Re: [OSM-talk] Still need for spam protection and if yes, what about OSM-based CATPCHA?
Captcha's are pure evil, I can never work the swines out and usually need to get someone to help, or more usually I just abandon what I was doing :-( One thing I've seen elsewhere which might be a half-suitable compromise is to only prompt when a url is included, most genuine users won't then be effected, and you can white list certain sites, e.g. osm related ones , to be even less annoying. On May 5, 2013 4:02 PM, Stefan Keller sfkel...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I think, there is still a need to protect e.g. comments and account registrations against spam and it seems that CAPTCHAs are still the best technology to do this. AFAIK OSM Wiki uses the original reCAPTCHA (which helps Google to translate books or decode house numbers!). OSM help, the forum and the User's Diaries (including help) currently require a regular account. I found e.g. his discussion [1] which seems to be never implemented. If somebody knows more pls. reply. Now, I got an idea of (yet) another re-CAPTCHA which is somehow more user friendly and builds on keepright data. Question: 1. Do you also think there still is a need for CAPTCHAs? 2. If yes, do you know of any volunteering OSM related webapplications, which would be willing to replace (re-)CAPTCHAs with a service which helps OSM? Yours, Stefan [1] http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=16021 ___ 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: [Talk-GB] Messed up buildings in Preston
I quickly learnt that that lesson and haven't done any more since. Been slowly fixing it ever since (and filling in various bits and pieces since) - kinda got distracted by software crashing on uploads so just banged it into JOSM (which I can never get the hang of) with the intention of fixing it (annoyingly the small areas I checked in detail before proceeding actually worked okay) soon after and quickly losing the will after losing multiple lots of edits. The building outlines actually pretty much match the area I grew up in (1930s - 1970s council new builds have lots and lots of rectangles!), it was only once the Mapnik rendering caught up a week or so later and panning towards the city centre that it became apparent how iffy the street-view data and road layout actually were. The road network was also reasonably good where I did my initial checks (thanks in part to the fixes I'd previously done from GPS traces). Mainly been working from the Lea area towards the docks and city though and been aligning to combination of OS data and the GPS traces, along with a combination of photos and local knowledge. *(The system really needs some form of you've uploaded loads of stuff, is this really any good? type warnings/cooling off period to try and get rid of some over-eagerness in getting extra detail in!)* Kev. On 14 March 2013 08:23, Kevin Peat k...@k3v.eu wrote: On 13 Mar 2013 19:37, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: I think some of that may well be me, I've been slowly but surly fixing it, but is compounded by the road network being a complete mess in many places, the difficulty in getting GPS lock to get something to align Bing... Loading building outlines in an area where the roads are a mess seems like a really bad idea. It just makes it even harder to sort things out. Loading the OS StreetView building outlines which are hugely simplified seems like an even worse idea. This tool doesn't seem to be production ready so probably the wiki page should say not to use it for production uploads. If Bing alignment is poor and you have no good traces you can always use an OS layer to align it. Kevin ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Messed up buildings in Preston
I think some of that may well be me, I've been slowly but surly fixing it, but is compounded by the road network being a complete mess in many places, the difficulty in getting GPS lock to get something to align Bing too, and being 200km from my home town! The western half of Ashton and southern half of the city centre being sorted in the main. Annoyingly that is one junction I fixed until my editor crashed on upload :-( On Mar 13, 2013 7:01 PM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I noticed some weirdness when doing some openstreetmap-carto work. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.763681lon=-2.723075zoom=18layers=M Notice a few things: * Overlapping buildings (e.g. to the south of the junction) * Strange triangular partial-buildings * Incredibly thin buildings (e.g. to the north of the junction) * Unlikely shapes of buildings (e.g. to the east) Move a bit further north: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.767768lon=-2.731803zoom=18layers=M Now I don't know the area, but I'll bet they don't build higgledy-piggledy like that in Preston. A brief look suggests this changeset: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/5994643 and the tags on the buildings suggest it's an import: source = Auto_OS_OpenData_StreetView So does anyone want to try fixing, redoing or reverting this, er, stuff? And does anyone know how widespread such Auto_OS_OpenData_StreetView damage is around the country? Taginfo suggests there's 45 598 cases - hopefully not all this bad? http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/source=Auto_OS_OpenData_StreetView 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
Re: [Talk-GB] FW: Office of National Statistics data
Does this set include BT (northern Ireland) , postcodes like nspd open did? If so that is one way it's better than code point open On Oct 31, 2012 11:45 AM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 31/10/12 11:39, Steve Doerr wrote: Can we get this data into Nominatim? Why? What would it give us over the CodePoint Open data? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ __**_ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/talk-gbhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Temporary road closures
I've only bothered on really long term ones , the most glaring example being in preston where it was in place for 24 months at least; our where the road will reopen on a new alignment - e.g. A46 Newark to Widmerpool On Jul 12, 2012 2:23 PM, cotswolds mapper osmcotswo...@gmail.com wrote: How long does a road temporary road closure need to last to make it worth tagging? I've just come across an enormous (4 metres high) dry stone retaining wall which has collapsed onto a single track road, completely blocking it. Alternative routes are long and difficult. Based on previous similar occurrences, the road is likely to be closed for at least 6 - 8 weeks, probably more. Is this worth tagging? I guess it depends mainly on how often the sites that use OSM for routing update their data. Rob ___ 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] railway:historic = rail tags
I've noticed a stack of stations showing up on the map recently labelled VillageName Station which just seams wrong and to have them show up on the default rendering seams even more wrong. They are tagged railway=station; disused=yes e.g. Widmerpool Station http://osm.org/go/eu8kWOCCe-- Plumtree Station http://osm.org/go/eu8PnPm7t- (closed 1949) (in those two examples the track is in situ, and for those Londoners on here your shiny new tube trains got there test runs on there) Edwalton Station http://osm.org/go/eu8aIQFA3- (closed 1949) While I'm on the subject of Railway Tagging the the Nottingham (Midland) station seams to have been micromapped to a bit too much detail -e.g. Mapnik now renders Platform 4/5 Canopy, Footpath No. 21 (demolished), Lift Shaft, Stairs, Porte-Cohére (etc) in addition to the useful stuff like WH Smith, Ticket Office, and the debatibly useful stuff (e.g. Karlsruhe Friendship Bridge which will be carrying NET (the tram) over the station once construction is complete). The Milk Dock has been turned into a cycle parking area but the rendering is completely obscured by the highway=service area=yes placed there - can it really be A highway when it's full of bike racks? What should be done here - nothing, remove the names or what? Kev On 4 July 2012 19:40, Donald Noble drno...@gmail.com wrote: On 4 July 2012 09:39, Craig Loftus craigloftus+...@googlemail.com wrote: I think highway=no is typically used as a temporary tag to try to stop remote mappers from adding something from a source that is not up to date. … However, what is the argument for keeping connections between sections of dismantled railway, that have since been split by modern developments? In some places, the abandoned railway is visible on aerial imagery, but has since been developed over. I would say this is a very similar situation to the roads. As to connecting things up, perhaps that is just OCD and trying to make things neat and tidy :p As an aside, how would one map a dismantled railway bridge? And, how would one map an intact but disused bridge from which the railway tracks have been removed? For an example of a dismantled bridge with old embankments on either side, I would map these as r=abandoned, and the route where the bridge used to be as r=dismantled. This has 2 benefits IMO: it shows other mappers that the ex railway has been mapped in a bit more detail than just a single rough way; and it may be of use to some users of OSM data, as Peter alluded to. For the intact bridge, I think this is a relatively clear case of r=abandoned, as there is something on the ground to map that is part of an abandoned railway. regards, Donald ___ 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] railway:historic = rail tags
