Re: [OSM-talk] Should we be mapping transformers and powerlines?

[Nick Whitelegg via talk]

Even still, the location of major substations (e.g the 400-132kv type) isn't 
really a secret. I could reel off quite a few in the UK without even looking at 
a map.

Nick



From: john whelan 
Sent: 19 January 2023 17:38
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Should we be mapping transformers and powerlines?

I accept powerlines are fine and visible on other maps but the case for 
transformers isn't quite so strong.

Cheerio John

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 12:15 Nick Whitelegg via talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:

I thought the whole point of OSM was to map the ground truth?

Power lines are there, and they are an important navigational aid when out 
walking or hiking.

And besides, just about every commercial mapping provider that I've used shows 
them. The OS does, as do maps that I've seen in a range of continental European 
countries.

Nick



From: john whelan mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 19 January 2023 03:03
To: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: [OSM-talk] Should we be mapping transformers and powerlines?

Apparently you can do a lot of expensive damage by firing a rifle bullet 
through them as happened more than once in the US and given the situation in 
Europe at the moment is there a risk that something similar could happen there?

Should we have a process that says some things should not be mapped?

I seem to recall that the location of the pipeline that supplies aviation fuel 
to airports is considered an official secret in the UK.

Thoughts?

Thanks John
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.openstreetmap.org%2Flistinfo%2Ftalk=05%7C01%7Cnick.whitelegg%40solent.ac.uk%7C976f4ceec26941fdf68a08dafa43f19b%7Cd684e4cd491a4577bf33546478d72e3c%7C0%7C0%7C638097466969506677%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=Wnt8Dqlivd%2F9kn3Npf%2BfPSCc2w8ZSGkGBI1hNvtsuRc%3D=0>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Should we be mapping transformers and powerlines?

[Nick Whitelegg via talk]

I thought the whole point of OSM was to map the ground truth?

Power lines are there, and they are an important navigational aid when out 
walking or hiking.

And besides, just about every commercial mapping provider that I've used shows 
them. The OS does, as do maps that I've seen in a range of continental European 
countries.

Nick



From: john whelan 
Sent: 19 January 2023 03:03
To: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Should we be mapping transformers and powerlines?

Apparently you can do a lot of expensive damage by firing a rifle bullet 
through them as happened more than once in the US and given the situation in 
Europe at the moment is there a risk that something similar could happen there?

Should we have a process that says some things should not be mapped?

I seem to recall that the location of the pipeline that supplies aviation fuel 
to airports is considered an official secret in the UK.

Thoughts?

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

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths downtime

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hello everyone,

I have updated mapthepaths.org.uk's DNS record to point to a different server. 
When this is done I will need to obtain a new HTTPS certificate. It's possible 
that interruptions may occur over the next 24 hours or so but once updated it 
will be up without further interuption.

Thanks,
Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hello Adam,

OK - that's great, thanks!

Does the AWS hosting include full shell access? We'll need that to install the 
relevant software.

Let me know if/when the server space is available.

In the meantime I will create a Hetzner server to start experimenting, this 
will be around EUR4/month which I am prepared to meet in the short term, I will 
also give accounts to trusted members of the community on request to work on 
the project should they wish.

Nick





From: OSMUK 
Sent: 13 December 2020 18:36
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Cc: Nick Whitelegg 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

Hey Nick,

This sounds like a great project and so I’m sure OSMUK can help with server 
space. We have just migrated hosting to AWS due to our previous host shutting 
down, so one option is to provide some space on there.

Best,

Adam

--
Adam Hoyle
[m] 07973 428 333
On 11 Dec 2020, 15:02 +0000, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB , wrote:

Hello Andy,

Thanks for this.

My own feeling regarding what server we need is "start small, to get it going" 
and then as soon as OSMUK can commit to funding (*if* they can, of course) 
and/or several people share the cost, then scale up. Hetzner's model is very 
flexible in this regard, for instance I started with an 8GB RAM VM before I 
found it wasn't quite adequate for my needs and upgraded the same VM to the 
16GB version (and added some disc space, I think, too). For now I am willing to 
spend a small amount (below EUR/GBP 5) for a month or two to get things going 
if there's sufficient interest.

I'd broadly agree to an extent about going the Mapnik route although I would 
prefer another person with more experience in the niceties of current Mapnik 
stylesheet development to do large-scale tweaks;  I would be happy to do small​ 
tweaks on such things as, for example, making designations appear in a similar 
style to Landranger which might be an idea for familiarity purposes. On the 
other hand, vector rendering would have some advantages for the aims of this 
project - an interactive map of the countryside in which POIs and paths can be 
clicked to add/retrieve information. I believe Tangram can do this quite 
easily; I have dabbled in Tangram and it's quite easy to setup a simple 
stylesheet though haven't tried it with anything complex. Tangram also has some 
nice things like being able to be rendered in both isometric and (via A-Frame 
components, https://aframe.io) even in 3D. I have to admit having a personal 
like for the vector approach,   it shifts more processing onto the client, good 
in a world where standard client hardware, desktop and mobile, is pretty 
powerful while powerful server hardware is expensive.

I wouldn't personally be so fussed about things like minutely updates until it 
becomes a 'production' map, while in development mode I think the best approach 
is to keep it simple and cheap to run. In terms of my own projects I do quite 
rigorous filtering of the OSM data before populating the DB, to reject things 
mostly of interest to urban areas which only use up space and resources in a 
walking-oriented map. Another way of keeping initial costs down would be to 
concentrate on one or a few counties, ideally well-mapped ones with many ROWs, 
hills, water features etc.

So I'd be quite happy - if​ there's interest - to setup a cheaper Hetzner 
server for now. If we want to go the mapnik route I'd be happy to do a basic 
setup there as well, as in, get mod_tile working and use your style unmodified. 
My main personal contribution to the project would be to work on the server- 
and client-side scripting necessary to develop an interactive POI map. We'd 
also of course need people with strong web design and UX skills - alas, mine 
are not so great!

As for other points - things like https cert renewal seem easy with Let's 
Encrypt; have been using that succesfully for a while now.

Nick



Nick Whitelegg
Senior Lecturer in Computing (Internet)  | School of Media Arts and Technology
Southampton Solent University  | RM424 | East Park Terrace | Southampton SO14 
0YN
T: 023 8201 3075 | E: 
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk<mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> | W: 
solent.ac.uk<http://www.solent.ac.uk/>

Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>

From: Andy Townsend 
Sent: 11 December 2020 13:40
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server



On 11/12/2020 09:59, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB wrote:

In the early stages I think we could run it on cheap hosting hardware, like 
most projects in the OSM ecosystem. I suspect for a while usage would be light 
and limited to those in the OSM community. I use Hetzner for my hosting 
(OpenTrailView, Hikar, MapThePaths) - I pay around EUR 19/month but that is for 
a larger system that has to deal with the whole of Euro

Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hello Martin/Nick,

Perhaps the combination of highway, surface and designation will cover many of 
these use-cases?

e.g. a service road that looks like a track but is a service road, and has 
bridleway rights, could be tagged as:

highway=service; surface=unpaved; designation=public_bridleway

For rendering, if one rendered tracks or unpaved service roads as dashed black 
lines, and designations as coloured lines, you could render the designation 
layer as a coloured transparent line above the track/service road layer. This 
is what I do in my own projects.

Nick



From: Martin Wynne 
Sent: 13 December 2020 14:01
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track

On 13/12/2020 13:45, Nick wrote:

> what do people think of Overlapping ways i.e. one is a road and
> a duplicate is a bridleway? Not elegant and something I would not
> normally suggest but...

Hi Nick,

When I've tried that in the past I've been jumped on for breaking a
fundamental rule of OSM that one feature should have only one entry in
the database.

Martin.

___
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] driveway-becomes-track

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hi everyone,

I notice I'm being CCed in quite a bit here.

Just to make it clear, there are at least two "Nick"s on the thread. I just 
made the comment about Noverton Farm - it's another Nick who has made most of 
the contributions.

It's an interesting thread but just want to make sure that I am not being 
attributed to posts I didn't make.

Thanks,
Nick



From: Peter Neale 
Sent: 13 December 2020 10:44
To: Nick Whitelegg ; Edward Bainton 

Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track

IMHO, if it leads on to another road, track, etc. it is not a "driveway", but 
could be a track, a bridleway, a service road, or something else.

The Wiki says that a driveway is (with my bold for emphasis),

" ... a minor service road leading to a residential or business property. It 
typically branches from a bigger road and leads toward an entrance to a 
specific destination (building, etc.). It may end at or pass the entrance, but 
either way, it gets close to its destination. It is rare for a driveway to be 
the way to access another roadway (but see Pipestems below)."

(pipestems allow a driveway to be shared between several properties)

So if, in this case, it leads on to another way (e.g. a bridleway, or a track), 
it is not a driveway.  Does this solve the problem?

Regards,
Peter

Peter Neale
t: 01908 309666
m: 07968 341930
skype: nealepb


On Sunday, 13 December 2020, 10:25:46 GMT, Edward Bainton 
 wrote:


Sorry, I joined this thread late and I see the initial query was, How to ensure 
tracks don't just pop up nowhere'. So driveway first then track doesn't solve 
the problem.

That makes me say track all the way, as someone else has said. The different 
surfaces can be caught in the attributes.

On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 10:08, Edward Bainton 
mailto:bainton@gmail.com>> wrote:
>  https://85a.uk/noverton_farm_1280x800.jpg
>
> It seems daft to me that the mud gets rendered but not the hardcore. If
> I change the "driveway" to "track" that would be the dreaded tagging for
> the renderer would it not? Generally in this part of the world "track"
> means mud, rather than a roadway suitable for all vehicles.

I don't know what part of the world you're in, but by my Fenland lights, I'd 
probably call that a track, not a driveway - certainly once it passes the farm 
buildings (since I see a driveway as implying car-worthy access to a building).

Would that solve it? Driveway as far as the farm and then track?

I'm going to risk blasphemy and suggest that tagging for the renderer is what 
we all do, all day (or why map?). The problem imo is "fudging it for the 
renderer", or "outright lying for the renderer". In this case, I'd say track is 
a valid choice - I think even for the whole length, if by "driveway" we infer 
something, short, tidy, and suburban.

But I'm still a spring chicken round here, relatively speaking, and I await 
correction by my olders.

On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 09:09, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
>Getting back to this case, this is the farm drive. Beyond the
>cattle-grid the public bridleway continues left through the farm
>buildings, and the surface deteriorates to the usual farm mud:

  >https://85a.uk/noverton_farm_1280x800.jpg


Apologies for going off topic, but I knew that name (Noverton Farm) sounded 
familiar.

A quick check of where it is would explain why. In 1998 I did a  long distance 
walk from Sussex to the Peak District, following ordinary footpaths (planned 
using OS maps) and went through this area, the Teme Valley. It was very nice 
but​ the footpaths were in an appaling state of disrepair, I remember on 
several occasions that day having to scramble through dense shrub cover and 
attempt to negotiate barbed-wire fences. I seem to recall Noverton Farm as 
being the site of some particularly badly-maintained footpaths.

As an aside this walk is what indirectly got me into OSM. I wanted to 
illustrate the walk on the internet but OS licensing did not permit it, which 
is how I started Freemap and then later got involved with OSM. I still haven't 
illustrated this walk incidentally, but...

Would be interested to find out if the area has improved since..

Nick



From: Martin Wynne mailto:mar...@templot.com>>
Sent: 12 December 2020 14:30
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track

On 12/12/2020 13:15, Andy Townsend wrote:

>
> Ultimately, if "something needs doing", "someone" will need to do it.
> Perhaps that someone is you?

Hi Andy,

Yes that someone could be me. I have a server (located in Columbus,
Ohio) on which I am using only a fraction of the available memory

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths downtime next weekend Dec 19/20

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hello everyone,

A warning that the MapThePaths site (www.mapthepaths.org.uk) and also perhaps 
Freemap will be unavailable next weekend, Dec 19/20, and possibly into the 
early part of next week.

The reason is that I am updating the OSM data on the server next weekend.

I have decided to create a smaller Hetzner server for my UK-specific OSM 
projects, notably MapThePaths, and leave the current server to focus on the 
Europe-wide (and potentially worldwide, but my funds don't stretch to this) 
Hikar and OpenTrailView projects.

This new server may, dependent on time and interest, also be used for 
experimenting with creating an OSM UK walkers' map. I will be willing to give 
shell accounts to trusted members of the OSM UK community (people I know 
personally or mailing list regulars). More on that later.

Nick



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

Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

>Getting back to this case, this is the farm drive. Beyond the
>cattle-grid the public bridleway continues left through the farm
>buildings, and the surface deteriorates to the usual farm mud:

  >https://85a.uk/noverton_farm_1280x800.jpg


Apologies for going off topic, but I knew that name (Noverton Farm) sounded 
familiar.

A quick check of where it is would explain why. In 1998 I did a  long distance 
walk from Sussex to the Peak District, following ordinary footpaths (planned 
using OS maps) and went through this area, the Teme Valley. It was very nice 
but​ the footpaths were in an appaling state of disrepair, I remember on 
several occasions that day having to scramble through dense shrub cover and 
attempt to negotiate barbed-wire fences. I seem to recall Noverton Farm as 
being the site of some particularly badly-maintained footpaths.

As an aside this walk is what indirectly got me into OSM. I wanted to 
illustrate the walk on the internet but OS licensing did not permit it, which 
is how I started Freemap and then later got involved with OSM. I still haven't 
illustrated this walk incidentally, but...

Would be interested to find out if the area has improved since..

Nick



From: Martin Wynne 
Sent: 12 December 2020 14:30
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] driveway-becomes-track

On 12/12/2020 13:15, Andy Townsend wrote:

>
> Ultimately, if "something needs doing", "someone" will need to do it.
> Perhaps that someone is you?

Hi Andy,

Yes that someone could be me. I have a server (located in Columbus,
Ohio) on which I am using only a fraction of the available memory space
and bandwidth. I have been thinking of making better use of it, possibly
by hosting something from OSM.


 >  I'd suggest setting up a copy of the
 > standard map rendering as per https://switch2osm.org/serving-tiles/
 > (just for Worcestershire would be fine) and start tinkering with the
 > logic that decides what sort of service road is what, such as
 >
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/b10aef3866bacf387581b8fea4eec265010b0d14/project.mml#L475



Thanks. I have been looking at https://switch2osm.org/serving-tiles/ but
I have a lot to learn. I can do Windows programming, but on stuff for
the web I'm only a dabbler. I looked at Mapnik and saw interfaces only
for Python and C. If that had been Pascal, I would have dived in by now.

I will have another look and see where I might start. The idea of
creating my own map does appeal to me.

Getting back to this case, this is the farm drive. Beyond the
cattle-grid the public bridleway continues left through the farm
buildings, and the surface deteriorates to the usual farm mud:

  https://85a.uk/noverton_farm_1280x800.jpg

It seems daft to me that the mud gets rendered but not the hardcore. If
I change the "driveway" to "track" that would be the dreaded tagging for
the renderer would it not? Generally in this part of the world "track"
means mud, rather than a roadway suitable for all vehicles.

This is where the farm drive leaves the road - this is definitely more
than a "track" - note the double gates:

  https://goo.gl/maps/XEs4XKs5UUHNBt8E8

cheers,

Martin.

___
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] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hello Seán,

Thanks for that, sounds a great idea! Would be a great addition to any UK 
countryside map once you have opened your API.

Nick


From: Seán Lynch 
Sent: 11 December 2020 21:03
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: Andy Townsend ; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 

Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

Hi all,

As people enjoy their walk, we would love if you could consider uploading any 
plastic / litter data into OpenLitterMap<http://openlittermap.com>

Right now the only way to add data is using our platform, but we will open our 
API hopefully next year and allow uploads from other developers.


github.com/openlittermap<http://github.com/openlittermap>

TeamLitterUK is currently in 1st place globally for uploading the most data

Litter mapping has a remarkably low barrier to entry, allowing for potentially 
many more people to get involved with data collection and mapping

Cheers,

Seán

On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 at 15:05, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:

Hello Andy,

Thanks for this.

My own feeling regarding what server we need is "start small, to get it going" 
and then as soon as OSMUK can commit to funding (*if* they can, of course) 
and/or several people share the cost, then scale up. Hetzner's model is very 
flexible in this regard, for instance I started with an 8GB RAM VM before I 
found it wasn't quite adequate for my needs and upgraded the same VM to the 
16GB version (and added some disc space, I think, too). For now I am willing to 
spend a small amount (below EUR/GBP 5) for a month or two to get things going 
if there's sufficient interest.

I'd broadly agree to an extent about going the Mapnik route although I would 
prefer another person with more experience in the niceties of current Mapnik 
stylesheet development to do large-scale tweaks;  I would be happy to do small​ 
tweaks on such things as, for example, making designations appear in a similar 
style to Landranger which might be an idea for familiarity purposes. On the 
other hand, vector rendering would have some advantages for the aims of this 
project - an interactive map of the countryside in which POIs and paths can be 
clicked to add/retrieve information. I believe Tangram can do this quite 
easily; I have dabbled in Tangram and it's quite easy to setup a simple 
stylesheet though haven't tried it with anything complex. Tangram also has some 
nice things like being able to be rendered in both isometric and (via A-Frame 
components, https://aframe.io) even in 3D. I have to admit having a personal 
like for the vector approach,   it shifts more processing onto the client, good 
in a world where standard client hardware, desktop and mobile, is pretty 
powerful while powerful server hardware is expensive.

I wouldn't personally be so fussed about things like minutely updates until it 
becomes a 'production' map, while in development mode I think the best approach 
is to keep it simple and cheap to run. In terms of my own projects I do quite 
rigorous filtering of the OSM data before populating the DB, to reject things 
mostly of interest to urban areas which only use up space and resources in a 
walking-oriented map. Another way of keeping initial costs down would be to 
concentrate on one or a few counties, ideally well-mapped ones with many ROWs, 
hills, water features etc.

So I'd be quite happy - if​ there's interest - to setup a cheaper Hetzner 
server for now. If we want to go the mapnik route I'd be happy to do a basic 
setup there as well, as in, get mod_tile working and use your style unmodified. 
My main personal contribution to the project would be to work on the server- 
and client-side scripting necessary to develop an interactive POI map. We'd 
also of course need people with strong web design and UX skills - alas, mine 
are not so great!

As for other points - things like https cert renewal seem easy with Let's 
Encrypt; have been using that succesfully for a while now.

Nick



Nick Whitelegg
Senior Lecturer in Computing (Internet)  | School of Media Arts and Technology
Southampton Solent University  | RM424 | East Park Terrace | Southampton SO14 
0YN
T: 023 8201 3075 | E: 
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk<mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> | W: 
solent.ac.uk<http://www.solent.ac.uk/>

Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>

From: Andy Townsend mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 11 December 2020 13:40
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server



On 11/12/2020 09:59, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB wrote:

In the early stages I think we could run it on cheap hosting hardware, like 
most projects in the OSM ecosystem. I suspect for a while usage would be light 
and limited to 

Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hello Andy,

Thanks for this.

My own feeling regarding what server we need is "start small, to get it going" 
and then as soon as OSMUK can commit to funding (*if* they can, of course) 
and/or several people share the cost, then scale up. Hetzner's model is very 
flexible in this regard, for instance I started with an 8GB RAM VM before I 
found it wasn't quite adequate for my needs and upgraded the same VM to the 
16GB version (and added some disc space, I think, too). For now I am willing to 
spend a small amount (below EUR/GBP 5) for a month or two to get things going 
if there's sufficient interest.

I'd broadly agree to an extent about going the Mapnik route although I would 
prefer another person with more experience in the niceties of current Mapnik 
stylesheet development to do large-scale tweaks;  I would be happy to do small​ 
tweaks on such things as, for example, making designations appear in a similar 
style to Landranger which might be an idea for familiarity purposes. On the 
other hand, vector rendering would have some advantages for the aims of this 
project - an interactive map of the countryside in which POIs and paths can be 
clicked to add/retrieve information. I believe Tangram can do this quite 
easily; I have dabbled in Tangram and it's quite easy to setup a simple 
stylesheet though haven't tried it with anything complex. Tangram also has some 
nice things like being able to be rendered in both isometric and (via A-Frame 
components, https://aframe.io) even in 3D. I have to admit having a personal 
like for the vector approach,   it shifts more processing onto the client, good 
in a world where standard client hardware, desktop and mobile, is pretty 
powerful while powerful server hardware is expensive.

I wouldn't personally be so fussed about things like minutely updates until it 
becomes a 'production' map, while in development mode I think the best approach 
is to keep it simple and cheap to run. In terms of my own projects I do quite 
rigorous filtering of the OSM data before populating the DB, to reject things 
mostly of interest to urban areas which only use up space and resources in a 
walking-oriented map. Another way of keeping initial costs down would be to 
concentrate on one or a few counties, ideally well-mapped ones with many ROWs, 
hills, water features etc.

So I'd be quite happy - if​ there's interest - to setup a cheaper Hetzner 
server for now. If we want to go the mapnik route I'd be happy to do a basic 
setup there as well, as in, get mod_tile working and use your style unmodified. 
My main personal contribution to the project would be to work on the server- 
and client-side scripting necessary to develop an interactive POI map. We'd 
also of course need people with strong web design and UX skills - alas, mine 
are not so great!

As for other points - things like https cert renewal seem easy with Let's 
Encrypt; have been using that succesfully for a while now.

Nick



Nick Whitelegg
Senior Lecturer in Computing (Internet)  | School of Media Arts and Technology
Southampton Solent University  | RM424 | East Park Terrace | Southampton SO14 
0YN
T: 023 8201 3075 | E: 
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk<mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> | W: 
solent.ac.uk<http://www.solent.ac.uk/>

Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>

From: Andy Townsend 
Sent: 11 December 2020 13:40
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server



On 11/12/2020 09:59, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB wrote:

In the early stages I think we could run it on cheap hosting hardware, like 
most projects in the OSM ecosystem. I suspect for a while usage would be light 
and limited to those in the OSM community. I use Hetzner for my hosting 
(OpenTrailView, Hikar, MapThePaths) - I pay around EUR 19/month but that is for 
a larger system that has to deal with the whole of Europe rather than just the 
UK.

 https://www.hetzner.com/cloud?country=gb

The second-lowest spec of these, the CPX11 is giving you 2GB RAM and 40GB disc 
space for EUR 4.19 a month. OK we'd need more than that long term, but I 
suspect that would get us going in the early stages.


