Re: [Talk-GB] Database of British and Irish hills

[Andy Townsend]

On 11/02/2019 23:31, Silent Spike wrote:
I recently came across the DoBIH 
 which you can see is 
licensed under CC BY 3.0.




At least one user claims already asked for permission to use this data:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36758689

(I've not seen anything public from that source though, and of course 
whether they gave permission doesn't address whether some of the data 
has actually come from another source first, such as the OS).


Best Regards,

Andy



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-au] more SEO spam?

[Andy Townsend]

On 30/01/2019 10:25, Andrew Harvey wrote:
I agree, unless they come to the table to discuss we should block as 
much as possible to limit their abuse of OSM.


On Wed., 30 Jan. 2019, 7:24 pm nwastra  wrote:


...




https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66761372
I am in favour of deleting them as SEO spam.



Hi,
I'd also press the "report" button on the user account in OSM (and 
mention there that you've already removed the data).  This should alert 
the admins to the spam user and (in case it gets bounced to the DWG for 
data tidying) alert us that you've already done that.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG).


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

Re: [Talk-us] The San Jose / Santa Clara border

[Andy Townsend]

Thanks to everyone who replied - I've reverted the change in 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66672189 .


On 27/01/2019 01:50, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
Do the latest NGS topographical maps show the city limits properly? 
Those are public domain
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 10:16 AM OSM Volunteer stevea 
mailto:stevea...@softworkers.com>> wrote:


On Jan 26, 2019, at 4:00 AM, Andy Townsend mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> A mapper has recently changed this to "cut the corner off" north
of the 880 between San Jose airport and Stevens Creek Mall /
Westfield Valley Fair.  You can see the change at

http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66619223=18=37.33883=-121.93327=B0TTTFT
.
>
> Some of this mapper's previous changes have had to be undone, so
I did check the node change made here to see if it might be one of
them.  However, according to the node history

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/373647840/history#map=13/37.3600/-121.9066
the original source of this node was a changeset quite a while ago
with a description "adjust boundaries based on san jose city map,
bing, and common sense ".  It therefore would be great if a local
could check it if possible.

I'm fairly local (SJC is my "home airport") yet I'm not finding
easily-available San José City Limit boundaries in an
ODbL-compatible format which I could use to relatively quickly
repair the damage.  (The user mk408 has a history of "making it up
as he sees fit" OSM data entry which many have disputed or
redacted, for example, many years ago he made MANY roads in the
entire South Bay region — Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno,
southern San José —into highway=tertiary roads, and that remained
very questionable until it slowly but surely "healed itself,"
again, this took months-to-years).  There are some geo data at
http://csj-landzoning.appspot.com/index.html which indicate the
present OSM data are "largely correct," the exception being that
the area directly over the northern part of the airport do not
include the "leg" that "covers" runway 12L/30R and that the acute
angle over taxiways V, W and W1 is more like "aligned with these
taxiways, rather than cutting across them."  You really have to
see them rather than expect that I can describe them with text. 
They are, again, "mostly correct" but could use some rather minor
correction.

As I bumped into somebody on a plane on my way back from SOTM-US
Seattle (2016) who works in the San José City Hall and when she
met me was bowled over at the coincidence that I was the very
person sitting next to her drinking gin and tonic who entered into
OSM most of Santa Clara County's bikeways/bicycle infrastructure
and network=lcn routing (which the city office found "extremely
helpful" — her words), it's conceivable that I might be able to
use that to sway release of some data which could be forthcoming. 
While I don't know quite who to call, exactly, if somebody wants
to "release to me" ODbL-compatible data which need to be
harmonized with what are now in OSM, I'll volunteer to be the
"nexus of citizen entry" to assure they find their way into our
wonderful map.  Send me a pointer to the data, assure me they are
ODbL-OK and I'll "merge" these into OSM.

SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

[Talk-us] The San Jose / Santa Clara border

[Andy Townsend]

A mapper has recently changed this to "cut the corner off" north of the 
880 between San Jose airport and Stevens Creek Mall / Westfield Valley 
Fair.  You can see the change at 
http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=66619223=18=37.33883=-121.93327=B0TTTFT 
.


Some of this mapper's previous changes have had to be undone, so I did 
check the node change made here to see if it might be one of them.  
However, according to the node history 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/373647840/history#map=13/37.3600/-121.9066 
the original source of this node was a changeset quite a while ago with 
a description "adjust boundaries based on san jose city map, bing, and 
common sense ".  It therefore would be great if a local could check it 
if possible.