Done - I now remember where I first saw them jumping out at me! On 6 July 2012 21:49, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 July 2012 21:43, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: I've noticed a stack of stations showing up on the map recently labelled VillageName Station which just seams wrong and to have them show up on the default rendering seams even more wrong. They are tagged railway=station; disused=yes Please feel free to fix them, as per http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2011-April/011460.html The combination railway=station; disused=yes should not be used. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging
Sorry Richard for spamming you - one day I'll remember this replies to the person rather than the group by default - argh! On 20 June 2012 15:11, Richard Mann richard.mann.westoxf...@gmail.com wrote: The people who collected the data tell me that the cycle lane widths were recorded in 3 categories: 1) 1.5m 2) 1.5=x2 3) =2 So the values in the data (1.25 and 1.75 mostly) are spuriously accurate and quite often overstated. Ah Ha, that explains why many of the 1.25m ones seam very generous - more like 0.6m on the ground (with a wall to one side and water to the other) for about half a dozen of them! *On 20 June 2012 15:21, Graham Stewart (GrahamS) gra...@dalmuti.net wrote: * *For the link routes as they are known within Sustrans, they should indeed have brackets around the ref on the signpost. They can go into OSM as route relations in themselves, e.g.* I've a few LCN's called (6) to change to NCN's then! ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging
One thing I have noticed with the data is that in a number of places the DfT data claims there is an LCN on a major road which I know has no LCN signage (except the odd crossing) - e.g. London Road - or claims that both the main carriageway AND the adjacent cycleway (well footpath with some wobbly painted lines) are LCN - the most obvious being here on the ring road http://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/cnxc-app/editor.html?lat=52.99199lon=-1.14147- i.e. both the cyclepaths on either side of the 40mph ring road are marked as being in the LCN (which tallies with the on the ground situation) but also the main 40mph carriageway (well actually a single line in the DfT data) which has no on the ground signs or even things like ASLs - in these cases is the road really supposed to be marked as LCN? Where it's on a residential road but unsigned on the ground I've been adding it in (most of these fill in the various missing links you get from surveying the signs) but on these major roads I've left it incomplete for the time being. Also, does anyone know when the OpenCycleMap data is last from (is there a page showing this?) - I notice that stuff I added LCN tags to on the 9th still hasn't been rendered dispite the tiles being updated on the 18th and currently marked as clean? ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging
Comments below. On 17 June 2012 12:44, Martin - CycleStreets list-osm-talk...@cyclestreets.net wrote: As previously announced [1], we've been working with Andy Allan and the DfT's contractors to open up the cycling data that the DfT have collected (via manual surveys on bikes) over recent years. This data for each area is now available, converted, and ready for easy merging in with a new Potlatch2 tool Andy has written. The DfT is very keen to see the data more widely used, by OSM. Neat - a productive way to improve the cyclemap on a wet weekend at home (especially in the local area where much is memorised)! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/England_Cycling_Data_**projecthttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project It has these attributes, and the CycleStreets router [2] now supports them: - Surface quality (surface=) - Local Cycle Network signage (lcn=) - Lots of missing paths not yet in OSM - Cycle lane/path widths (width/est_width=) - Barriers of various kinds (barrier=) - Traffic calming (traffic_calming=) - Lighting (lit=) The LCN tags, surface tags, and missing paths, will particularly help the routing quality, as Shaun/Gregory who see user feedback will attest! Now are LCN's which are also NCN's *Supposed* to be tagged? - round here most of the NCN stuff is just inside a relation, where as most of the LCN's are on the way's themselves (The Big Track and NTU City to Basford being the only LCN relations I know of) - I have tended to avoid adding LCN to a way which is also an NCN as it looks ugly on Open Cycle Map (although I guess this is tagging for the renderer) - should I be adding LCN to ways which are part of NCN Route's 6 or 15 too? The wiki URL above has a link to each area, and there's a screencast on Andy's merging tool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=A_sMxpWptCQhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_sMxpWptCQ I've so far merged in almost half the Cambridge data in under half a day. We'd love to see a local 'cheerleader' for each area. Could you sign up on the Wiki for that? Would be really handy if there were some tile render overlays (or KMLs/GPXs) showing where is still to be merged - so I can easy pick them up when I'm out and about - the stuff I'm looking at now (Nottingham) is mainly to the south of the city boundaries as that is the area I know best. Further work we're doing in support of this project is: - Any usability improvements in response to feedback on the tool. Speaking of which - when changing the highway from footway or bridleway to cycleway (where it makes OTG sense) it would be neat if you could add designation=public_xxxway without having to go into a separate Merkaartor or Potlatch session - ditto editing tags like lit and surface which you know the DfT has wrong (e.g. a number of off road routes have gained gravel surfaces in the last couple of years round here thanks to the flood defence work). Kev :o) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] England Cycling Data project: DfT cycling data now available for merging
oh, and the other suggestion - it would be handy if I could hide all existing OSM data which doesn't have highway=* - nearly added the DFT to fences about half a dozen times already! Kev On 17 June 2012 15:05, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: Comments below. On 17 June 2012 12:44, Martin - CycleStreets list-osm-talk...@cyclestreets.net wrote: As previously announced [1], we've been working with Andy Allan and the DfT's contractors to open up the cycling data that the DfT have collected (via manual surveys on bikes) over recent years. This data for each area is now available, converted, and ready for easy merging in with a new Potlatch2 tool Andy has written. The DfT is very keen to see the data more widely used, by OSM. Neat - a productive way to improve the cyclemap on a wet weekend at home (especially in the local area where much is memorised)! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/**wiki/England_Cycling_Data_**projecthttp://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/England_Cycling_Data_project It has these attributes, and the CycleStreets router [2] now supports them: - Surface quality (surface=) - Local Cycle Network signage (lcn=) - Lots of missing paths not yet in OSM - Cycle lane/path widths (width/est_width=) - Barriers of various kinds (barrier=) - Traffic calming (traffic_calming=) - Lighting (lit=) The LCN tags, surface tags, and missing paths, will particularly help the routing quality, as Shaun/Gregory who see user feedback will attest! Now are LCN's which are also NCN's *Supposed* to be tagged? - round here most of the NCN stuff is just inside a relation, where as most of the LCN's are on the way's themselves (The Big Track and NTU City to Basford being the only LCN relations I know of) - I have tended to avoid adding LCN to a way which is also an NCN as it looks ugly on Open Cycle Map (although I guess this is tagging for the renderer) - should I be adding LCN to ways which are part of NCN Route's 6 or 15 too? The wiki URL above has a link to each area, and there's a screencast on Andy's merging tool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=A_sMxpWptCQhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_sMxpWptCQ I've so far merged in almost half the Cambridge data in under half a day. We'd love to see a local 'cheerleader' for each area. Could you sign up on the Wiki for that? Would be really handy if there were some tile render overlays (or KMLs/GPXs) showing where is still to be merged - so I can easy pick them up when I'm out and about - the stuff I'm looking at now (Nottingham) is mainly to the south of the city boundaries as that is the area I know best. Further work we're doing in support of this project is: - Any usability improvements in response to feedback on the tool. Speaking of which - when changing the highway from footway or bridleway to cycleway (where it makes OTG sense) it would be neat if you could add designation=public_xxxway without having to go into a separate Merkaartor or Potlatch session - ditto editing tags like lit and surface which you know the DfT has wrong (e.g. a number of off road routes have gained gravel surfaces in the last couple of years round here thanks to the flood defence work). Kev :o) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Is there a world render with country/city labels in English?
