Just downloaded it onto a Samsung Galaxy 2.
1. when the phone goes to sleep, as soon as it wakes up, the position of the
map reverts back to the current position. If I'm using the phone to review
where I'm going to walk before I get to the start point, this is really
annoying. Suggest that:
a.
True, but the thread has not identified that it is indeed on an island.
If it is boat-only for that reason, then of course.
If it is at a place where you could walk there legally, but that the conditions
make it very dangerous to get there, then why not?
Yes. If a campsite is on a lake shore, or an island, and the only way to
get there is by boat, I don’t see how sac_scale depicts that information
If the campsite is on an island, then I feel that no additional tagging is
necessary.
If it is on shore, and the land around it is too dangerous, that
Am 26.07.2013 um 14:17 schrieb Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com:
I haven't seen sac_scale used on an area, but it seems reasonable
-1, it is clearly thought and defined for (osm-)highways and not for an area.
There are usually several possibilities where to cross an area, especially if
While I can't point to an example, I believe I've seen some state park
campsites that actually have a legal restriction against being accessed by
land. It might be that the terrain is considered too dangerous (park does not
want to assume liability for injuries), too ecologically sensitive or
Clifford,
Thanks for your comments. In fact plugging in OSM .gpx trace sharing is the
next item on our To Do list. The app supports waypoint note taking which
would enable users to note trail names, surface, difficulty...After reading
your comment, I wonder if it possible to implement a little
Mark,
Thanks for taking the time to check it out and share your thoughts.
It is possible to turn off Auto Centering by unselecting Center Map from
the menu options icon (usually found in the top right hand corner of the
screen).
Good call, on the City search feature. Adding it to our To Do
Hi Mike,
What you are seeing in the right pain are lists of .gpx files for rides
that have been uploaded for that area. If an area doesn't contain any
uploaded .gpx files then nothing appears in the right pane.
This is a work in progress, and has not yet been fully implemented. We are
in the
2013/7/26 Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com
While I can't point to an example, I believe I've seen some state park
campsites that actually have a legal restriction against being accessed by
land. It might be that the terrain is considered too dangerous (park does
not want to assume liability for
Derrick,
Thanks for the explanation.
The list of trails in the right pane is a very helpful feature. Consider
making it work solely off of OSM data. It would provide a great way to
find a trail by its name, especially by someone who is new to the area or
who is a visitor.
Mike
On Fri, Jul
IMHO it isn't an attribute of the campsite but an attribute of the areas
in front of it.
agree (if by areas in front you mean the non water areas)
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't seen sac_scale used on an area, but it seems
2013/7/26 Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com
If we want to make the map explicit as to the difficulty of foot travel,
then we should have a tag that can be applied to an area indicating this.
Perhaps it isn't sac_scale, but we should have something.
the only established tags for areas I am
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
the only established tags for areas I am aware of are natural=scrub and
natural=wetland with sub tags (swamp, etc.), maybe this can be further
refined if required (density), or we can come up with new tags
The intent is to convey what mode of travel is appropriate or authorized
for each of 100+ campsites. Many are hiker-only, easily solved by
horse=no, some are horse and hiker, a very few are hiker, horse, and
boat-accessible, and a very very few are only reachable by boat: There are
no trails,
Inspired by this discussion, I've written up a blog post on why we at the
OSM-US chapter love calling editathons:
http://openstreetmap.us/2013/07/why-editathons/
Like I mentioned before, I think they're a great tool to create an excuse
or an impulse for people around the US to get together in
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dridge
seems to suggest that the appropriate way to tag a ridge is as a way. Any
thoughts on this? I'm looking at 100+ ridges, wondering how to simplify
(de-node) yet keep the way roughly following to contours of the feature it's
supposed to be
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Thomas Colson thomas_col...@nps.gov wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dridge
seems to suggest that the appropriate way to tag a ridge is as a way. Any
thoughts on this? I’m looking at 100+ ridges, wondering how to simplify
(de-node) yet
These are based off of Lambertus's work here:
http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl
If you have questions or comments about these maps, please feel
free to ask. However, please do not send me private mail. The
odds are, someone else will have the same questions, and by
asking on the talk-us@
I have tagged numerous ridges (dozens, at least), always as a way.
To me, it doesn't make sense for a ridge to be a single node, that
semantic might be better conveyed with natural=peak. I include a
medium-sized mountain range, the Santa Cruz Mountains
(www.osm.org/browse/way/174808173),
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Thomas Colson thomas_col...@nps.govwrote:
The intent is to convey what mode of travel is appropriate or “authorized”
for each of 100+ campsites. Many are hiker-only, easily solved by
“horse=no”, some are horse and hiker, a very few are hiker, horse, and
Did the OSM board approve a bulk survey activity, directed to OSM user's
inboxes? The discussion on this survey was fairly negative a month ago,
and today it showed up in my inbox:
*padeshahekhoban*
*26 July 2013 at 21:10*
*Hello,*
*I am researching on the motivations and behaviors of OSM
On Jul 23, 2013 8:16 PM, Greg Morgan dr.kludge...@gmail.com wrote:
They could but they are not. Another reason not to calculate these is
the the freeway exit numbers are tied to mile makers in the US. They pick
the closet mile maker to the exit. The exit numbers don't always match up
to the
22 matches
Mail list logo
