On Sep 29, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 15:34, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Those people fill out a form and are invited later to use some simple online
screen capturing software while asked to do some simple tasks and this is
where you come
On Sep 30, 2010, at 10:40 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 16:20, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On Sep 29, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 15:34, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
Those people fill out a form and are
I think it's great that something is being done on this.
Personally I would suggest finding a few volunteers to be tested and sit in
a room with them. You don't need a lot of people to find the key issues and
I think you get more from seeing them do it in person and having them think
out loud
Will see what I can do, though not quite sure if I'll be able to make it to
SF or not. But would be happy to find some volunteers and do a few usability
tests in Denver before then, and record them so others can see them (in SF
or wherever). Obviously would be good to have some scenarios worked
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm importing the USFS data for the Ocala National Forest boundary.
There's the actual forest boundary, and there are private inholdings
inside the
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm importing the USFS data for the Ocala National Forest boundary.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think you should imply that there is a natural=forest boundary
logically separate from the National Forest's boundary. Assuming you're
using USFS's shapefiles, there should be one thing in there: the boundary of
the
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think you should imply that there is a natural=forest boundary
logically separate from the National Forest's boundary. Assuming you're
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the example. I would suggest using a border/boundary tag for the
national forest boundary area and a landuse tag for the national forest
land.
Yes, that's what I was thinking: boundary=protected_area for the outer
Peter,
If you are able to do some tests in Denver I would like to help.
Leslie
From: Peter Batty pe...@ebatty.com
To: SteveC st...@asklater.com
Cc: OSM-talk Openstreetmap t...@openstreetmap.org; Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
ava...@gmail.com;
Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm importing the USFS data for the Ocala National Forest boundary.
There's the actual forest
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
I think you two might be talking past each other.
I am slightly fuzzy on multipolygons, but I think the notion is that a
multipolygon has a number of outer rings, and a number of inner rings,
and it defines the area that
12 matches
Mail list logo
