Re: [OSM-talk] When two bots go to war

[Andrew Hain]

Is there a bot that does this or is someone prepared to write one?

--
Andrew


From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
Sent: 14 September 2023 10:39
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] When two bots go to war

Maybe there should be a general good-practice recommendation / policy
that bots running in this fashion to keep things in sync should only
automatically add/update/remove a tag that they've previously set if
the current state/value in OSM is unchanged from the last state/value
that the bot set. This way, bots could be used to keep things up to
date automatically, but would not automatically override any manually
applied changes by other mappers between runs. (A sensible bot owner
would have the bot send them a report of any tags that couldn't be
updated for manual review.)

Robert.

On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 08:41, Cj Malone
 wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 15:06 +0200, Snusmumriken via talk wrote:
> > My speculation is that Distriktstandvården (a chain of dental
> > clinics)
> > has taken "ownership" of "their" nodes and once a day check that the
> > values in osm database correspond to that of their internal database.
>
> I've added a more specific website tag to test this. If they restore it
> (Probably 03:00) to the generic home page I agree with you. They need
> to be informed that 1) there data needs improving (eg covid opening
> hours, POI specific not brand specific contact details) 2) they don't
> own these nodes, other people can edit them.
>
> CJ
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141243391


--
Robert Whittaker

___
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] Announcing State of the Map 2024: Join us in Nairobi and online on 6-8 September 2024!

[Andrew Hain]

I would like to congratulate the organising team in Nairobi and the SotM 
Working Group for doing this. Giving the worldwide community a broader 
understanding of the challenges of mapping Africa and using maps there is 
positive step for OSM’s inclusiveness as a truly worldwide map.

--
Andrew


From: Federica Gaspari 
Sent: 14 August 2023 18:56
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Announcing State of the Map 2024: Join us in Nairobi and 
online on 6-8 September 2024!


Dear all,



Get ready to meet and connect with old and new mappy friends from the global 
OpenStreetMap community again!



The State of the Map Organising Committee is thrilled to officially announce 
that the global conference of the OpenStreetMap community, State of the Map 
(SotM), will be making its way to Nairobi, Kenya from September 6th-8th 2024! 
This landmark event will bring together passionate mappers, data enthusiasts, 
technologists, and community members from all corners of the globe to celebrate 
the spirit of collaboration and open mapping.



Following the good feedback for State of the Map 2022 Firenze, the upcoming 
State of the Map 2024 will once again be held in a hybrid format. Building on 
the valuable lessons and experiences from the previous events, the SotM 
Organising Committee is committed to making this edition even more accessible 
to everyone who wishes to partake in this grand celebration of open mapping, 
sharing passionate voices with the entire community.



Learn more about the SotM 2024 announcement on the OpenStreetMap blog: 
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2023/08/14/announcing-state-of-the-map-2024-september-6-to-8-2024-join-us-in-nairobi-and-online/



More details about the organization will be soon communicated.



Federica Gaspari on behalf of the SotM Organising Committee


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

Re: [OSM-talk] ODbl concerns

[Andrew Harvey]

Hi Robert,

To preface, I'm not a lawyer and your should seek your own independent
legal advice, but as I understand:

1. the department has made a decision to adopt OSM as your data source,
accepting the terms this data is licensed under
2. you will adapt, modify, enhance, correct or extend OSM data with your
gazetted place and road names, which likely creates a Derivative Database
under the ODbL, we'll call this DTP Validated OSM
3. where you make this DTP Validated OSM data available to others, like
your distribution partners or the public via your open data portal, it must
continue to be licensed under the ODbL.
4. The implication for your distribution partners would likely be if they
want to further adapt, enhance, correct or extend your DTP Validated OSM
data, and they then use that adapted data publicly, they must continue to
license their adaptations under the ODbL, ie. the license is viral.
5. There is nothing here preventing these distribution partners using your
DTP Validated OSM data, or making further changes or adaptations to it. If
they don't accept the terms then they don't need to use your data.

One alternative, if you create your data independently of OSM may be to
publish it with only references to OSM, e.g. to OSM object IDs or with
location references eg. OpenLR. If created independently you may be able to
license as you wish.

You could in parallel still publish a full osm derived version of the data
under ODbL for convenience for those who accept the ODbL terms.

On Mon, 3 Jul 2023 at 10:13, Robert C Potter (DTP) via talk <
talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Hi OSM,
>
> Representing the state transport authority (Department of Transport and
> Planning) we have made the strategic decision to use OSM as our
> foundational mapping data source.  We are confident that this is a decision
> will be of value to both ourselves improving the management of the networks
> (road, Train, Bus, tram) and adding significantly to the citizens of the
> state.
>
> Our intended use of OSM is built on an extract being done then validating
> that extract for the gazetted/official place and road names. The resultant
> validated dataset will be shared that via our Opendata portal.  Our state
> government has a strong commitment to sharing all data openly.  We are
> currently developing that process and should be in production by the end of
> the year.
>
> Alas, there has been concern from our distribution partners with the ODbl
> license requirement to "Share alike".  You know these companies; Google,
> Here, Tomtom and Apple.
>
> The information we would share, and all shared as ODbl;
>
>- Disruptions
>- Heavy vehicles
>- Bicycles routes
>- Public transport routes and timetables
>
> I am wondering how we, can continue engage with these partners and use and
> improve OSM.
>
>
>
> If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Robert Potter
>
> *Helping people use the power of location to make better decisions*
>
> Manager, Spatial Data Strategy
> Department of Transport and Planning
>
> 1 Spring Street
>
> MELBOURNE 3000
>
>
> *M *0402 484 739
>
> *F* 03 9935 4111
> *E *robert.pot...@roads.vic.gov.au
> *W dtp.vic.gov.au *
>
>
> I acknowledge the Traditional Aboriginal Owners of Country throughout
> Victoria and pay my respect to Elders past and present and emerging and to
> the ongoing living culture of Aboriginal people.
>
> DISCLAIMER
>
> The following conditions apply to this communication and any attachments:
> VicRoads reserves all of its copyright; the information is intended for the
> addressees only and may be confidential and/or privileged - it must not be
> passed on by any other recipients; any expressed opinions are those of the
> sender and not necessarily VicRoads; VicRoads accepts no liability for any
> consequences arising from the recipient's use of this means of
> communication and/or the information contained in and/or attached to this
> communication. If this communication has been received in error, please
> contact the person who sent this communication and delete all copies.
> ___
> 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] mapilio? (street-level imagery)

[Andrew Hain]

Is there an imagery host that offers an OSM-friendly way to support mapping and 
is suitable for contributions using a smartphone or tablet?

--
Andrew

From: Greg Troxel 
Sent: 24 May 2023 13:31
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [OSM-talk] mapilio? (street-level imagery)

I just got spam from mapilio, implying that I was a "Mapilio
contributor".  This was, to my memory, the first I had heard of them.


I have avoided most street-level imagery schemes as not being
structurally similar to OSM (open source tooling, community project and
licensing scheme).

Looking briefly, it seems like a corporate thing with proprietary
tooling.  They talk about an app in proprietary app stores but do not
mention F-Droid :-) The point seems to be to monetize crowdsourced
contributions, in a gamified/rewards-ish sort of way.

I don't find a JOSM plugin that makes the imagery available in the way
that their web page implies it is licensed for OSM.

Thus, my approach will be to not deal with them at all and just block
their mail.


I am curious if anyone
  - thinks my assessment of the fundamentals is off
  - thinks there is a reasonable way to use their imagery in JOSM
  - anything else similar

  - has also been spammed (private replies please and I'll post a
followup if I get a bunch of comments)

Greg

___
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] [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

[Andrew Davidson]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:41 AM rob potter  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am representing the state transport department Department of Transport and 
> Planning (Victoria, Australia) - OpenStreetMap Wiki and we are looking to 
> consume the OSM road & rail networks for our operations.

Sounds interesting. Another OSM policy that you'll need to know about
is https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

Looking down the list of things that you are planning on doing I note
that one of the items on the list is "Tram and Bus stops". It would be
really helpful if you could get PTV to sign the required waiver
(https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Waiver_and_Permission_Templates)
to let us use the data in OSM. We've got an active group of mappers in
Vic that want to do public transport mapping but are being held back
by the fact that we've been trying to get permission since 2019 to use
the data.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

[Andrew Davidson]

On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 8:57 AM Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> The terms cover data distribution, ie downloading from 
> planet.openstreetmap.org so you need to go through those terms to obtain OSM 
> data regardless of the ODbL.

Which can be found here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

[Andrew Harvey]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2023, 2:09 am Greg Troxel,  wrote:

> rob potter  writes:
>
> As others pointed out those are website terms.  You want to use the
> data, not the website, and you should read the Open Database License.
>

The terms cover data distribution, ie downloading from
planet.openstreetmap.org so you need to go through those terms to obtain
OSM data regardless of the ODbL.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [talk-au] Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base

[Andrew Harvey]

Hi Rob,

Interesting point you raise!

While on the surface you'd think terms (from the OSMF Terms of Use
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use#III._Unlawful_and_other_unauthorized_uses)
only ask you not to use OSMF services like the website, API for those
purposes and not the data, it includes "data distribution".

I suggest you raise this on the legal talk mailing list
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk and/or directly with
the OSMF legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org (
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Contact).

On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 at 11:41, rob potter  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am representing the state transport department Department of Transport
> and Planning (Victoria, Australia) - OpenStreetMap Wiki
> 
>  and
> we are looking to consume the OSM road & rail networks for our operations.
>
> *Lawyers have raised a concern about these conditions, as the road data
> use is supplied to our emergency services fire and ambulance.  We have not
> started using the information but we are implementing a system of
> validation and change detection, then produce an authoritative version for
> other agency consumption.*
> *Unlawful and other unauthorized uses include a clause "Operate dangerous
> businesses such as emergency services or air traffic control, where the use
> or failure of the Services could lead to death, personal injury or
> significant property damage;" and "Store data available through the
> Services in order to evade these Terms (including aiding anyone else in
> doing so); or"*
>
> Please any advice would be greatly appreciated, ultimately we will enhance
> the overall content of OSM in the Victoria, but really do not want to cause
> problems later.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> talk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Jhulto Pul/ Morbi bridge

[Andrew Hain]

And you can put a comment on the changeset that deleted it.

--
Andrew


From: Marc_marc 
Sent: 07 November 2022 13:48
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Jhulto Pul/ Morbi bridge

Le 06.11.22 à 20:25, Andy Mabbett a écrit :
> Someone has deleted the way for the pedestrian bridge at Morbi, India.

it's always a good idea to post an osm id or a geoloc :)
the bridge started at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5734380320
and is currently deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/604295549/history



___
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] remove link to Wikidata from infoboxes is a valid arg to remove it from wiki page and data items ?

[Andrew Hain]

The Wikidata links haven’t gone away; they’re in the OSM data items where they 
are easily machine readable and can be curated against accidental divergences 
between languages. The other description arguments could just as easily follow 
(there’s no problem with them being listed in the wiki infoboxes) but, given 
the similarities between data items and Wikidata, I suppose it makes sense to 
start here.

--
Andrew

From: Marc_marc 
Sent: 30 September 2022 11:59
To: talk 
Subject: [OSM-talk] remove link to Wikidata from infoboxes is a valid arg to 
remove it from wiki page and data items ?

Hello,

a few months ago, the community unfortunately voted [|] to "remove
alphanumeric code visible in infoboxes at OSM Wiki linking to Wikidata"
because for some tags, the item described by the tag was not the same
as the one described by the wikidata item (in my opinion it is better
to only delete the erroneous links instead of hiding everything)

today I see that a bot is deleting the wikidata, which is not
the same thing as "hide from the infobox"

therefore if I want to make an application that displays natural=tree
genus species in the user's language, I don't have access to the
translation base that is de facto wikidata (and I would have to do
like many tools: ask people to waste their time to encode the same
translation again)

so it's the previous vote to hide a valid arg to remove it ?
do we really want the community to waste its time remaking
a wikidata-osm out of ego not to use wikidata.org when
it describes the same concept?
is it useful ? what do we gain by breaking the link between
natural=tree and |wikidata=Q10884 ?
compare osm's translation list with wikidata
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q4723
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q10884
of course for some, it's even worse, for ex genus=* 30 <> 125
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q310
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q34740

it's already a sad waste to have to translate every tag
for the wiki + iD + josm+  + ... + ... without this

[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/remove_link_to_Wikidata_from_infoboxes

Regards,
Marc



___
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] Automated Populate/Update Problem

[Andrew Harvey]

Yep you'll reach Victorian and Australian mappers better on talk-au as some
might not join the global talk list ->
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au.

I'll echo other's comments here, if you are planning or have done the
conflation I'd suggest sharing those results so the community can review
and share feedback.

On Wed, 28 Sept 2022 at 19:16, Phil Wyatt  wrote:

> Hi Rob,
>
> Given you are in Australia I would try the talk AU list as well. Maybe
> also the discord channels as there are a few Ozzie folks there in the
> Oceania channel with lots of transport experience.
>
> Cheers - Phil
> (On the phone so apologies for any typos)
>
> On 28 Sep 2022, at 6:36 pm, rob potter  wrote:
>
> 
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> I have read the guidelines.
>
> I'm in Victoria, Australia
>
> Rob
>
> On Wed, 28 Sept 2022, 18:07 Eugene Alvin Villar,  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I work for the state transport department
>>>
>>
>> Sorry if I missed this somewhere, but which state and which country?
>> Depending on the answer, there might be a local community that can help and
>> provide guidance as well with the conflation/import process.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Eugene
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 3:24 PM rob potter  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I work for the state transport department and we are looking to become
>>> an active member of the community and as a first dataset we have focused on
>>> is our public transport stops, bus and tram initially and then stations.
>>>
>>> I would like your advice on how to achieve the outcome.
>>>
>>> There are a number of considerations:
>>>
>>>
>>>- Currently in the state there are ~9,100 highway:bus_stop
>>>   - our GTFS - stops.txt has ~27,000 stops
>>>   - the current accuracy of highway:bus_stop needs review.
>>>   - stops.txt location appears to be of a much better quality
>>>
>>> My initial thought was extract current, match data location, enrich what
>>> stops.txt has then create all new and remove existing as final step.
>>>
>>> I would guess there are people screaming NO!! if so, please advise
>>> of a viable way of making such a significant
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Rob
>>> ___
>>> 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
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Andrew Hain]

The big problem I have with this manifesto is that it brings divisive North 
American attitudes to a worldwide project. As a worldwide project, building a 
community of mappers from the whole world is our most important single 
diversity objective. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t encourage other 
underrepresented groups such as women, but we should step away from this kind 
of international combativeness and dog whistling. It may even be 
counterproductive: some feminists in my country think “diversity” has become a 
code word for misogyny.

--
Andrew


From: Celine Jacquin 
Sent: 09 December 2020 19:06
To: osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org ; 
talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive 
Behavior in the OSM Community

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted to 
the conversation in the osm-talk-list 
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html) 
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced for 
many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to 
diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable 
mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve diversity.

We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to sign 
it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing


On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging an abandoned path?

