[HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Ray Kiddy]

Hello -

This is probably a somewhat basic question about editing for HOT tasks.

As I have been editing in various HOT tasks, I have been adding
something like source=Bing (where that is the imagery) onto every
road, every building, every ... everything that I create. Need I bother
with this?

I have seen in (perhaps just some tasks') instructions that I could also
just put this on the changeset comment. So I can just add it to the
changeset once instead of adding it to the object 100 times?

If it could be put on the changeset comment and not on every object,
that would be convenient. It would also explain why, when I look at all
of the objects others have created, I hardly ever see a source value.

So, am I doing too much work by re-entering the source value every
time? What is the level of diligence expected here?

thanx - ray

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Sander Deryckere]

It's more logical to put it on the changeset.

Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone who
lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the object
has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in fact your edit
operation that has a source, not the object itself.

As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset (also
because it keeps the database a bit smaller).

When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to the
changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline source). In
iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the changeset, but you don't
get an option to give other sources (which is why many people still put a
source on the objects).

Regards,
Sander

2014-11-03 19:41 GMT+01:00 Ray Kiddy :

>
> Hello -
>
> This is probably a somewhat basic question about editing for HOT tasks.
>
> As I have been editing in various HOT tasks, I have been adding
> something like source=Bing (where that is the imagery) onto every
> road, every building, every ... everything that I create. Need I bother
> with this?
>
> I have seen in (perhaps just some tasks') instructions that I could also
> just put this on the changeset comment. So I can just add it to the
> changeset once instead of adding it to the object 100 times?
>
> If it could be put on the changeset comment and not on every object,
> that would be convenient. It would also explain why, when I look at all
> of the objects others have created, I hardly ever see a source value.
>
> So, am I doing too much work by re-entering the source value every
> time? What is the level of diligence expected here?
>
> thanx - ray
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Ray Kiddy]

On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
Sander Deryckere  wrote:

> It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
> 
> Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
> who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
> object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
> fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.

I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.

> As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
> (also because it keeps the database a bit smaller).

> When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to
> the changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline
> source). In iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the
> changeset, but you don't get an option to give other sources (which
> is why many people still put a source on the objects).

So I understand this to mean that if you are putting in an object from
the imagery in front of you, you do not need to do anything else. I am
not seeing that iD is attaching this anywhere but I may not be looking
in the right place. But as long as the database sees it, I do not need
to.

Take away point, I do not need to set the source 100 times and I am
good with that.

cheers - ray

> Regards,
> Sander
> 
> 2014-11-03 19:41 GMT+01:00 Ray Kiddy :
> 
> >
> > Hello -
> >
> > This is probably a somewhat basic question about editing for HOT
> > tasks.
> >
> > As I have been editing in various HOT tasks, I have been adding
> > something like source=Bing (where that is the imagery) onto every
> > road, every building, every ... everything that I create. Need I
> > bother with this?
> >
> > I have seen in (perhaps just some tasks') instructions that I could
> > also just put this on the changeset comment. So I can just add it
> > to the changeset once instead of adding it to the object 100 times?
> >
> > If it could be put on the changeset comment and not on every object,
> > that would be convenient. It would also explain why, when I look at
> > all of the objects others have created, I hardly ever see a source
> > value.
> >
> > So, am I doing too much work by re-entering the source value every
> > time? What is the level of diligence expected here?
> >
> > thanx - ray
> >
> > ___
> > HOT mailing list
> > HOT@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> >


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Pat Tressel]

There was another thread relating to this a short while ago, so there's
more relevant discussion there.

Two notes:

The source tag can hold other info besides imagery, e.g. it could tell who
or what agency provided some item of information.  The iD imagery_used tag
is more specific.  But historically, source has been used for imagery too.

With respect to whether the source / imagery_used tag should go on features
or changeset:  I raised this question at the end of the previous thread on
this subject.  We don't want to lose the fact that something was traced
with use of a particular set of imagery if someone edits a feature.  Let's
take one specific case:  Say that someone enters a feature (say it's one
point, just to be clear) using one set of imagery, and the imagery_used tag
gets assigned to the changeset.  If someone later shifts that point, while
using a different set of imagery, is it still possible to get back to the
original changeset from the modified point?