FWIW I've only ever had the vaguest idea where the boundary was here 
(I'd always assumed it's around the 880 itself, but obviously the 
boundary predates the road, so that clearly makes no sense :)


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)


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

Re: [Talk-it] Utente pasticcione

[Andy Townsend]

(questa è una traduzione automatica, inglese originale sotto)

Ciao,

Alcuni altri mappatori di problemi sono stati segnalati al gruppo di 
lavoro sui dati che ha eseguito il mapping nello stesso stile di "Utente 
pasticcione" di prima (apportare alcune modifiche, bloccare, creare un 
nuovo account, ripetere). Ci collegheremo per riordinare alcuni dei 
problemi, ma è difficile capire cosa possiamo fare.


Ad esempio, https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/vohokudul è uno dei 
mappatori più recenti per adattarsi a questo modello. Sono stati 
contattati molte volte in diverse lingue 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=9211483, non 
hanno risposto quindi hanno ricevuto un messaggio da leggere prima di 
continuare a mappa https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2454, che 
hanno ignorato. Le modifiche hanno commenti di changeset insignificanti 
(qui, "frnc") in iD con un locale en-US o en-GB.


Alcuni dei problemi evidenziati hanno incluso il mapping di eliminazione 
e reinserimento (vedere 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/67256760/history e 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6214029481) e un " war on phoneboxes 
"(https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3249785526/history ne è una vittima).


Un'opzione con i mappatori come questo è a volte per "ripristinare tutto 
non modificato da altri mappatori". Sfortunatamente qui alcune delle 
modifiche sembrano valide - ad esempio 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6216912785/history (e no, non sembra 
essere una riaggiustamento di qualcosa che hanno cancellato loro stessi 
- vedi https : //overpass-turbo.eu/s/Fug e prova a cambiare la data). 
Quello di cui avremmo quindi bisogno qui è un suggerimento da parte 
della comunità su quale dei loro cambiamenti dovrebbe essere 
ripristinato (se ce ne sono) e come meglio farlo.


Saremo lieti di ricevere commenti su come utilizzare al meglio queste 
modifiche da questo mappatore: puoi rispondere qui o inviare un'email al 
gruppo di lavoro sui dati all'indirizzo d...@osmfoundation.org.


I migliori saluti,

Andy Townsend, a nome del Data Working Group di OSM.


Hello,

Some more problem mappers have been reported to the Data Working Group 
who have been mapping in the same style as the "Utente pasticcione" from 
previously (make some problem edits, get blocked, create new account, 
repeat).  We'd link to tidy up some of the problems, but it is difficult 
to work out what we can do.


For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/vohokudul is one of the 
most recent mappers to fit this pattern.  They've been contacted many 
times in several languages 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=9211483 , 
they haven't replied so they've been sent a message to read before 
continuing to map https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2454 , which 
they've ignored.  Edits have meaningless changeset comments (here, 
"frnc") in iD with an en-US or en-GB locale.


Some of the problems highlighted have included delete-and-re-add mapping 
(see https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/67256760/history and 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6214029481 ) and a "war on 
phoneboxes" (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3249785526/history is a 
casualty of that).


An option with mappers like this is sometimes to "revert everything not 
since edited by other mappers".  Unfortunately here some of the edits do 
seem valid - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6216912785/history for 
example (and no, that doesn't appear to be a re-addition of something 
they deleted themselves - see https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Fug and try 
changing the date).  What we'd therefore need here is a suggestion from 
the community about which of their changes should be reverted (if any) 
and how best to do that.


We'd welcome any comments about how best to deal with these edits by 
this mapper - you can reply here or email the data working group at 
d...@osmfoundation.org.


Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Changing highway=ford to ford=yes.

[Andy Townsend]

On 07/01/2019 12:37, Mike Baggaley wrote:

I think that if an intersecting highway and waterway are mapped just as lines, 
then these represent the full width of the highway and waterway and it is 
illogical to use a line or area to represent the ford. If either the highway or 
waterway is mapped as an area then I would expect the ford to be mapped both as 
a line across the area and also as a node at the intersection of the centre 
line. Only if both highway and waterway are mapped as areas would expect the 
ford to be mapped as an area (and also as a node at the intersection of the 
centre lines).


I spent a bit of time looking at how people mapped fords when I updated 
the rendering on https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html to 
support fords mapped as ways.


There were examples were people had mapped the way perpendicular to the 
water (e.g. 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=21=52.6509984=-1.2567927 
) and also "long fords" where the two are one and the same (e.g. 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20=53.1373688=-1.468014 
).  I didn't find much (any?) area usage.


Both types of mapping are pretty logical, though, as is "just add it as 
a node at the intersection".


