[Diversity-talk] UK Chapter Feedback on Diversity Statement

[Adam Hoyle]

Hi Diversity Working Group,

I'm writing on behalf of the UK Local Chapter (OSMUK). Regarding the OSM 
Foundation Diversity Statement, we asked our members whether they supported the 
statement and to provide any anonymous feedback which we could pass on to the 
working group.

The result was a broad level of support, with a few points, which I am passing 
to you here:

>  I don't personally understand the problems yet and would love to find out, 
> and increase the size and breadth of the community.

>  I support this as it is, on the basis that any pro-diversity statement is 
> better than none, but I think it's missing some important points. It says 
> that OSM wants a more diverse community but not why! And it also fails to say 
> clearly that diversity is good, and that discrimination is also bad.
> I would suggest, for example, adding a new sentence between the second and 
> third sentences like "We believe that the greater the diversity in our 
> community, the better OpenStreetMap will be.”

>  It's a sad comment on life today that this is even necessary. Also a policy 
> statement is merely a set of fine words which will remain empty without an 
> action plan and without an enforcement procedure.

>  I also agree with the comment about adding a sentence explaining why.


Best,

Adam
___
Diversity-talk mailing list
Code of Conduct: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity/MailingList/CodeOfConduct
Contact the mods (private): diversity-talk-ow...@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-GB] "OSMUK-in-a-box"

[Adam Hoyle]

Hey Jez,

Awesome! I’ve used Docker a few times, so am fairly confident in it, so happy 
to help unless someone else gets there first.

Best,

Adam
On 6 Feb 2020, 12:31 +, Jez Nicholson , wrote:
> I come from a database background, and when a question isn't easily answered 
> with Taginfo or Overpass Turbo I jump to my trusty local postgres database of 
> UK data. I have a script that downloads the British Isles from Geofabrik, 
> loads it with osm2pgsql, adds some useful indexes, and then removes Eire. 
> Thereafter I can run SQL queries across the whole database to get 'UK-wide' 
> results.
>
> I think that this would be useful for people on hackdays and the like and 
> would be a good service for OSMUK to provide, so have just added a new github 
> repository https://github.com/osm-uk/osmuk2pgsql
>
> Friendly-worded Issues are welcome, as are code contributions. I'd like to 
> put it on a Docker environment so that it works quickly-and-easily on 
> Windows, Linux, Mac, whatever.
>
> Comments? Thoughts?
>
> Regards,
>              Jez
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] OSMUK local chapter

[Adam Hoyle]

My tuppence:

I've not used it, but loomio looks great. If we decide to go with it I'm happy 
to install it somewhere (do we have OSMUK hosting), but if all we need is the 
simple version then $190 per year for their hosted version seems good value 
(and means one less thing to maintain) - https://www.loomio.org/pricing

Personally I'd definitely prefer Wordpress over Blogger, but for purely 
blogging I've noticed a lot of people preferring to post on Medium.com rather 
than hosting their own blog.

Best,

Adam


> On 1 Jul 2016, at 11:10, Christian Ledermann  
> wrote:
> 
> also there is https://openslides.org/ although I think this is
> probably overkill.
> 
> On 1 July 2016 at 11:02, Christian Ledermann
>  wrote:
>> Have you considered/evaluated https://www.discourse.org/ ?
>> I have used it (plone community, OKFN) and am quite fond of it
>> The email integration is very nice, you can get email push
>> notifications and respond to discussions via email.
>> 
>> I have not used loomio yet so I do not know how they compare
>> 
>>> On 30 June 2016 at 18:40, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
>>> BTW here are my notes from when I researched collaboration tools (focused on
>>> communication and decision making, rather than projects)
>>> 
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Z9vCilV96Tah5ruGFTIaSGxojEC9pvHo48Sc4vw5_Y/edit?usp=sharing
>>> 
>>> Feel free to add comments.
>>> 
>>> Rob
>>> p.s. I'm aware that OSMF use Wordpress, Loomio, Slack (at least the SotM WG
>>> have started with this although my own research suggested Fleep may be
>>> better). If you know more, please share.
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> 
>> Christian Ledermann
>> 
>> Newark-on-Trent - UK
>> Mobile : +44 7474997517
>> 
>> https://uk.linkedin.com/in/christianledermann
>> https://github.com/cleder/
>> 
>> 
>> <*)))>{
>> 
>> If you save the living environment, the biodiversity that we have left,
>> you will also automatically save the physical environment, too. But If
>> you only save the physical environment, you will ultimately lose both.
>> 
>> 1) Don’t drive species to extinction
>> 
>> 2) Don’t destroy a habitat that species rely on.
>> 
>> 3) Don’t change the climate in ways that will result in the above.
>> 
>> }<(((*>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Christian Ledermann
> 
> Newark-on-Trent - UK
> Mobile : +44 7474997517
> 
> https://uk.linkedin.com/in/christianledermann
> https://github.com/cleder/
> 
> 
> <*)))>{
> 
> If you save the living environment, the biodiversity that we have left,
> you will also automatically save the physical environment, too. But If
> you only save the physical environment, you will ultimately lose both.
> 
> 1) Don’t drive species to extinction
> 
> 2) Don’t destroy a habitat that species rely on.
> 
> 3) Don’t change the climate in ways that will result in the above.
> 
> }<(((*>
> 
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] New users and P2

[Adam Hoyle]

If you’re on an iPhone then “Trails” is very good. Records GPS and one can add 
waypoints and then export the lot straight to Open Street Map.

https://trails.io/en/

(I’m not a developer of it, just a fan).

I agree that it would be awesome to have a walkers app that allows on-the-move 
edits of OSM data.

On the P2 note - Adobe AIR means one can make Android and iOS apps from 
Actionscript, however I don’t know if P2 would be usable on a phone/tablet as a 
finger is much less precise than a mouse, although maybe on iPad Pro with the 
pencil it could work.

Best,

Adam

On 25 February 2016 at 17:29:23, Andy Townsend (ajt1...@gmail.com) wrote:

On 25/02/2016 17:04, Nick Whitelegg wrote:


One thought I've had for a long time (and have probably mentioned in the past) 
is a walkers' editor (app rather than web-based). To be used something like:



User goes for walk and records GPX trace, following this sort of pattern.


Each time the type of right of way changes, the user selects a high level type 
("Public Footpath", "Public Bridleway" etc in the UK) together with optional 
surface tags.



User can also enter relevant POIs like stiles, gates etc when they are 
encountered.



When user returns home, track simplification algorithm used to make a way from 
the GPX trace and tags it with the tags equivalent to the ROW type.



User downloads data from OSM and algorithms are used to auto-join the user's 
new ways to existing ways where appropriate (or alternatively, the user does 
this manually)


That's not a million miles from the way that I map right now, albeit without 
the benefits of an "app" as such:

I record a GPS trace (on a Garmin) with numbered waypoints in it.  The symbols 
for the Garmin waypoints "mean" something, so the "boat ramp" symbol means 
"public right of way".  If it's a bridleway I'll add "BR" to the comment on the 
Garmin.  If more text is needed (e.g. the name of a shop I've created a 
waypoint for) I'll create an line in an email to myself, the start of which is 
the Garmin waypoint number and the rest of which is the comment.

When I get home I'll split the individual traces out programmatically, merge 
the comments from the email into the GPX file (likewise) and upload to OSM.

I'll then edit in OSM using the uploaded trace directly (using P2 - JOSM can't 
process waypoints in a way that's useful to me).  Usually the combination of 
new GPS trace, previous GPS traces, Bing imagery, OS OpenData StreetView 
imagery and my recollection is enough to figure out where the path should go, 
but none of those (unless there are really _lots_ of old GPS traces) are good 
enough on their own.

On an introductory level, I can definitely see the benefits of something that 
can suggest to people "here are the other attributes of $thing that you've just 
added", like iD does, and like Kort does/used to do (see 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kort_Game ).

Cheers,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly project : Stats

[Adam Hoyle]

Hi Brian,

Great - I'm glad that it helps :-)

I've not looked at overpass before, but happy to take a look and add it in. 

If you (or anyone) have any pointers or example queries or anything to help me 
work it out, that would be awesome and definitely speed things up.