I wonder how much of that is down to us seaming needing to change every cities name when in English but foreigners being happy using the English spelling (especially the Latin alphabet countries)? Just from the top of my head we have Munich - München Cologne - Köln The Hague - Den Hagg Ghent - Gent Dusseldorf - Düsseldorf (okay, understandable as English doesn't have umlauts) Hanover - Hannover Although the English spelling of one of Nottingham's twin towns is Timișoara (looks random but is one of Nottingham's twin towns...) - yet every English town I have checked on foreign Wikipedia's uses the English spelling in both Dutch and German On 7 June 2012 13:24, Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk wrote: Looking at other locales (e.g. fr, de) it's interesting how few English place names have local names in other languages compared to the other way round (or at least have been tagged as such in OSM) - only London seems to have local names - whereas many towns in Germany and Italy (less so France, except for pronunciation) have English names. The Welsh locale is interesting though. Nick -SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.ukli...@mail.atownsend.org.ukwrote: - To: talk@openstreetmap.org From: SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.ukli...@mail.atownsend.org.uk Date: 06/06/2012 07:42PM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Is there a world render with country/city labels in English? Dave F. wrote: Hi As the subject line really. I've had a quick look but came up blank. Cheers Dave F. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Is http://toolserver.org/~osm/locale/en.html what you're looking for? Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-GB] GPX Traces to Image
A while ago I remember someone linking to a neat tool which took a pile of GPX traces and generated an image with them on it (one persons from over a period of time) - I was wondering if anyone could remember what it's called? IIRC it generated a png image with purple lines on a black background (at least when using the default settings) and it works on Windows. My Googling skills are failing miserably on this tonight! Kev :) ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] The state of Bristol in OSM
I've picked up a few main roads where I have GPS traces and have used bing to add lane counts and crossings in to - i.e. I have only changed where I have knowledge and am leaving something better behind. That being said I am currently bug killing on keep right so that when it gets nicer I can see the bugs ok I need to survey to fox much easier. So glad I started by using paper maps to note changes! On Jan 13, 2012 2:44 PM, Tim François sk1pp...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: All, To see what would happen to Bristol in April, see http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=wtfelon=-2.57888lat=51.46006zoom=12overlays=overview,wtfe_point_clean,wtfe_line_clean,wtfe_point_harmless,wtfe_line_harmless,wtfe_point_modified,wtfe_line_modified_cp,wtfe_line_modified,wtfe_point_created,wtfe_line_created_cp,wtfe_line_created I've started in my local area, basically deleting any problem roads or pois which I'm familiar with (and actually have contributed to in one way or another), and replaced them with entirely new roads or pois, using my own local knowledge mostly, and Bing and OS OpenData where appropriate. Question: is anyone else doing this? Are people waiting until April 1st to fill the gaps? I look foward to the varied opinions! Tim ___ 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] OpenFixMap .... android app for looking OSM errors
Looks neat, easy to find all the fix me bugs, impressively it even works on my x10i, a feat beyond most new apps! On Dec 16, 2011 9:58 AM, eMerzh merz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone ; has i wanted to learn a bit how android works, i've started an application to help my favorite community :) OpenFixMap The idea is to have a map displaying errors detected in OSM by users or robots an have the ability to add your own report in one of the supported platforms. It's my first try in java / android , so it's not perfect yet but it should works :) So for now, OFM supports MapDust, OpenStreetBugs and KeepRights (Thanks to all of them for helping me doing the app and helping the community with theirs). Of course, the application is free and libre , available on my github : https://github.com/eMerzh/OpenFixMap I've also created a quick page : http://openfixmap.bmaron.net/ All contributions are welcome There is already translations for Estonian and French, if you want others, help me on transifex : https://www.transifex.net/projects/p/openfixmap/ The link for the market is : https://market.android.com/details?id=net.bmaron.openfixmap Thanks, Brice Maron aka eMerzh ___ 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] Google Map Maker gets a UI overhaul
The Google maps app, via a labs add on, allows you to download offline vector maps! Okay they are only 10sq mi each and you are limited to 10 of them but its still possible. Kev On Dec 15, 2011 3:39 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote: Tobias Knerr writes: For people who are primarily motivated by applications they can use today, rather than the potential for future applications, we're just not that attractive - at least as far as mainstream applications are concerned. OSMAnd. Offline vector maps. Google Maps can't touch that. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ 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: [Talk-GB] LCN - Local Cycle Network
I've done a bulk of the Nottingham one (especially in the South and East) and have generally followed the following rules (which others in the area appear to have followed too) 1. If it's got NCN numbers it's NCN - From the last sign I continue it until the next junction (e.g. NCN 15 is only signed between Trent Bridge and Wilford Suspension Bridge at the Trent Bridge end - I stop it at Wilford Suspension bridge (Welbeck Road) - http://osm.org/go/eu8aQ7KA?layers=C ). 2. If it's a leisure route crossing county boundaries it's RCN (Only one so far - The Erewash Valley Trail which happens to be NCN in parts) 3. If it's a leisure route within Nottinghamshire it's LCN (Only one of these at the moment - The Big Track) - never too sure if this should be LCN or RCN though! 4. If it's got signed destinations it's LCN - however none of these have names except one Follow (green diamond) To New Basford Avoiding Tram Tracks and Follow (green diamond) To City Avoiding Tram Tracks - Trying to give these names (of the destination) would be a pain and leave a right mess on the rendering (e.g. a stretch of road in one way relations for each of :- City Centre, Meadows, Lady Bay, Vale of Belvoir, Holme Pierpont, Cotgrave, Basingfield (via A52 Crossing), Gamston, and NCN 15!...), but should we actually be trying to record these? 5. Anything else is just bicycle=yes, any paths with cycle signs are highway=cycleway; foot=yes On 28 November 2011 17:23, Derick Rethans o...@derickrethans.nl wrote: On Mon, 28 Nov 2011, Richard Fairhurst wrote: I would like to propose that: - Local cycle networks with objective, on-the-ground evidence (usually signposts) are tagged as lcn=yes (and lcn_ref=..., lcn_name=..., or the relations equivalent) as at present. - Cycle networks that are not significantly verifiable on the ground, but are proposed for official adoption and are under active discussion with the transport authority, are tagged as lcn=proposed. - Large-scale (non-NCN) leisure routes and county-wide networks are moved to rcn=, to accord with the similar routes already tagged as such (e.g. National Byway and light-blue-number routes). - Non-network routes are not tagged as lcn=, but may of course be tagged as route=bicycle (perhaps as a relation). Thoughts? Very sensible, I'm all for this... no tagging for the render(s) in this proposal either. regards, Derick ___ 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] Naptan Imports
Preston bus (used?) to operate on a hail and ride basis - i.e. it would stop anywhere on the estates to pick people up and set them down - in reality this became a few set places (i.e. where the footpath was paved up to the road edge rather than having a grass verge) but still rather handy actually! the set down places still seam to be used but the pick up places are all bus stop a now (however there are more than there used to be - most installed where people used to hail and ride). Seams to be a sensible idea for a new build estate - put the paths and bus stops where the people want then! Also a couple of buses a day were extended past the terminus so there was a customary stop opposite the terminus (now signed on the route I know best as its no longer a terminus for most services!). On Nov 24, 2011 9:22 AM, Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net wrote: Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: Also, in my opinion, unmarked bus stops are a daft concept to begin with, seemingly dreamed up to make life harder than it needs to be! +1 Why would you have a stop without a sign as a deliberate strategy? It completely defies the idea of bus stops being marked as a place to wait knowing a bus will stop there. -- Cheers, Chris (osm:chillly) ___ 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] Beta test of cycling date merge-tool