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Language used in OSM forum/wiki/mailing list

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/12/2018 13:55, Stephan Knauss wrote:


You should be ashamed to criticize


... on that specific note I don't think that people should _ever_ be 
ashamed to point out something that's "not quite right" or where the 
perception is wrong.  We can only work together if we communicate with 
each other, and the best way to start is often with a (public or 
private) polite "I don't agree with the way that you've done or said 
this", which has now happened.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Language used in OSM forum/wiki/mailing list

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/12/2018 10:36, Naveen Francis wrote:


It would better to have common guidelines forum/wiki/talk.


Different language communities have different ways of communication.  
Some langauges are quite direct, yet to be direct like that in other 
languages would be extremely rude   Even within the same language (or 
more or less the same, between the US*, the UK and Australia) there are 
huge differences about the pleasantries that you have to go through 
before saying anything meaningful.  By all means have (as we have now) 
catch-all etiquette guidelines but please don't try and prevent 
individual communities from communicating with each other as they would 
naturally.


Best Regards,

Andy

* and let's not forget that there's a huge variety in the US too.  I'm 
from the UK but one big software project I was involved with over there 
had, among other people involved, someone who seemed straight out of 
60's San Francisco and an ex-Vietnam War pilot from New York.  All of 
the project's key players had, shall we say, "different ways of 
communicating things".




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

Re: [OSM-talk] UJEM (Unidentified JOSM Error Message)

[Andy Townsend]

On 18/12/2018 16:25, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 12:12 PM Volker Schmidt  wrote:

"Error retrieving Cluster(s)
Would you like to suppress further notifications"

This string does not seem to be present in JOSM or any of its plugins.



It's not an operating system error saying that a physical bit of disk is 
unreadable is it?  I'd be tempted to check there first.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Ground truth for non-physical objects

[Andy Townsend]

On 13/12/2018 10:40, Tomas Straupis wrote:


   What is "ground" in this term for non physical objects:
   1. Physical place which could have some traces of an actual object.
   2. Ground where non-physical objects actually live - documents.



The whole point of the "verifiability" and "ground truth" principles is 
so as _not_ to have to rely on documents.  If I want to find the border 
between Ireland and Northern Ireland, for example, I might not (yet) 
find anything stopping me driving through but I will see something along 
the lines of "speed limits now in mph" or the reverse.  Reliance on 
non-physical objects is only necessary where you really can't see 
something on the ground (such as the border between lower and upper 
Rossnowlagh at https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/54.5702/-8.2369 ).  
The fact that we can't get some boundaries from an on the ground survey 
doesn't mean that we have to rely on "documents" for all of them, and 
for a good reason - "documents" often contradict each other, even from 
the same organisation.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Candidate's views? Re: Board decision on Crimea complaint

[Andy Townsend]

On 11/12/2018 13:45, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:


[...]

The decision of the DWG was absolutely correct according to the rules 
that OSM imposed on itself.


I think the board here is opening Pandora's box. It will certainly be 
interesting to see how all the controversial areas will be judged from 
now on.




Given that there will be effectively a "new board" after Saturday I 
think that it's only fair to let them get their feet under the table 
first, but there clearly will be pressure from the community once they 
have done that to release the more comprehensive statement that was 
promised in 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-December/081781.html .


Without knowing on what basis this board decision to create an exception 
to the OSM norm was reached it's difficult to generalise from it and 
understand how it might apply in other edge cases.


Best Regards,

Andy (a member of the DWG, but sending this in a personal capacity)


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

[OSM-talk] What is OSM for? (was: Re: Ground truth for non-physical objects)

[Andy Townsend]

On 12/12/2018 13:05, Tomas Straupis wrote:

... I do not imagine how would it be possible to
capture all that "on the ground" without an army of mappers devoted
specifically to this very boring and uninteresting but useful class -
addresses.


If you're looking for a project that essentially mirrors "official" data 
without actually checking that its valid then OpenStreetMap might not be 
the project for you.


What makes OSM unque and better than the alternatives is that the data 
in it is, where possible, verified by people on the ground.  In a sense 
it's the "anti-wikipedia" - original research is not just allowed it's 
positively encouraged.  Only this original research will catch corner 
cases like the house that has a name (but that name isn't in any way 
"official") that still gets mail delivered to it using that name (like 
the house that I'm sat in right now, actually).


Obviously different OSM communities in different regions differ over how 
much they want to rely on "official" data* - indeed some different 
regions within the same country have argued about this in the past, but 
the general view, which I think we can see from the balance of the posts 
in this thread, is that most people back the "on the ground" principle - 
if there's a housename that looks like looks like a house name, it's a 
house name, even if it's not in an "official" list.


Best Regards,

Andy

* for the avoidance of doubt here I'm talking about "official data" 
outside of any conflict or dispute.


