Re: [Talk-it] access=permit

aggiungerei un'altra osservazione: access=permit si riferisce a tutti i mezzi, mentre per situazioni dove L'ingresso con la macchina al centro storico è limitato a residenti (e forse ospiti di alberghi, altri autorizzati, ecc.), e dove forse *=permit potrebbe avere senso (generalmente sarebbe

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

Some other possible values: undesirable unnecessary unwanted unneeded undiscussed disapproved clutter However, among your examples you cite "gnis:feature_id=*" The wiki page for this key notes: "Unlike other imported tags such as gnis:created=* and gnis:import_uuid=*, gnis:feature_id=* is

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

Hello, Le 17.03.20 à 16:26, rodeo .be a écrit : > I assume they were not visible because the tags were deprecated military=bunker isn't deprecated, it's the correct tag for a bunker still in military use. I found at least one currently visible mapped with a node

[Talk-it] Mappa diffusione CoVid-19

Su FB ho trovato questa mappa interattiva [1], su una base OSM mostra i dati del contagio in varie modalità, la trovo interessante. Io non ne ho le capacità ma chi si diletta potrebbe riuscire a fare di meglio, aggiungendo altri dati. [1]

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

I think it's reasonable to mark something as this was used by an import long ago, isn't used by mappers now, and the existence of it shouldn't be taken as a clue that it's current good practice but I think this should also be done in a way that is not unkind to or judgemental about

[OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

Hey all, I was driving around today, and saw some bunkers along the road that were not visible on the map. But they were tagged on OSM ... already 11y ago .. I assume they were not visible because the tags were deprecated. What are the

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

On 3/17/2020 10:52 AM, Wayne Emerson, Jr. via talk wrote: However, among your examples you cite "gnis:feature_id=*" The wiki page for this key notes: "Unlike other imported tags such as gnis:created=* and gnis:import_uuid=*, gnis:feature_id=* is meaningful beyond the import. In fact, some

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

excuus voor de mierenneukerij, maar het is relevant, denk ik: s/abandonned/abandoned/g ;) On 2020-03-17 16:15, Lionel Giard wrote: For abandonned (historic) military bunker, the correct mapping is : - abandonned:building=bunker - military=bunker - bunker_type=* (most of them are pillbox for

[Talk-it] +++Nuovo modello autocertificazione (17/3/2020)+++

Magari a qualcuno interessa... Il link al modello non funziona. Buona giornata https://www.interno.gov.it/it/notizie/nuovo-modello-autodichiarazioni -- Lorenzo Rolla ___ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-it] +++Nuovo modello autocertificazione (17/3/2020)+++

Un bel form pdf online non sarebbe male: é piuttosto difficile scrivere il comune di residenza in un centimetro. Il mar 17 mar 2020, 12:23 Lorenzo Rolla ha scritto: > Magari a qualcuno interessa... Il link al modello non funziona. Buona > giornata > >

Re: [Talk-it] access=permit

Am Mo., 16. März 2020 um 19:04 Uhr schrieb Marcello : > Considerando che le strade inserite mi sembrano assolutamente normali e > che sono state inserite al primo o ai primi edit mi viene il sospetto > che chi lo ha aggiunto lo abbia voluto usare per specificare che > l'accesso è permesso

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Bunkers

are you sure it's not building=bunker abandoned:military=bunker ? my reasoning is: it's still a building, but no longer a military installation. m. On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 5:16 PM Lionel Giard wrote: > > For abandonned (historic) military bunker, the correct mapping is : > -

Re: [Talk-it] +++Nuovo modello autocertificazione (17/3/2020)+++

Un bravo anche a questo giovane... https://autocertificazionespostamenti.it Il giorno mar 17 mar 2020 alle 15:37 Cascafico Giovanni ha scritto: > Un bel form pdf online non sarebbe male: é piuttosto difficile scrivere il > comune di residenza in un centimetro. > > Il mar 17 mar 2020, 12:23

