Re: [Talk-se] Husnummerimport i Hbg kommun

2017-01-22 Per discussione Andreas Gnau 

(Ursäkta min svenska, har inte bott här så länge...)

Jag tycker att vi skulle skapa en wiki-sida enligt
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines för att sammanfatta
resultaten av diskussionen innan du börjar på riktigt. Frågorna i wikin 
hjälper också att fundera kring importen själv.


Mina kommentarer angående taggning:
===

addr:postcode:
Jag tycker att vi skulle ta bort mellanrummet mellan siffrorna.
Renderern kan alltid formatera det.

addr:country:
Jag anser addr:country som onödigt/redundant. Realiteten är att det
finns många addresser i OSM som har ingen addr:country (i några städer
ingen addr:city heller) dvs. att renderern måste titta på
admin-relationerna i alla fall och man kan ju anta att Sveriges 
riksgränser kortlades korrekt :-)


source:
Jag tycker att det vore bra att använda någon mer specifik källa, t.ex.
"Helsingborg Kommuns Baskarta" för att det finns inga flertydigheter i 
fallet de släpper fler kartor.


Jag måste fundera kring debatten om nod vs. byggnad. Jag ska svara i den
andra tråden senare.


Mina kommentarer angående metodiken:


En av OpenStreetmaps styrkor är "We map what's on the ground". Därför,
tycker jag, gäller det att undvika att importera "fel, men officiellt"
data. Jag tycker att man skulle vara väldigt försiktigt att man inte
importera skräp eller förstöra existerande data (också när man uppdatera
data).

Hur är datakavaliten? Har någon tittat på den? Jag har inte tittat på
den i detalj, så det kanske inte finns några av de fall jag beskriver
nedan. Jag kan inte heller bedöma det eftersom jag inte bo i Helsingborg.

On 01/21/2017 09:59 AM, Andreas Vilén wrote:

3) Jag laddar in adressfilen i Josm.


Andreas, kan du beskriver lite mer hur steg 3 fungera? Vilka fält i
GeoJSON används på vilket sätt?


6) Jag laddar upp husnumren som de är i befintligt skick, utan att
lägga in dem i husen. 7) Jag kopierar in husnummer i hus, korrigerar
mot redan mappade husnummer, sätter fast i entrénoder där det är
möjligt att se osv, och laddar upp igen.


Förstår jag det rätt, att du först vill ladda upp "allting" (även
adresser som redan finns i OSM) och i ett andra steg ta bort 
duplikatorna som skapades? Vad är motiveringen bakom / fördelen av detta?


Några frågor (och min åsikt, men jag vill höra andras åsikter)
Hur ska vi hantera adresser...
 * som redan finns (gör ingenting, existerande data har prioritet)
 * som finns t.ex. 2A och 2B i OSM men bara som 2 i kommunens data (gör
ingenting)
 * som har "felaktiga" koordinater som ligga längs bort (gör ingenting)
 * som har ett alternativt / felaktigt stavning jämfört med de som finns
i OSM (matcha dem manuellt. Gatunamnet skulle dock bara ändras om man
känner området eller var på plats. Folk har ofta kommit överens att
gatunamnet på skylten är det som gäller för "name" i dessa fall)
 * byggnader som har en adress enligt kommunen men inte "finns" på plats
t.ex. ingången finns inte längre, "hus" är ett garage... )
 * som försvinner eller flyttas enligt kommunen i någon senare
uppdatering? (Jag tycker vi skulle verifiera det på plats. Det
betyder ofta att det finns betydligt fler att mappa och vi skulle inte 
lita på kommunen "helt blind" t.ex. kunde det finnas adresser av hus som 
inte byggs än.)

 * har du tänkt på olika sätt att beskriva adresser t.ex. Sveavägen
"2A", "2 a", "2a", "2A-D" eller också addr:interpolation?

Hur ska vi säkerställa kvalitén på lång sikt? (Använd regio-osm
husnummerutvärderingen)


Kvalitetssäkring och eventuella alternativföreslag
==

Jag vet inte om ni känner den, men jag anser husnummerutvärderingen av
Dietmar Seifert (OSM-User: okilimu) som ett väldigt bra verktyg för att
jämföra husnumren. Det går t.ex. att
 * se adresser som bara finns i OSM / i kommunens data och öppna /
importera de till JOSM eller visa dem på kartan
 * visa distansen mellan matchande adresser
 * ignorera dvs. gömma och kommentera felaktiga adresser i kommunens data
 * se täckning per stad/stadsdel/gata och också den historiska
utvecklingen av täckningen

Som exempel en länk till en stadsdel i Hamburg, Tyskland:
http://regio-osm.de/hausnummerauswertung/auswertung_anzeigen?job_ids=2367=true=osmkartevoll=nein=nein=Bundesrepublik+Deutschland=Hamburg

Man kan ändra språket till Engelska upp till höger på webbsidan ;-)

Det vore också en möjlighet att använda den här utvärderingen för den
initiala importen. Om jag minns rätt, så är matchningsmekanismen ganska 
bra. Det ger en bra översikt av de existerande och icke-existerande 
adresser innan importen och importen till JOSM går ganska smidigt via en 
länk på utvärderingssidan.


___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione Denis Carriere 
There's been a lot of discussion on the license, however has anyone read
the documentation on the import yet? Could the OSM Talk-CA provide any
feedback on this, that way once the license is sorted out we can start
immediately afterwards.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Plan

For those who are more the visual type, we've created a YouTube video
explaining the workflow proposed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkFCkPBR7PA

If there's no feedback related to the Import Wiki page we're going to
assumed this section of the import is approved.

Cheers,

*~~*
*Denis Carriere*
*GIS Software & Systems Specialist*

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 12:45 AM, Paul Norman  wrote:

> On 1/22/2017 9:06 AM, James wrote:
>
>> So if I understand correctly Paul, CC0 or any other license would require
>> permission as a bypass to the license, even though it would be considered
>> compatible with ODBL.
>>
>
> No. CC0 is compatible with the ODbL, so you can just go ahead and use the
> data*, subject to any conditions the community has developed around imports.
>
> * There could be exceptional circumstances in some cases.
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [OSM-talk] RU Wikipedia now uses OSM by Wikidata ID

2017-01-22 Per discussione Oleksiy Muzalyev 

Dear Yuri,

Could you, please, provide an example with the location outline?

I tried Salzburg, New York, Odessa, Moscow, etc. in the Russian 
Wikipedia, but I got always just a marker on the map, but not an 
outline, i.e. a line indicating the outer contours or boundaries of an 
object or figure. Perhaps, it is a thin line, and I do not notice it on 
the map? Or I misunderstood something.


With best regards,
Oleksiy

On 21.01.17 02:40, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
Russian Wikipedia just replaced all of their map links in the upper 
right corner (geohack) with the  Kartographer extension!  
Moreover, when clicking the link, it also shows the location outline, 
if that object exists in OpenStreetMap with a corresponding Wikidata 
ID (ways and relations only, no nodes).  My deepest respect to my 
former Interactive Team colleagues and volunteers who have made it 
possible!  (This was community wishlist #21)


Example - city of Salzburg (click coordinates in the upper right 
corner, or in the infobox on the side):

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%86%D0%B1%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B3

P.S. I am still working on improving Wikidata linking, and will be 
very happy to collaborate with anyone on improving OSM data quality.



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione Paul Norman 

On 1/22/2017 9:06 AM, James wrote:
So if I understand correctly Paul, CC0 or any other license would 
require permission as a bypass to the license, even though it would be 
considered compatible with ODBL.


No. CC0 is compatible with the ODbL, so you can just go ahead and use 
the data*, subject to any conditions the community has developed around 
imports.


* There could be exceptional circumstances in some cases.

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione Paul Norman 

On 1/22/2017 9:48 AM, James wrote:
So why is this not considered the exact same as OGL-CA, which is 
considered compatible with ODBL?




As mentioned previously, the OGL-CA is compatible because the Federal 
government has said so for their data. The Federal government's 
statement only applies to their data under their license.


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione Paul Norman 

On 1/22/2017 7:07 AM, John Marshall wrote:

Paul,

So once we get a letter from the City of Ottawa, are we good to add 
the buildings as per the wiki?


It depends what they say in their reply. If they say no, then we can't 
use their data. If we have a suitable reply, then we are able to legally 
use their data.


There are of course other requirements that the community has developed 
like documenting the import, etc, and the letter has nothing to do with 
these.


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione Stewart C. Russell 
On 2017-01-22 12:48 PM, James wrote:
> 
> So why is this not considered the exact same as OGL-CA, which is
> considered compatible with ODBL?

My understanding of why it's not the same:

1) The OGL-CA, due to a fault in its design, can only be used by the
Canadian Federal Government. Contrast that with OGL-UK which is written
as a general licence for any organization in the UK public sector to use.

2) The Ottawa licence has some differences, apart from the information
provider in the definitions:

 - it's missing the introduction completely

 - in excluding personal information, it refers to the Ontario
   Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act,
   rather than the federal Privacy Act. These laws have different scopes

I'd tend to agree with Steve that if permission has been given by the
City, then I can't see any other objection. Paul Norman may have to
chime in with any remaining concerns.

I would ask those who claim that we should accept this because the
Federal government's lawyers and staff say we should: does the Federal
government have the best interests of OSM as a continuing project at
heart? One cannot rely on the opinion of other people's lawyers, because
they have different goals.

 Stewart


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-us] Choptank River

2017-01-22 Per discussione Elliott Plack 
Thanks for the inspiration Simon. I spent some time today in JOSM improving
the accuracy of the Choptank. Here's the finished relation:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/132#map=11/38.7592/-76.0542

Notes

1. Previous editors had created about 10 relations that were adjacent. I
removed all of the relations but saved the raw lines and added it to this
relation.
2. I removed a lot of lines with jagged boundaries.
3. I used fast-draw at various scales so that the resulting river would
look nice and be a close approximation of the river.
4. I also added the Broad River, Harris Creek, and Tred Avon Rivers using
the same methods. These tidal rivers are near the mouth of the bay.

Next steps (anyone can help)

1. Improve the smaller tributaries.
2. Add the river centerlines for the tributaries if they do not already
exist.
3. Add the wetlands. (as you zoom out with the river selected, the "blue"
zones seem to be much wider than the actual river in places. Those areas
are big swamps.)
4. The rest of the eastern shore :)

Best,

Elliott

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:05 AM Bill Ricker  wrote:

>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:53 PM, Kevin Kenny  > wrote:
>
> It would strike the locals as very odd if the Jamaica Bay or the Great
> South Bay were labeled as "Atlantic Ocean."
>
>
> ​It's certainly wrong above head-tide where river is fresh-water and
> non-tidal.
> Where navigable brackish and tidal, we'll look at you a little funny for
> not knowing the right name *  but yeah, it's salty.  ​
>
> ​*(as with people whose GPS uses some federal formal name no one uses)​
>
>
> --
> Bill Ricker
> bill.n1...@gmail.com
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux
>
-- 
Elliott Plack
http://elliottplack.me
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-lt] Asociacija „Atvirasis žemėlapis“

2017-01-22 Per discussione Ramas 
O tarp kitko, visai nebloga mintis.

2017-01-21 21:42 GMT+02:00 Kęstutis Paulikas :

>   Įtariu galima daryt minimalų (arba ir neminimalų :) ) pavedimą per
> banką ir pagal tai identifikuot. Bent jau mokant už Tele2 per Swedbanką
> yra varna "perduoti asmens kodą pardavėjui".
>
___
Talk-lt mailing list
Talk-lt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lt

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FANTOIR et métro parisien ?

2017-01-22 Per discussione Philippe Verdy 
D'ailleurs ça me fait penser qu'il y a aussi une toponymie souterraine,
notamment dans les réseaux d'égouts. OK pas très visitable par le grand
public (sauf certains secteurs). Souvent ce sont les noms des rues qui sont
au dessus, mais pas toujours car les rues en surface ont pu bouger mais pas
les galeries souterraines qui peuvent donc dévier et même garder des noms
historiques qui ne correspondent plus aux rues.

Mais bon, OSM pour l'instant ne s'intéresse pas beaucoup à la cartographie
souterraine, surtout si elle n'est pas accessible au public. On a ça
seulement dans les tunnels, stations de métros et gares, et sous les
"dalles" commerciales construites au dessus des rues, et les centres
comemricaux parce que justement les lieux sont destinés à recevoir du
public.

