Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Martijn van Exel]

That would be something to file on github as an issue so we can look into it. 
May be a bug or something to do with your browser environment.

Martijn van Exel

> On Jun 21, 2018, at 22:40, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> Looks like my points aren't sticking and I can't set a default editor.
> 
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 22:15 Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>> Most of it is taken from OSM. If you change things there, MapRoulette will 
>> pick it up. What did you want to change?
>> 
>> Martijn van Exel
>> 
>>> On Jun 21, 2018, at 20:43, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Is it normal to not be able to update your user profile in MapRoulette?
>>> 
 On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Horea Meleg  
 wrote:
 Hi everyone!
 
 First, a big thank you for all contributors who finished our first 
 MapRoulette Challenges.
 
 Second, as we promised, we prepared 4 more challenges like the others, but 
 in different areas. You can find them here:
 
 Tulsa, Oklahoma http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3067
 Tucson, Arizona http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3068  
 Albuquerque, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3066
 El Paso, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3065
  
 
 All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
 description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
 
 We'd love any input and advice!
 
 If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
 
 Thanks!
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 From: Horea Meleg 
 Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 10:02 AM
 To: talk-US@openstreetmap.org
 Subject: New MapRoulette challenges
 
  
 
 Hi everyone!
 To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav 
 mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it with 
 the community using MapRoulette Challenges.
 As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways 
 which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We 
 made two challenges, for two different areas:
 Jacksonville, Florida 
 http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
 San Antonio, Texas 
 http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042
  
 All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
 description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
 We'd love any input and advice!
 If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
 Thanks!
  
 
 
 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Paul Johnson]

Looks like my points aren't sticking and I can't set a default editor.

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 22:15 Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> Most of it is taken from OSM. If you change things there, MapRoulette will
> pick it up. What did you want to change?
>
> Martijn van Exel
>
> On Jun 21, 2018, at 20:43, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>
> Is it normal to not be able to update your user profile in MapRoulette?
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Horea Meleg 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone!
>>
>> First, a big thank you for all contributors who finished our first
>> MapRoulette Challenges.
>>
>> Second, as we promised, we prepared 4 more challenges like the others,
>> but in different areas. You can find them here:
>>
>>- Tulsa, Oklahoma http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3067
>>- Tucson, Arizona http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3068
>>- Albuquerque, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3066
>>- El Paso, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3065
>>
>>
>>
>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also,
>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>>
>> We'd love any input and advice!
>>
>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Horea Meleg
>> *Sent:* Friday, June 8, 2018 10:02 AM
>> *To:* talk-US@openstreetmap.org
>> *Subject:* New MapRoulette challenges
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi everyone!
>>
>> To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav
>> mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it with
>> the community using MapRoulette Challenges.
>>
>> As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways
>> which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We
>> made two challenges, for two different areas:
>>
>>- Jacksonville, Florida
>>http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
>>- San Antonio, Texas
>>http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042
>>
>>
>>
>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also,
>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>>
>> We'd love any input and advice!
>>
>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-co] UMAP Colombia

[Fernando C. T.]

Hola a todos,

Quiero contarles que después de varios días tratando de encontrar la mejor
forma de actualizar la instancia de uMap Colombia, logramos migrar la base
de datos completa y de esta forma conservar los más de 1400 mapas que han
creado diferentes personas en esta instancia. Aunque creíamos que el
proceso de migración manual por cada usuario funcionaria al ver que este
proceso no lograba exportar el mapa completo, incluyendo cada una de las
capas causando que posiblemente muchos de estos mapas se perdieran, es por
eso que el día de hoy y con un poco de ayuda del desarrollador principal de
uMap logramos hacer la migración completa de la base de datos y de todos
los archivos asociados a las capas.

Al lograr esto ya no es necesario que manualmente hagan la migración de los
mapas desde umapold.openstreetmap.co hasta https://umap.openstreetmap.co,
con este proceso conservamos todos los usuarios, mapas y demás
configuraciones.

Agradecemos mucho la paciencia y los comentarios que nos ayudaron a poner
mas atención para lograr que este proceso fuera exitosos. :)

Quedo atento a cualquier inquietud.

Saludos.

Kleper


El mié., 20 jun. 2018 a las 4:25, Fernando C. T. ()
escribió:

> Hola,
>
> Debido a los problemas que se han presentado con la instancia de UMAP
> Colombia y las dificultades que tuve para migrar la base de datos, he
> implementado la solución que habia propuesto, les dejo el siguiente enlace
> en donde documento como migrar los mapas:
>
> https://blog.openstreetmap.co/ia66b08bc494168ee6c011db75ec78f3e
>
> Saludos.
>
> El lun., 11 jun. 2018 a las 13:55, Fernando C. T. ()
> escribió:
>
>> Hola,
>>
>> Desde hace mas o menos dos semanas el UMAP de Colombia dejo de permitir
>> acceso utilizando el usuario de OpenStreetMap, es posible que eso se debe a
>> algún cambio en la API de OSM debido a las nuevas regulaciones en europa
>> sobre datos personales (GDPR).
>>
>> Yo he estado mirando pero no he podido encontrar la forma de arreglar la
>> instalación que tenemos actualmente y escribí en la lista de UMAP pero aun
>> no tengo respuesta, no se si Igor o alguien con experiencia en python me
>> pueda ayudar para arreglarlo.
>>
>> La otra opción es actualizar UMAP, pero la base de datos por ser una
>> versión muy vieja no es compatible con la versión actual para migrarla y
>> hasta ahora no he encontrado scripts para migrar o documentación sobre como
>> migrar una base de datos vieja de UMAP a la versión actual.
>>
>> Por ahora la opción que he encontrado para actualizar UMAP es dejar la
>> versión vieja como solo lectura y que cada usuario migre sus mapas
>> manualmente a la versión nueva.
>> Si alguien quiere ayudarme a hacer esta migración de una mejor manera por
>> ejemplo migrando la base de datos o algo parecido voy a esperar una semana
>> antes de implementar la única solución que he encontrado hasta ahora.
>>
>> Saludos.
>> **
>> *Fernando Castro T.*
>> *Fundación OpenStreetMap Colombia*
>>
>> *Tupale.co*
>> *Celular: (+57) 301 529 39 59*
>>
>>
___
Talk-co mailing list
Talk-co@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-co

Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Martijn van Exel]

Most of it is taken from OSM. If you change things there, MapRoulette will pick 
it up. What did you want to change?

