.
I am not sure what this means in rural areas, but in urban places,
hamlets are often just places like apartment complexes, or other
nondescript places.
i think this varies
On 6/21/13 11:07 AM, Sean Bartell wrote:
I realized only after last week's discussion about neighborhoods that
the hamlets (which are distinct from nehighborhoods) are the things
messing up the geocoder. A neighborhood is understood to be a place
that's not often in an address, but a hamlet is
i think we probably need to specify this.
do we want geocoding to reference postal addresses, e.g.
123 Example Street
Anytown, IA, 12345
to resolve as a proper postal address both forwards and back, or
do we want it to resolve within some recognized boundary for
Anytown? these are different,
On 6/21/13 9:39 PM, Mike N wrote:
On 6/21/2013 1:42 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
there is no single solution to both of these problems. the current
handling of this in Nominatum is so far as i know focused on
admin boundaries, and will not handle the postal address case
properly.
so what do we
On 6/17/13 10:19 PM, Jason Remillard wrote:
Hi,
If the way is part of relation that has a ref, and the way itself does
not have a ref, then the relation ref should propagate to the way. If
the way has a ref, then that is what should be used regardless if its
in a relation or not.
Would that
On 6/7/13 9:59 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
Given that, I think it's only really useful to discuss whether any
specific route merits a proposed tag, with the facts of that situation.
we probably want to see this as a life cycle issue relating to any
sort of highway/route situation, not just these
On 6/7/13 8:44 PM, Nathan Mills wrote:
If we're going for accuracy, corridor proposals should be mapped as a polygon.
They are area features which may someday become linear.
That said, I don't think that such early proposals belong in the database at
all.
i think they can go in when they can
On 5/31/13 2:57 PM, Alex Barth wrote:
Craigslist had added a feature to their OSM powered maps to submit map
problems back to OSM
Have you found that feature actually on craigslist?
i'd going to go take a look at the UI if i can find it.
there is a note on the wiki page for the new feature:
On 5/31/13 9:39 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
I've been working on finding and fixing them in New York State. I've
probably got more than half -- maybe 60% fixed. Hopefully even
70%. And I'm just one mapper (well, and you're another mapper who's
done a ton, plus there's a few more I'm sure). My main
On 4/22/13 4:08 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
On 22/apr/2013, at 02:55, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
Paragraph 5 states: 'UTA grants You a limited, revocable license to use,
reproduce, and redistribute UTA’s Web Services API (“Data”) in accordance with
the terms of this section
i was under the impression that the Code For America folks had done a bunch
of work with local governments on stuff that used OSM as a basemap.
i'm working on my emergency services thing, but i haven't quite got any
local FDs signed up just yet.
richard
On 3/26/13 10:30 AM, alyssa wright
On 3/21/13 1:30 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
Here in the U.S. such implicit speed limits are fairly rare except
within cities where most residential roads are assumed to be 30 mph.
All highways here are explicitly signed with the applicable speed
limit so the established use of the source:maxspeed
On 3/17/13 11:09 PM, Evan Robohm wrote:
My question is how literally should we as mappers
tag them--like the Wiki page says or as they're advertised
on road signs? This also applies to how ramps are
tagged--does toll=yes only apply to ramps with toll
booths or to ramps that lead into/out of a
On 3/16/13 7:59 PM, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
Eric,
I'm in general favor of your idea. I think that if we can get more
accurate, up to date data out of TIGER, then we should.
I'd strongly encourage you to join us on the OSM US Import Committee list:
On 3/12/13 5:00 PM, Mike N wrote:
On 3/11/2013 10:10 PM, Eric Fischer wrote:
The results of application will depend on both the original data and
the 2012 data. For layouts with 'regular geometry' - roughly square,
rectangular, or rhomboid layouts, the results will be generally good.
For
On 3/10/13 8:55 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 6:04 PM, KerryIrons irons54vor...@sbcglobal.netwrote:
It's fine to tag a route as proposed but proposed by who?