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

"unmaintained"? On 17 March 2020 10:52:39 CET, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >On 17/3/20 8:22 pm, Marc M. wrote: >> Hello Joseph, >> >> it may give the impression that this is the way it should be done. >> I agree to identify these "Noise" or poor quality tags, but with a >> keyword to

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

Unlike some of those who responded, I was not intending this status to be a "mark of shame", but rather informative. As mentioned, some imported tags like "gnis:feature_id=*" are useful to keep the Openstreetmap database object directly linked to an object in an external database. That's why I

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

I would like to stress once again how easily it is for intended semantics of what is meant to be tagged, "improve-tagged" or "tag-modernized so that people understand the historical context of this tag" to diverge from the semantics that OTHER volunteers / contributors to OSM glean from these.

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

Dear Joseph, dear readers of this list, as you mention the street lamps of Düsseldorf here and thinking that they were an import to the OSM-database, I can tell you that this was not the case. Many of he streets of Düsseldorf, city of about 600_000 inhabitants, capital of Northrhine-Westfalia,

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

Hello, the creation of the object:* tagging was the result of many remarks and disscussions. Most people agreed that the addr:* tag should be used only for buildings, shps, offices, etc. I thought that there was a need for an alternative addresing scheme that could be used without conflicting

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

See, data always have a backstory. Thinking you know what it is, or that you can improve upon OSM by erasing existing data that has a backstory, hmmm, give that one a good, long think first before you do anything. Discuss with others, research, think about past, present and even future

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

> I don't think that swiching from addr:* to object:* on these objects is > correctly described by the term "mechanical edit". Yes it was a mechanic/automated edit, because you switched all the tags at once Not all mechanical edits are bad:

Re: [Talk-at] serice=alley am Lande

On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 20:59:38 +0100 Patrick Strasser-Mikhail wrote: > Das gleiche gilt für service=driveway (das wäre eine Auffahrt im Sinne > der amerikanischen Suburbs, also eine kurze Einfahrt auf privatem Grund, > die quasi Parkplatz ist). Öfters sehe ich das als Teil einer >

[Talk-at] serice=alley am Lande

Hallo! Ich bin über seltsames Tagging gestoßen: In ganz Österreich gibt es viele highway=service (Haus- und Hofzufahrten ohne weiter Verbindungsfunktion), die zusätzlich service=alley (also "Enge Gasse, Versorgungssgasse") haben. In städtischen Gebieten oder wo Häuser dicht stehen oder wo es

Re: [Talk-at] serice=alley am Lande

On 17.03.20 20:59, Patrick Strasser-Mikhail wrote: In ganz Österreich gibt es viele highway=service (Haus- und Hofzufahrten ohne weiter Verbindungsfunktion), die zusätzlich service=alley (also "Enge Gasse, Versorgungssgasse") haben[...] Also, wo kommt es her und was macht man damit? Wer oft

[OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

I would like to add a new status to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Approval_status and to Tag and Key pages in the wiki The value "import" would be used for tags that were used in a large import, but are no longer commonly being added. These tags often have high numbers in the database but

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

Hello Joseph, it may give the impression that this is the way it should be done. I agree to identify these "Noise" or poor quality tags, but with a keyword to show that it's a problem. e.g. status=bad, disputed, error, ... it would be necessary to find a word that is not as strong as error, but

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

On 17/3/20 8:22 pm, Marc M. wrote: Hello Joseph, it may give the impression that this is the way it should be done. I agree to identify these "Noise" or poor quality tags, but with a keyword to show that it's a problem. e.g. status=bad, disputed, error, ... it would be necessary to find a word

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

Hi all My 2cts : "in use" status and statuslink to the import proposal would be enough, right? Point is to determine where does the tag come from, and it's done by statuslink, not status which reflect the current state of use. All the best François Le mar. 17 mars 2020 à 10:55, Warin

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed new status for tags in the wiki: "import" for undiscussed tags that were only used by an import