Just had a quick look at the Nottingham one - seams to be an even bigger work of fiction than the local cycle maps produced by the council (unless council publications override public footpath signs) - one jumping out straight away is the A60 trunk road (from the BBC Island through to West Bridgford) being marked as an LCN - the are no cycle facilities along the route from what I can remember (defiantly no lanes, can't remember ASLs, and no signs except where a signed LCN crosses the road). Unless anything has changed in the last eight weeks or so the area in West Bridgford (inside the area bounded by A52/River Trent) - apart from the area round Emmanual/Beckett Schools - Open Cycle Map currently reflects the On The Ground reality (aside from a few ASLs). I assume the general premise of on the ground mapping still applies - although it would be useful to fill a couple of gaps where the signing is ambiguous where there are two valid routes! Is there anyway to hide the foreground layer as I don't seam to be able to click the background one once the foreground has loaded. Is compressed gravel along grass with no real edging really surface=dirt, not to sure about one part of NCN15 near me - parts of the line are defiantly mud (well water usually - get tempted to take it natural=lake at times!) about 50cm wide, but the newer bit over the flood defences is defiantly compressed gravel! The DFT data has the post flood defences work layout. Kev On 16 November 2011 11:52, Andy Robinson ajrli...@gmail.com wrote: Andy, Just some observations from Birmingham that may be useful. I'm assuming that you have been able to look at the dft data to see how relevant it is? In working with Birmingham City Council (BCC) on cycle parking recently I had access to three lists of cycle parking points. The very incomplete BCC asset register list, the dft list and our own OSM list. As a stab we believe the final number of locations in the city will be about 750 (500+ known thus far). The BCC list had about 60% of this possible total, the dft list 40% and not all necessarily the same as BCC (for example most stands on Network Rail land were not included in BCC list), and OSM which had less than the other two but contained many locations that are in neither of the BCC or dft data sets. The BCC and dft data had the number of stands for parking rather than the number of spaces for bikes. The BCC set included parking for motorcycles. The three data sets all have different co-ordinates for the same parking provision. The BCC data is definitely OS based, the dft set I believe is not, though can't be sure, but are generally very close to the BCC locations though not the same. In verifying we have been revisiting each location to get a more precise positioning and thus OSM is now the most reliable. You can follow the progress of mapping the Birmingham cycle parking at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Birmingham/Bicycle_Parking Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Andy Allan [mailto:gravityst...@gmail.com] Sent: 16 November 2011 09:21 To: Talk-GB Subject: [Talk-GB] Beta test of cycling date merge-tool Hi All, I previously discussed[1] what our plans were with regards to the cycling data that is coming out of the DfT. It's now got to the stage where I'm soliciting beta testing and feedback on the approach. The project has its own page on the wiki at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DfT_Cycling_Data_2011 The demo of both the data, and the merging functionality built into p2, is available at http://gravitystorm.dev.openstreetmap.org/cnxc-demo/ I've got my own list of improvements that I'm hoping to make to potlatch, but I'd really like to hear your views too! Cheers, Andy [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2011- October/012256.html ___ 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] Beta test of cycling date merge-tool
Thanks for telling us how to toggle the various layers - quite neat (the visible but not click-able even more handy!) The rest of this message may appear to be a bit negative, but it's not supposed to be - hopefully it's constructive feedback! What would be useful is for there to be a way of picking out features / icon-ising them (e.g. cycle barriers/parking) - is there any chance of a GPX with those sorts of things in (making it trivial to copy to our GPSes for double checking OTG)? I'm not convinced some of the matching has been too brilliant - for example on Daleside Road it's put a cycleway (well footpath full of paint) as the LCN, then put the A-Road Daleside Road alongside it as an LCN too - the signage does all point to the cycleway. Additionally some of the bits have no textual data in them - spotted a few along Maid Marian Way (See http://imageshack.us/f/835/mainmarianway.png/ ) for an example. There are a number in the city centre. It would also be handy to edit the data before merging - for instance down the Nottingham and Beeston Canal they have lcn:name=Nottingham Canal but all the signage around the whole of the 16km circular route (and all other publicity) calls it THE BIG TRACK (although to be fair most of the usable signs have gone up in the last few weeks, the previous signs were about the size of a beer mat!) Something odd has also gone on with the import south of the Broadmarsh Bus Station - if you find Carrington Street its to the east of it, just north of the canal - two random bent lines with no labels! http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/337/broadmarshcentre.png/ (I think they are the roads into/out of the bus station). Finally bicycle=no would be handy to have in a different colour. (And est_width 2.5 seams to mean 25cm in Nottingham, although generally they seam to be reasonably accurate (i.e. 1.25)) Taken as a whole the data seams to be useful for finding locations to go and survey but not for importing - it's just too bitty and out of touch with reality (especially if we try and keep in touch with the OTG signage/logic). Then again perhaps my logic has been flawed - basically:- - If it has NCN route numbers (6,15,64) on the signs it's ncn:yes; ncn:ref:6/15/64 - If it's a non-NCN named route crossing county boundaries (i.e. The Erewash Valley Trail) it's rcn:yes. - If it's a non-NCN named route within Nottinghamshire (e.g. The Big Track, New Basford Avoiding Tram Tracks) it's lcn:yes and gets a relation with it's name in it. - If it has blue signs pointing to a destination (e.g. West Bridgford, Emmanuel School) it's lcn:yes - when a cycle path is adjacent to a road the LCN is on the cycle path unless the signage/road markings makes it obvious it's not. - If it has blue signs but with no directional signage it's either highway:cycleway; or bicycle:yes - If it has a cycle lane it's simply cycleway:lane *Slightly OT 1*: What would be even more useful would be for Nottingham City Council and Rushcliffe Borough Council to actually sign all these cycle routes - the named LCN The Green Line is a really useful cut through through West Bridgford with lots of tyre tracks down it (and IME more cyclists than peds - not too surprising when it runs from the edge of the town centre to the high school on the outskirts of the town and is parallel to a main road for it's entire route) but is spoilt with steps at either end - alas the only signs present are Public Footpath. There are numerous routes like this I have spotted (both with the city's paper maps and the DfT data). The OTG routes, and this DfT data, are full of holes in the network - the printed maps seam to take the path of least resistance between the gaps in the DfT data! *Slightly OT* 2 : Where do we stand on naming routes which aren't named on the ground (or in the DfT data)? - the Clifton Commuter Cycle Route for instance is obvious to work out when you know the three ends are NTU City campus, NTU Clifton campus and Clifton centre (i.e. follow the LCN signs for Clifton, NTU Clifton, and City Centre / NTU City) but the only place with those destinations and the route name is council publicity. The three commuter cycle routes would be handy to have on OpenCycleMap as they are generally very quick routes which are easy to follow and have few things to get in the way (although only of one them is anything more than signs put alongside the bus lanes and a few ASLs). Kev On 16 November 2011 14:32, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 November 2011 11:52, Andy Robinson ajrli...@gmail.com wrote: Andy, Just some observations from Birmingham that may be useful. I'm assuming that you have been able to look at the dft data to see how relevant it is? I haven't seen any of the data for any place that I'm personally familiar with. I have, however, seen all the different things that were to be surveyed, and a lot of it is exactly the kind of thing that we'd
Re: [OSM-talk] Fixme: A proposal
Commo fixme in the East midlands at least is Fixme:stub for future suvey Typically a path or bridleway where the end has been surveyed but the route not traversed. often these hasn't been placed to accuratly either (i.e. Someone spotted it when passing without gps) so incomplete isn't accurate either! Whats the best way of finding these, the only one i have seen is the ito analysis but they dont offer zooming in :-( (dont suggest josm, me and it seam to hate one another) On Oct 3, 2011 11:13 AM, John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: FIXME=Do these roads join here? Not clear on Bing imagery. Survey needed. That will be a useful note for somebody planning to visit the area later so they can check this place if they wish. How about starting a convention of using a tag fixme:survey_needed with the details in the value string? The only other subtype of fixme that I can think of immediately would be fixme:incomplete, for long / hard-to-spot linear features such as powerlines (where I've seen someone else was using fixme=incomplete and have tried to follow that convention myself). I like the idea of extending the NONAME layer to report fixmes, and if we used a convention like fixme:survey_needed we could have a distinct map symbol for that. __John ___ 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: [Talk-GB] Routing and other problems west of Uttoxeter
Some C roads are signed http://www.cbrd.co.uk/photo/c-roads/ (this topic sounds familiar!) which are arguably useful to sign, although I will admit unsigned ones are a bit useless! Kev On 11 August 2011 11:56, Paul Williams pjwde...@googlemail.com wrote: This morning, darren39 has fixed the unconnected way (125500644) Andy mentioned (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8983662). A section of the A522 was also deleted in darren39's first changeset after the block (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/62360148/history) and replaced by a new way (version 1 of http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/125500635/history). This new way also wasn't connected to various other roads including the next section northbound of the A522, but I reconnected it. I think it would be much better if he didn't keep deleting ways when he wants to alter them and instead altered the existing way, to avoid creating all these unconnected roads (and also make it easier to see the history of the way). While fixing some of his earlier work I've also noticed that he has added C and D road references to several roads in Staffordshire (eg http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/62776742/history). I'm wondering where he has found the information for these (C and D references don't normally appear on road signs), and hope they haven't been taken from a copyrighted source without permission. If the source is OK, I'm not sure whether C and D roads should be tagged with a ref tag, since it's not a reference for public use unlike M, A, and B roads. Cheers Paul Williams (Paul The Archivist) On 10 August 2011 22:47, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: On 10/08/2011 22:06, Jonathan Bennett wrote: First changeset after expiry: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8976461 I'll bung him a message about way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/62327024/history and way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/125500644 which replaced it (and doesn't join properly) 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] Routing and other problems west of Uttoxeter
