Is "NASA" really part of the actual name, or are you suggesting "tagging
for the renderer" because you expect to see "NASA" on the map? NASA is
certainly the operator, and that tag links the site to NASA.
//colin
On 2016-06-27 14:38, Fabrizio Carrai wrote:
> Correct, without NASA in the name we
On 2016-07-13 10:23, Lester Caine wrote:
> W3W and OLC both have the same problem. They are trying to fix something
> which is not really broken.
I disagree with this... They are not trying to replace / fix up lat/lon,
they are providing a lingua franca for people to use when communicating.
It's
On 2016-07-13 12:24, Dave F wrote:
> On 13/07/2016 11:10, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
>> W3W is a coordinate system...
>
> I fail to see how it can even be described as that as there is no
> coordination. The address of one block has no relation to adjacent ones.
Agreed - it's not a coordinate sys
I am going to say this very quietly what3words
On 2016-08-30 19:12, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> Hola,
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 05:03:39PM +0200, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote: Warning:
> flame thread about to start.
>
> El tirsdag 30. august 2016 16.50.14 CEST Oleksiy Muzalyev escribió: It is
hoff wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 07:24:02PM +0200, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> I am going to say this very quietly what3words
>
> I dont think what3words solves the issue of structured Addressing.
>
> Addresses are typically strict hierarchical and offer some seri
On 2016-08-30 20:10, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> w3w solves the problem of you not having a (compact) answer to "what´s your
>> address?" if you want to have something delivered. The fact that you only
>> h
On 2016-08-30 20:25, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> We have - that's why I am whispering. But w3w is not intended for the US.
>> It's for places which don't have addresses already, which apparently is a
>>
On 2016-09-10 18:55, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:
> Latitude and longitude are physical values, they will never change for a
> house on Earth, no matter what. They do not depend on politics, economics,
> linguistics of the current moment.
You sure about that? Plate tectonics means that everything is
Maybe these two-part names should be entered into the database using a
non-breaking hyphen (U+2011)?
//colin
On 2016-09-19 09:52, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:
> On 18/09/16 04:32, Paul Norman wrote:
>
>> I'm looking for feedback from people who read non-latin languages on a
>> proposed OpenStreet
Normal practise is for the "marketing department" to have the logo
available in a selection of forms, for different purposes. Think of
different formats (square, 16:9, full-width banner etc), different
resolutions, different colour depths, perhaps a monochrome version etc.
In order to protect the "
Have you tried contacting the mappers who created and last edited these
nodes? It looks like they were imported from some official source in
2011 and tidied up in 2014.
--colin
On 2016-11-20 18:41, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
> I'm looking at the following section of OSM:
>
> http://www.openstreetm
I believe the phrase is "tagging wrongly for the renderer" - we
constantly consider the users/consumers of the data when tagging, but it
is clearly frowned upon to "lie" in the tagging to get something to show
up in a particular way or otherwise to achieve a particular effect.
Whether tagging is "c
On 2017-06-11 18:18, Eric Gillet wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
>> I am concerned that reckless users will use your tool to basically go
>> over the planet in a "task manager" fashion, running the matching for
>> square after square, selecting all matches and hi
ith
> 1cm accuracy, there will always be "accuracy problems"
>
> On Jun 11, 2017 1:15 PM, "Colin Smale" wrote:
>
> On 2017-06-11 18:18, Eric Gillet wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I am concerned that reckless user
In the UK it is a specific road class, with its own style of signage. So
it is easily verifiable whether a road is a Trunk Road or not. Some
Trunk Roads are motorway-like, but others are standard two-way roads. So
actually it is not so much linked to the construction of the road, but
to the fact th
> as a trunk road , it is not currently the case in France :
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/42344655#map=15/46.4275/0.6306
>
> djakk
>
> Le ven. 18 août 2017 à 22:43, Colin Smale a écrit :
>
> In the UK it is a specific road class, with its own style of signage. So it
> is ea
I agree, classification should be largely irrelevant to routing.
Routing needs timings from node to node, which are best derived from
bendiness, number of lanes, junctions etc and then capped to the legal
maximum. A four-lane secondary, primary, trunk or motorway will all have
the same effective s
e the full picture.
