[OSM-talk] Use of OSM by municipalities

[Severin Menard]

Hi,

Is there somewhere a collection of use cases of OpenStreetMap data and
services by municipalities?

Sincerely,

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM by municipalities

[Andreas Vilén]

I have no sources right now but I know that Lund municipality in Sweden
uses OSM in its daily work, if mentioned work does not require better
precision than what we can aquire.

/Andreas

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Severin Menard 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Is there somewhere a collection of use cases of OpenStreetMap data and
> services by municipalities?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM by municipalities

[Andreas Vilén]

This example might be interesting:
http://kartor.lund.se/resejamforaren/start.htm

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Andreas Vilén 
wrote:

> I have no sources right now but I know that Lund municipality in Sweden
> uses OSM in its daily work, if mentioned work does not require better
> precision than what we can aquire.
>
> /Andreas
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Severin Menard 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there somewhere a collection of use cases of OpenStreetMap data and
>> services by municipalities?
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Severin
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM by municipalities

[Robert Banick]

I know that some municipalities in the Philippines are using OSM data as a 
foundational dataset. You should check with Jay-Ar (osm: jay-ar) for more info, 
he was telling me about it.


—
Sent from Mailbox

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Severin Menard 
wrote:

> Hi,
> Is there somewhere a collection of use cases of OpenStreetMap data and
> services by municipalities?
> Sincerely,
> Severin___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] OSM contact for complicated licence violation investigation

[Richard Z.]

Hi,

came across a pretty major license violation and need technical
help and another pair of eyes to figure out what is going on.

Semi-confidential at this point.

Richard

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM contact for complicated licence violation investigation

[Michael Kugelmann]

On 12.02.2015 at 12:30 Richard Z. wrote:

came across a pretty major license violation and need technical
help and another pair of eyes to figure out what is going on.
http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Data_working_group  or 
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group  ?

http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_Working_Group   ?


Cheers,
Michael.


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

[OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Dave F.]

Hi

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/archives/2388

Under 'Community' there a bullet point titled "guide to vandalism” in OSM?
As my French is very poor, could someone translate & expand on the 
process. Why is "false POI" being added to notes? It seems similar to 
entrapment from what is written.


Dave F.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM contact for complicated licence violation investigation

[SomeoneElse]

On 12/02/2015 11:53, Michael Kugelmann wrote:

On 12.02.2015 at 12:30 Richard Z. wrote:

came across a pretty major license violation and need technical
help and another pair of eyes to figure out what is going on.
http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Data_working_group  or 
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group  ?

http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_Working_Group   ?



Of those, it's http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_Working_Group .

There are a couple of email addresses at the bottom of that page which 
should help.


Cheers,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Maarten Deen]

On 2015-02-12 13:13, Dave F. wrote:

Hi

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/archives/2388

Under 'Community' there a bullet point titled "guide to vandalism” in 
OSM?

As my French is very poor, could someone translate & expand on the
process. Why is "false POI" being added to notes? It seems similar to
entrapment from what is written.


The post on the french forum is an expanded version of what is in the 
weekly OSM: as an anonymous user you can add a note to the map and a 
registered user converts that to something in OSM.


The point of the matter is: when mapping an anonymous note, only do so 
if you have verified the correctness of it.


Maarten

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Marc Gemis]

As far as I see it:

The author says that it is pretty easy to vandalise OSM data, even without
creating an account. You just have to make a note with some fake
information and wait until an armchair mapper picks up the note, does no
verification on the ground and adds the POI.
He shows 2 notes that he created to proof his point. He just tries to warn
other mappers not to follow the text in the notes without verifying it on
the ground.

regards

m

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Dave F.  wrote:

> Hi
>
> http://www.weeklyosm.eu/archives/2388
>
> Under 'Community' there a bullet point titled "guide to vandalism” in OSM?
> As my French is very poor, could someone translate & expand on the
> process. Why is "false POI" being added to notes? It seems similar to
> entrapment from what is written.
>
> Dave F.
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[malenki]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:08:37 -0500,
Tom MacWright wrote:

> Ever since 2012, in the second commit ever, "Not breaking other
> people's data" has been one of the three clearly stated public design
> goals of iD.

Regarding this statement it is interesting that iD went live with no
graphic hints about the existence of relations. (I hope I remember this
point correct.)

Thomas


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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Dave F.]

Thanks to both for the clarification. The way it was written it implied 
bona fide editors were deliberately adding false POIs to catch vandals.