-- Pat

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ray Kiddy  wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
> Sander Deryckere  wrote:
>
> > It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
> >
> > Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
> > who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
> > object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
> > fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.
>
> I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
> object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
> Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
> were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
> how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.
>
> > As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
> > (also because it keeps the database a bit smaller).
>
> > When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to
> > the changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline
> > source). In iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the
> > changeset, but you don't get an option to give other sources (which
> > is why many people still put a source on the objects).
>
> So I understand this to mean that if you are putting in an object from
> the imagery in front of you, you do not need to do anything else. I am
> not seeing that iD is attaching this anywhere but I may not be looking
> in the right place. But as long as the database sees it, I do not need
> to.
>
> Take away point, I do not need to set the source 100 times and I am
> good with that.
>
> cheers - ray
>
> > Regards,
> > Sander
> >
> > 2014-11-03 19:41 GMT+01:00 Ray Kiddy :
> >
> > >
> > > Hello -
> > >
> > > This is probably a somewhat basic question about editing for HOT
> > > tasks.
> > >
> > > As I have been editing in various HOT tasks, I have been adding
> > > something like source=Bing (where that is the imagery) onto every
> > > road, every building, every ... everything that I create. Need I
> > > bother with this?
> > >
> > > I have seen in (perhaps just some tasks') instructions that I could
> > > also just put this on the changeset comment. So I can just add it
> > > to the changeset once instead of adding it to the object 100 times?
> > >
> > > If it could be put on the changeset comment and not on every object,
> > > that would be convenient. It would also explain why, when I look at
> > > all of the objects others have created, I hardly ever see a source
> > > value.
> > >
> > > So, am I doing too much work by re-entering the source value every
> > > time? What is the level of diligence expected here?
> > >
> > > thanx - ray
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[john whelan]

To take this slightly further in JOSM when you upload it takes the title of
the imagery so where I'm working its "DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-2" however I
have noticed some mapping being done that is consistently out compared to
the DigitalGlobe imagery but matches up exactly with the available Bing
imagery.

Some Satellite imagery is more accurate than others, Kevin Bullock
http://stateofthemap.us/session/mapping-the-world-in-raster/ 15 mins in for
90 seconds covers it nicely.

Perhaps some automated tool could check the change sets for HOT uploading
to just verify the most accurate image is being used and suggest the most
accurate source back to the mapper if it isn't.

Thanks John



On 3 November 2014 14:01, Ray Kiddy  wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
> Sander Deryckere  wrote:
>
> > It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
> >
> > Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
> > who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
> > object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
> > fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.
>
> I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
> object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
> Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
> were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
> how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.
>
> > As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
> > (also because it keeps the database a bit smaller).
>
> > When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to
> > the changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline
> > source). In iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the
> > changeset, but you don't get an option to give other sources (which
> > is why many people still put a source on the objects).
>
> So I understand this to mean that if you are putting in an object from
> the imagery in front of you, you do not need to do anything else. I am
> not seeing that iD is attaching this anywhere but I may not be looking
> in the right place. But as long as the database sees it, I do not need
> to.
>
> Take away point, I do not need to set the source 100 times and I am
> good with that.
>
> cheers - ray
>
> > Regards,
> > Sander
> >
> > 2014-11-03 19:41 GMT+01:00 Ray Kiddy :
> >
> > >
> > > Hello -
> > >
> > > This is probably a somewhat basic question about editing for HOT
> > > tasks.
> > >
> > > As I have been editing in various HOT tasks, I have been adding
> > > something like source=Bing (where that is the imagery) onto every
> > > road, every building, every ... everything that I create. Need I
> > > bother with this?
> > >
> > > I have seen in (perhaps just some tasks') instructions that I could
> > > also just put this on the changeset comment. So I can just add it
> > > to the changeset once instead of adding it to the object 100 times?
> > >
> > > If it could be put on the changeset comment and not on every object,
> > > that would be convenient. It would also explain why, when I look at
> > > all of the objects others have created, I hardly ever see a source
> > > value.
> > >
> > > So, am I doing too much work by re-entering the source value every
> > > time? What is the level of diligence expected here?
> > >
> > > thanx - ray
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Blake Girardot]

On 11/3/2014 2:01 PM, Ray Kiddy wrote:


I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.