That'll depending on what you want the server to do, I think.  For an OSM Carto 
Map style with automatic updates and reasonable performance you'll probably 
need > 6Gb memory for the whole of the UK these days.  Maybe a CX31 at €11 per 
month (i.e. about the price of a couple of pints and a "substantial" pork pie 
for those in tier 2)?  https://map.atownsend.org.uk is a CX41 I believe, and 
renders Mapnik / Carto CSS map tiles that cover UK and Ireland.  It could 
probably include another "medium sized OSM country" in the same map style as 
well without too many problems.


On the question of "could we show feature X" (e.g. "cycleways with foot=yes" 
different to "cycl

Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

>Hi


Hello Tony,


>I like the idea.

>Can it be extended to be a UK based map which is has greater prominence to 
>aspects such as the >recent discussion about cyclists and paths?


Potentially, yes - I don't see why not.

I have to admit I personally haven't had much experience in recent years with 
creating mapnik stylesheets (I've been working with client-side renderers such 
as Kothic and have played with Tangram), hence my suggestion earlier of 
starting with Andy Townsend's style.


>Does anyone have an idea of how it could be made to happen - could we (OSM UK) 
>fund and >maintain it with commitment for say 2 years? Using volunteers or 
>donated equipment or personal >funding commitments? Do we know the size of 
>server required to support a given load? Can we >manage the required 
>operations and security?

In the early stages I think we could run it on cheap hosting hardware, like 
most projects in the OSM ecosystem. I suspect for a while usage would be light 
and limited to those in the OSM community. I use Hetzner for my hosting 
(OpenTrailView, Hikar, MapThePaths) - I pay around EUR 19/month but that is for 
a larger system that has to deal with the whole of Europe rather than just the 
UK.

 https://www.hetzner.com/cloud?country=gb

The second-lowest spec of these, the CPX11 is giving you 2GB RAM and 40GB disc 
space for EUR 4.19 a month. OK we'd need more than that long term, but I 
suspect that would get us going in the early stages.

I'm quite happy to create the server and pay the initial costs, but it would be 
good if funds could be found from OSMUK longer term if possible.

I'm also happy to do some dev work (client and server side). I can tweak the 
cartography and add contours (I have experience doing this) but I'll leave it 
up to others to do serious cartography work, and of course web design.

Or, we could even use client-side rendering, Tangram is pretty powerful, have 
had a play with it.

Would be a great project for the community to work on.

Nick



From: Tony Shield 
Sent: 10 December 2020 17:36
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application -- -& server


Hi

I like the idea.

Can it be extended to be a UK based map which is has greater prominence to 
aspects such as the recent discussion about cyclists and paths?


Does anyone have an idea of how it could be made to happen - could we (OSM UK) 
fund and maintain it with commitment for say 2 years? Using volunteers or 
donated equipment or personal funding commitments? Do we know the size of 
server required to support a given load? Can we manage the required operations 
and security?


Tony Shield - TonyS999




On 04/12/2020 15:40, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB wrote:
Hi,

Just floating an idea for a possible OSMUK site, namely an OSMUK 
'semi-official'  web application for walkers and hikers.

This could provide similar functionality to sites such as the Ramblers' 
Pathwatch 
(https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/pathwatch-report-path-features-and-problems.aspx)
 allowing users to report path problems as well as nice views, historical sites 
and so on. It could also provide info such as train or bus times (by clicking 
on a rail station), beers served (for a pub), routing via public transport to a 
given countryside location, and so on.

Reported path problems could be then made available via an API, which could be 
used by councils - and, given we have the council ROW data available to us via 
rowmaps.com  - the right of way reference could be sourced from this if it's 
not in OSM already.

For rendering, we could perhaps use Andy Townsend's SomeoneElse-style, maybe 
tweaked a little, as it appears to be the most actively maintained of all the 
England and Wales renderings. This could be setup on our own server, I seem to 
remember experimenting with this a couple of years ago when the OSMUK idea was 
first floated, on a server which had been loaned to the community (I need to 
re-check my emails, and indeed check if this server is still open for us to 
use!)

I've done similar things to this in the past on a small scale, e.g. Freemap 
(free-map.org.uk) once had the facility to add path problems, but now we have 
the OSMUK organisation in existence, maybe a semi-official OSMUK walkers' map 
with added functionality would have greater traction and it's something that 
could be launched as a project on GitHub?

Thanks,
Nick



Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<mailto: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

[OSM-talk] Advanced warning: temporary shutdown of OpenTrailView and Hikar, weekend of Dec 19/20

[Nick Whitelegg via talk]

Hello everyone,

For those of you who might use https://opentrailview.org or https://hikar.org, 
or the Hikar app, I'm posting an advanced warning that these sites will be 
unavailable on the weekend of December 19/20.

This is because I am updating the underlying database of Europe OSM data, which 
I have not updated in more than a year now.

Thanks,
Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway across field

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

This reminds me a bit of this location, also in Wiltshire:

https://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/?lat=51.06209564615185=-2.0421791551466137=3=0

Note the orange diagonal line. That is the line of a bridleway according to the 
Wiltshire ROW data as sourced on rowmaps.com (so not necessarily the definitive 
map). Contrast that to the brown line a bit to its north and west which is the 
bridleway as mapped on OSM, using bridleway signs apparent on the ground plus a 
bit of assumption. The brown line is a well-defined and easily-navigable (on 
horse and bike as well as foot) track, but there are no actual bridleway signs 
on the bit which diverges from the orange  line so it 'may not' be an actual 
bridleway - even though ground evidence suggests it 'probably' is. I first 
mapped this in 2010 from a ground survey,, but lacking any legal source for it 
not being a bridleway, it's remained an OSM bridleway ever since even though 
part of it technically isn't.

The orange line is a random line across a field with no evidence on the ground 
whatsoever. No signs, no gates, no stiles, no nothing - and therefore not 
mappable.

Wiltshire seems to be like this quite often, incidentally: its signposting can 
be a bit inconsistent and I've noticed quite a few divergences between 
web-based council data and ground evidence. We need the definitive data to be 
legally used in OSM in these cases; though maybe the council should really be 
trying to actually divert the path to the on-the-ground route that people 
actually use!

Nick



From: nathan case 
Sent: 08 December 2020 15:11
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway across field

That's a fair viewpoint and I'm open to changing my method.

But what would you suggest in the situation where a PROW runs through a 
building(s)? Map through it as a fully-fledged footway? Doesn't matter what 
your abilities are, you won't be able to go through there - well unless you can 
pass through walls...  At what point does a completely inaccessible, or even 
re-rerouted path (just not in the PROW data), become disused?

I am interested as a path I recently mapped is a PROW but is very dangerous to 
cross. It is now marked as disused:highway=path with 
access=discourged;designated but it is stilla PROW (byway open to all traffic 
in this case): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/93427676

-Original Message-
From: Dave F via Talk-GB 
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 2:10 PM
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway across field

On 08/12/2020 12:36, nathan case wrote:
> but instead setting as disused:highway. This is what I tend to do when the 
> PROW route is clearly inaccessible from aerial imagery (e.g. due to new 
> buildings, or rivers).

IMO, this is bad mapping.
Just because one person concludes it isn't used by staring at photograph taken 
thousands of feet in the air doesn't mean it isn't.

Accessibility is variable & subjective. What might be a deterrent to a 
wheelchair user, could be considered easy by a high jumper.

Even if it is found to be inaccessible after an on ground survey it doesn't 
mean it's been declared disused.

DaveF

___
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] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

... Just to follow up on this - if it helps explain what I thought would be 
nice for OSMUK to have - something like https://freemap.sk/, which I was 
introduced to by one of the lead developers several years ago at State of the 
Map Europe in Vienna.

This is an OSM-based map site specific for Slovakia, which comes with many 
features such as information about POIs, route-finding, elevation profiles, and 
so on. I've always thought that of all the local OSM sites, this one is 
particularly nice.

It could eventually use our own rendering but for now could use something like 
Andy Townsend's style combined with contours and hillshading.

On another matter, what's the status of whether OSMUK has its own server? (I've 
lost track of this, I have to admit). Do we have a development server where we 
could begin developing something like this, initially on a small scale (e.g. 
one county)?

Thanks,
Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB 
Sent: 04 December 2020 15:40
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application

Hi,

Just floating an idea for a possible OSMUK site, namely an OSMUK 
'semi-official'  web application for walkers and hikers.

This could provide similar functionality to sites such as the Ramblers' 
Pathwatch 
(https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/pathwatch-report-path-features-and-problems.aspx)
 allowing users to report path problems as well as nice views, historical sites 
and so on. It could also provide info such as train or bus times (by clicking 
on a rail station), beers served (for a pub), routing via public transport to a 
given countryside location, and so on.

Reported path problems could be then made available via an API, which could be 
used by councils - and, given we have the council ROW data available to us via 
rowmaps.com  - the right of way reference could be sourced from this if it's 
not in OSM already.

For rendering, we could perhaps use Andy Townsend's SomeoneElse-style, maybe 
tweaked a little, as it appears to be the most actively maintained of all the 
England and Wales renderings. This could be setup on our own server, I seem to 
remember experimenting with this a couple of years ago when the OSMUK idea was 
first floated, on a server which had been loaned to the community (I need to 
re-check my emails, and indeed check if this server is still open for us to 
use!)

I've done similar things to this in the past on a small scale, e.g. Freemap 
(free-map.org.uk) once had the facility to add path problems, but now we have 
the OSMUK organisation in existence, maybe a semi-official OSMUK walkers' map 
with added functionality would have greater traction and it's something that 
could be launched as a project on GitHub?

Thanks,
Nick



Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

>Some councils insist that problem reports only come through their own
>web sites, or reluctantly, by phone, and will ignore emails (which is
>the default presentation for FixMyStreet).

>The web sites generally provide structured input, whereas FixMyStreet is
>generally free text, and also, the web site sometimes bypasses the
>council contact centre, and goes direct to the out sourced contractor.

A while back I did build an app to send problem reports to Hampshire county 
council specifically, as Hampshire had a very keen and enthusiastic staff 
member. However I contacted other local councils asking for details on whether 
they had any APIs to send the data to, but either heard nothing or a response 
(as you said) that they were not so keen on input from other sources.

A shame really, an open, standard API - and accompanying open source clients to 
the API - adopted by all councils for problem reporting would be a great thing 
to have.

Nick



From: David Woolley 
Sent: 04 December 2020 16:49
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application

On 04/12/2020 16:38, Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB wrote:
> However as you say council take up could be problematic. Maybe we could
> provide a link to FixMyStreet?

Some councils insist that problem reports only come through their own
web sites, or reluctantly, by phone, and will ignore emails (which is
the default presentation for FixMyStreet).

The web sites generally provide structured input, whereas FixMyStreet is
generally free text, and also, the web site sometimes bypasses the
council contact centre, and goes direct to the out sourced contractor.

___
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] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

I was just thinking it might be a nice idea to have a completely open path 
problems API that could be used not only for councils but also third party 
applications.

However as you say council take up could be problematic. Maybe we could provide 
a link to FixMyStreet?

Nick



From: Jon Pennycook 
Sent: 04 December 2020 15:51
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application

For reporting problems, maybe FixMyStreet might be interested - see 
https://osm.fixmystreet.com/
They have sold a product to some councils to allow integration between the 
website and the council's (and their contractor's) back end systems.

I think that trying to encourage councils to use another API might be a 
challenge unless you offer them money.


On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, 15:43 Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB, 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
Hi,

Just floating an idea for a possible OSMUK site, namely an OSMUK 
'semi-official'  web application for walkers and hikers.

This could provide similar functionality to sites such as the Ramblers' 
Pathwatch 
(https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/pathwatch-report-path-features-and-problems.aspx)
 allowing users to report path problems as well as nice views, historical sites 
and so on. It could also provide info such as train or bus times (by clicking 
on a rail station), beers served (for a pub), routing via public transport to a 
given countryside location, and so on.

Reported path problems could be then made available via an API, which could be 
used by councils - and, given we have the council ROW data available to us via 
rowmaps.com<http://rowmaps.com>  - the right of way reference could be sourced 
from this if it's not in OSM already.

For rendering, we could perhaps use Andy Townsend's SomeoneElse-style, maybe 
tweaked a little, as it appears to be the most actively maintained of all the 
England and Wales renderings. This could be setup on our own server, I seem to 
remember experimenting with this a couple of years ago when the OSMUK idea was 
first floated, on a server which had been loaned to the community (I need to 
re-check my emails, and indeed check if this server is still open for us to 
use!)

I've done similar things to this in the past on a small scale, e.g. Freemap 
(free-map.org.uk<http://free-map.org.uk>) once had the facility to add path 
problems, but now we have the OSMUK organisation in existence, maybe a 
semi-official OSMUK walkers' map with added functionality would have greater 
traction and it's something that could be launched as a project on GitHub?

Thanks,
Nick



Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<mailto: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] Idea - OSMUK walkers' map application

[Nick Whitelegg via Talk-GB]

Hi,

Just floating an idea for a possible OSMUK site, namely an OSMUK 
'semi-official'  web application for walkers and hikers.

This could provide similar functionality to sites such as the Ramblers' 
Pathwatch 
(https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/pathwatch-report-path-features-and-problems.aspx)
 allowing users to report path problems as well as nice views, historical sites 
and so on. It could also provide info such as train or bus times (by clicking 
on a rail station), beers served (for a pub), routing via public transport to a 
given countryside location, and so on.

Reported path problems could be then made available via an API, which could be 
used by councils - and, given we have the council ROW data available to us via 
rowmaps.com  - the right of way reference could be sourced from this if it's 
not in OSM already.

For rendering, we could perhaps use Andy Townsend's SomeoneElse-style, maybe 
tweaked a little, as it appears to be the most actively maintained of all the 
England and Wales renderings. This could be setup on our own server, I seem to 
remember experimenting with this a couple of years ago when the OSMUK idea was 
first floated, on a server which had been loaned to the community (I need to 
re-check my emails, and indeed check if this server is still open for us to 
use!)

I've done similar things to this in the past on a small scale, e.g. Freemap 
(free-map.org.uk) once had the facility to add path problems, but now we have 
the OSMUK organisation in existence, maybe a semi-official OSMUK walkers' map 
with added functionality would have greater traction and it's something that 
could be launched as a project on GitHub?

Thanks,
Nick



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

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Removal of 'unsuitable' content from an OSM-related site

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Frederik,

OK - thanks for that. That clears things up quite nicely I think.

I have too many "day job" obligations at the moment to set it up as a
business, but the thought has crossed my mind for the future.

Thanks,
Nick

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:03 PM Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 02.12.20 09:49, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> > As I said I am paying for this out of my own money and do not want the
> > storage space to be used for purposes other than panos of walking trails.
>
> I think you have already done *much* more than can be expected of you. I
> would have removed the data long ago. Or, if you are in a business-y
> mood, offer to keep their images if they pay you some money - depending
> on what their use-case and expertise is, it might be cheaper for them to
> pay you than to run things themselves. If you're lucky, it pays for the
> whole server and then some.
>
> That of course then puts you in a situation where you will have some
> obligations, and you'd need to explain to them that they can't expect
> you to fix a bug on Christmas Eve. Which is likely going to be ok for
> them, since at the moment they rely on a service that could delete their
> images for good any time ;)
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Removal of 'unsuitable' content from an OSM-related site

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Martn,

I believe I 'probably' don't have any obligation, but I am just being
cautious as we do appear to live in a very litigious world and I just want
to be safe. It's a case of whether there is some automatic 'implied rights'
for users when there are no terms of service.

I don't have any terms of service - as a non-profit/research project it's
all quite informal - just some comments that 'unsuitable' panoramas, or
panoramas containing faces and license plates which are not detected by the
screening software I use - may be removed. Recently (after this) I have
added a comment on road panoramas being liable to be removed if unlikely to
be of interest to walkers.

Thanks,
Nick

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 11:44 AM Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> IANAL, but why do you believe you could have any obligation to host their
> content on your server?
>
> Do you have terms of service?
>
> Cheers
> Martin
> ___
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

[OSM-legal-talk] Removal of 'unsuitable' content from an OSM-related site

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

Apologies - this is not directly related to OpenStreetMap itself but is
related to a site of mine which uses OpenStreetMap data so I thought I'd
post my question here to get opinions.

I have been developing a site OpenTrailView (https://opentrailview.org) to
collect 360 panoramas of walking and hiking routes. OSM data is used to
connect the panoramas together.

The site has always advertised itself as a site to collect panos of
*walking* routes - however a company has used the site to upload a large
number of panoramas of on-road routes. My problem with this is that it's
using up server space on a server that I pay for out of my own money.

I have contacted the company asking them if it was OK to delete their
panoramas (as the content is arguably 'inappropritate' for a
walking-oriented site) nd they replied to me, in a friendly and cooperative
way, saying they would setup their own 'local' OpenTrailView server by
November 13th. I since contacted them to confirm whether they had done this
(twice) but have not heard back.

With this in mind, given it's my own server (well technically I rent the
space from a hosting provider, but you know what i mean) and given I've
sent several emails to them, will it be OK legally for me to remove their
panoramas?

Likely legislation would be Germany as that is where the server is based,
or possibly UK because that is where I am based most of the time,

As I said I am paying for this out of my own money and do not want the
storage space to be used for purposes other than panos of walking trails.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

Having run Christian's blurrer on around 200-300 images now (not all with 
people and cars) it does seem to be working quite well, it has only failed to 
detect people on one pano with two children partly looking away from the 
camera. Incidentally these were close to the edge of the pano. The faces of the 
children were vaguely visible. I have not allowed access to this.

Would just like to get some input on the acceptability or otherwise of a few 
examples. I have (temporarily if need be) enabled access to these panos which 
are what I'd consider edge-cases.

All are available at
https://www.opentrailview.org/?id=N

where N is a number, detailed below.

People some distance away from the camera. Not clearly visible. Not detected 
with any of the three pieces of software I've used for blurring, even 
Christian's:

N = 9731, 9732, 9771

Several people in a cafe/parking area on the top of a mountain. Some people are 
detected but people looking away/in the distance are not. Note that things are 
complicated a little with these in that the input image had already gone 
through a blurring run.

N = 3068, 3076, 3080

People close by:

N = 3096

Anyway, would be great to get some feedback on these 'edge cases', whether they 
look reasonably 'safe' to release permanently, on the balance of probability.

Thanks,
Nick


From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 10 October 2020 21:38
To: Christian Quest ; talk@openstreetmap.org 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)


..sorry, the photo ID in that URL is incorrect, should be 9728, not 9928.

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 10 October 2020 21:37
To: Christian Quest ; talk@openstreetmap.org 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

... to follow up on this, it works great on the one pano I've tested so far - I 
selected this one because it had a 'not-clearly-visible' face and I wanted to 
see how it would be handled. There was one adult man and two children in this 
pano, they're all effectively obscured. The previous blurring tools I used 
blurred all the faces but they didn't blur the child who was partly looking 
away (with the face not visible)

Christian - thanks once again for this!

e.g. see https://opentrailview.org/?id=9928

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 07 October 2020 17:31
To: Christian Quest ; talk@openstreetmap.org 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Hello Christian,

This does indeed look very nice, it's providing much more extensive blurring 
than what I've tried so far.

Thanks to everyone also for the replies.

Nick

From: Christian Quest 
Sent: 07 October 2020 09:25
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Le 06/10/2020 à 22:41, Nick Whitelegg a écrit :
Hi,

Apologies if this is only tangentially OSM related, but I thought I'd ask here 
to try and get some expert advice.

As you may know, Mapillary has been bought by Facebook and there has been 
interest in developing, or at least starting to develop/actively researching 
the possibility of, some sort of open source alternative. I have been 
developing OpenTrailView (opentrailview.org), however I now have a collaborator 
to work on exploring an open source panos platform.

The main question I have relates to the very necessary privacy steps that must 
be taken, in particular face and license plate blurring. I have experimented 
with various libraries using various datasets and models, and have found that 
the understand.ai Anonymizer (https://github.com/understand-ai/anonymizer), 
which advertises itself as something specifically aimed at implementing the 
privacy protections needed to comply with the GDPR, seems to be working the 
best.

It detects faces and license plates in clear view on panoramas, which can then 
be blurred.

My question, then, is what to do about people, or cars, which are further away 
from the camera? In these cases, the algorithm does not necessarily detect the 
face or license plate, but on the other hand in general the faces and license 
plates are not clearly visible, or identifiable, in any case.

So in summary, the tool blurs clearly visible faces or license plates, but in 
general does not blur those which are not clearly visible.

Apologies once again that this is only tangentially related to OSM 
(OpenTrailView uses OSM to connect panos together, so not completely unrelated) 
but it is very much an open geodata issue, so I thought I'd ask to get feedback.

I am in the UK and the server is in Germany (Hetzner), so GDPR would apply.

Thanks,
Nick


We have tested blurring using image segmentation which allows to blur full 
parts of pictures like people and cars, not only faces and license plates.


Here is the result: https://takeitout.cquest.org/photo/cquest/blurred

Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

[Nick Whitelegg]

... to follow up on this, it works great on the one pano I've tested so far - I 
selected this one because it had a 'not-clearly-visible' face and I wanted to 
see how it would be handled. There was one adult man and two children in this 
pano, they're all effectively obscured. The previous blurring tools I used 
blurred all the faces but they didn't blur the child who was partly looking 
away (with the face not visible)

Christian - thanks once again for this!

e.g. see https://opentrailview.org/?id=9928

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 07 October 2020 17:31
To: Christian Quest ; talk@openstreetmap.org 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Hello Christian,

This does indeed look very nice, it's providing much more extensive blurring 
than what I've tried so far.

Thanks to everyone also for the replies.

Nick

From: Christian Quest 
Sent: 07 October 2020 09:25
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Le 06/10/2020 à 22:41, Nick Whitelegg a écrit :
Hi,

Apologies if this is only tangentially OSM related, but I thought I'd ask here 
to try and get some expert advice.

As you may know, Mapillary has been bought by Facebook and there has been 
interest in developing, or at least starting to develop/actively researching 
the possibility of, some sort of open source alternative. I have been 
developing OpenTrailView (opentrailview.org), however I now have a collaborator 
to work on exploring an open source panos platform.