Martijn van Exel

> On Jun 21, 2018, at 20:43, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> Is it normal to not be able to update your user profile in MapRoulette?
> 
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Horea Meleg  wrote:
>> Hi everyone!
>> 
>> First, a big thank you for all contributors who finished our first 
>> MapRoulette Challenges.
>> 
>> Second, as we promised, we prepared 4 more challenges like the others, but 
>> in different areas. You can find them here:
>> 
>> Tulsa, Oklahoma http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3067
>> Tucson, Arizona http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3068  
>> Albuquerque, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3066
>> El Paso, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3065
>>  
>> 
>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>> 
>> We'd love any input and advice!
>> 
>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Horea Meleg 
>> Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 10:02 AM
>> To: talk-US@openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: New MapRoulette challenges
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Hi everyone!
>> To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav 
>> mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it with 
>> the community using MapRoulette Challenges.
>> As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways 
>> which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We 
>> made two challenges, for two different areas:
>> Jacksonville, Florida 
>> http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
>> San Antonio, Texas 
>> http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042
>>  
>> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
>> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>> We'd love any input and advice!
>> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>> Thanks!
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Paul Johnson]

Is it normal to not be able to update your user profile in MapRoulette?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Horea Meleg 
wrote:

> Hi everyone!
>
> First, a big thank you for all contributors who finished our first
> MapRoulette Challenges.
>
> Second, as we promised, we prepared 4 more challenges like the others, but
> in different areas. You can find them here:
>
>- Tulsa, Oklahoma http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3067
>- Tucson, Arizona http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3068
>- Albuquerque, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3066
>- El Paso, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3065
>
>
>
> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also,
> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>
> We'd love any input and advice!
>
> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Horea Meleg
> *Sent:* Friday, June 8, 2018 10:02 AM
> *To:* talk-US@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* New MapRoulette challenges
>
>
>
> Hi everyone!
>
> To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav
> mapping team is planning to process available open data and share it with
> the community using MapRoulette Challenges.
>
> As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways
> which don’t have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We
> made two challenges, for two different areas:
>
>- Jacksonville, Florida http://maproulette.org/mr3/
>admin/project/271/challenge/3041
>
>- San Antonio, Texas http://maproulette.org/mr3/
>admin/project/271/challenge/3042
>
>
>
>
> All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also,
> description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
>
> We'd love any input and advice!
>
> If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[OSM-talk-be] Mapping of motorways - use of int_ref tag on nodes?

[Yves bxl-forever]

Hello,

I came across something fishy:

node
  [int_ref="E 411"]
  (50.792806,4.417019,50.823614,4.481392);
out;


It seems that someone is routinely applying the "int_ref" tag on all individual 
nodes of motorways.  This seems weird and it duplicates a lot of information, 
because this is normally already there on the way.

If that is not okay, I’ll try to get in touch with the mapper who did that.
Is anyone familiar with how to map motorways properly?

Thanks.
Yves

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

Re: [OSM-ja] 高速道路上にある路線バス停の access タグ付け

[ribbon]

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:12:50PM +0900, kkondo wrote:
> こんにちは。
> 高速道路上にある路線バス停（バス車両以外の車は進入禁止）のタグ付けは、下記が正しい(?)ように思います。
> highway=service
> access=no
> bus=yes
> もしそうとすると、access= が現状あまり徹底していないように見えます。

上記なんですが、「バス停」ではなくて、「バスが来る(専用の)道路」
の事ではないでしょうか?

バス停だと highway=bus_stop とか、 public_transport=platform
になるのではないかと思います。

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:public_transport%3Dplatform

ribbon


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

Re: [Talk-at] Vervollständigung der Wiener Adressen

[Markus Straub]

Schöne Analyse, Andreas, danke!

Dann sind wir (trotz sicher einiger doppelter Einträge in OSM) aber 
dennoch auf einem sehr guten Weg in Richtung 149.000, dass der Großteil 
der Adressen noch diesen Sommer verfügbar ist. Die großen Lücken im 
Osten vom 22. Bezirk füllen sich. Im 21. gibt's noch Strebersdorf, 
Nordrand- und Großfeldsiedlung mit augenscheinlich großen Lücken, und im 
14. wartet die Kordonsiedlung noch auf Ergänzungen.


12.02.: 114204
29.05.: 129245
21.06.: 133345

LG, Markus


On 2018-06-01 17:25, andreas wecer wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:11 AM Markus Straub 
mailto:markus.straub...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Als OGD sind unter
https://www.data.gv.at/katalog/dataset/1d5c2411-9719-4c8f-b99d-57a5f4a4ae41

insgesamt etwa 286.000 Adressen enthalten, allerdings sind hier z.B.
Albertplatz 7/1 und Albertplatz 7/2 jeweils gesonderte Einträge - reine
Hausnummern sind es weniger.