I would like to take a closer look at your example route... Can you give
start and end locations?
--colin
On 2017-08-22 13:13, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 22/08/17 11:41, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> I agree, classification should be largely irrelevant to routing.
&g
I just got an email from the mailing list system that my
account/membership had been disabled due to "excessive bounces". I have
no idea why, but that is not the point I want to make here. My point is
that the email I received contained my password to that account, in
plain text!
WTF#1: Why is it
On 2017-11-25 11:53, Éric Gillet wrote:
> This is non-ideal, but you were warned during your account creation that this
> password is to be considered non-secure :
>
>> You may enter a privacy password below. This provides only mild security,
>> but should prevent others from messing with you
On 25 November 2017 16:04:45 CET, "Éric Gillet"
wrote:
> Another point : This password is not secure, but what the worst that
>could
>happen with it ? As long as one don't reuse it on other applications
>(as
>warned during registration), the only action an attacker could do would
>be
>to unsubs
On 2017-11-25 17:31, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 25/11/17 15:37, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> On 25 November 2017 16:04:45 CET, "Éric Gillet"
> wrote: Another point : This password is not secure, but what the worst that
> could
> happen with it ? As long as one don't reu
On 2017-11-25 17:59, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/25/2017 11:12 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> I just got an email from the mailing list system that my
>> account/membership had been disabled due to "excessive bounces". I have
>> no idea why, but t
Hallo John,
A level is not a unit of measurement like a metre or a kilogram. If
level 1.5 exists, it only tells you that it is between level 1 and level
2. If a landing on a staircase between level 1 and level 2 is to be
assigned a level, it wouldn't make any difference if you called it 1.1
or 1.
The technical differences between java and JS do not preclude generic
thinking. Consider tzdata[1] for example, which does something analogous
for time zone data.
The "rules database" can be made portable, in the form of XML or JSON
for example. The logic for using these rules can be described in
like taginfo
>
> Integrating scripting environment may be difficult, but offers far greater
> benefits of rule consistency and flexibility.
>
> On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 7:30 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> The technical differences between java and JS do not preclude generic
&
Why bother anyway? Why not just leave it to FvGordon? 90k changesets
fixing other people's tagging errors...
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/FvGordon/history
Actually, an analysis of all these changesets might produce some
interesting insights into "frequently made errors".
//colin
On 2017
Based on my experiences with mkgmap it's not so much a routing problem
as a navigation problem. The router will pick the correct path through
the graph but the translation to "human instructions" get confused, like
the exit numbers and the way the roundabouts display. Turning right at a
roundabout,
Just to throw another concept into the mix... so-called flare roads,
where a road joining a roundabout (or other junction for that matter)
splits into two short one-way segments which go either side of an
obstacle. Mkgmap tries to recognise them by seeing if they come together
within X metres. Why
Java and Javascript have only those four letters in common. They are
completely unconnected in all other respects.
On 2018-02-17 19:54, john whelan wrote:
> JAVA script is used by web sites. It does not require JAVA to be installed.
>
> JAVA itself may or may not be a security risk the issue is
On 2018-02-17 22:02, Jakob Mühldorfer wrote:
> Thanks for pointing it out to us!
>
> I too have some thoughts on points in the article.
> One I agree with, one not
>
> Let me start with this one:
> "No Support For Observational, or Other Datasets"
> This is the point I agree with.
> OSM is missi
On 2018-07-25 16:05, Daniel Koć wrote:
> We have the same problem with hospital symbol. There's even an official
> generic symbol that we could use, called "red crystal" (see
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Red_Cross_and_Red_Crescent_Movement#The_Red_Crystal
> ) and I like it very mu
On 2018-07-25 17:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I guess it would be perceived as shooting themselves in the foot if the
> international red cross would file a lawsuit against osmf for using a red
> cross as icon for hospitals.
It has happened before. The ICRC are totally fanatical about the
p
On 2018-07-25 17:13, Daniel Koć wrote:
> W dniu 25.07.2018 o 16:39, Colin Smale pisze:
>
>> The Red Crystal symbol is protected by the ICRC. We can't use it, nor can we
>> use the Red Cross or Red Crescent. There have been numerous legal cases
>> which came down t
On 2018-08-10 14:01, marekskleciak wrote:
> We have also mechanism for area routing but, that's true graphs are easier..
