Hi, Rod: Don't worry. I didn't take it personally. Only wanted to clarify.
About automatic notifications, the only services I am aware of are the itoworld OSM mapper and the whodidit. The first one allows me to have RSS for areas I want to monitor. The only issue is that it shows changes in ways and relations, but not nodes (don't know why). I'd like to know of better tools to monitor changes in areas. Cheers, Rafael. On 22/11/15 11:23, Rod Bera wrote: > Hi Rafael, > > > On 21/11/15 17:23, Rafael Avila Coya wrote: >> Hi, Rod: >> >> I already explained what I meant with my revert comments in my answer to >> Dale, and asked for apologies if I was misunderstood. My comments about >> revert were that "a ***potential*** revert would be troublesome, but I >> wasn't meaning that there should happen a revert without asking anybody. >> In fact, I wasn't aiming at any revert anyway, because, like you, I >> haven't ever been involved in any mapping in Haiti. > > I understood it this way. My observations weren't aimed at you in > particular. They pertain to us all (including myself, to make it clear). > > We are working together this seems obvious but all too easy to forget as > we are most of the time mapping "face-to-face" with our devices. > > As is too easy to forget that everything on the OSM DB is the product of > millions hours of (wo)man time, and must be respected as such. > > We must never delete or reverse lightly, and when we feel the need, this > should always be discussed extensively before. > > There are places for this (mailing lists, wiki, even TM...), but maybe > we (HOT and OSM) should improve information on where to find these > discussions. Many newcomers (and even some advanced mappers) never reach > these forums. > > What about automatic notifications when someone is about to map, or has > previously mapped, an area where substantial changes are planned or have > just occurred? > > > >> >> These past days there was a (still ongoing) thread in the Spanish talk >> list about how to follow up on some survey point nodes that some users >> delete from an old import from the IGN (Spanish Ordinance Survey), and I >> helped them with similar overpass queries that I thought could be of >> interest for Pierre to check how was the state of the map (buildings) of >> the area a month ago. That's it. When I answered, I wasn't aware that >> Dale also answered Pierre; otherwise my answer would probably be >> different, according to the new info. > > Apologies if you took if personally, it definitely wasn't my intention. > > > Best regards, > > Rod > > > >> >> I agree with you about all what you say about convivial interaction. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Rafael. >> >> On 21/11/15 16:49, Rod Bera wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I haven't taken part in mapping in this area, so I don't know about the >>> details, but what I read looks concerning: large scale deletion, massive >>> imports, and substantial reverts are to be discussed with the community. >>> This is the base of OSM's collaborative work. >>> >>> Therefore I agree with Dale that unilateral reverts should not happen >>> unless agreed on. But I also point out that no massive deletion should >>> have happened without prior discussion with the community. >>> >>> As to spatial consistency, this is also something that can (must) be >>> discussed collectively in order to define a coherent line of conduct >>> (imagery to be used/not >>> used/corrected/re-georectified/re-georeferenced/...). >>> >>> Let's bear in mind that OSM is COLLABORATIVE mapping, and collaboration >>> is not just about adding up individuals' contributions. >>> >>> It is also about inclusive and constructive interaction. >>> >>> Convivial* interaction. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Rod >>> >>> * con vivere [latin] --> living TOGETHER. We Hotties/OSMers/Humans >>> especially need to improve on this. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 20/11/15 21:00, Dale Kunce wrote: >>>> Rafael, >>>> We decided to do large scale deletion for a number of reasons. >>>> >>>> * Errors within iD that cause many buildings to be traced several >>>> times thus resulting in many many overlapping buildings. >>>> o I personally fixed thousands of overlaps and fixed several >>>> thousand of other validation errors in the area. >>>> * Poor spatial consistency between multiple imagery resources >>>> o Bing >>>> o 2013 drone imagery >>>> o 2014 drone imagery >>>> o 2015 drone imagery >>>> o Recent GeoEye imagery >>>> * Lack of existing drone imagery led us to acquire high resolution >>>> satellite imagery. >>>> o Imagery isn't nearly as clean and sharp as the drone imagery >>>> being shot but is consistent throughout the entire area. >>>> >>>> *Do not *revert these changes as it represents hundreds of man hours by >>>> ARC staff to clean up and fix this area. The area in its current state >>>> is the most up to date the area *has ever been *due to previous efforts >>>> by Haiti Communitaire and the ARC GIS team. We have spent considerable >>>> time in the field and remotely mapping this area. >>>> >>>> Again, for continued questions about these changesets please contact me >>>> off-list. >>>> >>>> Dale >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Rafael Avila Coya <ravilac...