On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
I don't believe I've seen anything other than the die-cut style in CA. Any
background would look wrong.
You live in the one state that still uses cutout US Highway shields :)
See the image near the top of
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 01/03/2011 08:33 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeGUSMssl7kt=0m15s
There's not much merging room (no worse than on many Interstates), but
it's nowhere near a right angle.
I'm familiar
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 01/01/2011 09:45 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Yes - Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct. It seems like a clear motorway to
me, but a local has tagged it as trunk.
Alaska has intersections on at least one of it's three decks
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Alan Mintz
alan_mintz+...@earthlink.net wrote:
At 2011-01-02 19:46, Paul Johnson wrote:
On 01/01/2011 11:55 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
I've been adding more highway shields to the shield renderer. Most
recently I've added a shield for Historic Route 66.
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
if by 2 lane freeway, you mean a super 2, by convention those are
usually trunk in the US.
I mean what some roadgeeks call a super 2, which isn't
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
if by 2 lane freeway, you mean a super 2, by convention those are
usually trunk in the US.
I mean what some roadgeeks call a super 2, which isn't necessarily
the same as what others use that term for. Two-lane freeway
Question: what do people think about minimum standards for tagging
something highway=motorway? In other words, would it be reasonable to
tag a highway as trunk rather than motorway because it has no
shoulders or a low speed limit (40 mph)?
___
Talk-us
Oops - meant to send this to the list.
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
On 1/1/11 5:47 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Question: what do people think about minimum standards for tagging
something highway=motorway? In other words, would it be reasonable
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Question: what do people think about minimum standards for tagging
something highway=motorway? In other words, would it be reasonable to
tag
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote:
In the US, we seem to have what I'd call Interstate standards.
It generally seems like motorway is appropriate for
Except half the Interstates don't meet current standards. I don't know
of any maps that show Interstate-standard
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
can someone point me at examples of well formed County Boundary
relations in the US? a quick search didn't show anything in the wiki,
and the boundaries in my part of NY are basically a bunch of
labeled ways with some
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
and be reserved for specific categories of motor vehicles.
This would eliminate a large
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Usually a freeway
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 12/22/2010 01:47 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I'm not seeing how this is the ACTUAL reference number - it's just a
way ODOT refers to segments of road for some internal uses.
It's the reference number that actually
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 12/20/2010 02:41 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Paul Johnson
baloo-PVOPTusIyP/sroww+9z...@public.gmane.org wrote:
the way's ACTUAL reference number.
Meaning?
Well, in context
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
the way's ACTUAL reference number.
Meaning?
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
A suggestion if you're not going to render trunk separately from primary:
My MapQuest/National Geographic road atlas from 1999 puts a line in
the middle of the road for a divided highway (in reality this includes
multilane undivided highways). It shouldn't be hard to parse the
number of lanes and
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Andrew S. J. Sawyer assaw...@gmail.com wrote:
Tying back to the US-Mexico boundary it would make sense to obtain the
highest-resolution boundary from each side and tag according to above.
I don't like boundary clutter but we should be able/try to
differentiate
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Ant The Limey anttheli...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Very very proud to announce that we have launched the US
http://open.MapQuest.com site
I like the toll=yes rendering; any chance of applying it to links, and
possibly to tolled non-motorways?
Overlaps are
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 12/14/2010 12:38 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:16 AM, Paul Johnson
baloo-PVOPTusIyP/sroww+9z...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On 12/13/2010 11:07 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
And US 169: http
PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone have a better source for the border? It's horribly
imprecise, at least in southeastern Texas:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=25.8903lon=-97.4978zoom=14layers=M
___
Talk-us mailing list
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Adam Schreiber
adam.schrei...@gmail.com wrote:
If I'm in the history of the border, I originally uploaded the border from
TIGER.
I can't tell definitely who originally uploaded it due to merging of
ways, but it appears to have been created here:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you please follow the import guidelines? Which TIGER data are you
planning on using?
http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/geo/shapefiles2010/main
How will you deal with cases where people have used
aerial imagery to follow the
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:45 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I just drove it (since there's no traffic right now and it's in my
neighborhood). The END 169 sign is approximately 790m east of Memorial
Drive, so it's after the interchange, but before you reach Memorial
Drive,
By the way you should probably remove the toll=yes and fee=$3.50 tags
from this portion of road (in both directions). I'd do it but...