Do you have any links/references for area routing? What "mechanism" are
you thinking of here?___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetma
On 2018-10-22 16:34, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> I strongly disagree, we map reality.
There is no one true reality, only perceptions. Which reality takes
precedence in your mind, may not be the same for everyone. Reality is
subjective.
What is the test to apply to decide whether a point is inclu
On 2018-12-11 13:53, Simon Poole wrote:
> As Frederik pointed out a bit back, this is just kicking the can down
> the road.
>
> We will still have to make choices
Why? It would be better if OSM did not make choices, but represented
differing points of view equally, without expressing any kind of
On 2018-12-15 12:54, Andy Townsend wrote:
> The whole point of the "verifiability" and "ground truth" principles is so as
> _not_ to have to rely on documents.
First time I have heard that as a (documented) rationale behind "ground
truth".
Surely the stronger requirement is public verifiabilit
December 2018 14:53:31 CET, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>On Saturday 15 December 2018, Colin Smale wrote:
>> > The whole point of the "verifiability" and "ground truth"
>> > principles is so as _not_ to have to rely on documents.
>>
>> First time
o have
parallel fora, especially when discussing something as fundamental as
this. Either we do it here on the ML, or on your blog post, or on the
OSM wiki; but please, not in three places at once.
On 2018-12-15 15:24, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> On Saturday 15 December 2018, Colin Smale wrote:
&
On 2018-12-17 09:57, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> Am Sa., 15. Dez. 2018 um 16:09 Uhr schrieb Colin Smale
> :
>
>> "without access to the same sources" ... what if there is only one source of
>> truth? With these non-observable items like admin boundaries that
On 2018-12-17 14:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 17. Dec 2018, at 13:31, Tomas Straupis wrote:
>>
>> Especially interesting and useful would be stories of how maritime
>> boundaries or boundaries with no considerable obstructions built have
>> been actually mapped by
On 2018-12-17 19:40, Sérgio V. wrote:
> (BTW, sorry for typo in title, "License")
I see no typo in the title... Licence is the correct English spelling
:-)___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
On 2018-12-17 23:16, Steve Doerr wrote:
> On 17/12/2018 09:41, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> One other thing: in the UK the boundaries of the area and the local
>> authority running that area are two different things. A local authority can
>> run a combination of adjacent
the new districts.)
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1995/493/made
On 2018-12-18 00:42, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 2018-12-17 23:16, Steve Doerr wrote:
> On 17/12/2018 09:41, Colin Smale wrote: One other thing: in the UK the
> boundaries of the area and the local authority running
I think the "club house" is more relevant than the "headquarters".
"Headquarters" usually implies administrative offices, which may be in a
different location. Most visitors (pilots, passengers etc in this case)
will not want the offices, but the main building where the club
activities take plac
User "mangoyang" has been doodling random multipolygons in the middle of
the North Sea, Thames Estuary and the Severn Estuary, some of which
purport to be buildings... He (or she) has only 35 edits to their name
so it may be a case of the user using an empty piece of the world for
practise. The
Hi,
I'm not sure this is the right place to raise this, but does anyone know
why the UK is turning blue on openstreetmap.org? It is clearly visible
across Oxfordshire and Bucks at z12-z14 as tiles are re-rendered.
Colin
___
talk mailing list
talk
s. It only appears at z11-z13. On this map, the left half is
"blue" (last rendered June 17) and the right half is "normal" (last
rendered June 10).
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/52.0770/-0.7172
On 2014-06-18 01:10, Michael Kugelmann wrote:
> Am 18.06.2014 00:41, schr
Indeed, it seems to be fixing itself now. Panic over!