Mit dem BEV-Datensatz vom April komm ich auf ca. 149.000 reine 
Hausnummern für die Gemeinde Wien und 127.000 Subadressen. Letzteres 
bzw. das Verhältnis erschien mir etwas viel, allerdings werden auch die 
durch Identadressen mehrfach gezählt (v.a. die Parzellen der 
Kleingartenanlagen werden dadurch tlw. bis zu 10x gezählt), also wenn 
man diese nur mehr einmal für die Hauptadresse zählt, halbiert sich das 
schon auf 66.000, was man dann noch auf die größten Prefix-Gruppen 
aufgliedern kann:

30.000 "/"
13.000 "Haus"
13.000 "Parz."

Direkt vergleichbar macht es das aber natürlich genauso wenig, weil bei 
den OSM-Daten genauso Subadressen dabei sind (oder je nach Mapping-Stil 
sein können), oder auch mehrere POIs die gleiche Hausnummer haben können.



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



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

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Tagging/ naming a railway junction

[Andy Mabbett]

I've been looking at the railway junction east of Castle Vale, at:

   
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.5184=-1.7701#map=14/52.5184/-1.7701

AFAICT, we have not given it a name or a reference; it must have one
or the other, if not both.

But what would we tag? A point in the middle? A relation? One (or
each) of the three points of the triangular junction?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [Talk-it] Name locality

[Damjan Gerl]

  
  
21.06.2018 - 21:24 - Andreas Lattmann:


  Buongiorno che ne pensate di questa mini editwar e della soluzione che ho trovato?  

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2311198647/history

Grazie.

Andreas Lattmann



Il problema è che il toponimo Žegen non c'entra con il San
  Antonio. Sono due toponimi distinti. Difatti in sloveno il
  toponimo San Antonio è Sveti Anton.
  
  Un altro problema è l'uso del separatore -. Se guardiamo il
  separatore usato in fvg è il /.
  
  L'ultimo problema e che l'utente spietsnaz si sta da tempo
  inventando nomi in italiano dove none esistono, solo per avere il
  nome in italiano.
  
  
  Cioa
  Damjan

  


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

[Talk-it] Name locality

[Andreas Lattmann]

Buongiorno che ne pensate di questa mini editwar e della soluzione che ho 
trovato?  

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2311198647/history

Grazie.

Andreas Lattmann
-- 
Inviato dal mio dispositivo Android con K-9 Mail. Perdonate la brevità. 

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Cartographier les voies vertes

[George Kaplan]

Bonsoir,

Sur le fond, pas d’objection à rendre le tag highway libre. Mais en respectant 
la loi française : pas de highway=cycleway car la piste cyclable est à l’usage 
exclusif des cycles ni de highway=footway car les trottoirs sont interdits aux 
cyclistes. De même pour les conventions OSM : pas de highway=bridleway qui par 
définition est réservée aux cavaliers.

Et dans la liste des tags impératifs,

highway=*
foot=designated
bicycle=designated
traffic_sign=FR:C115

motor_vehicle=no

 et préciser en fonction des situations les valeurs de wheelchair et horse.


Au final, qu’est ce qui manque comme information sur les attributs de la voie 
verte en utilisant highway=path et les clés width, surface, smoothness ?


George

Le 21 juin 2018 à 17:48, Antoine Riche 
mailto:antoine.ri...@zaclys.net>> a écrit :


Bonjour,

Lors de l'atelier "vélo-tags" qui s'est déroulé lors de SOTM FR le samedi 2 
juin, le sujet des voies vertes a été discuté. Le constat partagé lors des 
échanges est qu'une voie verte est identifiée par le panneau C115 (cf. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Road_signs_in_France), et que son 
aménagement peut être très différent : sentier, piste, voie de service, etc.

Le consensus des participant.e.s à cet atelier est de ne pas restreindre la 
valeur de la clef highway à path, et de préciser la présence du panneau par la 
clef traffic_sign. Je propose donc de modifier la section 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Voies_vertes pour indiquer 
qu'une voie verte est mappée par :

highway=*
foot=designated
bicycle=designated
traffic_sign=FR:C115

Ainsi nous affinons la description du terrain (on peut par exemple ajouter un 
tracktype si highway=track) et pouvons répondre aux attentes des collectivités 
qui souhaitent pouvoir identifier les voies vertes qu'elles ont balisées.

Des objections ou clarifications ?

Antoine.


[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]
  Garanti sans virus. 
www.avast.com

___
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] Cartographier les voies vertes

[Axelos]

Coucou

Le 21/06/2018 à 17:48, Antoine Riche a écrit :
> Lors de l'atelier "vélo-tags" qui s'est déroulé lors de SOTM FR le
> samedi 2 juin, le sujet des voies vertes a été discuté. Le constat
> partagé lors des échanges est qu'une voie verte est identifiée par le
> panneau C115 (cf.
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Road_signs_in_France), et que son
> aménagement peut être très différent : sentier, piste, voie de service,
> etc.
> 
> Le consensus des participant.e.s à cet atelier est de ne pas restreindre
> la valeur de la clef highway à path, et de préciser la présence du
> panneau par la clef traffic_sign. Je propose donc de modifier la section
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Voies_vertes pour
> indiquer qu'une voie verte est mappée par :
> 
> highway=*
> foot=designated
> bicycle=designated
> traffic_sign=FR:C115
> 
> Ainsi nous affinons la description du terrain (on peut par exemple
> ajouter un tracktype si highway=track) et pouvons répondre aux attentes
> des collectivités qui souhaitent pouvoir identifier les voies vertes
> qu'elles ont balisées.
> 
> Des objections ou clarifications ?

Oui moi !