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:ravilac...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, Pierre: >>>> >>>> I guess this is what the majority of people do, and only the most >>>> experienced users re-trace objects, also using the replace geometry >>>> tool >>>> (CTRL+SHIFT+G). It took me long to me to realise about that too. >>>> >>>> As usual in these cases, I would contact him to check what happened, >>>> and >>>> tell him how he should proceed from now on, so he learns the advantages >>>> of not deleting objects unless really needed, but improving those >>>> objects instead. >>>> >>>> I've checked the edits by that user, and he made lots of changesets >>>> (maybe around hundred), so I see a potencial reversion very troublesome >>>> and time consuming. >>>> >>>> The first of the changesets seem to have been edited about a month ago >>>> [1]. So around 6 am 21 Oct 2015. >>>> >>>> To check what buildings were at the area before deletion, you may use >>>> the next overpass query: [2]. As there isn't any Canaan area in OSM, >>>> just used the ({{bbox}}) thing. I set the date at 00:00:01 of that day >>>> (so 6 hours before the first changeset). >>>> >>>> With this other query [3] you can get a file with the building ways >>>> that >>>> were present at that same date and time, that were deleted, and also >>>> those that were modified and new buildings created. The output file >>>> don't open in JOSM, but could be use to get statistical info (for >>>> example) on number of buildings deleted. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Rafael. >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/34784526 >>>> [2] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/cQv >>>> [3] http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/cQw >>>> >>>> >>>> On 20/11/15 19:29, Pierre Béland wrote: >>>> > Being in Port-au-Prince for a Training session of the Haiti >>>> > OpenStreetMap community (Espace OSM francophone project), I >>>> collaborate >>>> > this week with the Haiti OSM community who have monitored >>>> urbanisation >>>> > progression in the Canaan sector, providing UAV imagery in 2013, 2014 >>>> > and 2015 (60% of the zone covered so far). They have also added >>>> to osm >>>> > the building footprints in the area from precise and accurate >>>> imagery (4 >>>> > cm precision). >>>> > >>>> > We organize a mapathon tomorrow to revise the Canaan zone using the >>>> > November 2015 imagery available and monitor the progress of rapid >>>> House >>>> > contruction in this sector. >>>> > >>>> > Planning the work, I see today that one contributor did most of >>>> Tak 1238 >>>> > for Canaan Haiti and it seems deleted systematically buildings before >>>> > redrawing them. In JOSM if I download buildings and search for newly >>>> > created buildings (ie version:1), most of the buildings have >>>> version=1. >>>> > >>>> > If this is exact, we should note that this is contrary to the OSM >>>> > philosophy. The rule that we generally follow at OSM to respect >>>> previous >>>> > contributions and keep history, is to revise geometry and not delete >>>> / >>>> > retrace. >>>> > >>>> > For these two changesets alone, I count 50 and 44 ways deleted. >>>> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35462043 >>>> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35462424 >>>> > >>>> > At the same time, many buildings are missing. Since I have no >>>> comparizon >>>> > with the situation before this mapping, It is hard to say what was >>>> done >>>> > exactly, if any building were erased and not replaced. >>>> > >>>> > Could somebody confirm that buildings were systematically deleted >>>> before >>>> > retracing. What should we do to correct rapidly this situation >>>> before we >>>> > start the mapathon tomorrow? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Pierre >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > HOT mailing list >>>> > HOT@openstreetmap.org <mailto:HOT@openstreetmap.org> >>>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>>> > >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> HOT mailing list >>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org <mailto:HOT@openstreetmap.org> >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> sent from my mobile device >>>> >>>> Dale Kunce >>>> http://normalhabit.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> HOT mailing list >>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> HOT mailing list >> HOT@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> > > _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list HOT@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