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Thanks for citing government data on this one, though. A couple
suggestions I would make would be to use much smaller changesets and
more relevant changeset comments, so people who are mapping on the
ground can follow
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
You wrote US relation fixup etc as the changeset comment for this, and
it covers almost all of the lower 48. What is actually going on with
this changeset?
I fixed up some of the U.S. Highway relations, most notably US
Does anyone have a better source for the border? It's horribly
imprecise, at least in southeastern Texas:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=25.8903lon=-97.4978zoom=14layers=M
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I fixed up some of the U.S. Highway relations, most notably US 24,
which was cut down to a couple ways in western Kansas for a few
months
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 12/13/2010 12:43 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I fixed up some of the U.S. Highway relations, most notably US 24,
which was cut down to a couple ways in western Kansas for a few
months.
OK, so why did that same edit
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
i concur, the NHS tagging should be done as route relations.
They don't work as relations, since they're not always routes that can
be followed from start to end.
___
Oops - meant to send this to the list.
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
i concur, the NHS tagging should be done as route relations.
They don't work as relations, since
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
i concur, the NHS tagging should be done as route relations
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
OK, how's this for a relation?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1319303
While I'm happy to see them in a relation, I still question
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
It appears that User:NE2 has added a tag NHS_High_Priority_Corridor to
hundred of ways around the country. Has anyone seen such an automated edit
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
NHS is a datapoint for what roads the US DOD thinks are important
in a military crisis.
You're thinking of the Strategic Highway Network, which, together with
the Interstates, is less than half of the entire NHS
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
While it may not be an import in the sense of convert a shapefile to OSM
format and send it to the API, it is a mass inclusion of external data. The
import guidelines could still be followed in such situations.
It's no more a
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, there are cases where a
single building has its own zip code, and these do not show up in the
census zip code polygons.
Or an entire (company-owned) city: Lake Buena Vista, Florida has been
32830 since 1971, but the
The WMS URLs on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/National_Agriculture_Imagery_Program
don't have the latest imagery available from NAIP, which is
downloadable as huge (1 gig) georeferenced MrSID files. Is there any
way to use these as a background for tracing?
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
I doubt anybody would protest mass-updating alleyways...
Except that tiger:name_type=Aly doesn't mean it's an alley, only that
the street is named Foo Alley. I looked at Florida and in addition to
errors there are cases
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Hi all.
I just had a look at the new OpenStreetBugs implementation at
mapdust.com. It's pretty slick and integrates nicely with postlatch /
josm.
Is there a way to use their routing engine online to try to reproduce
the
tiger:cfcc: census feature class codes used to differentiate feature
types; describes the importance (generally primary=U.S. Highway,
secondary=state highway) and type of road
Accuracy: low. Alignments of main routes through towns almost never
take the proper turns. Bridges and tunnels are often
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Antony Pegg ap...@nexuspro.com wrote:
I agree with most of this.
One very useful thing I've found tho is the (off the top of my head)
tiger:name_type=aly
seems all the alley's got imported as highway=residential - at least in my
area - so the tiger tag is
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Antony Pegg anttheli...@gmail.com wrote:
hmmmhow might one perform this XAPI query of which thou dost speak?!
ctrl-L, http://xapi.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/*%5bbbox=[you can copy
this part from the bookmarks pane of the download
box]%5d%5btiger:name_type=Aly
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, a tiger:name_type=Aly XAPI query is slightly more convenient than
downloading all the streets and searching for name:aly. Of course
there may be the occasional street named Foo Alley that's not actually
an alley
Nap44 has added some definite vandalism in the Naples, Florida area.
For example, he added a golf community
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=25.98lon=-81.5208zoom=14layers=M
in part of the Picayune Strand State Forest
http://www.fl-dof.com/state_forests/picayune_strand.html. I asked him
a week
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Andrew wynnd...@lavabit.com wrote:
Val Kartchner val...@... writes:
I'd like to use place=neighborhood as well. Can we get a consensus to
make this addition?
The tag place=suburb is establish for much this purpose. This also avoids
spelling issues with
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Bill Ricker bill.n1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
place=suburb doesn't work for inner-city neighborhoods.
nor for truly rural named crossroad settlements of no legal standing, of
which some
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 3:14 AM, Daniel Sabo daniels...@gmail.com wrote:
If it's not in GNIS, for example, that means it's not on USGS or other
government maps, which narrows down the field considerably. Then I can
see if the name is used by the local newspaper, for instance. An
example is
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Daniel Sabo daniels...@gmail.com wrote:
Resending to the list.