Thanks in advance,

Adam

// http://www.adamhoyle.co.uk/
// @adamhoyle

> On 10 Nov 2015, at 15:52, Brian Prangle <bpran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Adam
> 
> Thanks for your efforts here. This is a big step foward for us. Is there any 
> chance you could extend this backwards in time to Oct 1st when we started 
> this quarterly project?  I think there's something called attic data in 
> overpass
> 
> Regards
> 
> Brian
> 
>> On 6 November 2015 at 20:45, Adam Hoyle <atom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Rob,
>> 
>> As promised...
>> 
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZgOLIdPezrXUxa8GeNebuWrNmtuLTE2u5qEFUKbrPWY/edit?usp=sharing
>> 
>> I’ve got it running at 3am every morning on a server. Do let me know if it 
>> doesn’t run for any reason and I’ll prod the server.
>> 
>> It’s super easy to update for different tags, so I’m more than happy to do 
>> it for the next quarterly project.
>> 
>> For anyone interested the source code (written in javascript / nodejs) is 
>> here:
>> https://github.com/atomoil/osm_taginfo
>> 
>> In the meantime I’ve realised some of my local nature reserves aren’t 
>> covering the full area of the nature reserve (I added them some time ago), 
>> so I should probably go and fix them :-o
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Adam
>> 
>>> On 6 November 2015 at 08:07:05, Rob Nickerson (rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com) 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks Adam - much appreciated.
>>> 
>>> A Google sheet would be perfect if that's simple enough to do. And yes, 
>>> that should make the graph a simple point and click task!
>>> 
>>> Rob
>>> 
>>> On 6 Nov 2015 08:02, "Adam Hoyle" <atom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Like saving to a Google Sheet?
>>>> 
>>>> Sounds pretty straightforward - I'd be up for doing that. :-)
>>>> 
>>>> And I do quite like making graphs too, although Google Sheets can probably 
>>>> do that better.
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> Adam
>>>> 
>>>> // 07973 428 333
>>>> // http://www.adamhoyle.co.uk/
>>>> // @adamhoyle
>>>> 
>>>> On 5 Nov 2015, at 21:10, Rob Nickerson <rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> During another eventful Mappa Mercia meeting in which we continued to 
>>>>> plot world domination, one idea that came up was "would a kind OSMer who 
>>>>> has a server running be willing pull back some stats for us on a daily 
>>>>> basis?"
>>>>> 
>>>>> In essence we're looking for a volunteer to query the TagInfo UK API once 
>>>>> per day and dump the output to a simple file (or a graph if you're 
>>>>> feeling particularly creative).
>>>>> 
>>>>> Our current project is nature reserves so a good API call would be:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/api/4/tag/stats?key=leisure=nature_reserve
>>>>> 
>>>>> It may not be the world domination your were expecting but is anyone up 
>>>>> for the challenge?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>> Rob
>>>>> ___
>>>>> Talk-GB mailing list
>>>>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>> 
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> 
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly project : Stats

[Adam Hoyle]

Hi Rob,

As promised...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZgOLIdPezrXUxa8GeNebuWrNmtuLTE2u5qEFUKbrPWY/edit?usp=sharing

I’ve got it running at 3am every morning on a server. Do let me know if it 
doesn’t run for any reason and I’ll prod the server.

It’s super easy to update for different tags, so I’m more than happy to do it 
for the next quarterly project.

For anyone interested the source code (written in javascript / nodejs) is here:
https://github.com/atomoil/osm_taginfo

In the meantime I’ve realised some of my local nature reserves aren’t covering 
the full area of the nature reserve (I added them some time ago), so I should 
probably go and fix them :-o

Best,

Adam

On 6 November 2015 at 08:07:05, Rob Nickerson (rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com) wrote:

Thanks Adam - much appreciated.

A Google sheet would be perfect if that's simple enough to do. And yes, that 
should make the graph a simple point and click task!

Rob

On 6 Nov 2015 08:02, "Adam Hoyle" <atom...@gmail.com> wrote:
Like saving to a Google Sheet?

Sounds pretty straightforward - I'd be up for doing that. :-)

And I do quite like making graphs too, although Google Sheets can probably do 
that better.

Best,

Adam

// 07973 428 333
// http://www.adamhoyle.co.uk/
// @adamhoyle

On 5 Nov 2015, at 21:10, Rob Nickerson <rob.j.nicker...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

During another eventful Mappa Mercia meeting in which we continued to plot 
world domination, one idea that came up was "would a kind OSMer who has a 
server running be willing pull back some stats for us on a daily basis?"

In essence we're looking for a volunteer to query the TagInfo UK API once per 
day and dump the output to a simple file (or a graph if you're feeling 
particularly creative).

Our current project is nature reserves so a good API call would be:

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/api/4/tag/stats?key=leisure=nature_reserve

It may not be the world domination your were expecting but is anyone up for the 
challenge?

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Using store locator as source

[Adam Hoyle]

Hi OpenStreetmap HADW,

I've worked with a number of retailers on digital projects, usually involving 
some-kind of store locator and I'm certain they would encourage anything that 
points more customers to their stores, especially if it requires no additional 
resources / cost on their side. If there is no license on their website 
regarding the information, then shouldn't it be considered public domain? Worth 
noting, often the data is held in their systems as a post code, and is likely 
to have been converted at some point to the necessary lat/lon - this process 
might not be as perfect as OSM would like, so some common sense should be used 
to interpret this data.

Hope that helps,

Adam


On 15 Sep 2013, at 23:27, OpenStreetmap HADW osmh...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 15 September 2013 22:24, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
 On 15/09/2013 21:41, OpenStreetmap HADW wrote:
 
 I'm pretty sure that store locators pages on chain store web sites are
 not safe sources, but can someone confirm this.
 
 
 What do mean by safe? Inaccurate? Unlawful?
 
 Likely to be an infringement of the operator's copyrights (a store
 locator will have database rights, like a map), and if a map had
 actually been used from the site, which seems unlikely in this case,
 of the rights in the map (store locators often have rather better maps
 than the Bing one used in this case).  If it is OK to use store
 locators, I can see people exporting all the big name store locators
 into the map.
 
 There's nothing really wrong with the closed polygon that can't be fixed by
 
 These are side issues.  The issue I was consulting on here was the
 copyright one.
 
 removing the building tag. The mapper's clearly used the Bing aerial
 background imagery to trace the area  used Asda's website for other data.
 Seeing the car park originates from '09, I'm going to guess the supermarket
 polygon was expanded from a POI. I can't think of any data being more
 
 I can't remember.  However the current mapper has left at least two
 POIs behind when they have mapped buildings, so I have a feeling it
 wasn't mapped at all.  Also, I seem to remember thinking about mapping
 this myself, but holding back because I would have had to use the weak
 source, local_knowledge, to identify it as Asda, so I would have
 wanted to re-visit it on the ground, first.  The reasons I didn't just
 remove building=yes were:
 
 - I felt uncomfortable about building on something that might have
 come from a copyright map (I was half expecting a usable map of the
 site on Asda's web site);
 
 - the site outline is wrong.  It takes in a health centre and
 community centre and some blocks of flats  that are not part of the
 Asda site - I felt getting that right was something for another day;
 
 - getting the mapper to fix it would be more likely to avoid the same
 mistake being made again, and get them to fix their other instances -
 I know of at least one other with the building tag on a site
 
 Incidentally, the building tag may be an Id issue.  JOSM doesn't set
 building by default on shops.
 
 accurate than the operator's web page. I'm not sure why you so concerned
 about this instance. Nothing in OSM is completely accurate. If you know ways
 to improve the data, do so.
 
 However, the accuracy is a side issue, that can be handled offline.
 My concern is about the principle of whether store locators are a
 special case of a database that is exempt from the normal rule about
 not importing databases, even piecemeal.  If they are, I would expect
 a source code of something like store_locator, rather than the full
 URL, or, if the full URL for that store were visible on geographic
 site, simply website.
 
 (In this case, I suspect the real sources were survey (by eye, not
 GPS), Bing, and then only using the web site for phone numbers,
 website and address.  Although they didn't have opening hours at all,
 those should have been available on site.)
 