Let's not get hung up in the semantics; it basically means for all
practical purposes not live yet.
i've stayed
[the following includes a message that Adam cc'd to the list that
probably got into the moderator queue]
On 2/22/13 9:03 AM, Adam Schreiber wrote:
On 2/21/13, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
i look forward to it. is there any particular mapping task i should look
On 2/22/13 12:35 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
I always find it boggling that open data projects are willing to use
google docs and google hangouts. It would be really nice to at least
have the data in a free software/free culture
On 2/22/13 1:19 PM, Charlotte Wolter wrote:
As for using ref, that changes the nature of that tag. Now
we use ref to give the same identification to multiple pieces of a
way, not to give different identities to pieces of a way. I think it
might be better to include the number of each
i sent this out earlier today on conventional social networks, but i
know a lot of you probably
don't participate in them...
a year or so backSteve Coast
https://www.facebook.com/SteveCoast?group_id=171170822943323called for
some Civil War related mapping. i'm not sure how much has
really
On 2/21/13 7:49 PM, Adam Schreiber wrote:
Richard,
I hope you enjoy the area. I've already done a bit of mapping at the
Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania battlefields.
i look forward to it. is there any particular mapping task i should look
for at Spotsylvania?
richard
On 2/10/13 8:56 AM, Michal Migurski wrote:
I don't agree. NE2’s edits, most of all the route relations, are enormously
valuable to OSM in the US. I'm not aware of any precedent for banning a user
like this, and I'm not eager to see one set.
i'm with mike. while i, like many, have butted heads
NE2 asked me to share this diary entry with the list:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/NE2/diary/18600
richard
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On 2/9/13 2:39 PM, the Old Topo Depot wrote:
All,
I'm asking for additional eyes on
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/14828923 as well as the edits
of http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Themegamaster9000/edits in general.
The specific changeset contains material of which I am
this should also go to the tagging list.
On 1/12/13 9:08 AM, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote:
(this is a follow-up post to my original at
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2013-January/010086.html and
the responses thereto)
Thanks for the input on this topic earlier this month.
On 1/9/13 8:30 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
Around here, for municipal boundaries to cut diagonally through
residential lots isn't uncommon. I once lived in a house where
the front yard was in one township and the back yard in another.
Two separate tax bills (although the second one was cheap because
On 1/9/13 11:27 AM, Andrew Guertin wrote:
On 01/07/2013 10:45 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 1/7/13 10:37 PM, the Old Topo Depot wrote:
We do have an issue with US state and county borders, as some are
missing, incorrect, incomplete or incorrectly tagged. Perhaps we
can organize a cleanse
On 1/7/13 10:37 PM, the Old Topo Depot wrote:
We do have an issue with US state and county borders, as some are missing,
incorrect, incomplete or incorrectly tagged. Perhaps we can organize a
cleanse the state and county borders project to improve the data quality
and currentness.
i would
On 1/4/13 1:31 PM, Michal Migurski wrote:
Interesting—how would you characterize bad roads? One characteristic
of crappy TIGER data is road wiggliness, is that what you mean?
the tiger 2010/11/12 data is much better for many of the bad tiger
areas. it'd be a bit of work to do
a comparison of
On 1/1/13 7:32 PM, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote:
I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a stretch of road has
been adopted as part of an Adopt-a-Highway program.
unrelated to the source amenity tagging discussion...
i think that maybe adapt-a-highway is probably an
On 1/2/13 1:20 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:
Is there a difference between deprecated and now used less frequently?
Deprecated sounds pretty official, especially in our unofficious (word?)
OSM society.
in my experience, deprecated is a pretty official declaration that
something shouldn't
be
On 1/2/13 2:45 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:
Exactly. Where are these official declarations posted inside OSM?
