(Answered off-list).
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Please tag boundary=census on census tracts. These are distinct from
boundary=administrative + admin_level=8 (for city or town boundaries, at least
in California). See United States/admin_level for what works out to be all
fifty states and six "other things" like Territories and
many labels on many maps, especially when
they are older or specify an "older" aspect of a map label such as "Pack
Trail." This has an old-fashioned sense about it, as while pack animals on
trails are certainly still used, it's safe to say far, far less than the
ad
motorcycle, all-terrain-vehicle / four-runner or other high-clearance, two-axle
vehicle. It is a common phrase seen on maps of the 19th and 20th centuries,
but has fallen somewhat out of favor, though is still seen and used.
SteveA
___
Tal
le I'm no fan of edit wars, let's keep up
the vigilance and good work to remain as civil as we can with these folks.
Sometimes, with patience and a sort of
mentoring-while-not-appearing-to-be-mentoring, they can be shaped into great
contributors, other times, they are stubborn and don't reall
he extent it aids
better landcover mapping), it is a lightweight data structure, tagged with only
three tags (fire=perimeter, start_date and end_date), it remains invisible to
all renderers (that I know of) and is intended to aid mappers determining
"should re-mapping of landcover happ
Thanks, Richard. That's valuable input and I've updated the USBRS wiki, which
effectively puts the (informal) proposal for
proposed:route=bicycle into a sort of stalemate.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https
s areas just clearcut.
This thread likely shouldn't have been cross-posted by me to talk-us and is now
(substantially) continued at the tagging list.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
e other hand, if it isn't appropriate that we map any of this,
please say so.
Thank you, especially any guidance offered from HOT contributors who have
worked on post-fire humanitarian disasters,
SteveA
California (who has returned home after evacuation, relatively safe now that
this fire is 100% co
ording to local
convention). Clear!
May this clarify similar strategies for better place=* tagging in the USA. It
is complicated when US English diverges from the more British (or Australian)
English that strongly influences wiki definitions of tags, but with some
discussion, we can both better understand these potentially confusing (but
ultimately understandable) differences, and tag well, even in the USA.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Of course, I'm not pointing fingers or placing blame on any person / human in
particular. We agree: a bit of cleaning some rust off of the toolchain.
Change management. Does that happen on this channel? That's OK: no need to
answer that.
SteveA
hile I still find murky and mysterious exactly "how" to effect change in
renderers (who you gonna call?), my two best efforts along these lines are to
"tag well" and "wiki well." (And that can include a great deal of discussion
and consensus building on its ow
tend towards the ephemeral,
transitory-natured "I think this a good bike ride" GPX data, rather than "these
are official or quasi-official (signed on the ground)" bicycle route data
contained in OSM. Happily. the Internet has room for both. Is OSM
"unparalleled" when
in the United States."
The "definition" of "neighborhood" in the USA is even less clear, though it is
possible to draw the beginnings of a rough box around it. We could spend some
time trying to refine this, but I believe it would be difficult and possibly
contentious,
tly
wrong, but not absolutely), then these data are refined into adherence to
specification. Sure, we'd love the high-granularity, absolutely correct data
to enter the map "first, always and we're done," but that doesn't always happen.
> Exactly. My rule of thumb is if you're
he sub-city level. Larger
cities DO have these, admin_level=10 is correct on them. Smaller cities and
rural areas that are "a cluster of homes/houses/dwellings?" I think a
(multi)polygon tagged landuse=residential works well there.
SteveA
___
Whoops, "but NOT if it isn't something like a council"
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
f wards at admin_level=9 that are purely voting / electoral districts to
being better tagged administrative=political.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
=suburb, but it
makes me wrinkle my brow a bit at it not fitting as well as a
landuse=residential (multi)polygon might rather generically and innocently
(without any hierarchy required) fit in.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
you tag
appropriately. Tag "appropriately" and help it out: it will help you out with
a pretty "blossom" of your tagging. (Unless it doesn't, but then we're out at
the hairy edge of OSM and Carto...another, bigger, topic).
SteveA
__
s. Thanks,
again, Elliott, for a great suggestion.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
ce. Your suggestion to
consider Lifecycle_prefix in addition is both welcome and excellent, imo.
Thank you.
If anybody wishes to contribute a suggested strategy to include
Lifecycle_prefix tagging in our USBRS wiki, I welcome that and also consider
doing so myself.
What a great proje
Minor correction to my previous post: USBR 1 in Washington DC is a new route,
not a realignment.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
ASHTO to enter these data from these ballots.
Thank you for helping to build Earth's largest official cycling route network:
check out our wiki, follow the links to the turn-by-turn and map data and have
fun making bicycle route data in OSM more complete and better!
SteveA
California
One of many USBRS-in
areful and
accurate mapping might influence "official" or "authoritative" GIS data. It
can, it has, it does and it will continue to do so.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
r "adjustment or correction."