Now that I understand, I'm not sure they should be considered vandals. 
There appears to be no malice, just incompetence & laziness.


Dave F.



On 12/02/2015 12:45, Marc Gemis wrote:

As far as I see it:

The author says that it is pretty easy to vandalise OSM data, even 
without creating an account. You just have to make a note with some 
fake information and wait until an armchair mapper picks up the note, 
does no verification on the ground and adds the POI.
He shows 2 notes that he created to proof his point. He just tries to 
warn other mappers not to follow the text in the notes without 
verifying it on the ground.


regards

m

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Dave F. > wrote:


Hi

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/archives/2388

Under 'Community' there a bullet point titled "guide to vandalism”
in OSM?
As my French is very poor, could someone translate & expand on the
process. Why is "false POI" being added to notes? It seems similar
to entrapment from what is written.

Dave F.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


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






---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Dave F.]

On 12/02/2015 13:37, Marc Gemis wrote:


The author was not describing the mappers as vandals, but he was 
pointing to the people that create such notes in the hope some lazy 
mappers would create non-existing POIs or make other changes that do 
not correspond to the reality.


Has he given evidence of this happening deliberately?

Dave F.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Marc Gemis]

No evidence. The comments were saying that vandalism is rare on OSM, that
the majority of the notes (and the mapping) is done in good faith, that a
small number of POIs added this way does not have  a large impact, etc.

regards

p.s. I hope that I understood all comments correctly, French is not my
mother tongue.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Dave F.  wrote:

> On 12/02/2015 13:37, Marc Gemis wrote:
>
>>
>> The author was not describing the mappers as vandals, but he was pointing
>> to the people that create such notes in the hope some lazy mappers would
>> create non-existing POIs or make other changes that do not correspond to
>> the reality.
>>
>
> Has he given evidence of this happening deliberately?
>
>
> Dave F.
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[SomeoneElse]

On 12/02/2015 13:32, Dave F. wrote:
Thanks to both for the clarification. The way it was written it 
implied bona fide editors were deliberately adding false POIs to catch 
vandals.


I translated that bit; I added quotes to the German original and changed 
the payoff to try and make it obvious that no, these people weren't 
seriously writing a "how to vandalise OSM" guide*, but clearly I didn't 
do a good enough job :-) .  I'm sure that the openstreetmap.de folks 
would welcome more translation volunteers, though.


Actually, one thing that I just didn't think about doing was linking to 
a translation of the French forum as well as the original, since 
(depending on what browser you're using) automatic translation either 
"just happens" or is immediately accessible by Google Translate / 
Microsoft Translator or whatever - and with French/English both do a 
more than passable job.  I'll bear that in mind for the future ...


Cheers,

Andy

* There's actually been a bit of "previous" in the French OSM community 
about the use of notes, which has on occasion spilled over onto 
international lists.  However, trying to provide any background about 
that would be way out of scope for a one-line bullet-point item in a 
weekly newsletter.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Pieren]

FYI, after reading this thread in the forum, I sent a message to the
registred user who converted the notes into POIs in OSM that he should
always verify first from a 2nd source what is reported by the "note",
whatever the author is anonymous or not. The argument about "most of
the notes are correct" is not good enough.

Pieren

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Michał Brzozowski]

I happen to fix a lot of notes in Poland.
For me it would be impractical to check every POI that I add from notes.
Mind you, I do the research in the Internet if it's a feature that
could possibly have a website (fire station, church, restaurant,
supermarket etc), but the only way to check some (eg. smaller shops)
would be to check on the ground. Unless there's a mapper in every
single municipality it's not practical to do so - drive a long way to
just check "yep, it's there". Therefore sometimes I simply assume good
faith which in my opinion *is* sensible. But I mark any changesets or
POIs with source=notes.

Michał

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

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[colliar]

Am 12.02.2015 um 14:27 schrieb malenki:
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2015 16:08:37 -0500, Tom MacWright wrote:
>
>> Ever since 2012, in the second commit ever, "Not breaking other
>> people's data" has been one of the three clearly stated public design
>> goals of iD.
>
> Regarding this statement it is interesting that iD went live with no
> graphic hints about the existence of relations. (I hope I remember
> this point correct.)

+1

Well, methinks thou dost protest too much.

I did mention all my points longer time ago and there exists open issues
about them.

Still do not see the point why some actions should not be denied until
they proper work especially as there seems to be not much interest in
fixing them.

I just was ask by an user of iD how to check the consistency of common
relations like multipolygon, boundary and route in iD.

