Marc Gemis writes:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
The razed sections of the abandoned railway need not confuse anybody.
Or are you requesting a exception for railways ?
Yes, because a railway went from point A to point B, where you can see
Marc Gemis writes:
Sorry, but I'm not trolling. I just want to understand why the railway
people should get a different treatment.
Because there is a rendering of the data (openrailwaymap.org and the
ITO specialist renderings), and because people CARE.
If you're argument is to better
Sorry, but I'm not trolling. I just want to understand why the railway
people should get a different treatment.
If you're argument is to better understand why the landscape is like it is
now, then that is also true for razed streets [1] where the road used to
come closer to the buildings in the
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
The problem, as I see it, is that railroads are a contiguous
whole. Yet some people seem to think that a railroad should be shopped
up along its length, with part of it appearing in OSM (where you can
see it on the ground),
Hi,
On 04/17/2015 07:30 AM, Marc Gemis wrote:
What about previous swamps, forest, etc. that are now turned into ... ?
Careful there with the swamp enthusiast community ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote:
The razed sections of the abandoned railway need not confuse anybody.
Will you allow razed buildings and razed streets as well in OSM ( just
curious) ?
What about previous swamps, forest, etc. that are now turned into
Richard et al.,
Thanks for starting an interesting thread. There do seem to be an
increasing number of projects that live outside of OSM proper but that
connect loosely with OSM data and services.
By chance, I proposed a panel on this general topic for the upcoming
SOTM-US conference. My own
Mike Dupont writes:
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
If the two were layers in the same database, or if they have been
tagged using railway=dismantled and railway=abandoned, then it's no
problem to look at them, render them, edit them, analyze
There would be only one database. the layer would just be a filter that
would not display the railways.
if a railway is glued to a node which is moved in another layer, we would
have to duplicate it, so no data can be accidentally changed if not visible.
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Russ
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
If the two were layers in the same database, or if they have been
tagged using railway=dismantled and railway=abandoned, then it's no
problem to look at them, render them, edit them, analyze them
I still dont understand
On 4/4/15 8:29 AM, Mike Dupont wrote:
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com
mailto:nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
If the two were layers in the same database, or if they have been
tagged using railway=dismantled and railway=abandoned, then it's no
problem to
On 4/3/2015 9:17 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
i think the long term future of OSM will probably involve more
OHM like projects to supplement OSM. my question is how will
the core OSM community treat them? right now it seems very
mixed.
I think it's a great idea. There may be some definition
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
so one of the things from recent discussion that concerns me are
perceptions out there about projects parallel to OSM that are designed
to complement it, specifically OHM. here is an outline of the view from
OHM, and
Richard Welty writes:
[OHM is] a real database, using the OSM software stack. it's live, and you
can pan around in it and not see much because it's pretty sparse.
The problem, as I see it, is that railroads are a contiguous
whole. Yet some people seem to think that a railroad should be
so one of the things from recent discussion that concerns me are
perceptions out there about projects parallel to OSM that are designed
to complement it, specifically OHM. here is an outline of the view from
OHM, and i'm interesting in understanding why some treat the whole
project so dismissively
On 4/3/15 10:40 AM, Greg Morgan wrote:
If you are asking for an opinion, then this is the kind-of thing that
is a detriment to OSM. Whereas I try to use OpenSeaMap tags where I
can for the limited features that sea map applies, I won't go out of
my way to add data to OSH. My main concern
16 matches
Mail list logo