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

Re: [Talk-it] importare dati osm su database

[Andy Townsend]

On 12/12/2018 12:35, Maurizio Napolitano wrote:

parti da qui
https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-18-04-lts/
poi, per gli uggiornamenti invece basta usare le giuste opzioni di
osm2pgsql scaricando gli aggiornamenti da planet.openstreetmap.org
https://github.com/openstreetmap/osm2pgsql/blob/master/docs/usage.md




Also see

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SomeoneElse/Ubuntu_1804_tileserver_load#Updating_your_database_as_people_edit_OpenStreetMap

Cheers,
Andy


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

[Talk-GB] Mountain Rescue Posts

[Andy Townsend]

Hello,

One thing that I noticed when trying to add a specific icon to a map for 
mountain rescue posts was that although there is some usage of 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=mountain_rescue and 
slightly less of 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/emergency=mountain_rescue there 
are many examples of untagged buildings such as 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/450345895 .


I'd like to review these in the UK and where they obviously look like a 
staffed building add "amenity=mountain_rescue" (or 
"emergency=mountain_rescue" - which doesn't really matter to me).


There's also one example of 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=mountain_rescue_box at 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2018366012 (I'm not convinced the 
highway tag is necessarily appropriate there, but that's another 
discussion).  Can anyone think of untagged examples of these elsewhere?


I'm checking with the list first before making lots of tag changes in 
case I've completely misunderstood the tagging here (I don't think so, 
but it does no harm to check).  Mountain rescue posts (and supplies 
boxes) will appear on https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html in 
a few days.


Best Regards,

Andy

PS: I'm asking here rather than the tagging list because the untagged 
things named "Mountain Rescue" are mostly in the UK - see 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=mountain+rescue#values .




___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-us] Anyone feel like helping another mapper in New York?

[Andy Townsend]

On 09/12/2018 18:20, Jmapb wrote:

On 12/9/2018 6:38 AM, Andy Townsend wrote:

I sent him a message offering to help, but if he doesn't respond to 
you, I doubt he'll answer me either.



Thanks - at least it's not just me trying to talk to them!

Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [Talk-us] Anyone feel like helping another mapper in New York?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/11/2018 21:24, Andy Townsend wrote (heavily snipped):

Hello,

Over the last couple of months there have been edits by a new mapper 
in New York who seems to like changing things but hasn't quite got the 
hang of what they're doing yet.  ...   Comments can be seen at 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8356718 .


They've edited again and I've had to revert again due to "random" node 
drags.  It'd be great if someone a bit nearer than me could help - or at 
least "weed" their edits afterwards with a bit of local knowledge.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSMF makes a political decision where should be a technical solution?

[Andy Townsend]

n, is most widely internationally recognised and best meets 
realities on the ground, generally meaning physical control." *


It seems to me that it's the application of exactly that principle to 
the Russia/Ukraine border that you're objecting to. - it is widely 
internationally recognised that Russia now controls Crimea.  By all 
means lobby the developers of maps based on OSM data about how they show 
particular countries to particular audiences, and ensure that (where 
verifiable) data is contained within OSM to allow those maps to be made, 
but please don't say that this decision went against the letter or the 
spirit of that policy.  Unfortunately, there are no easy solutions - as 
I said near the top of this email, often we're choosing the "least worst 
option" of all of the available ones.


Best Regards,

Andy Townsend (from the Data Working Group, but written in a personal 
capacity)


PS: If anyone would like any help with any of the technical stuff 
(setting up a server, multiple sets of boundaries for multiple groups of 
users, different languages) then please do just ask 
(https://help.openstreetmap.org is a good place to start).  There are 
lots of options and lots of resources out there, and despite all the 
list, diary and forum posts I don't think I've seen anyone ask.




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

[Talk-us] Anyone feel like helping another mapper in New York?

[Andy Townsend]

Hello,

Over the last couple of months there have been edits by a new mapper in 
New York who seems to like changing things but hasn't quite got the hang 
of what they're doing yet.  Some of the smaller edits seem plausible, 
but they seem to be doing a lot of "node drags and merges" which results 
in some very non-grid-pattern street layouts.  Comments can be seen at 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=8356718 .  
I've sent them a couple of "messages that they have to read before 
continuing to edit" as DWG block messages so they'll definitely have 
seen that there are problems, but they haven't been able to translate 
that into them not making the same mistakes again.


It's probably just a schoolkid and It's not necessarily outright 
vandalism (it has none of the messages to teachers or priapic shapes 
that schoolkid vandalism often contains).


My comments haven't worked; maybe someone else could have a go? I'd be 
grateful for any suggestions where to go from here...


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)



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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSMF makes a political decision where should be a technical solution?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/11/2018 16:36, Tomas Straupis wrote:

2018-11-23, pn, 18:23 Andy Townsend rašė:

Yuri, I suspect that literally every statement that the DWG has made
throughout this process has said exactly the opposite of what you've
just suggested that we said.