On serait à Montréal, la carto souterraine intéresse pourtant bien du monde
(bien au delà des égouts et tunnels routiers ou ferroviaires), avec des tas
d'établissements qui ne sont accessibles que par là. Mais pas facile à
représenter sur une carte OSM privilégiant la "surface" (sans s'intéresser
non plus aux étages).

On voit là les limites du modèle de base d'OSM conçu au départ pour la 2D,
et plus ou moins bidouillé avec des tags level/layer/ele/incline. Le modèle
a aussi été conçu pour l'Angleterre au départ dont le relief est assez
plat. Pour Monaco, avec ses souterrains un peu partout c'est difficile de
naviguer, même uniquement en voiture ou de passer d'une rue à l'autre à
pied ou en vélo. Sans doute OSM n'espérait pas au départ aller aussi loin
ni même sortir du Royaume-Uni ou entrer dans autant de détails
qu'aujourd'hui.

Du coup OSM ne se suffit plus, et on doit jongler avec des couches
produites par des jeux de données tiers dans des formats incompatibles
entre eux et aux méthodes de mise à jour très différentes (exemple: les
DMT, la bathymétrie, les diverses bases de modèles 3D de batiments, avec
des implications sur ce qu'on doit garder dans OSM ou que certains vont
éliminer d'OSM parce que ça gène les autres modèles ou ça entre en conflit,
sans se souvier de ce qui est nécessaire aux modèles concurrents (regarder
par exemple comment apparait le Louvre dans les rendus 3D: terrain tout
plat, moins bien que les autres batiments autour, parce que des données
venant d'ailleurs sont sensées se charger à la place, et on commence à
obtenir un "gruyère" ou chaque base tierce impose ses choix contre les
autres bases tierces concurrentes.

Intégrer la modélisation 3D dans OSM est une horreur et ça ne tient pas
longtemps quand ça a marché une fois, les outils divers de vérification ne
s'y retrouvent plus, pas plus que les utilisateurs: Dans OSM tout ce qui
n'est pas au niveau du sol et dégagé au dessus (ou sinon au niveau des
toits et terrasses) n'a plus sa place. Comment concilier le fonctionneemtn
avec les bases tierces et les faire interopérer ? Pour l'instant il n'y a
aucune réponse, ni même tentative de réponse et ça mériterait pourtant une
réflexion globale dans un atelier dédié de la SOTM monde (et pour la mener,
déjà commencer à chercher des solutions au niveau national dans un SOTM
France, et comparer entre pays les résultats obtenus pour en tirer le
meilleur et chercher des points de convergence de solutions).



Le 22 janvier 2017 à 22:58, Philippe Verdy  a écrit :

> Le FANTOIR a des entrées diverses pour des lieux-dits associés à des
> stations de métro, des gares, des centres commerciaux, des hôpitaux, tout
> ce qui peut étant donné l'étendue ou l'importance locale aider à localiser
> un lieu et notamment les services qui s'y trouvent. Il n'y a donc pas que
> des rues. Normalement le code est différent (regarde la lettre préfixe)
>
>
> Le 22 janvier 2017 à 22:37, LeTopographeFou  a
> écrit :
>
>> Bonjour,
>>
>> A mes heures perdus j'essaie de forcer le rapprochement des données
>> cadastres avec OSM via Osmose ou le site cadastre.openstreetmap.fr. Et
>> il s'avère que certaines stations de métro parisiennes (pas tous ?) ont un
>> numéro FANTOIR et apparaissent dans l'onglet des Lieux-dits. Ex :
>> http://cadastre.openstreetmap.fr/fantoir/#insee=75113=4
>>
>> La question à 5 sous : est-ce que rajouter à ces stations (ou à la
>> "relation définissant la station" quand elle existe, qu'on l'aime ou pas)
>> un attribut ref:FR:FANTOIR suffit ? Faudrait-il ajouter un place=* (si oui
>> quelle valeur ?) pour en faire un "lieu-dit" ? Ou bien il faut mettre ces
>> deux attributs sur un node à part car le lieu-dit existe et qu'il n'est pas
>> nécessairement restreint à la station (ex : sa surface au sens du cadastre
>> couvrant un quartier entier alors que la station est plus petite) ?
>>
>> Je penche pour un ref:FR:FANTOIR sur le node station (ou la relation...)
>> et puis basta.
>>
>> A ce jour aucune station de métro ne semble avoir une réf FANTOIR dans
>> OSM, d'où aussi ma question de savoir si c'est volontaire.
>>
>> La même question peut se poser sur un hôpital (ex : hôpital de la

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FANTOIR et métro parisien ?

2017-01-22 Per discussione Philippe Verdy 
Le FANTOIR a des entrées diverses pour des lieux-dits associés à des
stations de métro, des gares, des centres commerciaux, des hôpitaux, tout
ce qui peut étant donné l'étendue ou l'importance locale aider à localiser
un lieu et notamment les services qui s'y trouvent. Il n'y a donc pas que
des rues. Normalement le code est différent (regarde la lettre préfixe)


Le 22 janvier 2017 à 22:37, LeTopographeFou  a
écrit :

> Bonjour,
>
> A mes heures perdus j'essaie de forcer le rapprochement des données
> cadastres avec OSM via Osmose ou le site cadastre.openstreetmap.fr. Et il
> s'avère que certaines stations de métro parisiennes (pas tous ?) ont un
> numéro FANTOIR et apparaissent dans l'onglet des Lieux-dits. Ex :
> http://cadastre.openstreetmap.fr/fantoir/#insee=75113=4
>
> La question à 5 sous : est-ce que rajouter à ces stations (ou à la
> "relation définissant la station" quand elle existe, qu'on l'aime ou pas)
> un attribut ref:FR:FANTOIR suffit ? Faudrait-il ajouter un place=* (si oui
> quelle valeur ?) pour en faire un "lieu-dit" ? Ou bien il faut mettre ces
> deux attributs sur un node à part car le lieu-dit existe et qu'il n'est pas
> nécessairement restreint à la station (ex : sa surface au sens du cadastre
> couvrant un quartier entier alors que la station est plus petite) ?
>
> Je penche pour un ref:FR:FANTOIR sur le node station (ou la relation...)
> et puis basta.
>
> A ce jour aucune station de métro ne semble avoir une réf FANTOIR dans
> OSM, d'où aussi ma question de savoir si c'est volontaire.
>
> La même question peut se poser sur un hôpital (ex : hôpital de la
> Salpêtrière), un cimetière (ex : cimetière du Montparnasse), une gare...
>
> Par avance merci,
> Cordialement,
>
> --
> LeTopographeFou
>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] FANTOIR et métro parisien ?

2017-01-22 Per discussione Vincent de Château-Thierry 

Bonsoir,

Le 22/01/2017 à 22:37, LeTopographeFou a écrit :


A mes heures perdus j'essaie de forcer le rapprochement des données
cadastres avec OSM via Osmose ou le site cadastre.openstreetmap.fr
. Et il s'avère que certaines stations
de métro parisiennes (pas tous ?) ont un numéro FANTOIR et apparaissent
dans l'onglet des Lieux-dits. Ex :
http://cadastre.openstreetmap.fr/fantoir/#insee=75113=4

La question à 5 sous : est-ce que rajouter à ces stations (ou à la
"relation définissant la station" quand elle existe, qu'on l'aime ou
pas) un attribut ref:FR:FANTOIR suffit ? Faudrait-il ajouter un place=*
(si oui quelle valeur ?) pour en faire un "lieu-dit" ? Ou bien il faut
mettre ces deux attributs sur un node à part car le lieu-dit existe et
qu'il n'est pas nécessairement restreint à la station (ex : sa surface
au sens du cadastre couvrant un quartier entier alors que la station est
plus petite) ?

Je penche pour un ref:FR:FANTOIR sur le node station (ou la relation...)
et puis basta.

A ce jour aucune station de métro ne semble avoir une réf FANTOIR dans
OSM, d'où aussi ma question de savoir si c'est volontaire.

La même question peut se poser sur un hôpital (ex : hôpital de la
Salpêtrière), un cimetière (ex : cimetière du Montparnasse), une gare...


Oui, rajouter le ref:FR:FANTOIR directement sur les objets (ici les 
stations, en node ou en relation), pourquoi pas. En l'état ça ne devrait 
pas suffire pour permettre le rapprochement, car côté lieux-dits on 
cherche explicitement un tag name ET un tag place. Mais l'idée, hormis 
pour le tag ref:FR:FANTOIR lui-même, a toujours été d'adapter BANO à OSM 
et pas l'inverse. Donc il faudra côté BANO élargir le critère de 
recherche des lieux-dits (au sens FANTOIR du terme) dans OSM pour 
provoquer des rapprochements. Un assouplissement pourrait être notamment 
de chercher un tag place OU un tag ref:FR:FANTOIR. Ça fonctionnerait 
pour un metro, mais aussi un hôpital ou un cimetière comme tu l'évoques.


=> https://github.com/osm-fr/bano/issues/131

vincent

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[OSM-talk-fr] FANTOIR et métro parisien ?

2017-01-22 Per discussione LeTopographeFou 

Bonjour,

A mes heures perdus j'essaie de forcer le rapprochement des données 
cadastres avec OSM via Osmose ou le site cadastre.openstreetmap.fr 
. Et il s'avère que certaines stations 
de métro parisiennes (pas tous ?) ont un numéro FANTOIR et apparaissent 
dans l'onglet des Lieux-dits. Ex : 
http://cadastre.openstreetmap.fr/fantoir/#insee=75113=4


La question à 5 sous : est-ce que rajouter à ces stations (ou à la 
"relation définissant la station" quand elle existe, qu'on l'aime ou 
pas) un attribut ref:FR:FANTOIR suffit ? Faudrait-il ajouter un place=* 
(si oui quelle valeur ?) pour en faire un "lieu-dit" ? Ou bien il faut 
mettre ces deux attributs sur un node à part car le lieu-dit existe et 
qu'il n'est pas nécessairement restreint à la station (ex : sa surface 
au sens du cadastre couvrant un quartier entier alors que la station est 
plus petite) ?


Je penche pour un ref:FR:FANTOIR sur le node station (ou la relation...) 
et puis basta.


A ce jour aucune station de métro ne semble avoir une réf FANTOIR dans 
OSM, d'où aussi ma question de savoir si c'est volontaire.


La même question peut se poser sur un hôpital (ex : hôpital de la 
Salpêtrière), un cimetière (ex : cimetière du Montparnasse), une gare...


Par avance merci,
Cordialement,

--
LeTopographeFou

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-cz] Mapillary app

2017-01-22 Per discussione Milan Cerny 
Moc díky, už pro oči nevidím:)

Milan

__
> Od: Marián Kyral 
> Komu: talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> Datum: 22.01.2017 20:35
> Předmět: Re: [Talk-cz] Mapillary app
>
>Dne 22.1.2017 v 17:45 Milan Cerny napsal(a):
>> Ahoj, nemáte prosím někdo starší verzi aplikace Mapillary pro Android, 
>> případně kde se nechá stáhnout?
>> Po aktualizaci mi v aplikaci nejde vypnout zvuk spouště, moc dlouho se to 
>> cvakání za jízdy poslouchat nedá. Nepomáhá ani nastavení do tichého režimu.
>>
>> Moc díky.
>>
>> Milan
>
>Třeba tady: http://android-releases.mapillary.io/index.html
>Dostal jsem se tam z hlavní stránky - odkaz "Get the apps" - "All versions"
>
>Marián
>
>
>___
>Talk-cz mailing list
>Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
>
>

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-es] Me presento

2017-01-22 Per discussione Santiago Higuera 
+1, un saludo,Ibai, bienvenido

Santiago Higuera

El dom, 22-01-2017 a las 19:39 +0100, Alejandro S. escribió:
> Bienvenido,
> 
> Cualquier duda que te surja, mira un poco por la wiki y si no lo
> encuentras, pregunta sin miedo.
> 
> Saludos,
>   Alejandro Suárez
> 
> 2017-01-22 18:09 GMT+01:00 Ibai Gurrutxaga  >:
> > Hola.
> > 
> > Llevo una temporada interesado en OSM: aprendiendo, haciendo
> > pequeños cambios, leyendo la lista... Soy informático, estoy muy
> > interesado en el movimiento del software/conocimiento libre y
> > siempre me han gustado los mapas (sobre todo los de montaña). Como
> > no podía ser de otra forma, con esos ingredientes OSM (y todo lo
> > que le rodea) me ha parecido fascinante.
> > 
> > En este proceso me van surgiendo dudas y creo que ya es hora de que
> > empiece a preguntar y opinar en la lista, pero me parecía adecuado
> > empezar con una presentación. Soy de Gipuzkoa y mi interés
> > principal en OSM es en la parte del senderismo, alpinismo, mountain
> > bike... y es donde principalmente intentaré aportar. No solo
> > mapeando, sino intentando acercar a este mundillo a tantos
> > aficionados a la montaña como pueda.
> > 
> > Por otro lado, he visto que tenéis un sistema para colaborar en
> > importaciones sin necesidad de ser de la zona importada. También
> > estoy dispuesto a echar una mano en este tipo de trabajos, siempre
> > que consiga sacar algo de tiempo para ello, que no es fácil.
> > 
> > Por último, quería agradeceros a todos el gran trabajo que estáis
> > haciendo y felicitaros por todo lo que habéis conseguido.
> > 
> > Un saludo,
> > Ibai Gurrutxaga.
> > 
> > ___
> > Talk-es mailing list
> > Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
> > 
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-cz] Mapillary app