 (What made me look at it was that it was local and had no changeset comment.)
 
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Using store locator as source

[Adam Hoyle]

On 16 Sep 2013, at 16:14, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 16 September 2013 14:18, Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote:
 
 If there is no license on their website regarding the information, then 
 shouldn't it be considered public domain?
 
 Err, no. That's not how the law works - either on copyright or on
 database rights.

Lol, good point - perhaps I should ask if any of them can attribute a license 
to the locations on their sites - what would be the best license for them to 
use? Creative Commons, or something else? Any good URLs to share would be handy 
to make a stronger case - if they don't just look at me blankly that is.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] BBC article on volunteers mapping hillforts

[Adam Hoyle]

John,

This would be awesome information to have in OSM, but as it is historic 
information, sometimes with no obvious above ground visualisation, is it 
definitely appropriate for the project? (Personally I hope it is, but wanted to 
see what the consensus is). 

There are existing sites such as http://www.themodernantiquarian.com and 
http://www.megalithic.co.uk/ which contain a lot of information on such things 
but as far as I know they lack a map feature - seems to me that OSM would be 
perfect if it's deemed appropriate by the community

There is a list of the people involved here: 
http://www.arch.ox.ac.uk/hillforts-atlas-team.html anyone on here already know 
any of them already?

Best,

Adam

On 8 Jul 2013, at 10:53, John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote:

 No mention of OSM that I can see, though; a different kind of mapping:
 
 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-23203500
 
 http://www.arch.ox.ac.uk/hillforts-atlas.html
 
 
 __John
 
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] BBC article on volunteers mapping hillforts

[Adam Hoyle]

On 8 Jul 2013, at 11:31, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:

 Adam Hoyle wrote:
 This would be awesome information to have in OSM, but as it is historic
 information, sometimes with no obvious above ground visualisation, is it
 definitely appropriate for the project? (Personally I hope it is, but wanted 
 to
 see what the consensus is).
 
 OHM has been set up exactly to support this type of data ;)
 But it looks a little empty at presnet :(
 http://www.openhistoricalmap.org/

Wow, I didn't realise such a thing existed - looks potentially rather awesome, 
although I agree it is slightly empty right now.

What's the background / roadmap / plan with it? Is it 'owned' by OSM, or an 
offshoot?

Best,

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

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)

[Adam Hoyle]

Hi Nick,

Thats awesome - thank you :-)

Best,

Adam

On 26 Jan 2013, at 15:30, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

 
 OK should have both Oxfordshire and Bucks now. (discovered the latter was 
 also on geofabrik)
 
 It may take some time to render first time you try somewhere out, as it's got 
 to generate the geojson from the database... but the geojson is now cached 
 making it much faster on subsequent requests.
 
 Nick
 
 -Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote: -
 To: talk-gb Talk-GB talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
 From: Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com
 Date: 25/01/2013 10:18AM
 Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for  adding  
 PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)
 
 
 On 24 Jan 2013, at 14:34, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
 
 Not entirely tangential question - Is there any chance that the designation 
 tag will be rendered in the default mapnik anytime soon / ever? Or is there 
 somewhere that already exists that renders designations? 
 
 Yes - www.free-map.org.uk. (at least for southern and northern England and 
 Wales)
 
 sad to say it doesn't appear to cover the chilterns - I think it might have 
 done a while ago, but not now :'(
 
 On 24 Jan 2013, at 15:01, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
 
 Since the public rights of way tagging using designation=* is a very
 British (actually English and Welsh) thing, I doubt it will ever be
 rendered on the main OSM map. :-(
 
 I'm sure you're probably correct, but are we sure designation doesn't apply 
 outside of the UK? I think it's worth pursuing - anyone know what the process 
 is to request it's added - it would add some much value to the UK map that I 
 really do think it's worth making the case to have it added.
 
 However, depending on what you're interested in, there's a nice view
 from ITO that highlights ways tagged with the main PRoW designation
 tags:
 http://www.itoworld.com/map/87#fullscreen
 
 
 That's awesome, although depressingly it shows just how few I have actually 
 managed to tag with a designation :'(
 
 Thanks all!
 
 Adam
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)

[Adam Hoyle]

On 24 Jan 2013, at 14:34, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

 Not entirely tangential question - Is there any chance that the designation 
 tag will be rendered in the default mapnik anytime soon / ever? Or is there 
 somewhere that already exists that renders designations? 
 
 Yes - www.free-map.org.uk. (at least for southern and northern England and 
 Wales)

sad to say it doesn't appear to cover the chilterns - I think it might have 
done a while ago, but not now :'(

On 24 Jan 2013, at 15:01, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

 Since the public rights of way tagging using designation=* is a very
 British (actually English and Welsh) thing, I doubt it will ever be
 rendered on the main OSM map. :-(

I'm sure you're probably correct, but are we sure designation doesn't apply 
outside of the UK? I think it's worth pursuing - anyone know what the process 
is to request it's added - it would add some much value to the UK map that I 
really do think it's worth making the case to have it added.

 However, depending on what you're interested in, there's a nice view
 from ITO that highlights ways tagged with the main PRoW designation
 tags:
 http://www.itoworld.com/map/87#fullscreen


That's awesome, although depressingly it shows just how few I have actually 
managed to tag with a designation :'(

Thanks all!

Adam___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)

[Adam Hoyle]

On 25 Jan 2013, at 10:42, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

 Not entirely tangential question - Is there any chance that the 
 designation tag will be rendered in the default mapnik anytime soon / 
 ever? Or is there somewhere that already exists that renders 
 designations? 
 
 Yes - www.free-map.org.uk. (at least for southern and northern England and 
 Wales)
 
 sad to say it doesn't appear to cover the chilterns - I think it might have 
 done a while ago, but not now :'(
 
 It's just about impossible on my server to import the whole of England, let 
 alone the UK, into postgres using osm2pgsql, so I'm having to do it 
 county-by-county. Consequently I'm restricted to using (most of) the counties 
 on Geofabrik.

completely understand.

 I could add Oxfordshire (available on geofabrik) to the coverage area, would 
 that help for your area?

Annoyingly I straddle the border between South Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire 
- if I had to choose I'd go for Bucks, as that's where the better walks are ;-)

 I do have one or two possible offers of server space so there is the 
 possibility of extending Freemap back to the whole of the UK.

that would be awesome :-)

Best,

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

Re: [Talk-GB] PRoW surveying authorities (Was: Guidance for adding PRoW to OSM: prow_ref=)

[Adam Hoyle]

On 24 Jan 2013, at 09:09, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:

 This way of doing the tagging is consistent with what is commonly
 already done with Public Rights of Way. The highway=* tag records the
 physical appearance of the way (footway, track, road, etc.), the
 designation=* tag gives the official status, and access tags can be
 used record the allowable users in a more standard manner. If you also
 want to record more detail about the condition / surface of the way,
 the tracktype=* and surface=* tags may also be useful (see the wiki
 for details).

Not entirely tangential question - Is there any chance that the designation tag 
will be rendered in the default mapnik anytime soon / ever? Or is there 
somewhere that already exists that renders designations? 

I've been adding them across the paths / tracks I regularly walk, but it's hard 
to spot where I've missed them, and I'm sure I've missed loads.

Also, slightly more tangentially - I recall a conversation a little while ago, 
when I was too busy to respond, around barrier=* becoming rendered at lower 
zoom levels - is there any movement on that, as I'd be very much in favour of 
it.

Thanks in advance,

Adam___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Should highway=byway be deprecated?

[Adam Hoyle]

On 22 Aug 2012, at 15:33, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:

 As an aside, note that it is not uncommon for a Byway Open to All
 Traffic to be subject to a Traffic Regulation Order banning motor
 vehicles during all or part of the year. The signs you'll typically
 see in this case is a Byway fingerpost, and a No Motor Vehicles
 traffic sign (a white circle with a red border, and a car and
 motorcycle inside). While this downgrades the access rights to those
 of a Restricted Byway, it doesn't alter the fact that the route is
 technically still a Byway Open to All Traffic. In this case, I would
 suggest tagging with designation=byway_open_to_all_traffic (since
 that's what it is), adding appropriate access tags (eg
 motor_vehicle=no) to give the access rights, and adding a note tag (eg
 note=BOAT subject to Traffic Regulation Order) to explain the
 discrepancy.


excellent, thnx

In the case of motor vehicles only being prohibited for half of the year, is 
there any consensus on the correct way to tag it?