   You're saying DWG position is that it IS acceptable to have
overlapping country polygons?


Where that best matches the situation on the ground about who has 
control, yes.  I even contributed a couple of examples to a recent 
thread about exactly that - 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-November/081712.html 
(wikipedia has a good summary of that) and 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-November/081717.html 
(read the Dutch thread there for the full story and links).


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSMF makes a political decision where should be a technical solution?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/11/2018 15:34, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:


I suspect the "default" is what the community took the main issue 
with.  DWG essentially declaring that there must be a single truth for 
non-overlapping country borders is what seems to have caused all 
this.  Simply saying that every country can define their own would 
have averted this whole thing.


Yuri, I suspect that literally every statement that the DWG has made 
throughout this process has said exactly the opposite of what you've 
just suggested that we said.


I've certainly gone on record as saying (some time before these 
discussions) that there are places where overlapping admin levels might 
make sense, and contributed a few examples.


Similarly the first section of "in summary" in 
DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf contains 
"You are free to make maps from our data leaving out or 
putting in what you need for harmony with your general usage, culture and legal system.

We encourage you to do this directly or to support one of our many worldwide 
local
OpenStreetMap communities that share your issue", and in most of the 
messages I've sent I've explicitly offered to help people do just that.


It's not the first example of "someone from DWG tries to help someone 
with a problem with a DWG decision" - 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/42069 was an 
attempt to document an approach to rendering names in a particular 
language based on geographical location and 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/38613 was designed 
to help someone who was converting all the tracks to roads in a 
particular area "so that they showed on his Garmin".


I've also regularly linked to PlaneMad's 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PlaneMad/diary/38176 which is 
particularly relevant here, especially the "'Fixing' the boundaries of 
India" part.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] admin_level=2 overlaps

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/11/2018 14:48, Ilya Zverev wrote:

After I sent the message, I’ve read in the wiki about this part of 
Serbian-Croatian border:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/45.7313/18.9257



Also apparently part of the border of the Netherlands 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64546 .  That thread 
started with me asking about a change to the Dutch/Belgian border and 
later someone said that the Dutch/German border was overlapping.


See https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=726701#p726701 and 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=10/53.3772/6.9022 .


Best Regards,

Andy

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

[OSM-talk] admin_level=2 overlaps (was: Re: OSMF silently sides with Russia?)

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/11/2018 13:47, Christoph Hormann wrote:

On Wednesday 21 November 2018, Ilya Zverev wrote:

[...]

To conclude, if we remove Kafia Kingi from the South Sudan relation,
there will be no notable violations to the 2013 agreement on our map
— though only by means of having one country overlap another.

I am inclined to concur.

For completeness: ... (more exampes snipped) ...


Another one is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/8692572 west of Ceuta - 
it's an outer of Spain but not an inner of Morocco - they've "agreed to 
differ" on it for the time being. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Perejil%20Island?uselang=en-GB#Sovereignty 
has some more info.  In this example I think that overlapping 
admin_level=2 is the best reflection of the on-the-ground situation.


This also presents a rendering conundrum for any renderer that wants to 
indicate the status as there isn't an easy way of showing "outer of one 
admin_level=2 but not an inner of another".


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Guildford Blackwell Farm redevelopment

[Andy Townsend]

Is their anyone in the Guildford  area who can verify these edits by a
new user please?
They look like a part of the town's planned expansion, but I'm assuming
Adam got a bit ahead of himself. He's also overlapped roads onto the
railway. I've put in a changeset message to him.

http://osmlab.github.io/changeset-map/#63800817

Cheers
DaveF


Its changesets 1 and 2 by a new mapper.  If it's "likely not correct" 
then I'd suggest reverting now as doing that cleanly will get harder as 
time goes on (it's already 29 days ago).


If it's more than just "planned expansion" and there's an element of 
fantasy I'd suggest that they might try https://opengeofiction.net .  As 
it is just changesets 1 and 2 I would (as everyone has so far) assume 
good faith and keep everything friendly.


If a revert is needed, it's only 2 changesets, so should be doable in 
JOSM without too many issues.  If it gets complicated then by all means 
drop the DWG a mail at d...@osmfoundation.org to see if we can help.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the Data Working Group)

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] OSMF silently sides with Russia?

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/11/2018 19:43, Tomas Straupis wrote:


   Do you know a country which has a fluctuating representation of its
borders say in schoolbooks?


