Since I'm using Potlatch to edit the map, I start the tagging of a walking path/road etc. by selecting the presets for the "walking man". Then, I select by the surface and permissibility, which for a peds only, gravel, 4ft wide public path ends up as higway=track and surface=gravel. But isn't highway=footway the preferred tagging for this?
On May 30, 2010 12:03 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: Send talk mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of talk digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (andrzej zaborowski) 2. Re: Questions regarding the mapping of hiking trails (Sami Dalouche) 3. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (Anthony) 4. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (John Smith) 5. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (John Smith) 6. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (Anthony) 7. Re: Cloudmade routing issue (Anton Popov) 8. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (Mikel Maron) 9. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (Ulf Lamping) 10. Re: On the ground rule on the wiki (Rory McCann) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 15:12:31 +0200 From: andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: John Smith <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 30 May 2010 09:40, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On 30 May 2010 15:39, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: >> "If the dispute can not be resolved through discussion, then the simple >> default rule is that whatever name, designation, etc are used by the people >> on the ground at that location are used in the non-localized tags." > > Isn't that kinda asking for an edit war where there is disputed > territory with different names by different languages possibly in > multiple languages? Why? By my reading it is to quiet such edit wars, so the exact opposite. See how this rule is applied in Belgium with streets having three names and all three printed on street signs. Cheers ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 09:16:34 -0400 From: Sami Dalouche <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Questions regarding the mapping of hiking trails To: [email protected] Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list <[email protected]> Message-ID: <1275225394.12673.0.ca...@samxps> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sun, 2010-05-30 at 03:21 +0000, John F. Eldredge wrote: > Also, the name "Van Hoevenburg Trail" doesn't necessarily mean that it passes through the Van Hoevenburg Property. That might be the name of the current land-owner, the name of a former land-owner, or simply the name of some notable person whom the trail was named after. > thanks for your answers. By "property", I was referring to the key/value pairs to tag ways, not anything else... Sami Dalouche ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 09:17:29 -0400 From: Anthony <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: John Smith <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 3:40 AM, John Smith <[email protected] >wrote: > On 30 May 2010 15:39, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > > "If the dispute can not be resolved through discussion, then the simple > > default rule is that whatever name, designation, etc are used by the > people > > on the ground at that location are used in the non-localized tags." > > Isn't that kinda asking for an edit war where there is disputed > territory with different names by different languages possibly in > multiple languages? > >From what I can tell, it was actually the solution to such an edit war. How "map what the people on the ground say" turned into "map what's on the ground", I can't figure out. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100530/f0969784/attachment.htm ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 23:19:45 +1000 From: John Smith <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: Anthony <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 30 May 2010 23:17, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > From what I can tell, it was actually the solution to such an edit war. How > "map what the people on the ground say" turned into "map what's on the > ground", I can't figure out. Seems like it would logically go the other way round, from map what was on the ground to map what people on the ground say... ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 23:26:30 +1000 From: John Smith <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 30 May 2010 23:12, andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]> wrote: > Why? By my reading it is to quiet such edit wars, so the exact Why... simple, you can't verify what is in someone's brain as true, at best you get a consensus, but that may be limited in scope, I guess it comes down to the importance of the object being mapped. > opposite. See how this rule is applied in Belgium with streets having > three names and all three printed on street signs. Ok so it works some times for some places, may not be applicable to all situations leaving things up to not being verifiable. ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 09:28:06 -0400 From: Anthony <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: John Smith <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 9:19 AM, John Smith <[email protected] >wrote: > On 30 May 2010 23:17, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > > From what I can tell, it was actually the solution to such an edit war. > How > > "map what the people on the ground say" turned into "map what's on the > > ground", I can't figure out. > > Seems like it would logically go the other way round, from map what > was on the ground to map what people on the ground say... > I'm not sure what it means to "logically go" one way or the other, but the earliest reference I can find to any sort of "on the ground rule" is November/December 2007, and it's that one quoted at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes . If you can find an earlier one I'd be quite interested. In any case, more important than the etymology of the phrase "map what's on the ground" is what it means and whether or not it's good advice. In terms of its use in excluding verifiable information I think it is quite problematic. When a route isn't written "on the ground" that's exactly when it's most useful to have it identified in a map. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100530/f536c3f8/attachment-0001.htm ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 17:05:40 +0300 From: Anton Popov <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade routing issue To: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hello Nathan, This is CM navigation engine bug. It's already in the most priority issues list, but still I cannot guarantee the ETA. Sorry for your feedback response delay - there's might be some technical problems, I will try to check that. On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>wrote: > I know this isn't the Cloudmade list, but a recent thread here got > some results. I used the feedback link but never got a response. > > If you go to > http://maps.cloudmade.com/?lat=40.257259&lng=-74.289401&zoom=16&directions=40.2545894931206,-74.28884267807007,40.256497279719156,-74.29014086723328,40.25585043964603,-74.29341316223145&travel=car&styleId=1&opened_tab=1 > and remove destination point B, it changes to a much longer route. I > believe all the turn restrictions are correct (this is a jughandle, > where you exit right to turn left), but the routing engine doesn't > like to use it. Can someone make sure they're aware of it? > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Best regards, Popov Anton. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100530/9013efad/attachment-0001.htm ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 10:09:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Mikel Maron <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Right now, the only mention of the "on the ground" rule on the wiki is > here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule > Should a separate page be created about how it applies more generally? The intention of us devising the On the Ground rule was only for Dispute resolution, originally in response to the situation in Cyprus. It really shouldn't be taken as a more general rule. Just for instance, localised names of places are not very often found on the ground. -Mikel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100530/a3953af6/attachment-0001.htm ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 19:34:00 +0200 From: Ulf Lamping <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Am 30.05.2010 19:09, schrieb Mikel Maron: > > > Right now, the only mention of the "on the ground" rule on the wiki is >> here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule > > Should a separate page be created about how it applies more generally? > > The intention of us devising the On the Ground rule was only for Dispute > resolution, originally in response to the situation in Cyprus. > > It really shouldn't be taken as a more general rule. Just for instance, > localised names of places are not very often found on the ground. +1 Regards, ULFL ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 20:01:44 +0100 From: Rory McCann <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] On the ground rule on the wiki To: andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]> Cc: Nathan Edgars II <[email protected]>, [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On 30/05/10 14:12, andrzej zaborowski wrote: > On 30 May 2010 09:40, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 30 May 2010 15:39, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: >>> "If the dispute can not be resolved through discussion, then the simple >>> default rule is that whatever name, designation, etc are used by the people >>> on the ground at that location are used in the non-localized tags." >> >> Isn't that kinda asking for an edit war where there is disputed >> territory with different names by different languages possibly in >> multiple languages? > > Why? By my reading it is to quiet such edit wars, so the exact > opposite. See how this rule is applied in Belgium with streets having > three names and all three printed on street signs. Or Ireland, which has the Irish (name:ga) and English names on all signs. I found a road today (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/3789374) that has 2 signs across the road from each other, both have the same English name ("Chancery Place"), but each has a different Irish name ("Pl?s Seansaire" vs "Pl?s na Seansaireachta"). I had to make an educated guess based on how new each sign was. Rory -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 0x5373FB61.asc Type: application/pgp-keys Size: 3157 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100530/8abfb711/attachment.key -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 262 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100530/8abfb711/attachment.pgp ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk End of talk Digest, Vol 69, Issue 82 ************************************
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