\a___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] On Countryside paths

[Adam Hoyle]

On 21 Aug 2012, at 17:56, Rob Nickerson wrote:

 
 Adam Wrote:
 It's totally confused me, so in the bit of UK countryside I edit I have 
 added tons of ways with highway=footway tags through woods, fields etc, when 
 in fact I am pretty sure they should really be highway=path tags. I realised 
 this a little while ago, so this thread is timely.
 
 Do please correct me if I'm still confused as I'm slowly going through the 
 process of re-tagging them from footway to path.
 
 Hi Adam,
 
 As noted on here many times and also reflected on the UK Tagging guidelines 
 page [1] there isn't consensus on whether a countryside 'route' should be 
 tagged as a path or a footway. The key thing is (if it is signed as a public 
 footpath) then tag it with designation=public_footpath. Other than that, I 
 would advise looking at what others are doing in the local area. Here for 
 example, the major paths are tagged as highway=footway, and the minor paths 
 (ones that don't look quite as official but it is clear that people walk on 
 them), tend to be tagged highway=path.
 
 There does seem to be a consensus that highway=track is usually wider than 
 highway=path (and is probably wide enough to drive a tractor/4wd down).
 
 Regards,
 Rob
 
 [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Tagging_Guidelines

Hi Rob,

I used to tag the major paths as footway and the minor paths as paths, to 
differentiate official paths and unofficial paths, but that was a really cack 
workaround to not having designation=public_footpath, so I'm happier now that 
the designation tag exists.

Speaking of the which, anyone have any idea when the designation tag will be 
rendered on the main OSM renderer (or even in Potlatch which would do me in the 
short term).   

Best,

Adam

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Rights of Way - WikiProject

[Adam Hoyle]

Hey All,

This is a very interesting discussion - wish I'd spotted it a bit earlier.

My primary interest as someone-adding-to-OSM is places I can / can't walk, so 
this discussion definitely affects the walking routes/paths I (feel I am) 
looking after in/around South Bucks.

I always use Potlatch an editor, and so the majority of the paths I have added 
are highway=footpath, unless I know it's designated as a bridleway in which 
case I've set it as highway=bridleway. If I use a path, but it's not actually 
signed as a public or otherwise footpath then I think I should use 
highway=path, but actually tend to just use highway=footpath as it's there for 
me in Potlatch.

Semantically it feels cleaner to use highway=path/track/service depending on 
width and condition (a tarmac'd driveway I tag as service, a muddy path that is 
wide enough to fit a car is a track for me, narrower is just a path) and *then* 
adding designation tags e.g. public_footpath or permissive_footpath (as is 
around the Hampden estate). In my experience around Bucks, walkers, cyclists 
and horse riders all use the same paths, so I only add specific access tags 
when it is a 'NO' (as in a few no cycles signs around here, against mostly in 
the Hampden Estate area).

My dilemma is that essentially all of my walking routes so far are 
highway=footpath / highway=bridleway with very little designation= (because I 
haven't done much mapping since I saw designation= being discussed), so 
changing to a combination of path/track/service  designation would be quite a 
chunk of work. I'm up for doing it, if that's a good thing to do.

Is there any consensus on whether this is a good thing to do or not (yet)? If 
it is a good thing, then I'd love to see Potlatch updated somehow to allow for 
this (perhaps changing footpath to be highway=path  adding public footpath 
with highway=path/designation=public_footway), and would be up for doing that 
piece of work if that helps, as it would really help me.

On a minor tangent - is there any pattern or spec around tagging the signposts 
at all? I'm starting to think it would be useful, as not all junctions have 
sign posts, and so it could help people know which junction is which when on a 
new walk. I had a quick search on the wiki, but couldn't find anything (I could 
be searching for the wrong thing).

Oh, and I've just spotted the Google Doc, so will try to add my thoughts to 
that if I get some free time later on.

Hope this makes sense,

Adam

On 12 May 2012, at 09:21, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

 
 
 Sorry but I do have to say this. In an area (UK outside of Scotland)
 where sadly, you're not free to roam where you like, access rights are
 *absolutely vital detail* for walkers and other users of the countryside
 and indicating them explicitly where known, either via designation, or
 foot/horse/bicycle = (designated/yes - the two I consider equivalent),
 permissive or private is essential. They should only be left out where
 they are not known.
 
 Yes, but no. Yes I agree that it's information we should gather, and
 anyone more into this thing than a casual mapper probably should.
 However in order to broaden OSM's appeal we can't demand it at the entry
 level. Particularly if there are no handy buttons for it in Potlatch.
 
 Just to make it clear, I'm not proposing rejecting edits containing 
 designation
 tags, or anything like that - just encouraging people to use them where known.
 
 Most of the general public don't know or care, or just bimble along
 anything with tarmac whether it's marked footpath or not.
 
 I can see that in towns, though I have to admit being a little surprised that 
 out in the country, people aren't
 aware of path designations.
 
 Experts can set additional access tags if they want and need to. IMO the
 full sets for a particular designation are a pain to remember, large,
 demonstrably quite difficult to understand in combination, and easy to
 get wrong. 
 
 Only two are really essential, though, I think, highway plus designation.
 foot|bicycle|horse=permissive are nice too, to indicate permissive paths,
 but not as essential as designation.
 
 Nick
 
 
 
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector

[Adam Hoyle]

Wow, that's scary, most of the major towns around where I live are going to 
cease to be.

Actually, I've just looked in more detail at some of the areas I've been 
editing, and think there is a bug somewhere.

For example (there are a lot more examples):

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-0.81228lat=51.72366zoom=17

Shows a path with red nodes, but I added that and no-one else has edited, and 
as far as I know I've signed the updated license thing. (I am 'atom oil' on 
openstreetmap.org). Also other paths around that are edited only by me and 
don't show up as red, so that's inconsistent at least.

Do I need to file this as a bug somewhere (can anyone point me where please?).

Best,

Adam

On 13 Dec 2011, at 08:46, Frederik Ramm wrote:

 Hi,
 
   apologies if this is the 2nd or 3rd time you're reading this, I have posted 
 to dev and legal-talk yesterday in the hope that any major bugs could be 
 ironed out before I announce this to a wider audience.
 
 I have added a world-wide license change map to OSM Inspector:
 
 http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-1.80469lat=35.88371zoom=2
 
 This is based on the per-object data I have on wtfe.gryph.de, combined with a 
 current planet file. The view is updated nightly.
 
 There's also statistics on the number of objects here:
 
 http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/munin.html
 
 And detailed information here:
 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Remapping/License_Change_View_on_OSM_Inspector
  
 
 Bye
 Frederik
 
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector

[Adam Hoyle]

Thank you all - I was looking at the Way, not the individual points, and it was 
obviously one that was there before I started mapping that I then edited.

Is the process for deciding whether or not to delete a node set in stone? I am 
fairly sure that I have moved the majority of those nodes from where they were 
originally (I am fairly sure because there was originally only 1 path on OSM 
going up the hill when there are 2 different paths on the ground), so surely if 
I moved them from their original position they can't be deleted just because 
the specific node id in the database was originated by someone else?? that's 
crazy - what's the logic behind that decision - shouldn't the check ensure that 
they are at least in the same place as the originator positioned them? 
Otherwise I can see a lot of senseless destruction and that makes me really 
quite sad.

Do I sound panicked? That might be because I am - it appears a *lot* of the 
footpaths and bridleways I've been editing over the last 3 years might be 
deleted. I will try to contact ngent, but to be honest I spend maybe an hour or 
two a week on OSM adding in walks I've done, so with all the good will in the 
world I don't realistically have the time to chase all of the original people 
who created nodes that are now potentially going to be deleted.

Help(?)