Si on parle exclusivement de voies vertes signalés par des panneaux
C115, alors je ne comprends pas l’intérêt de pouvoir y utiliser
plusieurs types de hyghway, puisque tous possèdent exactement les mêmes
caractéristiques en termes de classification.

highway=track ? Non ce n'est pas un chemin agricole mais une route.
Highway=cycleway ? Non les piétons peuvent y circuler donc ce n’est pas
une piste cyclable.
highway=footway ? Ba non ce n'est pas un chemin piétons, les vélos y ont
tout autant de légitimité (j'avoue que parfois je l'utilise lorsque
qu'il y a un panneau du genre "cyclistes mettez pied à terre").
highway=service ? Ba non c'est une route et non pas un accès.
highway=unclassified ? Là je dois avouer que ... lisez la suite !
highway=path ? Non une voie verte n'est pas un chemin mais une route !
highwat=tiertary et plus hauts nivaux ? c'est une approche qui peut se
poser concernant les réseaux de véloroutes qui peuvent potentiellement
l'emprunter, mais dans ce cas, il faut trouver une façon alternative que
les classifications habituelles pour les routes.

De façon générale, pour les différencier sur l'aspect, il existe des
descriptions tels que surface et smoothness qui sont je pense très
pertinent.

Peut-être me faudrait-il donner plus de détail sur l’intérêt de cette
proposition pour que ma vision change.

Concernant la référence au panneau via un tag spécifique, pourquoi pas ...

Axel.


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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Cartographier les voies vertes

[JB]

On peut reprendre ce qui vient d'être écrit et faire un peu de 
vérification ?

maper un panneau routier sur le way auquel il s'applique serrait une première
À voir le wiki, ce n'est pas le cas : 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_sign#On_a_way_or_area
D'après taginfo.fr non plus, d'ailleurs : un quart des traffic_sign est 
utilisé en combinaison avec highway=* : 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.fr/keys/traffic_sign#combinations

En plus la reconnaissance des panneaux routiers en cours pourrait aider.
Euh, on est à quel pourcentage de voies vertes couverte par Mapillary ? 
Proche de 100% ? J'en doute.

Si vraiment on veux un tag sur le way, "description=voie verte" me semble plus 
approprié.
Donc tu conseilles un tag qui ne sera utilisé par aucun traitement 
automatisé (rendu, routage) ?


Un peu de vérification avant d'être le premier à répondre ne ferait pas 
forcément de mal.

JB, un peu tranchant, ce soir.


Le 21/06/2018 à 18:01, marc marc a écrit :

Bonjour,

Le 21. 06. 18 à 17:48, Antoine Riche a écrit :

highway=*
traffic_sign=FR:C115

maper un panneau routier sur le way auquel il s'applique serrait une
première. est-ce vraiment nécessaire cette spécificité franco-fr ?
ne pourrait-on pas, comme pour les autres panneaux, mapper le panneau
avec un nœud là où il se trouve et ne mettre sur le way que l'effet
du panneau ?
En plus la reconnaissance des panneaux routiers en cours pourrait aider.
Si vraiment on veux un tag sur le way, "description=voie verte" me
semble plus approprié.

Pour le reste, je partage votre avis des avantages d'un highway=* libre
permettant un raffinement supplémentaire (track a la largeur d'une
voiture, au contraire du path)

Cordialement,
Marc
___
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] Différencier aménagement cyclables sur trottoir des autres

[osm . sanspourriel]

De tels aménagements sont fréquents en Allemagne, je suis pour cette 
manière de tagguer.


Jean-Yvon

Le 21/06/2018 à 17:11, Antoine Riche - antoine.ri...@zaclys.net a écrit :

Le 10/06/2018 à 13:42, Axelos a écrit :


Soit les trottoirs ne sont pas séparées de la chaussée, et me vient une
idée provenant de le la Grande-Bretagne :
cycleway:both=share_sidewalk à placer sur l'unique chemin. Les trottoirs
y sont implicites.
Le concept est similaire aux voies de bus, on indique que les cyclistes
partagent le trottoir et se soumettent aux obligations de ce dernier.
Une autre approche, documentée sur 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sidewalk, est d'utiliser 
sidewalk:bicycle=yes. On peut distinguer les 2 côtés de la chaussée 
avec sidewalk:left:bicycle et sidewalk:right:bicycle, on peut 
également décrire le type de revêtement, etc. Ces tags sont nettement 
plus utilisés, notamment en Allemagne : http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/zJX


Antoine.



 
	Garanti sans virus. www.avast.com 
 



<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


___
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-dk] Våde fødder ved Lille Vildmose

[osm]

Hej,
 
Jeg har rettet ruten så den går vest om Birkesø. Øst om søen ser tvivlsomt ud.
 
-- 
 
 

Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 12:58 PM
From: "Sonny B. Andersen" 
To: OpenStreetMap 
Subject: [Talk-dk] Våde fødder ved Lille Vildmose

Hej,-
 
Er der en lokal mapper, der kan rette Nordsøstien her?
Jeg var stien igennem forrige år, men siden da er der kommet en sø i området, 
så nu ser det lidt fjollet ud – især på lonvia-kortet 
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=14!56.8742!10.2028
 
I øvrigt mener jeg, at det ville bedre at kalde området Lille Vildmose i stedet 
for det lidt nørdede ”Natura2000 område nr. 17”
 
/sba-dk
___ Talk-dk mailing list 
Talk-dk@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-dk]
 
 

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Cartographier les voies vertes

[marc marc]

Bonjour,

Le 21. 06. 18 à 17:48, Antoine Riche a écrit :
> highway=*
> traffic_sign=FR:C115

maper un panneau routier sur le way auquel il s'applique serrait une 
première. est-ce vraiment nécessaire cette spécificité franco-fr ?
ne pourrait-on pas, comme pour les autres panneaux, mapper le panneau 
avec un nœud là où il se trouve et ne mettre sur le way que l'effet
du panneau ?
En plus la reconnaissance des panneaux routiers en cours pourrait aider.
Si vraiment on veux un tag sur le way, "description=voie verte" me 
semble plus approprié.

