Re: [OSM-talk-nl] JOSM plugin "Ga naar" ontwikkeling.

[Marc Gemis]

Je bedoelt zoiets als dit :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/utilsplugin2#Use_custom_URL_.28Shift.2BH.29
?

mvg

m

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 12:23 PM Allroads  wrote:
>
> Hallo,
>
> Er is ondertussen veel data, die we mogen gebruiken voor mapping/tagging in 
> Openstreetmap.
> Data, waarvoor we als Openstreetmap Nederland afspraken hebben gemaakt.
> Deze data is vaak in layer vorm te zien op een website, een website met in de 
> url de geografisch coördinaten en zoomniveau.
> Binnen de Openstreetmap community zijn ook enkele van deze sites ontwikkeld. 
> Om inzicht te krijgen. Hoe eigen Openstreetmap data is getagd.
> Voorbeeld: zone 30 controle, of een gebied sluitend is.
> http://mijndev.openstreetmap.nl/~marczoutendijk/openpoimap/nlvb/?map=snelheid=17=51.57365=3.70426=B0FTTFFF
>
> Wanneer alles makkelijker bereikbaar is, het in de lijst staat als controle 
> mogelijkheid, is er makkelijker te communiceren en de kwaliteit van de data 
> te verbeteren.
> En kan je meer respons verwachten!
>
> Wanneer we aan het editen zijn, wil je wel eens snel naar een site, op de 
> ingezoomde plaats.
>
> Als voorbeeld:
> We mogen nu BGT gebruiken, als layer BGT omtrekgericht in JOSM.
> Je werkt op lokaal niveau, ziet dat er iets niet klopt en wil naar “Verbeter 
> de kaart” website op locatie om een melding te maken.
> Nu moet je vele stappen nemen van/naar en inzoomen. Melding maken.
> https://www.verbeterdekaart.nl/#?geometry.x=16.5185=451931.46324746=3
>
> Wat ik mij voor stel is.
> Een node in JOSM selecteren, de knop in taakbalk “Ga naar” de website kiezen, 
> waar je naar toe wilt.
> Een Nederlandse lijst of eigen lijst, met websites om naar toe te gaan.
>
> De plugin: “Ga naar”.
>
> Wie zou willen helpen om dit tot stand te brengen? Participeren in de 
> ontwikkeling, kennis inbrengen.
> Interactie tot stand brengen van burger (vrijwilliger Openstreetmap) naar 
> Overheid. Win/win.
> Wellicht kan de Overheid, ook een taak op zich nemen. Meer meldingen is 
> betere data, vooral ook omdat de Openstreetmap mapper zeer lokaal/ingezoomd 
> werkt en vergelijkt.
> De suggestie is al bij “Verbeter de kaart” neergelegd. Financiering Kadaster 
> is moeilijk, prioriteiten. De API is mij bekend. Naar website, korte en 
> simpele stap zonder API?
> Wellicht zijn er fondsen, financiering vormen, die dit mogelijk kunnen maken. 
> Wie ziet daar mogelijkheden of zit aan het roer?
>
> Wat denken jullie van het plan en de uitvoerbaarheid?
>
>
> Met vriendelijke groet,
> Allroads.
>
> ___
> Talk-nl mailing list
> Talk-nl@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nl

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

Re: [talk-au] Discussion K: Evaluation of ACT paths audit 2012 and the OSM ACT dataset

[Richard Fairhurst]

This is getting ridiculous.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Australia-f5416966.html

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ZIP codes from OSM in non-compatible licensed dataset

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 7. Oct 2019, at 19:48, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk 
>  wrote:
> 
> In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns and not 
> removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one property that is 
> "OSM ZIP" and one property that is "proprietary ZIP", and they are two 
> different properties that are not used to improve each other, so it is a 
> collective database per 
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Collective_Database_Guideline_Guideline


As I read the collective db guideline, you cannot have both, the ZIP codes from 
your proprietary database and those from OpenStreetMap, in the same database 
matched to the same objects. It says “add or replace” a property (we do agree 
the ZIP codes are a property and not a primary feature?). If you keep both ZIP 
codes in your db, it implies you need both columns, which implies you are 
somehow mixing them at some point (or you could drop the proprietary ZIP codes, 
as you won’t need them)

Cheers Martin ___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 20:03, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 07/10/19 19:57, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
> I added this to the ATG as amenity=community_centre +
> community_centre:for=man,
>
>
> 'man' may mean both men and women. On the other hand it maybe the original
> use was for males only. I think the value is not good.
> There are only 4 uses of the community_centre:for=man in the data base. I
> would prefer a different value... with a clear meaning.
>

Yep, I did mention =man/woman earlier, but, thinking about it, I'm not that
thrilled with it.

=community_shed or =mens_shed  keep the "shed" title, which I think is
important

Thanks

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

[talk-au] Discussion K: Evaluation of ACT paths audit 2012 and the OSM ACT dataset

[Herbert.Remi via Talk-au]

# Discussion K: Evaluation of ACT paths audit 2012 and the OSM ACT dataset

## The Issue
It is clear from the OSM dataset for in the ACT, that it is the product of 
using the editor presets for paths. The OSM Australian Tagging Guidelines (ATG) 
is consistent with the real use and the legal definition of "community paths" 
in the ACT (and verifiable) but this is completely ignored by the mappers. No 
single incidence of this tagging exists in the ACT. Using ACT data from 2012, 
98% of ACT paths should be "community paths". The disconnect between the OSM 
ATG (correct) and the OSM path data (false) for the ACT is disturbing.

## QUESTION
What should we do about this?

## what you need to know
- Community paths ( permitted for both bikes and pedestrians) make up 98% off 
all paths that exist in the ACT.
- Editor presets overwhelmingly dominate in OSM dataset for the ACT: almost all 
the paths in the ACT are tagged with the Foot Path preset or the Cycle Path 
preset and some with the Cycle & Foot Path preset. The OSM ATG recommended 
tagging is NOT USED in the ACT. Prove it yourself below. :-)

## Most paths in the ACT are community paths
"Community paths" (official term) are the most common path type in the ACT and 
correspond in the OSM ATG to the tagging:
- highway=path
- foot=designated
- bicycle=designated
- segregated=no

Quoting the ACT document (link below) "Guidelines for community path repairs 
and maintenance":
"Footpaths and cycle paths (referred to as community paths) are provided to 
assist the community with walking and cycling activities. As at 30 June 2012, 
there was 2,533 kilometres of community paths in the ACT (2,190 kilometres of 
footpaths and 343 kilometres of off-road cycle paths). Community paths can be 
used by pedestrians, cyclists and motorised mobility devices (electric 
wheelchairs and mobility scooters/buggies that cannot travel over 10 kilometres 
per hour)."
source: 
https://www.tccs.act.gov.au/roads-paths/cycling/policy-for-footpath-maintenance

Back in 2012, there were 2533km of paths. As far as I know there where no bike 
ONLY and pedestrian ONLY paths at that time. Some bike ONLY paths have been 
built since: the Civic city loop (approx 4km in 2013), Woden bike path (2km), 
and Belconnen Bikeway (4.7km to be completed in 2020). None of these paths 
existed in 2012 so the calculation below is conservative. In the new suburbs, 
many community paths have been built since. They are not "footpaths"!

(1) Total paths in community paths 2533km
(2) Total "bike ONLY" paths know: approx 25km
(3) Double item 2 for possible "pedestrian ONLY" path duplication (unlikely): 
total now approx 50km
(4) There is approx 50km of bike ONLY and pedestrian ONLY paths
(5) Calculate bike ONLY and pedestrian ONLY paths as a percentage of the total 
1.97% (50/2533)
(6) The difference gives you the percentage of community paths (both bike and 
pedestrian) = 98%

**Community paths (both bike and pedestrian) make up 98% off all paths in the 
ACT.**

## Frequency distribution of path presets in the OSM ACT dataset
This can be best done visually from a live data set using the overpass-turbo 
tool. This "analysis" is a visuall comparison the standard ID editor presets 
with the ATG tagging recommended for the ACT. I will provide a link for each 
scenario.