Adam

On 13 Dec 2011, at 18:45, Michael Collinson wrote:

 Hi Adam,
 
 Yes, you have definitely accepted the new terms. You can check the UK list at 
 http://odbl.de/great_britain.html
 
 I opened the same location with the on-line Potlatch editor 
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=51.723507lon=-0.812403zoom=18
 
 It looks like the way itself is yours (Nov 2009) but that you have used nodes 
 made (May 2009) by an earlier contributor called ngent. He/she has not yet 
 accepted the new terms.
 
 I suggest that you send him a message saying that your edits depend on his 
 work and would he kindly login to his account and accept.  He may think his 
 contributions too small/old to be worth while.  I have done this several 
 times in the UK and have good response. Alternatively, remap it if you have 
 enough information to do so without just copying his work.
 
 If this happens again and you  use Potlatch, you and anyone else in the same 
 situation can do this:
 
 - Select the way or node.
 - Hit the t key to get the Advanced view on the left-hand side.
 - At the top, you will now see something like Node: 413600709 unsure
 - Left click on that.
 - Thus opens a new window http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/413600709
 - You can then click on ngent's name and see he is Contributor terms: 
 Undecided  and send him a message. Thank him for the contribution and ask 
 him to log in and accept as your contributions depend on his.
 -  (often there is more than one editor you will have to click on the View 
 History link and find which user by by going through each one):
 
 This is a pain to do for just one or two nodes, but as the same contributor 
 may have edits in other places we should collectively get these red points 
 minimised pretty quickly. Germany, UK and Spain are the worst at the moment.
 
 Mike
 
 On 13/12/2011 19:08, Adam Hoyle wrote:
 
 Wow, that's scary, most of the major towns around where I live are going to 
 cease to be.
 
 Actually, I've just looked in more detail at some of the areas I've been 
 editing, and think there is a bug somewhere.
 
 For example (there are a lot more examples):
 
 http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-0.81228lat=51.72366zoom=17
 
 Shows a path with red nodes, but I added that and no-one else has edited, 
 and as far as I know I've signed the updated license thing. (I am 'atom oil' 
 on openstreetmap.org). Also other paths around that are edited only by me 
 and don't show up as red, so that's inconsistent at least.
 
 Do I need to file this as a bug somewhere (can anyone point me where 
 please?).
 
 Best,
 
 Adam
 
 On 13 Dec 2011, at 08:46, Frederik Ramm wrote:
 
 Hi,
 
   apologies if this is the 2nd or 3rd time you're reading this, I have 
 posted to dev and legal-talk yesterday in the hope that any major bugs 
 could be ironed out before I announce this to a wider audience.
 
 I have added a world-wide license change map to OSM Inspector:
 
 http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-1.80469lat=35.88371zoom=2
 
 This is based on the per-object data I have on wtfe.gryph.de, combined with 
 a current planet file. The view is updated nightly.
 
 There's also statistics on the number of objects here:
 
 http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/munin.html
 
 And detailed information here:
 
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Remapping/License_Change_View_on_OSM_Inspector
  
 
 Bye
 Frederik
 

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector

[Adam Hoyle]

Hi Richard,

On 13 Dec 2011, at 18:34, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

 In this case, opening the area in Potlatch 2 shows those nodes highlighted
 in orange, which P2 uses to mean someone who edited this way hasn't
 responded to the CTs yet. You can click on any of these nodes and then,
 using the advanced view, click on the object ID to open it in OSM's data
 browser like so:

When I open P2 on my mac I don't get anything highlighted in orange (there is a 
yellow outline around 'The Ridgeway' but I have always presumed that's because 
it's part of a way). I've opened 'options' and ticked 'show license status' and 
also closed the window and re-opened, but nothing shows - is there something 
else I need to do?

Thanks in advance,

Adam___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector

[Adam Hoyle]

On 13 Dec 2011, at 21:20, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

 Adam Hoyle wrote:
 is there something else I need to do?
 
 It'll only work in the default, 'Potlatch' map style (not 'Network' or
 'Wireframe' or others - I need to fix that!) but apart from that, yes, that
 should be all you need to do.

Oh wow - I must have been on some long gone map style, it's all looking very 
different now I've changed the map style (and looking good too). Am I right in 
saying that purple outlines mean things are part of a hiking route, and green 
outline means foot route right?

And orange outlines are bad, orange outlines mean it'll get wiped, is that 
correct? Damn it, there are a *lot* of orange outlines. 
#wipestearsfromeyesandrollsupsleeves

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector

[Adam Hoyle]

On 13 Dec 2011, at 21:34, Frederik Ramm wrote:

 On 12/13/2011 09:39 PM, Adam Hoyle wrote:
 Is the process for deciding whether or not to delete a node set in
 stone? I am fairly sure that I have moved the majority of those nodes
 from where they were originally (I am fairly sure because there was
 originally only 1 path on OSM going up the hill when there are 2
 different paths on the ground), so surely if I moved them from their
 original position they can't be deleted just because the specific node
 id in the database was originated by someone else?? that's crazy -
 what's the logic behind that decision - shouldn't the check ensure that
 they are at least in the same place as the originator positioned them?
 
 This is an argument put forward by a number of contributors and it certainly 
 has something going for it.
 
 My usual counter-example is: Assume I highlight a river in my editor and move 
 the whole thing by one metre - leaving all the curves, bends, and zigzag 
 shapes that the original mapper placed there intact - does that then afford 
 me, exclusively, the copyright for all the nodes (if there is any at all)?

an interesting and very valid point.
 If it is agreed to be an issue, then surely it's another thing a computer 
could check - eg. if the relationship (distance and angle) between all the 
points on a line don't match (or a % of them don't match) then that can be 
considered different and so not necessary to remove.

 It is important to note that the OSM Inspector view is not the final word - 
 not even an official word - on the question of what gets deleted. It is 
 just my interpretation of the current situation.


it's awesome, and although this has panicked the hell out of me, I am glad to 
better understand the situation before things get deleted and I wonder why.

Regards,

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [OSM-legal-talk] License Change View on OSM Inspector

[Adam Hoyle]

On 13 Dec 2011, at 21:59, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

 I can't emphasise enough the importance of contacting people and asking them
 to agree. It really works.

Is there any tool out there that can highlight the red users in a given area? 
Fredrick, is that at all possible to add to your excellent, but frankly 
terrifying, map? 

Or is there a tool for entering a given osm username and finding out the ways 
they have initially created. I'm sure there is, there seem to be billions of 
awesome map hacks out there.

Also, what happens to a way that was say 2 nodes long and I've added 20 nodes 
to it, does the whole thing get deleted or just the 2 nodes that the other 
person created?

The damage around Aylesbury / Wendover / High Wycombe is going to be huge 
(looks like they will all essentially cease to be), but in some ways it could 
be quite a beautiful art project, rather like throwing a wrecking ball at a 
Ming vase. #thewhiskeyisnthelping

Hang on, it's happening on April 1st - this isn't an April Fools joke is it? 
#iwouldbesorelievedifitwas

\a___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Drinking Map of UK

[Adam Hoyle]

This project is perfect, so to chip in I've added The Chiltern Brewery north of 
Princes Risborough and also fixed the tags on Fuller's Griffin Brewery in 
Chiswick, both of which I know well. 

Looking forward to seeing them turn up on the map

Will the map pick up on pubs too? *cough* I know lots around here *cough*, so 
can add the operator tag if that'll help - should we specifically pick out pubs 
that aren't tied (as opposed to the tag just not being there), eg 
operator=independent (?)

Adam


On 14 Nov 2011, at 18:41, Craig Loftus wrote:

 On 14 November 2011 14:58, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote:
 I just wondered whether when mapping breweries whether we are using
 name for the name of the brewery and operator for the company that
 brews there. For smaller companies they may not have named their
 brewery, so name might do for the operator. Or are we using name for
 the brewing company and addr:housename if the brewery has a name?
 
 All was going swimmingly until I tried to add Nethergate in Growler
 Brewery...
 
 I would use name for the bricks and mortar thing, and operator for the
 company irrespective of whether they have a name for their brewery or
 not, this follows the style used for retail chains.
 