On 2014-06-18 08:56, JB wrote:
> After rerendering (/dirty), blue went away:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=12/51.9605/-0.7644 [2]
>
> Le 18/06/2014 08:27, Colin Smale a écrit :
>
> It only appears to be happe
It depends whether a right of way exists. Things are rather complicated in the
UK. Private means private, so no entry by default. If you are visiting an
address on a private road, you have presumably been invited, explicitly or
implicitly. An unofficial sign "residents only" might not have any f
On 2014-08-03 16:24, Craig Wallace wrote:
On 2014-08-03 11:00, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
Residential roads in the UK often seem to have 'private road' signs,
such as: - 'Private road' - 'Private road no parking' - 'Private road
no parking no turning' - 'Residents only no unauthorised parking o
As this discussion is about UK specifics, I thought it would be a good
plan to reach out to the talk-GB list.
--colin
On 2014-08-03 16:44, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 2014-08-03 16:24, Craig Wallace wrote:
> On 2014-08-03 11:00, Matthijs Melissen wrote: Residential roads in the UK
&
I have also been looking for such a facility - in my case for admin
boundaries.
Colin
On 2014-11-16 10:38, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> I try to find a tool that continuously monitors all members of a relation for
> changes. Specifically I would like to be informed automatically by email when
ink user Wambacher already monitors the admin boundaries for his website:
> https://osm.wno-edv-service.de/boundaries/ [2] , so you might contact him.
>
> regards
> m
>
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> I have also been looking for such a
Attack is the best form of defence?
On 2015-01-06 06:46, Jo Walsh wrote:
> dear Michal,
>
> This is an interesting set of comprehensive criticisms that gives OSM
> something to aim for in terms of a classical maturity model.
>
> However, I wonder what you bring to the party apart from crit
+1 to that! Hope it doesn't lead to an outbreak of "tagging for the
router" though... You know, down/upgrading roads to "improve" the
results...
My first quick test in Kent yielded a route (about 6 miles) which while
perfectly viable, no-one in their right mind would take. But that is
probably
As you will have noticed by now, it's complicated. There is no "truth"
agreed to by both sides, so we may need two boundaries: one according to
Spain, and one according to Gib/UK. In between is "disputed territory".
How do we handle that in other cases?
http://ersilia.net/ET2050_library/docs/m
There already is a "through_route" relation, to show the path of the
through route. It might not be well documented, but it is used (I
believe)by mkgmap.
There was a proposal, which was eventually rejected:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/through_route
IMHO it was reject
The difference between routing and navigation is that the routing
algorithm will work out which road you need to be on, but it is the
"navigation" aspect which makes translates the routing graph to useful
instructions for a human. If the main road does a 90 degree left at a
T-junction, something
The trouble with nodes is that they are non-directional. Junctions in
quick succession, and lane-dependent give-ways could make a challenging
scenario for a program to try and make sense of. Why not tag it
explicitly instead of leaving it to heuristics which (by definition)
will not always get i
Won't work in the UK as there are plenty of cases where you have to give
way and make a proper turn in order to stay on the same road name and/or
ref. The concept even has a name - TOTSO which means "Turn Off To Stay
On".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Martinvl/TOTSO
You cannot reliably i
Agree with that!
On 2015-04-28 11:10, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 28/04/15 05:10, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>
>> I'd call this mostly a routing presentation issue. If the road name is the
>> same, I'd want any super sharp curve to warn me: "Tight left in 100 meters",
>> or "15mph left turn ahead"
The existing through_route proposal may not be perfect but IMHO is a
good base. It will need weeding through to keep it on-topic.
This is how I see the scope of the discussion (just to get the ball
rolling, feel free to shoot):
1) it has to be about junctions, not about individual ways (it's
quot;through route" may not be
symmetrical.
//colin
On 2015-04-28 13:47, pmailkeey . wrote:
> On 28 April 2015 at 11:05, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> The existing through_route proposal may not be perfect but IMHO is a good
>> base. It will need weeding through to keep it
The "give way" sign won't help to distinguish between the arms where two
roads diverge...
By the way, the sign is often a STOP sign, so the logic will have to
check for both.
//colin
On 2015-04-28 17:09, pmailkeey . wrote:
> On 28 April 2015 at 13:15, Colin Smale
e. all roads are deemed equal and no one road/route has
priority over the others. These junctions are usually unmarked (i.e. no
white lines and no signs) because they are deemed to be "default" in the
absence of "priority road" signs (yellow diamonds).