[Andrew Harvey]

Abandoned is a tricky concept for a path, what make is abandoned? If there
is a sign up saying track closed or keep out for re-vegetation it's clear,
but otherwise it's less clear.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 01:36, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> Once it's definitely disappeared, I'd have no qualms about deleting it
> altogether.  Sometimes I update the tags on a path before deleting it to
> something like "note=nothing on this alignment any more".
>

If there is still some evidence on the ground, I think using the lifecycle
prefix is preferable because usually it takes a few years for a path to be
completely revegetated and provides a more accurate picture of what's
happening on the ground and helps data consumers track the it through the
different states.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 02:06, Mike Thompson  wrote:

> I use:
> disused:highway=path/footway/etc
> or
> abandoned:highway=path/footway/etc
>

I have used that too where it really is closed via signage, but if it's
just overgrown from lack of use, it could still be in active use.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 02:55, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> Indeed - https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/overgrown has some usage
>

I didn't know about that, usually I've just been adding
description=overgrown, but that tag is better. It's in need of some
discussion and documentation though to make it not subjective.

I suggest overgrown=yes would apply if you're constantly brushing against
the vegetation (not just occasionally but to the the point that you're
almost always in contact with the vegetation for the whole segment).

Then light if it has negligible affect on walking pace, dense if it slows
you down considerably.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Website showing what was just edited

[Andrew Harvey]

Other tools also listed at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM-based_services#Live.2Freal-time_edits_to_OSM_data

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 05:20, Michał Brzozowski  wrote:

> It was called Show me the Way ( https://osmlab.github.io/show-me-the-way/
> ).
>
> Greetings
>
> Michał
>
> wt., 15 wrz 2020, 21:11 użytkownik Mateusz Konieczny via talk <
> talk@openstreetmap.org> napisał:
>
>> I remember website showing what
>> was just edited in OpenStreetMap.
>>
>> I was unable to find it.
>>
>> Is it still up?
>> ___
>> 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] "Limitations on mapping private information" - wiki page

[Andrew Harvey]

On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 18:04, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> Yes, we do not map individual ownership of land and buildings generally,
> but unless the owner is a person, we could and privacy regulations would
> not prevent us from doing it. It also isn’t an argument for refraining from
> mapping property divisions, because these are interesting regardless of
> _who_ is the owner
>

Tangentially, at least where the cadastre matches what's on the ground, I
hope one day we can include the cadastre in OSM, with the address and
landuse information tagged on the parcel. Instead of trying to trace out
the outline of the parcels in a block in an editor I could just select all
the parcels and say they are residential parcels and that's the landuse
done.

Indeed I agree with Martin, that there is a lot of value in knowing about
parcels completely without any kind of ownership information attached. One
can do analysis on lot size, building floor space ratio to lot size, etc.
if we mapped the parcel.

> Limit the detail of mapping private backyards. As a guideline,
permanently installed private swimming pools, or some structure of a
semi-public garden appear to be the borderline of being acceptable. Add
access=private as appropriate.

Agreed backyard pools are widespread mapped and seem to be tolerated and
okay, backyard tennis courts I would put into the same category.

I think rooftop solar on residential houses is also mapped in places, and I
think is okay.

Given all of this is not personally identifiable and already public in
aerial imagery etc. I agree including this in OSM shouldn't pose an issue.

Under other reasons not to map, I think we could include Aboriginal sacred
sites where "The traditional owners and their representatives have asked
that the locations of other sites be kept private to protect them and
maintain their sanctity.".

But otherwise I feel the page is a good description of community consensus.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

[Andrew Harvey]

On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 18:28, pangoSE  wrote:

> Hi 😀
>
> Mateusz Konieczny  skrev: (22 augusti 2020
> 09:55:10 CEST)
> >"It a playground with half-ass quality more than an authoritative and
> >verified source of information (like e.g. Wikipedia)"
> >
> >I am not sure whatever you claim that
> >Wikipedia is
> >"playground with half-ass quality" or
> >"authoritative and verified source of information".
>
> I meant that a verification system does exist in Wikipedia and they now
> require references on all statements to keep up the quality of the articles
> which is sane IMO. We have no such system.
>

I do think OSM is slowly moving to such a system, at least in areas that
have an active community and are well mapped. I try to collect Mapillary
imagery and one of the reasons is it provides a reference for my change,
other's who do the same make the data quality a bit higher because others
can verify remotely from the imagery.

If I see a suspicious change, I'll post a changeset comment asking if they
are sure and if it changed recently especially when I have visited there
recently and seems unlikely it would have changed since.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] New API suggestion: Allowing contributors to easily track their OSM-objects over time

[Andrew Harvey]

I think you can set this up with OSM Hall Monitor
https://github.com/ethan-nelson/osm_hall_monitor by tracking all the
objects you touch and setting them up as subscriptions.

Personally I found it easier to just subscribe to my whole city in OSMCha.

Nothing is stopping such a system being built at the moment as a 3rd party
service, just needs someone motivated enough to build and support it.

On Sat, 22 Aug 2020 at 19:11, pangoSE  wrote:

> Hi
>
> I would like to track all objects that I ever created or edited.
> I suggest we implement a system to make this easy.
>
> I suggest we create a new system that is updated every time a changeset is
> uploaded. The new system tracks userids and osmids and date of last
> change/edit.
>
> When I create or edit an object an entry is made in this system (if a way
> is converted to relation the relation id is added and so forth). If another
> user converts my way to a relation the system edits the userobjects table
> of both users. This works around the problem of missing permanent ids. If a
> node, way or relation is deleted by anyone the row in my userobjects is
> deleted)
>
> The system can then be queried lke this:
>
> IMPLEMENTATION SUGGESTION:
>
> GET Openstreetmap.org/api/userobjects/pangoSE
> Outputs objects for user pangoSE with the oldest first (outputs 10
> entries, &offset can be used to get more, &size can be used to output up to
> 300 entries, &modified_date=desc by default)
>
> The osmids of the objects can then be used to query the suggested
> verification endpoint to easily find old userobjects that are stale and
> need reverification. The user can be used to generate maps and gpx exports
> of all osmids needing verification for the user to use during a mapping
> quest.
>
> This data is privacy sensitive so the endpoint should require permissions
> from the user to make it easy to write a script or service that uses the
> data on behalf of the user.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Cheers
> pangoSE
> --
> Skickat från min Android-enhet med
> k9.___
> 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 data without attribution

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, 20 Aug 2020 at 11:11, Andy Townsend  wrote:

>
> Indeed, and by the time they get to us they are usually "rabbits of
> negative euphoria"* because of the less than stellar support experience
> they've had at AllTrails.
>
> Looking at e.g.
> https://www.alltrails.com/explore/list/yorkshire-wolds-way?b_tl_lat=54.06089919948305&b_tl_lng=-0.7765960693359375&b_br_lat=53.9918264806059&b_br_lng=-0.6293106079101562
> I'm not surprised - to my eyes that really is a crime against cartography.
> Zoom in, and you'll see that that useful-looking north-south path just
> southeast of Thixendale is actually marked "(PRIVATE)", but at any scale
> you might want to plan a route on it isn't.
>
> The explanation we have to give every time goes something along the lines
> of:
>
>- No, we're not Alltrails support, and can't directly affect the way
>that their map represents things.
>- Yes, it's perfectly normal for the OpenStreetMap database to include
>ways along which there is limited access (such as only the householder, or
>perhaps other people in an emergency).
>- Individual maps can choose what data to show and what not, and if a
>map does a poor job of it that's really not an OpenStreetMap problem.
>- While we'd love you to update OpenStreetMap yourself** (since you
>know your local area better than we do) we're more than happy to try and
>fix the OSM data if it's wrong - but we can't guarantee when (or even if)
>any particular OSM-based map will show the changes.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy (from the Data Working Group)
>
> * not a happy bunny
>
> ** I'd also, if it seems that it might help, try and introduce them to the
> local OSM community.
>

With my DWG hat on, my view is the data working group should be for
resolving conflicts and helping deal with harmful edits or people acting in
bad faith, not as a "the map is wrong please fix it for me" service. If
there is something wrong on the map, generally people should be first
directed to edit in OSM or if they are not comfortable by adding a note,
not asking DWG to get involved in mapping.

AllTrails support team are directing people who are reporting issues with
OSM data to DWG directly, but instead I'd prefer they direct people to
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Beginners%27_guide or some other
landing page for prospective mappers.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Facebook acquires crowdsourced mapping company Mapillary

[Andrew Harvey]

+ Jan's diary post https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jesolem/diary/393358

On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 09:22, Shaun McDonald 
wrote:

> Thanks for the heads up.
>
> They’ve also posted a blog post about it:
> https://blog.mapillary.com/news/2020/06/18/Mapillary-joins-Facebook.html
>
> Supposedly no change from a mapping perspective. Commercial use now
> allowed for free.
>
> Shaun
>
> On 18 Jun 2020, at 23:32, Sérgio V.  wrote:
>
>
> https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-deals-mapillary/facebook-acquires-crowdsourced-mapping-company-mapillary-idUKKBN23P3N6
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
> ___
> 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] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

[Andrew Harvey]

More examples are very helpful, so than you, but in my opinion the examples
should go near the end, at least after the specification (so list of
transport modes and possible values)

1. Introduction (as exists)
2. Full list of transport modes
3. List of possible values
4. Examples

On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 20:16, Mateusz Konieczny via talk <
talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I just added some example at
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
> and improved existing one.
>
> Review, and improving edits (or comments here) would be welcomed.
>
> Deliberately posting to talk to get review also from people less involved
> in
> tagging discussions.
>
> Thanks to Malenki and Seventy7 for suggesting it (in 2009 and 2010
> respectively).
> ___
> 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] our Q&A site help.openstreetmap.org is dying

[Andrew Hain]

We could also look at the software Codidact and Topanswers have been writing.

--
Andrew

From: Mateusz Konieczny via talk 
Sent: 20 May 2020 14:48
To: Tobias Wrede 
Cc: Talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] our Q&A site help.openstreetmap.org is dying




May 20, 2020, 09:28 by l...@tobias-wrede.de:
Can we involve any of the OSM organizations to find, maybe pay, someone?
The question is about the plan. Life support for this specific platform?

It sounds like an endless pit that can consume plenty of resources,
but maybe I am too pessimistic.

Migrate to Stack Exchange? Even assuming that this company will agree
it has plenty of potential issues.

Wait for someone to volunteer and fix? It would be nice, but not sure what
are chances of that.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Andrew Hain]

See 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2018/10/16#Q29637965
 for another artificial item.

--
Andrew


From: Andrew Hain 
Sent: 03 May 2020 18:22
To: Joseph Eisenberg ; osm 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

Getting rid of the search link is definitely a good idea, there are also links 
to artificial Wikidata items such as Q57977870 highway key in OpenStreetMap to 
consider.

--
Andrew


From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 03 May 2020 17:10
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys and 
tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata

"While it is sometimes possible to state that all OSM elements with that tag 
are an instance of some Wikidata item, it is not possible in other situations. 
For example, roads with bridge=yes crossing a man_made=bridge are not instances 
of "bridge". Furthermore, a lot of OSM tags don't represent an instance 
relationship with some class of objects at all, but are properties instead. So 
I doubt that mapping Wikidata onto OSM tags in that manner is feasible. 
--Tordanik 21:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)"

"I don't think the "Wikidata" link adds anything useful for OSM mappers and I 
would be in favour of dropping it. Also, if there is no Wikidata link set, then 
currently the template displays a "search in Wikidata..." link which gives the 
whole "linked data" religion unnecessary prominence. The template has many 
optional parameters, and "wikidata" is the only parameter where, when it is 
missing, Wiki users are nudged in the direction of researching and adding it. 
This makes it look as if adding the "wikidata" parameter was a more valuable 
use of an editor's time than completing other missing bits of information. This 
is a value judgement that I oppose. --Frederik Ramm 16:02, 8 November 2018 
(UTC)"

"Now we have our own Wikibase there’s another problem. The Wikidata link has a 
database link (Q number) that is different from the Q number in our own 
Wikibase instance. The WMF developers were very un-keen on Yuri’s suggestion of 
us using a different prefix letter to distinguish the two. Getting rid of the 
Wikidata parameter would solve this.--Andrew (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2018 
(UTC)"

I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like "craft=*" is 
not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would need to link to 
several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag in that case.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Andrew Hain]

Getting rid of the search link is definitely a good idea, there are also links 
to artificial Wikidata items such as Q57977870 highway key in OpenStreetMap to 
consider.

--
Andrew


From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 03 May 2020 17:10
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys and 
tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata

"While it is sometimes possible to state that all OSM elements with that tag 
are an instance of some Wikidata item, it is not possible in other situations. 
For example, roads with bridge=yes crossing a man_made=bridge are not instances 
of "bridge". Furthermore, a lot of OSM tags don't represent an instance 
relationship with some class of objects at all, but are properties instead. So 
I doubt that mapping Wikidata onto OSM tags in that manner is feasible. 
--Tordanik 21:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)"

"I don't think the "Wikidata" link adds anything useful for OSM mappers and I 
would be in favour of dropping it. Also, if there is no Wikidata link set, then 
currently the template displays a "search in Wikidata..." link which gives the 
whole "linked data" religion unnecessary prominence. The template has many 
optional parameters, and "wikidata" is the only parameter where, when it is 
missing, Wiki users are nudged in the direction of researching and adding it. 
This makes it look as if adding the "wikidata" parameter was a more valuable 
use of an editor's time than completing other missing bits of information. This 
is a value judgement that I oppose. --Frederik Ramm 16:02, 8 November 2018 
(UTC)"

"Now we have our own Wikibase there’s another problem. The Wikidata link has a 
database link (Q number) that is different from the Q number in our own 
Wikibase instance. The WMF developers were very un-keen on Yuri’s suggestion of 
us using a different prefix letter to distinguish the two. Getting rid of the 
Wikidata parameter would solve this.--Andrew (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2018 
(UTC)"

I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like "craft=*" is 
not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would need to link to 
several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag in that case.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] It's time to manage libraries properly in OSM

[Andrew Harvey]

When I think of access=customers, I think of toilets inside a restaurant,
or a parking lot outside a pub you can only usually access as a customer,
so only things that are inside other things. The restaurant itself or the
pub wouldn't normally have the access tag. But I guess for an institutional
library only open to students I guess you could say they are "customers" of
the university, it's just a bit less clear.

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 11:29, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 21/4/20 10:44 am, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
> Agreed that we could do better, see the proposal process for new tags
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process.
>
> Currently we can already mark if the library is open to the public on not
> (access=yes means open to the general public), but it's unclear how say a
> school library or library restricted to attendees of an educational
> facility like a university should be tagged (is it access=private since
> only those people attending the institution have been given permission?
>
> access=customers?
>
>
> You can mark the operator of the library with
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator, which might be the
> local municipality/government/council, or might be the school or university.
>
> You can mark the operator type with
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator:type eg public, private,
> government, religious, ngo, community, consortium, cooperative.
>
> There are open questions similar to yours at
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=library#Types_of_libraries
>
> On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 06:04, Christian Rogel <
> christian.ro...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
>> We are generally aware of the importance of the libraries, as they are
>> numerous and useful by their variety (public, academic, specialized,
>> school…).
>> But, why they have been so neglected by us, the mappers, seing them on
>> the ground, getting maybe frequently in ?
>> So poors are the tags for describing them.
>>
>> Yes, you can add the address, the phone, the opening hours and a few
>> precisions. See ameniy = library
>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dlibrary>
>> But, you cannot indicate which public is admitted, if most of the
>> collection is visible, which kind of documents is displayed and/or lended,
>> and so on…
>>
>> I suggest that every person capable proposes some categorization and
>> enriches the wiki page above.
>>
>> From a few hours discussion on the French OSM list, we were looming
>> around using «  library:for = {public targeted} and library_collection.
>> But, there are more than 2 angles in library and information services.
>>
>> Note : a map of the libraries in the world
>> <https://librarymap.ifla.org/map> was launched years ago by the
>> International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA), but we do not see
>> any location, the figures per countries only.
>> Let us remember the huge number of 2.6 M libraries registered. The French
>> version on Google Map displays 162 locations.
>>
>> 81 500 *amenity=library* are  present in OSM database today
>> <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=library#overview> 20
>> apr. (5 500 in France). We can reach a richer content.
>>
>>
>> Christian Rogel
>> Retired chief librarian (France)
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
> ___
> talk mailing 
> listtalk@openstreetmap.orghttps://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] It's time to manage libraries properly in OSM

[Andrew Harvey]

Agreed that we could do better, see the proposal process for new tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process.