**Almost all the paths in the ACT are tagged with the Foot Path preset or the 
Cycle Path preset and some with the Cycle & Foot Path preset.**

### Foot Path preset (symbol "walking man“)
frequency of tagging in OSM dataset: VERY COMMON
overpass-turbo link: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MU7
tags:
- highway=footway

### Cycle Path preset (symbol blue bike)
frequency of tagging in OSM dataset: COMMON
overpass-turbo link: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MU8
tags:
- highway=cycleway

### Cycle & Foot Path preset (symbol blue bike)
 ID editor preset
frequency of tagging in OSM dataset: NONE
overpass-turbo link: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MUb
tags:
- cycleway=highway
- foot=designated
- bicycle=designated

 Alternate preset (not sure which editor though)
frequency of tagging in OSM dataset: SOME
overpass-turbo link: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MUe
tags:
- highway= cycleway
- foot=designated
- bicycle=designated

### ATG recommended tagging for the ACT Community Path
frequency of tagging in OSM dataset: RARE
(but leave off the segregated=no and you get more)
overpass-turbo link: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MUc
tags:
- highway=path
- bicycle=designated
- foot=designated
- segregated=no

## QUESTION
What should we do about this?

I welcome your comments
Keywords: Australia, ACT, ATG, ID editor, presets, paths, root cause analysis___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-cz] Pozvánka na mapathon a hackathon

[Jan Macura]

Zdravím ve spolek,

přijměte prosím pozvání na 2. mapathon Missing Maps v Plzni, který se bude
konat tento pátek 11. 10. v TechHeaven (přihlášení zde
).

Zároveň vás zvu na vůbec první hackathon s Lékaři bez hranic v ČR, který
bude na tomtéž místě 11.–13. 10., tj. od pátku (plynule naváže na večerní
mapathon) až do nedělního dopoledne (přihlášení a další informace zde
).
Cílem bude vyvinout či vylepšit nástroje, které usnadní mapování pro
MissingMaps dobrovolníkům mapujícím jak vzdáleně, tak v terénu. Na akci
budou účastni i zajímaví hosté z řad Lékařů bez hranic.

Na viděnou na některé z akcí
 Honza Macura
___
talk-cz mailing list
talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ZIP codes from OSM in non-compatible licensed dataset

[Kathleen Lu via legal-talk]

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:16 AM Lars-Daniel Weber 
wrote:

> From: "Kathleen Lu via legal-talk" 
> > In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns
> > and not removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one
> > property that is "OSM ZIP" and one property that is "proprietary ZIP",
> > and they are two different properties that are not used to improve each
> > other, so it is a collective database per
> >
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Collective_Database_Guideline_Guideline
>
> Okay, thanks for clarification. Then the specific column is under ODbL and
> the other columns can be proprietary.
> But I need to tell others, not to compare both ZIPs datasets and get "the
> best of both worlds", right?
>
> Exactly


> > (However, I am doubtful that the ZIPs would be considered
> > nonsubstantial, since that definition is not based on how many columns
> > of OSM is used.)
>
> Ah okay, there's the 100 features directive in OSM, which I didn't know
> about.
>
> The 100 features is *one way* (that is relatively easy to understand) but
not the only way for an extraction to be insubstantial. However, that said,
I would be doubtful that, for example, an extraction of all ZIPs in OSM
could be insubstantial. Where the line is has not been conclusively
established.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ZIP codes from OSM in non-compatible licensed dataset

[Lars-Daniel Weber]

From: "Kathleen Lu via legal-talk" 
> In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns
> and not removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one
> property that is "OSM ZIP" and one property that is "proprietary ZIP",
> and they are two different properties that are not used to improve each
> other, so it is a collective database per
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Collective_Database_Guideline_Guideline

Okay, thanks for clarification. Then the specific column is under ODbL and the 
other columns can be proprietary.
But I need to tell others, not to compare both ZIPs datasets and get "the best 
of both worlds", right?

> (However, I am doubtful that the ZIPs would be considered
> nonsubstantial, since that definition is not based on how many columns
> of OSM is used.)

Ah okay, there's the 100 features directive in OSM, which I didn't know about.


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] map drawn based on OSM tiles

[Kathleen Lu via legal-talk]

> Thus, assuming the shapefiles are essentially the equivalent of

> > simplified OSM border shapefiles, the shapefiles are covered by ODbL.
>
> Actually, it's like 40% OSM borders (hard borders, like roads, rivers,
> topography and administrative stuff) and 60% own borders, which don't
> appear in OSM. BUt those borders wouldn't make OSM any better, since
> they're specific for the current task.
>
> My view would be the OSM borders are ODbL. Just because it's one shapefile
doesn't mean all of the data in the shapefile has to be under one license.
If the other borders are not border types that are in OSM that you have
traced, ODbL does not implicate them per the Collective Database Guideline.


> > Now, it sounds like you're not tracing very much, so it's possible that
> > you have traced fewer than 100 features in which case your tracing is
> > insubstantial
> >
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline
>
> Actually, I've traced more than 100 features, but the "extraction is
> non-systematic and clearly based on your own qualitative criteria" - okay,
> not on my one, but on the one who draw the overlay with the pen.
>
> It's possible that your extraction is insubstantial, though I can't say
definitively. But I don't think that you need a definitive answer on
whether it's insubstantial, since if your usecase is as a filter to select
POIs, then you can do that whether the borders make up a substantial
extract or not, and you are willing to provide attribution anyway, so you
do not need to conclusively avoid ODbL.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] map drawn based on OSM tiles

[Lars-Daniel Weber via legal-talk]

From: "Kathleen Lu via legal-talk" 
> So if what is extracted is solely what was in the database, then the 
> extraction is not
> material that the tile license covered (the tile license cannot actually
> change the license of the data, which is ODbL, as that would be
> impermissible under ODbL). 

Yeah, that's why I assumed, too.

> Thus, assuming the shapefiles are essentially the equivalent of
> simplified OSM border shapefiles, the shapefiles are covered by ODbL.

Actually, it's like 40% OSM borders (hard borders, like roads, rivers, 
topography and administrative stuff) and 60% own borders, which don't appear in 
OSM. BUt those borders wouldn't make OSM any better, since they're specific for 
the current task.

> Now, it sounds like you're not tracing very much, so it's possible that
> you have traced fewer than 100 features in which case your tracing is
> insubstantial
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline

Actually, I've traced more than 100 features, but the "extraction is 
non-systematic and clearly based on your own qualitative criteria" - okay, not 
on my one, but on the one who draw the overlay with the pen.

But what does this result in? Sorry for asking... it's a real life problem, not 
a constructed one.

And please remember the other question I've asked. I haven't found an answer on 
the web or the OSM boards.

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ZIP codes from OSM in non-compatible licensed dataset

[Kathleen Lu via legal-talk]

In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns and
not removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one property
that is "OSM ZIP" and one property that is "proprietary ZIP", and they are
two different properties that are not used to improve each other, so it is
a collective database per
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Collective_Database_Guideline_Guideline
(However, I am doubtful that the ZIPs would be considered nonsubstantial,
since that definition is not based on how many columns of OSM is used.)

