[Talk-us] Whole-US Garmin Map update - 2015-09-14

[Dave Hansen]

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@ list, others can benefit.

Downloads:

http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2015-09-14

Map to visualize what each file contains:


http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2015-09-14/kml/kml.html


FAQ



Why did you do this?

I wrote scripts to joined them myself to lessen the impact
of doing a large join on Lambertus's server.  I've also
cut them in large longitude swaths that should fit conveniently
on removable media.  

http://daveh.dev.openstreetmap.org/garmin/Lambertus/2015-09-14

Can or should I seed the torrents?

Yes!!  If you use the .torrent files, please seed.  That web
server is in the UK, and it helps to have some peers on this
side of the Atlantic.

Why is my map missing small rectangular areas?

There have been some missing tiles from Lambertus's map (the
red rectangles),  I don't see any at the moment, so you may
want to update if you had issues with the last set.

Why can I not copy the large files to my new SD card?

If you buy a new card (especially SDHC), some are FAT16 from
the factory.  I had to reformat it to let me create a >2GB
file.

Does your map cover Mexico/Canada?

Yes!!  I have, for the purposes of this map, annexed Ontario
in to the USA.  Some areas of North America that are close
to the US also just happen to get pulled in to these maps.
This might not happen forever, and if you would like your
non-US area to get included, let me know. 

-- Dave


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

[Talk-us] Long way in Lake County, CA no tags - broken boundary or other relation?

[Blake Girardot]

Hi all,

Could someone with some knowledge or expertise please investigate this way:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158013854

I think it part of broken boundary relation or something, but it has no 
tags and does not seem to belong to any relations.


I only have the vaguest idea how boundaries and relations are used so I 
do not mess with them and when needed, find a more experienced mapper to 
help me with them.


I already left a note on the last changeset to modify this way as well:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/32790926

But I can't do anything to fix it and it happens to be in the middle of 
a current wildfire area (Valley Fire in CA) so will be seen and/or used 
by lots of people in the near and long term future.


Cheers,
Blake


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

Re: [Talk-us] Long way in Lake County, CA no tags - broken boundary or other relation?

[Eric Ladner]

There are places where it roughly corresponds to the border of Boggs
Mountain State Forest.  It fairly well follows the outline on the USGS map
in certain places, but about 80-90 percent of the way wanders away
significantly (miles) from that border.  Agree that it's most likely not
useful.

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 7:41 AM Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 17/09/2015 13:20, Blake Girardot wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Could someone with some knowledge or expertise please investigate this
> > way:
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158013854
> >
>
> A quick glance at
>
> http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=158013854
>
> suggests that it was created in
>
> http://osm.org/browse/changeset/11185320
>
> which appears to be an import.
>
> Some other ways created in that changeset have been deleted:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158014603
>
> (comment "Delete inaccurate imported landuse data")
>
> so I suspect that it's just more of the same.  The original importer's
> still active - if you're unsure I'd suggest asking them about it.  It
> appears unlikely that it's anything useful.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy (SomeoneElse)
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Another road classification disagreement (this time with HFCS in Kansas)

[Toby Murray]

I decided to use my county and just go retag a bunch of roads. Most of
the roads outside of the city that aren't highways were still
highway=residential from the TIGER import. I found this map on the
KDOT website (which I have permission to use as a source):
http://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/bureaus/burTransPlan/maps/county-pdf/riley.PDF

I went through and upgraded all roads marked as "Minor collectors" and
"Major collectors" from residential to tertiary. The result can best
be seen at zoom level 12:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1070359#map=12/39.4386/-96.7724

There are a few places where I diverged from the map a bit. For
example the city of Riley has no collectors marked on the KDOT map but
I still bumped the main road through it to highway=tertiary. There
were a couple of places where I didn't really think an upgrade to
tertiary was warranted but at the time I just went with it anyway. I
may go back and do some tweaking.

Overall I feel like this makes a reasonable road network. While
editing, I could often (although not always) see a visual difference
between the roads marked as collectors and those marked as "local
roads" on the KDOT map so it kind of provided a secondary source to
justify differing classifications.

Thoughts?

On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Toby Murray  wrote:
> My general rule of thumb for highway tagging in rural Kansas is as
> follows. If I know nothing else about the road I start off with US
> highway = primary, Kansas highway = secondary and county roads =
> tertiary. Then adjust as needed.
>
> For example. K-10 between Lawrence and Olathe [1] is controlled
> access, dual carriageway with a 70 MPH speed limit so I would probably
> bump it from secondary to trunk although I'm not sure I can come up
> with a reason why its current tag of motorway is wrong so... sure, I'm
> ok with that.
>
> Another exception: I downgraded US 24 to secondary and upgraded K-82
> to primary between Leonardville and Riley [2] because that leg of US
> 24 through Leonardville has a lower speed limit, no shoulder
> whatsoever and is just generally a less maintained road than K-82.
>
> I suppose there is some degree of subjectivity to the "adjust as
> needed" step and things won't always match up with government opinion
> but I feel like the end result is a better representation of how the
> roads are actually built and maintained in the real world.
>
> Toby
>
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/38.9499/-95.0109
> [2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/39.3301/-96.8853

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