 I've just come across the St Francis Abbey Brewery, which brews
 Smithwick 'brand' beer (their own word), and is owned and operated by
 Diageo. I'm going with:
 
 industrial=brewery;
 name=Saint Francis Abbey Brewery;
 brand=Smithwick's;
 operator=Diageo;
 
 How one reconciles this with the use of the brewery tag on pubs, I
 don't know. At a first guess I would think brewery=Smithwick's, for
 their tied pubs as I'm guessing that is what it says on the sign.
 
 Craig
 
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


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

Re: [OSM-talk] iPhone APP for GPX files?

[Adam Hoyle]

On 7 Aug 2011, at 22:34, Mike N wrote:

 But so far I couldn't find a really important type of apps that just work.
 
 So just any of you iPhone users here in the list have an APP that can create 
 proper GPX files?
 
 I like to take the bus and to create GPX files (I mean as a track not as 
 single POIs) of the bus routes. And there are a lot of bus routes missing in 
 this part of the world :-/
 
 Probably the best of that class for the iPhone is the OSMTrack app. Motion-X 
 GPS app can also create GPX tracks, but has many more features and is 
 therefore more complicated if all you need is GPX tracks.

I've used Trails for recording the GPX for all of the OSM updates that I've 
done and always found it good to use. I looked around at all of the options 
when the iPhone first came out yonks ago, but haven't looked since.



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Flash cookies

[Adam Hoyle]

Hey Richard,

Sorry to be dumb/lazy, and I'm sure you've told me before, but please can you 
point me at the Potlatch2 trac/svn etc.

thnx,

Adam

On 22 Jun 2011, at 13:54, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

 Steve Doerr wrote:
 In that case, could it be made to remember custom 
 backgrounds from one session to the next? If I want 
 to use the UK  postcode layer, I have to add it manually 
 every time.
 
 Sure - as ever, put it in a trac ticket. Stuff mentioned passingly on
 mailing lists gets forgotten. :)
 
 cheers
 Richard
 
 
 
 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Flash-cookies-tp6502897p6504118.html
 Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 ___
 talk mailing list
 talk@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Flash cookies

[Adam Hoyle]

On 22 Jun 2011, at 14:55, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

  Make
 sure to select potlatch2 as the component. And only set the priority to
 critical if it causes your computer to catch fire or major if it
 deletes whole cities from OSM without any human intervention whatsoever.
 :)

a bug report about a computer catching fire from a flash app is AWESOME - do 
you get many of those ;-)

 Source code is in git these days: my repository is at
 https://github.com/systemed/potlatch2 . There's documentation on the
 Potlatch 2 pages on the wiki.

excellent, cloning as I type this :-)

ttfn,

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Customised Maps (was OSM Analysis New Data and bot)

[Adam Hoyle]

zomg, kothic looks awesome, I'll definitely be giving that a whirl. :-)

On 16 Jun 2011, at 22:24, Graham Jones wrote:

 Hi Adam,
 The kothic system that Richard pointed you to is well worth a look - it 
 renders very pretty maps.  I think it uses a styling language similar to the 
 'carto' one I talked about.  I haven't looked at how you actually customise 
 it without setting up your own server yet though.
 
 If you want to have a look at mapnik and OSM, the instructions on the OSM 
 wiki are a good place to start (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapnik).  
 
 The biggest difference between the mapnik tutorial that you used is that 
 yours used data from a 'shape file'.   The OSM style uses a postgresql 
 database to hold the main OSM data, and a number of shape files for 
 coastlines, built up areas etc.
 
 I find the postgresql bit the tricky bit - follow the instructions on 
 Mapnik/PostGIS to set that up (linked from the Mapnik page).
 
 Have fun!
 
 Graham.
 
 On 16 June 2011 21:09, Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote:
 Hey Graham,
 
 All very helpful information, thank you very very much :-)
 
 I just managed to figure out where I got to. I basically followed the 
 tutorial here:
 http://trac.mapnik.org/wiki/GettingStarted
 
 to save you clicking it, I haven't even got the osm stylesheet yet, but I 
 have rendered a rather sweet view of the entire world. Not too shabby, and 
 not exactly advanced, but I was quite happy.
 
 So any pointers for the biggest learning curve bit? ;-)
 
 Maybe I should wait for the thang Richard mentioned, although I'd love to get 
 something at a more local level than the entire world rendered in Mapnik, 
 just so I can tick that off my to-do list :-)
 
 ttfn,
 
 Adam
 
 On 15 Jun 2011, at 22:41, Graham Jones wrote:
 
 Hi Adam,
 No problem - these lists have been a bit busy over the last few days
 
 If you have got mapnik running and generating maps using the 'standard' osm 
 stylesheet, you have got over the biggest learning curve.You will 
 probably have noticed that the 'standard' osm stylesheet is very complicated 
 - this is because it renders lots of different information differently at 
 different zoom levels.
 
 If you want to add contours, it is possible to do that by importing the 
 contours into your postgresql database, and modifying the standard osm style 
 file to plot them.   I have a crude example of this at 
 http://code.google.com/p/ntmisc/source/browse/#svn%2Fkefalonia_map - all my 
 changes compared to the standard osm style file are in the 'inc' directory - 
 I added a file that defines the style for the contour line drawing, and also 
 changed some other files to include the new one - search the osm wiki for 
 contours to see how to get contours into your postgresql database.   I did a 
 little write up on how I did this (but not much detail I am afraid) at 
 http://nerdytoad.blogspot.com/2011/04/kefalonia-map.html.
 
 To work on building up a mapnik stylesheet from scratch to get a better 
 understanding of how it works, I would suggest starting on a simple 
 transparent overlay to display over other map tiles.   I put together a few 
 slides on my version of how to render map data with mapnik, which you can 
 see at http://maps3.org.uk/doc/index.html.   If you look at 
 http://maps3.org.uk/osm_opendata, the 'about' link has a bit of a descripton 
 of how I produced the overlays for that map (another example of a very 
 simple overlay).
 
 Both of the above examples use the standard xml stylesheet for mapnik.   I 
 have been experimenting with a different way of producing the xml stylesheet 
 using a different language and a pre-processor called 'carto'.   I did a 
 little write up at 
 http://nerdytoad.blogspot.com/2011/05/rendering-openstreetmap-data-using.html
  on where I have got to - It is much less complete than the full OSM 
 stylesheet, and I think I need to learn some of the tricks used in that 
 style to make the map look better, but I think it is simpler to see what it 
 is doing, so I think I will stick with this for simple things.
 
 Hope that gets you started.   Let me know if you get stuck and I will see 
 what I can do.   The mapnik-users mailing list is a good place to ask for 
 help too.
 
 Regards
 
 
 Graham. 
 
 On 15 June 2011 14:22, Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote:
 Hi Graham,
 
 Sorry, I got a bit over excited and subscribed to tons of OSM mailing lists 
 and so totally missed your awesome reply :-(
 
 Sorry if I wasn't clear - I've successfully got Mapnik installed (did it a 
 week or three ago and it was pretty painless as far as I recall), so am 
 particularly after a sample config file to start from, particularly one with 
 hill contours / gradients / 
 whatever-they-are-really-called-outside-the-confines-of-my-head.
 
 Altho' having said that the package that Parveen Arora is putting together 
 looks pretty awesome, so maybe I should hold out for that, even tho' it 
 looks more

Re: [Talk-GB] Customised Maps (was OSM Analysis New Data and bot)

[Adam Hoyle]

On 10 Jun 2011, at 11:04, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

 Graham Jones wrote:
 setting up mapnik and all its dependencies is quite daunting
 
 This week I've seen something that gives near-Mapnik quality rendering with,
 hopefully, near-trivial installation, configuration and system demands. I
 think one comment on IRC was zomg which succinctly sums it up.
 
 I won't post the details here yet as hopefully the authors will be
 announcing something soon, but I'd just say that if you're a n00b at map
 rendering, you might want to hold off on learning Mapnik for now.
 
 (Mapnik is, of course, still amazing and unchallenged for serious heavy-duty
 rendering.)

another email I missed. d'oh.

this also sounds exceedingly good - any idea where I should look to make sure I 
don't miss it?