The main question I have relates to the very necessary privacy steps that must 
be taken, in particular face and license plate blurring. I have experimented 
with various libraries using various datasets and models, and have found that 
the understand.ai Anonymizer (https://github.com/understand-ai/anonymizer), 
which advertises itself as something specifically aimed at implementing the 
privacy protections needed to comply with the GDPR, seems to be working the 
best.

It detects faces and license plates in clear view on panoramas, which can then 
be blurred.

My question, then, is what to do about people, or cars, which are further away 
from the camera? In these cases, the algorithm does not necessarily detect the 
face or license plate, but on the other hand in general the faces and license 
plates are not clearly visible, or identifiable, in any case.

So in summary, the tool blurs clearly visible faces or license plates, but in 
general does not blur those which are not clearly visible.

Apologies once again that this is only tangentially related to OSM 
(OpenTrailView uses OSM to connect panos together, so not completely unrelated) 
but it is very much an open geodata issue, so I thought I'd ask to get feedback.

I am in the UK and the server is in Germany (Hetzner), so GDPR would apply.

Thanks,
Nick


We have tested blurring using image segmentation which allows to blur full 
parts of pictures like people and cars, not only faces and license plates.


Here is the result: https://takeitout.cquest.org/photo/cquest/blurred/


The code used is on github: https://github.com/tyndare/blur-persons/


We did some tests using TPU to speedup the process.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

[Nick Whitelegg]

..sorry, the photo ID in that URL is incorrect, should be 9728, not 9928.

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 10 October 2020 21:37
To: Christian Quest ; talk@openstreetmap.org 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

... to follow up on this, it works great on the one pano I've tested so far - I 
selected this one because it had a 'not-clearly-visible' face and I wanted to 
see how it would be handled. There was one adult man and two children in this 
pano, they're all effectively obscured. The previous blurring tools I used 
blurred all the faces but they didn't blur the child who was partly looking 
away (with the face not visible)

Christian - thanks once again for this!

e.g. see https://opentrailview.org/?id=9928

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 07 October 2020 17:31
To: Christian Quest ; talk@openstreetmap.org 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Hello Christian,

This does indeed look very nice, it's providing much more extensive blurring 
than what I've tried so far.

Thanks to everyone also for the replies.

Nick

From: Christian Quest 
Sent: 07 October 2020 09:25
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Le 06/10/2020 à 22:41, Nick Whitelegg a écrit :
Hi,

Apologies if this is only tangentially OSM related, but I thought I'd ask here 
to try and get some expert advice.

As you may know, Mapillary has been bought by Facebook and there has been 
interest in developing, or at least starting to develop/actively researching 
the possibility of, some sort of open source alternative. I have been 
developing OpenTrailView (opentrailview.org), however I now have a collaborator 
to work on exploring an open source panos platform.

The main question I have relates to the very necessary privacy steps that must 
be taken, in particular face and license plate blurring. I have experimented 
with various libraries using various datasets and models, and have found that 
the understand.ai Anonymizer (https://github.com/understand-ai/anonymizer), 
which advertises itself as something specifically aimed at implementing the 
privacy protections needed to comply with the GDPR, seems to be working the 
best.

It detects faces and license plates in clear view on panoramas, which can then 
be blurred.

My question, then, is what to do about people, or cars, which are further away 
from the camera? In these cases, the algorithm does not necessarily detect the 
face or license plate, but on the other hand in general the faces and license 
plates are not clearly visible, or identifiable, in any case.

So in summary, the tool blurs clearly visible faces or license plates, but in 
general does not blur those which are not clearly visible.

Apologies once again that this is only tangentially related to OSM 
(OpenTrailView uses OSM to connect panos together, so not completely unrelated) 
but it is very much an open geodata issue, so I thought I'd ask to get feedback.

I am in the UK and the server is in Germany (Hetzner), so GDPR would apply.

Thanks,
Nick


We have tested blurring using image segmentation which allows to blur full 
parts of pictures like people and cars, not only faces and license plates.


Here is the result: https://takeitout.cquest.org/photo/cquest/blurred/


The code used is on github: https://github.com/tyndare/blur-persons/


We did some tests using TPU to speedup the process.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Christian,

This does indeed look very nice, it's providing much more extensive blurring 
than what I've tried so far.

Thanks to everyone also for the replies.

Nick

From: Christian Quest 
Sent: 07 October 2020 09:25
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Le 06/10/2020 à 22:41, Nick Whitelegg a écrit :
Hi,

Apologies if this is only tangentially OSM related, but I thought I'd ask here 
to try and get some expert advice.

As you may know, Mapillary has been bought by Facebook and there has been 
interest in developing, or at least starting to develop/actively researching 
the possibility of, some sort of open source alternative. I have been 
developing OpenTrailView (opentrailview.org), however I now have a collaborator 
to work on exploring an open source panos platform.

The main question I have relates to the very necessary privacy steps that must 
be taken, in particular face and license plate blurring. I have experimented 
with various libraries using various datasets and models, and have found that 
the understand.ai Anonymizer (https://github.com/understand-ai/anonymizer), 
which advertises itself as something specifically aimed at implementing the 
privacy protections needed to comply with the GDPR, seems to be working the 
best.

It detects faces and license plates in clear view on panoramas, which can then 
be blurred.

My question, then, is what to do about people, or cars, which are further away 
from the camera? In these cases, the algorithm does not necessarily detect the 
face or license plate, but on the other hand in general the faces and license 
plates are not clearly visible, or identifiable, in any case.

So in summary, the tool blurs clearly visible faces or license plates, but in 
general does not blur those which are not clearly visible.

Apologies once again that this is only tangentially related to OSM 
(OpenTrailView uses OSM to connect panos together, so not completely unrelated) 
but it is very much an open geodata issue, so I thought I'd ask to get feedback.

I am in the UK and the server is in Germany (Hetzner), so GDPR would apply.

Thanks,
Nick


We have tested blurring using image segmentation which allows to blur full 
parts of pictures like people and cars, not only faces and license plates.


Here is the result: https://takeitout.cquest.org/photo/cquest/blurred/


The code used is on github: https://github.com/tyndare/blur-persons/


We did some tests using TPU to speedup the process.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

[Nick Whitelegg]

... sorry, this sentence maybe could be misconstrued. "however I now have a 
collaborator to work on exploring an open source panos platform."

This is very much a joint-effort project between myself and the person I'm 
collaborating with, I want to make that clear.

Thanks,
Nick


____
From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 06 October 2020 21:41
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

Hi,

Apologies if this is only tangentially OSM related, but I thought I'd ask here 
to try and get some expert advice.

As you may know, Mapillary has been bought by Facebook and there has been 
interest in developing, or at least starting to develop/actively researching 
the possibility of, some sort of open source alternative. I have been 
developing OpenTrailView (opentrailview.org), however I now have a collaborator 
to work on exploring an open source panos platform.

The main question I have relates to the very necessary privacy steps that must 
be taken, in particular face and license plate blurring. I have experimented 
with various libraries using various datasets and models, and have found that 
the understand.ai Anonymizer (https://github.com/understand-ai/anonymizer), 
which advertises itself as something specifically aimed at implementing the 
privacy protections needed to comply with the GDPR, seems to be working the 
best.

It detects faces and license plates in clear view on panoramas, which can then 
be blurred.

My question, then, is what to do about people, or cars, which are further away 
from the camera? In these cases, the algorithm does not necessarily detect the 
face or license plate, but on the other hand in general the faces and license 
plates are not clearly visible, or identifiable, in any case.

So in summary, the tool blurs clearly visible faces or license plates, but in 
general does not blur those which are not clearly visible.

Apologies once again that this is only tangentially related to OSM 
(OpenTrailView uses OSM to connect panos together, so not completely unrelated) 
but it is very much an open geodata issue, so I thought I'd ask to get feedback.

I am in the UK and the server is in Germany (Hetzner), so GDPR would apply.

Thanks,
Nick

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

[OSM-talk] Face and license blurring (GDPR territories)

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

Apologies if this is only tangentially OSM related, but I thought I'd ask here 
to try and get some expert advice.

As you may know, Mapillary has been bought by Facebook and there has been 
interest in developing, or at least starting to develop/actively researching 
the possibility of, some sort of open source alternative. I have been 
developing OpenTrailView (opentrailview.org), however I now have a collaborator 
to work on exploring an open source panos platform.

The main question I have relates to the very necessary privacy steps that must 
be taken, in particular face and license plate blurring. I have experimented 
with various libraries using various datasets and models, and have found that 
the understand.ai Anonymizer (https://github.com/understand-ai/anonymizer), 
which advertises itself as something specifically aimed at implementing the 
privacy protections needed to comply with the GDPR, seems to be working the 
best.

It detects faces and license plates in clear view on panoramas, which can then 
be blurred.

My question, then, is what to do about people, or cars, which are further away 
from the camera? In these cases, the algorithm does not necessarily detect the 
face or license plate, but on the other hand in general the faces and license 
plates are not clearly visible, or identifiable, in any case.

So in summary, the tool blurs clearly visible faces or license plates, but in 
general does not blur those which are not clearly visible.

Apologies once again that this is only tangentially related to OSM 
(OpenTrailView uses OSM to connect panos together, so not completely unrelated) 
but it is very much an open geodata issue, so I thought I'd ask to get feedback.

I am in the UK and the server is in Germany (Hetzner), so GDPR would apply.

Thanks,
Nick

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging an abandoned path?

[Nick Whitelegg]

Thanks for the replies, will probably go with something like overgrown=yes.

The path concerned has not been closed - it looks like a forestry track which 
was formerly used by vehicles but hasn't for many years. However, unlike many 
of the paths in the same area it doesn't appear to be popular as a 'desire 
path' and is definitely less pleasurable to negotiate than many of the others 
in the area. Just wanted some way of distinguishing this path from others in 
the area in active use, so that those seeking a 'nice walk in the woods' could 
avoid it!

Nick


From: Andrew Harvey 
Sent: 26 September 2020 03:58
To: Talk Openstreetmap 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging an abandoned path?

Abandoned is a tricky concept for a path, what make is abandoned? If there is a 
sign up saying track closed or keep out for re-vegetation it's clear, but 
otherwise it's less clear.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 01:36, Andy Townsend 
mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Once it's definitely disappeared, I'd have no qualms about deleting it 
altogether.  Sometimes I update the tags on a path before deleting it to 
something like "note=nothing on this alignment any more".

If there is still some evidence on the ground, I think using the lifecycle 
prefix is preferable because usually it takes a few years for a path to be 
completely revegetated and provides a more accurate picture of what's happening 
on the ground and helps data consumers track the it through the different 
states.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 02:06, Mike Thompson 
mailto:miketh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I use:
disused:highway=path/footway/etc
or
abandoned:highway=path/footway/etc

I have used that too where it really is closed via signage, but if it's just 
overgrown from lack of use, it could still be in active use.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 02:55, Andy Townsend 
mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Indeed - https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/overgrown has some usage

I didn't know about that, usually I've just been adding description=overgrown, 
but that tag is better. It's in need of some discussion and documentation 
though to make it not subjective.

I suggest overgrown=yes would apply if you're constantly brushing against the 
vegetation (not just occasionally but to the the point that you're almost 
always in contact with the vegetation for the whole segment).

Then light if it has negligible affect on walking pace, dense if it slows you 
down considerably.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Tagging an abandoned path?

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

Wondering if there was a consensus on tagging an abandoned, no longer very 
usable path (e.g. a path which has become overgrown or is unclear and prone to 
flooding in wetter periods). Something like "path=abandoned"?

There's a case like that near where I am in which a path was mapped in the 
early days of OSM but has now fallen into disuse. It isn't an official path, 
just a minor path through some woods on land with public access. My gut feeling 
would be to tag as "path=abandoned" to signal that it isn't really usable as a 
path anymore (so that renderers and routers can warn the user about it or even 
ignore it, for instance) but just wondering if anyone else has come across this 
situation.

Thanks,
Nick



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

Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

[Nick Whitelegg]

Yes - that's absolutely fine! Just wanted to clarify it here so that the 
wording could be altered (I'm quite happy to do this myself).

Thanks,
Nick



From: Mateusz Konieczny via talk 
Sent: 16 September 2020 11:01
Cc: osm 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page




Sep 16, 2020, 10:59 by talk@openstreetmap.org:

I would understand 'semi-public garden' to be, for example, a garden where you 
pay an admission fee to enter, or one which is closed at night. Like Martin, I 
would expect these to be completely acceptable to map.
Not a native speaker, not a lawyer. I would describe such areas as public 
(possibly privately owned).
I think the intention is to deter people from mapping _fully private_ gardens 
which can be viewed from public roads, is this correct?
I am not sure about other, but for me it is about discouraging mapping fully 
private garden in detail.

For example mapping garden area itself and trees (maybe even with their 
species), but
micromapping area where someone planted strawberries seems something that
is out of scope of OSM for privacy reasons.

Nick





From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
Sent: 16 September 2020 08:51
To: Mateusz Konieczny 
Cc: OSM Talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page



sent from a phone

On 16. Sep 2020, at 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny via talk  
wrote:

Do you think that this page is a good description of community consensus?


There are some points I would like to comment on:

-

  *   OpenStreetMap is not a property registry, thus do not map individual 
ownership of buildings or plots. There is no need to split residential landuse 
into individual plots. (Compare 
Parcel.)


Yes, we do not map individual ownership of land and buildings generally, but 
unless the owner is a person, we could and privacy regulations would not 
prevent us from doing it. It also isn’t an argument for refraining from mapping 
property divisions, because these are interesting regardless of _who_ is the 
owner


“some structure of a semi-public garden appear to be the borderline of being 
acceptable.“

IMHO exaggerated, semi-public objects can be mapped in all detail and aren’t 
borderline cases

Well, at least according to my understanding of the term semi-public


Cheers Martin




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

Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

[Nick Whitelegg via talk]

I would understand 'semi-public garden' to be, for example, a garden where you 
pay an admission fee to enter, or one which is closed at night. Like Martin, I 
would expect these to be completely acceptable to map.

I think the intention is to deter people from mapping _fully private_ gardens 
which can be viewed from public roads, is this correct?

Nick



From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
Sent: 16 September 2020 08:51
To: Mateusz Konieczny 
Cc: OSM Talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page



sent from a phone

On 16. Sep 2020, at 09:41, Mateusz Konieczny via talk  
wrote:

Do you think that this page is a good description of community consensus?


There are some points I would like to comment on:

-

  *   OpenStreetMap is not a property registry, thus do not map individual 
ownership of buildings or plots. There is no need to split residential landuse 
into individual plots. (Compare 
Parcel.)


Yes, we do not map individual ownership of land and buildings generally, but 
unless the owner is a person, we could and privacy regulations would not 
prevent us from doing it. It also isn’t an argument for refraining from mapping 
property divisions, because these are interesting regardless of _who_ is the 
owner


“some structure of a semi-public garden appear to be the borderline of being 
acceptable.“

IMHO exaggerated, semi-public objects can be mapped in all detail and aren’t 
borderline cases

Well, at least according to my understanding of the term semi-public


Cheers Martin



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

Re: [Talk-GB] New Forest Panorama Mapping Party - September 13th 11.00

[Nick Whitelegg]

Sorry, got Dave's email wrong - damn typo!

dgreenw...@trekview.org

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 23 August 2020 13:43
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: New Forest Panorama Mapping Party - September 13th 11.00


Hello everyone,

Some of you are aware of this, but we (David Greenwood of TrekView and myself) 
are organising a Panorama Mapping Party on September 13th (Sunday) 11.00 
meeting at Ashurst New Forest station (hourly trains from Waterloo assuming no 
engineering work or other disruption).

This is a postponed event originally due to take place in May. The idea is to 
capture 360 panoramic imagery of all (or as many as possible in the time-frame) 
the footpaths in the Ashurst area, of which there are many. If you have your 
own 360 camera or phone capable of taking 360 photos (e.g. Photo Spheres with 
the Google Camera installed) then bring it along, otherwise there will be a 
limited number of 360 camera packs available to borrow for the event.

This imagery will be used in the Trek View project (trekview.org) and will also 
be uploaded to OpenTrailView, my own 100% open-source project to capture 360 
panoramas of walking trails (see e.g. https://www.opentrailview.org/?id=9900); 
source code https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview.

In order to allow social distancing, we're looking at a max of 10-12 at the 
event and to split up into groups of between 1 and 3.

I myself hope to be there, but may need to travel abroad in September, but if 
not, Dave will be on hand to help!

You need to book a place; see
https://campfire.trekview.org/t/new-forest-pano-party-rescheduled-sunday-13th-september/325
for more details, or email myself or David at dgreemw...@trekview.org for more 
details.

Thanks,
Nick


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

[Talk-GB] New Forest Panorama Mapping Party - September 13th 11.00

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

Some of you are aware of this, but we (David Greenwood of TrekView and myself) 
are organising a Panorama Mapping Party on September 13th (Sunday) 11.00 
meeting at Ashurst New Forest station (hourly trains from Waterloo assuming no 
engineering work or other disruption).

This is a postponed event originally due to take place in May. The idea is to 
capture 360 panoramic imagery of all (or as many as possible in the time-frame) 
the footpaths in the Ashurst area, of which there are many. If you have your 
own 360 camera or phone capable of taking 360 photos (e.g. Photo Spheres with 
the Google Camera installed) then bring it along, otherwise there will be a 
limited number of 360 camera packs available to borrow for the event.

This imagery will be used in the Trek View project (trekview.org) and will also 
be uploaded to OpenTrailView, my own 100% open-source project to capture 360 
panoramas of walking trails (see e.g. https://www.opentrailview.org/?id=9900); 
source code https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview.

In order to allow social distancing, we're looking at a max of 10-12 at the 
event and to split up into groups of between 1 and 3.

I myself hope to be there, but may need to travel abroad in September, but if 
not, Dave will be on hand to help!

You need to book a place; see
https://campfire.trekview.org/t/new-forest-pano-party-rescheduled-sunday-13th-september/325
for more details, or email myself or David at dgreemw...@trekview.org for more 
details.

Thanks,
Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Surveying rural buildings

[Nick Whitelegg]

Re a "UK walking style" there is Freemap, my own (long-standing) project, which 
has gone through a number of ups and downs (mostly due to hosting difficulties 
and lack of time to work on it) but has had a number of style improvements this 
year due to having more time than expected to work on it. It's at 
https://www.free-map.org.uk.

It aims to distinguish between the different types of walking routes, in 
particular public rights of way and permissive paths.

It doesn't use the standard Mapnik approach, but kothic.js, which is a 
client-side rendering library which takes GeoJSON data and MapCSS compiled into 
JavaScript.

Nick


From: Mark Goodge 
Sent: 24 July 2020 14:41
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Surveying rural buildings



On 24/07/2020 13:20, Martin Wynne wrote:
>   > but most people I know aren't aware of OSM.
>
> I've been trying to persuade country-walking groups to use OSM. There is
> a lot of useful stuff there not shown on OS Explorer -- stiles, kissing
> gates, benches, bus stops, all pubs, cafes, etc. It's a lot more
> up-to-date, and if they find anything missing they can add it themselves
> for the benefit of others.
>
> Most of them go back to OS Explorer when they find UK public rights of
> way are not shown in different colours on the OSM standard map.

Yes; this is an issue specifically for map users on foot. With roads,
the question of legality is much less of an issue - almost all roads of
any significance are public highways, and those that are not are usually
clearly marked as such. But with footpaths and farm tracks in open
countryside, there is often no obvious visual distinction, and yet the
legality is a critical factor to users. This is an area in which OS maps
are much more useful to walkers.

On the other hand, one of the areas where OSM is better than OS is that
we map permissive paths, which OS tends not to unless they are big
enough to also be usable by vehicles (and even then, it doesn't have any
means of indicating permission).

This is one of the reasons why it would be nice to have a UK-specific
stylesheet for OSM. The data is there, so there's no reason why it cant
be rendered. Or, alternatively, a dedicated "outdoors" stylesheet which
focusses on hiking, biking, etc.

Mark

___
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] Paths on Wimbledon Common

[Nick Whitelegg]

.. to follow that up, a good example where I have used foot=permissive en-masse 
is the New Forest. It's an unusual case in that there are no rights of way 
(except, to guarantee access I suspect, crossings over railways) but all paths 
are implicitly open to the public. However there is no explicit 'This is a 
permissive path' notice.

Certain paths are closed from time to time, usually due to forestry operations.

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 11 July 2020 10:11
To: Talk GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Paths on Wimbledon Common


I would probably add to the definition of permissive, paths in the countryside, 
or on common-land or similar edge-of-town areas with public access, which are 
not rights of way but which nonetheless are in common use and do not have any 
'Private' or 'Keep out' signs; it seems apparent in this case that the 
landowner, or other authority, implicitly does not mind public use.

I think it's important to tag such paths as permissive. Plain 'highway=footway' 
to me at least, indicates 'This is a path. It might have public or permissive 
use. It might be private. At the moment we don't know'.

I tend to use:
designation for rights of way;
foot=permissive for explicit or implicit (as above) permissive paths;
foot=yes for urban paths;
access=private for those with an explicit 'Private/Keep Out' sign.

Nick



From: Adam Snape 
Sent: 11 July 2020 06:20
To: Talk GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Paths on Wimbledon Common

It seems a bit odd for Osmose to be flagging highway=footway, foot=yes as an 
error just because foot access is implied by default. Whilst there might be the 
tiniest bit of redundancy I can't see any particular reason to remove it and, 
indeed, there might be an argument that an explicit tag is always preferable to 
an implied value.

OT, but I've personally always viewed foot=permissive as a caveat for the end 
user that a way might be closed. I only add it where a route is explicitly 
stated to be permissive on the ground, is actually known or likely to be shut 
from time to time, or is clearly an informal path. Many paths through parks and 
housing estates etc. are clearly intended for permanent public use and about as 
likely to be closed as the nearby highways.

Kind regards,

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths on Wimbledon Common

[Nick Whitelegg]

I would probably add to the definition of permissive, paths in the countryside, 
or on common-land or similar edge-of-town areas with public access, which are 
not rights of way but which nonetheless are in common use and do not have any 
'Private' or 'Keep out' signs; it seems apparent in this case that the 
landowner, or other authority, implicitly does not mind public use.