2017-01-22 Per discussione Marián Kyral 
Dne 22.1.2017 v 17:45 Milan Cerny napsal(a):
> Ahoj, nemáte prosím někdo starší verzi aplikace Mapillary pro Android, 
> případně kde se nechá stáhnout?
> Po aktualizaci mi v aplikaci nejde vypnout zvuk spouště, moc dlouho se to 
> cvakání za jízdy poslouchat nedá. Nepomáhá ani nastavení do tichého režimu.
>
> Moc díky.
>
> Milan

Třeba tady: http://android-releases.mapillary.io/index.html
Dostal jsem se tam z hlavní stránky - odkaz "Get the apps" - "All versions"

Marián


___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [Talk-es] Me presento

2017-01-22 Per discussione yo paseopor 
Saludos Ibai desde Catalunya, te animo a que también participes en los
grupos de Telegram, dónde podrás hablar con nosotros "en directo". En la
montaña queda mucho curro por hacer así que tu ayuda será muy bienvenida, y
tu buena disposición a proceder en procedimientos que no abarquen "tu zona
de confort" me parece muy encomiable y animable, así que esperemos hablar
pronto

Salut i conversa
yopaseopor
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-es] Me presento

2017-01-22 Per discussione Alejandro S. 
Bienvenido,

Cualquier duda que te surja, mira un poco por la wiki y si no lo
encuentras, pregunta sin miedo.

Saludos,
  Alejandro Suárez

2017-01-22 18:09 GMT+01:00 Ibai Gurrutxaga :

> Hola.
>
> Llevo una temporada interesado en OSM: aprendiendo, haciendo pequeños
> cambios, leyendo la lista... Soy informático, estoy muy interesado en el
> movimiento del software/conocimiento libre y siempre me han gustado los
> mapas (sobre todo los de montaña). Como no podía ser de otra forma, con
> esos ingredientes OSM (y todo lo que le rodea) me ha parecido fascinante.
>
> En este proceso me van surgiendo dudas y creo que ya es hora de que
> empiece a preguntar y opinar en la lista, pero me parecía adecuado empezar
> con una presentación. Soy de Gipuzkoa y mi interés principal en OSM es en
> la parte del senderismo, alpinismo, mountain bike... y es donde
> principalmente intentaré aportar. No solo mapeando, sino intentando acercar
> a este mundillo a tantos aficionados a la montaña como pueda.
>
> Por otro lado, he visto que tenéis un sistema para colaborar en
> importaciones sin necesidad de ser de la zona importada. También estoy
> dispuesto a echar una mano en este tipo de trabajos, siempre que consiga
> sacar algo de tiempo para ello, que no es fácil.
>
> Por último, quería agradeceros a todos el gran trabajo que estáis haciendo
> y felicitaros por todo lo que habéis conseguido.
>
> Un saludo,
> Ibai Gurrutxaga.
>
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list
> Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es
>
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-de] Gelöschte Objekte visuell wiederfinden

2017-01-22 Per discussione Hakuch 
On 20.01.2017 14:43, Tobias Preuss wrote:
> OSM Deep History (leider offline)
> http://iandees.github.io/osm-deep-history/


hier online: https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/

___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [Talk-us] I think I got this right...

2017-01-22 Per discussione richiekennedy56 
On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Paul Johnson wrote

> It would be easier to verify by using forward in the child relations 
> exclusively.  Then it will validate as a loop, or it won't,
> and the gap becomes immediately apparent.  As tagged, most tools (JOSM 
> included) won't "get" it.

In order to automatically validate, no tag should be necessary. However, the 
GUI in the JOSM relation editor will still show be able to show the complete 
loop or lack thereof, making for a easy manual valication/override.

The retention of the directional tags are easier for *human* reference 

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Signalement Osmose étrange

2017-01-22 Per discussione lenny.libre 
J'ai vu qu'Osmose met l'erreur dans la catégorie "Tags à retirer / layer 
incorrect"


En général quand je met "covered= yes" dans des cas similaires, je ne 
met pas de layer. C'est ce qui est indiqué par le wiki "Ways passing 
/through/ buildings should normally have the same (or none) layer as the 
building."


Par contre il me semble qu'osmose râle quand il n'y a pas de points aux 
croisement entre le building et le highway comme indiqué dans le wiki : 
"When used without layer 
=* the way should have 
common nodes where the outline of the covering object is crossed. "


cordialement

léni


Le 22/01/2017 à 01:08, Philippe Verdy a écrit :
Je ne connaissais pas cette valeur pour tunnel. Jusqu'à présent je 
n'avais vu que tunnel=yes pour les vrais tunnels (creusés sous terre 
ou dans la roche), covered=yes pour les tranchées couvertes et tous 
les passages sous bâtiments.
Cependant il reste qu'Osmose ne reconnait pas covered=yes pour les 
tranchées couvertes et rues couvertes (y compris par des dalles 
piétonnes, comme celle de la Défense ou celle des Colombiers à Rennes, 
qui passent au dessus des rues et pas au travers de bâtiments).


Le 21 janvier 2017 à 23:36, Florian_G > a écrit :


Hello,

Le 21/01/2017 à 21:12, Philippe Verdy a écrit :
> Route souterraine sans tunnel
> way 374135878 rawedit josm edit
> covered = yes
> highway = footway
>
> ici ce n'est pas un tunnel mais un morceau de voie passant sous
un porche de bâtiment  au niveau du sol (d'où juste covered=yes,
le batiment vient à cheval, il est aussi au même layer mais pas
découpé au niveau du porche pour créer une partie "aérienne" en
layer=1;level=1).
Personnellement, j'aurais plutôt mis « tunnel=building_passage »
dans ce cas-là, d'après la vue aérienne.


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr





___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr


___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione James 
If someone actually read the introduction, it is saying exactly what Steve
is saying: replacing governing bodies.

This licence is based on version 2.0 of the Open Government Licence –
Canada, which was developed through public consultation. The only
substantive changes in this licence are to replace direct references to the
Government of Canada with the City of Ottawa, replace a reference to the
Federal Privacy Act with a reference to the Ontario Municipal Freedom of
Information and Protection of Privacy Act, and remove a reference to the
Federal Court of Canada.

So why is this not considered the exact same as OGL-CA, which is considered
compatible with ODBL?




On Jan 22, 2017 12:36 PM, "Steve Singer"  wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jan 2017, Paul Norman wrote:
>
> On 1/20/2017 6:00 PM, James wrote:
>>
>>> Is OGL-CA not compatible with osm?
>>>
>>
>> The license isn't OGL-CA. OGL-CA is the license from the Federal
>> government, while the City of Ottawa uses the ODL. In the case of OGL-CA
>> data it's compatible because they gave a statement on compatibility.
>>
>
> It seems to me that there are at least three situations that can crop up
> in deciding if we can use data
>
> 1) A reading of the license text allows the use with OSM.  If the text of
> a given license is compatible with the requirements of OSM then  I don't
> see why we need any additional statement.
>
> 2) The compatibility of the license is unclear because of particular terms
> of the license.  A particular government entity then gives us a statement
> saying that they feel the license is compatible with OSM.  That same
> government entity would then have a hard time coming back later and saying
> that the license isn't compatible. However it doesn't tie the hands of
> other government entities that happen to be using the same license.
>
> 3) A particular license might not be compatible with OSM but the
> government entity gives us permission to use their data.  In this case the
> 'permission' is the license.
>
> Why doesn't the OGL 2.0 qualify as compatible under criteria 1? Is there
> any particular term in a templated OGL 2.0 that someone feels is a concern?
>
> Replacing a  variable with 'Government of
> Canada' versus 'City of Ottawa' doesn't change the license.  we see this in
> software licenses all the time. The BSD software license reads 'Regents of
> the University of California' but changing that to the organization that is
> releasing the code doesn't make it no longer be a BSD license.
>
> The whole point of open-data licenses is that people can use the data
> without having to get special permission from the government for each use
> of the data.  Some of the licenses used by Canadian governments in the past
> had clauses that made them not open/suitable. It isn't clear to me what the
> problem is with this license.
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>> ___
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione Steve Singer 

On Sat, 21 Jan 2017, Paul Norman wrote:


On 1/20/2017 6:00 PM, James wrote:

Is OGL-CA not compatible with osm?


The license isn't OGL-CA. OGL-CA is the license from the Federal 
government, while the City of Ottawa uses the ODL. In the case of OGL-CA 
data it's compatible because they gave a statement on compatibility.


It seems to me that there are at least three situations that can crop up in 
deciding if we can use data


1) A reading of the license text allows the use with OSM.  If the text of a 
given license is compatible with the requirements of OSM then  I don't see 
why we need any additional statement.


2) The compatibility of the license is unclear because of particular terms 
of the license.  A particular government entity then gives us a statement 
saying that they feel the license is compatible with OSM.  That same 
government entity would then have a hard time coming back later and saying 
that the license isn't compatible. However it doesn't tie the hands of other 
government entities that happen to be using the same license.


3) A particular license might not be compatible with OSM but the government 
entity gives us permission to use their data.  In this case the 'permission' 
is the license.


Why doesn't the OGL 2.0 qualify as compatible under criteria 1? Is there any 
particular term in a templated OGL 2.0 that someone feels is a concern?


Replacing a  variable with 'Government of 
Canada' versus 'City of Ottawa' doesn't change the license.  we see this 
in software licenses all the time. The BSD software license reads 'Regents 
of the University of California' but changing that to the organization that 
is releasing the code doesn't make it no longer be a BSD license.


The whole point of open-data licenses is that people can use the data 
without having to get special permission from the government for each use of 
the data.  Some of the licenses used by Canadian governments in the past 
had clauses that made them not open/suitable. It isn't clear to me what the 
problem is with this license.



Steve




___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca




___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-es] Me presento

2017-01-22 Per discussione Ibai Gurrutxaga 

Hola.

Llevo una temporada interesado en OSM: aprendiendo, haciendo pequeños 
cambios, leyendo la lista... Soy informático, estoy muy interesado en el 
movimiento del software/conocimiento libre y siempre me han gustado los 
mapas (sobre todo los de montaña). Como no podía ser de otra forma, con 
esos ingredientes OSM (y todo lo que le rodea) me ha parecido fascinante.


En este proceso me van surgiendo dudas y creo que ya es hora de que 
empiece a preguntar y opinar en la lista, pero me parecía adecuado 
empezar con una presentación. Soy de Gipuzkoa y mi interés principal en 
OSM es en la parte del senderismo, alpinismo, mountain bike... y es 
donde principalmente intentaré aportar. No solo mapeando, sino 
intentando acercar a este mundillo a tantos aficionados a la montaña 
como pueda.


Por otro lado, he visto que tenéis un sistema para colaborar en 
importaciones sin necesidad de ser de la zona importada. También estoy 
dispuesto a echar una mano en este tipo de trabajos, siempre que consiga 
sacar algo de tiempo para ello, que no es fácil.


Por último, quería agradeceros a todos el gran trabajo que estáis 
haciendo y felicitaros por todo lo que habéis conseguido.


Un saludo,
Ibai Gurrutxaga.

___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione James 
What I don't understand is even if there was the most open license
possible, you are requiring to get an authorisation to use the data...So
what's the point of having a legal group or dealing with licensing as if a
restrictive copyrighted dataset that sues anyone who uses the data, if we
have express permission that license doesnt apply to us as we have been
added as an exception to the license.

So if I understand correctly Paul, CC0 or any other license would require
permission as a bypass to the license, even though it would be considered
compatible with ODBL. To me this is why licensing exists, to avoid having
to have to manage each licensing use case and says what you can/can't do
with the data.