This can be done for the most part with tags that look like this for 
example:


source=Bing
source:alt_name=GNS
source:name=survey
etc

If you want to list a specific source for some bit of the object just 
use source:x=value format.


As you mention, this is more on objects than changesets, but it could 
apply to changesets if you wanted to use it that way and it was accurate.


Blake

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Andy Anderson]

Hi, Pat,

Looking at OSM using the iD editor, when I type in “image” the only relevant 
tags that pop up are “image”,  “source:imagery”, and “source_type_imagery”; 
“imagery_used” is not an option, I have to type it in explicitly. Does this 
mean it’s not a very commonly used tag (?).

It would be much better if this were automatic, in any case. Even with the 
easy-to-use Source button present, it’s a bit of a bother; it would be even 
more so if this type has to be typed or menued in every time. Theoretically one 
could switch background imagery even in the middle of an edit, which might 
warrant multiple tags, but that would probably be rare.

— Andy

On Nov 3, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Pat Tressel 
mailto:ptres...@myuw.net>> wrote:

There was another thread relating to this a short while ago, so there's more 
relevant discussion there.

Two notes:

The source tag can hold other info besides imagery, e.g. it could tell who or 
what agency provided some item of information.  The iD imagery_used tag is more 
specific.  But historically, source has been used for imagery too.

With respect to whether the source / imagery_used tag should go on features or 
changeset:  I raised this question at the end of the previous thread on this 
subject.  We don't want to lose the fact that something was traced with use of 
a particular set of imagery if someone edits a feature.  Let's take one 
specific case:  Say that someone enters a feature (say it's one point, just to 
be clear) using one set of imagery, and the imagery_used tag gets assigned to 
the changeset.  If someone later shifts that point, while using a different set 
of imagery, is it still possible to get back to the original changeset from the 
modified point?

-- Pat

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ray Kiddy 
mailto:r...@ganymede.org>> wrote:
On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
Sander Deryckere mailto:sander...@gmail.com>> wrote:

> It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
>
> Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
> who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
> object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
> fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.

I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.

> As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
> (also because it keeps the database a bit smaller).

> When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to
> the changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline
> source). In iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the
> changeset, but you don't get an option to give other sources (which
> is why many people still put a source on the objects).

So I understand this to mean that if you are putting in an object from
the imagery in front of you, you do not need to do anything else. I am
not seeing that iD is attaching this anywhere but I may not be looking
in the right place. But as long as the database sees it, I do not need
to.

Take away point, I do not need to set the source 100 times and I am
good with that.

cheers - ray

> Regards,
> Sander
>
> 2014-11-03 19:41 GMT+01:00 Ray Kiddy 
> mailto:r...@ganymede.org>>:
>
> >
> > Hello -
> >
> > This is probably a somewhat basic question about editing for HOT
> > tasks.
> >
> > As I have been editing in various HOT tasks, I have been adding
> > something like source=Bing (where that is the imagery) onto every
> > road, every building, every ... everything that I create. Need I
> > bother with this?
> >
> > I have seen in (perhaps just some tasks') instructions that I could
> > also just put this on the changeset comment. So I can just add it
> > to the changeset once instead of adding it to the object 100 times?
> >
> > If it could be put on the changeset comment and not on every object,
> > that would be convenient. It would also explain why, when I look at
> > all of the objects others have created, I hardly ever see a source
> > value.
> >
> > So, am I doing too much work by re-entering the source value every
> > time? What is the level of diligence expected here?
> >
> > thanx - ray
> >
> > ___
> > 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

_

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Dan S]

Andy - "imagery_used" is automatically added by iD, every time. You
won't see it as a tag you can add, it's added automatically to the
changeset.