I think it's important to tag such paths as permissive. Plain 'highway=footway' 
to me at least, indicates 'This is a path. It might have public or permissive 
use. It might be private. At the moment we don't know'.

I tend to use:
designation for rights of way;
foot=permissive for explicit or implicit (as above) permissive paths;
foot=yes for urban paths;
access=private for those with an explicit 'Private/Keep Out' sign.

Nick



From: Adam Snape 
Sent: 11 July 2020 06:20
To: Talk GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Paths on Wimbledon Common

It seems a bit odd for Osmose to be flagging highway=footway, foot=yes as an 
error just because foot access is implied by default. Whilst there might be the 
tiniest bit of redundancy I can't see any particular reason to remove it and, 
indeed, there might be an argument that an explicit tag is always preferable to 
an implied value.

OT, but I've personally always viewed foot=permissive as a caveat for the end 
user that a way might be closed. I only add it where a route is explicitly 
stated to be permissive on the ground, is actually known or likely to be shut 
from time to time, or is clearly an informal path. Many paths through parks and 
housing estates etc. are clearly intended for permanent public use and about as 
likely to be closed as the nearby highways.

Kind regards,

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Nick Whitelegg]

.. sorry, perhaps I was not clear there in my description of the proposed 
TrekView software ('TrekView Explorer') and its relationship with imagery 
providers. It will allow users to upload sets of 360 panoramas, refine them 
(e.g. correct the orientation, adjust their position), tag them, and then 
submit them to providers such as StreetView, Mapillary and OpenTrailView. It 
will also provide general information such as how to make the best use out of 
the various brands of 360 camera (e.g. which ones  include bearing and which 
ones do not).

Users will also be able to save their panorama sets for later use.

Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 29 June 2020 10:03
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary


Something else which might be of interest to contributors to this thread, from 
the software side of things:

For OpenTrailView I am collaborating with the TrekView project (trekview.org) 
which aims to make it easy for people to take 360 panoramas of all walking 
trails, and other off-road locations, in the world.  It's a separate project to 
OpenTrailView: the aim of TrekView is not so much to collect the data itself, 
but rather, to make it easy to collect and make avaiable as many 360 panoramas 
of the natural world as possible, and to submit them to a range of sources, 
including StreetView, Mapillary and also OpenTrailView.

Nonetheless, it's relevant here because TrekView is aiming to develop a highly 
user-friendly and open source upload interface which could be adapted for 
road-based 360 photography too.

Perhaps, if there is any interest in taking this forward, it's worth starting a 
wiki page showing all the possible software which could be used? Including, but 
not limited to: the first (open source) version of OpenStreetCam; 
OpenTrailView; the TrekView upload system when it's ready; and any open source 
image blurring software out there.

Nick

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Nick Whitelegg]

Something else which might be of interest to contributors to this thread, from 
the software side of things:

For OpenTrailView I am collaborating with the TrekView project (trekview.org) 
which aims to make it easy for people to take 360 panoramas of all walking 
trails, and other off-road locations, in the world.  It's a separate project to 
OpenTrailView: the aim of TrekView is not so much to collect the data itself, 
but rather, to make it easy to collect and make avaiable as many 360 panoramas 
of the natural world as possible, and to submit them to a range of sources, 
including StreetView, Mapillary and also OpenTrailView.

Nonetheless, it's relevant here because TrekView is aiming to develop a highly 
user-friendly and open source upload interface which could be adapted for 
road-based 360 photography too.

Perhaps, if there is any interest in taking this forward, it's worth starting a 
wiki page showing all the possible software which could be used? Including, but 
not limited to: the first (open source) version of OpenStreetCam; 
OpenTrailView; the TrekView upload system when it's ready; and any open source 
image blurring software out there.

Nick

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Nick Whitelegg]

Just another thought on this (and it is just a thought) but reflects my current 
thinking on OpenTrailView but could also apply to an open source StreetView-lie 
app:

Start small, cover a relatively small area (a historic town or national park 
including the footways?)  - maybe a group of people could get together to fund 
the server for this.

If the end product is then genuinely useful to people and has features that 
StreetView and Mapillary do not offer - then maybe it will attract interest, 
and thus funding.

If not, then at least you have created a potentially useful bit of open-source 
software that others could also use in small-scale situations.


Nick

From: Marc M. 
Sent: 25 June 2020 16:25
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

Le 25.06.20 à 16:16, Florian Lohoff a écrit :
> Mapillary themselves say on their web pages that they already
> have 1,199,363,907 images. Thats 3515625 GB or 3.5TB Data
> assuming 3MByte per image.

3 500 000 GB ~ 3 500 TB ~ 3.5 PB ?
~100k€ ~100k$ hardware cost for the storage.
or 1000 people sharing a 6TB disk on a distributed system

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Florian,

Yes - I have to admit that's partly why I've been focusing on walking trails 
only in my own project (aside from the fact that I have a particular interest 
in waling trails), the storage requirements are not going to ramp up so quickly.

I have to admit I haven't considered how exactly a fully open source StreetView 
would be funded - other people would be better-placed than myself to think of 
solutions to this - but was just floating the idea as a nice-to-have.

Nick



From: Florian Lohoff
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2020 22:45
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary


Hi Nick,

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:47:01AM +, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
>
> (Disclaimer: I am the developer of said project)
>
> You can login using your OSM account.

The issue is that once you start pushing stuff into any projects your
storage expenses will kill you pretty fast.

https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage-pricing.html

Thats 0.005$ per GB and Month. Thats *12 *1024 for a Terrabyte. Thats
something like 60$ per Year per Terrabyte which sounds reasonable
concerning disk costs. Costs per disk per lifetime and infrastructure to
connect it to the IP Network.

Since late May i have produced:

flo@p4:/scratch/local/mapillary$ du -sh .
285G.
flo@p4:/scratch/local/mapillary$ find . -type f -iname "*.jpg" | wc -l
97407

So just pushing worth like 2 Weeks of taking street imagery will cost the
Hoster about 20$ per year from now on. And i have pushed multiple terrabytes
to Mapillary since 2014.

And thats just me. Put that to a global OSM perspective and you need
serious funding for storing all that imagery, let alone the CPU cycles
for your compute vision to blur faces and number plates.

And as i have done something like OpenStreetcam 10 years ago for my personal
imagery without the fancy blurring stuff. And i have worked for Hosting
companys so i know the deal.

This is why I think personally that the Facebook deal is the only
viable option for getting long term funding for storage. Somebody
has to pay for it. And i dont see a real businesscase which will pay
up for all the random Dashboards people store into your Dataset.

So either Facebook supports this service or we are toast.

The only option would then be OSMF funding but you may have a glimpse
at the Mapillary numbers and prepare some fundraising.

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
UTF-8 Test The  ran after a , but the  ran away
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Nick Whitelegg]

>One of the key functionalities required for such a project to be useable in 
>countries with developed privacy regulation is the >ability to automatically 
>pixelate relevant parts of the images with a high degree of reliability. It 
>took Mapillary literally years >to get that nailed down and bring it to the 
>level of functionality it is at now.


>Which is one of the reasons why, way back when Mapillary started, I was 
>sceptical about the sustainability because the >part of the product the 
>detection is required don't have a real associated revenue stream (except if 
>you a google, or ... and >can use it in one way or the other to sell ads).


>In any case doing that from scratch would be a real pain. I believe the OSC 
>stack is now actually all OSS which would be a >far better starting point -if- 
>sustainable funding could be built around the whole thing.

I've looked at the OSC github repo from time to time. Bit hard to see exactly 
what's happening but I understand it's now owned by someone other than Telenav, 
It _looks_ like the latest commit is client-side only. Strugging to find any 
server-side code there.

However, if you go back to commit 1, there appears to be a fully open-source 
application with a PHP back end, though I haven't analysed the code in any 
detail - I can just see it's got database interaction in there.

OSC I think only allows you to navigate along an uploaded set of photos, or at 
least it did last time I looked.

Maybe the way forward (particularly given both projects are PHP-based) would be 
to merge some of the stuff I've been working on in OpenTrailView with the first 
commit of OSC. The main question that needs to be asked for now I think is: is 
there sufficient interest in developing a fully open-source StreetView-like 
application within the OSM community, and elsewhere, to make such a project 
worthwhile?

In terms of the critical privacy issues, there are some interesting projects on 
GitHub regarding number plate and face blurring, for example
https://github.com/understand-ai/anonymizer

No idea how good it actually is, but I have a number of panoramas with both 
faces and number plates so I have material to test it with.

Maybe OSC have done some stuff here, haven't looked I have to admit.


Nick










From: Simon Poole 
Sent: 19 June 2020 15:06
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary



Am 19.06.2020 um 13:47 schrieb Nick Whitelegg:

(Disclaimer: I am the developer of said project)

One of the key functionalities required for such a project to be useable in 
countries with developed privacy regulation is the ability to automatically 
pixelate relevant parts of the images with a high degree of reliability. It 
took Mapillary literally years to get that nailed down and bring it to the 
level of functionality it is at now.


Which is one of the reasons why, way back when Mapillary started, I was 
sceptical about the sustainability because the part of the product the 
detection is required don't have a real associated revenue stream (except if 
you a google, or ... and can use it in one way or the other to sell ads).


In any case doing that from scratch would be a real pain. I believe the OSC 
stack is now actually all OSS which would be a far better starting point -if- 
sustainable funding could be built around the whole thing.


Simon


PS: naturally the whole reason for OSC was a business dispute that is now moot 
because Mapillary is opening up its images for commercial use too.


Those of you looking for 100% FOSS software and who are focused on 360 degree 
photography of off-road routes (walking trails and so on) might want to 
consider OpenTrailView (https://opentrailview.org). Do bear in mind that it is 
in the early stages of development, so don't expect Mapillary-style UX just 
yet, and there is only a small amount of imagery (largely southern England at 
the moment plus a few around Heidelberg for probably obvious reasons) but it is 
in active development and I do have a possible collaboration with another 
project (more on that later).

OpenTrailVIew also uses underlying OpenStreetMap data to auto-connect 
panoramas, using GeoJSON Path Finder 
(github.com/perliedman/geojson-path-finder), though, due to server capacity 
constraints, this only works at present in Europe and Turkey (though requests 
for other countries welcome, though note that if they are for large and/or 
highly-populated countries countries such as the USA, China or Brazil I would 
have to restrict it to a region).

You can login using your OSM account.

Nick

From: Florian Lohoff <mailto:f...@zz.de>
Sent: 19 June 2020 07:58
To: Niels Elgaard Larsen <mailto:elga...@agol.dk>
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> 
<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
Subje

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Martin,

In theory, it could work in urban areas as well as off-road. There's nothing 
technically preventing it doing so, it's just that up to now I have chosen to 
focus on off-road.

However if there's a real interest an alternate fully-FOSS StreetView like 
application as an alternative to Mapillary and others, then I'm quite happy to 
take street panoramas.

Nick



From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
Sent: 19 June 2020 12:56
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: OSM Talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary



sent from a phone

> On 19. Jun 2020, at 13:51, Nick Whitelegg  wrote:
>
> Those of you looking for 100% FOSS software and who are focused on 360 degree 
> photography of off-road routes (walking trails and so on) might want to 
> consider OpenTrailView (https://opentrailview.org).


has it a general scope, or is it only suitable for pictures “off road” as its 
name suggests?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Nick Whitelegg]

(Disclaimer: I am the developer of said project)

Those of you looking for 100% FOSS software and who are focused on 360 degree 
photography of off-road routes (walking trails and so on) might want to 
consider OpenTrailView (https://opentrailview.org). Do bear in mind that it is 
in the early stages of development, so don't expect Mapillary-style UX just 
yet, and there is only a small amount of imagery (largely southern England at 
the moment plus a few around Heidelberg for probably obvious reasons) but it is 
in active development and I do have a possible collaboration with another 
project (more on that later).

OpenTrailVIew also uses underlying OpenStreetMap data to auto-connect 
panoramas, using GeoJSON Path Finder 
(github.com/perliedman/geojson-path-finder), though, due to server capacity 
constraints, this only works at present in Europe and Turkey (though requests 
for other countries welcome, though note that if they are for large and/or 
highly-populated countries countries such as the USA, China or Brazil I would 
have to restrict it to a region).

You can login using your OSM account.

Nick

From: Florian Lohoff 
Sent: 19 June 2020 07:58
To: Niels Elgaard Larsen 
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 01:21:59AM +0200, Niels Elgaard Larsen wrote:
> Paul Johnson:
> > Great.  How's this affect those of us who trust Facebook about as far as we 
> > can throw it?
>
>
> Use openstreetcam

Openstreetcam is pretty much "disfunct" from my perspective. There are
tons of bugs people opened because of their tracks not beeing
processing. Same for me. Twitter feed dead for a year. It looks pretty
much abandoned since end of 2019 - Since early June serious problems
processing tracks and uploads.

And for the me focus on Car driveable streets makes it useless.

Flo
--
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
UTF-8 Test: The  ran after a , but the  ran away
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] Updated MapThePaths app - with tagged GPS traces

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Roger,

Thanks for pointing that out. I've fixed this now. It wasn't actually supposed 
to show the access area polygon at all; the server was returning anything with 
a 'designation' tag. I overlooked the fact that 'designation' might be used for 
things other than rights of way, hence the polygon was appearing.

I have now fixed this so only ways with specified values for the 'designation' 
tag, i.e. the allowed values for rights of way, are retuened.

Nick



From: Roger Calvert 
Sent: 23 May 2020 13:07
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Updated MapThePaths app - with tagged GPS traces

Nick,

I have noticed an anomaly in the MapThePaths site. Normally, clicking on a PROW 
shows its designation. But in my area, it does not seem to work if the path is 
within an access area. For example, footpath 505 008 (Blawith, Cumbria) crosses 
the access area boundary. Clicking outside the access area shows the reference. 
Inside the access area does not. If you close the OSM footpaths layer, the 
click then works.

Thanks,

Roger

On 23/05/2020 12:28, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
Hello everyone,

To follow up an email of just over a week ago, I have now updated the 
MapThePaths Android app (https://mapthepaths.org.uk/app.html; 
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=uk.org.mapthepaths.android) so 
that tagged GPS traces can be created. You can record a GPS trace, and tag each 
segment (GPX ) with the current path designation and path type (grass 
path, dirt track, paved service road, etc) by means of drop-down lists.

The GPS traces can be uploaded to OSM and to the MapThePaths server. The 
high-level designation and path types are converted to OSM highway, designation 
and surface tags, and each track segment tagged with these three tags.

It will shortly be possible to view the uploaded GPS traces on the MapThePaths 
website as a selectable layer.

As I said in my original email, one of my aims is to provide a way for OSM 
beginners to easily survey rights of way. The UI is still very rudimentary; I 
am not a UX expert so what would be really nice is for someone with good UX 
skills to come up with a better UI aimed at allowing beginners to easily use 
the app. My general idea is that users can select high-level, unambiguous 
designations (public footpath, etc) and path types (grass path, dirt track etc) 
via the UI. If I get some nice designs, which the community is happy with as a 
whole, plus some nice graphics, I'm quite happy to then use those designs and 
graphics in code.

The other component then needed is the JOSM plugin (either a new one or, 
probably bettter, a modification of an existing one -  I'm thinking of the KML 
plugin that was mentioned - as we discussed last week) to allow the tagged 
traces to be imported into JOSM for use by experienced mappers to actually 
create the OSM ways. An alert system would be nice also, to alert experienced 
users of any new traces in their area.

I have also added a new option to turn off the 'snap map to current GPS 
location' feature, allowing users to pan the map around.

Any further thoughts, please let me know.

Thanks,
Nick




Nick Whitelegg
Senior Lecturer in Computing (Internet)  | School of Media Arts and Technology
Southampton Solent University  | RM424 | East Park Terrace | Southampton SO14 
0YN
T: 023 8201 3075 | E: 
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk<mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> | W: 
solent.ac.uk<http://www.solent.ac.uk/>

Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>



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


--


Roger Calvert

www.rogercalvert.me.uk<http://www.rogercalvert.me.uk>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] Updated MapThePaths app - with tagged GPS traces

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

To follow up an email of just over a week ago, I have now updated the 
MapThePaths Android app (https://mapthepaths.org.uk/app.html; 
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=uk.org.mapthepaths.android) so 
that tagged GPS traces can be created. You can record a GPS trace, and tag each 
segment (GPX ) with the current path designation and path type (grass 
path, dirt track, paved service road, etc) by means of drop-down lists.

The GPS traces can be uploaded to OSM and to the MapThePaths server. The 
high-level designation and path types are converted to OSM highway, designation 
and surface tags, and each track segment tagged with these three tags.

It will shortly be possible to view the uploaded GPS traces on the MapThePaths 
website as a selectable layer.

As I said in my original email, one of my aims is to provide a way for OSM 
beginners to easily survey rights of way. The UI is still very rudimentary; I 
am not a UX expert so what would be really nice is for someone with good UX 
skills to come up with a better UI aimed at allowing beginners to easily use 
the app. My general idea is that users can select high-level, unambiguous 
designations (public footpath, etc) and path types (grass path, dirt track etc) 
via the UI. If I get some nice designs, which the community is happy with as a 
whole, plus some nice graphics, I'm quite happy to then use those designs and 
graphics in code.

The other component then needed is the JOSM plugin (either a new one or, 
probably bettter, a modification of an existing one -  I'm thinking of the KML 
plugin that was mentioned - as we discussed last week) to allow the tagged 
traces to be imported into JOSM for use by experienced mappers to actually 
create the OSM ways. An alert system would be nice also, to alert experienced 
users of any new traces in their area.

I have also added a new option to turn off the 'snap map to current GPS 
location' feature, allowing users to pan the map around.

Any further thoughts, please let me know.

Thanks,
Nick





Nick Whitelegg
Senior Lecturer in Computing (Internet)  | School of Media Arts and Technology
Southampton Solent University  | RM424 | East Park Terrace | Southampton SO14 
0YN
T: 023 8201 3075 | E: 
nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk<mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk> | W: 
solent.ac.uk<http://www.solent.ac.uk/>

Disclaimer<http://www.solent.ac.uk/disclaimer/disclaimer.aspx>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Rights of way mapping - making it easy for newcomers to OSM (perhaps!)

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Tony and Gareth,

Thanks for your thoughts.

My main thought was a specialised JOSM plugin - I did take a look at OSM's main 
GPX trace facility but it appears not to preserve tags in the uploaded trace. 
Some versions of the MapThePaths app (the first version, and the current 
version on Gitlab) allow GPX upload to OSM but the tags are removed.

So I'm thinking that my own storage (I have quite a bit of available storage) 
and a custom JOSM plugin, which, for example, creates colour-coded and 
clickable traces showing the ROW designation, surface and highway tags might be 
the way to go.

Thanks,
Nick

From: Gareth L 
Sent: 14 May 2020 09:56
To: Tony OSM 
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Rights of way mapping - making it easy for newcomers to 
OSM (perhaps!)

I wonder if it would be possible to use the GPS trace feature on OSM for this? 
Maybe format the name in a way to make it easier to retrieve?

Takes care of the storage of the traces.


On 14 May 2020, at 09:22, Tony OSM  wrote:



Hi Nick

I like the two stage approach - surveying then mapping. It would work well - 
some of my friends like walking but can't map to save their life, whereas I 
can't walk far but love mapping - Win Win for us all.


May I suggest that a layer be created for JOSM with all the paths and their 
details as provided for MapThePaths. Personally I find it easier to work with 
JOSM and I have learnt to create a style to highlight PROW's, but I don't know 
how to create a JOSM layer.

Separate layers would allow us to manually transfer from PROW layer to MAP 
layer thus avoiding the mechanical import rules, and would allow us to manually 
conflate where a path is already mapped but PROW data is absent.

A layer containing the surveyed GPS data so that all the sources we need are 
available would be awesome.


I may be asking for a workflow that is close to existing, if that is the case I 
am able to test and document the workflow for the UK wiki if that would be 
helpful.


Tony Shield

TonyS999


On 13/05/2020 18:11, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

Oops... sorry one or two editing errors in the last paragraph.

I meant to say:

"They [the non-expert user] select ROW type and path surface via a nice 
interface, and then a tagged GPX trace is generated, *with trksegs tagged with 
ROW designation and surface* (which was done by the first version of the app 
anyway). This is then uploaded to the MapThePaths server, and volunteer expert 
users *are alerted*. Said expert user then downloads the GPX trace and, *using 
the tags in the trksegs of the GPX* then edits in JOSM, perhaps via a JOSM 
plugin - or even directly in the MapThePaths web app. (I am possibly thinking 
of adding way creation into the MapThePaths web app anyway, time depending)."

Nick

____
From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 13 May 2020 18:08
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> 
<mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Rights of way mapping - making it easy for newcomers to OSM (perhaps!)

Hi,

Just to continue with the theme of rights of way mapping, I've been noticing 
that there are still large tracts of England and Wales away from the 'honeypot' 
areas with little or now ROW mapping at all meaning there's still quite a big 
job to be done.

As you may remember I have been developing a companion app to MapThePaths. In 
the first version of this (around two years ago) I experimented with 
auto-converting GPX traces to OSM ways. However I was dissatisfied with the 
results, the ways generated were really rather nasty and I ended up having to 
prettify them significantly in JOSM afterwards, rendering the auto-creation 
facility a little pointless. Consequently later versions of the app have 
focused on merely presenting the council and OSM data overlaid (like the 
website),  with only limited editing facilities, to change the designation of a 
path.

However (and I may have mentioned this before, it's been a while) I am 
wondering about a 'two-user' approach in which a new user merely does the GPX 
survey, using an easy to use UI (a refined version of the MapThePaths app with 
the UI re-designed by someone more versed in UX than myself).

They select ROW type and path surface via a nice interface, and then a tagged 
GPX trace is generated (which was done by the first version of the app anyway). 
This is then uploaded to the MapThePaths server, and volunteer expert users. 
Said expert user then downloads the GPX trace and then edits in JOSM, perhaps 
via a JOSM plugin - or even directly in the MapThePaths web app. (I am possibly 
thinking of adding way creation into the MapThePaths web app anyway, time 
depending).

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Nick




___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openst

Re: [Talk-GB] Rights of way mapping - making it easy for newcomers to OSM (perhaps!)

[Nick Whitelegg]

Oops... sorry one or two editing errors in the last paragraph.