On Jan 22, 2017 10:08 AM, "John Marshall"  wrote:

> Paul,
>
> So once we get a letter from the City of Ottawa, are we good to add the
> buildings as per the wiki?
>
> John
>
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM, john whelan 
> wrote:
>
>> There is another way forward for Stats at the moment and that would be to
>> use the Statistics Canada address file which is available on the Federal
>> Government Open Data portal under the Federal Government Open Data
>> licence.  The addresses are nodes rather than building outlines but there
>> is nothing to stop building:levels, and postcode etc. being added to a node.
>>
>> This was the file that Metrolink used to add addresses in the Toronto
>> area.  It also has the benefit that it uses less storage in the OSM
>> database.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 21 January 2017 at 21:34, john whelan  wrote:
>>
>>> It's to do with the way government works and is structured.  What you
>>> have is an official interpretation which carries weight.  Quite a lot of
>>> weight.
>>>
>>> Essentially both Canada and the UK are run by acts of parliament.
>>> However these are normally interpreted by civil servants to keep things
>>> running smoothly. For example in the UK by an Act of parliament of 1837
>>> bicycles are not permitted to  use the sidewalks but administratively you
>>> will not be prosecuted for cycling on the sidewalk in certain parts of the
>>> UK.  The act hasn't been repealed but it is simply not enforced.  The
>>> decision was taken by a civil servant after consultations but is upheld by
>>> the government.
>>>
>>> The day to day running is done by civil servants interpreting the
>>> minister's wishes or act of Parliament.  There will be discussion and
>>> debate at a greater depth than either a minister or Parliament have the
>>> time for and the decision will be recorded together with the reasons for
>>> and against it.  This can lead to a formal report with a recommendation.
>>> It is a brave manager or minister who doesn't accept the recommendations.
>>> Have a look at Yes Minister and you'll see that brave here means foolish.
>>> There has to be a level of trust between the politicians and the civil
>>> service for this to work.  The direction is set by the politicians but the
>>> day to day stuff by the civil servants.  If a civil servant screws up then
>>> its special assignment time which is the civil service way of terminating
>>> you.  So an interpretation is not given lightly.
>>>
>>> It has taken three or four years of discussion to get this far.  My
>>> understanding is the City of Ottawa licence actually makes reference to the
>>> Federal government licence in the FAQ basically because all the expertise,
>>> hard work and effort on licensing was done at the federal level.
>>>
>>> I think in this case you have to rely on civil servants and retired
>>> civil servants expertise.  Both Bjenk and I are of the opinion, as his his
>>> manager, that for practical purposes the OGL-CA and the Municipal
>>> equivalent are identical.  There are a number of CANVEC employees and
>>> retired employees floating around as well who will have an opinion but I
>>> think it will be supportive.  The open data manager at Ottawa is also of
>>> the same opinion.  My casual contacts at TB on the Open Data side are also
>>> of the same opinion.
>>>
>>> My hope is that we can accept Open Data from municipalities that are
>>> covered by the equivalent of the OGL-CA.  What you seem to be asking for is
>>> a resolution or vote by each municipality of their councillors before OSM
>>> can use the data.  This I think is getting towards the unreasonable and
>>> unwieldy side of things.
>>>
>>> Canadian cities would like to encourage their citizens to walk, cycle
>>> and use public transport.  Tagging which paths maybe used by cycles helps
>>> both sides.  In Ottawa until I sat down with the cycling specialist and
>>> pointed out on their cycle maps one path running through a park was on
>>> their cycle maps and an identical one in the same park wasn't so how was I
>>> to know which could be used?  I was armed with photos from both paths and
>>> of the signs, they were identical.  After that the city expanded its
>>> official

[Talk-GB] Request: T-con facility

2017-01-22 Per discussione Rob Nickerson 
Hi all,

For the first meeting of the OSM UK Company we would like to use a
telephone conference facility. This prevents any delays caused by people
having to download software/update plug-ins/restart dodgy internet
connections. It also means that conversation is in one place rather than 2
(e.g. skype and hangouts have a text chat facility alongside the voice
channel and this is distracting and difficult for the chairperson to
manage).

In the past we have used Wikimedia UK's facilities which have been kindly
provided to us for free. This was only ever a temporary solution and as
such we are now looking for an alternate provider.

If you or your business has a t-con service that we can use for one evening
please let us know as it would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards,
*Rob*

P.s. Draft timing of OSM UK meetings at:
https://www.loomio.org/d/PcOWk8n3/timings-for-getting-us-to-the-first-meeting
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-cz] Mapillary app

2017-01-22 Per discussione Milan Cerny 
Ahoj, nemáte prosím někdo starší verzi aplikace Mapillary pro Android, případně 
kde se nechá stáhnout?
Po aktualizaci mi v aplikaci nejde vypnout zvuk spouště, moc dlouho se to 
cvakání za jízdy poslouchat nedá. Nepomáhá ani nastavení do tichého režimu.

Moc díky.

Milan

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Centrales électriques

2017-01-22 Per discussione Jérôme Amagat 
Le 21 janvier 2017 à 23:34, François Lacombe  a
écrit :

> Bonjour Jérôme,
>
> Merci pour cette mise en valeur, c'est très réussi (ne serait-ce que pour
> débusquer les manques dans la base) !
>
> Lorsqu'on a yes sur plant:output:electricity, c'est que la valeur est
> inconnue (et qu'elle peut donc être considérée comme la plus faible).
> Le fait de connaitre la puissance installée est encore bien souvent du bon
> vouloir de l'exploitant. Des clés avec yes peuvent le rester longtemps
> avant que la valeur ne soit connue.
>
> Exemple ici : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5489802
> Il ne me semble pas que la puissance soit publique
>

Pour cette  centrale d’après ça de RTE :
https://www.data.gouv.fr/fr/datasets/registre-2015-des-installations-de-production-raccordees-au-reseau-de-transport-delectricite/
c'est 5.7 MW

pour les plant:output:electricity=yes je vais essayé de les ajouter. il y a
la taille du symbole mais aussi a quelle niveau de zoom l'afficher. Pour
l'instant plus on zoom et plus les power=plant avec les puissances les plus
faible sont affichées et tout est affiché au zoom 9 (à partir du zoom 10
les centrales les plus grandes (>1000 MW au zoom 10) "rapetissent" pour
voir ce qu'il y a dessous. Pour les power=generator (ici
http://perso.numericable.fr/olyon/plantetgenerator.html) c'est au zoom 10
que tous est affiché. Si j'en affiches plus ça devient lent et par endroit
tout ne s'affiche pas correctement.

>
>
> *François Lacombe*
>
> fl dot infosreseaux At gmail dot com
> www.infos-reseaux.com
> @InfosReseaux 
>
> Le 18 janvier 2017 à 12:28,  a écrit :
>
>> Il me semble raisonnable de faire l'hypothèse que yes=le plus petit.
>>
>> Car il vaut mieux afficher que ne pas afficher et les petits équipements
>> sont ceux les moins facilement renseignables.
>>
>> Un truc trop petit, tu veux le préciser si tu connais alors qu'un truc
>> carrément absent...
>>
>> Peut-être avec une couleur estompée pour montrer que ce n'est pas une
>> puissance connue ?
>> Jean-Yvon
>>
>> Le 18/01/2017 à 00:26, Jérôme Amagat - jerome.ama...@gmail.com a écrit :
>>
>> Le problème c'est que j'affiche que s'il y a une valeur pour
>> plant:output:electricity=*. là il y a yes et pas la puissance en watts.
>> sinon avec yes impossible de savoir si c'est une énorme centrale ou un
>> petit panneau solaire et donc comment l'affiché au milieu des autres qui
>> ont une taille proportionnelle à leur puissance?.
>>
>>>
>>> Bonne soirée
>>>
>>> Adrien
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-fr mailing list
>> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>
>
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

semanárioOSM Nº 339 10/01/2017-16/01/2017

2017-01-22 Per discussione weeklyteam 
Bom dia,

O semanárioOSM Nº 339, o resumo de tudo o que acontece no mundo OpenStreetMap, 
está publicado em português:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/pb/archives/8619/

Aproveite!

semanarioOSM?
Quem?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Onde?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-br mailing list
Talk-br@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-br

semanárioOSM Nº 339 10/01/2017-16/01/2017

2017-01-22 Per discussione weeklyteam 
Bom dia,

O semanárioOSM Nº 339, o resumo de tudo o que acontece no mundo OpenStreetMap, 
está publicado em português:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/pb/archives/8619/

Aproveite!

semanarioOSM?
Quem?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Onde?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-pt mailing list
Talk-pt@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pt

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione John Marshall 
Paul,

So once we get a letter from the City of Ottawa, are we good to add the
buildings as per the wiki?

John

On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 8:41 AM, john whelan  wrote:

> There is another way forward for Stats at the moment and that would be to
> use the Statistics Canada address file which is available on the Federal
> Government Open Data portal under the Federal Government Open Data
> licence.  The addresses are nodes rather than building outlines but there
> is nothing to stop building:levels, and postcode etc. being added to a node.
>
> This was the file that Metrolink used to add addresses in the Toronto
> area.  It also has the benefit that it uses less storage in the OSM
> database.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 21 January 2017 at 21:34, john whelan  wrote:
>
>> It's to do with the way government works and is structured.  What you
>> have is an official interpretation which carries weight.  Quite a lot of
>> weight.
>>
>> Essentially both Canada and the UK are run by acts of parliament.
>> However these are normally interpreted by civil servants to keep things
>> running smoothly. For example in the UK by an Act of parliament of 1837
>> bicycles are not permitted to  use the sidewalks but administratively you
>> will not be prosecuted for cycling on the sidewalk in certain parts of the
>> UK.  The act hasn't been repealed but it is simply not enforced.  The
>> decision was taken by a civil servant after consultations but is upheld by
>> the government.
>>
>> The day to day running is done by civil servants interpreting the
>> minister's wishes or act of Parliament.  There will be discussion and
>> debate at a greater depth than either a minister or Parliament have the
>> time for and the decision will be recorded together with the reasons for
>> and against it.  This can lead to a formal report with a recommendation.
>> It is a brave manager or minister who doesn't accept the recommendations.
>> Have a look at Yes Minister and you'll see that brave here means foolish.
>> There has to be a level of trust between the politicians and the civil
>> service for this to work.  The direction is set by the politicians but the
>> day to day stuff by the civil servants.  If a civil servant screws up then
>> its special assignment time which is the civil service way of terminating
>> you.  So an interpretation is not given lightly.
>>
>> It has taken three or four years of discussion to get this far.  My
>> understanding is the City of Ottawa licence actually makes reference to the
>> Federal government licence in the FAQ basically because all the expertise,
>> hard work and effort on licensing was done at the federal level.
>>
>> I think in this case you have to rely on civil servants and retired civil
>> servants expertise.  Both Bjenk and I are of the opinion, as his his
>> manager, that for practical purposes the OGL-CA and the Municipal
>> equivalent are identical.  There are a number of CANVEC employees and
>> retired employees floating around as well who will have an opinion but I
>> think it will be supportive.  The open data manager at Ottawa is also of
>> the same opinion.  My casual contacts at TB on the Open Data side are also
>> of the same opinion.
>>
>> My hope is that we can accept Open Data from municipalities that are
>> covered by the equivalent of the OGL-CA.  What you seem to be asking for is
>> a resolution or vote by each municipality of their councillors before OSM
>> can use the data.  This I think is getting towards the unreasonable and
>> unwieldy side of things.
>>
>> Canadian cities would like to encourage their citizens to walk, cycle and
>> use public transport.  Tagging which paths maybe used by cycles helps both
>> sides.  In Ottawa until I sat down with the cycling specialist and pointed
>> out on their cycle maps one path running through a park was on their cycle
>> maps and an identical one in the same park wasn't so how was I to know
>> which could be used?  I was armed with photos from both paths and of the
>> signs, they were identical.  After that the city expanded its official
>> cycle path network by many kms.  "The *city of Ottawa* has a vibrant
>> *cycling* culture and now boasts over 600 km of multi-use pathways,
>> *bike* lanes, off-road paths and paved shoulders"  We need the City to
>> identify these so they can be correctly tagged on the map.  Often there are
>> no signs on a path to say if it maybe used by cyclists or not.
>>
>> Metrolink has done a fair bit of address mapping in OSM in support of
>> getting people to use public transport.  They're in Toronto by the way.
>> Both sides are better off with imported bus stops.
>>
>> Life was so much simpler when OSM was just a group of cyclists going
>> round with GPS devices recording tracks but I think times are changing and
>> there are benefits.  The main problem in my mind is controlling the quality
>> of data for an import and in its careful merging with existing data.

