Pierre that's why you describe what state the road is in, weither it be a highway=track or highway=unknown or highway=tiertiary. As long as I can distinguish two tire tracks, to me it's a road
Pierre c'est pour ca on devrait décrire les routes que ca soit highway=track ou highway=unknown ou highway=tiertiary. En autant que je puisse voir deux traces de roues, pour moi c'est une rue. On Jun 26, 2016 6:57 PM, "Pierre Béland" <pierz...@yahoo.fr> wrote: > Question urgencs, on doit aussi se demander quelles seraient les clés à > ajouter pour bien décrire les difficutés rencontrées sur ces route > - surface - minimum 4x4 ou pickup? > - sécurité vs véhicules lourds > - approvisionnements et essence souvent absents > > > Pierre > > > ------------------------------ > *De :* James <james2...@gmail.com> > *À :* Michael Zajac <mich...@zajac.ca> > *Cc :* Talk-CA OpenStreetMap <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > *Envoyé le :* Dimanche 26 juin 2016 17h35 > *Objet :* Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads > > I agree with Michael. What happens if fire services need to use that road > or emergency services like ambulence etc. It should be the application's > job to determine in which condition a road should or shouldnt be used, not > the mappers job to obfuscate the map > On Jun 25, 2016 4:01 PM, "Michael Zajac" <mich...@zajac.ca> wrote: > > The map shows what’s there. Hopefully it can also show private- or > public-access status, but its job is not to babysit potential trespassers > by keeping parts of the landscape secret. > > > Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] wrote: > > > Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, > and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along > them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you > have authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the > controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you > need to get out of the way of. > > > > CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access > roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 . > > > > While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to > use them. > > -- > Michael Zajac > http://zajac.ca/ > +1-204-943-6596 > > > > > On 2016-06-25, at 13:52, talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote: > > > > Send Talk-ca mailing list submissions to > > talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > talk-ca-requ...@openstreetmap.org > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > talk-ca-ow...@openstreetmap.org > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Talk-ca digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Alan Richards) > > 2. Re: aerial imagery for missing roads (Pierre Béland) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:31:42 +0000 (UTC) > > From: Alan Richards <alarob...@gmail.com> > > To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, Kevin Farrugia > > <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> > > Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads > > Message-ID: > > < > 1311b39aa81e624e.ad0720c3-33a3-4256-87d1-d01909f9b...@mail.outlook.com> > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > Most forest service roads in BC are not private. They may be built by > private logging companies and may occasionally be gated, but the majority > are on crown land and are open for recreational use. Road conditions vary > wildly and roads are often unmaintained if active logging is not in > progress in the area. > > While I agree that typically these roads should not be used for typical > intercity routing, they are often used for recreation, hunting, fishing etc. > > > > Alan (alarobric) > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:59 AM -0700, "Martijn van Exel" <m...@rtijn.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Interesting, that seems to be worth a look! Do you happen to know who > these open data people are? Do similar open data groups / people exist in > other provinces? > > Martijn > > On Jun 25, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Kevin Farrugia <kevinfarru...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Morning everyone, > > I was looking at information on one of the Province's imagery programs > (SWOOP: > https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/3609/lio-swoop2015-eng-final-2014-05-13.pdf) > and I had previously assumed that the imagery was paid for by the province > but the rights still owned by the imagery company, which is the case where > I work. However, it looks like they might purchase the imagery outright > because it says the imagery is owned by the Queen's Printer, which is the > holder of the Crown's copyrights in Ontario. > > If that's the case you can try contacting their open data team to see if > they can persuade the Ministry of Natural Resources to release the data > openly under the Open Government Directive as a WMS/TIFFs or you can lodge > a FIPPA request to have it released (I don't know how this affects you or > us being able to use it in OSM, however). > > You can check out what their imagery looks like here to see if it's > worth your time contacting them: > http://www.giscoeapp.lrc.gov.on.ca/matm/Index.html?site=Make_A_Topographic_Map&viewer=MATM&locale=en-US > (in Map Layers turn off Topographic Data to see the imagery). > > -Kevin (Kevo) > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Begin Daniel <jfd...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > Missing access=no and access=private tags I understand... > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Stewart C. Russell [mailto:scr...@gmail.com] > > > > Sent: June-24-16 22:45 > > > > To: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > > > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads > > > > > > > > On 2016-06-23 10:26 PM, Pierre Béland wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Going north outside of urban zones, there are many tracks for lumber > > > >> areas. Hard to assess the accessibility of such roads for cars. > > > > > > > > Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, > and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic along > them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and unless you > have authorization and the right radio to call in the checkpoints, the > controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck coming that you > need to get out of the way of. > > > > > > > > CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access > roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 . > > > > While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to > use them. > > > > > > > > cheers, > > > > Stewart > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Talk-ca mailing list > > > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Talk-ca mailing list > > > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-ca mailing list > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20160625/c5a31d1f/attachment-0001.html > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 18:48:39 +0000 (UTC) > > From: Pierre Béland <pierz...@yahoo.fr> > > To: Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org>, "Stewart C. Russell" > > <scr...@gmail.com> > > Cc: "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads > > Message-ID: > > <1624224864.2286278.1466880519205.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > Au Québec comme en Colombie-Britannique et sans doute dans les autres > provinces, ce sont effectivement des routes publiques construites et > utilisées principalement pour le transport du bois. Il est possible d'y > circuer pour des activités récréatives telles chasse et pêche. Cependant, > les camions remorque lourdement chargés roulent vite, au milieu de la route > et projettent des cailloux. ! La surface peut aussi être inégale. Plusieurs > utilisent des véhicules 4x4 jugeant trop risqué d'utiliser une voiture. > > > > Il est difficile de classifier ces routes, de décrire l'état de la route > et les risques associés. Des contributeurs à distance avec un projet > Maproulette n'auraient pas l'info adéquate pour classifier ces routes et y > ajouter les clés adéquates pour décrire l'état de ces routes. > > Pierre > > > > > > De : Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> > > À : Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> > > Cc : "talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" <talk-ca@openstreetmap.org> > > Envoyé le : samedi 25 juin 2016 10h53 > > Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] aerial imagery for missing roads > > > > Should we assume that a reasonable amount of these private or even > dangerous routes have been mapped as public, potentially routable? What > would be a good way to inspect these? Do we have reference data on these > logging roads? A MapRoulette challenge could be useful. > > Martijn > > > > On Jun 24, 2016, at 8:45 PM, Stewart C. Russell <scr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Most logging roads, certainly in BC, are private. While they look large, > > and make tempting additions to the map, accidentally routing traffic > > along them could be fatal. Logging trucks don't (can't!) stop, and > > unless you have authorization and the right radio to call in the > > checkpoints, the controller won't be able to tell you if there's a truck > > coming that you need to get out of the way of. > > > > CanVec also mistakenly digitized a bunch of private wind farm access > > roads in Ontario, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39334427 . > > While using these might not be life-threatening, it is trespassing to > > use them. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-ca mailing list > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20160625/71764ec2/attachment.html > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Subject: Digest Footer > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Talk-ca mailing list > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of Talk-ca Digest, Vol 100, Issue 16 > > **************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