2014-11-03 23:45 GMT+00:00 Andy Anderson :
> Hi, Pat,
>
> Looking at OSM using the iD editor, when I type in “image” the only relevant
> tags that pop up are “image”,  “source:imagery”, and “source_type_imagery”;
> “imagery_used” is not an option, I have to type it in explicitly. Does this
> mean it’s not a very commonly used tag (?).
>
> It would be much better if this were automatic, in any case. Even with the
> easy-to-use Source button present, it’s a bit of a bother; it would be even
> more so if this type has to be typed or menued in every time. Theoretically
> one could switch background imagery even in the middle of an edit, which
> might warrant multiple tags, but that would probably be rare.
>
> — Andy
>
> On Nov 3, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Pat Tressel  wrote:
>
> There was another thread relating to this a short while ago, so there's more
> relevant discussion there.
>
> Two notes:
>
> The source tag can hold other info besides imagery, e.g. it could tell who
> or what agency provided some item of information.  The iD imagery_used tag
> is more specific.  But historically, source has been used for imagery too.
>
> With respect to whether the source / imagery_used tag should go on features
> or changeset:  I raised this question at the end of the previous thread on
> this subject.  We don't want to lose the fact that something was traced with
> use of a particular set of imagery if someone edits a feature.  Let's take
> one specific case:  Say that someone enters a feature (say it's one point,
> just to be clear) using one set of imagery, and the imagery_used tag gets
> assigned to the changeset.  If someone later shifts that point, while using
> a different set of imagery, is it still possible to get back to the original
> changeset from the modified point?
>
> -- Pat
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ray Kiddy  wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
>> Sander Deryckere  wrote:
>>
>> > It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
>> >
>> > Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
>> > who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
>> > object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
>> > fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.
>>
>> I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
>> object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
>> Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
>> were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
>> how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.
>>
>> > As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
>> > (also because it keeps the database a bit smaller).
>>
>> > When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to
>> > the changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline
>> > source). In iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the
>> > changeset, but you don't get an option to give other sources (which
>> > is why many people still put a source on the objects).
>>
>> So I understand this to mean that if you are putting in an object from
>> the imagery in front of you, you do not need to do anything else. I am
>> not seeing that iD is attaching this anywhere but I may not be looking
>> in the right place. But as long as the database sees it, I do not need
>> to.
>>
>> Take away point, I do not need to set the source 100 times and I am
>> good with that.
>>
>> cheers - ray
>>
>> > Regards,
>> > Sander
>> >
>> > 2014-11-03 19:41 GMT+01:00 Ray Kiddy :
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Hello -
>> > >
>> > > This is probably a somewhat basic question about editing for HOT
>> > > tasks.
>> > >
>> > > As I have been editing in various HOT tasks, I have been adding
>> > > something like source=Bing (where that is the imagery) onto every
>> > > road, every building, every ... everything that I create. Need I
>> > > bother with this?
>> > >
>> > > I have seen in (perhaps just some tasks') instructions that I could
>> > > also just put this on the changeset comment. So I can just add it
>> > > to the changeset once instead of adding it to the object 100 times?
>> > >
>> > > If it could be put on the changeset comment and not on every object,
>> > > that would be convenient. It would also explain why, when I look at
>> > > all of the objects others have created, I hardly ever see a source
>> > > value.
>> > >
>> > > So, am I doing too much work by re-entering the source value every
>> > > time? What is the level of diligence expected here?
>> > >
>> > > thanx - ray
>> > >
>> > > ___
>> > > HOT mailing list
>> > > HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>> > >
>>
>>
>> ___
>> HO

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Sander Deryckere]

@Pat tressel, for every object, you can query the history, so all
changesets that changed it, and the tags on those changesets.

So you can certainly query which sources were used to create an element if
all authors mentioned their sources.

@Andy Anderson, in iD, you cannot chose your own changeset tags. A
changeset tag is not a tag on an object. But iD adds some changeset tags by
default, like imagery_used=* and created_by=iD.

changeset tags were introduced to make the database smaller, before those,
almost all elements had tags on them like created_by=JOSM,
created_by=Merkaartor, ... which wasn't useful at all, it's more useful to
know which change came from which editor. So now, editors like JOSM
automatically delete those "created_by" tags when you modify an object, but
they do put a "created_by" tag on the changeset.