In my lifetime, lots - countries (and I don't mean where boundaries 
changed, but the external recogition of them did).  For example, the US 
only recognised the People's Republic of China in the 1970s.  I suspect 
that the 20th-century Chinese history gets a very different treatment in 
Beijing and Taipei, but I'm sure that no-one in Taiwan teaches kids that 
their government still controls mainland China.  Rather more recently, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_constitutional_referendums,_1998#Nineteenth_amendment 
changed the area claimed by the Republic of Ireland as part of that country.




Doesn't every country have ONE OFFICIAL
claimed border?



No, for a few reasons.  One is that countries might be in the process of 
accepting something like UNCLOS arbitration (so there isn't a settled 
border to claim yet), or they may have multiple claims some more rooted 
in reality than others. For example how much of Karelia east of the 
current border would you consider part of Finland, if any?




   All borders are verifiable mostly only by checking official documents.


Which often aren't suitably licensed for use in OSM, or are quite vague 
("that area over there really belongs to us").


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSMF silently sides with Russia?

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/11/2018 13:09, Tomas Straupis wrote:


   Can you give an example where things in OpenStreetMap are mapped in
a different way than overwhelming majority of world thinks?


If "the UN" counts for "the overwhelming majority of the world", there 
are quite a few examples.
The UN recognises territories the don't currently exist on the ground in 
their UN-regognised form (e.g. Western Sahara) and it has places such as 
Gibraltar on its "non-self-governing" list that have had referenda about 
their status (e.g. Gibraltar).


Neither is necessarily "wrong" - they're just different criteria. The UN 
has resolutions (which may confusingly conflict with each other 
depending on the politics of the time), OSM has 
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf 
.




   Note: I'm not asking to tag Crimea as just Ukraine (which would be
my personal opinion). I'm asking to have an open discussion of
disputed territory rules


An open discussion of how we recognise territories in OSM and how to 
handled places where we know there are disputes makes sense; I'd already 
suggested exactly that in the "Add some tag to identify disputed 
borders" thread.


To be clear though - it would be a big change for OSM to stop trying to 
make an "accurate" map (in terms of "who controls what") and instead to 
try and create some sort of "politically correct" one. To do that you'd 
really want to round up some OSMF members to lobby the OSMF board to 
change the policy, as it's really not something that the DWG makes up as 
it goes along.


Best Regards,

Andy




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

Re: [OSM-talk] 3rd party API integration

[Andy Townsend]

On 18/11/2018 18:23, Sebastian Kürten wrote:

Interesting point. Do you have an example for something misspelled that
returns interesting result on search engines?



No, because normally if I see something mispelt in OSM I'll fix it :)

Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] 3rd party API integration

[Andy Townsend]

I'd imagine there are plenty of examplea that use OSM street name and place 
information to hang other data or queries off.

One example off the top of my head was an application that I was involved with 
a few years ago tracking police "stop and search" requests in London, but there 
are plenty of others.

An easy way to find them is to search for something in OSM that has a spelling 
mistake and see what turns up in a Google search for that misspelling (in 
addition to the OSM object itself).

Best regards,
Andy





  Original Message  



From: sebastian.kuer...@fu-berlin.de
Sent: 17 November 2018 15:31
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] 3rd party API integration


Hi,

is anybody aware of 3rd party APIs that are integrated into the OSM
 database? An example for what I mean would be a mapped car park with an
 API link added as a tag that offers functionality such as retrieving the
 number of available parking spots. Another example would be uic_ref
 values on railway=station objects or ref:X values on highway=bus_stop
 objects which also allow using 3rd party APIs using these identifiers.
 Yet another example I already know about are Wikidata identifiers that
 allow queries to the Wikidata Query Service.

Thanks for any input on this,
 Sebastian

___
 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-GB] Pub dress codes and "no swearing" rules

[Andy Townsend]

 As I write this, I'm sat in a Sam Smith's pub.  As per other Sam Smith's pubs, it has big "no swearing policy" signs inside.  There's one use of "swearing" in OSM, but maybe there's another key I've not noticed?Likewise this pub has an "interesting" dress code (no trainers - but my grubby boots are ok apparently). There's a few uses of "dress_code" in taginfo, but I'm just wondering if I'm missing an obvious alternative key?Best Regards,Andy  ___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] osm2pgsql diff application with filtered OSM data

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/11/2018 16:16, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:


Usually people also clip minutely osc, as per day database grows by a 
small country otherwise.


There's a worked example of that (in a slightly different context) at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SomeoneElse/Ubuntu_1804_tileserver_load#Updating_your_database_as_people_edit_OpenStreetMap 
.  That uses https://github.com/zverik/regional - I'm guessing you'll be 
able to "borrow" everything you need from there.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

[OSM-talk] Garmin GPS and OSM-based maps (was: Re: How to get an overview of multiple gpx on OSM map?)