Re: [Talk-se] Husnummerimport i Hbg kommun

2017-01-22 Per discussione Andreas Vilén 
Svårt att veta var en villa har sin entré. Dessutom är det hela huset som
har adressen, inte bara entrén, till skillnad från med trapphus där
adresserna normalt sätts på entréer. Radhus mappas normalt som separata
byggnader. Wikin beskriver olika metoder där alla är lika accepterade:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses

Då adresser mappade på byggnader är något som använts i hela Sverige (och
övriga världen bortsett från Danmark som genomförde en statlig import) och
jag aldrig hört någon förespråka att göra på något annat sätt, kommer jag
att fortsätta göra så om jag inte får andra invändningar i samma stil.
Däremot kan jag ändra källtaggen till source:address=Helsingborgs kommun
även om byggnaderna också i 90% av fallen har kommunen som källa.

/Andreas

2017-01-22 14:09 GMT+01:00 Markus Lindholm :

> Jag ser det som ett suboptimalt sätt att tagga. Det är ett inkonsekvent
> sätt då det inte finns ett ett-till-ett förhållande mellan byggnader
> och adresser. En byggnad kan ha flera adresser eller ingen. Det leder
> som sagt också till tvetydigheter, som exemplet med source-taggen.
>
> Det bästa sätten (enligt mig) är kombinera adressen med entrence-
> taggen, om man känner till var ingången ligger. Det näst bästa är att
> ha den som en fristående nod inne i byggnaden.
>
> /Markus
>
>
> On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 10:26 +0100, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> > Hmm, det normala förhållningssättet till adresser är att de läggs på
> > byggnaderna. Det är så jag alltid gjort och det är så det ser ut
> > globalt med Danmark som enda undantag.
> >
> > Men jag skulle kunna ändra till source:address eller liknande så det
> > blir tydligare vad källtaggen syftar på.
> >
> > /Andreas
> >
> > Skickat från min iPhone
> >
> > > 22 jan. 2017 kl. 09:39 skrev Markus Lindholm  > > .com>:
> > >
> > > Hej
> > >
> > > Kollade på de första förändringarna som gjorts och en sak som jag
> > > noterade och som jag tycker inte är helt optimal är att du
> > > överladdar
> > > addr:* taggar och building=* på samma objekt, t.ex.
> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/411646429
> > >
> > >
> > > Det vore bättre om de hade varsin eget objekt, en nod för adressen
> > > och
> > > en area för huskroppen. Då skulle inte heller source-taggen bli
> > > tvetydig.
> > >
> > > /Markus
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 2017-01-21 at 09:59 +0100, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> > > > Nu har jag satt igång. Mitt tillvägagångssätt kommer vara
> > > > följande:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Jag har registrerat ett konto, grillo_import, som jag kommer
> > > > att
> > > > göra
> > > > alla redigeringar i det här projektet med. Eventuellt kommer det
> > > > återanvändas i framtiden för andra importer
> > > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Grillo_import
> > > > 2) Jag har även skapat ett opublicerat hot-projekt där jag har
> > > > delat
> > > > in
> > > > Helsingborgs kommun i rutor. Projektet är opublicerat så ingen
> > > > annan
> > > > börjar
> > > > stänga rutor utan att jag märker det.
> > > > 3) Jag laddar in adressfilen i Josm.
> > > > 4) Jag öppnar upp en hot-ruta i Josm.
> > > > 5) Jag raderar alla husnummer utanför hot-rutan.
> > > > 6) Jag laddar upp husnumren som de är i befintligt skick, utan
> > > > att
> > > > lägga in
> > > > dem i husen.
> > > > 7) Jag kopierar in husnummer i hus, korrigerar mot redan mappade
> > > > husnummer,
> > > > sätter fast i entrénoder där det är möjligt att se osv, och
> > > > laddar
> > > > upp igen.
> > > > 8) Jag stänger hot-rutan.
> > > >
> > > > Här är ett test av denna processen i kommunens utkant:
> > > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Grillo_import/history
> > > >
> > > > Om alla är okej med den här processen (eller om jag inte hör
> > > > något på
> > > > ett
> > > > par dagar) kommer jag att fortsätta med den tills kommunen är
> > > > klar.
> > > >
> > > > MVH Andreas
> > > >
> > > > 2017-01-10 12:30 GMT+01:00 Lars Aronsson :
> > > >
> > > > > > On 01/09/2017 09:49 AM, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Med bokstäver menar jag adresser av typ 15A, där 15 ligger
> > > > > > under
> > > > > > husnummer och A ligger under extrataggen. Ett något
> > > > > > okonventionellt sätt
> > > > > > att lösa det är att lägga A under addr:unit, men detta
> > > > > > avråddes
> > > > > > jag ifrån
> > > > > > när jag frågade om det på engelska OSM-IRC för några veckor
> > > > > > sedan.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > En viktig användning är att gå från postadress till
> > > > > vägbeskrivning.
> > > > > Man vill inte resa till Storgatan 15 utan till 15A och då vill
> > > > > man
> > > > > att vägbeskrivningen ska leda till rätt sida av huset, inte
> > > > > till
> > > > > dess
> > > > > baksida, som kanske kan nås via en park. Det är därför viktigt
> > > > > att 15A är en punkt på en sida av huset, som nås av vägar.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >   Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se)
> > > > >   Linköping
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione John Marshall 
I agree with Bernie.

The intent of the City of Ottawa was for this data to be added to OSM.

John Marshall
Ottawa

On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Bernie Connors 
wrote:

> Stewart,
>
>   Governments are writing open data policies, creating open data
> portals, and adopting the OGL-CA Licence because they want their data to be
> used. There are many benefits for governments to do this. It makes them
> appear more transparent, it supports citizens, businesses  and researchers,
> and it largely relieves them from having to monitor and police the
> licensees of their data (although I suspect that little or no effort was
> ever applied to monitoring licencees).
>
>So we know their intentions, we have a very permissive ‎licence,
> and the chance of OGL-CA licence issues arising are very, very slim. We
> should stop fretting over the OGL-CA derived licences and start mapping.  I
> don't hide inside my home for fear of being struck by lightning and I don't
> refrain from mapping with data that has a very permissive licence. It's not
> a perfect licence but nothing in life ever is perfect.
>
> Best regards,
> Bernie.
>
> Bernie Connors, P.Eng
> Geomatics Engineer and Civil Servant
> New Maryland, NB
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Bell network.
>   Original Message
> From: Stewart C. Russell
> Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 12:05 AM
> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing with Statistics Canada
>
> Hi Bjenk -
>
> > I am not sure why there is confusion about Ottawa's ODL and it's
> > equivalence to OGL because the information is public but here it is to
> > clarify:
> >
> > "The Open Data License is based on version 2.0 of the “Open Government
> > Licence – Canada” which was developed through public consultation and
> > consultation with other jurisdictions"
>
> I sense your frustration, and understand that this process must be
> trying. But it's partly an artifact of the licence itself.
>
> The Open Government Licence - Canada, version 2.0 (OGL-CA) is compatible
> with OSM's licence. This was confirmed in 2013:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2013-
> November/005906.html
>
> (Paul Norman tells me that there's an official notice somewhere from
> Government confirming this, but neither he nor I can find it.)
>
> Unfortunately, one trait of the licence inherited from its parent (the
> Open Government Licence United Kingdom 2.0,
> https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/
> )
> is that it is not _reusable_. Here, reusable means that the licence is
> not specific to an organization or jurisdiction. The OGL-CA has Her
> Majesty the Queen in right of Canada baked in as Information Provider.
> No-one but the Federal government can be that Information Provider. So
> even if Municipality of X wished to adopt the “Open Government Licence -
> X” by replacing ‘Canada’ with ‘X’, it would have to make textual changes
> to the licence, and in doing so — and this is the critical part — makes
> a new and different licence from the OGL-CA.
>
> (Paul N. previously suggested that the UK OGL was more reusable, and had
> better CC BY and ODC BY compatibility than OGL-CA.)
>
> So we can't use Ottawa's data under the Federal OGL-CA.
>
> Even with the best intentions, adoption of the OGL-CA results in
> fragmentation. For example, there's the "Open Government Licence –
> Ontario", the "Open Government Licence – Toronto" and the "Open
> Government Licence - Toronto Public Library". All of these, though based
> on OGL-CA, are *different* licences, and necessarily so. Accepting the
> OGL-CA hasn't allowed OSM to automatically accept all the derivatives
> under it.
>
> (It also helps that OSM explicitly has a statement from the Federal
> Government saying that we have permission to use their data. This
> permission does not flow down to provincial or municipal data.)
>
> If one happens to be a government, or a large commercial entity, one can
> muster lawyers to ensure one's continued existence if there's a legal
> challenge. OpenStreetMap doesn't have that luxury. In order to ensure
> continuity of the OSM project, a degree of caution is required.
>
> So while access to open data is valued by the community, it would be
> lovely if someone could pay for all the lawyers needed to go over the
> licences on behalf of OSM/OSMF too. To the best of my knowledge this
> assistance has seldom been forthcoming.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Stewart
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione Bernie Connors 
Stewart,

      Governments are writing open data policies, creating open data portals, 
and adopting the OGL-CA Licence because they want their data to be used. There 
are many benefits for governments to do this. It makes them appear more 
transparent, it supports citizens, businesses  and researchers, and it largely 
relieves them from having to monitor and police the licensees of their data 
(although I suspect that little or no effort was ever applied to monitoring 
licencees).  

       So we know their intentions, we have a very permissive ‎licence, and the 
chance of OGL-CA licence issues arising are very, very slim. We should stop 
fretting over the OGL-CA derived licences and start mapping.  I don't hide 
inside my home for fear of being struck by lightning and I don't refrain from 
mapping with data that has a very permissive licence. It's not a perfect 
licence but nothing in life ever is perfect. 

Best regards, 
Bernie. 

Bernie Connors, P.Eng 
Geomatics Engineer and Civil Servant 
New Maryland, NB

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Bell network.
  Original Message  
From: Stewart C. Russell
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 12:05 AM
To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing with Statistics Canada

Hi Bjenk -

> I am not sure why there is confusion about Ottawa's ODL and it's
> equivalence to OGL because the information is public but here it is to
> clarify:
> 
> "The Open Data License is based on version 2.0 of the “Open Government
> Licence – Canada” which was developed through public consultation and
> consultation with other jurisdictions"

I sense your frustration, and understand that this process must be
trying. But it's partly an artifact of the licence itself.

The Open Government Licence - Canada, version 2.0 (OGL-CA) is compatible
with OSM's licence. This was confirmed in 2013:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2013-November/005906.html

(Paul Norman tells me that there's an official notice somewhere from
Government confirming this, but neither he nor I can find it.)

Unfortunately, one trait of the licence inherited from its parent (the
Open Government Licence United Kingdom 2.0,
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/)
is that it is not _reusable_. Here, reusable means that the licence is
not specific to an organization or jurisdiction. The OGL-CA has Her
Majesty the Queen in right of Canada baked in as Information Provider.
No-one but the Federal government can be that Information Provider. So
even if Municipality of X wished to adopt the “Open Government Licence -
X” by replacing ‘Canada’ with ‘X’, it would have to make textual changes
to the licence, and in doing so — and this is the critical part — makes
a new and different licence from the OGL-CA.

(Paul N. previously suggested that the UK OGL was more reusable, and had
better CC BY and ODC BY compatibility than OGL-CA.)

So we can't use Ottawa's data under the Federal OGL-CA.

Even with the best intentions, adoption of the OGL-CA results in
fragmentation. For example, there's the "Open Government Licence –
Ontario", the "Open Government Licence – Toronto" and the "Open
Government Licence - Toronto Public Library". All of these, though based
on OGL-CA, are *different* licences, and necessarily so. Accepting the
OGL-CA hasn't allowed OSM to automatically accept all the derivatives
under it.

(It also helps that OSM explicitly has a statement from the Federal
Government saying that we have permission to use their data. This
permission does not flow down to provincial or municipal data.)

If one happens to be a government, or a large commercial entity, one can
muster lawyers to ensure one's continued existence if there's a legal
challenge. OpenStreetMap doesn't have that luxury. In order to ensure
continuity of the OSM project, a degree of caution is required.

So while access to open data is valued by the community, it would be
lovely if someone could pay for all the lawyers needed to go over the
licences on behalf of OSM/OSMF too. To the best of my knowledge this
assistance has seldom been forthcoming.