JOSM doesn't (yet) delete source=* tags, because it's still used by too
many people, and might contain more valuable information.

2014-11-04 9:36 GMT+01:00 Dan S :

> Andy - "imagery_used" is automatically added by iD, every time. You
> won't see it as a tag you can add, it's added automatically to the
> changeset.
>
> 2014-11-03 23:45 GMT+00:00 Andy Anderson :
> > Hi, Pat,
> >
> > Looking at OSM using the iD editor, when I type in “image” the only
> relevant
> > tags that pop up are “image”,  “source:imagery”, and
> “source_type_imagery”;
> > “imagery_used” is not an option, I have to type it in explicitly. Does
> this
> > mean it’s not a very commonly used tag (?).
> >
> > It would be much better if this were automatic, in any case. Even with
> the
> > easy-to-use Source button present, it’s a bit of a bother; it would be
> even
> > more so if this type has to be typed or menued in every time.
> Theoretically
> > one could switch background imagery even in the middle of an edit, which
> > might warrant multiple tags, but that would probably be rare.
> >
> > — Andy
> >
> > On Nov 3, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Pat Tressel  wrote:
> >
> > There was another thread relating to this a short while ago, so there's
> more
> > relevant discussion there.
> >
> > Two notes:
> >
> > The source tag can hold other info besides imagery, e.g. it could tell
> who
> > or what agency provided some item of information.  The iD imagery_used
> tag
> > is more specific.  But historically, source has been used for imagery
> too.
> >
> > With respect to whether the source / imagery_used tag should go on
> features
> > or changeset:  I raised this question at the end of the previous thread
> on
> > this subject.  We don't want to lose the fact that something was traced
> with
> > use of a particular set of imagery if someone edits a feature.  Let's
> take
> > one specific case:  Say that someone enters a feature (say it's one
> point,
> > just to be clear) using one set of imagery, and the imagery_used tag gets
> > assigned to the changeset.  If someone later shifts that point, while
> using
> > a different set of imagery, is it still possible to get back to the
> original
> > changeset from the modified point?
> >
> > -- Pat
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ray Kiddy  wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
> >> Sander Deryckere  wrote:
> >>
> >> > It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
> >> >
> >> > Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
> >> > who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
> >> > object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
> >> > fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.
> >>
> >> I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
> >> object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
> >> Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
> >> were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
> >> how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.
> >>
> >> > As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
> >> > (also because it keeps the database a bit smaller).
> >>
> >> > When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to
> >> > the changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline
> >> > source). In iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the
> >> > changeset, but you don't get an option to give other sources (which
> >> > is why many people still put a source on the objects).
> >>
> >> So I understand this to mean that if you are putting in an object from
> >> the imagery in front of you, you do not need to do anything else. I am
> >> not seeing that iD is attaching this anywhere but I may not be looking
> >> in the right place. But as long as the database sees it, I do not need
> >> to.
> >>
> >> Take away point, I do not need to set the source 100 times and I am
> >> good with that.
> >>
> >> cheers - ray
> >>
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Sander
> >> >
> >> > 2014-11-03 19:41 GMT+01:00 Ray Kiddy :
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > Hello -
> >> > 

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Andy Anderson]

Hi, Sander,

Sorry, missed the distinction in the conversation here between the saving of 
objects and the saving of changesets.

This is actually something that I think needs to be clarified in iD: there are 
two “Save” buttons that show up while editing, I think it would be much, much 
better from an HI perspective if they had distinct labels, viz. “Save Object” 
and “Save Changeset”. Where is the the appropriate location to request this 
change, here: https://help.openstreetmap.org/tags/ideditor/ ?

— Andy

On Nov 4, 2014, at 4:03 AM, Sander Deryckere 
mailto:sander...@gmail.com>> wrote:

@Pat tressel, for every object, you can query the history, so all changesets 
that changed it, and the tags on those changesets.