//colin
On 2015-04-28
I wonder how a marketing department would react if their (potential)
customers complained they couldn't find the store.
On 2015-05-01 08:47, Simon Poole wrote:
> Am 01.05.2015 um 02:29 schrieb Nicholas G Lawrence:
>
>
>> Exactly why this is necessary is a mystery to me. If business wan
ut what the OSMF
is or does in the ecosystem.
On 2015-05-01 09:45, Simon Poole wrote:
> Am 01.05.2015 um 08:56 schrieb Colin Smale:
>
>> I wonder how a marketing department would react if their (potential)
>> customers complained they couldn't find the store.
>
>
A bit of a meta-discussion I wonder why this topic is not going the
same way as the debate on talk-gb last November-December in which it was
proposed to tidy up and normalise various spelling variants? There was a
lot of vehement opposition to any automated "corrections" as many chains
are i
On 2015-05-02 23:28, Frederik Ramm wrote:
We collect observations.
...
There is
no way for the mapper on the ground to know that the name on the
building "should" be something else.
I think that sounds rather disingenuous. We humans are perfectly capable
of correctly interpreting data whi
...And this may be different to the limit of government jurisdiction. In
the UK, local authorities' jurisdiction goes (normally) to MLWS (mean
low water - spring tides), which is beyond the MHWS coastline. Why am I
saying this? Please don't use the same way in both the coastline and the
admin bo
If we can separate the flow direction discussion from the routing, the latter
becomes a more generic "routing through areas" problem which has been
discussed before in the context of pedestrian routing. The idea being that it
should be possible to construct a routing engine to take you from any
of a boat.
Simply adding a way from one side of a lake to the other to stop some QA
program complaining is bordering on tagging for the renderer...
--colin
On 28 July 2015 11:17:00 CEST, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>On Tuesday 28 July 2015, Colin Smale wrote:
>> If we can separate the flow
Before doing the actual routing, the polygon for the "whole lake" must
be preprocessed in various ways: eliminate areas which are too shallow,
prohibited, one-way/wrong-way, subject to traffic controls etc. Then the
routing algorithm can avoid all these no-go areas, just as if they were
physical
Practical maxspeed is useless as well. A straight wide road may be capable of
hosting land speed records, but traffic density is likely to be a far more
important factor.
On 30 July 2015 19:56:41 CEST, Richard wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 08:52:57AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
>> The issue o
e a lot of
preprocessing to simplify the real-time calculations), so they use heuristics
which work most often.
So how would you define the concept of "typical speed"?
--colin
On 30 July 2015 20:38:32 CEST, Richard wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 08:00:55PM +0200, Colin Smale wrote:
>> Pra
So who decides what is good data and what is bad data?
And "visibility on the ground" needs nuancing. Are we to remove
underground pipelines/power lines? Or boundaries? "Visible and/or
verifiable" might be better. A rule that needs loads of exceptions, is
not a well formed rule.
An abandoned
On 2015-08-15 13:15, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> So who decides what is good data and what is bad data?
>
> The community as a whole decides what is good and bad data. That starts with
> the local community an
I meant it a bit rhetorically... Let's live and let live, instead of
deleting stuff that *we* don't happen to be interested in. Which brings
us back to Russ's original point.
On 2015-08-15 14:08, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 15/08/15 12:55, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>&g
If only all this energy were directed at helping OSM forwards. We
haven't had a lot of progress in the last few years (I am not talking
about mapping as such, but about the OSM framework itself).
There are still periodical discussions about how to link OSM with other
data sources - OSM IDs are
On 2015-08-17 13:37, Warin wrote:
> On 17/08/2015 4:28 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> If only all this energy were directed at helping OSM forwards. We haven't
>> had a lot of progress in the last few years (I am not talking about mapping
>> as such, but a
t; On 08/17/2015 03:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote: So if I think something is useful
> to me, and I am prepared to maintain
> it to my own satisfaction, I can feel free add it
I'd think it should be documented in the wiki .. so others can 'see'
what it is and use it if they like
On 2015-08-18 02:13, Warin wrote:
> On 17/08/2015 11:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> ...which IMHO is part of the bigger picture of data quality. Quality is not
>> the same as perfection. It is about agreeing things, complying with what has
>> been agreed, th
That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a
consensus will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is
absolutely something which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the
specific case of abandoned railways, but about who has the right to
decide what data has n
wants to work with you on this anymore.