The one I am thinking of comes from HOT activity. There is no link to an import proposal, they just use 'any tag they like' .. and leave it there undocumented. On 17/3/20 8:59 pm, François Lacombe wrote: Hi all My 2cts : "in use" status and statuslink to the import proposal would be enough,

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:24AM +, Devonshire wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote: > > On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote: > > The inability to mark an object's location as "authorititive" has always > seemed like a massive shortcoming of the project to me. Stopping people

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

> le lien envoi vers la mission, du coup difficile de comprendre > de quel exemple précis tu parles Je n’ai pas trouvé comment mettre un lien sur un objet OSM à contrôler. Adrien, peux-tu mettre ça dans l’URL ? Par exemple https://pic4review.pavie.info/#/mission/921/review/n5725980841 > Ce qui

[OSM-talk-fr] Connecteur type 2 compatible avec type E ??

Bonjour, J'ai rajouté la borne de recharge 7302271646 (photo sur Wikimedia Commons ). Sur ses pages web, il est indiqué

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:25:24AM +, Devonshire wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote: > > On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote: > > The inability to mark an object's location as "authorititive" has always > seemed like a massive shortcoming of the project to me. Stopping people

Re: [Talk-es] Mapaton Humanitario 2020 - tarde del 21 de Abril

Hola Carlos, Cómo van la Vida? Nunca te respondi a esto y ahora limpiando correo te comento que visto cómo están las cosas no se que pasará al respecto pero es.posible que no haya mapaton nisiquiera cambio de fecha. Habrá que olvidarse hasta 2021... si acaso. Espero que estés bien. Saludos desde

Re: [Talk-se] Ska adresser ha land, stad, postnummer och allt?

pang...@riseup.net , 2019-11-28 20:20:33 (+0100): > Därutöver håller Lantmäteriet på att utreda hurvidare dem ska kunna frige > den resterande data dem i dag säljer dvs laserdata, fastighetskartan och > adressnoder samt underlag som flygbilder och stereofoton. > > Utredningen måste vara klar d.

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

Salut Marc, Par rapport à l’intérêt de mettre des photos des points d'eau, je donne deux exemples. Je viens d'ajouter des photos pour presque toutes les Fontaines Wallace à Paris. Il y'en a 103 grandes fontaines Wallace, et il n'en manque plus que quelques uns. Nous avons des photos de quasi

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 09:53:07AM +, John Aldridge wrote: > On 17-Mar-20 02:08, Warin wrote: > > A single GPS trace is fine if that is all there is, better to average many > > GPS traces, in some locations I have 50+. > > Though, AIUI, once you've reached this level of precision, remaining

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:08:52PM +1100, Warin wrote: > On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote: > > > > I have only just got around to looking in more detail, and discovered > > that it is much worse than I had realised: vandalism. > > > > I have taken waypoints on nearly all of the individual stones,

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 2:08 AM, Warin wrote: > On 17/3/20 8:02 am, ael wrote: >> In cases like this I would use the source tag on the way so that others have >> a very good chance of seeing it and respecting the previous work rather than >> simply changing it to what they think it should be.

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

Bonjour, Le 17.03.20 à 13:02, European Water Project a écrit : > revoir le workflow et reflechir à des meilleurs outils pour ajouter > des images Mapillary, Wikimedia Commons, et OpenStreetCam dans OSM. je pense que le soucis est dans l’énoncé de départ : si les gens ne capturent pas des photos

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

Bonjour, Peut-être nous pouvons utiliser un peu de temps pendant ce confinement pour revoir le workflow et reflechir à des meilleurs outils pour ajouter des images Mapillary, Wikimedia Commons, et OpenStreetCam dans OSM. Il me semble que peu des photos Mapillary dans OSM décrivent bien l'objet

