[Talk-us] Townships (was Re: Talk-us Digest, Vol 116, Issue 44)

On 07/27/2017 11:16 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: > By wide consensus, and because it works this way in a large number > (perhaps even unanimously?) of the 20 out of 50 states in which > townships exist, townships are a "complete" division of a county, > with no "leftovers." Funny you mention

Re: [Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 116, Issue 44

Albert Pundt writes: > Why are townships, boroughs, towns, and cities in PA mapped with separate > admin levels, or at least "supposed to be" mapped that way according to that > page? As far as I know they're always only ever one level below county, and > never overlap.

Re: [Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin level 9?

Why are townships, boroughs, towns, and cities in PA mapped with separate admin levels, or at least "supposed to be" mapped that way according to that page? As far as I know they're always only ever one level below county, and never overlap. i.e. you never have a town in the middle of some other

Re: [Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin level 9?

OK, three topics shake out from this, two Pennsylvania, one Boston. I'll try (and likely fail) to be brief: 1) Pittsburgh's neighborhoods, now entered and tagged admin_level=9, seem like they are better entered as admin_level=10, to harmonize with neighborhoods in many other states.

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Sourcing Open Aerial Imagery

Thanks for the correction Simon! Sorry I missed that announcement... I will update the editor-layer-index project docs to include some guidance on using the imagery waiver. Bryan > On Jul 27, 2017, at 1:29 PM, Simon Poole wrote: > > > > Am 27.07.2017 um 16:23 schrieb Bryan

Re: [Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin level 9?

​ ​> , "about 41 out of 50" states (leaving 9) were believed correct as described in that table. (And, that was posted here). > On July 10, Peter Dobratz and I (among others) submitted the six New England states (of those 9) in a sub-table, which I harmonized into that wiki's "Big Table."

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Sourcing Open Aerial Imagery

Am 27.07.2017 um 16:23 schrieb Bryan Housel: > TODO: We don’t have a template letter, or clear guidelines on which > imagery licenses are compatible with our use, and we should. > See https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index/issues/166 . Like > you said in your other email, tracing is

Re: [Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin level 9?

(Appologies as I was in the middle of writing my reply when inadvertantly hitting send. Here's the whole message) Boundaries below admin_level=8 are still being discussed. There was some discussion on this list as well as the OSM wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_

Re: [Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin level 9?

> Albert Pundt writes > I noticed that the neighborhoods in Pittsburgh are mapped as administrative > boundaries with admin_level=9. Is this proper? The wiki page for U.S. admin > levels doesn't list any use for admin level 9 in Pennsylvania, though this > seems appropriate if Pittsburgh

Re: [Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin level 9?

Boundaries below admin_level=8 are still being discussed. There was some discussion on this list as well as the OSM wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:United_States_admin_level#Nine_state_improvement Having lived in Pittsburgh, I remember that the neighborhood boundaries are well

[Talk-us] weeklyOSM #366 2017-07-18-2017-07-24

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 366, is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/9299/ Enjoy! weeklyOSM? who?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Sourcing Open Aerial Imagery

Thanks Kevin for the followup - sourcing imagery for use in editors is indeed a complicated topic! I think the key takeaways (TL;DR): - there are lots of public sources of aerial imagery available, especially at the us-state level, and we could use help collecting them. -

Re: [Talk-us] Request to review edits by Zowie Polie

Hi Maning, I've also noticed and reverted a couple of Zowie Polie's changes. It doesn't seem like they're responding to blocks or changeset comments, either. I did notice that some of the stuff they're deleting is only visible in newer imagery. I wonder if they're looking at older imagery and

[Talk-us] Request to review edits by Zowie Polie

Hi, Our team noticed Zowie Polie [0] deleting/modifying/adding major roads, service roads and buildings, random fictional features such as parks etc. over the US. We think a lot of her/his edits are suspicious. See changeset here [1]. This user also had a block from DWG [2]. We commented on

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Decline in accuracy of capture date metadata in Bing imagery

On 07/27/2017 12:23 AM, Brian May wrote: As for legal use and permissions, always look to the state statutes that specifies handling of public records requests. That is always going to override anything at the county / local level. For example, in Florida, the state statute says no agency