Pour le reste, je partage votre avis des avantages d'un highway=* libre 
permettant un raffinement supplémentaire (track a la largeur d'une 
voiture, au contraire du path)

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

[OSM-talk-fr] Cartographier les voies vertes

[Antoine Riche]

Bonjour,

Lors de l'atelier "vélo-tags" qui s'est déroulé lors de SOTM FR le 
samedi 2 juin, le sujet des voies vertes a été discuté. Le constat 
partagé lors des échanges est qu'une voie verte est identifiée par le 
panneau C115 (cf. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Road_signs_in_France), et que son 
aménagement peut être très différent : sentier, piste, voie de service, 
etc.


Le consensus des participant.e.s à cet atelier est de ne pas restreindre 
la valeur de la clef highway à path, et de préciser la présence du 
panneau par la clef traffic_sign. Je propose donc de modifier la section 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Voies_vertes pour 
indiquer qu'une voie verte est mappée par :


highway=*
foot=designated
bicycle=designated
traffic_sign=FR:C115

Ainsi nous affinons la description du terrain (on peut par exemple 
ajouter un tracktype si highway=track) et pouvons répondre aux attentes 
des collectivités qui souhaitent pouvoir identifier les voies vertes 
qu'elles ont balisées.


Des objections ou clarifications ?

Antoine.




---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel 
antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

... sorry, forgot URL: www.mapthepaths.org.uk.


Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 21 June 2018 16:28:29
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: MapThePaths - updates



Hello everyone,


A few updates on MapThePaths since the initial announcement, mostly from 
requests:


- Multiple zoom levels (4 in total) now implemented.


- Metropolitan-area councils in the north of England included: OSM footpaths 
from Merseyside, Greater Manchester, and South and West Yorkshire have now been 
added, and all council data available on rowmaps for these areas is also now 
present.


Note that some councils may still be missing as I don't think all of them are 
on rowmaps just yet. Also note that Tyne and Wear OSM data is not present yet 
as there isn't yet a Geofabrik extract; and Greater London and the West 
Midlands are still excluded due to the sheer amount of data in those areas.


- Permalink now added.


I haven't yet added the historical "FP" points but that's next on the list.


Nick




Nick Whitelegg
Senior Lecturer in Computing (Internet)  | School of Media Arts and Technology
Southampton Solent University  | JM506 | East Park Terrace | Southampton SO14 
0YN
T: 023 8201 3075 | E: 
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk | W: 
solent.ac.uk

Disclaimer
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,


A few updates on MapThePaths since the initial announcement, mostly from 
requests:


- Multiple zoom levels (4 in total) now implemented.


- Metropolitan-area councils in the north of England included: OSM footpaths 
from Merseyside, Greater Manchester, and South and West Yorkshire have now been 
added, and all council data available on rowmaps for these areas is also now 
present.


Note that some councils may still be missing as I don't think all of them are 
on rowmaps just yet. Also note that Tyne and Wear OSM data is not present yet 
as there isn't yet a Geofabrik extract; and Greater London and the West 
Midlands are still excluded due to the sheer amount of data in those areas.


- Permalink now added.


I haven't yet added the historical "FP" points but that's next on the list.


Nick




Nick Whitelegg
Senior Lecturer in Computing (Internet)  | School of Media Arts and Technology
Southampton Solent University  | JM506 | East Park Terrace | Southampton SO14 
0YN
T: 023 8201 3075 | E: 
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk | W: 
solent.ac.uk

Disclaimer
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it] Nomi di strade/piazze

[Federico Cortese]

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:05 PM Cascafico Giovanni  wrote:
>
> Se non ho sbagliato qualcosa, credo di aver estratto tutti gli highway names 
> d'Italia con overpass-turbo, georeferenziandoli. Gli appunti sono qui [1], la 
> umap per un paio di essi è qui [2] e l'elenco totale globbbale qui [3]
>

Grande, sono estasiato :)

Ciao,
Federico

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Différencier aménagement cyclables sur trottoir des autres

[Antoine Riche]

Bonjour,

Je réponds un peu tardivement, après avoir rattrapé mon retard et 
consulté Simon, expert-mapper des aménagements cyclables.


Le 10/06/2018 à 13:42, Axelos a écrit :

Soit les trottoirs sont séparés de la chaussée principale, via de la
verdure, barrières, véhicules stationnées... et là on y retient la
logique qu'il s'agit alors d'un simple trottoir sur lequel on y utilise
tout naturellement la balise highway=footway, et on y ajoute un petit
bicycle=yes pour coller à la présence des pictogrammes.

Ça me va.

Soit les trottoirs ne sont pas séparées de la chaussée, et me vient une
idée provenant de le la Grande-Bretagne :
cycleway:both=share_sidewalk à placer sur l'unique chemin. Les trottoirs
y sont implicites.
Le concept est similaire aux voies de bus, on indique que les cyclistes
partagent le trottoir et se soumettent aux obligations de ce dernier.
Une autre approche, documentée sur 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sidewalk, est d'utiliser 
sidewalk:bicycle=yes. On peut distinguer les 2 côtés de la chaussée avec 
sidewalk:left:bicycle et sidewalk:right:bicycle, on peut également 
décrire le type de revêtement, etc. Ces tags sont nettement plus 
utilisés, notamment en Allemagne : http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/zJX


Antoine.




---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel 
antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-GB] Geofabrik request: Tyne and Wear

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Frederik,


Could I make a request for an additional region within England on geofabrik?


It's Tyne and Wear, a former metropolitan county covering Newcastle and the 
surrounding area - similar in status to former metropolitan counties of South  
and West Yorkshire, Greater Manchester and Merseyside.