Currently we can already mark if the library is open to the public on not
(access=yes means open to the general public), but it's unclear how say a
school library or library restricted to attendees of an educational
facility like a university should be tagged (is it access=private since
only those people attending the institution have been given permission?

You can mark the operator of the library with
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator, which might be the local
municipality/government/council, or might be the school or university.

You can mark the operator type with
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator:type eg public, private,
government, religious, ngo, community, consortium, cooperative.

There are open questions similar to yours at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=library#Types_of_libraries

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 06:04, Christian Rogel <
christian.ro...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

> We are generally aware of the importance of the libraries, as they are
> numerous and useful by their variety (public, academic, specialized,
> school…).
> But, why they have been so neglected by us, the mappers, seing them on the
> ground, getting maybe frequently in ?
> So poors are the tags for describing them.
>
> Yes, you can add the address, the phone, the opening hours and a few
> precisions. See ameniy = library
> 
> But, you cannot indicate which public is admitted, if most of the
> collection is visible, which kind of documents is displayed and/or lended,
> and so on…
>
> I suggest that every person capable proposes some categorization and
> enriches the wiki page above.
>
> From a few hours discussion on the French OSM list, we were looming around
> using «  library:for = {public targeted} and library_collection.
> But, there are more than 2 angles in library and information services.
>
> Note : a map of the libraries in the world
>  was launched years ago by the
> International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA), but we do not see
> any location, the figures per countries only.
> Let us remember the huge number of 2.6 M libraries registered. The French
> version on Google Map displays 162 locations.
>
> 81 500 *amenity=library* are  present in OSM database today
>  20 apr.
> (5 500 in France). We can reach a richer content.
>
>
> Christian Rogel
> Retired chief librarian (France)
>
> ___
> 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] Taking a break and a call for help

[Andrew Hain]

When you aren’t sure of the exact nature of a service road it makes perfect 
sense to leave out the service= tag. If that makes it more prominent it’s the 
fault of the renderer.

--
Andrew


From: Greg Troxel 
Sent: 22 March 2020 16:46
To: Dave F 
Cc: Dave F via talk ; OpenStreetMap talk-us list 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Taking a break and a call for help

Dave F  writes:

> On 21/03/2020 20:59, Greg Troxel wrote:
>>
>> This really seems unfair.
>>
>> When someone maps for OSM because they want to, they have goals and a
>> typically a good attitude about community norms.
>>
>> When someone is a a paid mapper, their goals come from the person who is
>> paying them, and they don't necessarily care about the overall health of
>> OSM.
>>
>> So this "paid mapping is a bit scary" notion is 100% accurate.
>
> You've made a leap in logic there. From guessing to 100% true.

No leap, and no guessing.

I have made a logical conclusion about a situation with a structural
conflict of interest.

It is entirely normal in our greater society to recognize conflicts of
interest and to mitigate them.  In open source, we don't talk about it
much, but usually contributions come in chunks and are reviewed.  OSM
doesn't have a review process, really (not a complain - just that
review-before-merge isn't something that can address COI in OSM.

I did not say (and do not mean) any of

  all paid mappers are bad people

  all edits done by paid mappers are bad

My point is that when people are paid to map, there is a structural
conflict of interest between the good of OSM and the goals/incentives
impressed on the paid mapper.  Again, that doesn't mean it's always
misaligned - it means that the possibility is very real, and we
currently don't have a way to deal with this.  So I find the general
situation inherently fraught.

(There's also the issue of misalignment between the good of OSM and the
goals of the employer, but I'm assuming that the employer's goals flow
down to paid mappers goals, for a competent employer.)


>> That doesn't mean all paid apping is bad; were I to take money from
>> the local chamber of commerce to make sure all their businesses were
>> on the map with opening hours and other details, all of it would be
>> done in a way that other mappers would think is correct, or at least
>> just as correct as if I were doing it for fun.  But the idea that
>> people are hired into a position and given instructions might lead to
>> bad outcomes is quite sensible.  Really these edits are not so
>> different from mechanical edits, and I think the organizers need to
>> own the responsibilility for high quality, and the standard should be
>> quite a bit better than normal hand mapping norms.
>
> What's the betting you'd be the first to complain when your parcel is
> 30 minutes after it's allocated delivery time, because the driver
> couldn't find the right driveway.

Now you have crossed into ad hominem and strawmen.

Note that what you quoted from me said "might lead to bad outcomes", not
"always will".

I did not say that anybody, Amazon included, adding driveways following
existing norms was a bad thing.  Around me the average edit quality for
driveway additions has been good -- and I have not complained about
them.  There have been some with not quite right tagging, but mostly
they've been ok, and its been things like "highway=service" without
"service-driveway" -- not egregious, still better than before addition,
but too heavy on the render, as well as not quite right.

My belief is that a bunch of paid mappers with a narrow focus and
basically only adding missing things is quite likely to be mostly ok.
Once you get into changes with more nuance, I expect more trouble.

I did say that when someone pays a lot of people to map, then that
becomes a large scale edit.  Again I didn't say that was always bad --
but I did say that the company needs to be responsible for making the
problems that could happen not happen actually.  I really don't
understand why you consider that to be so offensive.

> This is all AL are doing, completing the final quarter of a mile of
> their journey in areas not easily accessible to the general public.
> It is *not* a mechanical* edit, but taken from on the ground surveys
> using GPS, in *exactly* the same way many voluntary contributors map.

Are you associated with AL in any way?  I'm guessing not, but your
reaction to pointing out a structural conflict of interest is remarkably
strong.

> Please don;t assume, go on the evidence of the contributions. I
> believe they're improving the quality of the OSM database.

My memory of which paid editor di

Re: [OSM-talk] Flashing school speed limit sign

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 17:31, Maarten Deen  wrote:

> maxspeed:conditional=20 @ flashing?
> It is free form, so you can fill in anything you like. If it catches on,
> the people who make the navigation will start to use it.
>

That sounds good and seems in line with what people are already doing.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Flashing school speed limit sign

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, 12 Mar 2020 at 12:51, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 8:23 PM Jack Armstrong 
> wrote:
>
>> How would this be tagged? I can't seem to find anything about this on the
>> wiki. Perhaps I'm just not looking in the right place. Thanks.
>>
>
> The sign itself would be highway=traffic_sign, traffic_sign=maxpseed,
> maxspeed=traffic_signals.  For the school zone on the way, that would be
> maxspeed=* (whatever the maxspeed is normally when it's not in effect),
> and maxspeed:variable=school_zone.
>

That looks good but how would you mark the variable speed as 20mph? I've
seen people use something along the lines of `maxspeed:conditional=80 @
wet` to indicate the lower speed for maxspeed:variable=weather, so
something similar could be used here.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Announcing Daylight Map Distribution

[Andrew Harvey]

On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 21:14, Volker Schmidt  wrote:

> I expect this Facebook operation to produce much more changes or potential
> changes (=suspected errors).
> What we need for both cases and similar ones in the future is a way of
> being able to identify such changes, which by their nature will be
> armchair-mapping efforts.
>

OSMCha has a ticket for integrating with OSM teams
https://github.com/mapbox/osmcha-frontend/issues/390 it would allow you to
open up OSMCha and filter for changesets by a given editing team in a given
area for you to review. There is a PR implementing this in OSMCha but it's
yet to be merged.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags

[Andrew Hain]

I strongly disagree.

It is perfectly useful to document the existence of tags in the database with 
data items. For example one was created for the key sub_sea:type 
[https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q4506] and it has been possible to 
add this it is a discardable tag that the main OSM editors remove when editing. 
While it is possible in principle to add a long form tag documentation page, 
and indeed the presence of the data item is a record that one may be worth 
writing, it needs a different set of skills to research its content. As such 
the data item and others like it are useful on their own.

--
Andrew

From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 18 February 2020 17:28
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags

Data Items should not be created by bot for undocumented tags.

According to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_items#Item_Creation_Process
the Data Items (aka "Wikibase" or "Wiki Data items") are automatically
created by a bot, even before a tag is documented, if a tag has a
certain standard format and more than 10 uses in the database.

The data item is created in this case with the text "‎Created a new
Item: Auto-updating from Wiki pages" - e.g.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Item:Q19947&action=history

This is confusing to users. For example, Item:Q19947 above,
"landuse=research" was created before there was a wiki page. Then
yesterday a user documented the tag with a page, but did not
understand why there was already a data item:

"Wikibase entry: evidence for preceding deletion? I've just created
landuse=research, but the data item
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Item:Q19947&action=history
was already existing in December '19. How was the data item then
created?"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki=#Wikibase_entry:_evidence_for_preceding_deletion.3F

Besided the potential confusion caused by creating these items by
bots, I think it is a bad idea to encourage wiki users to start
editing these data items without first creating an actual
human-readable wiki page to document the tag.

In theory, the "Data Items" can be useful if they properly document
how tags are used, in a way that is easier for computers to handle,
but this only works if the data is maintained and updated.

Creating a new wiki page (by human) will alert other users via
"Special:Recent" and "Special:NewPages", while the stream of items
created by bots is too much for humans to maintain, and the page names
are too obscure (Item: Q19947 is meaningless) to be scanned by humans.

Therefore, I propose that Yurikbot be changed to only add new data
items for documented tags which already have a wiki page in at least
one language. I do not see a benefit to creating date items for
undocumented tags.

Joseph Eisenberg

___
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] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Andrew Hain]

Have you talked to the Data Working Group about this?

--
Andrew

From: 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk 
Sent: 03 November 2019 16:47
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper


I find myself being stalked by one mapper, (using the stalking tools, WHODIDIT:



OpenStreetMap Changeset Analyzer and mapbox/osmcha)



who clams edit ownership over a 3,000 sq. mile bus system, who is at least 20 
miles



away from me, and i am on the ground mapping, (in my profile, shows mappers up 
to



8 km away 4 + miles and not one of them is a mapper and have tried to friend me 
?)



and sending me messages that i am wrong  and re editing every thing i do



in this catorry.



i am on the standard map, iD (in-browser editor) and he appears to be in the 
transit map



which he has copied the routes from yahoo.


From: Maarten Deen
Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2019 5:15 AM
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

On 2019-11-03 11:42, Philippe Latulippe wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> I like to improve OSM casually, making small fixes as I use the map in
> my day-to-day life. However, doing so without any precautions would
> reveal a great deal of information about where I've been, since my
> edits cover exactly the places where I'm active. A look at my edit
> history would reveal where I live, where I work, where I've traveled.
> If last night I had added a detailed POI of a restaurant and nothing
> else, one could correctly assume that I was at that restaurant
> recently.
>
> I've managed to protect my privacy somewhat by creating one account
> for every neighbourhood I want to map. This is time consuming and
> error prone, and it's held me back from making improvements to the
> map.
>
> Are there better ways to maintain some privacy while editing the map?
> Are there some tools? Or is there a way to make edits in a way that
> doesn't reveal my username to regular users?

What do you use your OSM username for? Is there any reason not to create
an anonymous username like anon65498?

I mean, sure your mailadres suggests your name is Philippe Latulippe and
I can find some people with that name on the internet, but how do I know
that is your real name and not an alias?

Regards,
Maarten

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

Re: [OSM-talk] From the SotM: tagging session

[Andrew Davidson]

On 30/9/19 14:50, Roland Olbricht wrote:


It has been a talking point that the wiki should be purely descriptive.
There is no objection that people sort out tagging questions in the
wiki, but the mixture of purely descriptive and as normative intended
pages would cause confusion.



By "normative" do you mean prescriptive?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Using OSM as database for nature park hiking routes?

[Andrew Harvey]

The hiking routes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hiking#Tagging_walking_and_hiking_Route_Networks
added
to OSM should be verifiable
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability.

Talking from my experience, there are a lot of hiking paths, but only some
are signposted routes, so only some can be actual routes in OSM. Because of
that you would need to maintain all the other informal or subjective routes
outside OSM, if there are any.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Attribution guideline status update

[Andrew Harvey]

On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 17:27, Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> It's even hard to recommend apps like Maps.me when they don't
> attribute Openstreetmap, instead putting their own logo in the lower
> right corner.
>
> If people don't know that OSM is the source of the data in a map, they
> won't know how to get involved to improve it.
>

They do provide the attribution, tt's under Settings | About (then again
under Settings | About | Copyright).
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] handling street names in speech

[Andrew Errington]

I think this is a rendering issue (i.e. rendering speech instead of
graphics) and as such does not belong in OSM.

The work to convert an arbitrary string into speech belongs in the TTS
engine.

If we start putting IPA strings in OSM then we will start getting arguments
about the "correct" pronunciation. At the very least it is tagging for the
renderer, which we should avoid.

IMHO, of course.

Andrew

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019, 09:20 Greg Troxel  wrote:

> John Whelan  writes:
>
> > One or two are problematic usually as the street name is an
> > abbreviation.For example 1e Avenue in French meaning First Avenue.
> >
> > Any suggestions on how these should be handled?  This particular
> > application is aimed at partially sighted people but I feel we should
> > be able to come up with a generic solution.
>
> Two comments:
>
>   osm norms are to expand abbreviations, as I understand it.  So that
>   should be fixed first
>
>   Even after that, we have ref tags, and there is often a road whose ref
>   is something like "CT 2", "US 1", or "I 95".  I don't really think
>   this should be expanded in the database.  Instead, what's needed is a
>   table in the application, perhaps centrally maintained in OSM, of how
>   to pronounce standardize ref abbreviations.  Putting phonetics of
>   "connecticut" on all use of CT or the expanded name is not reasonable.
>
>
> But I agree this needs help.  I get told to turn on "Court 2" and "Ma
> 2".  Luckily I understand this by now and it actually works ok.  But it
> does need fixing.
>
>
> ___
> 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 can I create a oshdb?

[Andrew Davidson]

https://github.com/GIScience/oshdb/blob/master/oshdb-tool/etl/README.md

On Sat., 13 Jul. 2019, 09:30 Milo van der Linden,  wrote:

> Thanks! The download server has no oshdb files for Curacao, the Caribbean
> Island I am interested in. Is there a converter available?
>
> Thanks again!
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019, 23:18 Mateusz Konieczny 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> https://github.com/GIScience/oshdb/blob/master/documentation/first-steps/README.md
>> has some docs.
>>
>>
>> 12 Jul 2019, 23:11 by m...@dogodigi.net:
>>
>> Can anyone point me in the direction of how to create the ohsome oshdb
>> from planet files?
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>> Milo
>>
>> ___
> 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] Mali

[Andrew Hain]

Is there any sign of mappers being part of an organised activity or of someone 
having encouraged them to contribute?