So you can certainly query which sources were used to create an element if all 
authors mentioned their sources.

@Andy Anderson, in iD, you cannot chose your own changeset tags. A changeset 
tag is not a tag on an object. But iD adds some changeset tags by default, like 
imagery_used=* and created_by=iD.

changeset tags were introduced to make the database smaller, before those, 
almost all elements had tags on them like created_by=JOSM, 
created_by=Merkaartor, ... which wasn't useful at all, it's more useful to know 
which change came from which editor. So now, editors like JOSM automatically 
delete those "created_by" tags when you modify an object, but they do put a 
"created_by" tag on the changeset.

JOSM doesn't (yet) delete source=* tags, because it's still used by too many 
people, and might contain more valuable information.

2014-11-04 9:36 GMT+01:00 Dan S 
mailto:danstowell+...@gmail.com>>:
Andy - "imagery_used" is automatically added by iD, every time. You
won't see it as a tag you can add, it's added automatically to the
changeset.

2014-11-03 23:45 GMT+00:00 Andy Anderson 
mailto:aander...@amherst.edu>>:
> Hi, Pat,
>
> Looking at OSM using the iD editor, when I type in “image” the only relevant
> tags that pop up are “image”,  “source:imagery”, and “source_type_imagery”;
> “imagery_used” is not an option, I have to type it in explicitly. Does this
> mean it’s not a very commonly used tag (?).
>
> It would be much better if this were automatic, in any case. Even with the
> easy-to-use Source button present, it’s a bit of a bother; it would be even
> more so if this type has to be typed or menued in every time. Theoretically
> one could switch background imagery even in the middle of an edit, which
> might warrant multiple tags, but that would probably be rare.
>
> — Andy
>
> On Nov 3, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Pat Tressel 
> mailto:ptres...@myuw.net>> wrote:
>
> There was another thread relating to this a short while ago, so there's more
> relevant discussion there.
>
> Two notes:
>
> The source tag can hold other info besides imagery, e.g. it could tell who
> or what agency provided some item of information.  The iD imagery_used tag
> is more specific.  But historically, source has been used for imagery too.
>
> With respect to whether the source / imagery_used tag should go on features
> or changeset:  I raised this question at the end of the previous thread on
> this subject.  We don't want to lose the fact that something was traced with
> use of a particular set of imagery if someone edits a feature.  Let's take
> one specific case:  Say that someone enters a feature (say it's one point,
> just to be clear) using one set of imagery, and the imagery_used tag gets
> assigned to the changeset.  If someone later shifts that point, while using
> a different set of imagery, is it still possible to get back to the original
> changeset from the modified point?
>
> -- Pat
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ray Kiddy 
> mailto:r...@ganymede.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
>> Sander Deryckere mailto:sander...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> > It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
>> >
>> > Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
>> > who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
>> > object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
>> > fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.
>>
>> I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
>> object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
>> Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
>> were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
>> how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.
>>
>> > As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
>> > (also because it keeps the database a bit smaller).
>>
>> > When you edit with JOSM, you can add the source manually as a tag to
>> > the changeset (which is handy if your source is a survey or offline
>> > source). In iD, it automatically logs the imagery used in the
>> > changeset, but you don't get an option to give other sources (which
>> > is why many people still put a sour

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Dan S]

Andy,

Feature requests for iD would go here:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues
but I doubt that they would be keen on making the buttons show such
verbose language...