>
> In Poland we have this often-used saying with regards to the political
> or social situation (yeah, we Poles like to complain a lot!) - it sucks
> but at least it's stable!
>
> Paweł
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 11:39, Coli
While we are at it, what about specific symbols for train/metro stations
per operator? That is also a great "landmark" for map users.
On 2015-08-21 11:57, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Minh Nguyen
> wrote:
>
>> Lester Caine lsces.co.uk [1]> writes:
>>
>>> Just w
This is your opinion, which you are seeking to impose on everybody.
Somewhat selectively it would appear, as you are not going to burn your
fingers on highway=proposed. I guess you will be deleting the HS2
(proposed UK high speed rail line) route as well, right? If you would
like to, you will fi
Are you suggesting that parcel boundaries have no place in OSM, or that
only verifiable sources should be used? Suppose there was a suitably
licensed source of such boundaries, with authoritative provenance. Would
you be against this being in OSM on principle? Or is it only your
supposition that
, is going a bit far.
On 2015-09-02 12:30, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
> On 02/09/2015, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> Are you suggesting that parcel boundaries have no place in OSM, or that
>> only verifiable sources should be used? Suppose there was a suitably
>> licensed s
data
that is agreed by the entire world.
On 2015-09-02 14:23, p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
> On Wed Sep 2 13:15:42 2015 GMT+0100, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: On 02/09/2015,
> Colin Smale wrote: I see two separate issues getting
> mixed up: firstly, what types of data
> "belong&
There already is such a tool, which currently only watches UK+Ireland.
http://www.loach.me.uk/osm/boundaries/
Try contacting Ed Loach, the author (EdLoach on OSM).
--colin
On 2015-09-04 09:39, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Ray Kiddy wrote:
>
>> It has occurred
Is there a metamodel behind this? Something that says (simplistic
example) there are "objects" which have "properties" and "links to /
relationships with other objects"? And how this might map to OSM
entities and their tagging?
IMHO something like this as a "poster on the wall for every mapper
Why shouldn't it work? It is perfectly easy to understand what is
intended.
Anyway where is the list or definition of what constitutes a *primary*
tag?
On 2015-09-12 00:11, Dave F. wrote:
> On 11/09/2015 03:07, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>
>> But the primary key is definitely highway=track, pe
you help me out and give a link to the
page you are referring to?
On 12 September 2015 10:33:58 CEST, "Dave F." wrote:
>On 12/09/2015 04:09, Warin wrote:
>> On 12/09/2015 8:36 AM, Colin Smale wrote:
>>>
>>> Why shouldn't it work? It is perfectl
a human's cognitive processes at their disposal.
Is amenity a primary tag? It certainly causes something to render. Is building
a primary tag? Same here. Is it improper to have both on the same object? Of
course not.
On 12 September 2015 13:55:20 CEST, "Dave F." wrote:
>
Respect to Russ for standing up for his principles in the face of all
this bullying. Nobody has given a *consistent* answer yet. Why are
"former railway lines" which are no longer immediately evident on the
ground forbidden so vehemently in OSM when so many other artefacts from
the past are not?
I wonder how many people are actually using world-wide data as opposed
to being interested in specific geographic areas.
Country/region based planet dumps would definitely get my vote,
especially if there was such a thing as a regional full history file...
On 2015-09-27 15:55, Daniel Koć wro
Hi,
User WJtW[1] has been making large numbers of edits to railways across
Europe in the past few months, all with the changeset comment
"Electrified". Most of them are adding tags like gauge=1435 which may
well be right (although I have no idea of his source for this). However
on many occasio
ndicating it is
> a superfluous tag when all tracks are mapped.
>
> It borders on vandalism.
>
> [1 [1]] <http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30099>
>
> Regards,
> Maarten
>
> On 2015-10-07 09:20, Colin Smale wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