On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 6:09 AM Lars-Daniel Weber 
wrote:

> Dear users,
>
> I'm often intersecting geodata with a license, which is in a
> non-ODbL-compatible license, with OSM data to enrich this data. Normally,
> I'm doing this for internal (private) use only, but I want to publish such
> a dataset now.
>
> For example, I'm getting postal ZIP codes from OSM and add these to other
> POI data. I'm keeping the original ZIP codes from the source and the ZIP
> codes from OSM and I'm not completing the ZIP codes by each other - they
> don't interact, I'm not removing duplicates and they're in two different
> columns. Of course, ZIP codes don't seem to be a substantial part, but the
> data is related by each other, since I've intersected (joined) both
> datasets.
>
> Is the joined result a "Collective Database" or a "Produced Work", since
> it only contains a non-substantial part (only one string column) from OSM?
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Lars-Daniel
>
>
>
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-talk] An own platform for tagging related discussions

[Valor Naram]

Hey,

see also
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2019-September/083286.html
(Tagging Goverance) and upfollowing discussion. Some of you and I
mentioned that it might be necessary to switch from a mailing list
"tagging" to another communication platform like Gitlab (or other git
flavored/like system), a forum, wiki or creating an own platform. In
this e-mail I will write you about the latter option because I find it
interesting but also a risky step.


Why it's interesting to have and build an own platform for "tagging"
and why it has some (dis)advantages.
First the disadvantages:
1. We need a group of developers we can trust, who do it voluntary and
who are part of the OSM community. (see the idea-mockup in the attachment I 
created as an idea how it can but doesn't need to lock and work)
2. It needs to be maintained actively. That's actually the risky part I
think.

Now the advantages:
1. Independence from outside
2. We can do what we want, build our very own modifications.
3. Integration within the other community channels throw integrations.

I don't want to say that we have all these (dis)advantages not when we
use existing systems. We can have other (dis)advantages with other
systems too. But we might have to take this step "creating our own
system", if we cannot find an existing system suitable for us. My
approach is not an "all-fitting nice solution" for all things related
Tagging Governance. Tagging Governance is complex. Beside the
discussion part which takes currently place in the mailing list it
makes its hand also dirty in voting, proposal writing, maintaining
proposal, announcing tagging changes (WeeklyOSM does a great job but we
might need an extra channel to communicate tagging changes (e.g. throw
tagging presets, editor tools like iD, JOSM, Vespucci, OSM Go)),
deprecation of tags, keeping wiki pages about tags up to date, keeping
presets up to date etc.

Cheers

Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram


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

[Talk-it] OSMit 2020

[mbranco2]

Ciao Lista,

riprendo quanto discusso poco tempo fa [1] riguardo a come organizzare la
giornata di sabato 22 febbraio 2020 al convegno di Torino su Software e
Dati Geografici Free e Open Source [2].
In questi giorni ho riscontrato da più parti un forte interesse perché
OSMit sia denso di contenuti e le varie proposte di argomenti trattabili le
ho riepilogate qui [3] ; i relatori possono ovviamente rettificare la breve
descrizione che ho messo agli argomenti, come pure chiunque può aggiungere
altri argomenti.

IMPORTANTE:
Non vorrei che concentrando al sabato gli interventi, nei 3 giorni
precedenti l'argomento OSM sia ignorato: lo spirito di questo evento è
anche di far incontrare le varie comunità e non voglio certo proporre di
fare i separatisti.
Per decidere in che giorno collocare un intervento penso che la
discriminante debba essere: se l'argomento è molto specialistico mettiamolo
al sabato, se ha una valenza più generale (e il relatore dà la sua
disponibilità) mettiamolo nei giorni precedenti; in questo secondo caso
l'abstract va naturalmente presentato al comitato organizzatore tramite il
sito [2].

Buona serata,
Marco

[1] http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/FOSS4G-it-2020-td5947159.html
[2] http://foss4g-it2020.gfoss.it/
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Italy/Events/OSMit_2020_-_draft/


Mail
priva di virus. www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Lieux-dits Fantoir surfaciques

[osm . sanspourriel]

Le 06/10/2019 à 21:17, Christian Rogel -
christian.ro...@club-internet.fr a écrit :

Le 5 oct. 2019 à 13:39, osm.sanspourr...@spamgourmet.com
 a écrit :

En général les endroits habités ont une représentation surfacique.



Où peut-on la trouver ? Le cadastre et la nomenclature FANTOIR ne sont
pas des sources fiables, car leurs préoccupations n’ont rien à voir
avec la dynamique historiques des appellations.


Avec le greffon cadastre-fr
 de JOSM
par exemple.

Il faut avoir l'interface avancée d'activée, c'est un onglet de
Télécharger (Télécharger depuis le cadastre). Cocher Lieux-dits.

Le 06/10/2019 à 21:17, Christian Rogel -
christian.ro...@club-internet.fr a écrit :

Ce serait trop simple, car, il y a des lieux habités qui semblent
avoir perdu leur nom. Peut-être était-ce Le Petit Truc-muche, mais,
comment savoir, à moins de remonter les ou d’interroger les habitants
? Et quand le cadastre donne 3 noms de  pour ce qui apparaît comme un
hameau unique et qui était composé de 3 fermes très proches et ayant
chacune leur nom ? A moins de rétrograder des Ker- en housename ?


Je ne vois pas en quoi ne pas utiliser le cadastre comme source élimine
le problème. Parce qu'on ne met qu'un nom ou aucun ? Si les trois fermes
ont une existence, dans le cadastre tu auras 3 zonages. Si les trois
fermes ne correspondent plus à rien, tu n'intègres pas et c'est tout.
Mais si tu as des code FANTOIR, il reste une existence même minimale.

Dans mon cas j'avais Les Trois Pierres qui ont remplacé sur le terrain
Petite Porte Cadic, je mets le nœud Les Trois Pierres comme label de la
relation name=Les Trois Pierres, alt_name=Petite Porte Cadic. Comme je
disais, le transformateur Enedis portant le nom Petite Porte Cadic, je
garde ça comme alt_name et non old_name.

Au pire, mettons qu'on ne sache pas, alors on suit le cadastre et un
(plus) local de l'étape pourra corriger. Ou on n'intègre pas le cadastre
sur cette zone.

Le 06/10/2019 à 21:17, Christian Rogel -
christian.ro...@club-internet.fr a écrit :


On aurait donc des nom de lieu à 2 ou  3 niveaux de technique
d’inscription, Il faudra des tutoriels costauds, pour s’y retrouver.


Je ne comprends pas : en quoi ça change l'actuel ? Mettre une relation
en plus du nœud c'est juste comme pour les relation administratives. On
a su le faire pour 35 000 communes. Et si on fait comme je propose une
pré-intégration avec le cadastre, toute la partie un peu technique est
réglée par super-Vincent ;-).

Jean-Yvon

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] map drawn based on OSM tiles

[Kathleen Lu via legal-talk]

In my mind, the tile license (CC-BY-SA) sits on top of the database
license, as the license to a produced work by the OSMF. So if what is
extracted is solely what was in the database, then the extraction is not
material that the tile license covered (the tile license cannot actually
change the license of the data, which is ODbL, as that would be
impermissible under ODbL). This is the same principle, that if you use a
CC-BY song in a music video that is licensed as CC-BY-SA, and then someone
comes along and rips the song from the music video, the song is still
CC-BY, not CC-BY-SA.
Thus, assuming the shapefiles are essentially the equivalent of simplified
OSM border shapefiles, the shapefiles are covered by ODbL.
Now, it sounds like you're not tracing very much, so it's possible that you
have traced fewer than 100 features in which case your tracing is
insubstantial
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 8:08 AM Lars-Daniel Weber 
wrote:

> From: "Simon Poole" 
> > I'm not ruling out the first interpretation either and potentially both
> > licenses would have to apply in full (which isn't possible without
> > conflict).
>
> I would like to clarify once again that I really do want to attribute OSM.
> But it's damn difficult for me to find out under which license my work
> falls.
> I know lots of people, loading OSM tiles in QGIS and draw stuff on it. So
> I'm pretty confused that there aren't any guidelines discussed.
>
> > But if the shape files are simply used for display purposes as a
> > tendency I would find that they are still being used as a produced work
> > as per
> >
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Produced_Work_-_Guideline
> > Which from the ODbL pov requires attribution and a pointer back to the
> > data source, which you can provide without being in conflict with CC
> > BY-SA terms that you would have to adhere to.
>
> No, the shapefile will be used for further geoprocessing: selection of
> POI, which are non-free, but fall into the border I've digitized upon the
> OSM background map.
>
> Would you recommend
> 1. to use another datasource as background map or
> 2. draw all borders on an OSM extract once again?
>
> Since neither the drawing, nor my digitalization uses OSM data, I'm really
> asking myself if it's not a trivial act at all?
> Wouldn't "Drawn on OSM tiles in CC-BY-SA 2.0, based on OSM data in ODbL"
> be enough as attribution?
>
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-talk-nl] JOSM plugin "Ga naar" ontwikkeling.