--
Andrew

From: John Whelan 
Sent: 29 June 2019 23:49
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Cc: Pierre Béland via HOT
Subject: [OSM-talk] Mali

I've been going over Mali adding in missing villages and hamlets working in the 
southern and eastern part of Mali and cleaning up as I go.  Adding nodes to 
highways that cross but have no nodes, adding tags to untagged ways etc.  I 
even try to make sure each village has one highway at least leading to it.

However as I work west I'm coming across areas that have lots of buildings and 
lots of errors.  I've zapped more than a few hundred duplicate buildings.  I 
confess I have not put a comment on every changeset especially when the mapper 
has less than 30 edits.  I'm seeing three buildings mapped on top of each other 
by the same mapper.  One is untagged and its not just once.  Interestingly some 
of the changesets are tagged "untangling the spaghetti" and I have sympathy 
with that mapper.

In particular I'm seeing whole villages marked as a single building=yes, 
villages with highways that don't meet in the middle.  Villages connected by 
tracks which doesn't match up with the African Highway wiki page.

Most errors are mapped by mappers with not that much experience.  The buildings 
in some ways are a nuisance as they both seem to be mapped from different 
imagery so often have been mapped crossing highways etc but the other problem 
is they fill the map so much so other features are difficult to spot like 
highways that don't quite meet.

Are there any local Mali mappers around to chat with to see if we can get 
something organised?  In particular we need the highway classification sorting 
out.  The African highway wiki is fine as far as it goes but something 
connecting a village to a highway comes out as unclassified especially if there 
are square roofs in the village.  In order to differentiate the highways that 
these connect to that connect a number of villages probably should be tertiary 
and the ones that connect towns and major villages probably something else.

However I'd be much more comfortable with some local mappers making these calls.

I'm not sure quite what to do.  It needs a more organized approach.  An Apple 
mapper has been in demoting highway=tertiary to unclassified and yes we did 
have a conversation however I'm fairly certain they are working remotely from 
imagery.

Thoughts?

Thanks John

--
Sent from Postbox<https://www.postbox-inc.com>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - remove blatant duplicates (sustenance=fast_food on amenity=fast_food, atm=yes on amenity=atm etc.)

[Andrew Harvey]

I think this proposed edit is reasonable, it makes things simpler without
loosing any information.

On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 17:30, Johnparis  wrote:

> From a user perspective, I want to be able to search for atm=yes to obtain
> all the nearby ATMs. Removing this tag leaves me without standalone ATMs,
> so I would have to search for atm=yes OR amenity=atm
>

Except you'd already need to search for amenity=atm or atm=yes to find
those amenity=atm's not tagged with atm=yes.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki pages?

[Andrew Hain]

Some more advantages:

Data item descriptions can be added for tag values that have no need for 
long-form documentation separate from the key.

Descriptions can be added in extra languages before anyone has the time to 
write full documentation in that language; with support from Taginfo this means 
that Map features tables can be generated automatically in all languages and 
not just English.

--
Andrew

From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 10 June 2019 13:30
To: Tobias Knerr
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki 
pages?

> A potential benefit of data items is that language-independent
information does not need to be manually copied to each translation.

But right now, instead of just checking the English page and the
translated page (eg Bahasa Indonesia), I have to check the English
page, the wikibase data item, and the Bahasa Indonesia page to make
sure they all match.

> The current situation with content duplicated between
data items and wiki pages isn't really ideal. But there's probably still
some work left until data items can fully replace the existing systems.

So for there to be any benefit, we would have to get rid of the
existing templates and switch to only using the wikibase data items,
correct?

I think we need to discuss if this is desired, before any more time is
spent on adding all of those data items.

-Joseph

On 6/10/19, Tobias Knerr  wrote:
> On 09.06.19 13:59, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> Has this wikibase feature been discussed and approved by the community
>> in some forum? Perhaps it happened before I was involved with OSM? I
>> don't quite understand how it works.
>
> The way it works is that every tag has a "data item". This is the one
> for natural=isthmus, for example:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q19327
>
> Of course, you're not expected to find this numeric URL yourself. You
> can get there from the wiki page for that tag by clicking on a "pencil"
> icon next to the description in the infobox, or by using an
> "OpenStreetMap Wiki data item" link that appears in the left-hand menu
> on every page that has a data item associated with it.
>
> The idea behind data items is actually quite similar to how templates on
> the wiki work: There is a number of possible properties that you can
> fill in with information. The properties which are currently available
> are mostly identical to the ones used by the templates: Whether the tag
> can be used on nodes/ways/..., links to related/required/implied tags,
> an image, and descriptions in various languages.
>
> If some information is omitted from a wiki page, the infobox will pull
> it in from the tag's data item. Otherwise, the information written
> directly on the page will take precedence.
>
> A potential benefit of data items is that language-independent
> information does not need to be manually copied to each translation. And
> while software like Taginfo has been able to extract information from
> the wiki for a long time, the hope is that this kind of extraction will
> eventually become easier thanks to data items.
>
> I do not believe there has been a community decision to stop adding
> information directly on wiki pages. So the other wiki contributor's edit
> was probably premature.
>
> Of course, though, the current situation with content duplicated between
> data items and wiki pages isn't really ideal. But there's probably still
> some work left until data items can fully replace the existing systems
> (updating data consumers, plus working on usability and documentation).
>
> Tobias
>
> ___
> 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] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki pages?

[Andrew Hain]

Every tag documentation page has a grey pencil icon next to the description to 
edit the data message. Maybe it could be made clearer.

--
Andrew

From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 09 June 2019 12:59
To: osm
Subject: [OSM-talk] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki pages?

While checking out the Map Features osm wiki pages, I noticed a few
items that were missing descriptions or had very short,
self-referrential ones (eg. "A peninsula" for natural=peninsula and
"An isthmus" for natural=isthmus), even though the wiki page actually
has a good description, which was approved as part of the proposal
process for each feature.

When I edited the pages to add the description to the usual template
(the ValueDescription template), I was surprised to see that this box
was missing. I ended up reverting the last edits which removed the
box, so that I could edit it.

I was then informed that there is now a "data item" in a tool called
"wikibase" where this information can be edited. Another osm wiki user
thought this is now the correct place to store information like a tag
description.

Has this wikibase feature been discussed and approved by the community
in some forum? Perhaps it happened before I was involved with OSM? I
don't quite understand how it works.

Description of wikibase data items (rather confusing to me):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_items

___
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] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application for hikers

[Andrew Harvey]

A neat thing you can do is infill the base of the image where your
hand/body/head are to make it less distracting. For example all my 360
images on Mapillary do this ->
https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/xfQGW4eK_ntjhRNyXDW5bQ

The script I use for this is
https://github.com/andrewharvey/lg360-mapillary-helpers/blob/master/lg360_inpaint
which
uses gmic's inpaint capabilities
http://gmic.eu/reference.shtml#inpaint_matchpatch. The script takes a
black/white mask, then patches that part of the image on a thumbnail sized
image (to make it faster) then composites that into the final output.

On Fri, 31 May 2019 at 21:49, Nick Whitelegg 
wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
>
> Some of you are probably aware that way back in 2010 I started developing
> OpenTrailView , which aims to be a StreetView-like web application but
> focusing on off-road routes such as hiking trails, with crowd-sourced
> panoramas.
>
>
> Recently, due to the increasing availability of 360 cameras and the
> appearance of mature panorama APIs (e.g. Pannellum) and client-side routing
> APIs (GeoJSON Path Finder) I have restarted work on OpenTrailView and did
> an initial presentation at FOSDEM 2019 back in February.
>
>
> Since then I have done further work and OpenTrailView, while still
> incomplete, is in a state where I believe it's ready to start receiving
> contributions.
>
>
> It's available at
>
> https://www.opentrailview.org/
>
>
> You can get an idea of how it allows you to 'walk' along OSM ways by
> navigating in the default area (Southampton Common). There are also some
> panoramas available close to Fernhurst, West Sussex (lat 51.05, lon -0.72).
> There's a Nominatim search available if you switch to 'map' mode (see the
> map icon).
>
>
> If you signup and then login, you can contribute your own 360 panos.
> Obviously follow the usual privacy considerations (no faces, no car number
> plates) - panos will be moderated before they go live to ensure they do not
> have any privacy violations amongst other things.
>
>
> The key thing about this version is that it will use underlying OSM data
> to auto-connect panoramas. This was not done on any previous version.
>
>
> However, note that while the site will accept panos anywhere in the world,
> at present, the auto-connection facility will only work in *Europe* plus
> Turkey (I am using the Europe Geofabrik extract), as my server currently
> only stores European data. Nonetheless I have had a possible offer of
> helping with hosting costs so expansion to the entire world could well
> happen soon.
>
>
> The maps provided are rather basic, showing only highways, coastlines and
> a few selected POIs, this is due to server capacity constraints. If anyone
> is aware of a tile server I can use legitimately as a replacement, without
> violating the usage policy, please let me know.
>
>
> In similar style to OSM, panos will be copyright 'OTV360 contributors' and
> licensed under CC-by-SA. IANAL but this seems to be the most common
> practice.
>
>
> Do remember once again that this is an unfinished product but it is now in
> a state where I believe it is of interest to contributors.
>
>
> Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/nickw1/opentrailview/
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] [Osmf-talk] Anyone who likes to organize an ID discussion panel at SotM?

[Andrew Hain]

This would be a good idea and it shouldn’t be confined to iD. This is just a 
particularly acute example of something that sometimes happens in OSM. Ideally 
there would be several developers there including iD.

--
Andrew

From: Christine Karch 
Sent: 29 May 2019 10:55
To: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
Cc: program-sotm
Subject: [Osmf-talk] Anyone who likes to organize an ID discussion panel at 
SotM?

Hi,

reading the discussions about the direction of ID development and how
the community wants the ID at the OSM website I had the idea that there
could perhaps be a panel at SotM. Does anyone want to organize an ID
discussion panel at SotM? Please tell me or us (program committee in CC)
and we can consider it. At the moment it would be sufficient to have
someone (or more) who wants to organize it. All details could be defined
later.

As ID is a core feature at the OSM website I think this would be
suitable for the main program at SotM.

Additionally it is always possible to organize informal meetings, panels
during SotM in the unconference space (we will provide a lot of it).

By the way ticket sales is open. The Early Bird phase is until 7 July.
Program announcement will be around 20 June.

We will have our schedule meeting at 8 June. So it would be good to know
if an ID panel should be planned. Details for the program booklet should
be provided until end of July.

Cheers

Christine

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Documenting controversial iD decisions

[Andrew Harvey]

I'm not sure if this should be added, but at the time how iD decided to add
presets for lifeguards facilities was controversial.

We used to have documented on the wiki and in use:
emergency=lifeguard_place
emergency=lifeguard_base
emergency=lifeguard_tower
emergency=lifeguard_platform

Which each were to be used to map different kinds of lifeguard
infrastructure on the ground.

Prompted by a request at https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4918 it
was then decided by Bryan at
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-June/037080.html that
"We have too many tags for different kinds of lifeguards.  This is too
confusing. I don’t want to have to show all these choices to iD users."

And it was decided by the iD maintainers to change the existing used and
documented tag emergency=lifeguard_place to emergency=lifeguard, and only
support that tag and none of the other types of lifeguard facilities.

On Wed, 29 May 2019 at 08:50, Michael Reichert 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I started documenting controversial decisions by the maintainers of iD
> at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ID/Controversial_Decisions
>
> Currently, only the highway=footway and the nonsquare=yes issue are
> mentioned.
>
> Please feel free to add other issues which have proofed controversial so
> far. Don't forget to summarise the opinion of the maintainer as well to
> aim at least some neutrality as far as it is possible for those involved
> in the disputes. Please add links to relevant discussions as well.
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael
>
>
> --
> Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
> ausgenommen)
> I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
>
> ___
> 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] mass iD validation arrives in NYC

[Andrew Hain]

Just out of idle curiosity, do we know of any data consumers that understand 
crossing=marked?

--
Andrew

From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
Sent: 28 May 2019 19:00
To: Dave F
Cc: osm
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] mass iD validation arrives in NYC



Am Di., 28. Mai 2019 um 19:56 Uhr schrieb Dave F via talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>:
I notice these changesets were completed in 30/60 seconds respectively.
I don't use iD. How is this possible? Does it have a JOSM like mass edit
ability?

   I don't see asking users to split the changesets as a solution to
what is the clear problem of mass adding/amending tags to
unknown/undocumented ones.



indeed, I see no way to judge whether the iD suggestion to change objects from 
crossing=zebra to crossing=marked makes sense, because there is no 
documentation of crossing=marked. Going by the words, probably any zebra 
crossing can be seen as a marked crossing so it may not be introducing errors, 
just reducing specificity/detail.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove validation rule asking to add highway=footway to railway/public_transport=platform

[Andrew Hain]

Also:

Have a new team of developers code from the codebase of iD.

Write a new online editor from scratch.

Abandon online editing and tell everyone to use an offline editor.

--
Andrew

From: Simon Poole 
Sent: 27 May 2019 11:07
To: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Remove validation rule asking to add highway=footway to 
railway/public_transport=platform

The problem with this (and the longer thread on tagging), that it has
had exactly 0 effect.

As I see it we can choose between

- doing nothing (seems to be most popular currently)

- wage an edit war by reverting any edits that clearly do not correspond
to best practices (not good)

- put in place a code of conduct for developers that want their code
deployed on osm.org and other OSMF sites with minimum requirements on
transparency and community interaction (the irony of this is not lost on
me, and it is not clear who would enforce this)

- deploy from a forked iD that is selective with respect to which
commits are integrated (IMHO too much work)

- engaging with the respective employers and ask them to rectify the
situation (obviously there's a big hole in this one)

That's probably about it.

Simon

Am 23.05.2019 um 18:11 schrieb Markus:
> Hello Bryan, hello everyone,
>
> I'm posting this reply to Bryan's message on GitHub
> (https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6409#issuecomment-495231649)
> here, as the issue has been locked by Bryan.
>
>> Hey all, I've locked this topic. Inviting other people to jump on the thread 
>> just to express disagreement is not very helpful.
> While i really appreciate the work you and the other developers have
> put into iD, i find it demotivating and harmful that you refuse other
> opinions.
>
>> Some people will disagree, and that's ok.
> So far, everybody except you disagreed. If there is a clear majority,
> i expect the iD developers to follow it.
>
> Moreover, this validation rule infringes upon these policies or guidelines:
>
> * Automated Edits code of conduct
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct):
> You take advantage of mappers unconsciously adding highway=footway to
> platforms. This is an automated edit.
> * Map what's on the ground
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground):
> A platform is not a footway.
> * Don't map for the renderer
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_for_the_renderer):
> It's rater "don't map for the router", but the effect is the same.
>
>> There exists no master list of all the routable features in OSM. This is 
>> because people are always making up tags. It is unreasonable to expect 
>> mappers and data consumers to "just know" what all the tags are that are 
>> routable.
> If the problem is the lack of a list of all routable features in OSM,
> then it should be solved by creating such a list, not by mapping for
> the router. (By the way, routable tags aren't added very frequently.)
> I guess it should also be possible to create a "routable" property for
> Wikibase (data items).
>
> I kindly ask you to reconsider your decision, to not block opinions
> that differ from yours and to listen more to the community.
>
> Best regards
>
> Markus
>
> ___
> 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] HTTPS all the Things (Automated Edit)

[Andrew Harvey]

For example https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/68527117 changed just one
feature, there were about 20 other changes all in the same city, maybe the
script has run it's course now I don't know, it's just lots of small
changesets clog up osmcha making it harder to skip over them in bulk.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 16:45, Bryce Jasmer  wrote:

> Is this a problem that only a few are concerned with? Can I get a
> geographic area where I can run a larger number of changes in a larger
> bounding box? I could easily make some one-off changes on a per country
> basis if that would help. And would fewer changesets of, say, 100 objects
> be a good middle-of-the-road number?
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 6:03 PM Mateusz Konieczny 
> wrote:
>
>> And from my side - avoid making changesets with more than 1000 objects.
>> Reverting changesets that went wrong, with tens of thousands modified
>> objects
>> is basically not making possible to review it.
>>
>> Mar 26, 2019, 12:41 AM by andrew.harv...@gmail.com:
>>
>> Any chance you could do more changes per changeset? At the moment this is
>> flooding feeds in osmcha with many small changesets, it would be easier if
>> you did one big changeset.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] HTTPS all the Things (Automated Edit)

[Andrew Harvey]

Any chance you could do more changes per changeset? At the moment this is
flooding feeds in osmcha with many small changesets, it would be easier if
you did one big changeset.