Best Wishes,
Stewart


___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Re: [OSM-talk] ODbL and source tags

2017-01-22 Per discussione Simon Poole 


Am 22.01.2017 um 13:38 schrieb David Marchal:
> ...
> I’m studying asking authorization for data import to a potential provider, 
> and have a question about the ODbL: does it mandate the preservation of 
> source tags, or at least including their content in the re-using DB 
> disclaimer? The potential data provider could be more easily convinced if I 
> could guarantee him that.
Wrong place for the question, but the answer is no and no.

Naturally any such tags are preserved at least in the database dump
including history and via the changeset and history views of objects,
but that is it, there are no downstream attribution requirements outside
of pointing back to OSM, and indirectly individual sources via the
Copyright and Contributors pages.

Simon



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing buildings with Statistics Canada

2017-01-22 Per discussione john whelan 
There is another way forward for Stats at the moment and that would be to
use the Statistics Canada address file which is available on the Federal
Government Open Data portal under the Federal Government Open Data
licence.  The addresses are nodes rather than building outlines but there
is nothing to stop building:levels, and postcode etc. being added to a node.

This was the file that Metrolink used to add addresses in the Toronto
area.  It also has the benefit that it uses less storage in the OSM
database.

Cheerio John

On 21 January 2017 at 21:34, john whelan  wrote:

> It's to do with the way government works and is structured.  What you have
> is an official interpretation which carries weight.  Quite a lot of weight.
>
> Essentially both Canada and the UK are run by acts of parliament.  However
> these are normally interpreted by civil servants to keep things running
> smoothly. For example in the UK by an Act of parliament of 1837 bicycles
> are not permitted to  use the sidewalks but administratively you will not
> be prosecuted for cycling on the sidewalk in certain parts of the UK.  The
> act hasn't been repealed but it is simply not enforced.  The decision was
> taken by a civil servant after consultations but is upheld by the
> government.
>
> The day to day running is done by civil servants interpreting the
> minister's wishes or act of Parliament.  There will be discussion and
> debate at a greater depth than either a minister or Parliament have the
> time for and the decision will be recorded together with the reasons for
> and against it.  This can lead to a formal report with a recommendation.
> It is a brave manager or minister who doesn't accept the recommendations.
> Have a look at Yes Minister and you'll see that brave here means foolish.
> There has to be a level of trust between the politicians and the civil
> service for this to work.  The direction is set by the politicians but the
> day to day stuff by the civil servants.  If a civil servant screws up then
> its special assignment time which is the civil service way of terminating
> you.  So an interpretation is not given lightly.
>
> It has taken three or four years of discussion to get this far.  My
> understanding is the City of Ottawa licence actually makes reference to the
> Federal government licence in the FAQ basically because all the expertise,
> hard work and effort on licensing was done at the federal level.
>
> I think in this case you have to rely on civil servants and retired civil
> servants expertise.  Both Bjenk and I are of the opinion, as his his
> manager, that for practical purposes the OGL-CA and the Municipal
> equivalent are identical.  There are a number of CANVEC employees and
> retired employees floating around as well who will have an opinion but I
> think it will be supportive.  The open data manager at Ottawa is also of
> the same opinion.  My casual contacts at TB on the Open Data side are also
> of the same opinion.
>
> My hope is that we can accept Open Data from municipalities that are
> covered by the equivalent of the OGL-CA.  What you seem to be asking for is
> a resolution or vote by each municipality of their councillors before OSM
> can use the data.  This I think is getting towards the unreasonable and
> unwieldy side of things.
>
> Canadian cities would like to encourage their citizens to walk, cycle and
> use public transport.  Tagging which paths maybe used by cycles helps both
> sides.  In Ottawa until I sat down with the cycling specialist and pointed
> out on their cycle maps one path running through a park was on their cycle
> maps and an identical one in the same park wasn't so how was I to know
> which could be used?  I was armed with photos from both paths and of the
> signs, they were identical.  After that the city expanded its official
> cycle path network by many kms.  "The *city of Ottawa* has a vibrant
> *cycling* culture and now boasts over 600 km of multi-use pathways, *bike*
> lanes, off-road paths and paved shoulders"  We need the City to identify
> these so they can be correctly tagged on the map.  Often there are no signs
> on a path to say if it maybe used by cyclists or not.
>
> Metrolink has done a fair bit of address mapping in OSM in support of
> getting people to use public transport.  They're in Toronto by the way.
> Both sides are better off with imported bus stops.
>
> Life was so much simpler when OSM was just a group of cyclists going round
> with GPS devices recording tracks but I think times are changing and there
> are benefits.  The main problem in my mind is controlling the quality of
> data for an import and in its careful merging with existing data.  For the
> City of Ottawa data the quality is reasonably good and some of it is
> already present in the CANVEC data.  The GTFS bus stop position data is far
> better than many American cities because of the automated stop announcement
> system to assist blind or partially sighted

Re: [Talk-ca] Talk-ca Digest, Vol 107, Issue 17

2017-01-22 Per discussione Bjenk Ellefsen 
Stewart, thank you for providing more details. 

What exactly in Ottawa's new open
Data license (it recently was updated) is a problem for OSM? 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 22, 2017, at 7:00 AM, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
> 
> Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to
>talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: Crowdsourcing with Statistics Canada (Stewart C. Russell)
>   2. hebdoOSM Nº 339 10/01/2017-16/01/2017 (weeklyteam)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2017 23:03:56 -0500
> From: "Stewart C. Russell" 
> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Crowdsourcing with Statistics Canada
> Message-ID: <6a9996a6-bed4-d85f-5b73-13dd1766c...@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> Hi Bjenk -
> 
>> I am not sure why there is confusion about Ottawa's ODL and it's
>> equivalence to OGL because the information is public but here it is to
>> clarify:
>> 
>> "The Open Data License is based on version 2.0 of the “Open Government
>> Licence – Canada” which was developed through public consultation and
>> consultation with other jurisdictions"
> 
> I sense your frustration, and understand that this process must be
> trying. But it's partly an artifact of the licence itself.
> 
> The Open Government Licence - Canada, version 2.0 (OGL-CA) is compatible
> with OSM's licence. This was confirmed in 2013:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2013-November/005906.html
> 
> (Paul Norman tells me that there's an official notice somewhere from
> Government confirming this, but neither he nor I can find it.)
> 
> Unfortunately, one trait of the licence inherited from its parent (the
> Open Government Licence United Kingdom 2.0,
> https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/)
> is that it is not _reusable_. Here, reusable means that the licence is
> not specific to an organization or jurisdiction. The OGL-CA has Her
> Majesty the Queen in right of Canada baked in as Information Provider.
> No-one but the Federal government can be that Information Provider. So
> even if Municipality of X wished to adopt the “Open Government Licence -
> X” by replacing ‘Canada’ with ‘X’, it would have to make textual changes
> to the licence, and in doing so — and this is the critical part — makes
> a new and different licence from the OGL-CA.
> 
> (Paul N. previously suggested that the UK OGL was more reusable, and had
> better CC BY and ODC BY compatibility than OGL-CA.)
> 
> So we can't use Ottawa's data under the Federal OGL-CA.
> 
> Even with the best intentions, adoption of the OGL-CA results in
> fragmentation. For example, there's the "Open Government Licence –
> Ontario", the "Open Government Licence – Toronto" and the "Open
> Government Licence - Toronto Public Library". All of these, though based
> on OGL-CA, are *different* licences, and necessarily so. Accepting the
> OGL-CA hasn't allowed OSM to automatically accept all the derivatives
> under it.
> 
> (It also helps that OSM explicitly has a statement from the Federal
> Government saying that we have permission to use their data. This
> permission does not flow down to provincial or municipal data.)
> 
> If one happens to be a government, or a large commercial entity, one can
> muster lawyers to ensure one's continued existence if there's a legal
> challenge. OpenStreetMap doesn't have that luxury. In order to ensure
> continuity of the OSM project, a degree of caution is required.
> 
> So while access to open data is valued by the community, it would be
> lovely if someone could pay for all the lawyers needed to go over the
> licences on behalf of OSM/OSMF too. To the best of my knowledge this
> assistance has seldom been forthcoming.
> 
> Best Wishes,
> Stewart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 00:00:14 -0800 (PST)
> From: weeklyteam 
> To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: hebdoOSM Nº 339 10/01/2017-16/01/2017
> Message-ID: <5884668e.d5091c0a.30ed4.d...@mx.google.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Bonjour,
> 
> Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 339 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
> en français. Un condensé à retrouver à:
> 
> http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/8619/
> 
> Bonne lecture!
> 
> hebdoOSM?
> Qui?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
> Où?: 
>

Re: [Talk-se] Husnummerimport i Hbg kommun

2017-01-22 Per discussione Markus Lindholm 
Jag ser det som ett suboptimalt sätt att tagga. Det är ett inkonsekvent
sätt då det inte finns ett ett-till-ett förhållande mellan byggnader
och adresser. En byggnad kan ha flera adresser eller ingen. Det leder
som sagt också till tvetydigheter, som exemplet med source-taggen.

Det bästa sätten (enligt mig) är kombinera adressen med entrence-
taggen, om man känner till var ingången ligger. Det näst bästa är att
ha den som en fristående nod inne i byggnaden.

/Markus


On Sun, 2017-01-22 at 10:26 +0100, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> Hmm, det normala förhållningssättet till adresser är att de läggs på
> byggnaderna. Det är så jag alltid gjort och det är så det ser ut
> globalt med Danmark som enda undantag.
> 
> Men jag skulle kunna ändra till source:address eller liknande så det
> blir tydligare vad källtaggen syftar på.
> 
> /Andreas
> 
> Skickat från min iPhone
> 
> > 22 jan. 2017 kl. 09:39 skrev Markus Lindholm  > .com>:
> > 
> > Hej
> > 
> > Kollade på de första förändringarna som gjorts och en sak som jag
> > noterade och som jag tycker inte är helt optimal är att du
> > överladdar
> > addr:* taggar och building=* på samma objekt, t.ex. 
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/411646429
> > 
> > 
> > Det vore bättre om de hade varsin eget objekt, en nod för adressen
> > och
> > en area för huskroppen. Då skulle inte heller source-taggen bli
> > tvetydig.
> > 
> > /Markus
> > 
> > 
> > > On Sat, 2017-01-21 at 09:59 +0100, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> > > Nu har jag satt igång. Mitt tillvägagångssätt kommer vara
> > > följande:
> > > 
> > > 1) Jag har registrerat ett konto, grillo_import, som jag kommer
> > > att
> > > göra
> > > alla redigeringar i det här projektet med. Eventuellt kommer det
> > > återanvändas i framtiden för andra importer
> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Grillo_import
> > > 2) Jag har även skapat ett opublicerat hot-projekt där jag har
> > > delat
> > > in
> > > Helsingborgs kommun i rutor. Projektet är opublicerat så ingen
> > > annan
> > > börjar
> > > stänga rutor utan att jag märker det.
> > > 3) Jag laddar in adressfilen i Josm.
> > > 4) Jag öppnar upp en hot-ruta i Josm.
> > > 5) Jag raderar alla husnummer utanför hot-rutan.
> > > 6) Jag laddar upp husnumren som de är i befintligt skick, utan
> > > att
> > > lägga in
> > > dem i husen.
> > > 7) Jag kopierar in husnummer i hus, korrigerar mot redan mappade
> > > husnummer,
> > > sätter fast i entrénoder där det är möjligt att se osv, och
> > > laddar
> > > upp igen.
> > > 8) Jag stänger hot-rutan.
> > > 
> > > Här är ett test av denna processen i kommunens utkant:
> > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Grillo_import/history
> > > 
> > > Om alla är okej med den här processen (eller om jag inte hör
> > > något på
> > > ett
> > > par dagar) kommer jag att fortsätta med den tills kommunen är
> > > klar.
> > > 
> > > MVH Andreas
> > > 
> > > 2017-01-10 12:30 GMT+01:00 Lars Aronsson :
> > > 
> > > > > On 01/09/2017 09:49 AM, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Med bokstäver menar jag adresser av typ 15A, där 15 ligger
> > > > > under
> > > > > husnummer och A ligger under extrataggen. Ett något
> > > > > okonventionellt sätt
> > > > > att lösa det är att lägga A under addr:unit, men detta
> > > > > avråddes
> > > > > jag ifrån
> > > > > när jag frågade om det på engelska OSM-IRC för några veckor
> > > > > sedan.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > En viktig användning är att gå från postadress till
> > > > vägbeskrivning.
> > > > Man vill inte resa till Storgatan 15 utan till 15A och då vill
> > > > man
> > > > att vägbeskrivningen ska leda till rätt sida av huset, inte
> > > > till
> > > > dess
> > > > baksida, som kanske kan nås via en park. Det är därför viktigt
> > > > att 15A är en punkt på en sida av huset, som nås av vägar.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --
> > > >   Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se)
> > > >   Linköping
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ___
> > > > Talk-se mailing list
> > > > Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > Talk-se mailing list
> > > Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
> > 
> > ___
> > Talk-se mailing list
> > Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
> 
> ___
> Talk-se mailing list
> Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [OSM-talk] Destructive new 'contributor'

2017-01-22 Per discussione Andrew Hain 

You could put a note on the map in New Orleans saying what you think needs 
checking locally.
--
Andrew

From: Dave F 
Sent: 22 January 2017 10:50:19
To: OSM Talk
Subject: [OSM-talk] Destructive new 'contributor'

Hi

Some one from China has made some meaningless & erroneous edit in
Bristol, UK which I've reverted, but there's one in New Orleans which
someone with local knowledge needs to look at.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45365148#map=11/29.9244/-90.2323

Is there someone here who can repost to Talk-US?