Fixed some of the A50 ones - surprised at how well Bing matches my GPS traces in that area (alas my knowlege of Stoke-on-Trent extends to the A34, A50 and A500 from passing through)! Are all the roads parallel to the A50 really trunk links or are they of a lower standard? Kev. On 8 August 2011 11:47, Paul Williams pjwde...@googlemail.com wrote: I've found that there is still a big problem with unconnected roads in the area west of Uttoxeter (including in Stoke-on-Trent), as well as various other problems including self intersecting and overlapping roads, and invalid turn restrictions (for example, http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1633622/history). The problems have been found on major roads such as the A50 as well as minor roads and paths in a large area mainly around North Staffordshire, so I'm guessing that the current data is largely useless for routing in the area. I've so far fixed some of the problems along the A50 in Stoke and am currently working on sorting out the Longton area, but could do with some help to fix the rest. Cheers Paul Williams (Paul The Archivist) On 11 July 2011 17:47, SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote: On 28/06/2011 20:45, Richard Bullock wrote: It seems Mr Darren39 has simply nuked all of my contributions in the north and east of the town, and replaced them with his own - and none of the ways connect to any other ways. A whole section of the A523 is missing. Much of the replacements are a complete mess. I've just noticed that there are similar issues west of Uttoxeter. I've mailed him about the deletion but do not expect a reply. Down there is a bit out of my area so am mentioning it here in case anyone needs a heads-up. 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] Maxspeed conundrum
on the a46 dualling I have been putting the reduced limits in, but here the road is on a new alignment so its for the rest of the life of the road (until is becomes part of ncn route 48 anyway!) . Shame there's no way AFAIK of tagging fixme:2013-05-01=roadworks due to finish, resurvey alignment/maxspeed and then have openstreet bugs ignore until that date (unless you wish to see them)! On 29 Jul 2011 10:13, Brian Prangle bpran...@gmail.com wrote: The M1 between junctions 11 and 13 is a standard 70 mph NSL, but until spring 2013 it is a 50mph average speed camera regulated section during upgrade works. After Spring 2013 it will become maxspeed=signals. How to tag it? My preference would be for the 50mph average speed with a note that it ends spring 2013. My guess is that sections rolling from the South will transform from 50 mph to maxspeed=signals, so those of you who travel this section of the M1 should watch out for the big switch on and edit appropriately - it will certainly make life swifter than the current congestion. As a general point do routing and travel planner algorithms make use of these long term construction speed restrictions? Regards Brian ___ 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] shortened names
If we are using pronunciations as a guide shall I go and rename Southwell as Suval and Leicester as Lesta? On Wednesday, 27 July 2011, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 July 2011 04:04, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 July 2011 10:40, Ed Loach e...@loach.me.uk wrote: Yes, it is called Saint Albans, written St Albans, except where some websites seem to have expanded it. e.g. http://www.meteoprog.co.uk/en/weather/SaintAlbans/ http://www.gomapper.com/travel/map-of/saint-albans.html etc... http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=%22saint+albans%22 I personally would be tempted to store the name tag in expanded form so it is clear what the St abbreviation applies to (I've seen things like S St N on Google where they've abbreviated South Street North, for example, which just looks silly). This seems to agree with http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name#Notes Um - no. If a place wants to be written St Albans, then that's the name. Just because you pronounce it Saint Albans makes no difference. I'd say the opposite is true. If it's pronounced Saint Albans then that is the name. The local administration may want to spell it however they like and make one way or the other official, but we don't care, in the end it's always a product of how people are and have been calling the place. Place names have often been abbreviated in writing because there was never any need for consistency across countries and continents, much less for machine-readability. In OSM there is this need. Cheers ___ 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] shortened names
So it's an a is it - google mail on Android shows a square! On 26 Jul 2011 15:54, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I think it is actually written St Albans as stated above. Indeed. In British English orthography, Saint in place and streetnames is always written as St. (It's not such an anomaly: Mrs as an honorific is never expanded, either.) Mind you, British English orthography is also that Martin has an a in it, not a ∡. ;) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/shortened-names-tp6556816p6622504.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lis... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-GB] More UK transport data being opened up
From today's Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/07/government-transparency-data-releases The transport data looks like it might have some use for OSM and related projects - Data on *current and future roadworks* on the Strategic Road Network to be published from October 2011, and subject to consultation to extend this during 2012 to Local Authority Streetworks Registers maintained under statute. - All remaining Government-owned free datsets from Transport Direct, including *cycle route data *and the *national car park database* to be made available for free re-use from October 2011. - *Real time data on the Strategic Road Network* including incidents, speeds and congestion to be published from December 2011. - Office of Rail Regulator to increase the amount of data published relating to service performance and complaints by May 2012. - *Rail timetable* information to be published weekly by National Rail from December 2011. Kev. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:51, Graham Stewart gra...@dalmuti.net wrote: Great shame. So - recruit some more mappers. Write better tools to help the people who show up nearby on your user page, yet who haven't edited yet. You've got me there. Of the 30 nearby people on my user page, 20 have never made any edit. Only 3 have edited in the past 6 months and few of those were local. Very similar for me just outside of Nottingham (i.e. within an hours walking distance to far side of the city centre) it can see that of the 30 near by 14 have made no edits, 12 haven't edited in over a year, and only one person aside from myself in the last month - the remainging three are all mapping outside the area! Admittedly these are all within 3 km so it's not picked up those that have been attending the meet ups who tend to map the other side of the city centre and further afield. On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 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).* It would be really useful if such maps highlighted roads with sidewalks too - one of the trunk routes round here has a decent footpath along side of it but any walking directions avoid it like the plague - mind you the slowless of OpenCycleMap updates recently has made me look at JXAPI for getting roads tagged with LCN so I guess I can now play with that working out how to add roads with sidewalks. Going back to the original argument - the reason I started Open Street Map was because my road had been missed dispite the whole estate being mapped to Google Maps Completeness apart from that (actually better than Google Maps as it didn't try and route you down a mud track) - but if the estate hadn't even been there at all I probably wouldn't have even done that minor fix! Kev ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
[Talk-GB] Housing Development Names
Looking at the cyclemap to see if I had made all the changes I thought I had I noticed the very prominent Knightshayes text on the map http://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=13lat=52.92356lon=-1.12127layers=B0 This is a new housing development which when I added it to the map was still under construction but signed in lots of places though the development and neighbouring areas - however we are now a few years on and all the signs are gone and all the properties are occupied. The current tagging is is_in:Gamston, West Bridgford place:suburb name:Knightshayes landuse:residential The question is what should I do with it now? 1) Remove as it's no longer signed on the ground 2) Downgrade it to some other tagging for historic mapping 3) Leave it as it is and raise a bug report on OpenCycleMap to get that sort of place less prominent on the map 4) Change my tagging as it's wrong (the development is a suburb of the village of Gamston, itself a suburb of the town of West Bridgford which is effectively a suburb of the city of Nottingham (but it's not within Nottingham City Council area, it's Rushcliffe Borough/Nottinghamshire County council here) so the tagging should really reflect it's true place in that hierarchy. My inclination would be 2) - I don't like the idea or removing data which was collected on the ground but it doesn't feel like it should be on the map at all for general use. It's very much like the 1970s development my parents live on - a few people do know the name of that development but in reality most people would never have heard of it - the council treat it as being part of the neighbouring estate (which only the council and local bus operator seam to know about!), the Royal Mail and many other people assume that the whole estate itself are part of a much larger suburb. Certainly none of the commercial maps I have seen over the years mentioned it's development name (well apart from the really old ones which show the sports ground that gave it it's name, but they don't have the roads). Kev. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] C roads
Some C (and U) roads are signed apparently - see http://www.cbrd.co.uk/c-roads/ (And not all A roads are signed on the ground either) Kev On 18 May 2011 11:05, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote: I note an increasing number of roads tagged with ref=Cnumber: http://osm.org/go/euF7qf93- http://osm.org/go/eu6CM0IS- etc. Leaving aside for now the question of sourcing, I feel a little uneasy about these being rendered on the map. Anyone using the map as, well, a navigational aid will think turn left onto the C94... oh... hang on... what C94?. So if we are to have such arcana in the database, and experience suggests you can't actually stop people adding arcana to OSM (I guess that's one of our strengths ;) ), it would be helpful to have some way of tagging this ref is not actually signed. That way, renderers and routers could choose not to show refs which aren't helpful for their audience. Something like ref:signed=no would work. Any thoughts? cheers Richard ___ 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] What's the best way of mapping/tagging...