[Andy Townsend]

Whilst it's great that Garmin are offering the convenience pre-installed 
OSM-based maps, it's worth bearing in mind that there are lots of free 
download options - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mkgmap for 
creating your own and 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Map_On_Garmin/Download for 
ready-made downloadable options.


http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl/ is a good place to start for "I want 
maps for a certain part of the world".


There are lots of help questions about the mechanics of installing maps 
on Windows, Linux, MacOS etc. at https://help.openstreetmap.org/ , and 
these might be an easier place to start reading than the wiki (which can 
be a bit confused at times).


I do have a GPSMap64s with preinstalled Garmin maps* that aren't 
OSM-based.  One problem with those is that they contain lots of old, 
inaccurate non-OSM POIs that it's impossible to turn off without 
removing the SD card - hopefully your OSM-based maps from Garmin won't 
share this problem.


Re EGNOS on an Etrex 35, assuming it's similar to an Etrex 30x, it's 
noticeably more accurate (within a few meters as opposed to a few tens 
of meters) when you're somewhere with WAAS/EGNOS coverage compared to 
when you're not (in my case it was Europe with and Australia without, 
but that was a while ago - don't know if the Australian situation has 
changed).


Barometric altimeter (on both Etrex30x and GPSMap64s) tend to be 
accurate to within 10m at the top of the hill if you've calibrated them 
at the bottom, but not if you haven't (apologies for being Captain 
Obvious there!).


Battery use on both Etrex30x and GPSMap64s are something like "one pair 
of rechargeable AA batteries every day and a half" (if it's on all day).


Re the new 66s my understanding is that it can use 2 of 
GPS/Glonass/Galileo at the same time.  Personally I'd wait to see a 
"review involving OSM-based map use" before getting one, but I'm sure 
they'll appear fairly soon.


Other non-Garmin options for "something to last all day" might be an old 
phone with GPS in it and user-removable batteries.  An old Blackberry 
might be an option (they still work after you manage to drop them on the 
floor, and you might find the keyboard more usable than a touchscreen 
when it's cold).


Best Regards,

Andy

* at the time this was essentially "free" due to availability and what 
stock the various discounters carried - in theory its about £60 extra, 
and probably isn't worth that.



On 06/11/2018 11:37, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:

Thank you, dikkeknodel.

I also received an email message with an advice to acquire Garmin 
eTrex.  I've ordered the Garmin eTrex 35 Touch with the pre-installed 
«TopoActive» Karte Europa, which is based on the OSM data, as I 
understood:

https://www.brack.ch/garmin-hand-gps-etrex-touch-370929

It supports the EGNOS, European Geostationary Navigation Overlay 
Service, which is supposed to correct the GPS signal. I have no idea 
how it works in reality. It also has got the GPS and barometric 
altimeters.


Best regards,
Oleksiy



On 05.11.18 19:59, _ dikkeknodel wrote:


Hi all,

Thanks for all the great advice. I’ve looked into uMap and it does 
the job perfectly. With all the gpx of over a year of hiking imported 
it still runs smoothly.


I would like to prevent running into performance issues later though. 
Does anybody know if it is wise to add ‘simplified’ versions of the 
gpx to uMap instead of the original recordings with 1 s resolution?


Since the published data is public, I just have to take into account 
not to import gpx which start from my home since I value my ‘sort of 
anonymity’.


*@Oleksiy*

To answer Oleksiy’s question, I record with OSMand on a Moto G4 
smartphone, that works like a charm. Off course there is fluctuation 
due to accuracy errors, I guess 10-15 m is achievable most of the 
time, but close to near vertical mountains it becomes much worse.


It however does never happen that I miss long stretches of data 
(except for tunnels ). I did have that problem in the past, when 
<15% battery charge and Android automatically started the battery 
saving mode. That just turned of the gps antenna whenever the screen 
was off. So now I have set battery saving mode to off.


Also OSMand does not drain the battery much. Usually I do take a lot 
of notes which OSMand attaches to the gpx and loads perfectly into 
JOSM. Recently I also used the voice recorder of OSMand, which really 
speeds up the note taking while on the go in comparison to typing. 
These also load into JOSM via the gpx, but some fiddling with the 
location of the audio is required. Taking notes on the phone does 
have an effect on the battery life off course. A 20 km hike in the 
mountains easily takes 6-8h, which my phone reaches most of the time 
on one charge in flight mode. I do have a power-bank as back-up, and 
for multi-day hikes though.


Altitude measurements have always been a bit tricky with OSMand. I 
guess the raw elevation data from 

Re: [Talk-GB] Hi everyone

[Andy Townsend]

On 04/11/2018 08:53, Jez Nicholson wrote:


Finally, I don't know who checks chnagesets. Can someone enlighten us 
please?