Cheers,

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Customised Maps (was OSM Analysis New Data and bot)

[Adam Hoyle]

Hey Graham,

All very helpful information, thank you very very much :-)

I just managed to figure out where I got to. I basically followed the tutorial 
here:
http://trac.mapnik.org/wiki/GettingStarted

to save you clicking it, I haven't even got the osm stylesheet yet, but I have 
rendered a rather sweet view of the entire world. Not too shabby, and not 
exactly advanced, but I was quite happy.

So any pointers for the biggest learning curve bit? ;-)

Maybe I should wait for the thang Richard mentioned, although I'd love to get 
something at a more local level than the entire world rendered in Mapnik, just 
so I can tick that off my to-do list :-)

ttfn,

Adam

On 15 Jun 2011, at 22:41, Graham Jones wrote:

 Hi Adam,
 No problem - these lists have been a bit busy over the last few days
 
 If you have got mapnik running and generating maps using the 'standard' osm 
 stylesheet, you have got over the biggest learning curve.You will 
 probably have noticed that the 'standard' osm stylesheet is very complicated 
 - this is because it renders lots of different information differently at 
 different zoom levels.
 
 If you want to add contours, it is possible to do that by importing the 
 contours into your postgresql database, and modifying the standard osm style 
 file to plot them.   I have a crude example of this at 
 http://code.google.com/p/ntmisc/source/browse/#svn%2Fkefalonia_map - all my 
 changes compared to the standard osm style file are in the 'inc' directory - 
 I added a file that defines the style for the contour line drawing, and also 
 changed some other files to include the new one - search the osm wiki for 
 contours to see how to get contours into your postgresql database.   I did a 
 little write up on how I did this (but not much detail I am afraid) at 
 http://nerdytoad.blogspot.com/2011/04/kefalonia-map.html.
 
 To work on building up a mapnik stylesheet from scratch to get a better 
 understanding of how it works, I would suggest starting on a simple 
 transparent overlay to display over other map tiles.   I put together a few 
 slides on my version of how to render map data with mapnik, which you can see 
 at http://maps3.org.uk/doc/index.html.   If you look at 
 http://maps3.org.uk/osm_opendata, the 'about' link has a bit of a descripton 
 of how I produced the overlays for that map (another example of a very simple 
 overlay).
 
 Both of the above examples use the standard xml stylesheet for mapnik.   I 
 have been experimenting with a different way of producing the xml stylesheet 
 using a different language and a pre-processor called 'carto'.   I did a 
 little write up at 
 http://nerdytoad.blogspot.com/2011/05/rendering-openstreetmap-data-using.html 
 on where I have got to - It is much less complete than the full OSM 
 stylesheet, and I think I need to learn some of the tricks used in that style 
 to make the map look better, but I think it is simpler to see what it is 
 doing, so I think I will stick with this for simple things.
 
 Hope that gets you started.   Let me know if you get stuck and I will see 
 what I can do.   The mapnik-users mailing list is a good place to ask for 
 help too.
 
 Regards
 
 
 Graham. 
 
 On 15 June 2011 14:22, Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote:
 Hi Graham,
 
 Sorry, I got a bit over excited and subscribed to tons of OSM mailing lists 
 and so totally missed your awesome reply :-(
 
 Sorry if I wasn't clear - I've successfully got Mapnik installed (did it a 
 week or three ago and it was pretty painless as far as I recall), so am 
 particularly after a sample config file to start from, particularly one with 
 hill contours / gradients / 
 whatever-they-are-really-called-outside-the-confines-of-my-head.
 
 Altho' having said that the package that Parveen Arora is putting together 
 looks pretty awesome, so maybe I should hold out for that, even tho' it looks 
 more targeted for Debian than OS X - I guess if push comes to shove I could 
 install Debian in VMware, which I already have on my laptop.
 
 By the way townguide looks rather amazing, so adding that to my (rather long) 
 list of things to check out :-)
 
 Thanks for the offer of helping generate the configuration file, not sure of 
 the best way to do that tho' as I want something I can start with and hack 
 around with and iterate a lot until it's right. The primary thing I want is 
 pubs and post boxes available when zoomed out (ideally the same zoom range as 
 footpaths show up on), and if possible the mountain gradients/contours - I've 
 seen a couple of maps in the wild that use these, but not sure how 
 possible/straightforward it is for a Mapnik newbie such as myself.
 
 Cheers,
 
 Adam
 
 On 10 Jun 2011, at 10:46, Graham Jones wrote:
 
 Adam (changed the title of the thread to keep this one separate),
 The simplest way to do it is to make overlays that are transparent and you 
 can view over another set of tiles.   
 I have done a few before now - there is one

Re: [Talk-GB] Customised Maps (was OSM Analysis New Data and bot)

[Adam Hoyle]

Hi Graham,

Sorry, I got a bit over excited and subscribed to tons of OSM mailing lists and 
so totally missed your awesome reply :-(

Sorry if I wasn't clear - I've successfully got Mapnik installed (did it a week 
or three ago and it was pretty painless as far as I recall), so am particularly 
after a sample config file to start from, particularly one with hill contours / 
gradients / whatever-they-are-really-called-outside-the-confines-of-my-head.

Altho' having said that the package that Parveen Arora is putting together 
looks pretty awesome, so maybe I should hold out for that, even tho' it looks 
more targeted for Debian than OS X - I guess if push comes to shove I could 
install Debian in VMware, which I already have on my laptop.

By the way townguide looks rather amazing, so adding that to my (rather long) 
list of things to check out :-)

Thanks for the offer of helping generate the configuration file, not sure of 
the best way to do that tho' as I want something I can start with and hack 
around with and iterate a lot until it's right. The primary thing I want is 
pubs and post boxes available when zoomed out (ideally the same zoom range as 
footpaths show up on), and if possible the mountain gradients/contours - I've 
seen a couple of maps in the wild that use these, but not sure how 
possible/straightforward it is for a Mapnik newbie such as myself.

Cheers,

Adam

On 10 Jun 2011, at 10:46, Graham Jones wrote:

 Adam (changed the title of the thread to keep this one separate),
 The simplest way to do it is to make overlays that are transparent and you 
 can view over another set of tiles.   
 I have done a few before now - there is one visible at http://maps3.org.uk, 
 which highlights historic things over the normal mapnik rendering.
 I still have the idea to set up something to make the learning curve easier, 
 because I appreciate that setting up mapnik and all its dependencies is quite 
 daunting - there is something on my osm user page about it (grahamjones).
 
 If you want to do it yourself, there are a few different sets of instructions 
 - the osm wiki 'mapnik' page is a good start.  Note that linux is much easier 
 than Windows (or at least there are better instructions!).
 
 I have a set of instructions that work for me at 
 http://code.google.com/p/townguide/wiki/InstallationInstructions.   (there 
 may be a minor issue with postgresql authentication that I need to fix).
 
 Parveen Aurora is currently working on making a simple package that will 
 install and configure everything for you for his Google Summer of Code 
 project, but you will have to give him a few weeks to get something ready for 
 testing (https://github.com/ParveenArora/MeraMap).
 
 If you would like to work out what you would like to render (ie which tag 
 combinations), how you would like them drawn (line colour and width, icon 
 image etc.), I can help you turn that into a mapnik configuration file and 
 generate the map for you on my computer.I think it is better to spend 
 time thinking about the rendering than having to worry about database 
 configuration nuts and bolts.
 
 Regards
 
 
 Graham.
 
 Regards
 
 
 Graham.
 
 On 10 June 2011 10:27, Adam Hoyle adam.li...@dotankstudios.com wrote:
 Sorry in advance - after writing this I've realised I'm possibly heading off 
 on a tangent (I do that).
 
 Speaking of the awesomeness of Cycle Map and how that encourages people - I 
 really want an openwalkingtothepubmap, which would basically be a clone of 
 the gorgeous cycle map, but with the coloured cycle routes removed in favour 
 of coloured paths and also pubs visible when quite zoomed out (and prolly 
 post boxes too, but that is probably particularly niche).
 
 I'm starting to realise that I might need to roll up my sleeves and do this 
 myself.
 