I meant to say:

"They [the non-expert user] select ROW type and path surface via a nice 
interface, and then a tagged GPX trace is generated, *with trksegs tagged with 
ROW designation and surface* (which was done by the first version of the app 
anyway). This is then uploaded to the MapThePaths server, and volunteer expert 
users *are alerted*. Said expert user then downloads the GPX trace and, *using 
the tags in the trksegs of the GPX* then edits in JOSM, perhaps via a JOSM 
plugin - or even directly in the MapThePaths web app. (I am possibly thinking 
of adding way creation into the MapThePaths web app anyway, time depending)."

Nick

____
From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 13 May 2020 18:08
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Rights of way mapping - making it easy for newcomers to OSM (perhaps!)

Hi,

Just to continue with the theme of rights of way mapping, I've been noticing 
that there are still large tracts of England and Wales away from the 'honeypot' 
areas with little or now ROW mapping at all meaning there's still quite a big 
job to be done.

As you may remember I have been developing a companion app to MapThePaths. In 
the first version of this (around two years ago) I experimented with 
auto-converting GPX traces to OSM ways. However I was dissatisfied with the 
results, the ways generated were really rather nasty and I ended up having to 
prettify them significantly in JOSM afterwards, rendering the auto-creation 
facility a little pointless. Consequently later versions of the app have 
focused on merely presenting the council and OSM data overlaid (like the 
website),  with only limited editing facilities, to change the designation of a 
path.

However (and I may have mentioned this before, it's been a while) I am 
wondering about a 'two-user' approach in which a new user merely does the GPX 
survey, using an easy to use UI (a refined version of the MapThePaths app with 
the UI re-designed by someone more versed in UX than myself).

They select ROW type and path surface via a nice interface, and then a tagged 
GPX trace is generated (which was done by the first version of the app anyway). 
This is then uploaded to the MapThePaths server, and volunteer expert users. 
Said expert user then downloads the GPX trace and then edits in JOSM, perhaps 
via a JOSM plugin - or even directly in the MapThePaths web app. (I am possibly 
thinking of adding way creation into the MapThePaths web app anyway, time 
depending).

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Nick

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

[Talk-GB] Rights of way mapping - making it easy for newcomers to OSM (perhaps!)

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

Just to continue with the theme of rights of way mapping, I've been noticing 
that there are still large tracts of England and Wales away from the 'honeypot' 
areas with little or now ROW mapping at all meaning there's still quite a big 
job to be done.

As you may remember I have been developing a companion app to MapThePaths. In 
the first version of this (around two years ago) I experimented with 
auto-converting GPX traces to OSM ways. However I was dissatisfied with the 
results, the ways generated were really rather nasty and I ended up having to 
prettify them significantly in JOSM afterwards, rendering the auto-creation 
facility a little pointless. Consequently later versions of the app have 
focused on merely presenting the council and OSM data overlaid (like the 
website),  with only limited editing facilities, to change the designation of a 
path.

However (and I may have mentioned this before, it's been a while) I am 
wondering about a 'two-user' approach in which a new user merely does the GPX 
survey, using an easy to use UI (a refined version of the MapThePaths app with 
the UI re-designed by someone more versed in UX than myself).

They select ROW type and path surface via a nice interface, and then a tagged 
GPX trace is generated (which was done by the first version of the app anyway). 
This is then uploaded to the MapThePaths server, and volunteer expert users. 
Said expert user then downloads the GPX trace and then edits in JOSM, perhaps 
via a JOSM plugin - or even directly in the MapThePaths web app. (I am possibly 
thinking of adding way creation into the MapThePaths web app anyway, time 
depending).

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Nick

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

[Talk-GB] City centre landuse tagging

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

Meant to include this in my other post, but...I'm noticing that several cities 
in the UK (Bristol, Bath and Chester are good examples) don't seem to tag the 
city centre area with an appropriate landuse tag (presumably retail, commercial 
or residential).

This is something I've missed over the years... but what is the common practice 
for tagging city centre areas? Presumably the above three landuses are not used 
because city centres are typically a mixrure of all three.

What I'm trying to achieve is a 'built-up-area' rendering which covers the 
whole of the built up area of a town or city. Not looking for administrative 
boundaries - but the actual physically built-up area.

Thanks,
Nick


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

[Talk-GB] New, hopefully improved Freemap

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

As you may now I was strongly considering closing down my Freemap (OSM site 
focusing on rights of way in England and Wales) site after years without having 
the time to update it.

However I did get one or two requests to keep it going, and I have found that 
with the situation of the last couple of months I've had a lot of time on my 
hands and have finally had the time to address many of its long-standing issues.

Consequently a hopefully improved version is now available, both at the 
original domain (free-map.org.uk) and also freemap.org.uk (no hyphen).

The main issues I've addressed have been:

  *   fixing multipolygon relations. This was actually trivial; with the 
toolchain I'm using (osmosis-osm2pgsql-postgis-own custom tileserver-kothic.js) 
it appears to 'just work'
  *   a wider range of rendering, in particular, urban landuse is shown as well 
as military areas, beaches, wetlands and scree.
  *   fixing some annoying tile boundary artefacts. The latest version of 
kothic.js appears to have fixed these.

What has helped a lot also, is moving it to a Hetzner machine with 16GB memory, 
16 times as much as my original server, and much more disc space, sharing the 
API and DB with my other projects (Hikar, OpenTrailView and MapThePaths). 
Trying to keep the site going on a 1GB VM was a nightmare at times.

The main other change though is that it is just a rendering rather than a 
full-blown application. I am intending to focus on the rendering; the other 
features such as walking-route sharing did not attract as much interest as I 
had hoped and consequently remain withdrawn.

Any suggestions for rendering improvements are welcome!

Thanks,
Nick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] prow_ref format for Dorset Public Rights of Way

[Nick Whitelegg]

>Based on this, my preference would be to standardise on the "SE4/22"
>style format for the prow_ref in Dorset, and convert any other
>instances found to this. What does everyone else think? I'll invite
>Nick Whitelegg (who developed the "map the paths" site) and also a few
>mappers who've made significant contributions to Dorset PRoW's in OSM
>to this thread to get their input too.


Hello Robert,

I wasn't familiar with the situation in Dorset but MapThePaths uses the 'SE 
4/22' scheme (actually it appears as 'SE 4 22') so if people want to use MTP as 
a source for prow_refs, then that would be the format to use.

In terms of how I arrive at the references, I sourced the data from the rowmaps 
site and applied a script which looked for a particular field (I forget its 
name) in the rowmaps data. This is done consistently across all counties.

I don't really mind too much what people use to be honest, obviously something 
like 'Studland FP 1' or similar would be more descriptive, but would require an 
extra step to look up the parish name.

Maybe we should develop some sort of (crowd-sourced?) service which looks up 
parishes based on parish codes to allow easy contribution of descriptive 
prow_refs?

On the other hand some counties do not use parish refs at all in hhe number, 
though they do mention them in the full ref (e.g. FERNHURST 1254). The 
Chichester district of West Sussex (not OGL, by the way - unfortunately from my 
POV as it's an area I'm interested in) appears to use a simple number for all 
PROW refs, ranging from about 1-3500. This is not consistent in a given parish, 
e.g. numbers between 1200-1299 appear to be spread between Fernhurst, Lynchmere 
and Milland parishes.

Nick





From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
Sent: 16 April 2020 14:18
To: talk-gb 
Subject: [Talk-GB] prow_ref format for Dorset Public Rights of Way

I've recently been looking at increasing the coverage of my PRoW
comparison tool https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/ by adding new
counties. In particular, I've been looking at the data from Dorset.
I've hit a small issue though, in that the council uses two different
formats for their Right of Way Numbers. We really need to just select
one for the county in order to be consistent in OSM.

One format has a parish code followed by a slash and then the route
number within the parish (e.g. "SE4/22" for path number 22 in
Affpuddle and Turnerspuddle parish). The other would be to use the
full parish name, right of way type, and number. I asked their
Definitive Map officer about this and got the response:

"Both systems are used in parallel. For mapping (where the status and
parish are obvious) and for internal use, we use the numbering system,
but when reporting to Committee members or members of the public who
will not be familiar with the numbering system, we name the parish and
describe the status. Our sealed statements are listed by named parish,
status and route number. Our working statement spreadsheet uses parish
number, status and route number."

The "SE4/22" style numbers are what are used on Dorset Council's own
online map at 
https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/countryside-coast-parks/rights-of-way/rights-of-way-map-where-to-walk-ride-or-cycle.aspx
. Currently in OSM we have about 394km of routes in Dorset using this
style in the prow_ref tag, and another 98km using this style with a
space instead of the slash. That a total of around 492km based on the
parish codes and numbers. Conversely, there's only around 125km of
routes in Dorset that have a prow_ref tag that includes a parish name.

Based on this, my preference would be to standardise on the "SE4/22"
style format for the prow_ref in Dorset, and convert any other
instances found to this. What does everyone else think? I'll invite
Nick Whitelegg (who developed the "map the paths" site) and also a few
mappers who've made significant contributions to Dorset PRoW's in OSM
to this thread to get their input too.

Best wishes,
Robert.

--
Robert Whittaker

___
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] MapThePaths editing bug - fixed

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Martyn,

OK - I'll add that in. Will need to be a text field as it's conceivable that it 
could be added via on the ground observatons (e.g. the Isle of Wight generally 
shows ROW refs on its signposting and it also occurs in other locations 
occasionally) as well as from the data presented in MapThePaths.

Nick

From: Martyn Evans 
Sent: 07 April 2020 12:08
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths editing bug - fixed

Good Job!  I'd only tried to use it yesterday after my approved 'exercise'.  
One extra possible addition: could it also add the source:prow_ref  with the 
appropriate data source?

regards, Martyn

On 07/04/2020 11:16, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
Hi,

I've just discovered that MapThePaths had a problem with editing which only 
came to light just now, but it will have been present ever since I moved it to 
another server several weeks ago. Essentially, a different configuration on the 
new server was producing (sensible) warning messages which corrupted the JSON 
returned - and highlighting a bug.

This bug is now fixed, and MapThePaths editing appears to be working again now.

Sorry for the downtime if anyone was trying to use it recently.

Thanks,
Nick



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<mailto: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] MapThePaths editing bug - fixed

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

I've just discovered that MapThePaths had a problem with editing which only 
came to light just now, but it will have been present ever since I moved it to 
another server several weeks ago. Essentially, a different configuration on the 
new server was producing (sensible) warning messages which corrupted the JSON 
returned - and highlighting a bug.

This bug is now fixed, and MapThePaths editing appears to be working again now.

Sorry for the downtime if anyone was trying to use it recently.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 'Freemap' - partial reprieve

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Martin,

OK - yes, sorry. http://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/freemap

Getting some subtleties with dealing with the trailing slash, which I'll need 
to investigate. Seems to be a bit more subtle to deal with than just adding it 
as an optional character in a regex pattern.

Nick


From: Martin Wynne 
Sent: 23 March 2020 14:18
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] 'Freemap' - partial reprieve

On 23/03/2020 13:57, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

> You can access it via
>
> http:///www.mapthepaths.org.uk/freemap


Hi Nick,

the extra / makes that link invalid. :)

Should be:

  http://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/freemap

cheers,

Martin.

___
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] 'Freemap' - partial reprieve

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

Although my long-standing, albeit not-updated-in-ages Freemap site 
(www.free-map.org.uk) is closing down at the end of the month, Freemap is 
having a partial reprieve as a mode on MapThePaths.

You can access it via

http:///www.mapthepaths.org.uk/freemap

On reflection, even though I do not want the maintenance effort and expense of 
a separate server and applictation for Freemap, I still think (even though it 
looks a bit dated) the layer is useful for showing rights-of-way and permissive 
paths on an OSM-derived map with contours.

Rolling it into MapThePaths as an alternative mode (in addition to the existing 
'standard' and historic maps mode) will considerably save on the maintenance 
effort, particularly as they both have the same back-end.

Nick


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

[OSM-talk] 3D OSM with terrain

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

As part of investigating the possibility of developing a web-based version of 
Hikar, I've developed a simple (and with several flaws!) proof-of-concept 3D 
OSM application which overlays OSM highways on Terrarium DEM data using A-Frame 
(aframe.io).

It is only simple, for instance it doesn't show water, doesn't yet show models, 
and doesn't show rivers - and has some rendering artefacts in that OSM ways 
might disappear below ground level if they do not contain enough nodes.
Also it's restricted to Europe and Turkey, as these are the regions my database 
cover.

Anyway, I was wondering if there was any active development on open-source 3D 
OSM renderers with terrain? I'm aware that several years ago we had the OSM-3D 
project but development on this seems to have stopped, and many projects exist 
which do impressive rendering of buildings, but I can't find anything which 
aims to render terrain and countryside areas.

If not, I'm wondering if anyone wanted to collaborate on this and take it 
further? It's unlikely I will personally have the time to fully develop the 
demo into an impressive OSM VR app, but would be interested to hear if anyone 
is keen to work on it.

Demo at: https://hikar.org/aframe/

Repo: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/aframe-expts/

Thanks,
Nick



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

[OSM-talk] Hikar and OpenTrailView - new development blog

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

For those interested in my projects Hikar (hikar.org; augmented reality for 
paths using OSM) and OpenTrailView (opentrailview.org; off-road 'StreetView' 
like application for countryside users) I have now started a new development 
blog.

If you're interested in these projects, all updates will be primarily posted 
there.
For people in the UK, I will also post updates on MapThePaths there, as well as 
the talk-gb list.

See

https://hikar.org/wordpress/

Thanks!

Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths: possible interrupted service this week

[Nick Whitelegg]

... sorry for all the emails: but further update - it's now up, but running 
HTTP not HTTPS (as it used to).
Hopefully HTTPS will be enabled very soon.

Thanks,
Nick




From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 12 February 2020 09:59
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths: possible interrupted service this week


Hello everyone,

To update: the site is transferred now but I am having some DNS issues 
(relating I think to IPv6 DNS records) meaning that the site is still 
inaccessible.
I have asked the new hosting provider about this; basically I want to run it as 
HTTPS but these DNS issues are preventing the certificate from being installed.

Apologies for the ongoing downtime, hopefully this will be resolved in the next 
day or so.

Thanks,
Nick


From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 10 February 2020 11:21
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths: possible interrupted service this week

Hello everyone,

Just a heads-up: I am transferring MapThePaths to the same server I use to run 
my other projects, Hikar and OpenTrailView, this week.

This means that there may be interruption or unavailability in service, 
starting today.

Thanks,
Nick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths: possible interrupted service this week

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

To update: the site is transferred now but I am having some DNS issues 
(relating I think to IPv6 DNS records) meaning that the site is still 
inaccessible.
I have asked the new hosting provider about this; basically I want to run it as 
HTTPS but these DNS issues are preventing the certificate from being installed.

Apologies for the ongoing downtime, hopefully this will be resolved in the next 
day or so.

Thanks,
Nick


From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 10 February 2020 11:21
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths: possible interrupted service this week

Hello everyone,

Just a heads-up: I am transferring MapThePaths to the same server I use to run 
my other projects, Hikar and OpenTrailView, this week.

This means that there may be interruption or unavailability in service, 
starting today.

Thanks,
Nick

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

[Talk-GB] Freemap (free-map.org.uk) - potential shutdown

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

As part of rationalising my server space and hosted projects, I am proposing 
shutting down my (very old) England and Wales footpath mapping site Freemap 
(free-map.org.uk).

This is basically because I no longer have the time to maintain and improve it 
and obviously incurs storage space and hosting costs, and I believe it is not 
used so much these days as it has been superseded by other projects.

Before I do so however, please let me know if you still use Freemap - if people 
are still using it, I will keep it up.

The underlying Freemap API, which powers several other projects including 
MapThePaths and Hikar, however, will remain up (albeit on a different server).

Thanks,
Nick



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

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths: possible interrupted service this week

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

Just a heads-up: I am transferring MapThePaths to the same server I use to run 
my other projects, Hikar and OpenTrailView, this week.

This means that there may be interruption or unavailability in service, 
starting today.

Thanks,
Nick

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-GB] Panorama Mapping Party with TrekView - May 23 - Ashurst, New Forest, UK

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Jez,

I think it probably would, as it would be of interest to open mapping 
enthusiasts, aims to collect open panoramic data, and OSM is used to connect 
the panoramas together - so I don't see why not.

I'll put it up when I have a chance.

Nick


From: Jez Nicholson 
Sent: 08 February 2020 11:39
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: osm-talk ; Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Panorama Mapping Party with TrekView - May 23 - Ashurst, 
New Forest, UK

Nice hookup with Trek Viewdoes this warrant adding to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Current_events as a mapping party? I always 
like seeing UK events on there.

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 5:37 PM Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:
Hello everyone,

As some of you may know I am developing OpenTrailView 
(https://opentrailview.org), a pure 100% FOSS StreetView-like application for 
off-road routes such as hiking trails which uses OpenStreetMap data to 
auto-connect the panoramas together.

Recently I've been working with Trek View (trekview.org<http://trekview.org>), 
an organisation which aims to capture panoramas of the natural world.
In their words: TrekView is a not-for-profit organisation using the power of 
panoramic photography to help educate and protect against further destruction 
of our beautiful planet. In 2020, they're launching Trekker Camp. Think virtual 
field trips. Trekker Camp will design and deliver immersive learning 
experiences to give students (7-11) the necessary understanding and skills to 
tackle the world's most pressing issues, from ocean health to climate change.

TrekView loan 360 camera packs (using the GoPro Fusion) to allow people to 
capture imagery of the natural world, from off-road routes including hiking 
routes and rivers. As well as Google Street View, TrekView's software now 
allows contributors to upload to OpenTrailView.

On to the most important aspect of this post. On May 23rd, and inspired by OSM 
mapping parties, we're organising a Panorama Mapping Party at Ashurst, New 
Forest, Hampshire, UK, with the aim of intensively capturing panoramic imagery 
of the paths and trails in the area which will then be uploaded to 
OpenTrailView. As OSM coverage in the area is exceptionally good, this should 
then result in the creation of extensive walk-through tours of the area.

The form will be similar to mapping parties. The plan is to meet at 11:00 
(there's a train which arrives from London at the local station, Ashurst New 
Forest, at around 10:45), plan, capture imagery and then get together in the 
pub afterwards.

More details (with OSM map showing location): 
https://www.trekview.org/blog/2020/pano-party-new-forest-uk-may-23-2020/


So if you're interested in 360 photography and OSM, then do come along! 360 
camera packs will be available to borrow and use on the day, or if you have 
your own device, please bring it along.

Thanks,
Nick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Panorama Mapping Party with TrekView - May 23 - Ashurst, New Forest, UK

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Jez,

I think it probably would, as it would be of interest to open mapping 
enthusiasts, aims to collect open panoramic data, and OSM is used to connect 
the panoramas together - so I don't see why not.

I'll put it up when I have a chance.

Nick


From: Jez Nicholson 
Sent: 08 February 2020 11:39
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: osm-talk ; Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Panorama Mapping Party with TrekView - May 23 - Ashurst, 
New Forest, UK

Nice hookup with Trek Viewdoes this warrant adding to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Current_events as a mapping party? I always 
like seeing UK events on there.

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 5:37 PM Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:
Hello everyone,

As some of you may know I am developing OpenTrailView 
(https://opentrailview.org), a pure 100% FOSS StreetView-like application for 
off-road routes such as hiking trails which uses OpenStreetMap data to 
auto-connect the panoramas together.

Recently I've been working with Trek View (trekview.org<http://trekview.org>), 
an organisation which aims to capture panoramas of the natural world.
In their words: TrekView is a not-for-profit organisation using the power of 
panoramic photography to help educate and protect against further destruction 
of our beautiful planet. In 2020, they're launching Trekker Camp. Think virtual 
field trips. Trekker Camp will design and deliver immersive learning 
experiences to give students (7-11) the necessary understanding and skills to 
tackle the world's most pressing issues, from ocean health to climate change.

TrekView loan 360 camera packs (using the GoPro Fusion) to allow people to 
capture imagery of the natural world, from off-road routes including hiking 
routes and rivers. As well as Google Street View, TrekView's software now 
allows contributors to upload to OpenTrailView.

On to the most important aspect of this post. On May 23rd, and inspired by OSM 
mapping parties, we're organising a Panorama Mapping Party at Ashurst, New 
Forest, Hampshire, UK, with the aim of intensively capturing panoramic imagery 
of the paths and trails in the area which will then be uploaded to 
OpenTrailView. As OSM coverage in the area is exceptionally good, this should 
then result in the creation of extensive walk-through tours of the area.

The form will be similar to mapping parties. The plan is to meet at 11:00 
(there's a train which arrives from London at the local station, Ashurst New 
Forest, at around 10:45), plan, capture imagery and then get together in the 
pub afterwards.

More details (with OSM map showing location): 
https://www.trekview.org/blog/2020/pano-party-new-forest-uk-may-23-2020/


So if you're interested in 360 photography and OSM, then do come along! 360 
camera packs will be available to borrow and use on the day, or if you have 
your own device, please bring it along.

Thanks,
Nick

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<mailto: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

[OSM-talk] Panorama Mapping Party with TrekView - May 23 - Ashurst, New Forest, UK

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

As some of you may know I am developing OpenTrailView 
(https://opentrailview.org), a pure 100% FOSS StreetView-like application for 
off-road routes such as hiking trails which uses OpenStreetMap data to 
auto-connect the panoramas together.

Recently I've been working with Trek View (trekview.org), an organisation which 
aims to capture panoramas of the natural world.
In their words: TrekView is a not-for-profit organisation using the power of 
panoramic photography to help educate and protect against further destruction 
of our beautiful planet. In 2020, they're launching Trekker Camp. Think virtual 
field trips. Trekker Camp will design and deliver immersive learning 
experiences to give students (7-11) the necessary understanding and skills to 
tackle the world's most pressing issues, from ocean health to climate change.

TrekView loan 360 camera packs (using the GoPro Fusion) to allow people to 
capture imagery of the natural world, from off-road routes including hiking 
routes and rivers. As well as Google Street View, TrekView's software now 
allows contributors to upload to OpenTrailView.