[Stefan de Konink]

On Thursday, October 3, 2019 12:29:06 PM CEST, Allroads wrote:

Wat denken jullie van het plan en de uitvoerbaarheid?


Het is een goed plan, mits je het in tweeen kan splitsen. De JOSM voorkant 
is slim, zeker voor OpenStreetMap gebruikers, maar het feit dat je weet bij 
wie je moet zijn als je een melding wilt doen is op zich zelf ook al erg 
waardevol. Je zou dus een metaservice willen hebben waar de JOSM plugin z'n 
informatie uithaalt, maar ook een online editor op zou werken.


In de afgelopen maanden heb ik erg veel verschillende 
"verbeterjebuurt"-achtige zaken gezien. Binnen 1 gemeente zijn er soms wel 
4 verschillende loketten waar je de omgevingsmelding moet doet, afhankelijk 
van het thema. Wellicht is het mogelijk om 'eenvoudig' zo'n loket link in 
te brengen in zo'n tussenliggende API.


--
Stefan

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Sur 01net L’incroyable histoire de Waze, la carte routière la plus précise au monde... conçue par des bénévoles

[HELFER Denis (SNCF RESEAU / SIEGE SNCF RESEAU / DT GE PPE)]

C’est curieux l’article n’aborde pas la question : comment Waze a été/est 
financé. 520 employés c’est un budget, non ?
Ca doit intéresser personne, sans doute.
Un indice : 
https://www.capital.fr/entreprises-marches/comment-waze-brasse-des-millions-grace-a-vous-1341068


Denis

De : Christian Quest 
Envoyé : lundi 7 octobre 2019 17:29
À : Discussions sur OSM en français 
Objet : Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Sur 01net L’incroyable histoire de Waze, la carte 
routière la plus précise au monde... conçue par des bénévoles

Waze, en France, a été initialisé avec un filaire routier dont je ne connais 
pas la source.

Il ne possédait pas les noms de rues ou routes, ni d'infos sur leur type ou 
sens de circulation. Je m'en rappelle plutôt bien car j'ai pas mal ajouté 
d'infos comme les noms dans Waze avant de découvrir OSM... et là waze a perdu 
un contributeur assidu ;)

Le dim. 6 oct. 2019 à 10:49, PierreV 
mailto:belett...@hotmail.fr>> a écrit :
https://www.01net.com/actualites/l-incroyable-histoire-de-waze-la-carte-routiere-la-plus-precise-au-monde-concue-par-des-benevoles-1777628.html

On contacte 01net pour leur proposer un article sur OSM qui est encore plus
"génial" que Waze car réutilisable par n'importe qui?

Par contre le fait que waze n'utile pas de "fonds cartographique"
contrairement a OSM, c'est un peu faux :
car d'après wikipédia Waze a acheté quelques données dans certains pays

apparemment c'est le premier d'une série d'articles:
https://twitter.com/LelloucheNico/status/1180427218067087362



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/France-f5380434.html

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


--
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
---
Ce message et toutes les pièces jointes sont établis à l'intention exclusive de 
ses destinataires et sont confidentiels. L'intégrité de ce message n'étant pas 
assurée sur Internet, la SNCF ne peut être tenue responsable des altérations 
qui pourraient se produire sur son contenu. Toute publication, utilisation, 
reproduction, ou diffusion, même partielle, non autorisée préalablement par la 
SNCF, est strictement interdite. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce 
message, merci d'en avertir immédiatement l'expéditeur et de le détruire.
---
This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees and are 
confidential. SNCF may not be held responsible for their contents whose 
accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed over the Internet. Unauthorized 
use, disclosure, distribution, copying, or any part thereof is strictly 
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please 
notify the sender immediately and delete it. 
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Sur 01net L’incroyable histoire de Waze, la carte routière la plus précise au monde... conçue par des bénévoles

[Christian Quest]

Waze, en France, a été initialisé avec un filaire routier dont je ne
connais pas la source.

Il ne possédait pas les noms de rues ou routes, ni d'infos sur leur type ou
sens de circulation. Je m'en rappelle plutôt bien car j'ai pas mal ajouté
d'infos comme les noms dans Waze avant de découvrir OSM... et là waze a
perdu un contributeur assidu ;)

Le dim. 6 oct. 2019 à 10:49, PierreV  a écrit :

>
> https://www.01net.com/actualites/l-incroyable-histoire-de-waze-la-carte-routiere-la-plus-precise-au-monde-concue-par-des-benevoles-1777628.html
>
> On contacte 01net pour leur proposer un article sur OSM qui est encore plus
> "génial" que Waze car réutilisable par n'importe qui?
>
> Par contre le fait que waze n'utile pas de "fonds cartographique"
> contrairement a OSM, c'est un peu faux :
> car d'après wikipédia Waze a acheté quelques données dans certains pays
>
> apparemment c'est le premier d'une série d'articles:
> https://twitter.com/LelloucheNico/status/1180427218067087362
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/France-f5380434.html
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>


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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Géocodage : différence entre les API

[Christian Quest]

J'ai plusieurs instances d'addok avec différents référentiels sur addok.xyz:
- ban.addok.xyz : c'est la BAN "ODbL" qui est derrière
- bano.addok.xyz: c'est BANO
- poi.addok.xyz: ce sont les POI d'OSM
- demo.addok.xyz: c'est BANO + POI + Geonames, l'idée étant de voir comment
addok se comporte sur un référentiel mixte
- all.addok.xyz: c'est metaddok qui répond, une surcouche python qui
interroge ban.addok.xyz, bano.addok.xyz et poi.addok.xyz

Effectivement, niveau doc c'est améliorable... c'est peu documenté car
utilisé surtout en interne (tout ça tourne sur ma tour infernale v1) pour
géocoder différentes bases (comme SIRENE).
Pour demo, comme son nom l'indique c'est à titre de démo et pour all,
metaddok est sur github: https://github.com/cquest/metaddok


Le sam. 5 oct. 2019 à 18:12, mga_geo via Talk-fr 
a écrit :

> Merci pour la réponse Jean-Yvon
> Je ne connaissais pas la version "all" et je n'ai plus d'échec.
> On trouve où la document sur cette API ?
> Marc
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/France-f5380434.html
>
> ___
> Talk-fr mailing list
> Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr
>


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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] map drawn based on OSM tiles

[Lars-Daniel Weber]

From: "Simon Poole" 
> I'm not ruling out the first interpretation either and potentially both
> licenses would have to apply in full (which isn't possible without
> conflict).

I would like to clarify once again that I really do want to attribute OSM. But 
it's damn difficult for me to find out under which license my work falls.
I know lots of people, loading OSM tiles in QGIS and draw stuff on it. So I'm 
pretty confused that there aren't any guidelines discussed.

> But if the shape files are simply used for display purposes as a
> tendency I would find that they are still being used as a produced work
> as per
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Produced_Work_-_Guideline
> Which from the ODbL pov requires attribution and a pointer back to the
> data source, which you can provide without being in conflict with CC
> BY-SA terms that you would have to adhere to.

No, the shapefile will be used for further geoprocessing: selection of POI, 
which are non-free, but fall into the border I've digitized upon the OSM 
background map.

Would you recommend
1. to use another datasource as background map or
2. draw all borders on an OSM extract once again?

Since neither the drawing, nor my digitalization uses OSM data, I'm really 
asking myself if it's not a trivial act at all?
Wouldn't "Drawn on OSM tiles in CC-BY-SA 2.0, based on OSM data in ODbL" be 
enough as attribution?