On Nov 12, 2010, at 12:37 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 3:14 AM, Daniel Sabo daniels...@gmail.com wrote:
If it's not in GNIS, for example, that means it's not on USGS
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, CDPs have no real-world significance, and are intended
only for statistical purposes.
That's just not the case.
Look at my town of Silver Spring, Maryland
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, CDPs have no real-world significance
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Carl Anderson carl.ander...@vadose.org wrote:
For an authoritative list of USPS valid combinations of community names and
ZIP Codes look at
the USPS City State product
http://www.usps.com/ncsc/addressinfo/citystate.htm
Mixed with the ZCTA5 dataset from the US
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
i guess it's like any other admin boundary, it's subject to change.
who is going to maintain it, or will it be allowed to slowly
deteriorate and become obsolete? if the rate of change is low,
maybe that's not an
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Lord-Castillo, Brett
blord-casti...@stlouisco.com wrote:
The St Louis County Planning Department, St Louis Planning and Urban Design
Agency, St Louis Regional Chamber of Commerce and Growth Association, and US
Post Office all have different definitions of the
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Please at least remove the Citrus Park CDP. Or provide a tool which
makes it easy for me to do so (I couldn't figure out how to remove it
easily, which is the only reason it's still there).
Open JOSM, ctrl-L,
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 7:58 PM, Mike N. nice...@att.net wrote:
I don't know of any benefits to keeping them - they meet the definition of
something that belongs in its original database - there's no value added in
bringing them into the map - they don't need to interconnect or interact
with
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/cob/pl_metadata.html
Census designated places (CDPs) are delineated for each decennial
census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs
are delineated to provide data for settled concentrations of
population that are identifiable by name but are not
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
On 11/04/2010 03:22 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
If there's a specific intersection or stretch of road that's hazardous
to a law-abiding cyclist, consider cycle_hazard=* (like
cycle_hazard=door zone or cycle_hazard=bike
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Nothing specific, but probably something wider than a regular sidewalk with
curb ramps but not a dedicated bike/exercise trail.
This should probably have a more generic tag, since it's important for
wheelchair users to have
If there's a specific intersection or stretch of road that's hazardous
to a law-abiding cyclist, consider cycle_hazard=* (like
cycle_hazard=door zone or cycle_hazard=bike lane to right of right
turn lane).
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
As with many OSM
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought this had been decided: we decided on route relations with various
tags designating the kind (interstate/state/county route), the number, and
the name. The ways retain their information for backwards compatibility.
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Val Kartchner val...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 15:17 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Wed, Oct 27
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
I recently stumbled upon an article[1] about the new use of the divided
diamond interchange design in the US.
It seems that the first one[2] is here[3] in Missouri and as yet unmapped.
A second one in the same city is
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 7:54 PM, j...@ocjtech.us j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
I've taken care of the new interchange at I-44 N Kansas Expressway
Are you sure there's no direct ramp from I-44 west to Norton Road like
the plans show? You might also want to include the center sidewalk, as
it's a rather
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:13 PM, j...@ocjtech.us j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 7:54 PM, j...@ocjtech.us j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
I've taken care of the new interchange at I-44 N Kansas Expressway
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Val Kartchner val...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry to disappoint, but the 17x17 example that you gave is quite
readable.
Not nearly as readable as a lone 7.
I've attached another 17x17 that is also readable. Since
readability at 17x17 is demonstrably not an issue,
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 3:17 AM, Val Kartchner val...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 01:27 -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
No for state roads in general. Some shields are poorly-designed for
display in a limited number of pixels. For example
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:36 AM, Adam Schreiber sa...@clemson.edu wrote:
I think that 4-way and 3-way stops can be handled unambiguously by
highway=stop. More complex stops should probably be modeled with turn
restrictions.
type=restriction
restriction=stop
roles=from,to,via
But a stop
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/26/2010 09:11 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
Attached are the bitmaps of the shield that is poorly-designed for
display in a limited number of pixels. The first one is 39x39 pixels,
and the second is 20x20 pixels
is_in doesn't work; part of New York State Route 17 is in Pennsylvania.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/25/2010 02:44 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
* Alex Mauerha...@hawkesnest.net [2010-10-25 12:44 -0500]:
So dealing with having a prefix in the ref is pretty much guaranteed
to be a requirement no matter what.