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

Salut Marc, On est bien d'accord qu'une photo d'un point d'eau qui n'est autre qu'un simple robinet sur un mur n'a pas beaucoup d’intérêt. Tes pistes de solutions avec OpenStreetCam, Mapillary et autre me semble très bien à creuser. Le fait de répondre à la question de Pic4Review très souvent

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

Bonjour Yves, Merci pour ton email. > Le problème vient plutôt de la qualité des photos de Mapillary et de leur positionnement. C’est pour ça que je fais des photos « posées » et je les télécharge dans Wikimedia Commons (Dans Mapillary, la série n’est pas adaptée pour des photos « uniques

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

Le 17.03.20 à 14:57, European Water Project a écrit : > Par rapport à l’intérêt de mettre des photos des points d'eau, je donne > deux exemples. Je viens d'ajouter des photos pour presque toutes les > Fontaines Wallace à Paris. les fontaines c'est autre chose, il y a un côté artistique. je

Re: [Talk-es] Mapaton Humanitario 2020 - tarde del 21 de Abril

Bueno, otra vez será. Cuídate! Un abrazo El mar., 17 mar. 2020 a las 16:19, Miguel Sevilla-Callejo (< msevill...@gmail.com>) escribió: > Hola Carlos, Cómo van la Vida? > Nunca te respondi a esto y ahora limpiando correo te comento que visto > cómo están las cosas no se que pasará al respecto

[Talk-bo] Tramo El Sillar en Carretera F4 Colomi-Villa Tunari, Cochabamba

Hola, Después de años de pasar y repasar la carretera de Colomi a Villa Tunari o viceversa, nunca supe dónde estaba el dichoso tramo "El Sillar" que tanto hablaban, tampoco vi un mapa que mostraba gráficamente de dónde a dónde, claro que si sabía más o menos las fallas geológicas y deslizamientos

Re: [Talk-bo] Tramo El Sillar en Carretera F4 Colomi-Villa Tunari, Cochabamba

Excelente Trabajo Marco Antonio. Yo asumo q como en esa zona hay una población llamada Abra del Sillar, pues todo el área tomo ese nombre o viceversa. Ciertamente No hay NADA que indique claramente de donde a dónde va la zona pues ni en la Cartografía del IGM sale algo concreto. En todo caso

[OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

> Et comme pour chaque mission, nous pouvons nous appuyer sur ces précieux > outils : MapContrib > , > MapRoulette , Mapillary, > Pic4Review

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Osmose, voirie non connectée

Bonjour Jocelyn, Je ne sais pas si c'est le même problème que le ticket que tu as créé, mais ici aussi j'ai corrigé l'erreur il y a 10 jours : http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/error/daed4c07-1737-313c-98c2-816a2d1e5e1b Stf Le 16/03/2020 à 22:35, Jocelyn Jaubert a écrit : Bonjour, Le

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Projet du mois de mars - Pic4Review

Le 17.03.20 à 08:09, Yves P. a écrit : > Un petit coeur est affiché sur les photos associées aux bornes. > Ça serait pratique de le faire en cliquant sur une icône. > Exemple : https://pic4review.pavie.info/#/mission/921/review le lien envoi vers la mission, du coup difficile de comprendre de

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On 17-Mar-20 02:08, Warin wrote: A single GPS trace is fine if that is all there is, better to average many GPS traces, in some locations I have 50+. Though, AIUI, once you've reached this level of precision, remaining errors are likely to be systematic (e.g. satellites in a particular

[Talk-gb-westmidlands] Meetings

I think we'll have to cancel our monthly meetings until further notice @Ian I hope your rail trip is not too chaotic Regards Brian ___ Talk-gb-westmidlands mailing list Talk-gb-westmidlands@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Talk-GB] Ficticious embankments? Vandalism.

On 17/3/20 8:53 pm, John Aldridge wrote: On 17-Mar-20 02:08, Warin wrote: A single GPS trace is fine if that is all there is, better to average many GPS traces, in some locations I have 50+. Though, AIUI, once you've reached this level of precision, remaining errors are likely to be