Does anyone have an answer ?

Where do I find a wiki or help system about iD explaining me the software ?
Only found one page which does not even mention relations.

I have no problems with newbie mistakes but users with over 2000 commits
are no newbies anymore but still miss the common understanding of
relations and are not aware of all tags of an object.

What do you say about changesets with comment "hopefully did not break
any relation this time" or "sorry about breaking relations" ?
I would say, nice the user is at least adding changeset comments but as
an developer alarm bells should start ringing in my head.

For sure, I use PM and directly discuss on changesets but so far my
advice is at least do not use "combine ways" or merging nodes at all,
plus always discuss in advance of deleting or even better use a better
editor software.

Cheers colliar


0xE8F56581.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Use of OSM by municipalities

[maning sambale]

Dear Sev,

I was involved the last two years on assisting 3 municipalities in
using OSM as a platform for basemapping in a disaster risk reduction
(DRR) project.  Anecdotal reports from local contacts were saying
these maps were actually used in the preparation and eventual response
to a big typhoon that hit the area last year.  One municipality is now
using it beyond DRR and integrating OSM data into the landuse
planning/zoning process of the town.  A video should be available soon
on this initiative.

On 2/12/15, Robert Banick  wrote:
> I know that some municipalities in the Philippines are using OSM data as a
> foundational dataset. You should check with Jay-Ar (osm: jay-ar) for more
> info, he was telling me about it.
>
>
> —
> Sent from Mailbox
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Severin Menard 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> Is there somewhere a collection of use cases of OpenStreetMap data and
>> services by municipalities?
>> Sincerely,
>> Severin


-- 
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
--

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Pieren]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Michał Brzozowski  wrote:
> Therefore sometimes I simply assume good
> faith which in my opinion *is* sensible.

That's where I disagree. If some registred user creates fake POI's
directly, he should be banned (first temporarily, with warnings etc)
once we notice the vandalism. The same rule should apply for registred
users copying easter eggs based on copyrighted maps or fake POI's
based on notes.

Pieren

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[JB]

 

+1. 

Quite funny actually that the parallel discussion on « how we map »
clearly states : 

In talking to other mappers, always ASSUME GOOD INTENTIONS. 

and drew no bad attention, but does not seems to be accepted for the
notes mappers (meaning creators, as in « I don't know to map, adding a
note is here for me »). Do that mean that anonymous notes should just
not be allowed ? 

(TLDR: also quite funny that on the discussion on importing the
bicycle_repair_station on talk and import, the note db could be imported
into with little regard to quality, but not the main one. Still
wondering if this note db is just considered a shitty one somewhere that
no one wants to see.) 

Le 12.02.2015 15:46, Michał Brzozowski a écrit : 

> I happen to fix a lot of notes in Poland.
> For me it would be impractical to check every POI that I add from notes.
> Mind you, I do the research in the Internet if it's a feature that
> could possibly have a website (fire station, church, restaurant,
> supermarket etc), but the only way to check some (eg. smaller shops)
> would be to check on the ground. Unless there's a mapper in every
> single municipality it's not practical to do so - drive a long way to
> just check "yep, it's there". Therefore sometimes I simply assume good
> faith which in my opinion *is* sensible. But I mark any changesets or
> POIs with source=notes.
> 
> Michał
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk [1]
 

Links:
--
[1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[Jo]

Thank you for dismissing all our arguments in one fell swoop. The
difference with reported bugs, is that said bugs did get addressed. If we
are anti-anything it's
anti-having-to-cleanup-with-no-possibility-to-shut-close-the-source-of-the-cause-of-precious-time-wasters.
If people were consciously breaking the data, this would most certainly be
called vandalism. If you manage to burn out the regular contributors is
OSM, you will have done the whole community a major disservice.

Then there is the suggestion: it must not be a problem, as nobody bothered
to create a pull request. We are mappers, not JS programmers and how hard
can it really be to create dialogs to interact with your users? No need for
external contributions to accomplish that, all that's needed is the
willingness to stop annoying the rest of the community.