Not
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/25/2010 04:31 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
I totally agree. My point is just that some people and some states
(Michigan, Kansas) feel that the prefix itself is an important part of
the
reference number: “The M
I also support the change; name=* should be for simple names, for
instance those that a toll road authority might assign (Pennsylvania
Turnpike exit 312 Downingtown). This also means that 'floating street
names' on urban highways without exit numbers will no longer be
rendered.
There's been no reply to this. Will anyone object if I change the
place tags in Florida from the type of incorporation to city if and
only if it's a principal city?
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
The US Census Bureau has something called a Statistical
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
There's been no reply to this. Will anyone object if I change the
place tags in Florida from the type of incorporation to city if and
only if it's
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
You seem to have a real interest in this. Would you consider making a
test to show the results of your proposed changes first? A comparison
of
* the wiki / population based place values
* the current incorporation
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2010-10-24 21:12 -0400]:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2010-July/003672.html
And http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2010-July/003660.html
The results
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Prefix information should not go in OSM. If a renderer wants to display a
prefix somehow, then they can go look it up based on other information given
in the other tags on the relation.
Then why do the Germans use A 9 and B
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Prefix information should not go in OSM. If a renderer wants to display
This discussion seems to have ended. Is it time to play spot the
consensus yet?
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
This discussion seems to have ended. Is it time to play spot the
consensus yet?
I've spotted the consensus. Stop your bickering. Either come
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with Richard but I don't want to feed the trolls by responding
(which is the policy of several other mailing list readers I know).
I'm not sure what the point of this thread was then. All I got from it was:
*If I ever
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah what the hell I'm sitting around at an airport with extra troll food...
Nathan, you said yourself that you only edit-warred because you were
trying to get the foundation's attention. I would call that trolling, yes.
I
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
3. We will not be drawn into further discussion about this. Edit wars are
not an acceptable means of settling a dispute *even* if one is right.
What would have been the correct means of settling the dispute then? I
tried
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
(4) some people correctly use the place=* tag to reflect the government of
a place rather than the population because they put the population in the
population=* tag.
Fixed for you.
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
Perhaps we need to shift the discussion to actually figuring out a better
replacement for place=*?
place=incorporated?
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Peter Budny pet...@gatech.edu wrote:
Anthony o...@inbox.org writes:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote:
There are townships in other states that are managed differently, but in PA
and NJ, they are just county subdivisions, and are
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/20/2010 03:01 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
Townships are at the same level as cities/towns/villages/other
municipalities[1], [2]. I’m sure someone correct me if I’m wrong, but my
understanding is you won’t find a chunk of
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/20/2010 03:14 PM, Anthony wrote:
Only in those 11 states, right?
I'm surprised admin level isn't already handled defined on a state by
state level.
Why treat it differently depending on the state?
Because states
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Okay, here's another wrench to throw in:
In Pennsylvania: School districts can comprise of one single
municipality, like the School District of Philadelphia or can comprise
of multiple municipalities.
The US Census Bureau has something called a Statistical Area:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/metroareas/metrodef.html
The actual areas are based on county lines (except in New England),
but may have more than one principal city. For example, the
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Don't tag for the renderer.
Don't tag *incorrectly* for the renderer.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Antony Pegg anttheli...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that currently we dont have a discrete tag for place=township
and all admin_level= are =8
so, half a question, half a statement of intent, unless someone argues me
down from the ledge...
I'm going to
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote:
On 10/18/2010 04:16 PM, Anthony wrote:
I guess renderers are going to be wrong or now.
For now shouldn't last too long, though. Just remove the ref info
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Ways and relations are equally easy to break
Nope. They're not, because relation membership is not a tag on the
way. A way is always uploaded with its tags, but for various reasons
(editor bugs, huge relations causing timeouts,
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Ways and relations are equally easy to break
Nope. They're not, because
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Zeke Farwell ezeki...@gmail.com wrote:
On the other hand no renderer or other data user I've heard of is
being negatively affected by the presence of bicycle=avoid so perhaps it
doesn't matter.
I don't know if he's had any success, but Paul has attempted to get
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
wrote
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
What if the law is implicit? Is there consensus whether or not to tag
implicit laws?
Yes, we tag implicit speed limits (along with a source:maxspeed or whatever).
But there is a dispute between Nathan and Paul as to whether or
401 - 500 of 594 matches
Mail list logo
