Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
> Because if people are still editing like this, then I don't see the > problem that WorstFixer is fixing as actually being fixed. Users of > the map will still have to deal with both the format that WorstFixer > doesn't like AND the format he does like. Less of the former and more > of the latter, but still some of both. You seem to not understand. 93% of this tags come from imports. Ich think 7% comes from import, but edited by hand after, so current database not holds imporer user name. > Persuade people to map just one way, THEN once they're doing that, go > back and get rid of the old way. Sane people use type= for relation types. They use water= tag to express whether it is lake, pond, river or stream. Not how often it flows. That is agreed on wiki. Other ways of tagging not documented on wiki at all. -- WorstFixer, twitter: http://twitter.com/WorstFixer ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Hello Paul, You use HTML letters in mailing list. Using blue color shows your power. 2012/5/30 Paul Norman : > Could you post the code used to generate the changesets? Ich may not. Some parts of it are not open source. I think of clean rewrite. > That would be the > easiest way for some of us to review your proposed changes. It wouldn’t > remove the need to explain it to non-programmers, but it would be much > easier for some of us if we could look at the code. Why bother posting code if it means Ich need to write long posts to people who can not analyze more than their neighbour hood, but send their mail fastly? > - You provide no information on why you are removing the keys that > you are Some people asked for another column, "edit reason". That is hard but do able. Ich will create database of bad tags with comments. > - A couple of other people have expressed concern over the message > sent by having a mechanical edit from the WorstFixer username. I share them. > It is not enough to dismiss this as an objection that is not “valid” Ok. I will do the same way as DWG does. Ich will create separate account WorstFixer_repair to distinguish it from my main account. > - A significant number of these ways appear to be from US NHD data. > You should also consult specifically with the US community and develop a > consensus there that the edit is worth doing, in addition to the global > community. US ist on the globe. They forget that from time to time, but must remember. Consulting global community is enough, according to current policy. > - The mapping from NHD FCode to OSM tags used for some of these > imports may of not been ideal. I have been working on a better one but have > not finished. I ask you to finish it and show. If you are not able to, Ich will have to. > I believe it would be best to exclude the US from this edit > and later on (post-rebuild likely) propose an edit which includes changing > tagging on untouched objects. This edit consists mostly of US import clean up. You know that. You just lazy to fix it. Three years already. Post-rebuild ist way of telling "fuck off forever". Some believe in Jesus second coming, some believe in rebuild. I not share both belifs. Both not have any effect on what Ich doing. -- WorstFixer, twitter: http://twitter.com/WorstFixer ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] One town, two featured images
Should a map of the whole world really have two images of Oxford featured in three weeks? -- Andrew ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] One town, two featured images
On 30 May 2012, at 08:45, Andrew wrote: > Should a map of the whole world really have two images of Oxford featured in > three weeks? If Oxford has two special things in it in 3 weeks, I don't see why not. Thanks Tom Davie ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] One town, two featured images
Andrew: > Should a map of the whole world really have two images of > Oxford featured in > three weeks? Tom: > If Oxford has two special things in it in 3 weeks, I don't see why not. +1 But I've noticed for the last couple of weeks that we've got to Monday morning and there is no new image. If someone has any suggestions, then add them to the bottom of: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Featured_image_proposals (which I think needs a bit of cleaning up to archive those that have already been used). Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] proposed automated edit: forested wetlands
Hello.
>> The landuse import for Georgia (which IMO is poor-quality and should be
>> deleted, but that's not going to happen) has a bunch of areas tagged as
>> note = Forested Wetland with no useful natural=* tags (since
>> natural=wood and natural=wetland both apply). Example:
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/31457349
>>
>> I propose to fix these.
Fine. It ist gut.
>> But what would be the best tags to use? Would natural=wetland
>> wetland=swamp ("An area of waterlogged forest, with dense vegetation.")
>> be correct?
I currently have no objection to this tag change. I have to propose a bit more.
> If there are no objections, I'm going to do this sometime today.
You have falloff Mechanical Edit Policy, if you not want your account blocked.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy
Please create a page on wiki describening what you plan to do.
Before you upload, I want have a look at data. I see already there are
other shitty import tags on objects with "note=Forested Wetland". We
should consider fixing these too. 10 hours delay before upload will be
sufficent for me.
I may prepare overview of other tags if you want.
--
WorstFixer, twitter: http://twitter.com/WorstFixer
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] proposed automated edit: forested wetlands
Hi, On 05/30/2012 11:46 AM, Worst Fixer wrote: Before you upload, I want have a look at data. I see already there are other shitty import tags on objects with "note=Forested Wetland". We should consider fixing these too. 10 hours delay before upload will be sufficent for me. There's absolutely no reason to rush. Data that's been sitting in OSM for *years* without even being noticed as a problem can certainly wait until even those who don't read talk-us mutliple times each day have had a chance to comment. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
* John Sturdy [2012-05-29 09:15 +0100]: > The nearest they make to an accurate point is "classification of > footpaths as roads" --- I don't think I've seen any of those, but I > have found quite a few "unclassified roads" that look more like > "tracks" on Bing (and have adjusted them accordingly where confident > of it). I don't know if this is what they're talking about, but the TIGER data in the US has more than a few footways, particularly wider, paved ones, recorded as roads, which got imported into OSM as highway=residential. (There are a lot of logging roads, 4x4 trails, and similarly difficult-to-travel things also classified highway=residential.) I fix them as I find them, naturally, but it's a flaw in the TIGER dataset (which I still think we're better off having imported). -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- "Londo, are you deliberately trying to drive me insane?" "The universe is already mad. Anything else would be redundant." -- Vir and Londo (Babylon 5, "Dust to Dust") --- -- ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
Maarten Deen wrote: Well, probably one of the very positive effects from OSM is the fact that when we start mapping something, the closed-source mappers follow suit. The fact that Google needs to add gimmicks like kajak routing across the pacific to beat us says enough. It's a win-win situation. When my TomTom starts actually providing correct information then perhaps they can start to complain, but many routes I follow using TomTom I have to KNOW when to ignore what it's telling me! I've given up bothering to flag the problems, but if I HAD an OSM map on the device then I would get back to fixing the errors! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
> From: Worst Fixer [mailto:worstfi...@gmail.com] > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters > > Hello Paul, > > You use HTML letters in mailing list. Using blue color shows your power. My client uses HTML to reply to HTML messages. Since your message was HTML, I followed up in HTML. > 2012/5/30 Paul Norman : > > Could you post the code used to generate the changesets? > > Ich may not. Some parts of it are not open source. I think of clean > rewrite. The logic that you have created is what I'm interested in. > > > That would be the > > easiest way for some of us to review your proposed changes. It > > wouldn’t remove the need to explain it to non-programmers, but it > > would be much easier for some of us if we could look at the code. > > Why bother posting code if it means Ich need to write long posts to > people who can not analyze more than their neighbour hood, but send > their mail fastly? The onus is on you to communicate the reasons for your edit. You are proposing large mechanical edits touching a wide variety of tags. The consultation is therefore likely to be complicated, to go along with the complicated edit. > > - You provide no information on why you are removing the keys > > that you are > > Some people asked for another column, "edit reason". That is hard but do > able. > Ich will create database of bad tags with comments. To review your proposed edit you really need to explain why you are making each change. If we don't know why you're making a change, how can it be reviewed? > > - A couple of other people have expressed concern over the > > message sent by having a mechanical edit from the WorstFixer username. > I share them. > > It is not enough to dismiss this as an objection that is not “valid” > > Ok. I will do the same way as DWG does. Ich will create separate account > WorstFixer_repair to distinguish it from my main account. The concern was with the WorstFixer part of the name. If WorstFixer is your main account then I have concerns about such an inexperienced user making mechanical edits. > > - A significant number of these ways appear to be from US NHD > data. > > You should also consult specifically with the US community and develop > > a consensus there that the edit is worth doing, in addition to the > > global community. > > US ist on the globe. They forget that from time to time, but must > remember. Consulting global community is enough, according to current > policy. The consultation in the policies is a bare minimum. It may come out in consultation that an edit requires additional consultation with other groups. This edit, as you say, consists mainly of US import clean-up. It is not unreasonable to expect you to then consult with talk-us. > > - The mapping from NHD FCode to OSM tags used for some of > > these imports may of not been ideal. I have been working on a better > > one but have not finished. > > I ask you to finish it and show. If you are not able to, Ich will have > to. No - you do not have to. Another option is to wait. The current logic is at https://github.com/pnorman/ogr2osm-translations/blob/us_nhd/us_nhd.py but this has not yet been reviewed by the US community. > > I believe it would be best to exclude the US from this edit and later > > on (post-rebuild likely) propose an edit which includes changing > > tagging on untouched objects. > > This edit consists mostly of US import clean up. You know that. You just > lazy to fix it. Three years already. > > Post-rebuild ist way of telling "fuck off forever". Some believe in > Jesus second coming, some believe in rebuild. I not share both belifs. > Both not have any effect on what Ich doing. My work on the NHD translations continues. I foresee it finishing either during the rebuild or after it, based on current progress. As there are to be no mechanical edits when the rebuild is going on, that places it as after. If I finish before the rebuild then I'd propose something then, but it will take some time for anything I propose to be reviewed since it would be fairly extensive. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
John Sturdy writes: > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Thomas Davie wrote: >> To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud >> and gravel, it's a track... > > The ones I reclassified typically had two wheel-tracks of soil-colour > and grass between them, I think. If it's asphalt-coloured, even if > there is grass growing down the middle, I still call it a road. I think the real issue between road and track is whether it's a public way or private way (both roads) vs just someplace where one can physically drive a vehicle. In Massachusetts, both private and public ways are discernable by parcel boundaries, and tracks (both agricultural and within conservation) are not. Exactly what the condition is a separate issue, although typically a road will be at least a decent dirt road. pgp2z9tMV7RI2.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us
TomTom is right, OSM is still a immature product. That may change, but it isn't yet. But for a few Garmins serious routing on OSM is a hazardous enterprise. Even in the Netherlands, one of the countries with a high completion rate, road classification is NOT consistent, so are the deafault traffic rules that go with it. A router may find a route, but that is it. No comfort, no lanes, no direction signs, no traffic lights, and no obstruction warnings. Many roads (albethem small ones) are still marked pedestrian, and inhibit a car router to reach destination. Cycle roads are tagged inconsistently or plain faulty, and there are many ,many real errors. At the time, before OSMF told me to stop correcting the map for something as trivial as a license, I found errors on every 20 roads on average. Not all fatal, but enough to make me turn to Google Navigon or TomTom to get me at my destination. Those who state the contrary are too forgiving with their "baby". And yes as Greg says, you may correct the errors, but when you're done correcting the error, you do not need OSM anymore to get there !!! Regards, Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Greg Troxel [mailto:g...@ir.bbn.com] Verzonden: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 5:00 PM Aan: John Sturdy CC: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] TomTom is thumping us John Sturdy writes: > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Thomas Davie wrote: >> To be honest, if a road has no classification, and is made of mud and >> gravel, it's a track... > > The ones I reclassified typically had two wheel-tracks of soil-colour > and grass between them, I think. If it's asphalt-coloured, even if > there is grass growing down the middle, I still call it a road. I think the real issue between road and track is whether it's a public way or private way (both roads) vs just someplace where one can physically drive a vehicle. In Massachusetts, both private and public ways are discernable by parcel boundaries, and tracks (both agricultural and within conservation) are not. Exactly what the condition is a separate issue, although typically a road will be at least a decent dirt road. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Old versions of OSM?
Is it possible to view an older rendering of OSM, such as how an area was mapped earlier this year/last year. Thanks Phil (trig222) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] It was a shame
Just a little drop note that both of the editors that actually performed some ODbL cut&paste actions to OSM in the Netherlands have contacted me to ensure me that they did not intend to falsify the taunted data, and that both of them insist on using independent data sources such as BING and (in Holland ) BAG-data and that the actual fact it happened was merely caused by insufficient information (GG: by OSMF or LWG) about how to treat tainted data. They also witnessed hat they had no angry feelings against me and expressed their regrets about me not participating anymore. (GG : not signing the CT) As one may conclude: protection against copyright breaches will not come without sufficient vigilance of their respective owners. Regards, Gert Gremmen ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Old versions of OSM?
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Philip Barnes wrote: > Is it possible to view an older rendering of OSM, such as how an area > was mapped earlier this year/last year. I don't know of a service where you can travel back arbitrarily in time... but there are some map providers that just happen to not have updated in a while. Right now I see that Cloudmade doesn't have updates I did several weeks ago. I'm guessing they may not have switched to the new diff location after the April 1st location switch. http://maps.cloudmade.com Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Old versions of OSM?
You can get sort of a touch and feel to how the map looked before if you have the .osm file for that time. Slice a suitable piece of it and view it in JOSM with "Mapnik (true)" Paint Style. The custom paint styles are available via Edit > Preferences: Map Settings (3rd left side tab from top) > Map Paint Styles and move the Mapnik (true) to the right side from there.e Not exactly the real thing, but decent. Cheers, -Jaakko On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Philip Barnes > wrote: > > Is it possible to view an older rendering of OSM, such as how an area > > was mapped earlier this year/last year. > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Edit review: intermittent waters
Worst Fixer writes: > > Persuade people to map just one way, THEN once they're doing that, go > > back and get rid of the old way. > > Sane people use type= for relation types. > They use water= tag to express whether it is lake, pond, river or > stream. Not how often it flows. You seem not to understand. Perhaps German is not your first language? Nobody is talking about the sanity or lack of sanity of editors except perhaps you. I'm talking about how people *actually* map. I think it's great that you're starting up a conversation on how we should interpret data not documented in the wiki. I'm NOT sure that we want to be *changing* data not documented in the wiki. Not sure at all. In fact, I'm pretty sure that we *shouldn't* be changing it. Sure that *you* shouldn't be changing it. Y'see, once you've made that change, one and only one interpretation of this undocumented data is available to everyone -- YOUR interpretation. You might be right, you might be wrong, but YOUR voice will prevail. Whereas, if we documented this data, and said "Don't map like this -- map like that", then we accomplish two goals: 1) we let data users know what is the standard interpretation of this data, and 2) we encourage editors to stop editing like this. You know ... without calling them insane. So yeah, you should stop making these edits, and if you won't stop, I support taking action to stop you. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
