Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

I told you Californians loved attention! I picked 6 Californias because I thought it was the nicest way to divide up the state into equally sized shapes with some reference to political boundaries. I also "detest" the politics of breaking up California but I like the geospatial organization. I

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

> On Nov 6, 2018, at 1:58 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea > wrote: > > Taken "straight across the state" (west to east), following the political > boundaries of "the northern edges of three counties" (admin_level=6) to break > up a state (admin_level=4), it's both easy (technically, simply "10

Re: [Talk-us] Review named junction nodes

Yeah, this seems to be a PA Turnpike thing. The first Maproulette task I got was this https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/xaK6JK7CzFYTEfkAp_kwtQ https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/345383389 Harald. On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 4:39 PM Martijn van Exel wrote: > I found a case[0] where the name is

Re: [Talk-us] Review named junction nodes

I found a case[0] where the name is definitely legitimate, so I added a warning to double check with available street level imagery, plus an example to the challenge instructions. Martijn [0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/33991781 , and see

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Simon Poole wrote: > I think the question is less where N vs S California is but more if > there is a regional split of California that would make sense from a > processing pov. Is for example somebody likely to do something with a > North-CA extract, or if you would want to do something on a

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Counties in California are very different in size and population. A few in the mountains have under 20,000 people and a rather small area. But Los Angeles county has 10 million people and covers a huge area. If 2 files become too big in a few years, it would be most useful to break up the states

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Jumping in here slightly unwarranted, but what the heck :-). I think the question is less where N vs S California is but more if there is a regional split of California that would make sense from a processing pov. Is for example somebody likely to do something with a North-CA extract, or if you

[Talk-us] Proposed building import in Hamilton County, Ohio

Below is a link to a proposed import for building footprints (with some address tags, height info, etc.) in Hamilton County Ohio. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hamilton_County_Building_Import We've been planning this on the OSM Ohio slack channel, but I figured I should reach out here

[Talk-us] Review named junction nodes

Hi, I created a MapRoulette challenge to review named junction nodes. Since named junctions are very uncommon, most of these should probably be edited. There’s only a few hundred of them so we should be able to review these together pretty quickly.

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

As another Californian (from the SF Bay Area) with some amount of opinion here, I suppose I'll chime in. The straight-ish line (northern boundaries of San Luis Obispo, Kern, and San Bernardino counties) seems largely reasonable to me as a possible North/South two-way split. (Other possible

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Bradley White wrote: > I would suggest splitting into North & South along the northern edge > of the SLO/Kern/San Bernardino county lines as the first step; this > will at least split the LA and SF Bay areas into separate files, both > of which I assume account for a significant portion of CA's

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Northern and Southern California would work; make the split along the county boundaries just north of Bakersfield, which conveniently follow one line of latitude. It would also be possible to split the State into Northern, Central and Southern regions, but this would be harder to define. Joseph

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

On Nov 6, 2018,at 12:38:05 AM PST, Frederik Ramm wrote: > ...on the Geofabrik download server, we usually split up countries into > sub-regions once their single .osm.pbf has gone over a certain size. The > aim is to make it easy for people to work with data just for their > region, even on

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Luis Villa writes: >> My guess is the only split that the majority in the state would instantly >> recognize would be “Northern California” and “Southern California”. However >> exactly where that split occurs is likely to be contested. :) >> >> Were I to hazard a guess, I would start on the

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

> 3. what would be a sensible way to split California - in 58 counties, or > maybe just go with SoCal and NorCal for now? I would suggest splitting into North & South along the northern edge of the SLO/Kern/San Bernardino county lines as the first step; this will at least split the LA and SF Bay

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big :)

Hi OSM US List -   California native and current resident here -- while implementing California urban planning analysis a few years ago,  we used a grouping based on the transportation governance here. The grouping is shown graphically in a blog post [0]     CA Landuse is governed at the county

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 5:59 AM Tod Fitch wrote: > > For background, I a 40 year resident of California and have lived, worked > and/or performed volunteer work in five of the “six Californias”. At > present I live in Orange County (part of the Six California’s “South > California” and perform

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

> On Nov 6, 2018, at 5:23 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Tod, > > generally, the Geofabrik OSM PBF extracts are available across the size > spectrum from continent to smallest extract, so the California OSM PBF > extract will not go away (sorry if I was unclear about that). > > But my

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Tod, generally, the Geofabrik OSM PBF extracts are available across the size spectrum from continent to smallest extract, so the California OSM PBF extract will not go away (sorry if I was unclear about that). But my assumption was that there might be a need for smaller files because the

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

I detested the “Six Californias” when it was being proposed as a ballot measure. Perhaps that is flavoring my response, but at one time or another I’ve generated topo maps for areas that lie within four of those six divisions so it would be a bit of a hassle for me to have that. If a split

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Hi, On 06.11.2018 11:53, Vivek Bansal wrote: > 2.  I would certainly love smaller more regularly updated extracts!  I'm > not sure how much my team would pay for it though. The downloads are free of charge. Maybe I should check with the Interline folks, I don't want to step on their toes with

Re: [Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Hi Frederik, Yes California is too big! We also like the attention! 1. Since the demise of metrozen extracts, I don't know of a good site outside of Geofabrik to get regulary updated OSM extracts of California. There is https://www.interline.io/osm/extracts/ but it is a similar business model

[Talk-us] California is too big ;)

Hi, on the Geofabrik download server, we usually split up countries into sub-regions once their single .osm.pbf has gone over a certain size. The aim is to make it easy for people to work with data just for their region, even on lower-spec hardware where it might be difficult to handle huge