User talk:Gravitystorm

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Messages for User:Gravitystorm (Andy Allan) here:

Good to meet you

Hi there Andy. Good to meet you. I'm figuring out the usernames of people I met on Friday.

Just took another look at your cycle maps. I don't use a bike, but I'm loving the pubs at higher zoom levels!

Maybe we'll cross paths next time I'm drinking at IC union. Tuesday 8th Jan or some other Tuesday canoe club pool session night

-- Harry Wood 11:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Cyclemap Howto

Hi Andy. I was wondering if (when you have the time) you might work up an article explaining your entire cyclemaps workflow. I'd like to be able to re-create your results. The new contour lines are very, very nice. Unfortunately, we don't measure things in meters over here in the US, so I'd like to be able to render my own tiles in feet. -- bonius

Sure, will do. It changes quite frequently though so I'm trying to get to a position where all the code is cleaned up and available rather than just explanations - but the explanations will be useful too and probably quicker to sort out. I'll see what I can do. Gravitystorm 17:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Cyclemap bug reports

Please be aware of trac.openstreetmap.org - things can be posted there with component as cyclemap

  • There's something weird going on with the coastline around south Skye - see this region where the sense of it is inverted. --Tms13 19:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure how often the coastline is updated, but there's a region around Lochcarron where you need to pull in a newer version of the coast. --Tms13 19:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Fixed this a while ago Gravitystorm 16:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
  • In Germany many highways/streets are tagged with cycleway=track or cycleway=lane. Can you highlight these streets in your cyclemap? --Laufstar1 18:20, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
cycleway=lane is already rendered on Andy's map. E.g. see the blue edge to Sturry Road here:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.28688&lon=1.09226&zoom=17&layers=00B0FTF
--Gregoryw 19:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes the cycleway=lane works fine, but also here in Denmark, there are a lot of streets tagged (correctly) with cycleway=track with nice bike paths seperated with a curb or sometimes trees and grass. They are not rendered as bike paths in Opencyclemap.
--Opspin 10:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
See http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/1283 Gravitystorm 12:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Probably http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/1656 Gravitystorm 16:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Hi Andy, first of all: thanks for this map type also from my side. CycleMap does not render landuse=forest, natural=wood ist rendered well. We're eliminating natural=wood here in Germany (common sense is that we nearly have no unmanaged areas with wood here). Also highway=path is not rendered at all. Could this be made possible? --ToniE 12:16, 03 April 2009 (UTC)
I'll look into this - if someone files a trac ticket that would be great Gravitystorm 16:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I think most people imagine the map of a country divided by the motorways, so they get a general idea of where they are by looking what motorways are near them. Especially cyclists also use mountains and rivers to navigate, mainly because there are cycle paths without hills along rivers often. It would be great if rivers were highlighted a bit more in the CycleMap in low zoom levels, maybe like motorways, only in blue (mountains and motorways are visible very well). --Candid Dauth 20:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Will think about this, not certain how well it would work
  • It would be great to see super-relation support in the cycle map, this includes: 1. Adding the ref of a relation to the refs of all of its member relations. 2. Increasing the network tag of any member relations if necessary (the members of a ncn relation should become ncn if they are rcn or lcn). By this we could more easily reuse segments that are part of multiple ways. --Candid Dauth 20:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Not really a high priority for me, but feel free to put a ticket in. Gravitystorm 16:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Are there any plans to support highway=path? In my place (Cologne, Germany) combined foot- and cycleways are very common and they are usually tagged as highway=path. Because of this, a significant amount of cycleways is missing on your map. If those ways are member of a cycle route, only the blue "halo" is rendered (example: http://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=17&lat=50.92829&lon=6.99868&layers=B000) Astoreg 19:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
See http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/1716 Gravitystorm 16:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestions Gravitystorm 16:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Hi Andy. While we're talking about rendering changes, I would like to see amenity=place_of_worship removed from the cycle map tiles. In some areas, the density of these churches and such tend to drown out the POIs that are actually relevant to cyclers, so I think it is a distraction from the otherwise beautiful cycle map. (example: http://opencyclemap.org/?zoom=15&lat=29.9631&lon=-90.05489&layers=B000 this area contains quite a few bike-relevant POIs but I think the map is still dominated by the churches) Thanks! Matt Toups 16:35, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
I might be able to come up with a better way of doing them, but I'd still like to keep them since they are often useful for getting your bearings. Gravitystorm 16:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
One quick compromise might be to just remove them from the lower zoom levels (z15) but leave them in for the higher zoom levels, where they're less likely to overlap with other cyclemap POIs. Also perhaps represent them with a different graphic, without quite so much contrast. Matt Toups 02:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Hi Andy. Thanks for enhanced rendering (highway=path as footway and bicycle=* without "no" as cycleway). Now render map also bicycle=permissive as cycleway. I think, than permissive is is more like render as "no". Is possible change it render feature permissive ? Thanks hanoj 08:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
"Permissive" means you are allowed to cycle there. "Yes" means you are allowed to cycle there. "No" means you are *not* allowed to cycle there. Why would "permissive" look the same as "no"? Gravitystorm 11:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
bicycle=yes or highway=cycleway is strong bicycle way with explicit sing and designed way for bicycle, bicycle highway. I think permissive as tag, than have no reflected in traffic sings and that is set in primary foot/vehicle highway. wiki: permissive means there is no legally-enshrined right of access, but the landowner has allowed it at his/her discretion. So if we have in map symbol interval <true--false> for <"bicycle highway"--"other way">, permissive if in mi might other way; silent, no-capacity, local way. Permissive tag is attitudinal, prior IMHO for routing. hanoj 20:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Update frequency of the cyclemap rendered tiles