2015-02-12 0:40 GMT+01:00 Tom MacWright :

> We also aimed to have no bugs and like every software project before us,
> have failed to achieve that goal.
>
> The uproar about iD is the same as the uproar about the map style,
> website, user groups, code of conduct, Steve Coast, the board, imports,
> license change, attribution, and practically everything else about
> OpenStreetMap. It's not anti-iD bias, of course. It's anti-everything bias.
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Bryce Nesbitt 
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Tom MacWright  wrote:
>>
>>> Ever since 2012, in the second commit ever, "Not breaking other people's
>>> data" has been one of the three clearly stated public design goals of iD.
>>>
>>
>> This goal does not appear to have been carried out.
>>
>> The iD project comes off as tone deaf to breaking data concerns: Look at
>> the uproar over issues of "breaking data".  Look at the core team response,
>> which is mostly defensive posturing, not oriented to solutions.
>>
>> Why has iD taken such a beating on the mailing list "breaking data"
>> issues?  I don't think it's just anti-iD bias.
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[colliar]

Am 12.02.2015 um 15:46 schrieb Michał Brzozowski:> I happen to fix a lot
of notes in Poland.
> For me it would be impractical to check every POI that I add from notes.
> Mind you, I do the research in the Internet if it's a feature that
> could possibly have a website (fire station, church, restaurant,
> supermarket etc), but the only way to check some (eg. smaller shops)
> would be to check on the ground. Unless there's a mapper in every
> single municipality it's not practical to do so - drive a long way to
> just check "yep, it's there". Therefore sometimes I simply assume good
> faith which in my opinion *is* sensible. But I mark any changesets or
> POIs with source=notes.

+1

I often test the reaction by asking a question about additional tags.

I even got some anonymous reporter to learn about the needed information
like surface, lit, sidewalk, maxspeed, opening_hours, building, brand
and cuisine.

Not sure if they are that anonymous anymore but the seem to strain from
creating an account.

cu colliar


0xE8F56581.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


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

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[Tom MacWright]

ICYMI, Richard Fairhurst contributed a patch to fix this problem that we're
currently reviewing for inclusion:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/pull/2526

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Jo  wrote:

> Thank you for dismissing all our arguments in one fell swoop. The
> difference with reported bugs, is that said bugs did get addressed. If we
> are anti-anything it's
> anti-having-to-cleanup-with-no-possibility-to-shut-close-the-source-of-the-cause-of-precious-time-wasters.
> If people were consciously breaking the data, this would most certainly be
> called vandalism. If you manage to burn out the regular contributors is
> OSM, you will have done the whole community a major disservice.
>
> Then there is the suggestion: it must not be a problem, as nobody bothered
> to create a pull request. We are mappers, not JS programmers and how hard
> can it really be to create dialogs to interact with your users? No need for
> external contributions to accomplish that, all that's needed is the
> willingness to stop annoying the rest of the community.
>
> 2015-02-12 0:40 GMT+01:00 Tom MacWright :
>
>> We also aimed to have no bugs and like every software project before us,
>> have failed to achieve that goal.
>>
>> The uproar about iD is the same as the uproar about the map style,
>> website, user groups, code of conduct, Steve Coast, the board, imports,
>> license change, attribution, and practically everything else about
>> OpenStreetMap. It's not anti-iD bias, of course. It's anti-everything bias.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Bryce Nesbitt 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Tom MacWright 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Ever since 2012, in the second commit ever, "Not breaking other
 people's data" has been one of the three clearly stated public design goals
 of iD.

>>>
>>> This goal does not appear to have been carried out.
>>>
>>> The iD project comes off as tone deaf to breaking data concerns: Look at
>>> the uproar over issues of "breaking data".  Look at the core team response,
>>> which is mostly defensive posturing, not oriented to solutions.
>>>
>>> Why has iD taken such a beating on the mailing list "breaking data"
>>> issues?  I don't think it's just anti-iD bias.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Michał Brzozowski]

I think the person who added these fake notes misses the point in how
OSM actually works.
Wouldn't be for the trust and assumption of good faith, there would be no OSM!

@Pieren: You switch topics so easily that I'm not sure what are you
talking about precisely. Is your stance "Someone showed that it is
easy to add fake notes, therefore we must assume that every single POI
added from notes is fake unless we prove it 100%"? You seem to
overgeneralize, can someone prove that outsiders (ie. *not* people who
do this to bait mappers) really add so much fake notes that we should
not trust them?

Michał

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Find all your unresolved Notes

[hbogner]

Thx for this!

Croatia dropped from 300 to 77(1.40%) open notes since you created this!

Keep up the good work :D

Hrvoje

On 02/03/2015 08:56 PM, Matija Nalis wrote:

OSM Notes are quite useful feature, and if you take advantage of it, you'd
have a lots of Notes.  Vast majority of them resolved and closed, of course,
since you're an active mapper.