Thanks,

Nick


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

[OSM-ja] 高速道路上にある路線バス停の access タグ付け

[kkondo]

こんにちは。
高速道路上にある路線バス停（バス車両以外の車は進入禁止）のタグ付けは、下記が正しい(?)ように思います。
highway=service
access=no
bus=yes
もしそうとすると、access= が現状あまり徹底していないように見えます。

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

Re: [Talk-it] Nomi di strade/piazze

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Se non ho sbagliato qualcosa, credo di aver estratto tutti gli highway
names d'Italia con overpass-turbo, georeferenziandoli. Gli appunti sono qui
[1], la umap per un paio di essi è qui [2] e l'elenco totale globbbale qui
[3]


[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Cascafico/diary/44214
[2] http://u.osmfr.org/m/229235
[3] https://github.com/cascafico/scripts/blob/master/odonimi.csv.gz
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-cz] edit war na Žižkově - mapujeme podle stavu v terénu, nebo podle legálního stavu?

[Honza Cibulka]

Hele ale těžko budem zkoumat, jestli je někde něco nelegálně: Nevíme, co 
všechno za spory u toho běží, jak jsou rozhodnutý, co opravný prostředky, 
právní moc... Že si to přečtem v novinách, na to se imho nemůžem moc spolíhat 
(píšu jako novinář ;)).

 

From: Jan Dudík  
Sent: čtvrtek 21. června 2018 13:09
To: OpenStreetMap Czech Republic 
Subject: Re: [Talk-cz] edit war na Žižkově - mapujeme podle stavu v terénu, 
nebo podle legálního stavu?

 

Jenže opět jsme i problému, že v datech to sice je, ale skoro žádný renderer to 
neumí vykreslit jinak => běžný uživatel nepozná, zda je to legální nebo 
nelegální

(ať už se jedná o squat, nepřístupnou cestu, či soukromý bazén)


---

JAnD

 

 

čt 21. 6. 2018 v 2:16 odesílatel Petr Vozdecký mailto:v...@seznam.cz> > napsal:

-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Mikoláš Štrajt mailto:stra...@seznam.cz> >

souhlasím - tyhle problematické až ilegalní entity by měly v mapě odlišitelné 
od těch bezproblémových. 

U těch cest jsem to už kdysi dávno viděl na jakési papírové mapě, kde byly ty 
horské silničky v 1. zóně NP přeškrtány.

 

To je podobný, ale JINÝ případ - silnička v 1. zóně NP je tam legálně a je 
právní normou veřejnosti znepřístupněna. Proto je v mapě namalována a 
přeškrtána...

 

 

-- Původní e-mail --
Od: Jan Martinec mailto:j...@martinec.name> >

Připadá mi poněkud relevantní tenhle dokument - byť se týká sporných 
teritorií, pro jiná data v OSM platí IMNSHO totéž:
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf

> However, to remain neutral and to provide a practically useful service to a 
> global community, we cannot delete base data to suit a particular legal 
> jurisdiction.

 

Asi nejsilnější a nejpevnější argument. Zmapovat! Ovšem za mě - pokud je to 
bezesporu ilegální, pak by se tomu hodil nějaký tag, který umožní rendereru 
rozhodnout, co s tím udělá.

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

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

[Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenges

[Horea Meleg]

Hi everyone!
First, a big thank you for all contributors who finished our first MapRoulette 
Challenges.
Second, as we promised, we prepared 4 more challenges like the others, but in 
different areas. You can find them here:

  *   Tulsa, Oklahoma http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3067
  *   Tucson, Arizona http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3068
  *   Albuquerque, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3066
  *   El Paso, New Mexico http://maproulette.org/mr3/challenge/3065

All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.
We'd love any input and advice!
If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.
Thanks!



From: Horea Meleg
Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 10:02 AM
To: talk-US@openstreetmap.org
Subject: New MapRoulette challenges


Hi everyone!

To make OpenStreetMap more navigable and accurate in guidance, Telenav mapping 
team is planning to process available open data and share it with the community 
using MapRoulette Challenges.

As a starting point we processed Tiger 2017 data, and we extracted ways which 
don't have name in OSM but there is an available name in Tiger. We made two 
challenges, for two different areas:

  *   Jacksonville, Florida 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3041
  *   San Antonio, Texas 
http://maproulette.org/mr3/admin/project/271/challenge/3042



All necessary information can be found in challenges description. Also, 
description contains GitHub tickets for both challenges.

We'd love any input and advice!

If you have any questions or comments, please let me/us know.

Thanks!

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

Re: [Talk-dk] Våde fødder ved Lille Vildmose

[Uffe Kousgaard]

Lille Vildmose er en delmængde af Natura området:
https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lille_Vildmose

Men klart, ville se bedre ud med de rigtige navne.
Vi skriver jo heller ikke kommunernes numre på kortet, men derimod deres 
navne.


mvh
Uffe Kousgaard

On 21-06-2018 12:58, Sonny B. Andersen wrote:


Hej,-

Er der en lokal mapper, der kan rette Nordsøstien her?

Jeg var stien igennem forrige år, men siden da er der kommet en sø i 
området, så nu ser det lidt fjollet ud – især på lonvia-kortet 
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=14!56.8742!10.2028 



I øvrigt mener jeg, at det ville bedre at kalde området Lille Vildmose 
i stedet for det lidt nørdede ”Natura2000 område nr. 17”


/sba-dk



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


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

Re: [Talk-cz] edit war na Žižkově - mapujeme podle stavu v terénu, nebo podle legálního stavu?

