[Talk-GB] Licence change - one month to go
OSM at redcake.co.uk
Sat Mar 3 11:01:31 GMT 2012
I agree that we want to try and have a complete main road network network.
Whilst longish stretches of road are easy to spot there are a lot of
other small sections (eg. bridges) which are harder to see on cleanmap
(unless the rest of the area is clean).
We also have the issue of nodes going at highway junctions. Even if the
ways stay we may loose the critical join. There a still a number of
motorway junctions like this across the UK (and there must be plenty on
trunk roads). You need OSMI to see these and with things like footpaths
(which we can't remap remotely) adding to the red it is very difficult
to spot. I do wonder if it would be easier to erase things we can't
remap so we can identify more easily those we can.
As Robert says getting a list of problem highway nodes/ways would be a
On 03/03/2012 09:19, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:
> On 2 March 2012 14:35, Richard Fairhurst<richard at systemed.net> wrote:
>> We change to the new licence in just under a month's time, so it's a good
>> time to look at the current state of the UK.
> We're almost certainly not going to be able to able to get the UK
> completely clean by the switch-over, and it's definitely good if we
> can prioritise work on particularly badly-tainted areas. But I wonder
> if another prioritisation approach might be useful too -- prioritising
> certain high-value types of objects, where-ever they might be.
> For instance, as far as routing is concerned, any gaps in the major
> road network is likely to cause significant problems for data-users.
> So might it be possible for someone to generate a list of
> highway=motorway and highway=trunk objects that are tainted, so people
> could work on eliminating those. The idea could extended to include
> the corresponding *_link ways, and if progress is good we could
> continue to do highway=primary and highway=secondary.
> We might want to do the same for railway=rail and perhaps
> waterway=river. Are there any other types of object people can think
> of that might be worth prioritising?
> You can sort of look for these types of object using BadMap  at low
> zooms, but it's not that easy, and the low zooms aren't updated as
> often I don't think. It would be much easier if there was a specific
> list of objects to work from. I'm afraid I don't have the hardware /
> experience / technical expertise to generate the data sets, but maybe
> someone who does might think it's a good idea...
>  http://cleanmap.poole.ch/?zoom=6&lat=54.28388&lon=-3.24444&layers=00B0
More information about the Talk-GB