However, those that remain open will likely be lost forever, as browsing
your OSM user pages through dozens (and hundreds) of closed Notes (until you
find open one) is very tedious. And if you have multiple accounts (and/or are
tutoring your SO and friends in OSM), the pain in finding older unresolved
Notes increases exponentially.

So I've made a web script that shows you ONLY open notes for specified user
(or several of them).

You can use it at: http://my-notes.osm-hr.org/

(or go grab the source yourself at https://github.com/osm-hr/my-osm-notes )





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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Pieren]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Michał Brzozowski  wrote:

> @Pieren: You switch topics so easily that I'm not sure what are you
> talking about precisely. Is your stance "Someone showed that it is
> easy to add fake notes, therefore we must assume that every single POI
> added from notes is fake unless we prove it 100%"?

I'm just saying that a note is not good enough as a single source for
contribution. Especially when it is easy to verify like in the two
reported examples (a bank and a bakery). And in case of doubt, you
just leave the note open for others instead of compulsive "close
notes" contributions.

Pieren

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Paul Norman]

On 2/12/2015 6:46 AM, Michał Brzozowski wrote:

I happen to fix a lot of notes in Poland.
For me it would be impractical to check every POI that I add from notes.
It's for this reason that notes say "This note includes comments from 
anonymous users which should be independently verified".


This is an important requirement. An anonymous note can call your 
attention to something that needs to be fixed, but the actual fix needs 
to be able to be made without reference to the note.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Maarten Deen]

On 2015-02-12 18:23, Pieren wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Michał Brzozowski 
 wrote:



@Pieren: You switch topics so easily that I'm not sure what are you
talking about precisely. Is your stance "Someone showed that it is
easy to add fake notes, therefore we must assume that every single POI
added from notes is fake unless we prove it 100%"?


I'm just saying that a note is not good enough as a single source for
contribution. Especially when it is easy to verify like in the two
reported examples (a bank and a bakery). And in case of doubt, you
just leave the note open for others instead of compulsive "close
notes" contributions.


I agree. Especially new notes, just wait a while until someone who maybe 
has local knowledge picks it up.
Another thought: give the possibility to add photo's to notes. That way 
you have more confirmation that there is something. You still don't know 
if it is there unless there are GPS coordinates in the picture, but it's 
something.


Maarten

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?

[Pierre Béland]

We have to think of OSM as a global community where not all countires are equal 
with access to internet and computers. Often, people have smartphones and could 
contribute.
Adding a note with photo would greatly help. The @osmthis Twitter tag let's do 
this. But it is uneasy then to communicate with these persons.adding @osmthis.  
The same functionality in OSM would be fantastic. But with anonymous notes, we 
cannot contact these people and obtain clarification.  Then the risk that notes 
stay open for a long period since incompleted.

 Pierre 

  De : Maarten Deen 
 À : talk@openstreetmap.org 
 Envoyé le : Jeudi 12 février 2015 12h43
 Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] "guide to vandalism” in OSM?
   
On 2015-02-12 18:23, Pieren wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Michał Brzozowski 
>  wrote:
> 
>> @Pieren: You switch topics so easily that I'm not sure what are you
>> talking about precisely. Is your stance "Someone showed that it is
>> easy to add fake notes, therefore we must assume that every single POI
>> added from notes is fake unless we prove it 100%"?
> 
> I'm just saying that a note is not good enough as a single source for
> contribution. Especially when it is easy to verify like in the two
> reported examples (a bank and a bakery). And in case of doubt, you
> just leave the note open for others instead of compulsive "close
> notes" contributions.

I agree. Especially new notes, just wait a while until someone who maybe 
has local knowledge picks it up.
Another thought: give the possibility to add photo's to notes. That way 
you have more confirmation that there is something. You still don't know 
if it is there unless there are GPS coordinates in the picture, but it's 
something.

Maarten



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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] "How We Map"

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 10 February 2015 at 12:19, Jo Walsh  wrote:
> I wish to float this draft page for discussion and possibly future
> approval!
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map

I welcome this page, I think it is very useful.

One small comment - I oppose the following sentence:

| OpenStreetMap has very few rules on tagging. There are tagging
| standards but they evolve instead of being pushed through.

There is no consensus on this point, and including it in official 'How
we map' guidelines would falsely suggest that there exists such a
consensus. It is also not true that we map in this way: many tags that
we are using have been proposed before they were used, see
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Proposed_features_%22Approved%22.

Also, the meaning of this sentence is not clear: what does it mean for
a tagging standard to 'evolve', and what does it mean for a tagging
standard to be 'pushed through'?