[Jan Dudík]

Jenže opět jsme i problému, že v datech to sice je, ale skoro žádný
renderer to neumí vykreslit jinak => běžný uživatel nepozná, zda je to
legální nebo nelegální
(ať už se jedná o squat, nepřístupnou cestu, či soukromý bazén)
---
JAnD


čt 21. 6. 2018 v 2:16 odesílatel Petr Vozdecký  napsal:

> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Mikoláš Štrajt 
>
> souhlasím - tyhle problematické až ilegalní entity by měly v mapě
> odlišitelné od těch bezproblémových.
>
> U těch cest jsem to už kdysi dávno viděl na jakési papírové mapě, kde byly
> ty horské silničky v 1. zóně NP přeškrtány.
>
>
> To je podobný, ale JINÝ případ - silnička v 1. zóně NP je tam legálně a je
> právní normou veřejnosti znepřístupněna. Proto je v mapě namalována a
> přeškrtána...
>
>
>
>
> -- Původní e-mail --
> Od: Jan Martinec 
>
> Připadá mi poněkud relevantní tenhle dokument - byť se týká sporných
> teritorií, pro jiná data v OSM platí IMNSHO totéž:
>
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf
>
> > However, to remain neutral and to provide a practically useful service
> to a global community, we cannot delete base data to suit a particular
> legal jurisdiction.
>
>
> Asi nejsilnější a nejpevnější argument. Zmapovat! Ovšem za mě - pokud je
> to bezesporu ilegální, pak by se tomu hodil nějaký tag, který umožní
> rendereru rozhodnout, co s tím udělá.
> ___
> Talk-cz mailing list
> Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
> https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz
>
___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

[Talk-dk] Våde fødder ved Lille Vildmose

[Sonny B. Andersen]

Hej,-

Er der en lokal mapper, der kan rette Nordsøstien her?
Jeg var stien igennem forrige år, men siden da er der kommet en sø i området, 
så nu ser det lidt fjollet ud – især på lonvia-kortet 
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=14!56.8742!10.2028

I øvrigt mener jeg, at det ville bedre at kalde området Lille Vildmose i stedet 
for det lidt nørdede ”Natura2000 område nr. 17”

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

Re: [Talk-it] Milano - open day AMAT la mattina del 7 luglio

[Alessandro Palmas]

Ciao lista,
vi ricordo che sabato 7 luglio ci sarà l'incontro con AMAT.

Oltre agli OSMer ci sarà la presenza del Comune di Milano (giovedì 
scorso ero da loro a parlare con SIT) e Città Metropolitana di Milano 
(che utilizza già OSM). Si parlerà anche di dati attinenti alla ciclabilità.


Questo il link per la registrazione.
 
https://www.eventbrite.it/e/registrazione-openday-amat-openstreetmap-46968235256?aff=wikimediaIT

Alessandro Ale_Zena_IT

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

Re: [Talk-lt] Adresai

[Tomas Straupis]

Laba diena

2018 m. birželio 21 d. 08:33, Rambla Rambla rašė:
> Pamenu buvo kalba dėl regionų adresų. Štai mūsų geoportale yra sudėta ant
> OSM'o www.geoportal.lt/savivaldybes/anyksciai ; varnelę reikia uždėti ant
> 'Administracinės ribos ir adresai' . Maps lt irgi adresai yra sudėti, tik
> žemėlapio pagrindas yra ne OSM.

  Adresų problema yra ne techninė „iš kur gauti failą“, o teisinė
„gauti leidimą naudoti oficialius adresų duomenis“.
  Geoportale yra tie patys registrų centro duomenys. Maps.lt irgi tie
patys RC duomenys.
  Yra ir daugiau žemėlapių, kurie naudoja RC adresų duomenis.

  Žodžiu kol Seimas nepakeis įstatymų ir neatvers adresų duomenų - tol
mes juos turėsim rankomis patys susivedinėti. Bet Seimas turi kur kas
„svarbesnių“ reikalų nei kad kažką atverti ar pagerinti, jau nekalbant
apie tai, kad nelabai jie orientuojasi aplinkoje :-)

  Tik didesniuose miestuose, kurie turi savo adresų duomenų bazes,
galima susitarti su savivaldybe ir tas adresų bazes gauti ir sukelti į
OSM.

P.S. Bet tai nereiškia, kad norintys ir turintys laiko negali ieškoti
kontaktų su RC ir per tą galą stumti adresų atvėrimo. Mantas gi kažką
buvo pradėjęs su komunikacija?

-- 
Tomas

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

Re: [Talk-cat] OpenStreetMaps al Ajuntament de Barcelona

[Jose Luis Infante]

Hola Xabier,

como ya conoces, OpenStreetMap sigue la filosofía de compartir conocimiento
libremente que caracteriza a los proyectos de software libre y a proyectos
"procomuns" como Guifi o Wikipedia.

Así que desde la comunidad catalana de OSM valoramos muy positivamente el
hecho que comentas de migrar a una opción libre, y desde luego pensamos que
OSM debería ser esa opción. Por eso tenemos como principal objetivo mejorar
el mapa de Catalunya, precisamente para que cualquier administración u
organización considere que OSM debe ser su mapa, y por tanto se implique
también en mejorarlo. En este aspecto, ya hemos contactado con Mercè Fígols
y Màrius Boada para tramitar la autorización del uso del opendata de
Barcelona en OSM, datos que usaremos para mejorar el mapa de Barcelona.
Pongo en copia a Joaquín, que es uno de los miembros de nuestra comunidad
que está gestionando esta autorización.

Si os interesa podemos quedar un día para conocer las necesidades
específicas que tenéis con el traspaso y cómo OpenStreetMap os podría
servir de solución.