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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] map drawn based on OSM tiles

[Simon Poole]

Am 07.10.2019 um 01:23 schrieb Lars-Daniel Weber:
> I thought, whenever you re-digitize OSM data from a printed map, it would get 
> ODbL again. According to current ruling by European Court of Justice, a 
> printed map is just a database (it has been judged for a German topographical 
> map in small scale).
>
> So if I had freely drawn the borders based on extract of OSM (with the paper 
> on the desk), it would fall under ODbL?
>
I'm not ruling out the first interpretation either and potentially both
licenses would have to apply in full (which isn't possible without
conflict).

But if the shape files are simply used for display purposes as a
tendency I would find that they are still being used as a produced work
as per
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Produced_Work_-_Guideline
Which from the ODbL pov requires attribution and a pointer back to the
data source, which you can provide without being in conflict with CC
BY-SA terms that you would have to adhere to.




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

Re: [Talk-it] inserimento postamat piccoli comuni

[Andreas Lattmann]

>...e magari anche con licenza libera? Non mi aspetto nulla da una
>s.p.a.
>che blinda persino i codici di avviamento postale

Dura realtà quella dei CAP... ed assurda.


Il 6 ottobre 2019 22:27:45 CEST, Cascafico Giovanni  ha 
scritto:
>Il dom 6 ott 2019, 20:11 Lorenzo Rolla  ha
>scritto:
>
>*Mi si dia atto che Poste Italiane avrebbe potuto creare un elenco con
>le
>esatte coordinate a disposizione dell'utenza.*
>
>
>
>...e magari anche con licenza libera? Non mi aspetto nulla da una
>s.p.a.
>che blinda persino i codici di avviamento postale

--
樂

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

Re: [Talk-it] inserimento postamat piccoli comuni

[Andreas Lattmann]

>
>natural=christmas_tree
>oppure
>
>artificial=tree
>+
>christmas_tree=yes
>
>?

È un albero particolare... 

genus=Ilex
leaf_cycle=evergreen
leaf_type=broadleaved
natural=tree
species=Ilex aquifolium
xmas:feature=tree
xmas:location=L' albero si trova in centro ad una piazzetta di fronte al comune.


Il 6 ottobre 2019 18:50:25 CEST, Ivo Reano  ha scritto:
>> Non credo che "100 abitanti = scarsa mappatura".
>>
>+1
>
>
>> P.S.: vivo in un paese di 112 abitanti ed è mappato pure l'albero di
>> Natale... 
>>
>
>natural=christmas_tree
>oppure
>
>artificial=tree
>+
>christmas_tree=yes
>
>?

--
樂

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?

[Simon Poole]

Am 07.10.2019 um 15:50 schrieb David Woolley:
> On 07/10/2019 14:23, Mark Goodge wrote:
>> The ONS website explicitly states that their postcode products are OGL
>
> The OGL only applies to the parts of the data that relevant government
> organisation has the ability to grant rights to.  It excepts "third
> party rights the Information Provider is not authorised to license;".
> As such being OGL doesn't meant that you have a right to any RM data
> it may contain.

It needs to pointed out that being sure that the dataset does not
contain 3rd party IP that can't be used on OGL terms is not just a
theoretical point, but one  that has happened in real life (for example
it is partially responsible for the failure of openaddresses.uk).

SImon

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



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?

[Simon Poole]

Am 07.10.2019 um 15:50 schrieb David Woolley:
> On 07/10/2019 14:23, Mark Goodge wrote:
>> The ONS website explicitly states that their postcode products are OGL
>
> The OGL only applies to the parts of the data that relevant government
> organisation has the ability to grant rights to.  It excepts "third
> party rights the Information Provider is not authorised to license;".
> As such being OGL doesn't meant that you have a right to any RM data
> it may contain.

It needs to pointed out that being sure that the dataset does not
contain 3rd party IP that can't be used on OGL terms is not just a
theoretical point, but one  that has happened in real life (for example
it is partially responsible for the failure of openaddresses.uk).

SImon

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



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?

[Mark Goodge]

On 07/10/2019 14:50, David Woolley wrote:

On 07/10/2019 14:23, Mark Goodge wrote:

The ONS website explicitly states that their postcode products are OGL


The OGL only applies to the parts of the data that relevant government 
organisation has the ability to grant rights to.  It excepts "third 
party rights the Information Provider is not authorised to license;". As 
such being OGL doesn't meant that you have a right to any RM data it may 
contain.


Yes, but the ONS website licensing page lists the exceptions to OGL in 
its products. It is quite clear about the extent of OGL, and the data to 
which it does not apply. And it doesn't list the user type flag in 
postcode data as an exception. So, as far as ONS are concerned, the user 
type is OGL. That is the only valid conclusion from their wording.


Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?

[David Woolley]

On 07/10/2019 14:23, Mark Goodge wrote:

The ONS website explicitly states that their postcode products are OGL


The OGL only applies to the parts of the data that relevant government 
organisation has the ability to grant rights to.  It excepts "third 
party rights the Information Provider is not authorised to license;". 
As such being OGL doesn't meant that you have a right to any RM data it 
may contain.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?

[Mark Goodge]

On 07/10/2019 11:43, Simon Poole wrote:


Am 03.10.2019 um 10:26 schrieb Mark Goodge:


ONSPD solves this problem, because it includes the "large user" flag.



It's the nature of the beast that when we are discussing OGL licensed
datasets that when something turns up that was previously thought to be
part of a proprietary dataset all alarm bells go off. Do you know how
they derived that flag and if there is really no residual proprietary IP
from RM in the data?


The ONS website explicitly states that their postcode products are OGL, 
with the exception of NI postcodes (which need to be licensed separately 
from NI Land and Property Services).


https://www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/geography/licences

Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?

[David Woolley]

On 07/10/2019 11:43, Simon Poole wrote:

It's the nature of the beast that when we are discussing OGL licensed
datasets that when something turns up that was previously thought to be
part of a proprietary dataset all alarm bells go off. Do you know how
they derived that flag and if there is really no residual proprietary IP
from RM in the data?


Something you have to consider is the threat to RM.  RM won't worry too 
much if they are not loosing revenue, but they probably make significant 
revenue from licensing the postcode database to commercial mapping 
services, so if OSM starts to effectively compete, RM may look rather 
closely at how OSM sourced its postcode data.


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

[Talk-ca] hebdoOSM Nº 480 2019-09-24-2019-09-30

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 480 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/12433/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

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

[OSM-talk-fr] hebdoOSM Nº 480 2019-09-24-2019-09-30

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 480 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/12433/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

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

[Talk-ht] hebdoOSM Nº 480 2019-09-24-2019-09-30

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 480 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/12433/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

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-ht mailing list
Talk-ht@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ht
Notez! Vous pouvez utiliser Google Translate (http://translate.google.com) pour 
traduire les messages.

[Talk-africa] hebdoOSM Nº 480 2019-09-24-2019-09-30

[theweekly . osm]

Bonjour,

Le résumé hebdomadaire n° 480 de l'actualité OpenStreetMap vient de paraître 
*en français*. Un condensé à retrouver sur :

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/archives/12433/

Bonne lecture !

Saviez-vous que vous pouvez vous aussi soumettre des messages pour la note 
hebdomadaire sans être membre ? Il vous suffit de vous connecter sur 
https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login avec votre compte OSM. Pour en savoir plus 
sur la rédaction d'un article, cliquez ici: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/fr/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm

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

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Andrew Harvey]

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 21:03, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 07/10/19 19:57, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
> I added this to the ATG as amenity=community_centre +
> community_centre:for=man,
>
>
> 'man' may mean both men and women. On the other hand it maybe the original
> use was for males only. I think the value is not good.
> There are only 4 uses of the community_centre:for=man in the data base. I
> would prefer a different value... with a clear meaning.
>

Yes, but in this context I think it's pretty please it's for males not
persons. I didn't create that tag, it was already documented at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for.