I would like to know what the update frequency is for the rendered tiles available on the opencyclemap.org site. The reason I ask is that I have changed a fair amount of 'cycleways' in my area to paths, as they are in parks where the path is more appropriate, although cycling is permitted there. --ivom 11:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The database is updated each week on a Wednesday morning, although it takes a few days after that for all the tiles to be updated. Gravitystorm 11:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Is this still the case? I have quite a few edits that have not appeared after more than a month. Is there a problem with rendering at the moment? --Ebenezer 01:33, 3 August 2010 (BST)
I too have seen some irregularities with the rendering and update cycle. It has sometimes taken two weeks for changes to update. Also I notice a inconsistencies between zoom levels. For example, the red NCN 2MTB route is rendered at zoom level 11 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.754&lon=7.695&zoom=11&layers=C), but not entirely at zoom level 12 and then correctly at zoom level 13. I updated this route over two months ago. (OpenCycleMap is great, BTW) --Wmaurer 13:17, 22 August 2010 (BST)

Postal code tasks

Hi,

you have removed my chapter "tasks" in postal_code. Can you please move such things to discussion instead? This section is senseful, because it tells you there is no solution yet! Thanks. --Lulu-Ann 11:00, 30 March 2011 (BST)

public_transport Keys and TransportMap

Hi Andy, is it possible to render bus stops tagged with public_transport=stop_position + bus=yes and platforms tagged with public_transport=platform? Although we mapped most of the bus stops in Passau, they do not show up in the TransportMap. --Michael_K ¿! 04:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)


The actual render doesn't follow the logic explained in the public transport scheme, afaik. One behaviour that bugs me most is the stop area rendering:

  • when 2 close highway=bus_stop belong to the same stop_area you don't have any visual clue nor a stop_area name is shown to identify it e.g.
  • it renders the way you'd expect only if every highway=bus_stop has the same name=*. It renders a round outline enclosing and visually connecting them, but shows the same name on every bus_stop not just one time e.g.
  • to fully comply with the Public transport scheme the aforementioned behaviour should be applied to public_transport=platform instead of highway=bus_stop but I can see that this shift would probably lead to a worse situation as long as the public transport scheme doesn't become a well-spread standard
  • the rendering behaviour is not just strange but goes against the scheme because it's clearly stated in public_transport=platform (which is the equivalent of highway=bus_stop) that the name=* key is used to identify the name of the individual platform, because the stop_area name is specified in the proper relation

I'm sorry to bug you with this utter crap (cit.), I just think that every actual mapping effort should be rewarded with a nice rendering :) And now the obligatory Thank for your effort! because your rendering layers already look great and extremely useful --Dariopnc (talk) 10:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Cleaning up the wiki

Please take part in this discussion :) --★ → Airon 90 12:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Potlatch 2 merging tool

Hi Andy, do you know if the "Potlatch 2 merging tool" is integrated into the Potlatch 2 which is on the OSM homepage? I guess this merge project is abandoned (regarding development), right? --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

yes, it's in the main version, but it needs a customised config file to load the vector layers iirc. I'm not working on the technology any more. Gravitystorm (talk) 15:57, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Yes, I know. I am just trying to cleanup the documentation a bit to make it more clear what the current state is. It may still be interesting for somebody. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

API usage policy

Who may be asked about clarifying API usage policy or give examption?

I want to (as part of preparing for mechanical edit) find people who added some specific tag to OSM. I have no hardware to import database with full history so I wanted to use Overpass to find sample of objects with given tag and use API to check in history who added given tag.

It is impossible with Xapi ("Xapi only ever deals with elements that are current and does not return any elements that are historical or deleted.") and with Overpass API it would require high amount of requests like http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/beT (binary search over time with really slow queries, as "Overpass API doesn't offer changeset-based criteria. It's possible to work around that, by using time-based diffs, but this may be clumsy."). With API it is extremely simple - for example http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/node/1/history gives all what is necessary, only parsing of received data is necessary.

Unfortunately API usage policy has "not for read-only purposes or projects" and interpreting this purpose as part of editing process seems borderline (though JOSM is supporting viewing history what is basically this mechanism)

I am asking you because your edit removed "and also permits small-scale individual use" from list of allowed use so I am hoping that you know who may change/clarify/give exemption to API usage policy. OSMF? Admins? DWG? Somebody else?

Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

The OSMF Operations Working Group (OWG) (of which I'm a member) are the team in charge of API Usage policies for OSMF-run services. Gravitystorm (talk) 10:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the author of image File:Catches.jpg ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified February 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for an explicit licensing! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Mateusz_Konieczny/notify_uploaders/Gravitystorm has some other files that may be worth looking at Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:49, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Rails-catches.jpg is also affected, by judging from https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/591 it seems that deletion also would be fine? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:20, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:DSC07698.jpg ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified March 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:15, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gravitystorm&oldid=2297030"