For example, Serge indicated source=* has been deprecated. Where is this
(should this be) recorded?
normally you'd indicate deprecation on the page for the tag itself.
i'm not sure we have
On 1/2/13 10:49 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 1/1/13 7:32 PM, dies38...@mypacks.net wrote:
I am interested in what tagging you would suggest to indicate that a
stretch of road has been adopted as part of an Adopt-a-Highway
program.
unrelated to the source amenity tagging discussion...
i
i have observed some things along I 85 north of Charlotte that could use
some attention from a local
mapper. please contact me off list if you are in a position to go look
at some stuff and i'll give you
all the details.
thanks,
richard
___
On 1/1/13 6:52 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:
Zip code areas and voting districts seem to me to be be functionally
equivalent to CPDs in that they are arbitrary geographic distinctions
determined by agencies outside of local governments or administrations. Are
they given a boundary=administrative?
zip
funny you should bring this up, i've been pondering CDPs a bit lately
and have come to very different conclusions from yours.
On 12/31/12 3:30 PM, stevea wrote:
I have been pondering the use of the admin_level key in the USA, and
have come to the realization that while values 2, 4, 6 and 8
On 12/31/12 5:12 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
I'd argue that not all governmental boundaries need to be tagged as
boundary=administrative. In Ohio, we've started to retag CDP
boundaries with boundary=census and place=locality but without
admin_level. [1][2] They still show up in Nominatim as
On 12/31/12 9:38 PM, Steve Coast wrote:
On Dec 31, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Steve Coast writes:
Waze, last time I looked, was 5 times larger than OSM. Today, probably 10.
Nobody ever tells me about Waze.
You live in upstate New York, dude. :-)
beyond upstate.
On 12/27/12 2:46 PM, Mike Dupont wrote:
This is about shawnee county, not riley. I am working on getting a
written confirmation, until then I will not import any more data, just
continue to clean up what I have imported.
thank you.
we really do need to take this much care whenever we bring in
if fire trucks are permitted, then use
access=no
emergency=yes
On 12/23/12 11:20 AM, nicholas ingalls wrote:
Tagging with access:no usually does the trick :)
Just see here for a list of access tags -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access
cheers,
ingalls
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:41 AM,
On 12/22/12 10:39 PM, James Mast wrote:
I personally think that the letter shouldn't be stored in the ref tags on the ways as they could
be considered as an internal designation that just happens to make it onto the route shields. Maybe the
letters could be added as an additional tag like
On 12/20/12 4:21 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
That's why I often react strongly if I encounter people who don't seem
to share this deeper why do you do all this, people who, at least
superficially, seem to be concerned only with getting a nice map
quickly and who couldn't care less about how the
On 12/18/12 9:51 PM, Brian DeRocher wrote:
Food for thought... Imagine we performed a large data import into a
side table, then used MapRoulette to overlay that data on OSM, allow
users to review additions, and import features one at a time. Would
that be better?
this could work for some
On 12/17/12 9:42 AM, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
When I helped create the US Chapter several years ago, this was one of
the main reasons I thought it should exist, but I think there's
finally the amount of data and interest to justify it.
What do folks think?
i think it's a necessary step, thanks
On 12/10/12 7:06 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
On 12/10/12 6:48 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
Who is available to initiate and moderate this tonight? All it takes
is 1)
start a hangout 2) post link on google+ event and 3) be there for the
duration.
i'll take a crack at it.
although considering how
i'm trying to relaunch the hangout, but having some network problems
reaching google plus.
if someone else wants to start this thing, feel free.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
i'm looking at a need to do some analysis estimation based on road nets
extracted from OSM; the goal is to be able to estimate things like time to
complete ground surveys (e.g., TIGER review and collection of hydrant
locations.)
are there any libraries or tools kicking around that folks might
On 12/5/12 10:04 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 12/05/2012 03:55 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
i'm looking at a need to do some analysis estimation based on road
nets
extracted from OSM; the goal is to be able to estimate things like
time to
complete ground surveys (e.g., TIGER review
On 11/29/12 1:03 PM, Steven Johnson wrote:
The
data are copyrighted and Arlington County owns all rights to the data and
allows use ...as an acknowledged source to produce maps or analysis but
you may not redistribute, resell, or copy the data (except for back-up
purposes).