Nicely, I believe we are both correct!
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
ender according to our hammered-out-here
agreements on how this should and will best take place. We really are getting
closer to doing this, thanks to excellent discussion here.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
evin and Joseph talking, this feels like it can get solved!
Thanks for putting on thinking caps and typing words carefully,
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
tion with strict criteria (like it
must be signed, benched or on another map). OSM tends to "self-heal" if it
runs away with itself like this. (Strong local volunteers who mentor and grow
novice users and establish wide consensus greatly helps, too).
Too long, stopping here,
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
at the sign
says (which Frederik posted and I have seen personally). Speculating, I'd
guess this sign was placed there by local search and rescue personnel (might be
fire / paramedics) who don't wish to be burdened with rescues (or worse) at the
s
erers
do their magic. (As usual, but it's a good question, thank you for that
familiar sign and I'm glad there is such lively participation in suggestions).
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
belongs in OSM for many reasons and want it tagged "correctly." Yes, there are
other maps that show this, I believe OSM should have these data, too, as this
perimeter will affect much (in the real world) and much newer, updated mapping
in OSM going forward.
Thank you for your suggestions,
AT
unusual, even if some wiki pages are explicit about it and others are less so
or not.
A subset of these are something we used to call "WikiProjects" but somehow that
moniker seems to have dissolved.
SteveA
> On Aug 21, 2020, at 6:38 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I feel like now i
ined through a certain kind of use, because we
talked about it some more here. That's a good conversation we might have here.
Or on the tagging list.
Let's talk about it; we're here on talk and doing so and it's not crystal clear
and does seem to blend into access=destination.
SteveA
_
m for
> driveway access (which, IMO, is already implied by service=driveway)
Thank you Kevin: when you word it like that, I fully agree with you — this is
a very workable solution.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists
s some more discussion and
consensus and may vary by region to conform with law and/or custom. We'll get
there.
SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Please click on the "View History" link of the wiki page (upper right) to see
the contributors to this wiki (there are ten).
You can click on their username links to contact them.
SteveA
> On Aug 2, 2020, at 8:25 AM, 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk
> wrote:
> Did someone on th
thank Taylor for his quick reply
to my request for state-issued county boundary data: I appreciate the pointer.
SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
rstanding.
As the issue seems to be "at the highest zoom levels" (where I assume it wasn't
before), I defer to the authors of the renderer code to determine what the root
cause may be.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
If any Colorado or Rocky Mountain area mappers know where data may be acquired
to fix some missing segments in the boundary of Clear Creek County
(relation/442310), I ask that they either be pointed to or that those data
please be repaired.
SteveA
ow it was previously though
incorrectly tagged."
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
as rendering support, or lack
thereof, for various values of protect_class), it is possible I lack full
clarity into either the present exception of or intended effects of these tags
and the Carto renderer. Here, I only offer my best explanation of present
tag
.
This is a difficult and contentious (less so, but still) topic in OSM in the
USA, so tag your best, map your best. OSM can keep kicking this can down the
road, but eventually will need to harmonize parks / public lands tagging with
better rendering.
SteveA
___
Let's all be careful growing these wonderful map data. They are wonderful,
often beautiful.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
(I
think!) and take responsibility for our actions. Sometimes, we are not aware
that our actions are like pulling a machine gun trigger or tipping over an
entire bucket of paint: relatively minor actions on our part but which have a
profound effect on the map's data.
Be aware, the map
se data
before you remove "no" tags. Individually during a review that might go pretty
quickly, but not all at once with an assumption that sounds a lot like a lark
or a wish. Be careful!
Cautious sometimes (including here), rather than bold (but bold on occasion),
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Jul 7, 2020, at 4:37 PM, Bob Gambrel wrote:
> A very good answer stevea. I suspect the changes I have been making would be
> appropriate enough for removing tiger_reviewed=no.
>
> 1) almost always have driven the road as passenger taking notes in OSMAND+
> about pavement
odeArea to a (unique) county,
rather than a whole state-at-a-time. Good luck, have fun, share with your OSM
friends how this can be a fun activity in your local area and let's slay the
TIGER dragon!
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
You never know!
Thank you for offering your "streaming JOSM" session, it's a great idea,
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Chuck contacted me, Nathan and Clay are included in the emails, we'll see how
many of us might make it tomorrow.
Thank you for organizing the discussion, Michael.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https
relation and I'd be happy to be wrong on this
> point.
It's rich, deep and almost beyond my ken. I think I can understand it, I think
many who are reading this can, too. Speaking for myself, we're out on the
hairy edge of my understanding of MPs, super-rela
ght take some work on the part of
an intrepid OSM mapper to do this, as I'm not sure the way the USFS publishes
the geo data of the NFs these are quite delineated "by Ranger District," but it
could be done. And maybe it should be, I think it would be a nice thing to map.