On side note: Do users of editors like mapswithme receive changeset
comments?

DaveF.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Imagery CC-BY-NC 4.0 + OSM Specific allowance

2017-01-22 Per discussione Simon Poole 


Am 21.01.2017 um 22:42 schrieb Tobias Wendorff:
> ...
> Is it enough to get a permission to distribute it under ODbL? Wouldn't
> it also be needed to have a permission for DbCL? The DbCL states that
> the stored components don't have a foreign copyright. So contracts, which
> tell us "you can distribute under ODbL only" wouldn't be valid for DbCl,
> which is part of OpenStreetMap's use of ODbL (facts are free etc.).
> ...

I believe we (OSM) are taking the position that individual (geo-)facts
are not protected by copyright and that they can only have protection as
part of a database or a collection. I suspect anybody claiming something
else would have a bit of an uphill battle essentially everywhere.
Naturally we've been through all the arguments that tracing an object
could have a creative element etc etc etc, but in the case of tracing
from imagery any such rights, if they exist, would clearly be owned by
the OSM contributor, not the provider of the imagery.

The ODbL is a bit more general and needs to allow for situations in
which the individual elements of a database -do- have an individual
creative element that needs to be licensed, for example photographs and
similar.

In any case, getting permission to distribute on ODbL terms only would
seem to be suboptimal and endangers any contributions based on so
licensed material as any license change, even in name only, would cause
issues that require going back to the licensor.

Simon



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-talk] ODbL and source tags

2017-01-22 Per discussione David Marchal 
Hello, there.

I’m studying asking authorization for data import to a potential provider, and 
have a question about the ODbL: does it mandate the preservation of source 
tags, or at least including their content in the re-using DB disclaimer? The 
potential data provider could be more easily convinced if I could guarantee him 
that.

Awaiting your answer,

Regards.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Itinéraires et balisages FFRP et Club Vosgien

2017-01-22 Per discussione David Marchal 

> Le 22 janv. 2017 à 13:06, sly (sylvain letuffe)  a écrit :
> 
> Puis-je suggérer le wiki.openstreetmap.org ? cela permettra à plus de monde
> à mon avis d'y participer (pas besoin de compte github qui fait d'ailleurs
> un peu "tech") pour ceux ayant déjà un compte sur le wiki et non sur github.
Tu as raison sur ce point ; étant un tech, j’ai l’habitude de Github à tout 
propos.

> Je retrouve d'ailleurs la page :
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ffrp-lettre-ouverte
> que j'avais créée en 2012 et qui ressemble pas mal à l'idée que tu as (et
> qui résumait jusqu'en ~2013 ou nous en étions, les liens, les tentatives,
> les non réponses, etc.)
> Peut-être peut on partir de cette page pour lister toutes les initiatives et
> faire un lien vers la lettre que tu vas écrire ?
Je verrai à mesure que j’avance comment lier ça aux pages existantes, mais je 
comptais de toute façon intégrer les arguments déjà cités sur ces pages, mon 
but étant surtout d’arriver à un courrier plus ou moins prêt à l’emploi, pour 
faire avancer les démarches.

> Je soutiens évidement à donf l'initiative et m'impliquerait volontiers pour
> relecture et participation sous toute formes.
Noté. ;)

> Si Christian a en entretient la semaine prochaine, ça ne coûte rien
> d'attendre 7 jours de plus pour lui demander ce que ça à donner et entendre
> un "rien n'a avancé depuis 10 ans" ;-)
De toute façon, ça n’aboutira pas avant plusieurs semaines, donc la réunion et 
ses conséquences ont tout le temps d’arriver.

> Je donne l'impression d'être mauvaise langue mais j'ai une sensation de déjà
> vu, en 2012 quand on a voulu écrire une lettre, on a entendu du : "à mais on
> va avoir un rdv avec eux, ça a de grande chance d'avancer" et puis ça à
> parlé de tout mais les personnes de la FFRP ont systématiquement botté en
> touche ce genre de demandent dans un plus pur style "noyade de poisson"
> 
> En clair, je soutiens encore plus ton initiative et ne pas se laisser
> intoxiquer par des "attendez, on va en discuter en commité machin qui aura
> lieu dans 3 mois »
Même si la FFRP décide de ne pas bouger, un courrier type de ce genre pourrait 
servir pour convaincre d’autres organismes. Je pense notamment au Club Vosgien, 
dont la signalétique ne se limite pas au massif des Vosges, et dont les 
sentiers ont tendance à être plus nombreux et diversifiés. Après, c’est sûr que 
ce courrier serait un bon point de départ pour présenter les avantages et 
questions de droit à d’autres fournisseurs de données intéressantes.

Et puis, ce n’est pas forcément être mauvaise langue ; ce dossier traîne depuis 
des années, sans avancée concrète, et ce n’est manifestement pas faute d’avoir 
essayé. Les contributeurs OSM n’ayant aucune structure réelle, il est normal 
que les questions de ce genre soient plus longues à être traitées, mais, là, je 
ne pense pas que le problème se situe côté OSM.
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-us] I think I got this right...

2017-01-22 Per discussione Paul Johnson 
On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 6:11 PM,  wrote:

> Regarding the use of child relations for routes, and what to do about
> directional roles on beltways, I made some mapping changes to a beltway
> that happens to be local to me.
>
>
>
> I took the relation for I-435[1] and “cloned” it into 2 new relations in
> JOSM[2][3]. I then deleted all ways from the in the relation and added the
> new relations, turning the old relation into the parent. As 435 is a
> beltway, I added “(clockwise)” and “(counterclockwise)” to the new
> relations. Milepost 0 on I-435 is the junction with I-35 at the southwest
> corner and the mileposts increase going clockwise (and do not reset at the
> state line) so I used the I-435 bridge over I-35 as my starting point.
> Starting there, I organized the ways in the clockwise direction in the JOSM
> relation editor. Once I had created a “loop,” I removed all the other ways
> from the clockwise relation, then selected the members of the clockwise
> relation to remove them from the counterclockwise relation. I then sorted
> out the ways for the counterclockwise direction in the same way.
>
>
>
> I left the directional roles (i.e. “north,” “south,” “east,” and “west”)
> intact to represent how the segments on 435 are signed, and changed roles
> previously marked as “forward” back to directional roles. I also happened
> to find that I had inadvertently left a gap in the counterclockwise
> direction in the Johnson County Gateway project. I also noticed someone has
> previously attempted to note the direction in the “ref” tag. I changed
> those as well.
>
>
>
> Aside from the fact that JOSM does not support the use of directional
> roles, I think the changes should make it cleaner for future mappers.
>
>
>
> [1]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/62155
>
> [2]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6898835
>
> [3]: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6898836
>

It would be easier to verify by using forward in the child relations
exclusively.  Then it will validate as a loop, or it won't, and the gap
becomes immediately apparent.  As tagged, most tools (JOSM included) won't
"get" it.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-it] Mappiamo le strade d'Abruzzo

2017-01-22 Per discussione Fabrizio Tambussa 
Vista la situazione, riprendo dall'altro thread il suggerimento dato.
Il task manager è sempre attivo, qui il link diretto:

http://osmit-tm.wmflabs.org/project/8

Saluti
Fabrizio
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Itinéraires et balisages FFRP et Club Vosgien

2017-01-22 Per discussione sly (sylvain letuffe) 
David Marchal wrote
> Afin de ne pas faire les choses dans mon coin, je pensais faire un
> brouillon de courrier que je publierai sur Github, afin de vous permettre
> à tous d’y proposer des modifications, 

Puis-je suggérer le wiki.openstreetmap.org ? cela permettra à plus de monde
à mon avis d'y participer (pas besoin de compte github qui fait d'ailleurs
un peu "tech") pour ceux ayant déjà un compte sur le wiki et non sur github.

Je retrouve d'ailleurs la page :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ffrp-lettre-ouverte
que j'avais créée en 2012 et qui ressemble pas mal à l'idée que tu as (et
qui résumait jusqu'en ~2013 ou nous en étions, les liens, les tentatives,
les non réponses, etc.)
Peut-être peut on partir de cette page pour lister toutes les initiatives et
faire un lien vers la lettre que tu vas écrire ?

Je soutiens évidement à donf l'initiative et m'impliquerait volontiers pour
relecture et participation sous toute formes.

Si Christian a en entretient la semaine prochaine, ça ne coûte rien
d'attendre 7 jours de plus pour lui demander ce que ça à donner et entendre
un "rien n'a avancé depuis 10 ans" ;-)
Je donne l'impression d'être mauvaise langue mais j'ai une sensation de déjà
vu, en 2012 quand on a voulu écrire une lettre, on a entendu du : "à mais on
va avoir un rdv avec eux, ça a de grande chance d'avancer" et puis ça à
parlé de tout mais les personnes de la FFRP ont systématiquement botté en
touche ce genre de demandent dans un plus pur style "noyade de poisson"

En clair, je soutiens encore plus ton initiative et ne pas se laisser
intoxiquer par des "attendez, on va en discuter en commité machin qui aura
lieu dans 3 mois"




-
-- 
sly, contact direct : sylvain /a\ letuffe o r g
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Sletuffe
--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Itineraires-et-balisages-FFRP-et-Club-Vosgien-tp5889754p5889783.html
Sent from the France mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-it] Mappa centri accoglienza terremoto l'Aquila

2017-01-22 Per discussione Cascafico Giovanni 
Il giorno 21 gennaio 2017 17:33, Matteo Fortini 
ha scritto:

> La lista che abbiamo usato è qui, è stata geotaggata a mano da persone del
> posto, io ho mappato nei dintorni dei luoghi per non lasciarli nel nulla,
> ma tutto potrebbe essere migliorato parecchio
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1so6Bt74QvJJ1mG7TLUgu
> MSVPQARww9zw0eCW4gOjw7g/edit?usp=sharing
>

Ciao,

questo approccio crowd mi pare ottimo. Hai valutato di farlo con il
connubio ethercalc-umap, evitando google?

Puoi generare velocemente una mappa tematica direttamente alimentata da un
foglio elettronico condiviso [1] : appena qualcuno inserisce sul foglio
elettronico una riga e valorizza le colonne lat e lon, appare una puntina
sulla umap. La umap è esportabile, includibile in pochi click.

Mi sono permesso di copincollare il vostro foglio elettronico in ethercalc
[1] e generare una umap [2]


[1] https://ethercalc.org/fi7xm5jdna9q
[2] http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/it/map/mappa-senza-nome_122343
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] Destructive new 'contributor'

2017-01-22 Per discussione Andy Townsend 

On 22/01/17 10:50, Dave F wrote:

Hi

Some one from China has made some meaningless & erroneous edit in 
Bristol, UK which I've reverted, 


For completeness, that was

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45364788

Unfortunately your comments there weren't really actionable - they don't 
explain what the contributor was doing wrong, and what they need to do 
better next time.


but there's one in New Orleans which someone with local knowledge 
needs to look at.


https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45365148#map=11/29.9244/-90.2323

Is there someone here who can repost to Talk-US?


You can, if you subscribe to the list. :)



On side note: Do users of editors like mapswithme receive changeset 
comments?


It depends.  Many users of MAPS.ME just think it is "an app with some 
maps in it" and have no idea what OSM is.  This has been raised with the 
MAPS.ME developers a number of times (see 
https://github.com/mapsme/omim/issues ).  If they've signed up with a 
throw-away email address (or generally "don't read email"), they won't 
see it.