In any case, I would like to thank you for drafting this document.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "How We Map"

[Jo Walsh]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015, at 07:39 PM, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map
> 
> I welcome this page, I think it is very useful.
> 
> One small comment - I oppose the following sentence:

Thank you for the comment Matthijs, I've added it to the discussion page
here, 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:How_We_Map

> In any case, I would like to thank you for drafting this document.

The original longer draft was a collective effort on the part of the DWG
some time before i joined up, and Frederik did all the hard work of
writing it up, so I can only accept a tiny modicum of credit for
compressing it :)

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "How We Map"

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 02/12/2015 08:53 PM, Jo Walsh wrote:
> so I can only accept a tiny modicum of credit for
> compressing it :)

... from a dry and almost legalese long-form that nobody wanted to read
into something that radiates community spirit. Credit whom credit is due ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[Michał Brzozowski]

I was wondering, what do you think (interpret this only as a question)
about introducing validation in iD in the future?

Using MAGIC integrated circuit design tool, that does DRC (Design Rule
Check) in real time and highlights errors inspired me that OSM editors
could also incorporate this. It makes sense to me. First, users will not be
overwhelmed by a sh**load of errors at once and second, they could learn
what they actually do wrong.

But this poses challenges, because sometimes when you're editing, there
will be a temporary error state, to disappear just when you finish a
sequence (e.g. you don't enter all tags at once so there will be a
transient "place of worship without religion" error.) That type of error
message should not happen, because spamming irrelevant errors only makes
users ignore them.

Still, there are checks that can be safely made in real time, like all
sorts of geometrical tests (self-intersections, building crossing another
building and so on.). Maybe good-enough heuristics could be applied for
when the user stopped editing a feature and moved on to another, to address
the "temporary error" issue.

Anyway, thanks in advance to anyone who makes iD more iDiot-proof. It
really matters a lot, for example there was press coverage (Polish News
Agency) back in 2014-08-18 that generated 500 or more new users who
obviously contributed a fair share of mistakes. There was simply no
manpower available to check edits of all the users, let alone message them
on what they did wrong.

Having no severe errors is quite a point of honor to me, as I think we must
try to be free of all these "that cursed satnav told me to do this"
situations. Steve Jobs once told something along the lines of "We don't
ship junk. We make products that we could recommend to our family and
friends" and surely anyone tech-savvy can relate to that feeling of
embarrassment when a cool gadget/software you show to your family happens
to betray you. Have your navigation lead you off-road (see: wrong road
tagging), people will tell that "OSM is shit" even though other map
products are not ideal as well.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[Tom MacWright]

Since two years ago, iD has an range of validations it runs on every
potential changeset, as well as an interface to review & correct potential
errors before saving them.

https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/blob/master/js/id/validate.js#L1

We welcome contributions to expand these, and have a few proposed additions
which would be good places to start if you want to help:
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Avalidation

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Michał Brzozowski 
wrote:

> I was wondering, what do you think (interpret this only as a question)
> about introducing validation in iD in the future?
>
> Using MAGIC integrated circuit design tool, that does DRC (Design Rule
> Check) in real time and highlights errors inspired me that OSM editors
> could also incorporate this. It makes sense to me. First, users will not be
> overwhelmed by a sh**load of errors at once and second, they could learn
> what they actually do wrong.
>
> But this poses challenges, because sometimes when you're editing, there
> will be a temporary error state, to disappear just when you finish a
> sequence (e.g. you don't enter all tags at once so there will be a
> transient "place of worship without religion" error.) That type of error
> message should not happen, because spamming irrelevant errors only makes
> users ignore them.
>
> Still, there are checks that can be safely made in real time, like all
> sorts of geometrical tests (self-intersections, building crossing another
> building and so on.). Maybe good-enough heuristics could be applied for
> when the user stopped editing a feature and moved on to another, to address
> the "temporary error" issue.
>
> Anyway, thanks in advance to anyone who makes iD more iDiot-proof. It
> really matters a lot, for example there was press coverage (Polish News
> Agency) back in 2014-08-18 that generated 500 or more new users who
> obviously contributed a fair share of mistakes. There was simply no
> manpower available to check edits of all the users, let alone message them
> on what they did wrong.
>
> Having no severe errors is quite a point of honor to me, as I think we
> must try to be free of all these "that cursed satnav told me to do this"
> situations. Steve Jobs once told something along the lines of "We don't
> ship junk. We make products that we could recommend to our family and
> friends" and surely anyone tech-savvy can relate to that feeling of
> embarrassment when a cool gadget/software you show to your family happens
> to betray you. Have your navigation lead you off-road (see: wrong road
> tagging), people will tell that "OSM is shit" even though other map
> products are not ideal as well.
>
> Michał
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[Michał Brzozowski]

Whoops. Good to know. Though it's still rudimentary ;) Not long ago I
tried to do intentionally do stupid things in iD demo in order to see
if it would stop me - it didn't.