On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 at 18:05, Bryce Jasmer  wrote:

> I have written a script that will search for OSM objects that have a
> website tag that explicitly states "http://..."; or implicitly uses http
> by leaving of the protocol specification. The script will then loop through
> all that it discovers and asks the http site if it will redirect me to the
> secure version of the website over the https protocol. If it does, I will
> update the database with the new value.
>
> This has a couple of advantages. From now through the end of time, any
> user clicking on one of those links will be spared the time it takes to
> establish the connection, ask if there is a secure version of the site, and
> tear down the connection. It's on the order of 10-200 ms to do, but over
> the life of the link and the number of objects that are clicked and the
> population, this could save centuries of time :-)
>
> Another advantage is that it will make https more pervasive and hopefully
> people will start thinking https and forgetting all about http. A more
> secure internet is in all of our best interests.
>
> Anyway, I'd like to (slowly) run this across the planet. I've discussed
> this on the US Slack channel and have performed the actions on the United
> States already. I've addressed many questions and have heard no strong
> objections. I'm seeking feedback from the larger community now before
> proceeding.
>
> The wiki page is
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits/b-jazz
>
> The Slack conversation is available, but has died down and the transcript
> is available at the wiki page mentioned above.
>
> The diary entry with some more conversation is at the bot's page:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/b-jazz-bot/diary/47743
>
> The source code is available on GitLab for review:
> https://gitlab.com/b-jazz/https_all_the_things
>
> Example changeset for a run over the "9yfd" geohash:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67454775
>
> I welcome your input.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

[Andrew Hain]

Is it worth mechanically removing any of the existing discardable tags from the 
database as well?

--
Andrew

From: Dave F via talk 
Sent: 17 March 2019 21:09
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of 
osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

Mateusz
There's also a few osmarender:renderName in the UK. Maybe check osmarender:* to 
collate all?

Simon
Never comprehended the reluctance to remove dead items. Does stepping the 
version /really/ cause any harm?
Contributors, especially newbies, often copy tags from existing examples with 
redundant tags often propagating as result.

We allow everybody to add data (which I agree with), but there's an increasing 
resistance to anybody suggesting tag removal.

If it improves database quality, then go for it.

DaveF


On 15/03/2019 20:13, Simon Poole wrote:

Why would we want to create new versions of objects just to remove a tag
that is not hurting anybody in any way?

The correct way to handle this is to add the tag to the list of
deprecated tags that should be automatically removed (essentially iD has
a list and JOSM has one too), when and if the objects are ever edited
the tags will then be removed.

Simon

Am 15.03.2019 um 20:16 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:


osmarender:nameDirection=* is an old tag that is case of tagging for
the renderer.
Additionally, Osmarender is defunct anyway.

I propose to purge this tag from database as useless, confusing and
encouraging
tagging for renderer.

This edit would remove about 2000 osmarender:nameDirection=* tags
worldwide,
with most of them in Germany and England.

osmarender:nameDirection is described on OSM Wiki as

"By default Osmarender will draw street names left-to-right along ways.
It uses the longitude (horizontal position) of the start and end
points of the
way to determine the direction.

In some cases, for example, very winding roads, the automatically chosen
name direction is not ideal. In this case the way can be tagged with
osmarender:nameDirection=-1 or osmarender:nameDirection=1 as a
hint to tell Osmarender which way to draw the name. "

Automated edit page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/elimination_of_osmarender:nameDirection_-_blatant_tagging_for_the_renderer

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







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


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Missing day replicate

[Andrew Davidson]

Hasn't worked for three days now:

https://munin.openstreetmap.org/problems.html#critical

also the Planet dump is also not working. I'm not sure how we're 
supposed to report these, there used to be a status page on the wikki 
but that appears to no longer be the appropriate place.


On 8/2/19 8:22 am, Andre Hinrichs wrote:

Hi list,

I am missing the day replicate for today (2019-02-07)...

Hour and minute replicate seems to work ok.

Please check the process...


Greetings

Andre



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


https://munin.openstreetmap.org/problems.html#critical

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Streetview

[Andrew Harvey]

https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/710/can-i-use-google-streetview-to-help-create-maps

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 11:03, Alert Bouterse  wrote:
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> I know that it is not allowed to use Google Maps to "copy" streetnames, but 
> my question is: is it allowed to use Google streetview to check streetnames 
> by checking the photo's for streetname signs? That way I am not just copying 
> but do a kind of survey through picture material. What are your ideas about 
> this?
>
> Greetings Alert Bouterse
> ___
> 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] [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

[Andrew Hain]

Will the board be following up with additional information as promised?

--
Andrew

From: Martijn van Exel 
Sent: 10 December 2018 16:55:42
To: OSM Talk; OSMF Talk
Cc: OSMF Board
Subject: [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

Hi all,

On November 17, the OSMF Board of Directors received a request to review the 
Nov 14, 2018 Data Working Group decision regarding Crimea.

The Board decided that this decision is to be reversed and the previous 
situation, as laid out in the May 5, 2014 Data Working Group minutes, is to 
further remain in effect.

The board highly values the Data Working Group’s work and appreciates the 
difficulty and complexity of the cases they are asked to review on an ongoing 
basis.

A more comprehensive statement will follow in the next weeks.

Best regards,
Martijn van Exel
Secretary, OpenStreetMap Foundation
___
osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

[Andrew Hain]

A question both to the current board and the candidates: Do you support normal 
levels of Board transparency on this issue?
--
Andrew

From: Martijn van Exel 
Sent: 10 December 2018 16:55:42
To: OSM Talk; OSMF Talk
Cc: OSMF Board
Subject: [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

Hi all,

On November 17, the OSMF Board of Directors received a request to review the 
Nov 14, 2018 Data Working Group decision regarding Crimea.

The Board decided that this decision is to be reversed and the previous 
situation, as laid out in the May 5, 2014 Data Working Group minutes, is to 
further remain in effect.

The board highly values the Data Working Group’s work and appreciates the 
difficulty and complexity of the cases they are asked to review on an ongoing 
basis.

A more comprehensive statement will follow in the next weeks.

Best regards,
Martijn van Exel
Secretary, OpenStreetMap Foundation
___
osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Copying from a venue's website

[Andrew Harvey]

What's the acceptance on copying things like address, phone numbers,
contact email, opening hours from a venue's website?

Is that considered acceptable in OSM?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Zoom to search results on the map

[Andrew Buck]

You can hit the "back" button in the browser to go back to the list 
after clicking on one (this is not obviously communicated to the user 
but it does work).  I agree in general though that this part of the site 
is not great UI wise.  Not sure what to do to change it for the better, 
but it definitely could use work.  I guess one improvement would be a 
"back" or "return to search results" kind of button when you click on 
something.  Yes you can use the browser back button to do this now, but 
there is no conveyance in the UI that this is an option.  Adding an 
explicit button would go a long way on the usability front.


-AndrewBuck



On 10/26/18 1:26 AM, Maarten Deen wrote:
When you search on something in the searchbox on openstreetmap.org that 
returns multiple results, the map moves to the first result and when you 
hover over the result it displays a marker.
But for all the other results, you need to click to see where it is. 
This removes the search results and displays details of the object you 
clicked.  Suppose this is not what you're looking for, you now have to 
enter the search parameters again and nominatim now searches from the 
last point the map was centred at. So the search results differ from the 
first try. Now you have to remember what results you've looked at so you 
don't look at them again.


Is there no way to show the second, third, etc, result on the map 
without removing the search results?


Regards,
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] OEM Wiki is still slow to load

[Andrew Harvey]

I've noticed it too, it seems worse than it used to be. It'll around
4-10 seconds waiting for wiki.openstreetmap.org, but after than the
whole page loads very fast.
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Mateusz Konieczny  wrote:
>
> 3. Oct 2018 13:09 by davefoxfa...@btinternet.com:
>
> Hi
>
> For the couple of weeks OSM Wiki pages are quite slow to load. Is it 
> coincidence it was at the same time OSM Wikibase was implemented?
>
> Are there any plans to rectify the situation?
>
>
>
> I  noticed no slowdowns during viewing or editing.
>
> ___
> 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] OSM Wikibase is now live

[Andrew Hain]

Could you give some examples so that the wider OSM community can do something 
about it?

--
Andrew


From: Christoph Hormann 


We already have quite a few people on the wiki who try to forbid mappers
accurately documenting widely used tags because these tags are bad in
terms of certain systematics and should not 
exist.<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>

[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png]<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
 Virus-free. 
www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Errington]

Yes indeed, otherwise I wouldn't have recorded them.

I'd be happy to hear a better solution for survey points. The naive
approach is to assume that the latitude and longitude of the point in OSM
is the surveyed value, which it should be, but without external
corroboration you can't be sure.

Anyway, my point was it is sometimes appropriate to record explicitly the
latitude and longitude of a point, even though it's redundant. In fact in
that case redundancy is good.

In this general discussion concerning Open Location Code, tagging the
database objects with the OLC is dumb. As soon as someone moves the object
the OLC is wrong. To fix that we could re-tag the object with a new OLC, or
move it back to the place dictated by the OLC. Obviously, we don't want to
move it back (it was moved for a reason), so we could generate a new OLC
tag (from the object's lat/lon), but it's pointless storing that as it can
be easily and trivially calculated on the fly.

Andrew

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 22:23 Andrew Hain  wrote:

> Do you know whether the latitude and longitude on the plaque are in the
> WGS84 that we use?
> ------
> *From:* Andrew Errington 
> *Sent:* 11 August 2018 10:56
> *To:* mmd
> *Cc:* Talk Openstreetmap
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add
> the Open Location Code to the OSM search?
>
> I tag survey points with latitude and longitude (taken from the plaque on
> the survey marker). Then it is possible to see if they have been moved
> accidentally, and for users to check that they are actually in the surveyed
> location.
>
> Andrew
>
> On Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 21:24 mmd  wrote:
>
> Am 10.08.2018 um 19:46 schrieb Christoph Hormann:
> > The idea of tagging encoded coordinates is so ridiculous to anyone with
> > a bit of understanding of computer programming, data processing and
> > data maintainance that even after ignoring all the arguments in
> > substance that have been voiced this should be universally rejected if
> > for no other reason then because it would make OSM the laughing stock
> > of the whole geodata world.
>
> With all due respect, I think we've long crossed that point:
>
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/KSJ2%3Alat
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ngbe%3Alat_ed50
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/gns%3ALAT
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/latitude
>
> --
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Hain]

Do you know whether the latitude and longitude on the plaque are in the WGS84 
that we use?

From: Andrew Errington 
Sent: 11 August 2018 10:56
To: mmd
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open 
Location Code to the OSM search?

I tag survey points with latitude and longitude (taken from the plaque on the 
survey marker). Then it is possible to see if they have been moved 
accidentally, and for users to check that they are actually in the surveyed 
location.

Andrew

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 21:24 mmd mailto:mmd@gmail.com>> 
wrote:
Am 10.08.2018 um 19:46 schrieb Christoph Hormann:
> The idea of tagging encoded coordinates is so ridiculous to anyone with
> a bit of understanding of computer programming, data processing and
> data maintainance that even after ignoring all the arguments in
> substance that have been voiced this should be universally rejected if
> for no other reason then because it would make OSM the laughing stock
> of the whole geodata world.

With all due respect, I think we've long crossed that point:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/KSJ2%3Alat
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ngbe%3Alat_ed50
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/gns%3ALAT
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/latitude

--



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Errington]

I tag survey points with latitude and longitude (taken from the plaque on
the survey marker). Then it is possible to see if they have been moved
accidentally, and for users to check that they are actually in the surveyed
location.

Andrew

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 21:24 mmd  wrote:

> Am 10.08.2018 um 19:46 schrieb Christoph Hormann:
> > The idea of tagging encoded coordinates is so ridiculous to anyone with
> > a bit of understanding of computer programming, data processing and
> > data maintainance that even after ignoring all the arguments in
> > substance that have been voiced this should be universally rejected if
> > for no other reason then because it would make OSM the laughing stock
> > of the whole geodata world.
>
> With all due respect, I think we've long crossed that point:
>
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/KSJ2%3Alat
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ngbe%3Alat_ed50
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/gns%3ALAT
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/latitude
>
> --
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Hain]

If they did sue, could Nomination, Osmand or OSM be liable if we implement it?

--
Andrew

From: Simon Poole 
Sent: 11 August 2018 09:43
To: Blake Girardot
Cc: OpenStreetMap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open 
Location Code to the OSM search?



Am 10.08.2018 um 23:25 schrieb Blake Girardot:
> Is that not the reason OSM was started in the first place?   :)

It is slightly different in more than one way for a monopoly owner to
pre-emptively create and promote a free system  to stop a competitor
from gaining a foothold in a potential new market (and the goog is
obviously spending a fair bit of small change on the whole thing). I
suspect suing the goog is plan b for the w3w investors if they are not
successful with the company as such.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Harvey]

> If the OSM community accepts the OpenLocationCode, then it would become
de facto universal addressing system. Only then people may start believing
and investing in it.

As others have pointed out the proper place for OSM to support the
OpenLocationCode in OSM is in https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/ both
forward and reverse geocoding so if you search for an OLC it finds the
coordinates, and vice versa right clicking, Show address here returns the
OLC.

Nothing stopping you taking an extract of OSM, adding your own OLC codes to
that data and then doing what you like with that. No need to upload it to
the OSM database
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Hain]

This looks to be very comfortably within the computational ability of mobile 
phone apps (“You could calculate it with AI” is a much less attractive 
deletionist argument) so everyone who has implemented it by conerting 
coordinates on the fly would seem to be doing the right thing.

--
Andrew

From: Paul Norman 
Sent: 10 August 2018 23:00:39
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open 
Location Code to the OSM search?

On 2018-08-10 1:06 PM, Blake Girardot HOT/OSM wrote:
> Learning the real world use cases and where the proper technological
> solutions work and if there really genuinely are places where dynamic
> generation is just not possible.
>
> This seems totally in line with things done in the past and should
> work well here.

Speaking as a developer, it's much easier to add PlusCode support
properly than to try and parse another address tag. Don't add them
thinking it makes it easier.

___
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] highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

[Andrew Harvey]

> No, all highways are areas :) Mapping them as a line is a manual
generalization ;)

Yes, but you're mapping the road centerline, which isn't a generalization
but a real world feature.



On 11 August 2018 at 15:56, Andrew Hain  wrote:

> The wiki has definitely had problems recently and we should have a good
> discussion about what we want from it.
>
> --
> Andrew
> --
> *From:* Paul Johnson 
> *Sent:* 10 August 2018 18:13:36
> *To:* Tomasz Wójcik
> *Cc:* Talk Openstreetmap
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*
>
> Sounds fine by me.  Seems there's a decent sized contingency working the
> wiki independently of how things are actually tagged anymore, it's been
> getting hard to point to the wiki as a usable reference for a couple years
> now.
>
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018, 05:08 Tomasz Wójcik  wrote:
>
> So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't
> incorrect, it's just not documented. What do you guys think about adding
> a better documentation of combination with area=yes to some of highway=*
> Wiki pages?
>
>
> ___
> 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] highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

[Andrew Hain]

The wiki has definitely had problems recently and we should have a good 
discussion about what we want from it.

--
Andrew

From: Paul Johnson 
Sent: 10 August 2018 18:13:36
To: Tomasz Wójcik
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Sounds fine by me.  Seems there's a decent sized contingency working the wiki 
independently of how things are actually tagged anymore, it's been getting hard 
to point to the wiki as a usable reference for a couple years now.

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018, 05:08 Tomasz Wójcik mailto:tom...@wp.pl>> 
wrote:
So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't
incorrect, it's just not documented. What do you guys think about adding
a better documentation of combination with area=yes to some of highway=*
Wiki pages?


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Harvey]

On 10 August 2018 at 22:47, Michael Reichert  wrote:
>
> There is no need for this data in OSM because the data can be retrieved
> automatically from latitude and longitude (plain coordinates) which are
> already assigned to anything which has a location on the planet.
>
> Adding Plus Code tags to OSM objects is as useful as adding latitude=*
> and longitude=* or any other coordinate system which can be calculated
> from latitude and longitude.
>
> This import should be reverted.
>

I agree, unless people start putting up signs of the Plus Codes outside
their house and you're mapping that as the on the ground housenumber. I
don't agree with importing these, it just adds unnecessary bloat to the
database size.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Lua modules are here: Improving OSM wiki templates

[Andrew Hain]

It would be interesting to know how much of the problem is because of the large 
number of languages tested, many with no pages on the wiki written in that 
language.

--
Andrew

From: mmd 
Sent: 29 July 2018 19:37:04
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Lua modules are here: Improving OSM wiki templates

Am 29.07.2018 um 14:57 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> * Much better performance compared with wiki template language

Sounds great. One of the major pain points on many Wiki pages is the
whole topic around Language / LanguageSwitch templates.

Verdy_p has written a lengthy analysis of the current situation, which
I'm mostly unable to follow as I'm not really familiar with Mediawiki
internals:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Verdy_p#Performance_impact_due_to_translation_templates

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than myself could take a look, if it is
worthwhile throwing in some Lua for better performance in this case, or
maybe trying something different.

Thanks!

--





___
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] anonymous notes spam?

[Andrew Hain]

Can we find out what software is being used to send these notes?

--
Andrew

From: Doug Hembry 
Sent: 20 July 2018 14:26:13
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous notes spam?

Yes. In the San Francisco Bay Area. Single letters "f", "k", and "l".
Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/778721#map=15/37.5009/-122.3032&layers=N
BTW, is there a simple way to delete such note comments?

On 7/20/2018 2:32 AM, maning sambale wrote:
> I'm getting several single letter notes comments since yesterday.
> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/562375
> Are people noticing the same?
>

___
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] API a lot slower?

[Andrew Hain]

Will there be a local team or does whatever can’t be done remotely need a visit?

--
Andrew

From: Grant Slater 
Sent: 17 July 2018 13:55:05
To: Daniel Koć
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] API a lot slower?

On 17 July 2018 at 13:42, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> W dniu 17.07.2018 o 12:22, Grant Slater pisze:
>> Our primary hardware is moving to a new data centre next week, and
>> will take some time to get up and running.
>
> What data center do you mean? Is it the one which OSMF was looking for
> at the beginning of the year?
>
> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2018/02/19/osmf-request-for-proposals-data-centre-2018/
>
> Could you give some more details about it?
>

Yes. We are moving some core servers to an Equinix data centre in Amsterdam, NL.

OpenStreetMap's Brexit ;-) 

Kind regards,

Grant
Part of the OSM Operations team.

___
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] proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

[Andrew Hain]

Should we ask for validation steps in editors to flag FIXME as a likely tagging 
mistake going forwards?

--
Andrew

From: Mateusz Konieczny 
Sent: 02 July 2018 18:42
To: Talk
Subject: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

fixme tag is a standard way to mark fixmes.
Editors wishing to finish mapping in their area would (directly or
indirectly, for example using JOSM) look through objects tagged with
fixme tags.

FIXME tag is an unexpected way to mark fixmes, retagging this duplicate to
fixme key would improve tagging without any information loss.

It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
discover and implement support for this duplicated key.

Between X and Y objects are expected to be edited. See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/FIXME#map for a
geographic distribution.

Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
bounding boxes. As this tag may be on extremely large objects (for example 
relations representing long routes) it may be unavoidable to make some edits 
with very large bounding boxes.

For documentation page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_FIXME_to_fixme
For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account

Please comment - especially if there are any problems with this idea.
Please also comment if you support this edit, in case of no response
at all edit will not be made as there would be no evidence that
this idea is supported.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [HOT] Why the HOT obsession with low quality buildings in Africa ?

[Andrew Hain]

Generally, of course, yes, but there was a talk by someone who had estimated 
the population of a seasonally inhabited village by mapping buildings that are 
demolished each year.

--
Andrew

From: Jean-Marc Liotier 
Sent: 02 July 2018 15:25:38
To: Vao Matua
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org; HOT Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [HOT] Why the HOT obsession with low quality buildings 
in Africa ?

On Mon, July 2, 2018 2:59 pm, Vao Matua wrote:
> When you say "low quality" buildings, do you mean the quality of the
> polygon data or are you judging someone's home to be of low value?

The tracing of course - mud shacks and posh villas are all equal before
Openstreetmap contributors !


___
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] WMF: "Interactive maps, now in your language"

[Andrew Hain]

One of OSM’s strengths is, or should be, that we are a truly worldwide map. 
Multilingual names are part of this. Excluding actual names from the map 
database as “ought not” is no different from omitting casinos in a stand 
against gambling or leaving the road number of the high street in your town off 
the map.

It is unfortunate that a few people have sought to limit the contribution of 
names by our mappers.

--
Andrew

From: Andy Mabbett 
Sent: 29 June 2018 12:21:06
To: OSM talk mailing list
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] WMF: "Interactive maps, now in your language"

On 29 June 2018 at 11:57, Simon Poole  wrote:

>> On 29.06.2018 12:18, Andy Mabbett wrote:

>>> New Wikimedia Foundation blog post:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/06/28/interactive-maps-now-in-your-language/

> they should not be calling for their users to vandalize OSM.

Nor are they.

I expected some negativity in response to this remarkable good news;
but this hyperbolic response is beyond acceptable.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
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] Changes to www.openstreetmap.org markup - where to requsest?

[Andrew Harvey]

https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Tool to change dual carriageway to sinjle preserving route relations?

[Andrew Hain]

Is there a tool that preserves bus route relations properly whlle correcting a 
road currently mapped as dual carriageway to predominantly single carriageway?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Sidewalk symmetry

[Andrew Harvey]

On 18 April 2018 at 06:30, Jmapb  wrote:

> (My personal feeling is that that it's better to avoid mapping sidewalks
> as separate ways unless there's a compelling reason that would outweigh the
> additional data clutter and routing complications. In some circumstances --
> those where walking on the sidewalk, or on a particular side of a road with
> two sidewalks, has noticeably different routing implications -- it seems
> like a good idea.)
>

It means less tags on the road which makes it easier to edit manually. A
road already has:

highway, surface, maxspeed, maxweight, maxheight, width, oneway, access,
lanes, turn:lanes, lit, parking:lane:left, parking:lane:right,
parking:condition:left, parking:condition:right,parking:lane:left:type,
parking:lane:right:type, etc.

A sidewalk also has it's own:

maxspeed (some places where bicycles can use the sidewalk and sections have
signposted speed), maxweight, width, access, surface

On top of that the highway needs to be split every time just one of those
tags changes meaning you end up with many short segment ways.

I realise editors can and do abstract some of this, but if we can put all
those sidewalk attributes on their own ways it makes it much easier to map
by reducing the complexity of the highway centerline.

It means we can use say the exact same tags on the separate sidewalk rather
than prefixing them with sidewalk:left:width, sidewalk:left:bicycle, etc.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GDPR introduction

[Andrew Harvey]

On 17 April 2018 at 23:31, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> On Tuesday 17 April 2018, Simon Poole wrote:
> >
> > > * When you add new 'terms of use' or 'data processing agreement'
> > > provisions that people who want to access OSM data with metadata
> > > need to agree to does that constitute an amendment of the ODbL and
> > > therefore a change in license?  If not would any downstream data
> > > user who distributes a derivative database be allowed to add
> > > similar terms of use that restrict use of the data to the data they
> > > distribute?
> >
> > As the mail said, the exact details are not nailed down there yet,
> > however it is likely that we will not want to enter in to an
> > agreement with such people, but would simply offer to help with their
> > obligations from Art. 14. It is not as if the GDPR suddenly
> > disappears when we distribute data on ODbL terms so people processing
> > the full dataset are going to be subject to it in any case.
>
> Ok - that is much clearer (and IMO also addresses what Andrew wondered
> about).  If it is sufficient for the GDPR to (a) not have technically
> unrestricted access and (b) make sure everyone receiving the data is
> made aware of the legal obligations that seems something that can be
> reasonably dealt with.
>
> The terminology used in the position paper however seems to point into a
> somewhat different direction (i.e. that providing bulk metadata would
> be subject to a specific contractual agreement).


Yes that does help clarify my concerns too. I still wonder if someone
outside the EU can go ahead and publish the full metadata included OSM
database under the ODBL outside the OSMF, or in the worst case local
communities outside the EU can still publish their regional extracts with
metadata publicly.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] GDPR introduction

[Andrew Harvey]

Thank you those in the LWG that have put this paper together. My thoughts
are OSM's ODBL license grants me the right to publish a version of
http://hdyc.neis-one.org/ open to the public, not restricted to OSM users.
Reading this, I understand the OSMF is proposing to introduce Terms of Use
which take away my rights to use the OpenStreetMap data in ways that were
okay last month, in order to comply with an EU specific law. Would that
eliminate all options for someone outside the EU to publish something like
http://hdyc.neis-one.org/ but open to the public?

On 17 April 2018 at 20:48, Simon Poole  wrote:

> On the 25th of May 2018 the *General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
> * will
> enter in to force, this will likely result in some changes in how
> OpenStreetMap operates and distributes its data.
>
> The LWG has prepared a position paper on the matter that has been reviewed
> by data protection experts and in general the approach to not rely on
> explicit consent has been validated. It should be noted that while the
> paper outlines our approach, some of the details still need to be
> determined. In particular the future relationship with community and third
> party data consumers that utilize OSM meta-data and what will actually be
> dropped/made less accessible of the data listed in Appendix B.
>
> LWG GDPR Position Paper
> 
>
> Please feel free to discuss on the talk page
>  or on this list.
>
> Simon
>
> ___
> 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] External contact channels and GDPR

[Andrew Hain]

The issue would be that we are asking someone to trust an external provider. At 
worst we could be responsible for propagating their noncompliance with the GDPR.

--
Andrewm

From: Kathleen Lu 
Sent: 16 April 2018 23:11:11
To: Andrew Hain
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] External contact channels and GDPR

Hi Andrew,
It's not clear to me why GDPR would make it unacceptable in general to ask 
someone to discuss something, whether a controversial edit or not, in one forum 
or another, OSMF or not. What would be the concern?
-Kathleen


On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9:18 PM Andrew Hain 
mailto:andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk>> wrote:
When we ask mappers to discuss controversial edits or imports is it ever 
acceptable under GDPR to direct people to a contact channel that is not 
directly run by the OSMF?

--
Andrew
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] External contact channels and GDPR

[Andrew Hain]

When we ask mappers to discuss controversial edits or imports is it ever 
acceptable under GDPR to direct people to a contact channel that is not 
directly run by the OSMF?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

[Andrew Hain]

You could say that every existing edit is by an “old” account and new ones 
going forwards are by main site accounts which occasionally have the same name. 
Perhaps you could link some of the old wiki accounts to the OSM user names 
where they are known to be the same person.


--

Andrew



From: Nicolás Alvarez 
Sent: 19 March 2018 04:51
To: osm-talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

El 18 mar. 2018, a la(s) 20:50, François Lacombe 
mailto:fl.infosrese...@gmail.com>> escribió:


2018-03-19 0:38 GMT+01:00 Michael Kugelmann 
mailto:michaelk_...@gmx.de>>:
Am 18.03.2018 um 20:45 schrieb Richard:
fundamental decission - maybe osm and osm-wiki accounts should be the same?
This had been independent in the very old history. And now you have conflicts 
=> will not work w/o huge effort...
There had been requests like this 5 years ago or so w/o success. Not because 
nobody wanted to implement but because it was not possible.

This is a great idea.

Can you sum up what are the technical issues which make it not possible please ?

Suppose user 'John' currently has a wiki account called 'JohnW'. That's 
currently possible, since the accounts are independent. What do you do if you 
unify the accounts? Does OSM user John get a new wiki account called John? What 
if that wiki account already exists? Or does he have to manually connect the 
OSM and Wiki accounts?

What if an OSM user called JohnW also exists (but never used the wiki yet), 
what wiki account do you create for him if the name JohnW is already taken on 
the wiki?

Users can rename OSM accounts. What happens if a user has accounts on both OSM 
and the wiki, with the same name, but changes his user name to "Javiersanp"? 
That name isn't taken in OSM, but it's taken in the wiki. Does the rename get 
rejected?

There are different OSM users "nicolas" and "Nicolas". Wiki usernames always 
have a uppercase first letter, so if accounts get unified, those two different 
OSM users can't get different wiki accounts. There is a similar problem with 
the wiki considering " " (space) and "_" (underscore) equivalent, while OSM 
doesn't.


I would love it if wiki accounts and OSM accounts were unified, but that would 
need to be done since the start. Now it seems too hard to do it; too many 
conflicts with existing accounts.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

[Andrew Hain]

Interesting idea. The wiki dates from before OAuth of course, even before the 
fiddle we implemented for trac and the forum. It must be just about the only 
internal communication space not using the main accounts.


--

Andrew



From: Richard 
Sent: 18 March 2018 19:45
To: James
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list
Subject: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:18:38AM +, James wrote:
> You could also argue the opposite way: Not everyone in OSM edits the wiki,
> thus probably doesnt have an account, thus to participate, they need to
> create an account to vote

fundamental decission - maybe osm and osm-wiki accounts should be the same?

I have recent reports from one mapper sending me messages through OSM messaging
that he had trouble setting up a wiki account and commenting on my talk page so
clearly there is some confusion about the accounts and by my estimate only a 
tiny
minority of mappers could ever have any use for separate mapping and wiki
accounts.

Richard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk Info Page - lists.openstreetmap.org Mailing 
Lists<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>
lists.openstreetmap.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the talk Archives. 
Using talk: To post a message to all the list members, send email to ...


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

[OSM-talk] Fw: Nominatim on the main page

[Andrew Hain]

From: Andrew Hain 
Sent: 19 February 2018 21:50
To: Sarah Hoffmann
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim on the main page


It’s unfortunate that a new user mapping mistake has such unfortunate 
consequences.


--

Andrew



From: Sarah Hoffmann 
Sent: 19 February 2018 09:17
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim on the main page

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 08:12:45PM +0100, Maarten Deen wrote:
> On 2018-02-18 20:07, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Maarten Deen 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 2018-02-18 19:28, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > > I can't comment about how the algorithm works because I don't know
> > > anything about it. I'm just saying that we do tell it the viewbox
> >
> >  It appears to me that the bounding box is used when searching places
> > (towns, cities) or streets, but not when searching objects like shops
> > or restaurants.
> > For instance, searching for a McDonald's always gives me the
> > McDonald's at 1351, George Dieter Drive, El Paso City, El Paso County,
> > Texas, 79936, Verenigde Staten van Amerika

To fix that please delete all the wikipedia=McDonalds tags from
the McDonalds restaurants that show up inappropriately. Nominatim uses
the wikipedia links to determine how well known a place might be and
ranks places with a wikipedia tag higher. That naturally only works
when the wikipedia tags actually link to a wikipedia page that
describes the object. It leads to funny results when the link goes
to category pages or, like in this case, to the company description.

Alternatively: I've proposed a GSoC to overhaul the Wikipedia
importances that Nominatim uses. Getting rid of this particular
problem from the Nominatim side would be part of this job.

For more information, see:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code/2018/Project_Ideas#Nominatim

There are also two other topics proposed and if you have another particular
itch you want to sratch, there are surely ways they can be transformed into
a GSoC topic. Just send me a email or open an issue in github. It would be 
wonderful, if
we find some students interested in geocoding this year.

Kind regards

Sarah

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk Info Page - lists.openstreetmap.org Mailing 
Lists<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>
lists.openstreetmap.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the talk Archives. 
Using talk: To post a message to all the list members, send email to ...


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

Re: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

[Andrew Hain]

Hopefully anyone who revives the topic will find a way to avoid the 
circumstances of the original list’s demise.


--

Andrew



From: Rory McCann 
Sent: 19 February 2018 09:47
To: Sérgio V.; talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

Shame that it's gone. It's nice to be able to contact people in OSM who
are interested in diversity.

GMane, which is a mailing list-to-NNTP service still seems to be still
up and hosting it as a newsgroup, so you can post messages to that
newsgroup.

On 17/02/18 20:56, Sérgio V. wrote:
> Hi, I've just realized that in the
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity
Diversity - OpenStreetMap Wiki<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity>
wiki.openstreetmap.org
How can we increase diversity in OSM? Gender; Sexuality; Race/ethnicity; 
Disability; Age; Religion; Class; Region; Language; other? Discussions 
within/about OSM


> at the bottom, /Resources,
>
> there's no such link to
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/diversity-talk
>
> If you click there , or search for it, it returns "No such list
> diversity-talk".
>
> Is it still alive?
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
[http://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]<http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs>

smaprs | OpenStreetMap<http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs>
www.openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use 
under an open license.




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk Info Page - lists.openstreetmap.org Mailing 
Lists<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>
lists.openstreetmap.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the talk Archives. 
Using talk: To post a message to all the list members, send email to ...


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

Re: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

[Andrew Hain]

According to the Wayback Machine the last message was posted early in 2015.

--
Andrew


From: Sérgio V. 
Sent: 17 February 2018 19:56:57
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

Hi, I've just realized that in the

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity
at the bottom, /Resources,

there's no such link to

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/diversity-talk

If you click there , or search for it, it returns "No such list diversity-talk".

Is it still alive?


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM data, how can we contribute to keep it to a reasonable size?

[Andrew Hain]

Or a mass change from Name=Untitled Polygon (wasteful but not wrong) to 
name=Untitled Polygon.

--
Andrew

From: Mark Wagner 
Sent: 18 January 2018 19:07:20
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM data, how can we contribute to keep it to a 
reasonable size?

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 19:44:47 +0100
Oleksiy Muzalyev  wrote:

> Imre,
>
> It is very good and surprising idea.
>
> I discovered on the page "Error categories" a tool
> https://www.keepright.at/ with the help of which I found already
> dozens obviously misspelled tags. It functions quite intuitively,
> just select "misspelled tags" check box and move the map to an area
> of interest.

But make sure they're really misspelled.  I recently saw a change that
fixed a dozen instances where the key "brand" was misspelled as "band"
-- except that one of the "band" tags was correct, describing the fact
that a radio antenna operated in the two-meter band.

--
Mark

___
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] GeoChat

[Andrew Buck]

It is a great little tool.  Simple, but surprisingly effective. It 
actually works amazingly well when coupled with a voice chat program.  
In HOT we use mumble for voice and the geochat plugin combined with that 
allows mappers to "point" to objects in imagery by centering on them and 
then letting other user look at the same area to discuss what is being 
seen in the imagery.  Things like how a road should be classified, how 
to tag a specific thing, etc.  Of course you can use the text chat right 
in the plugin as well, but I always prefer voice chat for discussion as 
it is just so much faster.



In any case, it is not a plugin I use super often, but when I do need 
it, it is just the right tool for the job.  My only suggestion would be 
that you consider making "show users on map" default to "on" instead of 
"off" like it is now.  I always forget to turn it on unless I 
specifically want to collaborate with someone, but I think if it 
defaulted to on then it would get a lot more use.  It would be really 
fun to be mapping and see other people showing up in the area to see 
what you are working on.  I think it would really add to the sense of 
community in OSM.



-AndrewBuck


On 01/07/2018 09:00 AM, Ilya Zverev wrote:

Paul wrote:
Is GeoChat  
down
or defunct now?  I haven't been able to connect to it in a couple 
days now.


Sorry Paul, that was caused by forcing https on all OSM servers. Java, 
turns out, does not auto-redirect from http to https. I've just 
updated the URL in the plugin and tested that it works.


Nice to hear somebody uses it :)

Ilya

___
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] GeoChat

[Andrew Buck]

I used it about a week ago and it was working fine then, but haven't 
tried it more recently than that.  So the project is not dead, but that 
doesn't mean there aren't issues at the moment.





On 01/06/2018 04:33 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:

Is GeoChat  down
or defunct now?  I haven't been able to connect to it in a couple days now.



___
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] Wiki Proposals: An OSM Echo Chamber?

[Andrew Hain]

I would suggest that this is part of a wider malaise that the mission of the 
wiki has become unclear.

--
Andrew

From: Roland Olbricht 
Sent: 04 December 2017 08:42:46
To: osm-talk
Subject: [OSM-talk] Wiki Proposals: An OSM Echo Chamber?

Hi all,

We recently had an experienced and productive community member, Ilya,
putting a lot of time in a Wiki Proposal just to see the whole process
fail. Given the feedback from the process, this has been due to a whole
bunch of hard-to-control problems
- the whole thing has been too complex
- the wording did cause misunderstandings
- attempt to discuss the matter in an unsuitable medium

If even an experienced member cannot handle the process then we should
reconsider whether the process of Wiki Proposals makes sense at all.

I suggest to replace the Proposal process by three more specialized
and therefore much simpler processes. They are structured by what they
can affect.

In particular, the discussion should go to better suited places than the
infamous Wiki page discussion shadow pages:

Ilya complained that at the wiki discussion page turned into a complete
mess of "56K text". I do agree that the wiki page is a hard-to-read
mess, but yet it has only the content of 10-30 messages.
There had even been expressed deprecation that the discussion spilled
into the voting section because it is so difficult to read.

For comparison: My mail client currently handles more than 100'000
messages and is still fast and comfortable to use. Even in the forum
where users are stuck with what the web interface allows, it is easy to
have discussions with some hundred responses.

This should remind us that the wiki discussion facility is unsuited for
any nontrivial discussion but it disguises as sufficient discussion
facility.

Note that on the same time there is a group of 350 community members
who have indicated to be interested in public transport. Ilya stated as
a reson that the corresponding mailing list has "less than 3 messages"
per month. The content equivalence of "3 messages" on a wiki discussion
page already would make the impression of a heated discussion.
Apparently the wiki discussion pages have distracted him from the real
audience.

Please note:
It does not make sense to discuss the redesign of one communication
channel in another communication channel. But the wiki does not have a
suitable place to discuss the issue. Hence I cross-post to the forum to
at least reach also a large portion of the less tech-savvy community
members.

I suggest the following three specialized replacements for the Proposal
process:

=== Distinguished Documentation ===

OSM could profit in a lot of cases from a good how-to map for particular
subjects. But at the same time exists poor documentation and people do
not necessary know which to trust. Writing a good documentation will
become more rewarding if we can offer a process to indicate general
acclaim and distinguish excellent documentation.

The voting confirms that the claims of the documentation reflect actual
mapping practice. That way, it makes the effort a distinguished
documentation.

It des not affect any existing wiki pages.
It does not affect the OSM database.

=== Wiki Cleanup ===

Amongst the real problems of OSM is that our wiki documentation has lots
of poorly maintained pages. There exist even contradictions between
different pages. For an unexperienced users it is difficult to figure
out which wiki pages are really applicable.

We need a decision process which of the contradictive statements can be
discarded. The hurdles should not be too high because we generally do
have too few maintenance of the wiki content. Nonetheless, as this does
give some rulesets a spin in favour of others, it should be subject to a
voting.

There should be left a success notice after the cleanup has actually
been done.

The document must state which wiki pages are considered authoriative.
It should state which wiki pages are to be changed.
It can list the used tags, tagging combinations, or data constellations
that are in scope of the document at all.
It should state which used tags, tagging combinations, or data
constellations will after the change newly contradict the wiki.

Affects the wiki.
Does not affect the OSM database.

=== Tag Disambiguation ===

Sometimes different people tag different types of objects with the same
tags. This is a problem because you do no longer know what is really
there. It is the core concern of the old Proposal process.
Given that backwards compatbility is nowadays an important virtue,
the preferred solution is to add an extra tag to distinguish the
different situations.

The voting is to check that the disambiguation is logically sound
and that it covers the vast majority of applicable constellations.

Affects the wiki: the description of the affected tags and tag
combinations are changed.
Affect the OSM database: mappers are adviced to systemat

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map alleys in African cities?

[Andrew Buck]

I do still use tertiaries and above for higher level roads in accordance
with the Highway Tag Africa scheme.  I was merely giving an example of
how I classify a service road.

-AndrewBuck


On 11/14/2017 09:48 PM, Pierre Béland wrote:
> From discussions since 2013 with various african OSM communities and other 
> continents with similar realities, it appears that this wiki page is quite 
> usefull to help classifiy the highways in these countries.  
> The objective was to simplify, clarify how to tag highways. Adding pages by 
> country would not faciliate the task, would add confusion.
> About Andrew proposition, I dont understand why to use the hierarchy set 
> (residential, service) instead of (tertiary, residential). With such 
> classification, there is nothing between motorways / primary and residential 
> highways.
>  
> Pierre 
>  
> 
> Le mardi 14 novembre 2017 22:10:38 HNE, Gaurav Thapa 
>  a écrit :  
>  
>  Youthmappers initiative actually has a very large presence in Africa and in 
> particular local mappers of Ghana, Uganda and Nigeria are very active. They 
> don't use the talk pages but maybe we can bring them on board to improve 
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org /wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa
> 
> or create country specific pages.
>  
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 4:15 AM, Andrew Buck  wrote:
> 
> Pierre's suggestions are a good guideline in general and I don't have
> any disagreements with them.
> 
> I did, however want to expand a bit on the idea of when to use service
> roads, so here is that...
> 
> I for one am in favor of additionally making liberal (but careful) use
> of highway=service.
> 
> A service road is like a residential road, but is not meant to be used
> for "through traffic" but rather as the first or last leg of a longer
> journey.  With this in mind, I offer up the following example as a good
> guideline (or case study) of how this should look in practice:
> 
> Several years ago, I traced the roads in Ibadan, Nigeria.  It was nearly
> a blank map when I started so I had complete freedom in deciding how to
> classify them (this was years before "highway tag africa").  I started
> by just marking nearly everything as highway=residential.  Then after
> the whole city was mapped I spend some time just looking at the finished
> map and the roads overlaid on the satellite imagery.  After taking in
> this "whole city view" for a while I began to see patterns in how the
> roads were laid out, and these patterns suggested which roads should be
> downgraded to service.
> 
> In the case of Ibadan there are little "pocket communities" of people,
> separated by streams with a few roads crossing the streams but a dense
> network within each community.  So after digesting the map, and seeing
> how the town was structured, I decided I would downgrade all the roads
> that only served to access buildings within one community, but were not
> part of the routing if you were traveling outside of the community.
> This lead to a marked improvement in the quality of the map, which you
> can see in the two links below.  Although I finished tracing all the
> roads, I didn't finish all the classifications, so you can see a good
> "before and after" of how much better it looks with proper use of
> service roads.
> 
> Here is a "before" section where all the roads are left as residential:
> 
>   https://www.openstreetmap.org/ #map=15/7.3354/3.9118
> 
> And here is an "after" section where I have downgraded local-access-only
> roads to service but left the rest as residential.  Notice how much more
> clearly you can see the neighborhoods, and also how much easier it is to
> follow a route, without having to use a route planning tool.  You can
> navigate just by looking at the map.
> 
>   https://www.openstreetmap.org/ #map=15/7.3933/3.9598
> 
> In the second example above you can actually see some areas of all
> residential to the east, so there is a very clear difference between the
> two sections.
> 
> Obviously every town will be slightly different, but I think this is the
> general rule we should follow:
> 
>    if you use the road mainly for accessing buildings (even if it is
>    a fairly large number of them) but not for long distance travel,
>    then the road should be downgraded to service.
> 
> After you spend a bit of time looking at the whole town, and keeping
> this rule in mind, you will get a good sense of what to downgrade.  Then
> it is just a matter of going through and applying it.
> 
> Anyway, hope this all makes sense to people.  I had been meaning to
> write it up for a while now and this seemed like a good opportu

Re: [OSM-talk] How to map alleys in African cities?

[Andrew Buck]

Pierre's suggestions are a good guideline in general and I don't have
any disagreements with them.

I did, however want to expand a bit on the idea of when to use service
roads, so here is that...

I for one am in favor of additionally making liberal (but careful) use
of highway=service.

A service road is like a residential road, but is not meant to be used
for "through traffic" but rather as the first or last leg of a longer
journey.  With this in mind, I offer up the following example as a good
guideline (or case study) of how this should look in practice:

Several years ago, I traced the roads in Ibadan, Nigeria.  It was nearly
a blank map when I started so I had complete freedom in deciding how to
classify them (this was years before "highway tag africa").  I started
by just marking nearly everything as highway=residential.  Then after
the whole city was mapped I spend some time just looking at the finished
map and the roads overlaid on the satellite imagery.  After taking in
this "whole city view" for a while I began to see patterns in how the
roads were laid out, and these patterns suggested which roads should be
downgraded to service.