 Every now and then I try to install Mapnik on my Mac, and mostly fail, but I 
 tried t'other day and it worked, so I'm wondering where the various styles 
 that are used on OSM are kept (or even if they are actually available for 
 derivative use) - I'm most keen on cyclemap or something that has gradients, 
 cos as a walker I'm quite interested in whether I am about to walk over a 
 massive hill or not.
 
 Can anyone point me in the right direction?
 
 All the best,
 
 Adam
 
 On 10 Jun 2011, at 09:35, Bob Kerr wrote:
 
 I agree with Andy about increasing the number of mappers is essential. With 
 Cycle map he has increased the interest in the cycling communities. Getting 
 interest and publicity is very difficult. I can see many other communities 
 that we could encourage to start helping us, from NHS to golfers but we have 
 no organised way of doing this at the moment. Using a bot to replace large 
 sections of data in the UK is going to be counterproductive or destructive, 
 especially as the UK is now 80% (road name)complete.  However restricting a 
 bot by area to the size of small villages may help. I believe we can both 
 encourage people to join us

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot

[Adam Hoyle]

Sorry in advance - after writing this I've realised I'm possibly heading off on 
a tangent (I do that).

Speaking of the awesomeness of Cycle Map and how that encourages people - I 
really want an openwalkingtothepubmap, which would basically be a clone of the 
gorgeous cycle map, but with the coloured cycle routes removed in favour of 
coloured paths and also pubs visible when quite zoomed out (and prolly post 
boxes too, but that is probably particularly niche).

I'm starting to realise that I might need to roll up my sleeves and do this 
myself.

Every now and then I try to install Mapnik on my Mac, and mostly fail, but I 
tried t'other day and it worked, so I'm wondering where the various styles that 
are used on OSM are kept (or even if they are actually available for derivative 
use) - I'm most keen on cyclemap or something that has gradients, cos as a 
walker I'm quite interested in whether I am about to walk over a massive hill 
or not.

Can anyone point me in the right direction?

All the best,

Adam

On 10 Jun 2011, at 09:35, Bob Kerr wrote:

 I agree with Andy about increasing the number of mappers is essential. With 
 Cycle map he has increased the interest in the cycling communities. Getting 
 interest and publicity is very difficult. I can see many other communities 
 that we could encourage to start helping us, from NHS to golfers but we have 
 no organised way of doing this at the moment. Using a bot to replace large 
 sections of data in the UK is going to be counterproductive or destructive, 
 especially as the UK is now 80% (road name)complete.  However restricting a 
 bot by area to the size of small villages may help. I believe we can both 
 encourage people to join us and use the a bot on small areas at the same time.
 
 Cheers
 
 bob
 
 
 From: Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com
 To: sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk
 Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
 Sent: Thursday, 9 June 2011, 16:45
 Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
 
 On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Jerry Clough : SK53 on OSM
 sk53_...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
 
  In order to get  a better level of completeness in the UK what we need are
  more mappers.
 
 Absolutely.
 
 Everything we do should be focussed on helping get more mappers, or
 helping the mappers we have get their jobs done more easily.
 Everything that is a direct substitute for having more mappers is, at
 best, a distraction from (what I see as) the desired goal. If we have
 mappers, and lots of them, then - as we've now demonstrated - we can
 get a glorious dataset.
 
 Note that not everyone here shares the same goals - some people are
 focussed on the data, others on the community. It might be worth
 examining why we (collectively) have a tendency to discuss the data
 all the time and I see very few discussions on community matters.
 
 I find in most conversations, if the answer is because we don't have
 enough mappers yet then the solution is not to bypass them with some
 form of automation but to get more of them. Unfortunately to most
 OSMers, community building seems hard (which it is), and writing bots
 or doing imports seems easy (which it's not).
 
  A bot is putting short-term gain ahead of our long-term interests.
 
 Indeed. What's more, all the effort that goes into writing bots,
 discussing them, justifying them etc is time that hasn't gone into the
 primary goal of recruiting and helping more people to OSM.
 
 Cheers,
 Andy
 
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
 
 
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot

[Adam Hoyle]

On 9 Jun 2011, at 17:47, David Earl wrote:

 On 09/06/2011 17:36, Ed Avis wrote:
 What stops more people using OSM?
 
 While I agree with your other points, even before you get to the data, I 
 think the first reason is people don't know about it.
 
 And for most people, why would you not just use Google maps even if you did?


google maps doesn't feature any footpaths!

that's what got me into OSM a few years ago. Sorry to prolly be off-message but 
I'm happy with Google Maps for all things road related (aside from the small 
errors it has), but I do like OSM for it's footpaths as I'm not aware of 
anything else that does that, and I've noticed tons of footpaths missing from 
Ordnance Survey (maybe not official ones, but traversable ones nonetheless) .

What *I* would quite like is something to import woods and water, and ideally a 
tool that would allow me to do it on as small an area as I like (eg 1 mile 
square), with some-kind of preview and option to back out.

If it could be done on local scales, then surely that would empower people 
(provided they could get their heads around what the tool is and how it works).

ttfn,

Adam



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

Re: [Talk-GB] On footpaths

[Adam Hoyle]

On 4 May 2011, at 15:57, Peter Miller wrote:

 Here is a global map view showing highway=footway in blue and highway=path in 
 brown.
 http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=97

wow, that is awesome!

I am a little confused (I get like that). The rather amazingly wonderful 
potlatch 2 doesn't appear to put the designation stuff in when one tags a 
footpath or track etc. I will still go through and fix the paths I've added, 
but I was wondering if there was a reason it's not in potlatch 2, and if there 
isn't, I wondered if the potlatch project is open source and if someone can 
point me towards where I can get the source and I'll attempt to make the 
relevant change.

ttfn,

Adam___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] On footpaths

[Adam Hoyle]

On 5 May 2011, at 23:07, Richard Fairhurst wrote:

 Adam Hoyle wrote:
 I am a little confused (I get like that). The rather amazingly wonderful
 potlatch 2 doesn't appear to put the designation stuff in when one tags 
 a footpath or track etc. I will still go through and fix the paths I've 
 added, but I was wondering if there was a reason it's not in potlatch 2
 
 Thus far P2 doesn't have country-specific presets. Until it does, adding
 specific values for designation= would be counter-productive - people in
 Germany or Lithuania or Iraq or wherever would see a button and start adding
 designation=public_footpath without knowing what it meant, and we'd lose
 the usefulness of it.

ah, yes - that makes sense.

 When we add a facility for country-specific presets then we'll do stuff like
 that. Of course if you'd like to get involved with the programming that'd be
 great. ;)

well, I do speak actionscript, and with FDT it's a dream to write, so that's a 
distinct possibility. :-D

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

Re: [Talk-GB] On footpaths

[Adam Hoyle]

This is a very interesting discussion. I've been walking and then adding 
footpaths north of High Wycombe / south of Wendover and surrounding areas for a 
couple of years, but for various felt-too-much-like-work reasons I've only just 
joined this mailing list in the last few weeks.

Fwiw I had thought that footway meant an official footpath and path meant an 
non-official, but obviously well used footpath, not that I used path that often 
tbh.

I'm glad to hear about the designation tag, as that makes things a bit clearer, 
but how does designation work with highway=bridleway? Should I be adding both?

Cheers,

Adam



On 4 May 2011, at 14:37, SomeoneElse wrote:

 On 04/05/2011 13:22, Peter Oliver wrote:
 
 • There's an old method of tagging ways suitable for pedestrians, and a 
 new method. 
 
 I'd ignore the new method as documented there.  It was added by a 
 wikifiddler a couple of months ago and bears no resemblance to common usage 
 in the UK.  The huge table that was added also makes the page pretty much 
 illegible.  
 
 The new method is not wrong, but doesn't add any more information and 
 involves more typing.  Personally, I'll record new footpaths as 
 highway=footway, and if someone already mapped one as highway=path, foot=blah 
 I'll leave it at that.  Life's too short for edit wars.
 
 As well as echoing what other people have said (e.g. recording 
 designation=public_footpath if there's a sign) what I would add is to see 
 please get mapping!  Don't worry about getting 100% of the detail at the 
 first attempt (if someone spots later that something was actually a bridleway 
 and not just a footpath they can change it).
 
 Cheers,
 Andy
 
 ___
 Talk-GB mailing list
 Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
 http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

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