There's one more face to iD and mistakes users make: translations. Bad
translations cause bad tagging. English terms don't always translate
1:1 so I think it is beneficial for a translator to deviate a little
when needed. Example: "track" was translated to Polish as "droga
gruntowa" ("grunt" is "ground" so translated back to English it's
"unpaved road"). Which of course is a bad idea, as people will tag
every single unpaved road as highway=track. I took a little liberty
and changed that to "Droga polna lub leśna" ("Field or forest road")
which I think captures the essence more faithfully.

Michał

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Tom MacWright  wrote:
> Since two years ago, iD has an range of validations it runs on every
> potential changeset, as well as an interface to review & correct potential
> errors before saving them.
>
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/blob/master/js/id/validate.js#L1
>
> We welcome contributions to expand these, and have a few proposed additions
> which would be good places to start if you want to help:
> https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Avalidation

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

Re: [OSM-talk] "How We Map"

[Michał Brzozowski]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Jo Walsh  wrote:

> OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection.

Could both terms be more elaborated on?
Does "data perfection" in practice mean "adding true but not really
useful things, often in not-well-thought-out way"?
Because otherwise, we should strive to be perfect.

Michał

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Imports] amenity=bicycle_repair_station :::: only 18 so far

[Bryce Nesbitt]

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Serge Wroclawski  wrote:

> Bryce,
>
> After reading through this thread, I just don't see this dataset as
> being high enough of quality to import.
>
> Arguing that users will be free to move objects does not jive with the
> ~10 years experience we have in OSM, and nearly that long with
> imports. Imported data is rarely touched, even when the quality is low
> (ie TIGER).


I ran an experiment to see if a local mapper would be willing to
re-position a node that can't be seen on an
air photo.  We already know that armchair mappers are willing to make
similar corrections.

Here's the experiment:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/313414
The node was properly moved to the opposite side of the street, by user
dchiles.

---
As a crowd sourced map, it should be within reach to find 500 local mappers
to validate 500 locations.
No commercial effort could match this (the cost of airfare would be
prohibitive).
In fact it could be seen as a core strength of OSM: the ability to seek
local volunteers scattered across the globe.

---
I see a high quality and extensively vetted data set here, with a chance
for engagement by local on the ground mappers
to correct what are fairly modest imagery/base layer offset issues.  Beyond
that, this import has already engaged several bike
communities, bringing new mappers to OSM specifically in order to map bike
repair stations.

This is not low quality data: it's high engagement data.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] "How We Map"

[Jo Walsh]

> > OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection.
> 
> Could both terms be more elaborated on?
> Does "data perfection" in practice mean "adding true but not really
> useful things, often in not-well-thought-out way"?
> Because otherwise, we should strive to be perfect.

Ah, this is exactly where i start whipping out classic references to
Jorge Luis Borges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Exactitude_in_Science
"In that Empire, the Art of Cartography attained such Perfection that
the map of a single Province occupied the entirety of a City, and the
map of the Empire, the entirety of a Province. In time, those
Unconscionable Maps no longer satisfied, and the Cartographers Guilds
struck a Map of the Empire whose size was that of the Empire, and which
coincided point for point with it. The following Generations, who were
not so fond of the Study of Cartography as their Forebears had been, saw
that that vast map was Useless, and not without some Pitilessness was
it, that they delivered it up to the Inclemencies of Sun and Winters."

The wording here was an attempt not to set OSM up for a cultural fall by
saying anything along the lines of "data quality is not as important to
us as successful community". Suggestions for easier wording of this
statement, on the Talk page for the draft, would be appreciated. I see
this point has already been raised there:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:How_We_Map#Community_cohesion

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

Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place

[Imre Samu]

>There's one more face to iD and mistakes users make: translations.
>Bad translations cause bad tagging.
> Example: "track" was translated to Polish .

Good translation is very important for the beginners.
and _now_  not so easy to check the quality of the iD translations.

I would like to inform you, that I am working on a new *"iD Editor
translation QA tool" *
   for helping translators  detecting  translator bugs ...