Separately to this, a lot of people are spending a lot of time trying to 
communicate with MAPS.ME users - and in some cases succeeding (though 
the response rate seems lower to me than with other mappers).  If 
communication fails then drop a mail to d...@osmfoundation.org so that 
we can apply a 0-hour block on the account - force them to read a 
message before continuing mapping (but not actually stopping them from 
mapping - they can edit again as soon as they've read the message).  
This is useful when people have e.g. used a throw-away email account to 
sign up to an online service.  However, it's important to have explained 
mapping problems in changeset discussion first, since we'll inevitably 
refer back to previous discussions for a particular mapper such as 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=5167736 here.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Destructive new 'contributor'

2017-01-22 Per discussione Dave F 

Hi

Some one from China has made some meaningless & erroneous edit in 
Bristol, UK which I've reverted, but there's one in New Orleans which 
someone with local knowledge needs to look at.


https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45365148#map=11/29.9244/-90.2323

Is there someone here who can repost to Talk-US?

On side note: Do users of editors like mapswithme receive changeset 
comments?


DaveF.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-be] 90 --> 70 km/h

2017-01-22 Per discussione Jo 
Dat ziet er inderdaad goed uit, als query. Ik wist zelfs niet dat het
mogelijk was om meerdere criteria mee te geven. Ik ging er altijd van uit
dat dat enkel werkte op name en name:xy.

Jo

Op 22 januari 2017 om 10:53 schreef Jakka :

> Op 21/01/2017 om 9:04 schreef Jakka:
>
>> Hoi Ruben,
>> overpass Query is nog niet mijn ding
>> Wat kan ik aanpassen om bijvoorbeeld alleen het arrondissement Kortrijk
>> West-Vlaanderen op te vragen (server time saving). Gans Vlaanderen heb
>> ik voorlopig niet nodig ;)
>> Vermoed dat met de assistent niet mogelijk is ?
>>
>
> Graag deel ik het met jullie... Met wat plak en knipwerk is het mij
> gelukt.. volgens regels van de kunst 
>
> http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/lpk
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] 90 --> 70 km/h

2017-01-22 Per discussione Jakka 

Op 21/01/2017 om 9:04 schreef Jakka:

Hoi Ruben,
overpass Query is nog niet mijn ding
Wat kan ik aanpassen om bijvoorbeeld alleen het arrondissement Kortrijk
West-Vlaanderen op te vragen (server time saving). Gans Vlaanderen heb
ik voorlopig niet nodig ;)
Vermoed dat met de assistent niet mogelijk is ?


Graag deel ik het met jullie... Met wat plak en knipwerk is het mij 
gelukt.. volgens regels van de kunst 


http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/lpk



___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Cartographie des églises

2017-01-22 Per discussione Christian Quest 
building=* décrit le type architectural de bâtiment et pas son usage, 
même si il est souvent identique à l'usage initial (la raison pour 
laquelle le bâtiment a été construit). Même une église transformée en 
autre chose (il y en a) reste finalement un building=church.


A l'inverse un hangar transformé en mosquée reste architecturalement un 
hangar mais à qui on ajoute un amenity=place_of_worship vu son usage.



Le 21/01/2017 à 22:26, osm.sanspourr...@spamgourmet.com a écrit :


Je n'ai pas dit de ne pas vérifier d'autres tag comme
amenity= 
place_of_worship 



ou la présence d'autres choses à cet endroit.

Si un building=yes s'appelle chapelle XX et qui ne sert à rien de 
spécifique c'est probablement une chapelle.


> On en trouve (surtout les "chapelles") dans les gares, dans les 
hôpitaux, dans des immeubles résidentiels, dans des lycées...

Dans ce cas la chapelle sera un nœud pas un bâtiment.
Si le bâtiment a été construit pour avoir la fonction de chapelle 
alors building=chapel.


Tu dis qu'il peut y avoir des chapelles ailleurs. Oui, mais je n'ai 
pas dit le contraire.


Et si une église a changé de fonction on pourra ajouter 
disused:amenity 
=place_of_worship 



Jean-Yvon


--
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France

___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-se] Husnummerimport i Hbg kommun

2017-01-22 Per discussione Markus Lindholm 
Hej

Kollade på de första förändringarna som gjorts och en sak som jag
noterade och som jag tycker inte är helt optimal är att du överladdar
addr:* taggar och building=* på samma objekt, t.ex. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/411646429


Det vore bättre om de hade varsin eget objekt, en nod för adressen och
en area för huskroppen. Då skulle inte heller source-taggen bli
tvetydig.

/Markus


On Sat, 2017-01-21 at 09:59 +0100, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> Nu har jag satt igång. Mitt tillvägagångssätt kommer vara följande:
> 
> 1) Jag har registrerat ett konto, grillo_import, som jag kommer att
> göra
> alla redigeringar i det här projektet med. Eventuellt kommer det
> återanvändas i framtiden för andra importer
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Grillo_import
> 2) Jag har även skapat ett opublicerat hot-projekt där jag har delat
> in
> Helsingborgs kommun i rutor. Projektet är opublicerat så ingen annan
> börjar
> stänga rutor utan att jag märker det.
> 3) Jag laddar in adressfilen i Josm.
> 4) Jag öppnar upp en hot-ruta i Josm.
> 5) Jag raderar alla husnummer utanför hot-rutan.
> 6) Jag laddar upp husnumren som de är i befintligt skick, utan att
> lägga in
> dem i husen.
> 7) Jag kopierar in husnummer i hus, korrigerar mot redan mappade
> husnummer,
> sätter fast i entrénoder där det är möjligt att se osv, och laddar
> upp igen.
> 8) Jag stänger hot-rutan.
> 
> Här är ett test av denna processen i kommunens utkant:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Grillo_import/history
> 
> Om alla är okej med den här processen (eller om jag inte hör något på
> ett
> par dagar) kommer jag att fortsätta med den tills kommunen är klar.
> 
> MVH Andreas
> 
> 2017-01-10 12:30 GMT+01:00 Lars Aronsson :
> 
> > On 01/09/2017 09:49 AM, Andreas Vilén wrote:
> > 
> > > Med bokstäver menar jag adresser av typ 15A, där 15 ligger under
> > > husnummer och A ligger under extrataggen. Ett något
> > > okonventionellt sätt
> > > att lösa det är att lägga A under addr:unit, men detta avråddes
> > > jag ifrån
> > > när jag frågade om det på engelska OSM-IRC för några veckor
> > > sedan.
> > > 
> > 
> > En viktig användning är att gå från postadress till vägbeskrivning.
> > Man vill inte resa till Storgatan 15 utan till 15A och då vill man
> > att vägbeskrivningen ska leda till rätt sida av huset, inte till
> > dess
> > baksida, som kanske kan nås via en park. Det är därför viktigt
> > att 15A är en punkt på en sida av huset, som nås av vägar.
> > 
> > 
> > --
> >   Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se)
> >   Linköping
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ___
> > Talk-se mailing list
> > Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se
> > 
> 
> ___
> Talk-se mailing list
> Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

___
Talk-se mailing list
Talk-se@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-se

Re: [Talk-se] Busslinjer - 3 changesets i Västerås, vad har jag missat?

2017-01-22 Per discussione Christoffer Holmstedt 
Perfekt. Tackar för tipset om ÖPNVkarte. Det står att datan ska laddas över
inom några minuter men får se senare i veckan om det fungerar eller, än så
länge har mina nya rutter inte laddats in till kartan. Kanske ska se över
möjligheten att generera öpnvkarte liknande tiles själv lokalt.

-- 
Christoffer Holmstedt


Den 21 januari 2017 22:56 skrev Essin :

> Ja det stämmer, ordningen spelar roll både för hållplatserna och
> sträckningen. Om linjen går i en slinga på vägen från start- till
> ändhållplats kan samma OSM-objekt till och med förekomma flera gånger i
> ruttrelationen. En tjänst som använder ordningen på hållplatserna är
> ÖPNVkarte [1] -- testa att klicka på en hållplats och sen en av linjerna
> som trafikerar hållplatsen! (Det verkar dessutom som att ÖPNVkarte bara
> räknar ihop stop_position och platform om de tillhör samma stop_area, en
> anledning så god som någon att vara noga med stop_area-relationer.)
>
> [1] https://öpnvkarte.de/#16.5782;59.6135;12
> 
>
> Vänliga hälsningar, Essin
>
> Den 21 januari 2017 23:01 skrev Christoffer Holmstedt <
> christoffer.holmst...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Tack för tipsen. Ska gå igenom allt i detalj när jag får tid nästa gång.
>> Men en snabb fråga angående relationer, ordningen spelar alltså roll?
>>
>> I JOSM så råkade jag trycka på "reverse the order of relation members" en
>> gång men hade för mig att jag korrigerade detta så det såg rätt ut men
>> antagligen inte.
>>
>> --
>> Christoffer Holmstedt
>>
>>
>> Den 21 januari 2017 17:16 skrev Essin :
>>
>>> Hej!
>>>
>>> Vad kul att kartvisningen på bussarna leder till återkoppling och
>>> förbättring av OSM! Det jag har ritat i Västerås är mest baserat på
>>> Mapillary, vilket kanske förklarar en del konstiga luckor, till exempel vid
>>> Centralen.
>>>
>>> Huvuddragen i det system som används i större delen av Sverige, bland
>>> annat Västerås, finns dokumenterade på [1]. Jag ska försöka undvika att
>>> upprepa vad som redan står där, men några ytterligare kommentarer:
>>>
>>> name= på public_transport=platform ska i första hand användas för
>>> hållplatslägesbeteckningar (ofta A, B, C etc, VL skyltar dem vid större
>>> hållplatser). Jag tänker ibland att det hade varit bättre att fortsätta
>>> använda local_ref= för det ändamålet för bättre bakåtkompatibilitet, men
>>> det är lätt att vara efterklok. Hållplatsens namn framgår av
>>> stop_area-relationens name=, och för bakåtkompatibilitet av
>>> stop_position-nodernas. (Jag har ofta varit för lat för att skapa
>>> stop_area-relationer, men det betyder inte att jag ogillar dem.)
>>>
>>> ref= på public_transport=platform eller public_transport=stop_area
>>> syftar på bussbolagens interna hållplatskoder och är antagligen inte så
>>> högprioriterat. Jag har inte sett att VL skyltar dem överhuvudtaget, men
>>> det är möjligt att de står i finstilt på hållplatstidtabellerna. Ett bra
>>> exempel på hur de kan se ut är [2].
>>>
>>> route_ref= behöver bara läggas in på public_transport=platform-objekt
>>> och är egentligen inte nödvändigt där heller om man kan lägga in
>>> hållplatsen i rätt ruttrelation direkt. Det skadar inte att lägga in det
>>> ändå, men är mer ett sätt för mappare att kommunicera med varandra än något
>>> som renderingar eller andra verktyg använder.
>>>
>>> public_transport:version= är en tagg som jag egentligen inte tycker om
>>> eftersom den infördes av JOSM-programmerarna när de inte lyckades få
>>> validatorn att skilja på de olika systemen för kollektivtrafikrelationer.
>>> Jag har motvilligt accepterat den eftersom den underlättar mycket när man
>>> redigerar kollektivtrafik i JOSM, men den har ingen effekt på annat än
>>> route-relationer.
>>>
>>> [3] hade fått hållplatserna listade baklänges, men det var kanske bara
>>> av misstag?
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Sweden/Publi
>>> c_transport#Hur_skall_vi_tagga_nu.3F
>>> [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2255483
>>> [3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5673052
>>>
>>> Vänliga hälsningar, Essin
>>>
>>>
>>> Den 21 januari 2017 00:28 skrev Christoffer Holmstedt <
>>> christoffer.holmst...@gmail.com>:
>>>
 Hej
 I Västerås så visar alla bussar en OSM karta om vart bussen är och jag
 har lagt märke till att busslinjerna inte alltid är kompletta. Nu har jag
 fixat till busslinje 2 och 4 i Västerås till att börja med.

 Hur ser ändringarna [1,2,3] ut? Något jag bör fixa till?

 Sedan undrar jag vad som är praxis när busstopp ska placeras ut, gjorde
 ett försök med [2]. Finns det någon "best practice" för svenska
 förhållanden?

 [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45337608
 [2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45338360
 [3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45339920

 Med vänlig hälsning
 --
 Christoffer Holmstedt

hebdoOSM Nº 339 10/01/2017-16/01/2017

2017-01-22 Per discussione weeklyteam 
Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 339 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître en 
français. Un condensé à retrouver à:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/8619/

Bonne lecture!

hebdoOSM?
Qui?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

hebdoOSM Nº 339 10/01/2017-16/01/2017

2017-01-22 Per discussione weeklyteam 
Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 339 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître en 
français. Un condensé à retrouver à:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/8619/

Bonne lecture!

hebdoOSM?
Qui?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
Où?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr