Re: [OSM-talk] New Scientist article on OpenStreetMap and HOT

[Mikel Maron]

Thanks Tom. Glad they picked up this angle. Still, I'm asking them to make a 
couple small corrections (OpenStreetMapS) (Map Kibera was started by 
GroundTruth)


 
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


>
> From: Tom Taylor 
>To: talk@openstreetmap.org; HOT Openstreetmap  
>Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2013 11:59 PM
>Subject: [OSM-talk] New Scientist article on OpenStreetMap and HOT
> 
>
>Article at
>
>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23808-citizen-cartographers-fill-the-gaps-in-maps.html
>
>
>TomT5454
>
>___
>talk mailing list
>talk@openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
>___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[Cartinus]

That is a nice text where you admit that according to you the proposal
system somehow magically grants wiki editors permission to vandalize
other people's tag documentation and at the same time allows them to
document hardly used but voted tags.

For people who have missed why the voting system is broken. Here is a
nice example:



On 07/04/2013 11:48 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> On 04.07.2013 23:04, Cartinus wrote:
>> gluten_free=yes has 53 uses
>> diet:gluten_free has 88 uses
>>
>> This insignificant difference suddenly lets you declare one key as
>> controversial and hardly used?
> 
> The gluten_free key is controversial because there are many users who
> support a different key. It is hardly used because it only has 53 uses.
> 
> The stats for diet:gluten_free did not play any role for my argument.
> 
>> You can't play the numbers game only when it suits you and stay believable.
> 
> To me, proposals do matter (so diet:vegetarian from your examples would
> not be judged purely based on usage stats). I just don't consider it a
> requirement for considering a tag established. The proposal process is
> simply one of several valid approaches.
> 
> As for gluten_free, why I'm even looking at the numbers here is because
> there has to be some proper reason for giving a key its own Key:* page.
> And gluten_free does not have an approved proposal, major tool support
> or anything like that, so the only thing left would be impressive
> taginfo stats - but it doesn't have much to offer in that department either.
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 

-- 
---
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[Tobias Knerr]

On 04.07.2013 23:04, Cartinus wrote:
> gluten_free=yes has 53 uses
> diet:gluten_free has 88 uses
> 
> This insignificant difference suddenly lets you declare one key as
> controversial and hardly used?

The gluten_free key is controversial because there are many users who
support a different key. It is hardly used because it only has 53 uses.

The stats for diet:gluten_free did not play any role for my argument.

> You can't play the numbers game only when it suits you and stay believable.

To me, proposals do matter (so diet:vegetarian from your examples would
not be judged purely based on usage stats). I just don't consider it a
requirement for considering a tag established. The proposal process is
simply one of several valid approaches.

As for gluten_free, why I'm even looking at the numbers here is because
there has to be some proper reason for giving a key its own Key:* page.
And gluten_free does not have an approved proposal, major tool support
or anything like that, so the only thing left would be impressive
taginfo stats - but it doesn't have much to offer in that department either.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[Serge Wroclawski]

On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Cartinus  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Have you noticed that there are many other people within OSM who think
> the wiki proposal system is completely broken and should be
> abolished/ignored?

It's not just the wiki proposal system, but the wiki users. They are
often at odds with the actual tag usage and editing the wiki can
become frustrating, as work is often reverted without discussion or
review, simply because it does not follow a process that is not used
by a vast majority of our users.

In an ideal world, the tagging list would be a place where questions
would be answers and things could be discussed like on talk, and wiki
would reflect usage, but I suspect that the tagging weenies feel that
they have a sort of power.

- Serge

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[Cartinus]

No that is not beside the point at all.

cuisine=vegetarian has 871 uses
diet:vegetarian has 456 uses

Because diet:... is approved people are suddenly allowed to write on
both the cuisine page and the diet:... page that you shouldn't use
cuisine=vegetarian?

gluten_free=yes has 53 uses
diet:gluten_free has 88 uses

This insignificant difference suddenly lets you declare one key as
controversial and hardly used?

You can't play the numbers game only when it suits you and stay believable.



Or maybe we should be grateful that the diet:... keys only contain one
colon and just accept it :rolleyes:


On 07/04/2013 10:47 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> On 04.07.2013 22:15, Cartinus wrote:
>> Have you noticed that there are many other people within OSM who think
>> the wiki proposal system is completely broken and should be
>> abolished/ignored?
> 
> Yes, but that's beside the point. If that key was already widely used,
> then it would of course deserve a Key:* page without a proposal or vote.
> 
> However, the key only has 53 uses and is also controversial, so I
> believe it should not yet be presented as if it were established.
> 
> Moving this into the proposal namespace makes it clear that this is just
> an idea at this point, but lets people find it if they search for
> "gluten free". It doesn't mean that it will necessarily ever go through
> an RFC, vote or whatever - it can also just sit there until it enough
> people have used it.
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 

-- 
---
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] New Scientist article on OpenStreetMap and HOT

[Tom Taylor]

Article at

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23808-citizen-cartographers-fill-the-gaps-in-maps.html


TomT5454

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[colliar]

Am 04.07.2013 22:15, schrieb Cartinus:
> Hello,
> 
> Have you noticed that there are many other people within OSM who think
> the wiki proposal system is completely broken and should be
> abolished/ignored?
> 
> Look at the usernames at
> 
> and try to find the osm admins on that list.

Thanks for this category, gonna enter.

Sorry, but moving to proposal name space does not mean that there will
be a vote at all

It is the proper place for unapproved tags with only little numbers in
the database though.

The page should have been never created in "tag" namespace anyway.

Please have a look at [1]

Cheers
colliar

[1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2013-June/067334.html



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[Tobias Knerr]

On 04.07.2013 22:15, Cartinus wrote:
> Have you noticed that there are many other people within OSM who think
> the wiki proposal system is completely broken and should be
> abolished/ignored?

Yes, but that's beside the point. If that key was already widely used,
then it would of course deserve a Key:* page without a proposal or vote.

However, the key only has 53 uses and is also controversial, so I
believe it should not yet be presented as if it were established.

Moving this into the proposal namespace makes it clear that this is just
an idea at this point, but lets people find it if they search for
"gluten free". It doesn't mean that it will necessarily ever go through
an RFC, vote or whatever - it can also just sit there until it enough
people have used it.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[Cartinus]

Hello,

Have you noticed that there are many other people within OSM who think
the wiki proposal system is completely broken and should be
abolished/ignored?

Look at the usernames at

and try to find the osm admins on that list.



On 07/04/2013 09:52 PM, colliar wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I did move the page [1] a few days to proposal name space and started a
> discussion on its talk page [2].
> 
> On the same time we have a discussion about this issue on tagging@.
> 
> Now with out discussion the page was reverted and I got following answer
> on my request to move it back [3]:
> 
> " I do not recognise the 'approval' process. I believe the wiki is for
> documenting tags as used. I do not propose to move this page back and
> will treat other attempts to move it as vandalism!"
> 
> Please, would some wiki admin move this page back to proposal name space
> and tell the user how to create page for new unused tags or tags with
> low usage and how communication works in OSM. I expect at least an
> apology for moving the page without any comment.
> 
> Thanks
> colliar
> 
> -
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:gluten_free
> [2]
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:gluten_free&oldid=921090
> [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:SK53
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 

-- 
---
m.v.g.,
Cartinus

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Would some wiki admin please move the page gluten_free=* back to proposal namespace

[colliar]

Hi

I did move the page [1] a few days to proposal name space and started a
discussion on its talk page [2].

On the same time we have a discussion about this issue on tagging@.

Now with out discussion the page was reverted and I got following answer
on my request to move it back [3]:

" I do not recognise the 'approval' process. I believe the wiki is for
documenting tags as used. I do not propose to move this page back and
will treat other attempts to move it as vandalism!"

Please, would some wiki admin move this page back to proposal name space
and tell the user how to create page for new unused tags or tags with
low usage and how communication works in OSM. I expect at least an
apology for moving the page without any comment.

Thanks
colliar

-
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:gluten_free
[2]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:gluten_free&oldid=921090
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:SK53



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Michael Kugelmann]

Am 04.07.2013 11:18, schrieb Christian Quest:

Here is zoom 7 (others are in the render_list queue):
to me this looks really nice and a huge improvement to the current OSM 
default lowzoom rendering!



Best regards,
Michael.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[colliar]

Am 04.07.2013 11:18, schrieb Christian Quest:
> Based on Frederik lowzoom idea, I started improving the low zooms on
> our OSM-FR style...
> 
> Here is zoom 7 (others are in the render_list queue):
> http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=7&lat=46.88069&lon=3.13697&layers=B0FFF
> 
> Here is how I did it:
> - modify my OSM-FR to remove all labels and boundary at zoom 8 (which
> was already using landcover/landuse),
> - generate 4 large PNG using nik2img
> - combine them and generate one large tiled z8.tif using
> gdal_translate (133MB, if you want to play with it I can share the
> result)
> - create a very simple stylesheet to test using this z8.tif as raster,
> then add placenames and boundaries
> 
> It's a work in progress. I'm currently merging this lowzoom stylesheet
> to my main OSM-FR style sheet.
> 
> I've not played with imagemagick, it is just a lanczos downscaling
> made by mapnik.
> 
> Label ordering is handled by using the place=* tag, then the
> population=* tag so large cities are placed first.
> The placename density is limited using text-min-distance.

Nice

One minor problem: Some city names are not rendered but the city nodes.
Probably it makes sense to allow to move label a bit if they are to close.

Cheers
colliar




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Tirkon]

Frederik Ramm  wrote:

>> The first priority for rendering could be the admin level.
>
>Certainly an idea worth pursuing, however some magic would have to be 
>applied to match place tags (usually nodes - they will have a population 
>or capital tag) with admininistrative boundaries (that have an admin 
>level but neither "capital" nor population info).

ÖK! So the idea could be slimmed down: No consideration of
admin_level. Rendering as today decided on the place tag. But if there
is much empty space the next lower value of the place tag will be used
as well. No berücksichtigung

Here is an example of "empty space":
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.12&lon=11.7&zoom=8&layers=M

The other features could be added (possibly partly), because
population and capital are now available. In particular preferred
rendering of capital-names and its stars could be added for
comparatively little costs. This alone gives a better orientation
cause these cities are known better in the most cases.


The "magic" in the extended version could be provided by adding the
correspondent place-node with admin_centre-role as a member to the
boundary-relation. But this has to be done worldwide and thus it is a
problem.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Tom Hughes]

On 04/07/13 10:48, Christoph Hormann wrote:


On Thursday 04 July 2013, Tom Hughes wrote:


Low zooms (0 to 12) are not actually updated in real time anyway -
they are only updated periodically by a batch job.


But you can still trigger a rerender using /dirty.


At the moment you probably can, yes. I have suggested a feature in 
mod_tile to tell it to never render tiles below a certain zoom though so 
that may not be true forever ;-)


Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 04 July 2013, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> Low zooms (0 to 12) are not actually updated in real time anyway -
> they are only updated periodically by a batch job.

But you can still trigger a rerender using /dirty.

Greetings,

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Christian Quest]

Based on Frederik lowzoom idea, I started improving the low zooms on
our OSM-FR style...

Here is zoom 7 (others are in the render_list queue):
http://tile.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=7&lat=46.88069&lon=3.13697&layers=B0FFF

Here is how I did it:
- modify my OSM-FR to remove all labels and boundary at zoom 8 (which
was already using landcover/landuse),
- generate 4 large PNG using nik2img
- combine them and generate one large tiled z8.tif using
gdal_translate (133MB, if you want to play with it I can share the
result)
- create a very simple stylesheet to test using this z8.tif as raster,
then add placenames and boundaries

It's a work in progress. I'm currently merging this lowzoom stylesheet
to my main OSM-FR style sheet.

I've not played with imagemagick, it is just a lanczos downscaling
made by mapnik.

Label ordering is handled by using the place=* tag, then the
population=* tag so large cities are placed first.
The placename density is limited using text-min-distance.

-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France
Un nouveau serveur pour OSM... http://donate.osm.org/server2013/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Tom Hughes]

On 04/07/13 09:39, Christoph Hormann wrote:


The thing is the standard osm.org map is meant to allow near real time
updates and compromises rendering quality for that.  But there is very
little actual real time data in the rendering at the lowest zoom levels
anyway - none in 0 and 1, only labels in 2 and 3.


Low zooms (0 to 12) are not actually updated in real time anyway - they 
are only updated periodically by a batch job.


Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2013/7/4 Frederik Ramm 

> On 07/04/2013 02:00 AM, Tirkon wrote:
>
>> I am not sure: Do you want to replace rhe lowzoom levels at osm.org?
>>
>
> I think the lowzoom levels at osm.org look very bland and my approach
> attempts to fix that




I partly agree (have thought that for a long time, but somehow got used to
the status quo in the meantime). I believe they come from an era in OSM
when we were still proud to have some country boundaries and the coastline
(what we now take mostly for granted).



> , trying not to be a cartographically solid map (for that, MapQuest has
> done an excellent job I think) but instead highlighting where OSM has data
> and where it hasn't.
>


yes, that's what makes them interesting, it is somehow osmarender lowzoom
2.0 ;-) (btw.: MapQuest seems to use a handmade map for really low zooms:
1-3)




> I don't have a particular agenda about replacing the lowzoom tiles on
> osm.org; if someone wants me to install my process on the OSM tile server
> I can do that but if most people are happy with what we've got then I have
> no problem with that.



maybe we could have both? In the end low zoom tiles don't require so much
disk space and won't have to be updated very often.

cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 04 July 2013, Tirkon wrote:
> [...]
> The first priority for rendering could be the admin level. Within the
> admin level at first the towns with a capital tag are rendered wirh a
> star next to the name. If this is space-kompetitiv at a given zoom
> level, the winner will be decided on the population. Then all other
> towns of the given admin level are rendered. Space-competition is
> decided first on the place tag (which could indicate independent
> cities) and then on population.

The problem about this is not how to do it in principle but that label 
placement optimization is a highly non-local problem so doing it well 
requires doing it for the whole globe at once and you would have to 
redo it every time something changes anywhere.  Even the current very 
simple approach suffers from this problem resulting in occasional cut 
off labels at tile edges.

The thing is the standard osm.org map is meant to allow near real time 
updates and compromises rendering quality for that.  But there is very 
little actual real time data in the rendering at the lowest zoom levels 
anyway - none in 0 and 1, only labels in 2 and 3.  Frederik's approach 
would bring the real time osm data to the lower zoom levels but in the 
end only few of the individual changes in the database have a visible 
effect on the map at this scale.  So it would make sense to take a 
split approach to the lower zoom levels - create a real time version 
that allows reviewing edits made to the database and a second high 
quality version that is pre-rendered periodically using techniques that 
can be more expensive.

Greetings,

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM data by UNEP without proper attribution

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 04 July 2013, Mikel Maron wrote:
> I just now have contact directly with those involved (relatively fast
> for a big organization), and am explaining the issue to them.

Great, thanks for that.

Greetings,

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Mapnik Lowzoom TIles - proof of concept

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,
> Frederik Ramm  wrote:
>
>>> http://fred.dev.openstreetmap.org/lowzoom/
>>
>>I have updated these tiles with current data. (I had somehow lost the
>>code that produced the tiles and had to reverse engineer my way back
>>from the old tiles... the year-old tiles are still available from the
>>layer switcher.)
>

On 07/04/2013 02:00 AM, Tirkon wrote:

I am not sure: Do you want to replace rhe lowzoom levels at osm.org?


I think the lowzoom levels at osm.org look very bland and my approach 
attempts to fix that, trying not to be a cartographically solid map (for 
that, MapQuest has done an excellent job I think) but instead 
highlighting where OSM has data and where it hasn't.


I don't have a particular agenda about replacing the lowzoom tiles on 
osm.org; if someone wants me to install my process on the OSM tile 
server I can do that but if most people are happy with what we've got 
then I have no problem with that.



At present the shown names seem to be taken from the place tag.


[...]


The first priority for rendering could be the admin level.


Certainly an idea worth pursuing, however some magic would have to be 
applied to match place tags (usually nodes - they will have a population 
or capital tag) with admininistrative boundaries (that have an admin 
level but neither "capital" nor population info).


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