Indeed you can't drive through the wall, the signs take you through the shopping precinct. Re the blue area on my map - cobble stone ramps get you on it, much like the foreground but steaper. As mentioned earlier no signs prohibiting motor vehicles, until just before the wall anyway. Living street sounds reasonable, although the sidewalks imply otherwise. As with nearly all the lcns in nottingham, no ref apart of the eventual desinations (the sea of blue, duplicated, signs and half arsed cycle lanes along the routes gives the lcns route away). Kev On 2 Apr 2011 13:25, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: On 02/04/2011 09:08, Kev js1982 wrote: Cycling to work this week I have come across a more direct way to town, but also a road which I ... http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8ll=52.940734,-1.140834spn=0.003246,0.009645t=hz=17layer=ccbll=52.940734,-1.140834panoid=nqz0Qta4kazDIF3Ok2sN4wcbp=12,324.6,,0,0.8 http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8ll=52.940734,-1.140834spn=0.003246,0.009645t=hz=17layer=ccbll=52.940734,-1.140834panoid=nqz0Qta4kazDIF3Ok2sN4wcbp=12,324.6,,0,0.8 My aerial drawing : http://kjs.me.uk/3rdparty/osm/arkwrightwalk.png First off, going on the streetview, I wouldn't say the road with reddish colouring 'cobblestones' (shown white on your sketch) is pedestrian/cycle exclusive. It appears that vehicles, such as deliveries, are allowed. I think there would be bollards if not. Does the signpost give any clues? Bit unsure about the blue bits. It seems there's no bollards so in theory could a vehicle be allowed to cross it, albeit very slowly. What type of kerbs do these blue areas have. Also if there's no a gap in the wall, how do you cycle through it? Does the LCN have a number? If so tag it, preferably in a relation. General mapping tip: You can go as detailed as you like - if it's physical, you can map it (given time patience). Personally I don't tag pavements that are not separated from the road by grass verge etc. Cheers Dave F. ___ 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] Mapdust Newbie Question
I think the roundabout symbol is where the user raised the bug - MapDust seams a rather apt name in my experience though - Dust doesn't serve any useful purpose (in reality) and neither does mapdust's bugs. Kev On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 15:13, Paul n...@pointdee.co.uk wrote: I know this isn't strictly an OSM question but after hearing on here about Mapdust I thought I'd have a look but so far I can't seem to work out exactly what most of the bugs are meant to be Take http://www.mapdust.com/detail/157118 for example. This shows a start point on a motorway slip road, an end point on the motorway and has a roundabout symbol in the middle. The bug report says that routing on the roundabout is flawed. What roundabout? Can anyone try to explain what this bug is meant to be? Of the several bugs I've looked at so far only one made any sense and the OSM data is correct so it's a false positive anyway. The rest just don't seem to make sense. Thanks Paul ___ 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] Update to OSM Analysis
How often are the tiles updated? It would be really useful if the analysis map showed what date the tiles are from (well the data they are using) as I have put a number of changes in and while the statistics have changed the tiles remain the same, I'm guessing it's every few days? However it's a really nifty tool - knocking in a number of missing roads round the borough (some rural areas are brilliantly mapped, some haven't been touched since the NPE stuff went in ( with all the corrections that needs I'm so tempted just to blow everything away and start again in places) and adding a load more to my check list*. I've also been spotting some nice things to map (areas with lots of paths, buildings, and sports fields) that are devoid of GPS traces (so nothing to align Bing too) that others might like to pick up (i'm unlike to visit anywhere near Charnwood boundary for instance) and for those nearer to home it gives me something to aim at. * Does anyone have an opinion on using Open Street Bugs for this - been correcting a few obvious typos (mainly in places I did from Streetview/surveys - my spelling sucks) but there are lots of questions remaining (e.g. does the road to Tithby really have two names - i.e. Tithby Road and Tythby Road - or have the OS got some typo's/copyright traps in Locator and Streetview?) - I've been adding to Open Street Bugs for two reasons, it highlights to someone else not using the OSM Analysis that it needs checking; and it also shows up in OSMAnd so when I'm out on the bike I can pick up something nearby. Kev On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.comwrote: ITO are pleased to offer out updated version of OSM Analysis with a thematic overview page allowing us to see how we are getting on in different parts of the county. To get the top prize 95% of the roads represented in OS Locator need to be in OSM and there are 17 districts which achieve that today. We also have 88 districts with less that 50% coverage which need a little TLC and the rest are in-between. Check out our announcement here and give it a whirl! http://itoworld.blogspot.com/2011/01/openstreetmap-gb-progress-report.html Regards, Peter Miller ITO World Ltd ___ 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] Ordnance Survey
Are the scripts which were used to generate the tiles from the StreetView data files available anywhere? I am trying to work out how to generate the Streetview tiles myself and am struggling to understand everything (falling at the first hurdle at present unfortunately Kev. osm@countach:~/osm/opendata/1 250 000 Scale Raster/data$ gdalwarp -s_srs EPSG:27700 -t_srs EPSG:900913 HP.tif 900913/HP.tif Copying color table from HP.tif to new file. ERROR 1: Unable to compute a transformation between pixel/line and georeferenced coordinates for HP.tif. There is no affine transformation and no GCPs.) On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote: We're generating StreetView tiles at the moment and some people have already been tracing. :) Small hiccup in the generation process meant that we've just had to restart (there were a couple of blank areas appearing at 'sheet' boundaries) but it's going well. OS have also just announced what VectorMap District, available for free at the start of May, is going to look like: http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/vectormap/district/ From what the page suggests, this completely blows Meridian2 out of the water and, in vector format, is likely to be a lot better than StreetView. I'm just playing with the example shapefiles now. So it very much reinforces no need to rush - what there is in a month will be much better than what we have now. cheers Richard ___ 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] Waterways Map (was invisible)
The Grantham canal round here varies in quality from Being in a pipe under the road for a big stretch Looking like a normal canal but with all the locks missing/ damaged Drained of water and full of weeds Looking like a normal canal but full of algee and other stagnet strenches Oh, and most paths/roads cross on the level with nothing more than a pipe underneath. The tow paths are generally navigatable by foot, and from plunger ( I think) to the trent by bike in all weathers ( if you ignore the a46 Fosseway crossing which is closed to allow the construction of a dual carridgeway) On 19 Jan 2011 21:29, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you all for your comments. Dealing with 'disused' was nice and easy - I have deleted disused locks altogether and changed disused canals to a fainter, dotted line (see just north of Carnforth near Lancaster). I am not sure I have ever seen a 'disused' canal - does this mean a ditch, or just an overgrown, impassable canal? I have also prevented locks being shown until you zoom in to zoom level 10. Updated version now rendering at http://maps.webhop.net/canals, using the mapnik style http://maps.webhop.net/canals/canal2.xml.. Adding navigable rivers is a good idea, but will take more doing because my database does not include the 'boat=' tag - I will have to re-import the whole uk, which takes a few hours... Are there any other waterway specific tags that should be included? What points of interest should a waterways map highlight - I only have locks at the moment, because I remember these being the interesting part of canal boating, but I can add other things - especially if anyone would like to draw an icon for it - otherwise we will end up with another one of my dodgy drawings! Graham. On 19 January 2011 19:24, Chris Moss mosch...@googlemail.com wrote: Thanks Graham and Malcolm, Certainly I can see for the first time where the gaps are in the waterway coverage and it encourages me to explore mapnik and see how everything works. Chris ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Graham Jones Hartlepool, UK. ___ 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] Bing maps is misplaced
Quite a lot of car parks and other roads have one way arrows visible on the bing imagry, often the position of speedlimits are available too, although this might just be a uk only tendancy. Certainly helps in completing places I have visited without a gps and pen/paper. Then again I have only been doing stuff I have some knowledge of. On 15 Dec 2010 11:19, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/12/9 Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com: What the whole discussion here seems to be missing: You can't read street names from bing (or Ya... +1, and you can't see restrictions, surface quality and material, oneways, etc. on them. That's why there is highway=road. You should avoid to tag highway=specific-highway-class if you don't know the location from being on the ground. Please tag roads derived from aerial imagery as highway=road so it is clear what kind of information about the road we have (mainly the position as it appeared in a several year old orthographic photo). cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lis... ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] [OT] ABC Radio National's Future Tense Maps and tracking - Part One