In the case of Ibadan there are little "pocket communities" of people,
separated by streams with a few roads crossing the streams but a dense
network within each community.  So after digesting the map, and seeing
how the town was structured, I decided I would downgrade all the roads
that only served to access buildings within one community, but were not
part of the routing if you were traveling outside of the community.
This lead to a marked improvement in the quality of the map, which you
can see in the two links below.  Although I finished tracing all the
roads, I didn't finish all the classifications, so you can see a good
"before and after" of how much better it looks with proper use of
service roads.

Here is a "before" section where all the roads are left as residential:

  https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/7.3354/3.9118

And here is an "after" section where I have downgraded local-access-only
roads to service but left the rest as residential.  Notice how much more
clearly you can see the neighborhoods, and also how much easier it is to
follow a route, without having to use a route planning tool.  You can
navigate just by looking at the map.

  https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/7.3933/3.9598

In the second example above you can actually see some areas of all
residential to the east, so there is a very clear difference between the
two sections.

Obviously every town will be slightly different, but I think this is the
general rule we should follow:

   if you use the road mainly for accessing buildings (even if it is
   a fairly large number of them) but not for long distance travel,
   then the road should be downgraded to service.

After you spend a bit of time looking at the whole town, and keeping
this rule in mind, you will get a good sense of what to downgrade.  Then
it is just a matter of going through and applying it.

Anyway, hope this all makes sense to people.  I had been meaning to
write it up for a while now and this seemed like a good opportunity.
Maybe I will try to go through and finish up Ibadan, I am a lot faster
at this now than I was back then, so it wouldn't take me long.  I will
leave it for the time being so it doesn't break the examples.  If people
think this sounds reasonable, maybe we should grab some before and after
screenshots for the wiki to document this.

-AndrewBuck




On 11/14/2017 03:30 PM, john whelan wrote:
> That seems very sensible.
> 
> Thanks John
> 
> On 14 November 2017 at 16:26, Pierre Béland  wrote:
> 
>> I we follow the Highway Tag Africa wiki page I initiated in 2013, narrow
>> highways should be evaluaed on the type of traffic possible
>> - highway= residential in residential areas if at least passable by 4
>> wheels
>> - highway=path if only motorcycles, bicyles and foot traffic is possible.
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa
>>
>> The additions made to the wiki page a few months ago about the width add
>> confusion. I think that we should simply move this in a separate section
>> giving guidance on possible widths that represent the various types of
>> highways.
>>
>> regard
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>>
>> Le mardi 14 novembre 2017 16:14:22 HNE, john whelan 
>> a écrit :
>>
>>
>> I'm not even sure if this is the best place to raise this but Africa
>> covers a lot of countries.
>>
>> We have some agreement on how to map highways in general Africa but narrow
>> residential highways are a problem.  I suspect highway=residential plus a
>> width tag might be best.
>>
>> South Africa I think has local mappers who able to resolve any problems
>> but for the rest of Africa given the large number of armchair mappers
>> mapping there some guidance would be nice.
>>
>> Some mappers use highway=service generously.
>>
>> Is it possible to reach some sort of general concenus?
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Thank

Re: [OSM-talk] Odd mapping in Atar Mauritania

[Andrew Buck]

If it is an untagged way that covers the whole block of buildings I
would say just delete it.  It is not accurate data anyway, so not really
worth keeping.  I know we try very hard to clean up data from newbies,
but this I think is beyond the point where it makes sense to.

-AndrewBuck

On 11/08/2017 06:51 AM, john whelan wrote:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/330511654#map=16/20.5184/-13.0507
> 
> But you really need to zoom in using JOSM to see the problem.
> 
> The best way to describe it is the road network is a grid but each block of
> buildings has been mapped as a single building rather than the six to a
> dozen separate buildings that are there and I'm not sure what to do.  It's
> not just in Atar and there are a large number of them.  I've seen something
> similar by HOT mappers before but not on this scale.
> 
> One mapper has a thousand untagged ways in Mauritania most of which are of
> this type.  I have sent a note to them but not yet heard anything back.
> 
> Suggestions please.
> 
> Thanks John
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 




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

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

[Andrew Hain]

It is not only his language ability that he overestimates. His Mediawiki 
programming has a cargo cult flavour and he has a fetish for links going to the 
“right” place 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Iotw_text/2017-43&diff=1516878&oldid=1516754
 being a typical recent example) that he takes as far as special cases in 
templates just to satisfy it, this was the root of the current calendar 
argument.

--
Andrew

From: Richard 
Sent: 30 October 2017 13:10:49
To: Tobias Knerr
Cc: talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 12:13:14AM +0100, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> On 28.10.2017 12:06, Andrew Hain wrote:
> > His behaviour over the past years makes him a contributor of net
> > negative value.
>
> I have to disagree here. He's probably the single most active wiki
> contributor, and is also performing a lot of useful maintenance work
> that no one else would bother doing.

Agree.
At the same time, exactly as he is a respected and experienced
contributor the cost of every single missstep is disproportionately
higher than if "gaer3jfkk4ej555_I_want_to_fuck_OSM" does it.

An exceptionally high self esteem regarding foreign language skills
does not help either. ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/escada/diary/40120 )

> This does not mean that he should be exempt from the rules, of course.
> To the contrary: What I would hope for is consistent enforcement of the
> rules, with gradually increasing penalties. Jumping straight from spotty
> enforcement to a permanent ban, though, seems wasteful and needlessly cruel.

Rules can help - if they can be enforced by simple technical means. For some
contributors lets say a limit like
* 2 edits to a single page within 14 days
* 5 edits to talk pages per 7 days
* 1 revert per 14 days

Nothing personal but very few people here have the time to follow
dozens of changesets so this would help a lot.

Maybe for some contributors a personal blacklist banning every edit with
the word "you" in every language and declination can help.

Richard

___
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] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

[Andrew Hain]

It is now time to talk about banning Verdy p from the wiki permanently.

His behaviour over the past years makes him a contributor of net negative value.

It is exceptionally difficult to correct any mistake that he makes and as a 
result people have cut down their contributions to the wiki or given up 
completely.

He likes to tell people that they have made mistakes without trying to teach 
them what he thinks they did wrong and obfuscates changes with mass 
reformatting. It is often unclear whether he is addressing a problem that 
actually exists.

He often projects his own personality deficiencies onto other people.

Even in the current case where there is software that could be made more 
flexible, he only offers handwaving rather than assistance.

--
Andrew

From: weeklyteam 
Sent: 28 October 2017 08:47:48
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 379,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things 
happening in the openstreetmap world:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/9571/

Enjoy!

weeklyOSM?
who?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
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] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Andrew Hain]

How much use are you making of tools developed for identifying contributions to 
be redacted in the licence change?

--
Andrew

From: Frederik Ramm 
Sent: 28 August 2017 13:43:44
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by 
user chdr

Hi,

On 08/27/2017 08:51 PM, Mikel Maron wrote:
> Also, Frederik, I think your script picked up false positives. Spot
> checked in DC, and these are expansions of both the street and the
> quadrant ("St NW" -> "Street Northwest"(. Can we fix the script and
> regen the list?

I have modified my "name equality rule" to consider "N" equal to "North"
etc., also it will ignore case, whitespace, and as before the usual
street type expansions (St->Street etc).

This brings the number of problematic objects down by around 5500, and
practically all of them are in the US. However, I noticed that I forgot
to account for "Saint"->"St", and will re-do the numbers yet again
before publishing an updated list.

I think the best course of action would be:

1. Wait a while, until various communities (potentially pointed to this
conversation via the widely-read weekly new roundup) have had the time
to check whether my automated assessment of which names count as
"contributed" by chdr is correct. Mikel has found the issue above and I
fixed it; it is quite possible that there are others.

2. Run the redaction, and remove all names contributed by chdr. At
present it looks as if less than 10% of these objects had a different
name before; more than 90% had not name at all. Perhaps it is indeed
best to remove the name in these cases as well instead of reverting to
the old name.

3. Load the IDs of all affected objects in a MapRoulette task or
similar, so people can check the names by survey, or from different
sources. (I assume that, as Simon pointed out, open data will not be
available for all countries affected. I fear that, with MapRoulette
geared towards armchair mapping, there might be a temptation for people
to yet again fill in the blanks from inadmissible sources. Maybe we
should limit the use of MapRoulette to countries where we know that open
sources exist, and use fixme tags or notes for other countries?)

I think that would be cleaner than verifying the names ahead of time.
Also it would create an audit trail - from the object history, you could
then see that the name was removed for copyright reasons, and you could
then see that user XYZ has added a new name. If it should later turn out
that this name was also copied from an indadmissible source, we know
that user XYZ is at fault, whereas people creating lists with
independently verified names is not something that would give us such a
recording.

I must apologize for not having given a time frame in my initial email;
there's absolutely no reason to panic. This matter has been sitting idle
for years, and a few more weeks won't kill us. We can sort this out
calmly and then do the right thing.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Andrew Hain]

There was a script during the licence change that assessed whether or not 
changes to names were copyrightable.

--
Andrew

From: Mikel Maron 
Sent: 27 August 2017 19:51:05
To: Greg Morgan; Martijn van Exel
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; Steve Friedl; Tod Fitch; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by 
user chdr

> we can find a good workflow for that. I wasn't expecting the community to 
> start working on this pre-redaction but if people prefer that to fixing 
> issues later...

Absolutely, let's do this!

Also, Frederik, I think your script picked up false positives. Spot checked in 
DC, and these are expansions of both the street and the quadrant ("St NW" -> 
"Street Northwest"(. Can we fix the script and regen the list?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109419946/history
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109431926/history
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109431927/history

-Mikel


* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


On Sunday, August 27, 2017 2:45 PM, Greg Morgan  wrote:




On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Martijn van Exel 
mailto:mart...@openstreetmap.us>> wrote:
Happy to help. All we'd need for MapRoulette is a list of locations and a 
proper description of the work we'd expect people to do. Anyone can create the 
challenge but I'd be happy to do it.
Martijn

Martijn,

I'd would be great if you can break this down to an area.  For example, I have 
a list of Arizona streets.  I'd prefer to work on this as an Arizona challenge 
verses one big chdr challenge.

Please Advise,
Greg

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Andrew Hain]

Presumably it means something like the 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:odbl%3Dclean tag. It may not be as much 
use hete though.
--
Andrew

From: Nicolás Alvarez 
Sent: 27 August 2017 20:01:16
To: Frederik Ramm
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by 
user chdr

I don't understand what people mean with 'verifying' objects. We're
not trying to find factually-incorrect data. The data is legally
tainted. It's questionable whether looking at the current names
imported from GMaps, comparing to another source, seeing they match
and marking them as "verified" will legally change anything. And it's
impossible to know if people are really verifying anything or just
blindly marking them as verified.

I think the only clean way to solve this is to redact and then re-map
from legal sources.

--
Nicolás

2017-08-27 14:39 GMT-03:00 Frederik Ramm :
> Steve:
>
> thank you for your work. I'll save your list. It appears that others
> might be eager to do the same, maybe we can find a good workflow for
> that. I wasn't expecting the community to start working on this
> pre-redaction but if people prefer that to fixing issues later, it is of
> course an option. I certainly prefer out-of-band "marking" of verified
> objects to adding a new tag to each!
>
> Tod:
>
> On 08/27/2017 07:31 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:
>> When you reviewed Orange County, how did you do it so quickly? The only way 
>> I know to go through this is looking at each one, one at a time.
>
> I could of course make a page with links to the ways, even per county if
> that helps, or we could upload the list to some suitable tool. Ian
> mentioned MapRoulette but I'm not sure if that would make things easier.
> I'm certainly happy to try. Maybe Martijn would like to chip in about
> MapRoulette?
>
> 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

___
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] Highway=trunk : harmonization between countries ?

[Andrew Hain]

While you can do that, it diminishes one of our most important offers, that we 
have a map of the whole world.

--
Andrew

From: ajt1...@gmail.com 
Sent: 20 August 2017 11:46:28
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Highway=trunk : harmonization between countries ?

On 20/08/2017 11:36, djakk djakk wrote:
>
> Why I want to do that ? To improve openstreetmap, this is a worldwide
> map and the renderer can't be adapted by countries.
>

Sure it can - it's perfectly possible for a render to use a
location-sensitive rendering (I've just done it myself).

Best Regards,

Andy


___
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] An import in New Zealand, assistance requested

[Andrew Harvey]

On 16 August 2017 at 23:29, Richard  wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 07:44:00AM -0400, john whelan wrote:
>> >They have data for all of New Zealand
>> 's roads,
>> released under a license which is compatible with that of OSM.
>>
>> Has the Open Data license been cleared by the legal working group?
>
> soneone else has to answer that but I was under the impression that
> the LINZ has been looked at in detail. It seems to be an import effort
> that is underway since many years.

LINZ completed the OSMF CC BY waiver so it should be all okay.

See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#LINZ and
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:OSM_waiver_-_LINZ.pdf

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Sourcing Open Aerial Imagery

[Andrew Harvey]

On 28 July 2017 at 00:23, Bryan Housel  wrote:
> TODO:  We don’t have a template letter, or clear guidelines on which imagery
> licenses are compatible with our use, and we should.  See
> https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index/issues/166 .  Like you said in
> your other email, tracing is very different from importing, so the existing
> ODBL advice is not what we need.

The OSMF do publish a template waiver/permission for aerial imagery
for tracing at 
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Waiver_and_Permission_Templates

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Message error on umap

[Andrew Buck]

The delimeter is what separates one "cell" of data in the CSV file from
the next.  Umap is telling you it cannot automatically determine what
character you are using to separate the fields.  You will either need to
tell it what character you are using manually (not sure how this is done
on the umap interface), or change your CSV file to use one of the
delimeters that it can autodetect.  Either way you will need to look at
the documentation for umap or just mess around in the interface until
you find what you need.  Hope this at least points you in the right
direction, even if it is not a direct answer to your problem.

-AndrewBuck




On 07/15/2017 10:34 AM, Fabrizio Carrai wrote:
> Hello,
> I hope to not be out-of-topic but I'm having this message error when my
> umap [1] is loaded:
> 
> "Could not autodetect delimiter"
> 
> After closing the pop-up data are shown correctly, but the message is
> annoying. The map reads the data from a CSV remote data source that looks
> good to me.
> 
> Any idea ? Thanks in advance
> 
> FabC
> 
> 
> [1]
> https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/it/map/ariss-school-contacts-missione-vita_157353#7/43.592/13.118
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 




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

Re: [OSM-talk] Has anyone cracked the code yet?

[Andrew Hain]

Are there ever single character comments by users who are logged In? If so, has 
anyone asked them what website or program they were using at the time?

--
Andrew

From: ajt1...@gmail.com 
Sent: 09 July 2017 10:28:37
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] Has anyone cracked the code yet?

Over the last few months there have been lots of single-character note
comments - initially in China and Russia, but recently more widespread
(see for example http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/369774 ).  The
single-character comments seem to include cyrillic characters, which may
suggest that they're related to the Russian-language "bridge detector"
that adds notes such as http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1056574 , but
it's difficult to see why someone's adding these note comments.

Related, there's an issue raised over at github about the wider issue of
allowing anonymous note comments
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1543 (not
specifically just these).

Does anyone have any thoughts as to what benefit there might be to
someone adding these?  About the only thing that I can come up with is
that it's an OSM API test - people clone a project and run it, and the
result is these notes (a bit like the OsmApi "My First Test" nodes that
keep appearing near "null island").

Best Regards,

Andy



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