Un saludo,

Jose Luis Infante



El 18 de junio de 2018, 12:14, Barandiaran Fernández, Xabier E <
xbarandia...@bcn.cat> escribió:

> Buenas,
>
> Os escribo porque en su día nos ayudasteis y mostrasteis interés en
> impulsar que https://decidim.barcelona migrara a OSM. Llevamos año y
> medio con OSM en Decidim y nos va de maravilla, aquí un ejemplo de
> geolocalización de trobadas:
> https://www.decidim.barcelona/processes/pam/f/11/
>
> Y aquí de geolocalización de propuestas:
> https://www.decidim.barcelona/processes/lesrambles/f/2393/
>
> Desde el Ajuntament ahora estamos explorando la posibilidad de renunciar
> a los servicios de Google Maps, más allá del Decidim, a otros servicios
> digitales.
>
> Os pongo en contacto con Cristina Ribas que es la directora de
> comuniación digital y está valorando opciones libres y creando un plan
> de migración.
>
> un fuerte abrazo,
>
> xabier
> --
> Dr. Xabier E. Barandiaran
> - Decidim.Barcelona Coordinator
> - Research, Development & Innovation Directorate for Participation,
>   Transparency & Citizen Rights at Barcelona City Council.
> - Regidoria de Participació i Districtes,
>   Plaça Sant Miquel, Edifici Nou 2a planta, 08002 Barcelona.
> - GPG fingerprint:
>   6683 0572 9D57 F9F0 9CC6 2AE1 7833 F41B 652D 12AF
___
Talk-cat mailing list
Talk-cat@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cat

Re: [talk-au] Got an email from Royal Geographical Society of QLD about Boundaries

[Sam Wilson]

On 21/06/18 14:13, Warin wrote:

Yes to OHM.


Note that OHM is undergoing some maintenance at the moment. It'll be 
back online soon according to

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/historic/2018-June/001168.html


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

Re: [talk-au] Got an email from Royal Geographical Society of QLD about Boundaries

[Warin]

Yes to OHM.

However some of the present day boundaries have there origins in the original 
boundaries, so some of them may be useful in OSM too.

As there are 'pastoral' boundaries they would be seen as 'farms' in OHS/M 
terms, not an administrative boundary - except where that occurs.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Farm for farm type mapping.

As a first instance I would map the boundaries as simple landuse=farmland,
 coming along later to make it a relation with a hole for the landuse=farmyard 
(homestead +  other buildings etc).
Note that relations will be an important thing to learn so boundary ways can be 
shared, this will be a new skill to learn for the building mappers.

The important thing in OHM is the start_date and end_date

https://wiki .openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date


and as a confusing over view
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts
Might be better to keep learners away from that page, sigh.



On 21/06/18 14:44, Joel H. wrote:


A few days ago Bob from the Royal Geographical Society of QLD sent me an
email about mapping historical Pastoral Districts.

Anyone around Brisbane should have a little read (particularly the
question to OSM).

I made the suggestion that Open Historical Map should be used instead. I
was also thinking that OSM Brisbane and RGSQ could get together for an
event again!

Does anyone have anything to add?

 Forwarded Message 
Subject:MAP GROUP, ROYAL GEOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY OF QLD (RGSQ) & OSM
Date:   Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:03:28 +1000
From:   Bob Abnett 





Joel,

  


Prior to your running the OSM group in Brisbane, the Map Group had a close
working relationship to David Dean, the previous contact person - now
working in Armidale, NSW.

  


Map Group members have not been so responsive to OSM this year, as RGSQ is
looking for a replacement premises and Map Group, within RGSQ, is
temporarily meeting in Moorooka, not Milton anymore.

  


As the Co-Ordinator of Map Group, I am also heading up the Replacement
Premises Committee of RGSQ and hence, I personally, have been very busy on
building matters.

  


However, this replacement building process is expected to be completed
during the second half of 2018 and as Co-ordinator of Map Group, I am
looking at the 2019 Program.

  


2019 Program:  Mapping of the early Pastoral Districts of Queensland

  


One of the Presenters in 2019 will be an historian, who has been recording
the history of the early Land Commissioners in Pre-Separation Qld from 1842
to 1859.

  


She has asked if Map Group could consider some modern digitally based
mapping system to re-map the original Pastoral Districts of Pre-Separation
Queensland.

  


These Pastoral Districts were initially described in the NSW Govt Gazette by
"metes and bounds" and from these "original boundaries", quite simple maps
were drawn up of Southern Queensland by the  then Colonial Govt of NSW, as
it was in the 1840s and 1850s, using the Pastoral Districts as the basis for
mapping.  Both the historian and Map Group have got digital images from the
NSW State Archives of these early, but rather simple Pastoral District maps.

  


Once Queensland became a separate colony in 1859, it set up its own Lands
Department containing surveyors and later cartographers, and the mapping of
Queensland vastly improved from then onwards.

  


Later in 2019, Map Group is to have another Presenter talk about the mapping
of Queensland from 1860 to the 1880s, when much of the State was then mapped
(at a far higher standard than that from the earlier period).

  


Question to OSM:

  


Would the Brisbane group of OSM be interested in participating with some Map
Group members in a mapping exercise of: mapping the boundaries of Qld's
Pre-Separation Pastoral Districts, upon an OSM base map of Queensland?

  


I have looked at OSM for Queensland and at a higher level of mapping, versus
the close up "zooming in", where local details come to the fore, it would
initially look possible to map the Pastoral District boundaries.

  


When David Dean taught Map Group members how to use OSM in 2016, it was at
the local level and we learnt particularly about placing buildings onto OSM
maps.  (we worked the Milton area as Map Group; then South Brisbane, as a
group; the Nundah area as part of a Map Group project, then many of us did
our own streets where we live).

  


I believe that those of us interested in mapping the Pastoral District
boundaries would need to learn how to edit OSM to map such boundaries.  Note
that these early Pastoral District Maps covered all of Southern Qld,
northwards to Gladstone and westwards to the Maranoa, west of the Darling
Downs.  Hence the boundaries cover a lot of territory.

  


Anyway, would the OSM group in Brisbane be interested in such a "higher
level" of mapping?

  


If so, would you or someone else be willing to "teach" a few Map Group
members how to map boundary lines? (versus