Just listened to this weeks podcast entitled Maps and tracking - Part One which was talking about how mapping and cartography have changed in recent years which I found to be quite interesting and also gave OSM a little mention too Broadcast on Australia's ABC Radio National on Thursday September 9th. http://www.abc.net.au/rn/futuretense/ *Old maps have a certain reassuring permanence about them, not so the new ones - welcome to the age of real-time cartography!* Kev ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Trolley)
With regards to the fee how would you tag the majority of uk supermarkets where the trolleys accept both £1 and €1 coins? This seams to be pretty standard on all trolleys introduced since approx 1998. On 4/26/10, Gregory nomoregra...@googlemail.com wrote: On 26 April 2010 11:45, Adrien Pavie dr...@laposte.net wrote: Don't forget that we already use the scheme vehicle=yes/no/designated/maybe/... to express access restrictions for modes of transport - so cart=no actually means no shopping cart riding allowed in here ;-) -Martin Ok, I will change it in the wiki, shop:cart=true/false and the other tags/propositions. But it could be funny create a roadsign No shopping carts =P A lot of supermarkets have a system to stop you taking trolleys/carts home (sometimes instead of a charge) so they have a sign like No carts beyond this line, cart will stop suddenly. You could use the fee tag. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fee http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:feebut on the shop=* node that seems strange (an entry fee to a shop?) so I would suggest shop:cart:fee=yes/no (or cart:fee=yes/no) and link to the fee page. I would like to know what coin I need for the trolleys, and I think the fee tag is supposed to allow this with something like fee=0.50 (assumes local currency!), and I think we can assume you usually have just one coin needed. I don't see a need for this information to be rendered on the map, but someone could make an application of providing the information at the side (along with opening_hours etc) when you click the shop or in a list of search results for shops near you. OSM isn't all about 'the' map. -- Gregory o...@livingwithdragons.com http://www.livingwithdragons.com -- Sent from my mobile device ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Postcodes to Shapefile
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: I am currently trying to create a series of shapefiles from postcodes (using OS Open Geo Data) using the code from Random Junk ( http://random.dev.openstreetmap.org/postcodes/#) running on Ubuntu 9.10 but I can't get it working. lots of blah blah about what I did... Think i've sussed most of it... I zapped my pyshapelib folder and downloaded both it and shapelib again With the shapelib and pyshapelib tar gzs inside my osm folder I then issued the following commands tar -xvzf shapelib-1.2.10.tar.gz mv shapelib-1.2.10 shapelib tar -xvzf pyshapelib-0.3.tar.gz mv pyshapelib-0.3 shapelib/pyshapelib/ cd shapelib make cd pyshapelib python setup.py build sudo python setup.py install cd ../../ # The next line is really important if you want python to think this folder has python scripts touch shapelib/__init__.py cp shapelib/pyshapelib/* shapelib/ This seamed to get over the original problem Then you need to ensure you input file has no trailing lines And now to work out why I'm getting Traceback (most recent call last): File makeShapeColoured.py, line 349, in module result = voronoi.computeVoronoiDiagram(pts) File /home/kev/osm/voronoi.py, line 746, in computeVoronoiDiagram voronoi(siteList,context) File /home/kev/osm/voronoi.py, line 206, in voronoi edge = Edge.bisect(bot,newsite) File /home/kev/osm/voronoi.py, line 404, in bisect newedge.a = dx/dy ZeroDivisionError: float division ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] Roadside Distance Markers
In the uk km 0 is often on a road that was never built! The km markers on the m6 start counting at the london end of the m1 so it isn't always the same road that the end is on On 10/23/09, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/10/23 mle i...@dynoyo.plus.com: Hi Folks - on a recent survey, I mapped some roads with modern km markers by the side of the road. How should these be mapped - As a node within the highway, or a separate single node to the side of the highway. And how to tag these ? Wouldn't it be better to make a relation or something similar to indicate the start of the way and then mile markers can be calculated? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Sent from my mobile device ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] trunk_link ref=*
In the uk they do - visible on the driver location signs - seams to be a bit random as to which road gets them though - at the a50/a500 junction the latter gets all of them iirc Can't remember seeing them at the later a500/m6 junction though or the m6/m65 one On 9/25/09, Cartinus carti...@xs4all.nl wrote: On Thursday 24 September 2009 00:16:14 Dave F. wrote: I've trunk_link going form one trunk to another. They have different references. Do I add a ref=*. If so which one? The one it's leaving or the one it's going to? The others responded to the second question. But I think the first question is a lot more important. We (should) map what is there. So the real question is: Do sliproads between trunk roads actually have a ref in the real world? If I'm not mistaken, then they don't have one around here (the Netherlands). -- m.v.g., Cartinus ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Sent from my mobile device ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] NOVAM viewer
Or even a single operator - during Nottingham City Transports transition to a fully low floor operation the old buses were cascaded down too other routes which shared the same stops, And what about Preston bus station where they had to lower the kerbs to allow low floor buses to access it ;-) On 9/16/09, John Robert Peterson jrp@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/16 Robert Naylor rob...@pobice.co.uk snip I'll be switching to using kerb=raised now. Although I assume if they've altered the kerb that they buses serving the route would be low-floor buses. not necisarilly a good assumtion -- there can be 2 diferent companies running busses to the same stop, one using low floor, and one not. Although in general it may be a reasonable assuption. Can accessability information be included with the bus route relation? On second thoughts after hearing about a bus stop which got built on the wrong street - and maintained maybe not :) there is a bus stop a few miles from my parents house: they were asked to install it at the crossroads so they did, on the wrong leg of the crossroads, as a result they had to move around all the bus routes to fit, adding miles to some journeys. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Sent from my mobile device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] How to map quarters?
On a similar line how would you tag the zones in Nottingham city centre? These are aimed at navigation (basically if you are heading for somewhere in the victoria zone follow the red square with queen victoria in it for a suitable car park) These zones don't match with the suburbs (lace market zone includes part of hockley as well as all of the lace market, the broadmarsh zone is larger tham the former suburb or the shopping centre there now, Hockley lies in victoria and lace market so they certainly are not suburbs On 9/13/09, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sat, 12 Sep 2009, Frankie Roberto wrote: Well I mentioned it before, but I really believe that for something like the French Quarter, it is better to use locality. I've always used suburb, but locality might be a good alternative. Another question is: is it better to map quarters as areas or nodes? they are not a locality in the English I know, and although resident in australia, I am a native speaker of English, To me these Quarters, usually a part of an old city, need a separate tag. We could then use that tag for Chinatown in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Sent from my mobile device ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] GSoC End: signFinder
Round here (south Nottingham, uk) black on white, with post codes and council name in red. In the city itself most are black on white, with some old ones white on black. On 8/20/09, Łukasz Jernaś deej...@srem.org wrote: Poland, Greater Poland : White on blue and black on white. It can be different even in the same city... Regards, -- Łukasz ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Sent from my mobile device ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Amenity Editing
Streets certainly get postcoded differently on opposite sides of the street - one just has to look at the street name signs (as used by Rushcliffe BC) to see that. Also it's certainly possible where one street has multiple postcodes that the splits happen in different places on different sides of the street) it's even possible that two houses adjecant to one another connected to the street by a shared use path have different postcodes. As postcodes are related to dwellings and businesses but not streets (at least in the uk) would in not make more sense to add the postcode and associated properties into a single relation? Adding area, district, and sector to the postcode would make it trivial to find every property in ng ng2 or ng2 7. On 03/07/2009, Steve Hill st...@nexusuk.org wrote: On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, WessexMario wrote: A lowest level postcode (SN13_2PQ) is not unique for a node, as multiple dwellings will have the same postcode, so this leads to having multiple tags for what is essentially a single data item, a postcoded area of land. It should be unique to a way (or part of a way) though. Marking postcodes on a way could be problematic, as there can be different postcodes on opposite sides of a road. Really? I've not come across that - if a street has more than one post code, doesn't it just get split along its length? If you really do get different post codes on opposite sides, you could have a postcode:left and postcode:right type pair of tags though. - Steve xmpp:st...@nexusuk.org sip:st...@nexusuk.org http://www.nexusuk.org/ Servatis a periculum, servatis a maleficum - Whisper, Evanescence ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb -- Sent from my mobile device ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [OSM-talk] pub vs bar vs club