I have created an experimental, manually formatted QA metadata reports for
Polish language :)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CLt3l_ZQhKFRH5YmfGzo3VJNLQHtHiZSBva3ldU_jJs/edit?pli=1#gid=1373627312

Maybe you can use.
 (   4 Sheets :
-  "meta_pl" : meta data ...
-  "iDups",<-  duplicated/same translations
-  "iPresets",<-   presets  ( 2028  )
[ translations from transifex +  presets.json

 ]
-   "iFields"  <-fields (261 )
 [translations from transifex + fields.json
 ]
  )


Freshly generated raw reports exists  for every other  iD languages (
de,pl,es,ru, cz,pt,  ... ) ( but not formated )
   see  :   https://github.com/ImreSamu/ideditor_translation_test_reports

   find  your xlsx -> "./qadata/
(LangCode)/id_presets_translation_(LangCode).xlsx"
   for example:

./qadata/af/id_presets_translation_af.xlsx
./qadata/ar/id_presets_translation_ar.xlsx
./qadata/ar-AA/id_presets_translation_ar-AA.xlsx
./qadata/ast/id_presets_translation_ast.xlsx
./qadata/bg-BG/id_presets_translation_bg-BG.xlsx
./qadata/bn/id_presets_translation_bn.xlsx
./qadata/bs/id_presets_translation_bs.xlsx
./qadata/ca/id_presets_translation_ca.xlsx
./qadata/cs/id_presets_translation_cs.xlsx
./qadata/da/id_presets_translation_da.xlsx
./qadata/de/id_presets_translation_de.xlsx
...



My favorite problems type is the "same/duplicated translations"
(  https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2448 )
Now the status by languages  -here : id_langDups_all.md



For example German language.
But be careful,  Experimental report!
Not every  line is problematic -  please check  the other columns
 like
  - geometry metadata  (
area,point,line,vertex,relation )
  - "searchable"
   (  id_presets_translation_duplicates_de.md

)   nameTransl nameEn presetKey  Administrative Grenze Administrative
Boundary type/boundary/administrative  Administrative Grenze Administrative
Boundary boundary/administrative  Bahnsteig Platform
public_transport/platform  Bahnsteig Railway Platform railway/platform
Boutique Boutique shop/boutique  Boutique Fabric Store shop/fabric
Campingplatz Camp Site tourism/camp_site  Campingplatz RV Park
tourism/caravan_site  Drogerie Chemist shop/chemist  Drogerie Cosmetics
Store shop/cosmetics  Eisenbahn Rail railway/rail  Eisenbahn Railway railway
Fährenroute Ferry Route route/ferry  Fährenroute Ferry Route
type/route/ferry  Friedhof Graveyard amenity/grave_yard  Friedhof Cemetery
landuse/cemetery  Garagen Garages building/garages  Garagen Garages
landuse/garages  Gemischtwarenhandel Convenience Store shop/convenience
Gemischtwarenhandel Variety Store shop/variety_store  Graben Ditch
barrier/ditch  Graben Ditch waterway/ditch  Hütte Hut building/hut  Hütte
Cabin building/cabin  Kehrtwendeverbot No Turns
type/restriction/only_straight_on  Kehrtwendeverbot No U-turn
type/restriction/no_u_turn  Kirche Church amenity/place_of_worship/christian
Kirche Church building/church  Radweg Cycle Path highway/cycleway  Radweg Cycle
Route type/route/bicycle  Seilbahn Cable Car aerialway/cable_car  Seilbahn
Aerialway aerialway  Uhrmacher Clockmaker craft/clockmaker  Uhrmacher
Watchmaker craft/watchmaker  Wald Wood natural/wood  Wald Forest
landuse/forest  Zebrastreifen Crosswalk footway/crosswalk  Zebrastreifen
Crosswalk highway/crosswalk

And the Translation status by languages :  id_langData_all.md




Imre
   ( from the Hungarian OSM community )



2015-02-13 3:43 GMT+01:00 Michał Brzozowski :

> Whoops. Good to know. Though it's still rudimentary ;) Not long ago I
> tried to do intentionally do stupid things in iD demo in order to see
> if it would stop me - it didn't.
>
> There's one more face to iD and mistakes users make: translations. Bad
> translations cause bad tagging. English terms don't always translate
> 1:1 so I think it is beneficial for a translator to deviate a little
> when needed. Example: "track" was translated to Polish as "droga
> gruntowa" ("grun