On to the most important aspect of this post. On May 23rd, and inspired by OSM 
mapping parties, we're organising a Panorama Mapping Party at Ashurst, New 
Forest, Hampshire, UK, with the aim of intensively capturing panoramic imagery 
of the paths and trails in the area which will then be uploaded to 
OpenTrailView. As OSM coverage in the area is exceptionally good, this should 
then result in the creation of extensive walk-through tours of the area.

The form will be similar to mapping parties. The plan is to meet at 11:00 
(there's a train which arrives from London at the local station, Ashurst New 
Forest, at around 10:45), plan, capture imagery and then get together in the 
pub afterwards.

More details (with OSM map showing location): 
https://www.trekview.org/blog/2020/pano-party-new-forest-uk-may-23-2020/


So if you're interested in 360 photography and OSM, then do come along! 360 
camera packs will be available to borrow and use on the day, or if you have 
your own device, please bring it along.

Thanks,
Nick

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

[Talk-GB] Panorama Mapping Party with TrekView - May 23 - Ashurst, New Forest, UK

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

As some of you may know I am developing OpenTrailView 
(https://opentrailview.org), a pure 100% FOSS StreetView-like application for 
off-road routes such as hiking trails which uses OpenStreetMap data to 
auto-connect the panoramas together.

Recently I've been working with Trek View (trekview.org), an organisation which 
aims to capture panoramas of the natural world.
In their words: TrekView is a not-for-profit organisation using the power of 
panoramic photography to help educate and protect against further destruction 
of our beautiful planet. In 2020, they're launching Trekker Camp. Think virtual 
field trips. Trekker Camp will design and deliver immersive learning 
experiences to give students (7-11) the necessary understanding and skills to 
tackle the world's most pressing issues, from ocean health to climate change.

TrekView loan 360 camera packs (using the GoPro Fusion) to allow people to 
capture imagery of the natural world, from off-road routes including hiking 
routes and rivers. As well as Google Street View, TrekView's software now 
allows contributors to upload to OpenTrailView.

On to the most important aspect of this post. On May 23rd, and inspired by OSM 
mapping parties, we're organising a Panorama Mapping Party at Ashurst, New 
Forest, Hampshire, UK, with the aim of intensively capturing panoramic imagery 
of the paths and trails in the area which will then be uploaded to 
OpenTrailView. As OSM coverage in the area is exceptionally good, this should 
then result in the creation of extensive walk-through tours of the area.

The form will be similar to mapping parties. The plan is to meet at 11:00 
(there's a train which arrives from London at the local station, Ashurst New 
Forest, at around 10:45), plan, capture imagery and then get together in the 
pub afterwards.

More details (with OSM map showing location): 
https://www.trekview.org/blog/2020/pano-party-new-forest-uk-may-23-2020/


So if you're interested in 360 photography and OSM, then do come along! 360 
camera packs will be available to borrow and use on the day, or if you have 
your own device, please bring it along.

Thanks,
Nick

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

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths - now with way-splitting functionality

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

Would like to announce an update to MapThePaths (mapthepaths.org.uk) - a site 
which allows OSM contributors to compare council rights of way data with the 
RoW data in OSM, and in doing so, allows users to discover which paths need 
designation tags or even need mapping from scratch.

Since it was launched MapThePaths has allowed users to add designation and 
prow_ref tags to paths. However it now allows contributors to split existing 
ways - this is particularly useful as there are many cases where an OSM way 
covers both right-of-way and non-right-of-way segments.

To access the editing functionality, log into OSM via MapThePaths and zoom in, 
and activate 'Edit' mode.

To split a way, highlight it (by clicking on it) and then click on the node 
where you want to split it.

To add a node to a way (which may be necessary if there is currently no node at 
the desired split point), highlight a way, select the 'add node' mode (top 
right of screen) and then click on the highlighted way.

This functionality has actually been live for a week or so but originally there 
were a number of bugs. These are now, I believe, fixed.

Please let me know any desired improvements, or any bugs. If you encounter a 
bug please give me the precise location (lat, lon, OSM way ID) and what actions 
you took, so I can try to replicate it.

Thanks,
Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Which paths are shown on this OS 'Standard' render

[Nick Whitelegg]

This reminds me of the old First Series maps last published around 1958-ish.

Looking at an area I'm very familiar with: it does not show public rights of 
way; it merely seems to show paths which are physically present on the ground. 
Some of these are rights of way, and some are not.
Nick


From: Martin Wynne 
Sent: 29 December 2019 22:52
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Which paths are shown on this OS 'Standard' render

On 29/12/2019 22:23, Andy Townsend wrote:

> Looking elsewhere in a couple of areas I'm familiar with, as well as
> missing data, there are plenty of of basic digitisation errors around,
> e.g. gardens seeming to be significantly larger then they should be.
> This is, I guess, only the free version - maybe there's a parallel
> complete version for paying customers?

Hi Andy,

No there isn't - I'm a Premium subscriber.

The "Standard" base map is rubbish as a map in its own right. For
example it has contour lines, but no height indications on them, or even
which direction is uphill. What's the use of that? It is used as a base
map for other coloured overlays in addition to the Street map, such as
the National Park Paths, Cycle Map, Greenspace maps. None of which work
very well.

On mobile devices there is also a low-brightness Night map which is useful.

However, the Aerial, 25K and 50K maps are fine -- and the 3D stuff and
fly-over functions are great.

The main reason for subscribing however, is the ability to view a large
database of routes, create your own custom routes to add to it (or not),
and have an easy URL of your route which you can send to friends.

cheers,

Martin.

___
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] Rights of way layer - raster and vector tiles

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Rob,

Glad you're finding MTP useful!

Incidentally the way-split functionality has been on the MapThePaths 'todo' 
list for quite some time. I will try and get round to it as soon as I can - 
probably the Christmas break now.

Nick



From: Rob Nickerson 
Sent: 11 November 2019 21:13
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: [Talk-GB] Rights of way layer - raster and vector tiles

Hi all,

Have been enjoying using Nick's MapThePaths.org.uk 
website recently. In most cases I can make the edit to OSM using the built in 
editing functionality. However from time to time there is a need to fire up 
JOSM or iD editor in order to split an OSM way. In doing so I was looking for a 
ProW layer to add to the editor to guide my edits.

Using Mapbox Studio I have created such a layer.

Raster tiles
In JOSM add it using:

wmts:https://api.mapbox.com/styles/v1/robjn/ck2nvvl8u06p91cqrlcvmzcsd/wmts?access_token=pk.eyJ1Ijoicm9iam4iLCJhIjoid0dYNkY1QSJ9.A-0lzQOawGYICYPfURsjDA

And in iD Editor add it using:

https://api.mapbox.com/styles/v1/robjn/ck2nvvl8u06p91cqrlcvmzcsd/tiles/256/{zoom}/{x}/{y}?access_token=pk.eyJ1Ijoicm9iam4iLCJhIjoid0dYNkY1QSJ9.A-0lzQOawGYICYPfURsjDA

A few things to note:

Firstly, all Rights of Way data is currently shown. I was hoping to filter out 
the data which is not universally accepted as compatible with OSM within Mapbox 
Studio but it seems like you cannot use wildcards in the expressions there. If 
there is interest in this layer, I will reload the data in to Mapbox Studio so 
that I can apply styling (e.g. fade/blur) to the data that is not OSM 
compatible (it can be used as a prompt for a ground survey).

Footpaths are pink, bridleways are green, restricted byways - orange/brown, 
BOATS - blue.

The text label is || as is stored in 
the KML files on rowmaps.org. Use the Local Authority Code 
to confirm against Robert Whittaker's site 
(https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/) that you are editing one of the OSM 
compatible areas.

In iD Editor the text label does not show up as it is black on a black 
background. It is also not possible to have this tile layer and aerial imagery 
layer shown at the same time. See "Vector Tiles" section below for a workaround.

I have added a black diamond at the end of each way. Unfortunately in Mapbox 
Studio I could only find how to add this symbol at one end of each way so it's 
not complete but hopefully still useful. I've done a previous test in 
Warwickshire to add black marks at both ends of each way. If useful let me know 
so I can process this data and load it into Mapbox Studio for styling.

Vector tiles
Mapbox also creates vector tiles of the data. This can be loaded into iD 
Editor. To do so open iD, press "f" to open the Map Data dialogue and within 
Custom Data paste the following:

https://api.mapbox.com/v4/robjn.cc9hly53/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.mvt?access_token=pk.eyJ1Ijoicm9iam4iLCJhIjoid0dYNkY1QSJ9.A-0lzQOawGYICYPfURsjDA

This then shows the data in bright pink. Text labels are also in bright pink 
solving the problem of black text on black background above. You can overlay 
this on top of aerial imagery. The other great thing is that you can select the 
ways just as if they were OSM ways. Selecting one shows the extent of the ways 
and it's tags. Given that all ways are drawn in pink when using vector tiles 
you will need to select each to confirm it's right of way class. Maybe one day 
there will be simple rules within iD that allow us to colour vector tiles data 
based on the tags.

I'm not yet aware of any way to add the mvt vector tiles to JOSM.

P.S. I am on a free tier within Mapbox Studio. If popular I might run out so if 
the layer stops working you know why! We could see if Mapbox will allow us (or 
OSM UK) so additional free allowance.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Resurrecting the 'find the missing paths for 2026' project

[Nick Whitelegg]

The main aim, though, of this project is to investigate, using the historical 
maps, historical rights of way for the point of view of gathering evidence to 
re-open them before 2026.

A possible side-effect of this is to locate new paths to map for OSM. Such 
paths would not, of course, be tagged with a designation (unless they are 
legally re-opened) but if there is evidence of use, they could certainly be 
added as a highway=footway at the very least.

Nick



From: David Woolley 
Sent: 01 October 2019 13:56
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Resurrecting the 'find the missing paths for 2026' 
project

On 30/09/2019 18:25, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> I made a start on this about a year ago, here's a quck mock-up showing
> council data in colours and OSM paths shown in white as a 'tippex'
> effect. This allows the identification of historical 'F.P' footpaths on
> the historical maps which do not correspond either to current council
> RoWs or current OSM paths, and thus would be candidates for
> investigation to see if the path is in a usable state or there is
> evidence of use.

Such paths are not going to have finger boards with "public footpath" on
them.  In other threads, I sense quite a strong lobby for only mapping
rights of way that are so marked on the ground and ignoring any
designation that only appears in a map.

As such, you will end up with at best a permissive status recorded on
OSM.  Even that is actually likely to be subjective.

___
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] Resurrecting the 'find the missing paths for 2026' project

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

Was just thinking whether it would be worth us (as in OSM UK) resurrecting the 
'missing paths for 2026' project?

A quick reminder - we have until 2026 to record historical rights of way which 
have fallen out of use in recent times, and the combination of OSM, council 
data and historical map layers (which I have been granted access to by NLS for 
MapThePaths) would be a good way to identify possible missing paths.

I made a start on this about a year ago, here's a quck mock-up showing council 
data in colours and OSM paths shown in white as a 'tippex' effect. This allows 
the identification of historical 'F.P' footpaths on the historical maps which 
do not correspond either to current council RoWs or current OSM paths, and thus 
would be candidates for investigation to see if the path is in a usable state 
or there is evidence of use.

http://mapthepaths.org.uk/?mode=1

Obviously it's perhaps not the best time of year to launch an outdoor project - 
but the next few months would be a good time to develop the project ready for 
use in the spring.

Anyone keen to work on this?
Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/mapthepaths/

Thanks,
Nick



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

[OSM-talk] Hikar update - campsites,, hostels and mountain huts

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,

Thanks to everyone who attended my talk on Hikar (OSM augmented reality Android 
app for hikers, https://hikar.org) at SOTM!

Just a quick heads up on some small changes (version 0.3.1), partly as a result 
of feedback at SOTM.
The virtual signposts on the app now show campsites, alpine huts, hostels and 
viewpoints - all features of interest to walkers.

Also the Canary Islands are now covered - originally they were omitted as they 
are classed as Africa, not Europe.

Thanks,
Nick


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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

To update: users can now view their own uploaded panoramas even if they haven't 
been approved yet.


Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 01 September 2019 10:32:20
To: Stefan Baebler 
Cc: osm-talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates



Hello Stefan,


Thanks for the that. ll be a very quick job to show photos to authors without 
approval, so will do that very soon - today or tomorrow.


Nick




From: Stefan Baebler 
Sent: 30 August 2019 23:27:48
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: Simon Polster ; osm-talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Yes, this is the one.
I don't mind waiting for the approval process, but when the user has no 
feedback "thanks for the photo, please wait few days for review before it can 
be seen" it might give impression that something didn't work, discouraging them 
from further uploads. You could even show the photos (on map and panorama) to 
their logged-in authors/uploaders without any approval.

Interestingly, when i open my uploaded panorama on the phone (same as the 
picture was taken with) it says:
"Your panorama is too big for your device! It's 8704px wide, but your device 
only supports images up to 8192px wide. Try another device. (If you are the 
author try scaling down the image.)"
Some quick googling confirmed that this is a WebGL device driver limitation.
https://github.com/mpetroff/pannellum/issues/444

br,
Štefan

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 7:23 PM Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hello Stefan,


Sorry - I have to approve panos before they go live, I've done this now. This 
is to guard against panos with privacy violations or unsuitable content. I 
presume yours is the one in the Alps at:


https://www.opentrailview.org/?id=82


I generally check for updates daily. This is the only one I can see, did you 
try others? Note that you have to upload them one at a time, it will not do 
multiple file uploads in one go.


Thanks for your suggestions, will implement them as soon as I can.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Stefan Baebler mailto:stefan.baeb...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 30 August 2019 07:46:23
To: Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>
Cc: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>; osm-talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Thanks, the uploading works now!

However, I cannot see my uploaded photospheres anywhere on the site, not even 
while being logged in, logging in again Neither on the map nor on some 
list. Not sure if it was successful or not.

Few suggestions:
- make it so that the uploader sees his own uploads immediately (no pending 
approvals etc needed) with a status clearly shown
- allow for lower zoom levels. Panning away from your demo area is slow in high 
zooms.
- search box should trigger searching when enter key is pressed
- after login you should remove oauth_token from the URL (either via JavaScript 
history.push or http redirect)
- persist current coordinates in the URL, so it is easy to share and bookmark 
links (there are plugins for leaflet, eg leaflet-hash)
- make the site more mobile friendly (text is extremely unreadable, buttons 
hard to hit...)

Thanks,
Stefan

V sre., 28. avg. 2019 19:11 je oseba Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> napisala:


Hello Stefan,


Have increased limit to 15 MB now - let me know if you still have problems. 
Still not mobile friendly just yet - will do this when I have the time.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Stefan Baebler mailto:stefan.baeb...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 25 August 2019 22:33:38
To: Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>
Cc: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>; osm-talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Hi!

I have problems uploading full 360°*180° photospheres. All of them are around 
10MB, and could not find any below 5MB to test with. The error does not say 
much - no photo uploaded and no error code.

The size limit should be raised (eg to 15MB) in my opinion as there is no easy 
option to compress such images (eg by lowering the resolution).

Also the website is really hard to use on mobile devices. :-(

Br,
Stefan




V pet., 16. avg. 2019 19:05 je oseba Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> napisala:


Hello Simon,


Glad it's working for you!


It looks like it should be possible to show the view field on the map - a 
Leaflet plugin exists to draw semicircles for example, so I'll have a look into 
that - shouldn't be too difficult to implement.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>
Sent: 15 August 2019 18:17:46
To: talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] 

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Stefan,


Thanks for the that. ll be a very quick job to show photos to authors without 
approval, so will do that very soon - today or tomorrow.


Nick




From: Stefan Baebler 
Sent: 30 August 2019 23:27:48
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: Simon Polster ; osm-talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Yes, this is the one.
I don't mind waiting for the approval process, but when the user has no 
feedback "thanks for the photo, please wait few days for review before it can 
be seen" it might give impression that something didn't work, discouraging them 
from further uploads. You could even show the photos (on map and panorama) to 
their logged-in authors/uploaders without any approval.

Interestingly, when i open my uploaded panorama on the phone (same as the 
picture was taken with) it says:
"Your panorama is too big for your device! It's 8704px wide, but your device 
only supports images up to 8192px wide. Try another device. (If you are the 
author try scaling down the image.)"
Some quick googling confirmed that this is a WebGL device driver limitation.
https://github.com/mpetroff/pannellum/issues/444

br,
Štefan

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 7:23 PM Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hello Stefan,


Sorry - I have to approve panos before they go live, I've done this now. This 
is to guard against panos with privacy violations or unsuitable content. I 
presume yours is the one in the Alps at:


https://www.opentrailview.org/?id=82


I generally check for updates daily. This is the only one I can see, did you 
try others? Note that you have to upload them one at a time, it will not do 
multiple file uploads in one go.


Thanks for your suggestions, will implement them as soon as I can.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Stefan Baebler mailto:stefan.baeb...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 30 August 2019 07:46:23
To: Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>
Cc: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>; osm-talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Thanks, the uploading works now!

However, I cannot see my uploaded photospheres anywhere on the site, not even 
while being logged in, logging in again Neither on the map nor on some 
list. Not sure if it was successful or not.

Few suggestions:
- make it so that the uploader sees his own uploads immediately (no pending 
approvals etc needed) with a status clearly shown
- allow for lower zoom levels. Panning away from your demo area is slow in high 
zooms.
- search box should trigger searching when enter key is pressed
- after login you should remove oauth_token from the URL (either via JavaScript 
history.push or http redirect)
- persist current coordinates in the URL, so it is easy to share and bookmark 
links (there are plugins for leaflet, eg leaflet-hash)
- make the site more mobile friendly (text is extremely unreadable, buttons 
hard to hit...)

Thanks,
Stefan

V sre., 28. avg. 2019 19:11 je oseba Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> napisala:


Hello Stefan,


Have increased limit to 15 MB now - let me know if you still have problems. 
Still not mobile friendly just yet - will do this when I have the time.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Stefan Baebler mailto:stefan.baeb...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 25 August 2019 22:33:38
To: Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>
Cc: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>; osm-talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Hi!

I have problems uploading full 360°*180° photospheres. All of them are around 
10MB, and could not find any below 5MB to test with. The error does not say 
much - no photo uploaded and no error code.

The size limit should be raised (eg to 15MB) in my opinion as there is no easy 
option to compress such images (eg by lowering the resolution).

Also the website is really hard to use on mobile devices. :-(

Br,
Stefan




V pet., 16. avg. 2019 19:05 je oseba Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> napisala:


Hello Simon,


Glad it's working for you!


It looks like it should be possible to show the view field on the map - a 
Leaflet plugin exists to draw semicircles for example, so I'll have a look into 
that - shouldn't be too difficult to implement.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>
Sent: 15 August 2019 18:17:46
To: talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Looks very nice and works very smoothly for me, thank you!

One functionality I think would be useful for orientation: somehow make
the current viewfield of the panorama visible in the little overview map
(or if that's too difficult to implement at lea

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Stefan,


Sorry - I have to approve panos before they go live, I've done this now. This 
is to guard against panos with privacy violations or unsuitable content. I 
presume yours is the one in the Alps at:


https://www.opentrailview.org/?id=82


I generally check for updates daily. This is the only one I can see, did you 
try others? Note that you have to upload them one at a time, it will not do 
multiple file uploads in one go.


Thanks for your suggestions, will implement them as soon as I can.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Stefan Baebler 
Sent: 30 August 2019 07:46:23
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: Simon Polster ; osm-talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Thanks, the uploading works now!

However, I cannot see my uploaded photospheres anywhere on the site, not even 
while being logged in, logging in again Neither on the map nor on some 
list. Not sure if it was successful or not.

Few suggestions:
- make it so that the uploader sees his own uploads immediately (no pending 
approvals etc needed) with a status clearly shown
- allow for lower zoom levels. Panning away from your demo area is slow in high 
zooms.
- search box should trigger searching when enter key is pressed
- after login you should remove oauth_token from the URL (either via JavaScript 
history.push or http redirect)
- persist current coordinates in the URL, so it is easy to share and bookmark 
links (there are plugins for leaflet, eg leaflet-hash)
- make the site more mobile friendly (text is extremely unreadable, buttons 
hard to hit...)

Thanks,
Stefan

V sre., 28. avg. 2019 19:11 je oseba Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> napisala:


Hello Stefan,


Have increased limit to 15 MB now - let me know if you still have problems. 
Still not mobile friendly just yet - will do this when I have the time.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Stefan Baebler mailto:stefan.baeb...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 25 August 2019 22:33:38
To: Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>
Cc: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>; osm-talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Hi!

I have problems uploading full 360°*180° photospheres. All of them are around 
10MB, and could not find any below 5MB to test with. The error does not say 
much - no photo uploaded and no error code.

The size limit should be raised (eg to 15MB) in my opinion as there is no easy 
option to compress such images (eg by lowering the resolution).

Also the website is really hard to use on mobile devices. :-(

Br,
Stefan




V pet., 16. avg. 2019 19:05 je oseba Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> napisala:


Hello Simon,


Glad it's working for you!


It looks like it should be possible to show the view field on the map - a 
Leaflet plugin exists to draw semicircles for example, so I'll have a look into 
that - shouldn't be too difficult to implement.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>
Sent: 15 August 2019 18:17:46
To: talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Looks very nice and works very smoothly for me, thank you!

One functionality I think would be useful for orientation: somehow make
the current viewfield of the panorama visible in the little overview map
(or if that's too difficult to implement at least link the rotation of
the panorama with the overview map so that they always share the same
geographic direction).

Cheers
Simon

Am 06/08/2019 um 16:58 schrieb Nick Whitelegg:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> To follow up my post of a couple of months ago, I have made a few updates to 
> OpenTrailView, a StreetView-like application which allows users to upload 360 
> panoramas which will then be automatically linked using underlying OSM ways, 
> allowing users to navigate from panorama to panorama.
>
>
> It now allows you to login with your OSM credentials, removing the need to 
> create a separate account - in fact I have removed the signup facility so if 
> you signed up before, you should now login using your OSM username instead.
>
>
> It also has a facility to allow you to set the position of a panorama if EXIF 
> latitude and longitude metadata is not present. This can be done either by 
> clicking on the map to position the panorama, or by using a GPX file recorded 
> at the same time to position panoramas automatically by using EXIF and GPX 
> timestamps.
>
>
> URL: https://www.opentrailview.org/
>
>
> <https://www.opentrailview.org/>
>
> Gitlab repo: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:t

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Stefan,


Have increased limit to 15 MB now - let me know if you still have problems. 
Still not mobile friendly just yet - will do this when I have the time.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Stefan Baebler 
Sent: 25 August 2019 22:33:38
To: Nick Whitelegg 
Cc: Simon Polster ; osm-talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Hi!