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Peter Childs pchi...@bcs.org wrote: * there may (or may not) be an area set aside for dancing, e.g. with a DJ Thats a nightclub. It's not though - many places have dance floors but they aren't often used - A night club is somewhere you go to dance, a bar is somewhere you go before hand to get drunk on affordable alcohol. . * in places with ridiculous licensing laws (such as the UK), these places are often open later than pubs, which normally wind down around 11pm or midnight. A bar or club may not even really get moving before 11 or 12 Quite a lot of bars round here open around 19:00 but are often quiet empty for a while - a more obvious difference is that a pub is somewhere you generally sit down, can hear yourself think, often has a pool table and fruit machines and sometimes serves food. It also hasn't been decorated since Queen Victoria was a toddler ;) Generally a place you go to socialise and relax in the company of friends and a good drink - it would also be a place you seek out when in need of refreshment while out cycling or walking. Found anywhere. A bar on the other hand often plays loud music, had little seating, tends to be missing the games stuff and was decorated when an Ikea van crashed into it. Generally a place you go, have a cheap drink and move onto the next bar. Usually only found in town ad city centres. A night club certainly plays loud music, has a complete lack of seating away from the chill out space, and the decór is forgotten thanks to the influence of alcohol - often hold a large number of people. A day out (especially at the week end) will usually see you start in the pub, progress onto the bar, before venturing onto a night club which you leave the following morning. Perhaps the distinction between Pub and Bar is a peculiarly British thing thanks to our archaic licensing laws? Kev :o) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-GB] Generating Mapnik Images to epsg:27700 (British National Grid) Projection
As a follow up to my earlier emails regarding this. I have finally got it working with thanks to Matt Amos (and everyone else who has replied). Basically there appear to be bugs* in Mapnik preventing it converting from Google projection to 27700 on the fly, coupled with some misunderstanding of the XML file and python scripts. Once the data is in the database in the 27700 format (needed to recompile osm2pgsql) and the shape files have been converted (I used MapWindow GIS to filter to the British Isles and surrounds (i.e. Benelux, Northern France) Mapnik seams to work okay (apart from some weirdness like Lincoln becoming Linc, Peterbourgh - erborough etc... Now to write up for the Wiki. Thanks everyone for their help. Kev Swindells. * Possibly bugs or just a complete lack of memory on my machine. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Generating Mapnik Images to epsg:27700 (British National Grid) Projection
Argh, newbie mistake own up time. Firstly as far as I can tell the actual projection stuff in the generate image isn't needed when passing in coords in the correct projection - the lines bbox = Envelope(west,south,east,north) m.zoom_to_box(bbox) are sufficient when using geocodes. The main thing to do is edit the imported XML, change the top declaration to have the srs parameter as +proj=tmerc +lat_0=49 +lon_0=-2 +k=0.999601 +x_0=40 +y_0=-10 +ellps=airy +units=m +towgs84=446.448,-125.157,542.060,0.1502,0.2470,0.8421,-20.4894 +units=m +nodefs Then all the following stay as they were - i.e. a combination of +proj=merc +datum=WGS84 +over and +proj=merc +a=6378137 +b=6378137 +lat_ts=0.0 +lon_0=0.0 +x_0=0.0 +y_0=0 +k=1.0 +units=m +nadgri...@null +no_defs +over depending on what the data is stored in - alas I have an issue where it isn't rendering tiles properly, looks to be memory related - those with really complex coastlines (North West Wales) are rendering in sea colour, and those with less complex coastlines (Birmingham) are only rendering roads for the first 50px or so from the left. On the home straight now though :o) On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: That makes sense, sounds like I might be missing the projection in postgis. Is there any documentation showing how to test the projections, and install them in Postgis if needed? Postgres/postgis are outside my usual experience so I'm not too sure where to start! Ta Kev On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.comwrote: Well, the purpose of the forward projection code is to take the ll variable as lat long and then use the defined projection to calculate what the projected c0 and c1 points are in projected coordinates. So you should leave the ll in degrees. But it does sound like the projection string isn't working. I'd first test in postgis whether you can project in the fashion you describe. And not all projections are possible in one step - for example, you need to project twice to get from spherical mercator on disk to latlon, so you end up with things like this: quote Can't go 900913 - 4326, but you can do 900913 - 3395, and 3395 - 4326. Gah! select astext(transform(transform(way, 3395), 4326)) from planet_osm_point where name like '%utney%'; /quote I'd try messing with postgis to get good OSGB results as somewhere to start. Cheers, Andy On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Oliver O'Brien m...@oliverobrien.co.uk wrote: Have you tried using the full PROJ4s string for EPSG:27700 rather than using +init? e.g. follow the Proj4js link at: http://spatialreference.org/ref/epsg/27700/ I'm wondering whether your installation knows the settings for 27700. Certainly I've had a similar problem with WebMercator. Certainly you definitely want to use metres rather than km or degrees when specifying the bounding box. Your 20km difference is probably because your installation is not recognising +init=EPSG:27700, defaulting to WGS84 (which uses a different world-shape than OSGB36 used for the BNG) and then drawing a map containing a few metres of ocean around 0deg N, 0deg E. The Ireland/Norwich problems suggest something more complicated is going wrong too, but try this and see what happens. Ollie -Original Message- Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:19:05 +0100 From: Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu Subject: [Talk-GB] Generating Mapnik Images to epsg:27700 (British NationalGrid) Projection To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Message-ID: 96af97fa0904220219i6ab35e3awa779475fe0592...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this (I can't find a better one). I am trying to generate some tiles to generate a set of tiles to cover the British Isles in the OSGB Projection (epsg:27700) The files I have use an quite possibly unique naming schema (we are intending to use them as a drop in replacement for some OS supplied tiles when the licence expires, extending coverage to Northern Ireland* in the process) - an example of which is map-n44-e36-s42-w34-px250.png the numbers are the meters north/east of the OSGB origin (centered on western edge of the city of Preston in this example) so it should be relatively easy to generate the tiles - but I am coming unstuck at generating the images. Modifying generate_image.py and using (chopped a bit for brevity - full code at http://kjs.me.uk/wiki/Talk:Mapnik , the main Mapnik page contains my installation notes) prj = Projection(+proj=merc +a=6378137 +b=6378137 +lat_ts=0.0 +lon_0=0.0 +x_0=0.0 +y_0=0 +k=1.0 +units=m +nadgri...@null +no_defs +over) ll = (-6.5, 49.5, 2.1, 59) c0 = prj.forward(Coord(ll[0],ll[1])) c1 = prj.forward(Coord(ll[2],ll[3])) bbox = Envelope(c0.x,c0.y,c1.x,c1.y) m.zoom_to_box(bbox) gives
[Talk-GB] Generating Mapnik Images to epsg:27700 (British National Grid) Projection
Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this (I can't find a better one).
I am trying to generate some tiles to generate a set of tiles to cover the
British Isles in the OSGB Projection (epsg:27700)
The files I have use an quite possibly unique naming schema (we are
intending to use them as a drop in replacement for some OS supplied tiles
when the licence expires, extending coverage to Northern Ireland* in the
process) - an example of which is
map-n44-e36-s42-w34-px250.png the numbers are the meters
north/east of the OSGB origin (centered on western edge of the city of
Preston in this example) so it should be relatively easy to generate the
tiles - but I am coming unstuck at generating the images.
Modifying generate_image.py and using (chopped a bit for brevity - full code
at http://kjs.me.uk/wiki/Talk:Mapnik , the main Mapnik page contains my
installation notes)
prj = Projection(+proj=merc +a=6378137 +b=6378137 +lat_ts=0.0 +lon_0=0.0
+x_0=0.0 +y_0=0 +k=1.0 +units=m +nadgri...@null +no_defs +over)
ll = (-6.5, 49.5, 2.1, 59)
c0 = prj.forward(Coord(ll[0],ll[1]))
c1 = prj.forward(Coord(ll[2],ll[3]))
bbox = Envelope(c0.x,c0.y,c1.x,c1.y)
m.zoom_to_box(bbox)
gives me a map of the British Isles which generates okay :)
Changing the projection line to
prj = Projection('+init=epsg:27700')
gives me a map centered some 500km or so south of Ghana on the equator
Thinking I need to use Geocodes (aka Eastings and Northings) changing the ll
line to
ll = (0,0,50,50)
This gives me a box of ocean, as does using km instead of meters
ll = (0,0,500.000,500.000)
Various combinations of changing the bbox and ll result in getting either
Ghana or ocean - I guess i'm doing somet slightly wrong somewhere along the
way.
Taking the Eastings/Northings and converting to Latitude/Longitude means
they don't quite match (Holyhead ends up around 20km north of it's original
location for example) and the tiles don't join properly - this (as you would
expect) results in noticable tearing of the map, particulally on the west
coast of Ireland (for example Limerick is shown twice) and results in the
town of Norwich disappearing on the east coast of England.
Does anyone know/have a working example of how to generate a single tile
using generate_image.py (or based on) based on the geocodes that bound the
tile?
* Yes I know the Island is on a different grid but all our points use Great
Britain geocodes, which means negative eastings.
Thanks
Kev :o)
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
