Posting a cc of this to talk-us in case others can't download data in
while OSM is in read-only mode: try THIS!
Wbat version of JOSM are you using? I'm having no problem using
that plugin in v5159.
Ah, thank you so much, James. I was using 5088, upgrading to 5159
did it. Dang, that's a
Ngày 2012-04-02 5:25 AM, Phil! Gold viết:
There are actually two shield styles we have. There's the cutout-style
that you see by default and another style you can switch to that more
closely resembles the roadside reassurance signs for the routes. The
cutouts will probably load faster--more of
* CrystalWalrein closed...@hotmail.com [2012-04-02 15:45 -0700]:
For areas in New Jersey, when I look at this rendering, I get county shields
for all 500-series roads, but no shields are shown for 600-series roads
anywhere.
The formatting for county route relations in New Jersey is
stevea wrote:
Most specific shields in California look good and familiar, as you
make correct distinctions between Interstates and state routes.
However, county routes (designated by a regional letter and a
number, such as S 21) are not rendered with proper shields at all.
This is a critical
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@
* Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org [2012-04-03 02:19 -0700]:
Displaying concurrent shields in bunches is certainly an improvement
over all the maps that just pick one shield to display, and they
look like reassurance sign assemblies to boot. But it's still
strange to see shields hanging off either
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2012-04-02 14:34 -0400]:
A total of *two* relations have network=US:US:Business, vs. 707 with
network=US:US and modifier=Business. Yes, I know I had major
influence in that, but that was months ago.
There's also one US:OR:Business (which also has
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote:
I personally find [building footprints] makes the map far more usable
for adding other information.
the coastal-swath NOAA LIDAR footprints imported is MASS are wonderful.
(Especially in Stamen watercolor tiles, but also
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
Here's something that might be a diversion while you wait for the database
to allow editing again.
Richard Weait and I have been working on a rendering that uses route
relations to make individual shields that reflect what
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 4:26 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
* CrystalWalrein closed...@hotmail.com [2012-04-02 15:45 -0700]:
For areas in New Jersey, when I look at this rendering, I get county shields
for all 500-series roads, but no shields are shown for 600-series roads
anywhere.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Alexander Jones happy5...@gmail.com wrote:
And oddly, in the San Diego area, CA 209 and CA 75 (Point Loma
and Coronado, respectively) don't render with your newer shields, but
the old style Mapnik shields. Even in read only mode I am unable
coax JOSM to read
On 4/3/2012 10:21 AM, Chris Lawrence wrote:
- Secondaries (network US:VA:secondary) don't seem to be rendering at
all, and the fallback shields aren't showing up even where there are
ref tags (just seems to be using Mapnik style). Simple rule for VA:
if the ref= 600, or it has a letter in it,
On Tuesday, April 03, 2012 08:17:16 AM Phil! Gold wrote:
* Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org [2012-04-03 02:19 -0700]:
I'd prefer to see the shields strung out along the concurrency, with
no spacing between each shield. That would be especially helpful
where the concurrency's shields happen to
* Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org [2012-04-03 07:21 -0700]:
Also curious how some of the more interesting edge cases work out,
such as Missouri Secondary State Highways
Someone seems to have made route relations for a lot of these already,
with a network of US:MO:Supplemental, so that's what I
* Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org [2012-04-03 07:23 -0700]:
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Alexander Jones happy5...@gmail.com wrote:
Rosecrans is technically no longer a state highway, as CA 209 was
decommissioned in 2003. I could take another look at 75 when the database is
editable
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote:
Also curious how some of the more interesting edge cases work out,
such as Missouri Secondary State Highways, Oregon/Washington/Oklahoma
State Tour Routes, Oklahoma/Kansas Turnpike, or the 7 state highway
networks in
On 4/3/2012 10:54 AM, James Umbanhowar wrote:
I don't know if they use Mapnik, but I like the way Stamen places their
shields along concurrencies. e.g.
http://maps.stamen.com/terrain/#15/39.7542/-86.0373
The problem with this one is that only one shield shows up when the two
shields would be
On 4/3/2012 11:19 AM, Phil! Gold wrote:
A lot of those still don't render because they duplicate the
subnetwork in the ref tag, so Loop 5 (picking an arbitrary number) might
be represented as network=US:TX:LOOP, ref=5 Loop. Once the ref is changed
to a plain 5, it would be rendered properly.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
* Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org [2012-04-03 07:21 -0700]:
Also curious how some of the more interesting edge cases work out,
such as Missouri Secondary State Highways
Someone seems to have made route relations for a lot of
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
The edge cases are an opportunity for we, as a community, to get it
right. There are many many more signed routes that will be interesting
to one or more groups, as long as we have a reasonable way to tag
them.
That just
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/3/2012 11:19 AM, Phil! Gold wrote:
A lot of those still don't render because they duplicate the
subnetwork in the ref tag, so Loop 5 (picking an arbitrary number) might
be represented as network=US:TX:LOOP, ref=5
On 4/3/2012 11:57 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
FM and RM should render identically (obviously since they're actually
the same network)
Er no. On roadside assemblies the text FARM ROAD and RANCH ROAD
appears, and on green guide signs the shields have FM or RM up top.
* Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 10:21 -0400]:
- Secondaries (network US:VA:secondary) don't seem to be rendering at
all, and the fallback shields aren't showing up even where there are
ref tags (just seems to be using Mapnik style). Simple rule for VA:
if the ref = 600, or it
On 4/3/2012 11:59 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
That just reminded me... Chicago and Tulsa have city routes.
I'm not aware of any such routes in Chicago. Are you thinking of the
address numbers that are prominently posted on signs?
___
Talk-us mailing
On 4/3/2012 12:06 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
We're looking for US Business routes under a network of US:US:Business.
It probably isn't tagged that way. Once it is, it'll show up.
Again, you mean if, not once. It's not the job of renderers to force
a choice between equally-valid existing tagging
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:54 AM, James Umbanhowar jumba...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, April 03, 2012 08:17:16 AM Phil! Gold wrote:
* Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org [2012-04-03 02:19 -0700]:
I'd prefer to see the shields strung out along the concurrency, with
no spacing between each shield.
Ngày 2012-04-03 5:17 AM, Phil! Gold viết:
* Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org [2012-04-03 02:19 -0700]:
Displaying concurrent shields in bunches is certainly an improvement
over all the maps that just pick one shield to display, and they
look like reassurance sign assemblies to boot. But it's still
* Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org [2012-04-03 08:57 -0700]:
Oregon/Washington/Oklahoma State Tour Routes
Not currently supported. Can you point me at some information about
these?
I don't think there's been a real effort to tag these yet, the four in
Oregon I'm aware of are the Lewis
* Minh Nguyen m...@1ec5.org [2012-04-03 09:36 -0700]:
INDIANA and possibly others would be more legible in a wider font.
There's still space on either side to accommodate the text.
Only on the wide-format shields. On the narrower ones used for two-digit
numbers, the name runs right to the
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 11:44 -0400]:
On 4/3/2012 11:19 AM, Phil! Gold wrote:
A lot of those still don't render because they duplicate the
subnetwork in the ref tag, so Loop 5 (picking an arbitrary number) might
be represented as network=US:TX:LOOP, ref=5 Loop. Once
* Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org [2012-04-03 08:59 -0700]:
That just reminded me... Chicago and Tulsa have city routes.
I'm planning on looking at city routes after we sort out county routes.
And these edge cases (city routes and state secondary/supplemental
routes, especially oddball
On 4/3/2012 12:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
* Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 11:44 -0400]:
On 4/3/2012 11:19 AM, Phil! Gold wrote:
A lot of those still don't render because they duplicate the
subnetwork in the ref tag, so Loop 5 (picking an arbitrary number) might
be represented
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 12:07:57PM -0400, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On 4/3/2012 11:59 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
That just reminded me... Chicago and Tulsa have city routes.
I'm not aware of any such routes in Chicago. Are you thinking of the
address numbers that are prominently posted on signs?
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/3/2012 11:57 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
FM and RM should render identically (obviously since they're actually
the same network)
Er no. On roadside assemblies the text FARM ROAD and RANCH ROAD appears,
and on green
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
* Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 10:21 -0400]:
- Secondaries (network US:VA:secondary) don't seem to be rendering at
all, and the fallback shields aren't showing up even where there are
ref tags (just seems to
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
Ah, okay. I'll set them up just like other
named-but-not-publically-numbered routes like the New Jersey Turnpike and
look for network US:OK, no ref, and whetever their name is.
Just to avoid confusion with ODOT highways
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/3/2012 12:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
* Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 11:44 -0400]:
On 4/3/2012 11:19 AM, Phil! Gold wrote:
A lot of those still don't render because they duplicate the
* Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 13:36 -0400]:
On 4/3/2012 12:52 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
Point taken. They will appear on our particular rendering if the locals
choose to change the tagging.
So you'll include network=US:US ref=17 Truck as acceptable tagging?
Since I'm local
* Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 15:15 -0400]:
As NE2 correctly points out, the number may not be the best guide. VA
secondaries are a lot more like CR systems in other states or the
secondary system in Missouri, in that the numbering doesn't carry
between counties/cities
That just reminded me... Chicago and Tulsa have city routes. And
these edge cases (city routes and state secondary/supplemental routes,
especially oddball (Oregon) and extreme (Texas) cases) make for great
prepwork to render cycleway network trailblazers (which tend towards
obscenely diverse in
On 4/3/2012 5:19 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
If you want to tag your local routes that way, I won't stop you. But I
don't want to have to deal with multiple tagging standards and it seems to
me that there's a consensus on this list that network=US:US:Truck, ref=17
is the better approach, so that's
On Apr 3, 2012 3:15 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
That tagging is nonsense. There's no Truck U.S. Highway network, only a
U.S. Highway network that includes truck-bannered routes.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't bannered routes pretty much the reason
for the modifier tag?
On 4/3/2012 8:49 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Apr 3, 2012 3:15 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com
mailto:nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
That tagging is nonsense. There's no Truck U.S. Highway network,
only a U.S. Highway network that includes truck-bannered routes.
Correct me if I'm wrong,
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
* Chris Lawrence lordsu...@gmail.com [2012-04-03 10:21 -0400]:
I think concurrencies might look better stacked vertically in some
circumstances... you'd have to have some logic about the underlying
direction of the way to make
44 matches
Mail list logo