I have problems uploading full 360°*180° photospheres. All of them are around 
10MB, and could not find any below 5MB to test with. The error does not say 
much - no photo uploaded and no error code.

The size limit should be raised (eg to 15MB) in my opinion as there is no easy 
option to compress such images (eg by lowering the resolution).

Also the website is really hard to use on mobile devices. :-(

Br,
Stefan




V pet., 16. avg. 2019 19:05 je oseba Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> napisala:


Hello Simon,


Glad it's working for you!


It looks like it should be possible to show the view field on the map - a 
Leaflet plugin exists to draw semicircles for example, so I'll have a look into 
that - shouldn't be too difficult to implement.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Simon Polster mailto:sid...@posteo.de>>
Sent: 15 August 2019 18:17:46
To: talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Looks very nice and works very smoothly for me, thank you!

One functionality I think would be useful for orientation: somehow make
the current viewfield of the panorama visible in the little overview map
(or if that's too difficult to implement at least link the rotation of
the panorama with the overview map so that they always share the same
geographic direction).

Cheers
Simon

Am 06/08/2019 um 16:58 schrieb Nick Whitelegg:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> To follow up my post of a couple of months ago, I have made a few updates to 
> OpenTrailView, a StreetView-like application which allows users to upload 360 
> panoramas which will then be automatically linked using underlying OSM ways, 
> allowing users to navigate from panorama to panorama.
>
>
> It now allows you to login with your OSM credentials, removing the need to 
> create a separate account - in fact I have removed the signup facility so if 
> you signed up before, you should now login using your OSM username instead.
>
>
> It also has a facility to allow you to set the position of a panorama if EXIF 
> latitude and longitude metadata is not present. This can be done either by 
> clicking on the map to position the panorama, or by using a GPX file recorded 
> at the same time to position panoramas automatically by using EXIF and GPX 
> timestamps.
>
>
> URL: https://www.opentrailview.org/
>
>
> <https://www.opentrailview.org/>
>
> Gitlab repo: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Simon,


Glad it's working for you!


It looks like it should be possible to show the view field on the map - a 
Leaflet plugin exists to draw semicircles for example, so I'll have a look into 
that - shouldn't be too difficult to implement.


Thanks,

Nick


From: Simon Polster 
Sent: 15 August 2019 18:17:46
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Looks very nice and works very smoothly for me, thank you!

One functionality I think would be useful for orientation: somehow make
the current viewfield of the panorama visible in the little overview map
(or if that's too difficult to implement at least link the rotation of
the panorama with the overview map so that they always share the same
geographic direction).

Cheers
Simon

Am 06/08/2019 um 16:58 schrieb Nick Whitelegg:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> To follow up my post of a couple of months ago, I have made a few updates to 
> OpenTrailView, a StreetView-like application which allows users to upload 360 
> panoramas which will then be automatically linked using underlying OSM ways, 
> allowing users to navigate from panorama to panorama.
>
>
> It now allows you to login with your OSM credentials, removing the need to 
> create a separate account - in fact I have removed the signup facility so if 
> you signed up before, you should now login using your OSM username instead.
>
>
> It also has a facility to allow you to set the position of a panorama if EXIF 
> latitude and longitude metadata is not present. This can be done either by 
> clicking on the map to position the panorama, or by using a GPX file recorded 
> at the same time to position panoramas automatically by using EXIF and GPX 
> timestamps.
>
>
> URL: https://www.opentrailview.org/
>
>
> <https://www.opentrailview.org/>
>
> Gitlab repo: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,


The reason for this is that there isn't a 'next' panorama as such; rather than 
a linear sequence of panoramas, it's a network, so at a junction there might be 
multiple routes to follow - it uses the underlying OSM way network to navigate.


It's in the todo list to provide Mapillary (and StreetView) like arrows 
superimposed on the ground, but this isn't implemented just yet.


Nick


From: Dave F 
Sent: 06 August 2019 16:18:46
To: osm-talk 
Cc: Nick Whitelegg 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

Hi

I find it slightly irritating the next panorama icon isn't in a constant 
location on the screen. Is there a key shortcut or maybe add directions arrows 
at the top of the screen similar to Mapilary?

Cheers
DaveF

On 06/08/2019 15:58, Nick Whitelegg wrote:


Hi,


To follow up my post of a couple of months ago, I have made a few updates to 
OpenTrailView, a StreetView-like application which allows users to upload 360 
panoramas which will then be automatically linked using underlying OSM ways, 
allowing users to navigate from panorama to panorama.


It now allows you to login with your OSM credentials, removing the need to 
create a separate account - in fact I have removed the signup facility so if 
you signed up before, you should now login using your OSM username instead.


It also has a facility to allow you to set the position of a panorama if EXIF 
latitude and longitude metadata is not present. This can be done either by 
clicking on the map to position the panorama, or by using a GPX file recorded 
at the same time to position panoramas automatically by using EXIF and GPX 
timestamps.


URL: https://www.opentrailview.org/


<https://www.opentrailview.org/><https://www.opentrailview.org/>

Gitlab repo: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/


Nick






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


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

[OSM-talk] OpenTrailView - updates

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,


To follow up my post of a couple of months ago, I have made a few updates to 
OpenTrailView, a StreetView-like application which allows users to upload 360 
panoramas which will then be automatically linked using underlying OSM ways, 
allowing users to navigate from panorama to panorama.


It now allows you to login with your OSM credentials, removing the need to 
create a separate account - in fact I have removed the signup facility so if 
you signed up before, you should now login using your OSM username instead.


It also has a facility to allow you to set the position of a panorama if EXIF 
latitude and longitude metadata is not present. This can be done either by 
clicking on the map to position the panorama, or by using a GPX file recorded 
at the same time to position panoramas automatically by using EXIF and GPX 
timestamps.


URL: https://www.opentrailview.org/




Gitlab repo: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/


Nick

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Nick Whitelegg]

OK - this is now done.


Panoramas will be licensed under CC-BY 4.0 and users are required to agree to 
their panoramas being used as source material for OSM on signup.


Thanks,
Nick



From: Kathleen Lu 
Sent: 04 June 2019 17:15:01
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: Martin Koppenhoefer; Milo van der Linden; OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers

In that case, if I were you, I'd just go straight CC-BY with a OSM/ODbL 
compatibility waiver. (See 
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ for template 
language)
The "sharealike" in SA refers to the sharing conditions on derivatives, not the 
original. The BY part refers to the attribution requirement, which should 
inform future users how the panos are available under the original license.

CC-BY-SA would not permit the video I described being released on CC-BY terms, 
for example


On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 11:52 PM Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:

Hi,


All I really want is to ensure the panos as individual entities (i.e. not as 
part of another piece of work) must be attributed (to "OTV360 contributors") 
and must be available as individual entities under the same  permissive license 
as originally provided.


I am not so bothered if people then use them as part of some other piece of 
work which is commercial  (such as a video with a narration, as you suggested) 
- as long as they are attributed.


Would ODBL be the best license in this case? Or CC-by-SA?


Thanks,

Nick


From: Kathleen Lu mailto:kathleen...@mapbox.com>>
Sent: 03 June 2019 18:03:50
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: Martin Koppenhoefer; Milo van der Linden; OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers

So to confirm what you want...
If someone wanted to use the panos in a video, stitched together with photos 
they took and narration about a hike, that video must be CC-BY-SA or the panos 
cannot be used, is that right?



On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 4:58 AM Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hello Martin,


Yes, that sounds a good idea.


So (and asking everyone) if I was to license the panos themselves under CC-SA,  
but their locations, and data derived from them, as ODBL - does that sound 
acceptable?


Thanks,

Nick





From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 01 June 2019 08:25
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: Kathleen Lu; Milo van der Linden; OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers



sent from a phone

On 31. May 2019, at 22:13, Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hello Kathleen and Milo,

Thanks!


No-one besides myself has uploaded anything yet, so happy to change to ODbL. 
The panoramas are a different dataset to OSM however, now I think about it, it 
could well be they are a 'derived work' as the OSM map helps users to position 
them - so fine with the license change.


maybe you can make use of 2 licenses, cc-by-sa for the images/panoramas and 
odbl for data derived from these images? ODbL is a db license and isn’t very 
suitable for individual photographs?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,


All I really want is to ensure the panos as individual entities (i.e. not as 
part of another piece of work) must be attributed (to "OTV360 contributors") 
and must be available as individual entities under the same  permissive license 
as originally provided.


I am not so bothered if people then use them as part of some other piece of 
work which is commercial  (such as a video with a narration, as you suggested) 
- as long as they are attributed.


Would ODBL be the best license in this case? Or CC-by-SA?


Thanks,

Nick


From: Kathleen Lu 
Sent: 03 June 2019 18:03:50
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: Martin Koppenhoefer; Milo van der Linden; OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers

So to confirm what you want...
If someone wanted to use the panos in a video, stitched together with photos 
they took and narration about a hike, that video must be CC-BY-SA or the panos 
cannot be used, is that right?



On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 4:58 AM Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hello Martin,


Yes, that sounds a good idea.


So (and asking everyone) if I was to license the panos themselves under CC-SA,  
but their locations, and data derived from them, as ODBL - does that sound 
acceptable?


Thanks,

Nick





From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>>
Sent: 01 June 2019 08:25
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: Kathleen Lu; Milo van der Linden; OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers



sent from a phone

On 31. May 2019, at 22:13, Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hello Kathleen and Milo,

Thanks!


No-one besides myself has uploaded anything yet, so happy to change to ODbL. 
The panoramas are a different dataset to OSM however, now I think about it, it 
could well be they are a 'derived work' as the OSM map helps users to position 
them - so fine with the license change.


maybe you can make use of 2 licenses, cc-by-sa for the images/panoramas and 
odbl for data derived from these images? ODbL is a db license and isn’t very 
suitable for individual photographs?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Martin,


Yes, that sounds a good idea.


So (and asking everyone) if I was to license the panos themselves under CC-SA,  
but their locations, and data derived from them, as ODBL - does that sound 
acceptable?


Thanks,

Nick





From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
Sent: 01 June 2019 08:25
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: Kathleen Lu; Milo van der Linden; OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers



sent from a phone

On 31. May 2019, at 22:13, Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hello Kathleen and Milo,

Thanks!


No-one besides myself has uploaded anything yet, so happy to change to ODbL. 
The panoramas are a different dataset to OSM however, now I think about it, it 
could well be they are a 'derived work' as the OSM map helps users to position 
them - so fine with the license change.


maybe you can make use of 2 licenses, cc-by-sa for the images/panoramas and 
odbl for data derived from these images? ODbL is a db license and isn’t very 
suitable for individual photographs?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Andrew,


>A neat thing you can do is infill the base of the image where your 
>hand/body/head are to make it less distracting. For example all >my 360 images 
>on Mapillary do this -> https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/xfQGW4eK_ntjhRNyXDW5bQ

>The script I use for this is 
>https://github.com/andrewharvey/lg360-mapillary-helpers/blob/master/lg360_inpaint
> which uses gmic's >inpaint capabilities 
>http://gmic.eu/reference.shtml#inpaint_matchpatch. The script takes a 
>black/white mask, then patches that part >of the image on a thumbnail sized 
>image (to make it faster) then composites that into the final output.


Thanks for this, looks great. Yes - removing or hiding the photographer was 
definitely one of the main problems I've had so far. I hid myself crudely (by 
blanking out regions of the image manually) on photos in which my face was 
showing but didn't on the others.


Thanks,

Nick



From: Andrew Harvey 
Sent: 01 June 2019 04:58:35
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: osm-talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers

A neat thing you can do is infill the base of the image where your 
hand/body/head are to make it less distracting. For example all my 360 images 
on Mapillary do this -> https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/xfQGW4eK_ntjhRNyXDW5bQ

The script I use for this is 
https://github.com/andrewharvey/lg360-mapillary-helpers/blob/master/lg360_inpaint
 which uses gmic's inpaint capabilities 
http://gmic.eu/reference.shtml#inpaint_matchpatch. The script takes a 
black/white mask, then patches that part of the image on a thumbnail sized 
image (to make it faster) then composites that into the final output.

On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 21:49, Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:


Hi,


Some of you are probably aware that way back in 2010 I started developing 
OpenTrailView , which aims to be a StreetView-like web application but focusing 
on off-road routes such as hiking trails, with crowd-sourced panoramas.


Recently, due to the increasing availability of 360 cameras and the appearance 
of mature panorama APIs (e.g. Pannellum) and client-side routing APIs (GeoJSON 
Path Finder) I have restarted work on OpenTrailView and did an initial 
presentation at FOSDEM 2019 back in February.


Since then I have done further work and OpenTrailView, while still incomplete, 
is in a state where I believe it's ready to start receiving contributions.


It's available at

https://www.opentrailview.org/


You can get an idea of how it allows you to 'walk' along OSM ways by navigating 
in the default area (Southampton Common). There are also some panoramas 
available close to Fernhurst, West Sussex (lat 51.05, lon -0.72). There's a 
Nominatim search available if you switch to 'map' mode (see the map icon).


If you signup and then login, you can contribute your own 360 panos. Obviously 
follow the usual privacy considerations (no faces, no car number plates) - 
panos will be moderated before they go live to ensure they do not have any 
privacy violations amongst other things.


The key thing about this version is that it will use underlying OSM data to 
auto-connect panoramas. This was not done on any previous version.


However, note that while the site will accept panos anywhere in the world, at 
present, the auto-connection facility will only work in *Europe* plus Turkey (I 
am using the Europe Geofabrik extract), as my server currently only stores 
European data. Nonetheless I have had a possible offer of helping with hosting 
costs so expansion to the entire world could well happen soon.


The maps provided are rather basic, showing only highways, coastlines and a few 
selected POIs, this is due to server capacity constraints. If anyone is aware 
of a tile server I can use legitimately as a replacement, without violating the 
usage policy, please let me know.


In similar style to OSM, panos will be copyright 'OTV360 contributors' and 
licensed under CC-by-SA. IANAL but this seems to be the most common practice.


Do remember once again that this is an unfinished product but it is now in a 
state where I believe it is of interest to contributors.


Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/


Thanks,

Nick





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

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Kathleen and Milo,

Thanks!


No-one besides myself has uploaded anything yet, so happy to change to ODbL. 
The panoramas are a different dataset to OSM however, now I think about it, it 
could well be they are a 'derived work' as the OSM map helps users to position 
them - so fine with the license change.


Nick


From: Kathleen Lu 
Sent: 31 May 2019 19:31:52
To: Milo van der Linden
Cc: Nick Whitelegg; OSM Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers

Looks neat, Nick!

I will say that given that OSM is under ODbL, which is not compatible with 
CC-BY-SA (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility) I 
would suggest that you consider using ODbL as the license instead of CC-BY-SA.

Best,
Kathleen

On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:22 AM Milo van der Linden 
mailto:m...@dogodigi.net>> wrote:
Cool! It looks and interacts awesome.

On Fri, May 31, 2019, 18:43 Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>> wrote:

Thanks! Actually used Pannellum: https://pannellum.org/


<https://pannellum.org/>

Note that there is one little issue, which I thought I'd resolved, but has 
recurred today, and *might* be down to Pannellum: occasionally (and 
inconsistently, i.e. there isn't a sequence of actions which causes it to 
happen) if you click on a camera icon when in map mode it doesn't load the 
panorama. Most of the time it's fine though.



Nick


From: Milo van der Linden mailto:m...@dogodigi.net>>
Sent: 31 May 2019 17:20:57
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: osm-talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers

Nice! Did you create your own panoviewer or did you use 
https://www.marzipano.net/?

Op vr 31 mei 2019 om 13:46 schreef Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>:


Hi,


Some of you are probably aware that way back in 2010 I started developing 
OpenTrailView , which aims to be a StreetView-like web application but focusing 
on off-road routes such as hiking trails, with crowd-sourced panoramas.


Recently, due to the increasing availability of 360 cameras and the appearance 
of mature panorama APIs (e.g. Pannellum) and client-side routing APIs (GeoJSON 
Path Finder) I have restarted work on OpenTrailView and did an initial 
presentation at FOSDEM 2019 back in February.


Since then I have done further work and OpenTrailView, while still incomplete, 
is in a state where I believe it's ready to start receiving contributions.


It's available at

https://www.opentrailview.org/


You can get an idea of how it allows you to 'walk' along OSM ways by navigating 
in the default area (Southampton Common). There are also some panoramas 
available close to Fernhurst, West Sussex (lat 51.05, lon -0.72). There's a 
Nominatim search available if you switch to 'map' mode (see the map icon).


If you signup and then login, you can contribute your own 360 panos. Obviously 
follow the usual privacy considerations (no faces, no car number plates) - 
panos will be moderated before they go live to ensure they do not have any 
privacy violations amongst other things.


The key thing about this version is that it will use underlying OSM data to 
auto-connect panoramas. This was not done on any previous version.


However, note that while the site will accept panos anywhere in the world, at 
present, the auto-connection facility will only work in *Europe* plus Turkey (I 
am using the Europe Geofabrik extract), as my server currently only stores 
European data. Nonetheless I have had a possible offer of helping with hosting 
costs so expansion to the entire world could well happen soon.


The maps provided are rather basic, showing only highways, coastlines and a few 
selected POIs, this is due to server capacity constraints. If anyone is aware 
of a tile server I can use legitimately as a replacement, without violating the 
usage policy, please let me know.


In similar style to OSM, panos will be copyright 'OTV360 contributors' and 
licensed under CC-by-SA. IANAL but this seems to be the most common practice.


Do remember once again that this is an unfinished product but it is now in a 
state where I believe it is of interest to contributors.


Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/


Thanks,

Nick





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


--
[http://www.dogodigi.net]<http://www.dogodigi.net>
Milo van der Linden
web: dogodigi<http://www.dogodigi.net>
tel: +31-6-16598808
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Nick Whitelegg]

Thanks! Actually used Pannellum: https://pannellum.org/


<https://pannellum.org/>

Note that there is one little issue, which I thought I'd resolved, but has 
recurred today, and *might* be down to Pannellum: occasionally (and 
inconsistently, i.e. there isn't a sequence of actions which causes it to 
happen) if you click on a camera icon when in map mode it doesn't load the 
panorama. Most of the time it's fine though.



Nick


From: Milo van der Linden 
Sent: 31 May 2019 17:20:57
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: osm-talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for 
hikers

Nice! Did you create your own panoviewer or did you use 
https://www.marzipano.net/?

Op vr 31 mei 2019 om 13:46 schreef Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>:


Hi,


Some of you are probably aware that way back in 2010 I started developing 
OpenTrailView , which aims to be a StreetView-like web application but focusing 
on off-road routes such as hiking trails, with crowd-sourced panoramas.


Recently, due to the increasing availability of 360 cameras and the appearance 
of mature panorama APIs (e.g. Pannellum) and client-side routing APIs (GeoJSON 
Path Finder) I have restarted work on OpenTrailView and did an initial 
presentation at FOSDEM 2019 back in February.


Since then I have done further work and OpenTrailView, while still incomplete, 
is in a state where I believe it's ready to start receiving contributions.


It's available at

https://www.opentrailview.org/


You can get an idea of how it allows you to 'walk' along OSM ways by navigating 
in the default area (Southampton Common). There are also some panoramas 
available close to Fernhurst, West Sussex (lat 51.05, lon -0.72). There's a 
Nominatim search available if you switch to 'map' mode (see the map icon).


If you signup and then login, you can contribute your own 360 panos. Obviously 
follow the usual privacy considerations (no faces, no car number plates) - 
panos will be moderated before they go live to ensure they do not have any 
privacy violations amongst other things.


The key thing about this version is that it will use underlying OSM data to 
auto-connect panoramas. This was not done on any previous version.


However, note that while the site will accept panos anywhere in the world, at 
present, the auto-connection facility will only work in *Europe* plus Turkey (I 
am using the Europe Geofabrik extract), as my server currently only stores 
European data. Nonetheless I have had a possible offer of helping with hosting 
costs so expansion to the entire world could well happen soon.


The maps provided are rather basic, showing only highways, coastlines and a few 
selected POIs, this is due to server capacity constraints. If anyone is aware 
of a tile server I can use legitimately as a replacement, without violating the 
usage policy, please let me know.


In similar style to OSM, panos will be copyright 'OTV360 contributors' and 
licensed under CC-by-SA. IANAL but this seems to be the most common practice.


Do remember once again that this is an unfinished product but it is now in a 
state where I believe it is of interest to contributors.


Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/


Thanks,

Nick





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


--
[http://www.dogodigi.net]<http://www.dogodigi.net>
Milo van der Linden
web: dogodigi<http://www.dogodigi.net>
tel: +31-6-16598808
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,


Some of you are probably aware that way back in 2010 I started developing 
OpenTrailView , which aims to be a StreetView-like web application but focusing 
on off-road routes such as hiking trails, with crowd-sourced panoramas.


Recently, due to the increasing availability of 360 cameras and the appearance 
of mature panorama APIs (e.g. Pannellum) and client-side routing APIs (GeoJSON 
Path Finder) I have restarted work on OpenTrailView and did an initial 
presentation at FOSDEM 2019 back in February.


Since then I have done further work and OpenTrailView, while still incomplete, 
is in a state where I believe it's ready to start receiving contributions.


It's available at

https://www.opentrailview.org/


You can get an idea of how it allows you to 'walk' along OSM ways by navigating 
in the default area (Southampton Common). There are also some panoramas 
available close to Fernhurst, West Sussex (lat 51.05, lon -0.72). There's a 
Nominatim search available if you switch to 'map' mode (see the map icon).


If you signup and then login, you can contribute your own 360 panos. Obviously 
follow the usual privacy considerations (no faces, no car number plates) - 
panos will be moderated before they go live to ensure they do not have any 
privacy violations amongst other things.


The key thing about this version is that it will use underlying OSM data to 
auto-connect panoramas. This was not done on any previous version.


However, note that while the site will accept panos anywhere in the world, at 
present, the auto-connection facility will only work in *Europe* plus Turkey (I 
am using the Europe Geofabrik extract), as my server currently only stores 
European data. Nonetheless I have had a possible offer of helping with hosting 
costs so expansion to the entire world could well happen soon.