I think we should use Key:community_centre:for rather than Key:gender
because per the wiki "The community_centre:for tag is used to describe the
group of people that is primarily served by the facility, when it is
distinguished by age or gender."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for


>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines=revision=1856025=1855758.
> Not saying we need to follow, this if the discussion leads elsewhere it can
> be updated.
>
> To me it seems more like a community centre for men than a club.
> I don't think this warrants it's own tag.
>
> Since there's a wikipedia page, there's a wikidata tag, I wonder if we
> should use operator:wikidata or brand:wikidata to link these all together?
>
> brand rather than operator? I am not certain where the funding comes from,
> some from members contributions.
> I'd think each shed has some control over their operations .. so tagging
> the operator might give the wrong impression?
>

Yes I was leaning more towards brand too.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [Talk-GB] Import UK postcode data?

[Simon Poole]

Am 03.10.2019 um 10:26 schrieb Mark Goodge:
>
> ONSPD solves this problem, because it includes the "large user" flag.
>
>
It's the nature of the beast that when we are discussing OGL licensed
datasets that when something turns up that was previously thought to be
part of a proprietary dataset all alarm bells go off. Do you know how
they derived that flag and if there is really no residual proprietary IP
from RM in the data?



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

Re: [Talk-cat] Importació centres docents a Catalunya

[Lanxana .]

Bon dia,

sí, així és, l'script ha de convertir els camps del csv o xml (el format
que et vagi més bé) a format osm amb l'etiquetat detallat. He vist que em
vaig oblidar posar a la taula que a tots els centres s'ha d'afegir la
etiqueta "source=Generalitat de Catalunya", suposo que no serà cap problema
afegir-lo.

Et passo el fitxer de Figueres en format osm perquè el puguis remenar.
Sobre el llenguatge de programació, el que et vagi més bé. Si ho fas amb
python, el podré llegir, a programar no m'hi veig.

Gràcies!

El mié., 25 sept. 2019 a las 20:46, Victor () escribió:

> Ok, llavors entenc s'hauria de fer un script que converteixi el CSV de la
> generalitat a format OSM amb els camps adaptats segons la teva descripcio.
> I despres aquest OSM es convertiria en les tasques per carregar pels
> voluntaris. Correcte?
> El 1er script no crec que sigui gaire problema, ho podria fer en python.
> M'aniria be el format concret del OSM, un d'exemple, pero que ho puc
> trobar. El script de Madrid es shell-script, mes criptic de seguir.
> El que no se quan podre, d'aqui a un parell de setmanes potser.
> victor
>


Libre
de virus. www.avast.com

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


cd_figueres.osm
Description: Binary data
___
Talk-cat mailing list
Talk-cat@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cat

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Ewen Hill]

The feminine term is a pretty standard "Hen's shed" so perhaps
name=Boyanup Hens Shed
community_centre=community_shed
gender=female

Take shed more as a collective noun rather than a structure per se.

Ewen

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 20:15, Jonathon Rossi  wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:07 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 16:25, Ewen Hill  wrote:
>>
>>>  Exceddingly happy with community.shed as proposed
>>>
>>> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, 5:15 PM Sam Wilson  wrote:
>>>
 I think amenity=community_centre makes sense, and I think there’s
 enough in Australia to warrant a specific community_centre=mens_shed
 (or maybe community_shed, which Wikipedia suggests as the generic
 term).

>>> Yes, that has a lot going for it!
>>
>> Still as community_centre=community_shed?
>>
>> Or maybe community_shed=man/woman?
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 16:35, Jonathon Rossi  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I think shed (sometimes) describes the building not that they do. How
>>> about community_centre=workshop?
>>>
>>
>> No, they're not always located in a "shed", but as that's a pivotal part
>> of the name, I think we should keep reference to it?
>>
>
> Yes, after a bit more research I agree, I hadn't realised other countries
> are also referring to these as men's sheds:
>
> > 1,000 Australia
> > 450 Ireland
> > 300 United Kingdom,
> > 100 New Zealand
> > 20 Canada
> > ~12 United States
> >
> https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/livable-in-action/info-2019/mens-sheds-in-us.html
>
> Looks like a few Men's Sheds are opening to regular She Shed/Women Shed
> classes for a cost (https://www.thewomensshed.org/). However, these
> classes have a different purpose to the overall goal of Men's Sheds. Are
> they still just a Men's Shed that opens to women? "Like CWA, but with power
> tools" was one way they were described. I wouldn't
> mind community_centre=mens_shed because the overall goal is men's health,
> i.e. the Shoulder to Shoulder slogan, even if the facility gets used by
> women occasionally.
>
> If we go with community_centre=community_shed, we need to make sure the
> wording makes it clear it isn't like Share Shed (
> https://www.shareshed.org.au/), they are like a library for tools run by
> the community.
>
> --
> Jono
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>


-- 
Warm Regards

Ewen Hill
Internet Development Australia
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Warin]

On 07/10/19 19:57, Andrew Harvey wrote:
I added this to the ATG as amenity=community_centre + 
community_centre:for=man,


'man' may mean both men and women. On the other hand it maybe the 
original use was for males only. I think the value is not good.
There are only 4 uses of the community_centre:for=man in the data base. 
I would prefer a different value... with a clear meaning.


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines=revision=1856025=1855758. 
Not saying we need to follow, this if the discussion leads elsewhere 
it can be updated.


To me it seems more like a community centre for men than a club.
I don't think this warrants it's own tag.

Since there's a wikipedia page, there's a wikidata tag, I wonder if we 
should use operator:wikidata or brand:wikidata to link these all together?
brand rather than operator? I am not certain where the funding comes 
from, some from members contributions.
I'd think each shed has some control over their operations .. so tagging 
the operator might give the wrong impression?


On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 14:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote:


As per the title, what do we call a Men's Shed?
https://mensshed.org/ in case any of our overseas followers don't
know what we're talking about!

I'm guessing club=?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:club but what?

Not really a community centre?

Maybe craft=?, possibly =handicraft?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Acraft%3Dhandicraft

Any thoughts?

Thanks

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



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



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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Importer/exporter facilement filtres JOSM

[PanierAvide]

Effectivement les niveaux intermédiaires ne sont pas réellement gérés 
pour l'instant. Selon les besoins que tu as pour ce projet, on peut 
discuter des évolutions de l'outil à mettre en place. L'objectif est 
qu'il soit justement plus simple et intuitif que JOSM pour la partie 
carto intérieure.


Cordialement,

Adrien P.

Le 07/10/2019 à 11:20, Axel Listes a écrit :

Bonjour,

Le 07/10/2019 à 09:21, PanierAvide a écrit :

Peut-être qu'une solution plus simple pour gérer l'ajout de données en
intérieur serait d'utiliser le nouvel éditeur dédié "OsmInEdit", qui
gère automatiquement la notion d'étages, permet l'import de plans en
fond pour aider à la saisie, et ne nécessite pas d'installation car
disponible sur le web :

https://osminedit.pavie.info/

J'ai testé ton outil, il propose effectivement un système de calques
plus avancé (gère notamment la balise repeat_on=*), mais il reste la
prise en charge des niveaux intermédiaires qui reste limité (level=0.5).

En ce qui concerne la facilité d'usage, je pense que ça revient un peu
au même, d'utiliser JOSM ou ton interface web plutôt dédié à des
contributeurs déjà avertis.
Après, les goûts et les couleurs ... :)


Et pour répondre à la question en elle-même, les filtres JOSM sont
stockés dans le fichier "preferences.xml" (sous Linux :
/home/monutilisateur/.config/JOSM/preferences.xml), dans la balise :

|||
||...||
|||

J'avais effectivement remarqué cela, mais pas encore testé le
copier/coller dans une autre installation.
Je pensais plutôt à un truc graphique, mais bon finalement ça ne doit
pas être trop difficile à gérer ainsi.