Hey, it's a TAL
uters, one-to-many inners (inholdings) and both tags on the multipolygon
itself (protect_class=6, operator=USFS, protection_title=National Forest...)
AND tags on the individual inner members which are different (operator=BLM, for
example). I've understood this and tagged like this for many years (an
s blend ZIP codes and census boundaries, you'd muddy a lot of water by
using ZCTAs, especially as you use OSM data.
I, too, (like Clifford) wish you good luck and hope you have fruitful results
you might share with us here at the completion of your project.
SteveA
___
USFS may or might "have influence to someday manage."
If we ignore 3) as "not real, but rather aspirational or in the future rather
than the present, and certainly not on-the-ground" then an OSM multipolygon
consists of simply 1) plus 2).
Yes?
SteveA
"owned by USFS" (when the
government owns land, the People own the land; the government agency is
operator FOR the People) which I seem to confuse with 3). Am I doing that? Is
Bradley? Is Congress? Is it about ownership and operator status being
confused in my mind?
I'm not stupid,
at least how these
should best logically be expressed by OSM relations. The discussion is good, I
simply reiterate my "I still don't quite understand all of this very well" here
and now. Brian seems to agree with me and I don't think I'm alone. Let's keep
the momentum rolling until
nd owned by the People, and managed for us properly, under
law, BY our federal employees, the USFS."
I retreat to more of a "watching mode" to see if more discussion shakes out of
this. Again, it is fascinating.
SteveA
___
Ta
ould map it as protected. That doesn't
seem weird to me, although "half of Reno in a NF" does. Most importantly how
would we / who declares where is this "other" boundary? (not the Congressional
one, the one which says "the USFS actually owns and manages this") Very
confusing as stated; I think we can state this more clearly.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Jun 21, 2020, at 5:58 PM, Mike Thompson wrote:
> 1) Not all "inholdings" are completely surrounded by the National Forest,
> they are "bites" off the edge in some cases. I don't think one can have an
> inner ring and an outer ring which are at all coincident (they can't share an
> edge)
s a member tagged "inner." Voilà, double-duty and done.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
structures when we already achieve this with one data structure (and possibly
others, by that I mean "one multipolygon representing the forest, which might
have inner members," while noting that ADDITIONAL polygons can describe what
the i
olygon memberships need to be added to this relation." And that's
OK, but if / as we do so, let's make note of it (perhaps a FIXME tag in the
relation with value "Incomplete; needs more inner members to describe the full
gamut of all inholdings in this forest.")
SteveA
___
ageable. I am not an attorney.
It's OK to have similar conversations over and over again. We get a bit
smarter and sharper as we do, as long as we don't lose patience or civility. I
think we're fine in that department.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mail
Mike, I hadn't considered that, it distinctly deepens the discussion. Stroking
my chin and saying "hm" now.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
elations representing national forests." With "perfect,
rich structure?" Every single first draft? Let's talk in a week or month,
these might take some work and discussion and work and discussion to do them.
That's OK. Earth wasn't built in a day.
SteveA
offer "status reporting"
with color-coded tables.
I am bowled over that Nathan Proudfoot says "Researchers utilize OSM as we have
the most up to date railway map in the country of any data source...". Wow!
Go OSM,
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
It is absolutely fascinating (to me, anyway) to watch this conversation!
I thanked Russ Nelson on wiki for his comments at New York/Railroads. (And we
still have a ways to go there).
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https
is in both our tagging and in
our wiki, and again, quite extensively.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
tion / standardization can happen later. This
seems a workable approach, though I'd like to hear from others who might posit
that a "no, let's globalize such tagging immediately" approach is better.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
I am finding quite a few of these with
quite-poorly tagged boundaries. Surely, OSM can do better than this, but Tod
asks an excellent question: "with what tags, please?"
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
My apologies (it was my error): the correct link to Chuck's post is
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Talk:OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_North_America
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
nversation. But what else would we call "the
remainder of land which is used for residential purposes which does not
strictly contain the footprint of a building (hut, apartment, tent, hogan, mud
daub dwelling)?" Something other than residential? It is residential!
SteveA
___
now map and perhaps might map with tags we
agree are more accurate (or not). The topics are rich and complex, indeed.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
two sides
and I'm not sure which is more important: convenience or accuracy. I lean
towards accuracy, that is simply me (and my nature). Others are welcome to
disagree, which means some discussion must continue. Honestly, I think the
discussion is productive, provided we remain civil, and w
treetMap is valueable because it
> provides local knowledge of what is really there.
The "land, as it is being used, residentially" (denoted in OSM as
landuse=residential) is really there, so I do.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
ot; vs. "potential landuse," (does
take place vs. can or might take place) where some say to "tag only what is
actual." Others see this approach as a removal of land rights, further
muddying what OSM means by landuse.