The maps provided are rather basic, showing only highways, coastlines and a few 
selected POIs, this is due to server capacity constraints. If anyone is aware 
of a tile server I can use legitimately as a replacement, without violating the 
usage policy, please let me know.


In similar style to OSM, panos will be copyright 'OTV360 contributors' and 
licensed under CC-by-SA. IANAL but this seems to be the most common practice.


Do remember once again that this is an unfinished product but it is now in a 
state where I believe it is of interest to contributors.


Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/


Thanks,

Nick





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

[OSM-talk] Hikar (OSM AR for walkers) - now fixed and available again

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,

Apologies for the non-availability of my OSM augmented reality app Hikar
(announced on March 29th) from Google Play over the weekend. Unfortunately
I left some test code in the last release which prevented GPS locations
being processed.

As I was on holiday with no access to a development machine I figured it
was best to temporarily unpublish it.

It's now fixed and published again and you should be getting an update soon
if you haven't already. The corrected version is 0.2.3, the broken version
is 0.2.2.

Apologies once again for the downtime.

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

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths - updates and app

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,


With spring here and the footpath mapping season underway, I thought I'd give a 
quick update on MapThePaths (www.mapthepaths.org.uk).


Firstly, in response to an earlier request, I have added a facility to 
customise the colours of the different types of right of way.


Secondly I have updated the OGL council list (only two, Herefordshire and 
Dorset).


Thirdly, there is now a MapThePaths Android app available as a pre-release, 
beta version on Google Play. This allows you to view council and OSM data in 
the field while walking, and also (if logged into OSM with your normal account) 
allows you to live-edit the designation of paths.

There is also an (experimental, use with caution) feature to perform a GPS 
survey (selecting the right of way designation and path type as you go) and 
auto-create appropriately-tagged OSM ways from it. These auto-created ways are 
auto-connected with existing OSM data where possible. However - do use with 
caution (and the app tells you this when uploading), the auto-created ways may 
be subject to artefacts from GPS inaccuracy and therefore you should refine 
with JOSM or a similar editor after uploading. To help you, the app gives you 
the option to upload your full GPX trace to OSM as well as the auto-created 
ways.


As the app is a pre-release, you have to search for its app id, 
"uk.org.mapthepaths.android" on Google Play, to find it. Or, direct link:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=uk.org.mapthepaths.android



Would be great to get feedback on the app from MapThePaths users who would like 
to use something similar in-the-field.



In terms of future plans for the actual website, I had one request a couple of 
months back for a way-splitting feature,  for use in cases where part of an 
existing OSM way is along a RoW and part isn't. Apologies for the delay on this 
up to now (I've been focusing on Hokar, my AR project) I'm hoping to implement 
this soon (late April/early May) all being well.


Thanks,

Nick


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

[OSM-talk] Hikar - OSM augmented reality for walkers - now covering whole Europe, with virtual signposts

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,


Just a quick announcement that I have just released the latest version (0.2.0) 
of "Hikar", my augmented reality app for walkers and hikers showing footpaths 
and signposts on the camera feed.


Main changes are that it now covers the whole of Europe (thanks to affordable 
hosting by Hetzner) and also features virtual signposts pointing the way to 
nearby points of interest.


It's available on Google Play at

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=freemap.hikar


and source code is available at

https://gitlab.com/nickw1/hikar


A few caveats, for example you won't get a perfect match between the real-world 
and OSM data due to GPS inaccuracies (both device and surveyed path), it's 
battery intensive and doesn't have a really nice UI (though is usable for 
navigation).


Also note that it's unlikely to work effectively in large cities (e.g. London, 
Paris) due to sheer volume of data. It's aimed more at countryside use or 
smaller cities and towns.


It appears stable from testing but do let me know any crashes/bugs, including 
the lat/lon the crash occurred (this will help debugging immensely), either via


https://gitlab.com/nickw1/Hikar/issues


or via email hikar...@gmail.com.


It requires 4.2+ but for an unknown reason will not work on the Amazon Fire HD 
10.


Thanks,

Nick

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway or track?

[Nick Whitelegg]

I would urge the use of 'foot=yes' or 'foot=permissive' for paths which are 
_not_ rights of way but _do_ have public access (implicitly or explicitly) 
rather than simply 'highway=footway' or 'highway=path'. There needs to be a way 
to distinguish between non-rights-of-way which definitely have public access 
and those which may not - so that, for example, routing software will not try 
and route you along some path which is private but is just missing a 'PRIVATE' 
sign currently.


For instance a path between roads in towns which is not a right of way I'd use 
'foot=yes', while one in the countryside marked as permissive I'd use 
'foot=permissive'.



Nick


From: Dave F via Talk-GB 
Sent: 15 March 2019 18:24:40
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway or track?

>From the footnote of that table:
"The United Kingdom Tagging 
Guidelines
 state that highway=path, when used it the UK, implies "a generic narrow path 
that is used in conjunction with access tags". This makes the default "yes" 
assumption dubious."

What does foot=yes mean?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Path_examples
Some wiki pages say it's 'legal right' another says "A urban path without any 
legal status suitable for walking."

This is a reason why I take much of the wiki with a pinch of salt. 'foot=yes' 
should be used in combination with the access tag (usually when it's  set to 
'no' or 'private') not as a stand alone sub tag (ie highway=footway;foot=yes).

Are there any data users who use 'highway=footway;foot=yes' to distinguish from 
other footways?

DaveF


On 15/03/2019 11:05, David Woolley wrote:
On 15/03/2019 01:24, Dave F via Talk-GB wrote:
AFAIA, neither tag had any impied permissions or condition attributes.

They do, and they are country specific.





___
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] MapThePaths - update

[Nick Whitelegg]

.. DNS issue now fixed, now back up.

Do please note there may be further temporary interruptions this week.


Nick



From: Nick Whitelegg 
Sent: 18 February 2019 15:29:57
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] MapThePaths - update



Hello everyone,


To follow from my previous message: MapThePaths is being transferred to another 
server (the Freemap server) this week.

While this is done there may be DNS issues meaning it can't be accessed via 
mapthepaths.org.uk.


In the meantime please use the IP address:

http://46.43.8.107/


Thanks,

Nick


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

[Talk-GB] MapThePaths - update

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,


To follow from my previous message: MapThePaths is being transferred to another 
server (the Freemap server) this week.

While this is done there may be DNS issues meaning it can't be accessed via 
mapthepaths.org.uk.


In the meantime please use the IP address:

http://46.43.8.107/


Thanks,

Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM augmented reality project - affordable hosting recommendations or Overpass?

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello everyone,


Thanks for the suggestions. I've had an offer of hosting (many thanks!) but 
it's good to know what options are available.

Roland - thanks for the info on Overpass. Am aware that GeoJSON isn't supposed 
to be epsg:3857 but I do it that way as it saves a reprojection stage.


Thank,s

Nick



From: Roland Olbricht 
Sent: 05 February 2019 16:59:48
To: Nick Whitelegg; d...@openstreetmap.org; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM augmented reality project - affordable hosting 
recommendations or Overpass?

Hi,

> As an alternative, I was wondering how acceptable it would be to use the
> Overpass API to obtain the data? Downloaded data would be cached on the
> device so for a given area, data would only need to be downloaded once.

I'm fine with such a usage. The fine print is about other issues:

- Overpass API does support GeoJSON indirectly, but GeoJSON does not
support EPSG:3857, see
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7946#section-4

To get GeoJSON I suggest

[out:json];
way(south,west,north,east)[highway];
convert link ::=::,::geom=geom();
out geom;

where (south,west,north,east) is the bounding box.

As an act of courtesy I suggest to set the "Accept-Encoding: deflate,
gzip" header and use

[out:json];
way(south,west,north,east)[highway];
if (count(ways) < 2)
{
   convert link ::=::,::geom=geom();
   out geom;
}
else
{
   make error what="Too many ways in this bounding box";
   out;
}

This compresses the data and bails out if there are more than 2 ways
in the bounding box, corresponding to between 1 MB and 2 MB of data.
Overpass would happily deliver about 1 GB per user and day, but the
users may have data plans with rather 1 GB per month.

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

[Talk-GB] OSM augmented reality project - affordable hosting recommendations or Overpass?

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,


This weekend at FOSDEM I gave a talk on "Hikar", my augmented reality project 
for walkers/hikers making use of OSM data to show trails and virtual signposts 
on the device. (see http://www.free-map.org.uk/common/hikar.html for info and 
screenshots).

At the moment however it only works in Britain, Ireland and Greece due to the 
constraints of my server. Would be great to get it working in the whole of 
Europe (I realise the world might be a bit much at this stage!), so I wondered 
if anyone had any affordable hosting recommendations? Hikar downloads GeoJSON 
from a server containing OSM data (see below) and caches it on the device.


Basically what I need is an OSM PostGIS database (of the type used for Mapnik 
rendering) but it only needs to contain highways and selected POIs (as nodes) - 
nothing else. Ideally I also need PHP with the postgres extension as that is 
what my service is written in at the moment. However, if the best solution was 
an environment without PHP, I would be prepared to rewrite in say node.js.

Would be looking for hosting of not much more than approximately £20/EUR 20 per 
month, perhaps £30/EUR 30 as a maximum.


My current server has 1GB of memory and can just about cope with the areas 
above, so I suspect for the whole of Europe more memory would be required. 
Storage requirements for Britain, Ireland and Greece is perhaps (as an 
estimate) 10GB or a little less.


The same service would also serve OpenTrailView, a recently resurrected project 
to create a fully FOSS StreetView-type system for walkers and hikers. (see 
opentrailview.org - _very_ early demo!)


As an alternative, I was wondering how acceptable it would be to use the 
Overpass API to obtain the data? Downloaded data would be cached on the device 
so for a given area, data would only need to be downloaded once.


Thanks,

Nick


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Lees Footpath mapping: results

[Nick Whitelegg]

Not related to the mapping party... but have just found a bug in MapThePaths 
which prevented the permalink feature working correctly, so the link in Jerry's 
message didn't take you to the right area.


I've fixed this now, so the link should take you to the area Jerry's talking 
about.


Apologies for the bug!


Nick


From: SK53 
Sent: 09 January 2019 21:17:18
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Lees Footpath mapping: results

Dear All,

I think we had a successful day last Saturday. I've added various snippets on 
the wiki page of what was surveyed and what has got into 
OSM
 so far:

If you look at Map the 
Paths,
 there is still a big patch of virgin territory to the immediate W of the area 
we focused on this time. I think I'm right is saying that this is the largest 
patch of unmapped footpaths near the big cities of the East Midlands.

I may suggest another day perhaps in March. There is a pub in Long Lane which 
is a bit closer as a meeting point, and maybe The Ostrich is still open too. A 
couple of people asked about public transport, but I'm afraid the area has next 
to no bus service which is probably one reason it hasn't been explored by 
OSMers. However, lifts can be arranged from Derby station (and possibly others) 
from one of the regular participants.

Regards,

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Guildford Blackwell Farm redevelopment

[Nick Whitelegg]

Not been in Guildford area for a while but I do note that there is a Blackwell 
Farm railway station showing. AFAIK no new railway stations have been built on 
this route (Guildford-Reading line).


Wikipedia (not necessarily accurate) suggests it's merely a proposal at this 
stage.


I do have to say that this does look like an odd area for a big development, as 
it's on the north side of the Hogs Back which I always took to be an area 
protected from development (as wiki says).



Nick



From: Dave F 
Sent: 20 November 2018 18:49:53
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Guildford Blackwell Farm redevelopment

Hi

Is their anyone in the Guildford  area who can verify these edits by a
new user please?
They look like a part of the town's planned expansion, but I'm assuming
Adam got a bit ahead of himself. He's also overlapped roads onto the
railway. I've put in a changeset message to him.

http://osmlab.github.io/changeset-map/#63800817

Cheers
DaveF

___
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: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

[Nick Whitelegg]

>This will leave your site down between the delete and import of new data.

>It's also going to be fragile, because using append mode with a file that 
>isn't a diff isn't supported, and if the area has a lot of footpaths, it'll be 
>slower, since >append has to do more work.

>If you match the SQL delete and osmosis filtering carefully you shouldn't get 
>too many errors, but you've probably got some to do with updates and >changing 
>object types.

>As long as you're aware of these problems and it works for your needs, I'd say 
>to go for it.


Thanks. I have actually used append frequently over several years and never had 
a problem with it; main issue is that memory is expensive on servers so I have 
to do take various less-than-ideal steps to work round low memory.


The intention is to bring the site down over the (say) 2-3 hours the update is 
taking place; this is what I used to do when I last performed weekly updates. 
This would be scheduled for (probably) Wednesday 0100-0400 UK time, a time that 
the server is likely to see little traffic as it's UK and Ireland oriented; at 
such time most of Europe will be asleep. Granted there might be a few 
out-of-Europe visitors at that time; but as my site is quite niche with limited 
visitors, I consider this acceptable downtime.


Nick


From: Paul Norman 
Sent: 13 November 2018 10:12:58
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

On 2018-11-11 7:53 AM, Nick Whitelegg wrote:


After thinking about this, I realised that I don't really want to update _all_ 
the data that often. The only thing I need to update on a weekly basis is the 
footpaths (I'm not so bothered if say the roads, or the pubs are a year out of 
date - as long as newly mapped footpaths appear quickly). So what I'm now doing 
is just doing an osmosis extract of paths weekly, deleting all data in the DB 
which I class as a 'path' and repopulating in amend mode.

This will leave your site down between the delete and import of new data.

It's also going to be fragile, because using append mode with a file that isn't 
a diff isn't supported, and if the area has a lot of footpaths, it'll be 
slower, since append has to do more work.

If you match the SQL delete and osmosis filtering carefully you shouldn't get 
too many errors, but you've probably got some to do with updates and changing 
object types.

As long as you're aware of these problems and it works for your needs, I'd say 
to go for it.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

[Nick Whitelegg]

Thanks for all the replies.


After thinking about this, I realised that I don't really want to update _all_ 
the data that often. The only thing I need to update on a weekly basis is the 
footpaths (I'm not so bothered if say the roads, or the pubs are a year out of 
date - as long as newly mapped footpaths appear quickly). So what I'm now doing 
is just doing an osmosis extract of paths weekly, deleting all data in the DB 
which I class as a 'path' and repopulating in amend mode.


Thanks,

Nick



From: Paul Norman 
Sent: 08 November 2018 20:10:14
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

On 2018-11-08 6:34 AM, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

At the moment I download full planet extracts about every 6 months. However, 
due to the limitations of my server, I filter out (with osmosis) a lot of stuff 
I don't need so that I am basically left with roads, footpaths, natural 
features, water features and selected POIs.


I'd like to move towards a system which applies diffs from geofabrik instead, 
and applies them regularly (daily or weekly) with osm2pgsql.


My question is this; given that not everything in the diff will be in my 
database (as I filter out what I don't need during the import process), will 
osm2pgsql apply the diff successfully or will it complain that not all features 
in the diff are in my database?

I can think of four ways to do this, all which have a different balance of 
correctness, performance, and ease of use.

There are two "right" ways to do this. The first one is to re-import every 
week. Because imports without slim tables (either --slim --drop or no --slim) 
are faster, this is a good option and needs less space than a database able to 
consume diffs.

The second right way involves keeping two files, one with the current full 
data, and one with the filtered data. Call these "planet.pbf" and 
"planet-filtered.pbf". Then when updating create "planet-new.pbf", filter it to 
get "planet-filtered-new.pbf", create a diff for the differences between 
"planet-filtered-new.pbf" and "planet-filtered.pbf", and apply that diff to the 
database. Then replace the old files with the new ones. This will keep the 
database correct.

A "wrong" way to do it is to import the filtered data, apply updates directly, 
and periodically delete data from the DB. The problem with this is that if 
someone adds one of the selected POI tags to a building that you have filtered 
out, osm2pgsql won't have the node data to create a geometry. This might be 
acceptable, depending on use case.

A less wrong way would be to modify your filtering so no nodes are filtered 
out. There are still potential errors with relations, but these are less 
common. If you're doing the planet or a large extract and using flat nodes 
there's no storage penalty for having all the nodes.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

[Nick Whitelegg]

... append mode!





From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 11 November 2018 15:53:18
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data



Thanks for all the replies.


After thinking about this, I realised that I don't really want to update _all_ 
the data that often. The only thing I need to update on a weekly basis is the 
footpaths (I'm not so bothered if say the roads, or the pubs are a year out of 
date - as long as newly mapped footpaths appear quickly). So what I'm now doing 
is just doing an osmosis extract of paths weekly, deleting all data in the DB 
which I class as a 'path' and repopulating in amend mode.


Thanks,

Nick



From: Paul Norman 
Sent: 08 November 2018 20:10:14
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

On 2018-11-08 6:34 AM, Nick Whitelegg wrote:

At the moment I download full planet extracts about every 6 months. However, 
due to the limitations of my server, I filter out (with osmosis) a lot of stuff 
I don't need so that I am basically left with roads, footpaths, natural 
features, water features and selected POIs.


I'd like to move towards a system which applies diffs from geofabrik instead, 
and applies them regularly (daily or weekly) with osm2pgsql.


My question is this; given that not everything in the diff will be in my 
database (as I filter out what I don't need during the import process), will 
osm2pgsql apply the diff successfully or will it complain that not all features 
in the diff are in my database?

I can think of four ways to do this, all which have a different balance of 
correctness, performance, and ease of use.

There are two "right" ways to do this. The first one is to re-import every 
week. Because imports without slim tables (either --slim --drop or no --slim) 
are faster, this is a good option and needs less space than a database able to 
consume diffs.

The second right way involves keeping two files, one with the current full 
data, and one with the filtered data. Call these "planet.pbf" and 
"planet-filtered.pbf". Then when updating create "planet-new.pbf", filter it to 
get "planet-filtered-new.pbf", create a diff for the differences between 
"planet-filtered-new.pbf" and "planet-filtered.pbf", and apply that diff to the 
database. Then replace the old files with the new ones. This will keep the 
database correct.

A "wrong" way to do it is to import the filtered data, apply updates directly, 
and periodically delete data from the DB. The problem with this is that if 
someone adds one of the selected POI tags to a building that you have filtered 
out, osm2pgsql won't have the node data to create a geometry. This might be 
acceptable, depending on use case.

A less wrong way would be to modify your filtering so no nodes are filtered 
out. There are still potential errors with relations, but these are less 
common. If you're doing the planet or a large extract and using flat nodes 
there's no storage penalty for having all the nodes.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hello Darafei and Frederik,


OK - thanks for that.


What I will do therefore, to avoid unwanted data, is to generate a filtered 
planet extract and import that into the DB, and then generate another filtered 
extract and find the diff between the two. Advantage of that is that I'll only 
need to  do the first filtering run on the server, and subsequent runs on my 
local machine (assuming the resulting diff is small enough to upload from my 
local machine to the server).


Thanks,

Nick



From: Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski 
Sent: 08 November 2018 16:16:48
To: Nick Whitelegg
Cc: osm-talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

Hi Nick,

osm2pgsql is tolerant to features absent in database. You can in theory even 
start with empty set of tables and just insert new diff data.

Usually people also clip minutely osc, as per day database grows by a small 
country otherwise.

чт, 8 нояб. 2018 г. в 17:37, Nick Whitelegg 
mailto:nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk>>:


... sorry, when I say "full planet extracts" I mean only England, Wales, 
Scotland, Ireland (all) and Greece - not the entire planet.

Thanks,

Nick

____
From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 08 November 2018 14:34:17
To: osm-talk
Subject: osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data



Hi,


Looking towards overhauling the import system I use for my Freemap site 
(free-map.org.uk<http://free-map.org.uk>) which is itself going to go through 
an overhaul in the near future by moving to Tangram and hopefully applying hill 
shading.


At the moment I download full planet extracts about every 6 months. However, 
due to the limitations of my server, I filter out (with osmosis) a lot of stuff 
I don't need so that I am basically left with roads, footpaths, natural 
features, water features and selected POIs.


I'd like to move towards a system which applies diffs from geofabrik instead, 
and applies them regularly (daily or weekly) with osm2pgsql.


My question is this; given that not everything in the diff will be in my 
database (as I filter out what I don't need during the import process), will 
osm2pgsql apply the diff successfully or will it complain that not all features 
in the diff are in my database?


Thanks,

Nick

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
--
Darafei Praliaskouski
Support me: http://patreon.com/komzpa
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

[Nick Whitelegg]

... sorry, when I say "full planet extracts" I mean only England, Wales, 
Scotland, Ireland (all) and Greece - not the entire planet.

Thanks,

Nick

____
From: Nick Whitelegg
Sent: 08 November 2018 14:34:17
To: osm-talk
Subject: osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data



Hi,


Looking towards overhauling the import system I use for my Freemap site 
(free-map.org.uk) which is itself going to go through an overhaul in the near 
future by moving to Tangram and hopefully applying hill shading.


At the moment I download full planet extracts about every 6 months. However, 
due to the limitations of my server, I filter out (with osmosis) a lot of stuff 
I don't need so that I am basically left with roads, footpaths, natural 
features, water features and selected POIs.


I'd like to move towards a system which applies diffs from geofabrik instead, 
and applies them regularly (daily or weekly) with osm2pgsql.


My question is this; given that not everything in the diff will be in my 
database (as I filter out what I don't need during the import process), will 
osm2pgsql apply the diff successfully or will it complain that not all features 
in the diff are in my database?


Thanks,

Nick

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

[OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

[Nick Whitelegg]

Hi,


Looking towards overhauling the import system I use for my Freemap site 
(free-map.org.uk) which is itself going to go through an overhaul in the near 
future by moving to Tangram and hopefully applying hill shading.


At the moment I download full planet extracts about every 6 months. However, 
due to the limitations of my server, I filter out (with osmosis) a lot of stuff 
I don't need so that I am basically left with roads, footpaths, natural 
features, water features and selected POIs.


I'd like to move towards a system which applies diffs from geofabrik instead, 
and applies them regularly (daily or weekly) with osm2pgsql.


My question is this; given that not everything in the diff will be in my 
database (as I filter out what I don't need during the import process), will 
osm2pgsql apply the diff successfully or will it complain that not all features 
in the diff are in my database?


Thanks,

Nick

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