Best
Dan


2014-11-04 14:02 GMT+00:00 Andy Anderson :
> Hi, Sander,
>
> Sorry, missed the distinction in the conversation here between the saving of
> objects and the saving of changesets.
>
> This is actually something that I think needs to be clarified in iD: there
> are two “Save” buttons that show up while editing, I think it would be much,
> much better from an HI perspective if they had distinct labels, viz. “Save
> Object” and “Save Changeset”. Where is the the appropriate location to
> request this change, here: https://help.openstreetmap.org/tags/ideditor/ ?
>
> — Andy
>
> On Nov 4, 2014, at 4:03 AM, Sander Deryckere  wrote:
>
> @Pat tressel, for every object, you can query the history, so all changesets
> that changed it, and the tags on those changesets.
>
> So you can certainly query which sources were used to create an element if
> all authors mentioned their sources.
>
> @Andy Anderson, in iD, you cannot chose your own changeset tags. A changeset
> tag is not a tag on an object. But iD adds some changeset tags by default,
> like imagery_used=* and created_by=iD.
>
> changeset tags were introduced to make the database smaller, before those,
> almost all elements had tags on them like created_by=JOSM,
> created_by=Merkaartor, ... which wasn't useful at all, it's more useful to
> know which change came from which editor. So now, editors like JOSM
> automatically delete those "created_by" tags when you modify an object, but
> they do put a "created_by" tag on the changeset.
>
> JOSM doesn't (yet) delete source=* tags, because it's still used by too many
> people, and might contain more valuable information.
>
> 2014-11-04 9:36 GMT+01:00 Dan S :
>>
>> Andy - "imagery_used" is automatically added by iD, every time. You
>> won't see it as a tag you can add, it's added automatically to the
>> changeset.
>>
>> 2014-11-03 23:45 GMT+00:00 Andy Anderson :
>> > Hi, Pat,
>> >
>> > Looking at OSM using the iD editor, when I type in “image” the only
>> > relevant
>> > tags that pop up are “image”,  “source:imagery”, and
>> > “source_type_imagery”;
>> > “imagery_used” is not an option, I have to type it in explicitly. Does
>> > this
>> > mean it’s not a very commonly used tag (?).
>> >
>> > It would be much better if this were automatic, in any case. Even with
>> > the
>> > easy-to-use Source button present, it’s a bit of a bother; it would be
>> > even
>> > more so if this type has to be typed or menued in every time.
>> > Theoretically
>> > one could switch background imagery even in the middle of an edit, which
>> > might warrant multiple tags, but that would probably be rare.
>> >
>> > — Andy
>> >
>> > On Nov 3, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Pat Tressel  wrote:
>> >
>> > There was another thread relating to this a short while ago, so there's
>> > more
>> > relevant discussion there.
>> >
>> > Two notes:
>> >
>> > The source tag can hold other info besides imagery, e.g. it could tell
>> > who
>> > or what agency provided some item of information.  The iD imagery_used
>> > tag
>> > is more specific.  But historically, source has been used for imagery
>> > too.
>> >
>> > With respect to whether the source / imagery_used tag should go on
>> > features
>> > or changeset:  I raised this question at the end of the previous thread
>> > on
>> > this subject.  We don't want to lose the fact that something was traced
>> > with
>> > use of a particular set of imagery if someone edits a feature.  Let's
>> > take
>> > one specific case:  Say that someone enters a feature (say it's one
>> > point,
>> > just to be clear) using one set of imagery, and the imagery_used tag
>> > gets
>> > assigned to the changeset.  If someone later shifts that point, while
>> > using
>> > a different set of imagery, is it still possible to get back to the
>> > original
>> > changeset from the modified point?
>> >
>> > -- Pat
>> >
>> > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ray Kiddy  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
>> >> Sander Deryckere  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
>> >> >
>> >> > Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
>> >> > who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
>> >> > object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
>> >> > fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.
>> >>
>> >> I had wondered about this when I saw multiple source values on an
>> >> object. I mean, which other attributes came from which source?
>> >> Technically the source should map to the subset of the attributes that
>> >> were observed from that source, but in real life, I would have no idea
>> >> how that could be presented in a way anyone would understand.
>> >>
>> >> > As such, source=Bing is by many mappers preferred on the changeset
>> >> > (a

Re: [HOT] bother adding source=Whatever to each object?

[Andy Anderson]

Thanks, Dan — you may be right about simple button names, in which case I would 
suggest the use of the language “Save” and “Commit”, which is used by Git and 
from what I can tell is a more accurate description of what’s happening. I 
think it’s also understandable to non-Git users.

— Andy

On Nov 4, 2014, at 9:29 AM, Dan S  wrote:

> Andy,
> 
> Feature requests for iD would go here:
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues
> but I doubt that they would be keen on making the buttons show such
> verbose language...
> 
> Best
> Dan
> 
> 
> 2014-11-04 14:02 GMT+00:00 Andy Anderson :
>> Hi, Sander,
>> 
>> Sorry, missed the distinction in the conversation here between the saving of
>> objects and the saving of changesets.
>> 
>> This is actually something that I think needs to be clarified in iD: there
>> are two “Save” buttons that show up while editing, I think it would be much,
>> much better from an HI perspective if they had distinct labels, viz. “Save
>> Object” and “Save Changeset”. Where is the the appropriate location to
>> request this change, here: https://help.openstreetmap.org/tags/ideditor/ ?
>> 
>> — Andy
>> 
>> On Nov 4, 2014, at 4:03 AM, Sander Deryckere  wrote:
>> 
>> @Pat tressel, for every object, you can query the history, so all changesets
>> that changed it, and the tags on those changesets.
>> 
>> So you can certainly query which sources were used to create an element if
>> all authors mentioned their sources.
>> 
>> @Andy Anderson, in iD, you cannot chose your own changeset tags. A changeset
>> tag is not a tag on an object. But iD adds some changeset tags by default,
>> like imagery_used=* and created_by=iD.
>> 
>> changeset tags were introduced to make the database smaller, before those,
>> almost all elements had tags on them like created_by=JOSM,
>> created_by=Merkaartor, ... which wasn't useful at all, it's more useful to
>> know which change came from which editor. So now, editors like JOSM
>> automatically delete those "created_by" tags when you modify an object, but
>> they do put a "created_by" tag on the changeset.
>> 
>> JOSM doesn't (yet) delete source=* tags, because it's still used by too many
>> people, and might contain more valuable information.
>> 
>> 2014-11-04 9:36 GMT+01:00 Dan S :
>>> 
>>> Andy - "imagery_used" is automatically added by iD, every time. You
>>> won't see it as a tag you can add, it's added automatically to the
>>> changeset.
>>> 
>>> 2014-11-03 23:45 GMT+00:00 Andy Anderson :
 Hi, Pat,
 
 Looking at OSM using the iD editor, when I type in “image” the only
 relevant
 tags that pop up are “image”,  “source:imagery”, and
 “source_type_imagery”;
 “imagery_used” is not an option, I have to type it in explicitly. Does
 this
 mean it’s not a very commonly used tag (?).
 
 It would be much better if this were automatic, in any case. Even with
 the
 easy-to-use Source button present, it’s a bit of a bother; it would be
 even
 more so if this type has to be typed or menued in every time.
 Theoretically
 one could switch background imagery even in the middle of an edit, which
 might warrant multiple tags, but that would probably be rare.
 
 — Andy
 
 On Nov 3, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Pat Tressel  wrote:
 
 There was another thread relating to this a short while ago, so there's
 more
 relevant discussion there.
 
 Two notes:
 
 The source tag can hold other info besides imagery, e.g. it could tell
 who
 or what agency provided some item of information.  The iD imagery_used
 tag
 is more specific.  But historically, source has been used for imagery
 too.
 
 With respect to whether the source / imagery_used tag should go on
 features
 or changeset:  I raised this question at the end of the previous thread
 on
 this subject.  We don't want to lose the fact that something was traced
 with
 use of a particular set of imagery if someone edits a feature.  Let's
 take
 one specific case:  Say that someone enters a feature (say it's one
 point,
 just to be clear) using one set of imagery, and the imagery_used tag
 gets
 assigned to the changeset.  If someone later shifts that point, while
 using
 a different set of imagery, is it still possible to get back to the
 original
 changeset from the modified point?
 
 -- Pat
 
 On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Ray Kiddy  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 19:51:52 +0100
> Sander Deryckere  wrote:
> 
>> It's more logical to put it on the changeset.
>> 
>> Like when you draw a building, and add source=bing. But then someone
>> who lives there gives it a name, and forgets to alter the source, the
>> object has data that can't be derived from the source. So it's in
>> fact your edit operation that has a source, not the object itself.
> 
> I had wondered about this