the redistribute
Found in Albany this morning:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nfgusedautoparts/8229572497/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On 11/29/12 1:48 PM, Steven Johnson wrote:
Yes, in that the carriageways are effectively separated. But in a very
tortured sort of way.
from looking at bing imagery, it looks like they tore out a badly
deteriorated
section between the two carriageways.
richard
On 11/29/12 12:30 PM, Brian Quinion wrote:
If you mapped is as above it would work in nominatim since both name and
short_name are supported.
Translation of 'Street' = 'St' is supported anyway but 'First' = '1st'
isn't because that would require a large multilingual number database to
resolve
On 11/29/12 2:18 PM, Jim McAndrew wrote:
It looks like there were a few points where there were garden dividers,
but that changed after a repaving.
From looking around on OSM, it doesn't seem like people are marking roads
with a garden in the middle of the road as a dual carriageway, maybe they
On 11/29/12 5:26 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
I'm also very very doubtful about the value of importing city, state and (!)
country: if we don't have polygons for all of those already, then we really
should. Importing n billion nodes into the States which all say hey, this
is in the States will
On 11/29/12 11:07 PM, Brian Quinion wrote:
I'm very happy for it to be fixed as you suggest, adding code to the
geocoders is definitely preferable, I just don't have the bandwidth to get
it done myself at the second. Also just wanted to make clear that any
solution like this needs to handle
On 11/29/12 11:28 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thursday, November 29, 2012, Mike N wrote:
It would be useful to navigate to address points - properly placed,
they will lead to the building of interest or driveway. Centroids on
large parcels will frequently misdirect to a side street with no
On 11/29/12 11:36 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On Thursday, November 29, 2012, Mike N wrote:
So map the driveways and buildings, too. I mean, how core are we?
My hope is that we can get the best address points added to OSM
On 11/28/12 6:35 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
Is anyone else interested in this? I could use some help gathering
volunteers to the cause.
i am working on leveraging things so that i can import enhanced 911
address data from NYS into OSM. this will probably happen as part of
my emergency response GPS
the rule we frequently follow is to use the format of the name on the
sign as
the guideline for what to put in the name tag for a way.
there's a neighborhood in Rotterdam, NY where the signs for the side
streets along the main drag (Hamburg Street) are spelled out (e.g.,
Fourth Street)
but the
On 11/27/12 12:45 PM, Charlie Smothers wrote:
I've been watching all the discussion about fixing street names, direction
prefixes, robots, etc. and want to make sure my efforts don't get wasted.
I have made lots of changes around Sacramento CA
the bot we're talking about would only be run on
On 11/27/12 12:24 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
We had our first virtual mappy hour two weeks or so ago, and it was
fun so let's do another. I scheduled it for next Monday 5:30 PST /
8:30 EST.
i'd just like to say that the first one of these was fun, and i'm sorry that
i'm going to miss this
On 11/27/12 10:10 PM, Toby Murray wrote:
Time for concrete examples and tests.
I just ran a test file through the bot. It had a single way in it with
the following tags:
highway=residential
name=Main St SW
tiger:name_base=Main
tiger:name_type=St
tiger:name_direction_suffix=SW
This resulted in
On 11/25/12 8:31 PM, Mike N wrote:
One complication is hand-entered street data, which may result in an
abbreviation in addr:street with no TIGER ancestor to trace back for
finding the base name and type for a safe machine expansion.
my normal reaction would be that an expansion run
thanks to Martijn for coming up with this and organizing it.
http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/11/openstreetmaps-operation-cowboy-marathon-mapping-session-underway.php
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
this has been on tagging for the last two days, i'm looking for comment
from a broader
audience. take your best shots...