Voilà ce que j'ai fait en pièce jointe (si cela t’intéresses).

Axel.

___
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] Importer/exporter facilement filtres JOSM

[Axel Listes]

Bonjour,

Le 07/10/2019 à 09:21, PanierAvide a écrit :
> 
> Peut-être qu'une solution plus simple pour gérer l'ajout de données en
> intérieur serait d'utiliser le nouvel éditeur dédié "OsmInEdit", qui
> gère automatiquement la notion d'étages, permet l'import de plans en
> fond pour aider à la saisie, et ne nécessite pas d'installation car
> disponible sur le web :
> 
> https://osminedit.pavie.info/

J'ai testé ton outil, il propose effectivement un système de calques
plus avancé (gère notamment la balise repeat_on=*), mais il reste la
prise en charge des niveaux intermédiaires qui reste limité (level=0.5).

En ce qui concerne la facilité d'usage, je pense que ça revient un peu
au même, d'utiliser JOSM ou ton interface web plutôt dédié à des
contributeurs déjà avertis.
Après, les goûts et les couleurs ... :)

> Et pour répondre à la question en elle-même, les filtres JOSM sont
> stockés dans le fichier "preferences.xml" (sous Linux :
> /home/monutilisateur/.config/JOSM/preferences.xml), dans la balise :
> 
> |||
> ||...||
> |||

J'avais effectivement remarqué cela, mais pas encore testé le
copier/coller dans une autre installation.
Je pensais plutôt à un truc graphique, mais bon finalement ça ne doit
pas être trop difficile à gérer ainsi.

Voilà ce que j'ai fait en pièce jointe (si cela t’intéresses).

Axel.
  

  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  


  
  
  
  
  
  

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

Re: [talk-au] Discussion J: regionalisation of editor presets

[Andrew Harvey]

There is another thread here about the ATG being recently changed and it
being discussed to revert this back, so could you please post what tags and
kinds of infrastructure you're talking about?

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 10:05, Herbert.Remi via Talk-au <
talk-au@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Discussion J: regionalisation of editor presets
> I am now putting the question at the top and bottom of the text.
>
> ## QUESTION
> How can the presets for the editor (ID and JOSM) be changed to the ATG
> default for the ACT when editing paths in this territory?
>
> # The Issue (background)
> What is the cause of the overwhelming inconsistencies between the path
> tags in OSM and the ATG? This was the question from Discussion I
> (6/10/2019). There may be multiple causes. The error seems to be systematic.
>
> ## Human factors and preset design
> One possible systematic cause is that mappers are trusting the preset to
> get it right.
>
> If it looks like a pedestrian path, then the click on the “walking man”
> button in the ID editor. The presumption here is the preset is correct for
> the ACT. This turns out to be a mistake.
>
> If the path looks like it is for bikes then the mapper clicks the blue
> bike. Again, the mapper is trusting the preset to be correct for the ACT
> but it is not.
>
> The preset with the closed approximation to the ATG tags are the “bike and
> pedestrian” button (noted in Discussion D), which is the least favoured of
> the three in the ACT (try it for yourself in overpass turbo).
>
> ## ID editor preset values
> The ID editor has the following tag values for presets. None are correct
> according to the ATG for the ACT. Pushing any of these buttons will fill
> the OSM database with the wrong data for the ACT.
>
> Foot Path preset (symbol "walking man“)
> tags:
> - highway=footway
>
> Cycle Path preset (symbol blue bike)
> tags:
> - highway=cycleway
>
> Cycle & Foot Path preset (symbol blue bike)
> tags:
> - cycleway=highway
> - foot=designated
> - bicycle=designated
>
> ## accumulating tags assumption
> One mapper has suggested in this forum that the tags accumulated when you
> click multiple buttons, one after another. This assumption may be widely
> held but is also incorrect.
>
> The actual behaviour of the ID editor is quite different. Push the buttons
> in any sequence and the tags of the new preset overwrite the tags that the
> previous button had put on the "way". Tags are overwritten and not
> accumulated. (Lifecycle tags accumulate a history.)
>
> ## The default is king - proven again and again
> Studies have shown that people will stick with the default option 85% of
> the time. In the studies, an alternative option is offered but nobody ever
> clicks on it. This is human nature (psychology). People prefer to go with
> the default.
>
> For the ID editor, this is problematic. The three preset buttons discussed
> have default tags and the editor does not offer to the mapper to change
> them. I doubt most people would think to do so.
>
> The presets in the editor have become the defacto STANDARD, replacing
> anything that might be found in the ATG. The ATG is ignored in preference
> for a default chosen by the editor developer. The outcome is a systematic
> skew of the data in OSM to preset values (verify it yourself in overpass
> turbo).
>
> ## changing the preset to be ATG conform for each state/territory
> One option is to change these three presets to conform with the ATG and
> ACT standard values for “type A” and “type B” paths (see Discussion D).
> Both these types are a Cycle & Foot Path but may have a different
> appearance. Cycle Path and Foot Path would take on the ATG default for
> cycle ONLY path and pedestrian ONLY path respectively. The mapper may need
> to be reminded that the Cycle & Foot Path is the default for the ACT.
>
> Another option would be to set the Cycle Path and Foot Path with the ATG
> and ACT standard values for “type A” and “type B” paths (see Discussion D).
> The advantage of this is that we don’t require the mapper to change their
> behaviour. For the mapper, it is business as usual. Over time the OSM data
> will be corrected through the mappers' habit of toggling each other's work.
> The whole OSM data set for paths in the ACT will be overwritten and it will
> become largely correct. We would go from 95% incorrect to mostly correct. A
> big improvement.
>
> ## QUESTION
> How can the presets for the editor (ID and JOSM) be changed to the ATG
> default for the ACT when editing paths in this territory?
>
> I welcome your comments.
> Keywords: Australia, ACT, ATG, ID editor, presets, paths, root cause
> analysis
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Andrew Harvey]

I added this to the ATG as amenity=community_centre +
community_centre:for=man,
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines=revision=1856025=1855758.
Not saying we need to follow, this if the discussion leads elsewhere it can
be updated.

To me it seems more like a community centre for men than a club.
I don't think this warrants it's own tag.

Since there's a wikipedia page, there's a wikidata tag, I wonder if we
should use operator:wikidata or brand:wikidata to link these all together?

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 14:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> As per the title, what do we call a Men's Shed?
> https://mensshed.org/ in case any of our overseas followers don't know
> what we're talking about!
>
> I'm guessing club=?  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:club but
> what?
>
> Not really a community centre?
>
> Maybe craft=?, possibly =handicraft?
>  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Acraft%3Dhandicraft
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Sam Wilson]

I think it'd take all three keys, if a item needs the further 
clarification of man/woman (although my local is pretty inclusive I 
think, so it's not absolute).


Also, if anyone's in the mood for cataloguing men's sheds, there aren't 
many in Wikidata yet: https://w.wiki/9bA


:-)

On 7/10/19 3:07 pm, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:


On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 16:25, Ewen Hill > wrote:


 Exceddingly happy with community.shed as proposed

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, 5:15 PM Sam Wilson mailto:s...@samwilson.id.au>> wrote:

I think |amenity=community_centre| makes sense, and I think
there’s enough in Australia to warrant a specific
|community_centre=mens_shed| (or maybe |community_shed|, which
Wikipedia suggests as the generic term).

Yes, that has a lot going for it!

Still as community_centre=community_shed?

Or maybe community_shed=man/woman?

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 16:35, Jonathon Rossi > wrote:



I think shed (sometimes) describes the building not that they do.
How about community_centre=workshop?


No, they're not always located in a "shed", but as that's a pivotal 
part of the name, I think we should keep reference to it?


Thanks

Graeme

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

Re: [talk-au] Consistent tagging of botanic gardens around Australia - leisure=park vs leisure=garden

[Andrew Davidson]

On 7/10/19 3:55 pm, Warin wrote:


The landuse=forest one is probably an arboretum.