These issues truly are complicated,
sagreement about these topics to
anybody, now seems to be a good time and place to express it.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
On Jun 2, 2020, at 4:11 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> stevea writes:
>> ...we ask the wider community "what do you think?" and "What are best
>> practices here?"
>
> Agreed this is really hard.
I'm heartened to hear others share not necessarily on
It sounds like we are all on a "broad mind" of "channel what is known locally
about land-use, deeply." That is many different things around the world. Let
us keep a very open mind about how we characterize and categorize. These are
deep and diffi
Mateusz Konieczny writes:
> (quoting stevea)
"treed farmland" or "heavily wooded residential" prove slightly problematic to
OSM tagging.
Then, Mateusz Konieczny answers:
> Map tree-covered area (landuse=forest) and map farmland (landuse=farmland) or
> residentia
ne and build polygons to describe an area and tag them accurately, though
many combinations render differently.
This is being sent to both talk-us and the tagging list, where I think the
latter may be a better place, but this was noticed by a couple of Cal
Due to some discussion between Minh, Martin and I on the Talk page of United
States admin_level, we seemed to agree that restoring admin_level=6 to
Connecticut counties is reasonable. I did so, and made minor changes to the
wiki to outline why.
SteveA
mind talking about them again, though because
renderers change, laws change, better/newer tagging schemes sometimes emerge,
they almost MUST be talked about every so often. We're simply discussing. I
strive mightily to keep my mind open and not seem autocratic and having an
attitude o
t look like 5, in a certain way, in Connecticut, because of x, y and z.
But nobody is hearing that and nobody but user:Mashin is saying so. (At least
in wiki and talk-us. Slack? That's proprietary. I avoid secret-sauce
walkie-talkies in an open data project, but that's me. I do hear that people
use it to communicate, I wouldn't know what's on it).
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Thank you, Kevin. And so it goes.
I'll be an observer for a while.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
government agree on
these things. Sometimes, not quite. That's OK, especially as we recognize
this, point it out and explain why. I think we do OK here. The distinctions
can be subtle, but they are explainable, so we do.
Wow, people still have patience to discuss this!
SteveA
quot; Mashin has (only begun, in my opinion) to make
it and it needs to be FURTHERED by addressing the "limited powers" aspects of
these RCOGs. That is a wholly unspoken conversation, and so, (to quote the
Soup Nazi): "no admin_level for you." Maybe in the future with (currently,
unmade) supporting arguments, but "not today."
If you've read this far, I deeply thank your patience with this topic.
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
y=COG). Maybe that's OK, maybe
admin_level wasn't meant to be "beaten up" like that. I don't look forward to
participating in those discussions, that's for sure.
It's manageable, it takes some words and time to slog through. Let's keep that
trimmed well.
SteveA
> On May 7, 2020,
ple involved.
>
> Good luck,
> Clifford
I appreciate the Slack post, I appreciate your wish for good luck, I appreciate
you reminding us that patience can quickly wear thin regarding OSM admin_level
discussions. Indeed, they can frequently use good luck.
SteveA
___
." Please help this Discussion if you have this sort of knowledge / wisdom
to contribute.
Thank you,
SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
any others who endeavor to
bring these routes and this system to OSM and the world. AASHTO may approve
these, in which case OSM removes the state=proposed tag. It all works!
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
ht
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
I just finished entering the last 15% - 20% of USBR 50 in California as a
"first draft" into OSM. Thanks for entering the first 80% or so, Bradley:
teamwork!
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstr
n a crowdsourced map, especially),
SteveA
> On Apr 15, 2020, at 6:47 AM, Harald Kliems wrote:
>
> I'm happy to report that the proposed WI segment of USBR 30 is complete now.
> My route relation skills are a little rusty, and so it's possible that some
> of the forward/b
the Approved section. Just dotting my is
and crossing my ts.
And thank you both Harald (for asking around) and Bradley for terrific progress
on USBR 50 in California!
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
ing to build Earth's largest
official cycling route network, check out our wiki, follow the links to the
turn-by-turn and map data and have fun!
SteveA
California
USBRS-in-OSM guy (among other hats I wear)
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@ope
turing this for some time, but as it would be a first (for USA rail
wiki pages) I'd like some feedback in case there might be a better way to do
this I haven't thought of.
If interested, please see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Talk:California/Railroads
for the further discuss
ttps://wiki.osm.org/wiki/United_States/Railways
and
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_North_America
although I leave how and where exactly (or even whether you do so) up to you.
Thank you,
SteveA
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@open
d" for accuracy).
Finally, you could also add a similar "In North America..." text blurb directly
to
https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dhalt#Distinction_Between_Halt_and_Station
(there is already one bullet point that is specific to Germany).
SteveA
_
1 - 100 of 592 matches
Mail list logo