the context is that i'm working on an emergency services project (some
of you may have seen
my blog post here:
ok, thanks, carl. this helps. i'm working on an emergency services
related project
right now and it's helpful to learn about these things.
the next question is this. supposing we implement Steven's proposal, how
does
this help in emergency services mapping projects, that is, what does
this
On 11/21/12 5:48 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 21.11.2012 22:51, Apollinaris Schöll wrote:
relations seem to be a elegant solution for people with technology
background. And all your arguments are good ones
BUT they have quite some disadvantages. Too many non techies have
problems to get
On 11/21/12 6:20 PM, Charlotte Wolter wrote:
Hello all,
I don't know a lot about this, but apparently there is a
current effort in the U.S. to improve the addressing in rural areas so
emergency responders can locate addresses more easily. It might be
advantageous to look at their
On 11/21/12 4:16 PM, Steven Johnson wrote:
Second, Richard, please see Carl's post which talks about the proposal from
the standpoint of emergency services. Carl could likely say what the pros
cons are of splitting the tags vs loading everything in the addr:street tag.
i did read Carl's post.
On 11/19/12 10:41 AM, Toby Murray wrote:
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EXPANDING NAMES ALREADY IN OSM!
Please read my email again. All I did was update the TIGER 2012 road
name tiles. I am not touching OSM data at all!
But please do take a look at the road name tiles in the areas you have
On 11/17/12 6:56 AM, Charlotte Wolter wrote:
Hello,
While doing the Maproulette, I came upon a large area east of
El Paso
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=31.7234lon=-106.1106zoom=13) with
hundreds of neatly laid-out roads tagged residential that are only
weathered tracks.
On 11/17/12 9:34 AM, Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote:
highway=track is fine if the road is open to the public, but quite often
incomplete subdivisions are not.
and that's why we have access=private or access=no
___
Talk-us mailing list
Martijn and i are starting to pull together the video from SOTM US to
prepare it to be put online.
i know that a number of the volunteers did backup video with their cell
phones. could all of those
who did so please drop me a note? a lot of the video from the Bloggie
cameras is fairly usable,
On 11/12/12 7:54 PM, Charlotte Wolter wrote:
Hey folks,
I understand the link to Mappy Hour will be posted on the
Google event page, but what is the link to the Google event page?
Thanks.
try this:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/events/cba7vmqc6g9gspoedbr0lbml2s4
On 11/1/12 12:01 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
If, for example, the US community would express a clear preference for
local mappers having their way in tagging, then a tagging bully would
clearly and visibly operate outside of the rules of accepted
behaviour, and all his explanations about why
On 10/30/12 5:23 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
Is everybody still OK with receiving these updates on this list? They
seem to have gotten more frequent lately (Thanks Lambertus)!
I could easily limit the notifications to only be every month or two
weeks or something.
i think it's fine the way it is,
On 10/29/12 10:25 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Martijn van Exel writes:
In general, I would venture to say unedited TIGER can almost certainly
be improved using Bing imagery anywhere in the US.
M, no, there are some counties in NY which were in excellent
condition, and which haven't needed
On 10/27/12 2:46 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
If the former, then it matters if it's Business-80 or 80-Business. If
the latter, then as long as we preserve the modifier, then we're good.
at this point, i think i've seen enough to know that what goes on the signs
can be a little bit unpredictable. on
On 10/25/12 2:38 PM, Mikel Maron wrote:
For specific reasons why OSM-US should care, a couple concrete things off the
top of my head are trademarks and promotion. OSM Foundation holds the
trademarks, like OpenStreetMap and the logo. The promotion space for events on
the OSM.org website (like
On 10/25/12 9:14 PM, Mike N wrote:
On 10/25/2012 12:34 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
We're
talking about promoting a US project like fixing TIGER deserts / Ghost
towns[1] for the next NOTLM (date to be set). Good idea?
I would say that this is a good idea. If a curious person (non-OSM
301 - 400 di 698 matches
Mail list logo