It's a botanical garden laid out in an area of bushland:

https://www.northernbeaches.nsw.gov.au/things-to-do/recreation-area/stony-range-regional-botanic-garden

I separated out the arboreta from the list. Which is why the confusingly 
named "Friends of the Warbys Arboretum" is in the list; it's a botanical 
garden created by people who are friends of an arboretum:


http://staging.waymarking.com/gallery/image.aspx?f=1=ba3d792d-28e3-40cd-8edd-0d12b2d96877



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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Importer/exporter facilement filtres JOSM

[PanierAvide]

Bonjour,

Peut-être qu'une solution plus simple pour gérer l'ajout de données en 
intérieur serait d'utiliser le nouvel éditeur dédié "OsmInEdit", qui 
gère automatiquement la notion d'étages, permet l'import de plans en 
fond pour aider à la saisie, et ne nécessite pas d'installation car 
disponible sur le web :


https://osminedit.pavie.info/

Et pour répondre à la question en elle-même, les filtres JOSM sont 
stockés dans le fichier "preferences.xml" (sous Linux : 
/home/monutilisateur/.config/JOSM/preferences.xml), dans la balise :


|||
||...||
|||

Cordialement,

Adrien P.

Le 06/10/2019 à 13:07, Axel Listes a écrit :

Bonjour,

Je gère actuellement un projet visant à introduire des données relatives
à l'intérieur de bâtiments publics dans OSM, en se basant dans un
premier temps sur les plans de la collectivité.

Ce projet a pour but de proposer aux habitants de participer à
l'introduction des données.
L'approche est encore au stade de tâtonnements, et nous avons rencontré
des difficultés à introduire les données avec JOSM, faute d'avoir un
système de calques satisfaisant.

L'idée a été de contourner la problématique en ne respectant pas
forcement à la lettre les recommandations du Mapping Indoor indiquées
sur le Wiki. Seulement après réalisation il s'est avéré que le résultat
ne convenait pas.

J'ai donc ce matin effectué des tests en créant moi-même des filtres sur
JOSM, correspondants plus aux besoins. J'aimerais maintenant pouvoir
exporter ces filtres, et les importer facilement dans d'autres clients
JOSM. Je ne trouve pas de fonctionnalité le permettant, avez-vous une idée ?

Bien cordialement, Axel.

___
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-au] Men's Shed?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

> 7 Oct 2019, 08:39 by matkoni...@tutanota.com:
>
> Based on images it sounds close to hackerspace/makerspace, but with no (or
> lower) focus
> on software part and greater on direct working with wood and similar
> materials.
>
> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhackerspace
>
> To clarify - not sure whatever describing it in this way is a good match,
> but maybe
> it may be one of tags used to describe such object.
>
> At least it would be a good idea how it differs from hackerspace if it is
> not one
> (minimal focus on software and electronics?).
>

Most of them concentrate on wood- &/or metalwork, but some I've heard of
also play with computers & even cooking!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_shed  gives a good description, & I
didn't realise till reading that article that they were now international!

Thanks

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

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 16:25, Ewen Hill  wrote:

>  Exceddingly happy with community.shed as proposed
>
> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, 5:15 PM Sam Wilson  wrote:
>
>> I think amenity=community_centre makes sense, and I think there’s enough
>> in Australia to warrant a specific community_centre=mens_shed (or maybe
>> community_shed, which Wikipedia suggests as the generic term).
>>
> Yes, that has a lot going for it!

Still as community_centre=community_shed?

Or maybe community_shed=man/woman?

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 16:35, Jonathon Rossi  wrote:

>
> I think shed (sometimes) describes the building not that they do. How
> about community_centre=workshop?
>

No, they're not always located in a "shed", but as that's a pivotal part of
the name, I think we should keep reference to it?

Thanks

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

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Warin]

On 07/10/19 17:43, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:




7 Oct 2019, 08:39 by matkoni...@tutanota.com:

Based on images it sounds close to hackerspace/makerspace, but
with no (or lower) focus
on software part and greater on direct working with wood and
similar materials.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhackerspace

To clarify - not sure whatever describing it in this way is a good 
match, but maybe

it may be one of tags used to describe such object.

At least it would be a good idea how it differs from hackerspace if it 
is not one

(minimal focus on software and electronics?).


To me 'hackerspace' involves working with computers.

Mens sheds typically involve older tools without any computers, this 
keeps the cost down and, as they are older people, usually the users 
have knowledge of and skills to suit these older tools.


These were formed to provide social interaction of retired men using the 
'work' as an aid to get them involved.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Mateusz Konieczny]

7 Oct 2019, 08:39 by matkoni...@tutanota.com:

> Based on images it sounds close to hackerspace/makerspace, but with no (or 
> lower) focus
> on software part and greater on direct working with wood and similar 
> materials.
>
> See > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhackerspace 
> 
>
To clarify - not sure whatever describing it in this way is a good match, but 
maybe
it may be one of tags used to describe such object.

At least it would be a good idea how it differs from hackerspace if it is not 
one 
(minimal focus on software and electronics?).
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Jonathon Rossi]

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 4:14 PM Sam Wilson  wrote:

> I think amenity=community_centre makes sense, and I think there’s enough
> in Australia to warrant a specific community_centre=mens_shed (or maybe
> community_shed, which Wikipedia suggests as the generic term).
>
I think shed (sometimes) describes the building not that they do. How about
community_centre=workshop?

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

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Ewen Hill]

Please don't forget the Hen's shed or Hen House (Boyanup wa from memory).
They do all differ with some having lots of mechanical stuff (Forrest Wa)
to others which are more craft and sudoko in a house or annex or former
shire office. Exceddingly happy with community.shed as proposed

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019, 5:15 PM Sam Wilson  wrote:

> I think amenity=community_centre makes sense, and I think there’s enough
> in Australia to warrant a specific community_centre=mens_shed (or maybe
> community_shed, which Wikipedia suggests as the generic term).
>
> On 7/10/19 1:57 pm, Warin wrote:
>
> On 07/10/19 16:52, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
>
> Thanks fella's - thought I remembered seeing some mention of them!
>
>
> With only 2 expressing an opinion I am reluctant to put it on the wiki
> guide.
>
> What do you think Graeme? Anyone else?
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
> ​
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Jonathon Rossi]

On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:53 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 14:23, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Existing;
>>
>> amenity=community_centre
>> community_centre:for=men
>> name=North Sydney Men's Shed
>>
>>
>
>> name=Parramatta District Men's Shed
>> office=charity
>>
>> building=yes
>> name=St George Men's Shed
>>
>> amenity=social_centre
>> name=Bankstown Men's Shed
>>
>
> Hmmm - of those, I think I prefer =social_centre?
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dsocial_centre
>

The wiki has this:
> Differentiation
> Some forms of community centres might overlap with social facilities.
When the centre is open to general audiences (sometimes of a specific age
group or with specific interests), gathering for particular activities, it
should be tagged amenity=community_centre. When it addresses an audience
with specific problems, and/or is staffed with professional helpers (social
workers, nurses), amenity=social_facility would be preferred.
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcommunity_centre)

>From my initial thoughts and from that description amenity=community_centre
would be my pick. I think of men's sheds a bit like Scouts for youth, which
I'd also tag community_centre not social_centre.

Also the wiki has community_centre:for=m*a*n not community_centre:for=m*e*n
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for).
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Men's Shed?

[Sam Wilson]

I think |amenity=community_centre| makes sense, and I think there’s 
enough in Australia to warrant a specific |community_centre=mens_shed| 
(or maybe |community_shed|, which Wikipedia suggests as the generic term).


On 7/10/19 1:57 pm, Warin wrote:


On 07/10/19 16:52, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:

Thanks fella's - thought I remembered seeing some mention of them!


With only 2 expressing an opinion I am reluctant to put it on the wiki 
guide.


What do you think Graeme? Anyone else?


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


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