I don't know anyone in GB who explicitly checks the 
"review_requested=yes" changeset tag, though it is available in QA tools 
such as OSMCha that can search those.  I think people (in GB) are more 
likely to look for "new mappers near them" either by noticing new edits 
locally or via some other means (for example, a bot posts "first edits" 
to the #osm-gb IRC channel).


Best Regards,

Andy



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Facebook Map Query - Thames rendered as Thanames

[Andy Townsend]

On 26/10/2018 10:56, Dave F wrote:
I'd be more concerned that on Facebook's mobile website (Android/Silk 
Browser) that image clicks through to Google Maps.


I suspect it depends (I did look into issues related to this in response 
to some DWG* tickets).  The maps you saw depending on where you were, 
where (both geographically and how far away) and what the thing that you 
were looking for was (e.g. roughly "a destination", "some other place", 
"something else"), and how you were accessing FB (e.g. on the phone was 
it app or browser, and I suspect it'd depend on OS too).


Any attribution issues you find are probably best handled by the LWG** 
though I'm not convinced that "clicking on a map from provider A and 
going to a map from provider B" necessarily is one.


Instagram of course is something else again, despite being owned by 
Facebook.  We (the DWG) have seen some misdirected reports come to us 
because Instagram's "report a problem" link (at least in the Android app 
a couple of weeks ago) pointed straight to OSM, and of course OSM has no 
influence on the search results that Instagram returns, which is usually 
what users are complaining about. However, I suspect it might result in 
businesses adding themselves to OSM that otherwise would not so I guess 
that "every cloud has a silver lining" :)


Best Regards

Andy

* https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group

** https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licensing_Working_Group



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Does this Antarctic airfield exist?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/09/18 19:59, Christoph Hormann wrote:

On Sunday 23 September 2018, Dave F wrote:

Ever heard of this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62799981

No, that's fake.


With a DWG hat on I've sent them a "message that they have to read 
before continuing to edit".  Are any of the changesets that don't have 
any discussion comments on them yet plausible, or are they just more of 
the same?  If anyone would like any help with reverts please drop a mail 
to the usual DWG address d...@osmfoundation.org .


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Strange edit to admin_level on England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland

[Andy Townsend]

On 16/09/18 11:37, Colin Smale wrote:


Hi,

An infrequent mapper "Ant Ko" has changed the admin_level on the UK 
nations to 3 (used to be 4). The changeset comment is:



They're semi-indie units and NOT regions,and you HAVE to know it.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62629726

I left a comment on the changeset suggesting they revert the change 
and leave UK matters to UK mappers... But if they don't revert it 
themselves in a reasonable timeframe I think we should fix it anyway.




That mapper is known to the Data Working Group - I'll pick it up.

Best Regards,

Andy

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-us] NYC Name Vandalism

[Andy Townsend]

On 06/09/2018 01:56, Alan Brown wrote:
... I suspect the OSM community is not culturally disposed to that 
form of moderation. So I will ask about a different approach.


One thing the OSM community _is_ culturally disposed to is people trying 
things to see if they work, and in order to do there there's no need to 
do it on a planet-wide basis.


A place to start might be consuming diffs, and if you're looking for 
"something that processes diffs that is relatively easy to understand" 
then https://github.com/zverik/regional might be a place to start; an 
example of how that can be used is at 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/mod_tile/blob/zoom/openstreetmap-tiles-update-expire#L159 
.  In that example "trim_osc.py" is called to remove data from a diff 
file based on geographical location prior to inclusion in a rendering 
database; you could create something similar based on some other 
criteria*. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SomeoneElse/Ubuntu_1804_tileserver_load#Updating_your_database_as_people_edit_OpenStreetMap 
is the elevant bit of some "set up a tile server" instructions that call 
that; you could use those to create a tile server incorporating your 
filtering and see how it compared to "real OSM" after a few days.


Best regards,

Andy


* perhaps initially just a simple obscenity filter for place names, not 
withstanding that that won't catch e.g. things drawn with water and 
roads to form letters - I've seen a couple of those recently.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs

[Andy Townsend]

On 29/08/2018 20:25, Toby Speight wrote:

Thanks for that - it predates my joining this list.  It seems to (partially)
answer only my first question - it's to benefit those who don't like their
rendering (on paper/screen or on a navigation device).  That's why we have
rendering rules - if you don't like the rendering, change the rules.  Using
the wrong tag for the data (especially a totally undocumented tag) to get a
rendering you like is really not helpful.


How would you suggest that data is tagged so that a renderer or a router 
knows the true local situation, e.g. "This reference tag, B1363, appears 
on signs is nationally unique and is something that drivers can use as a 
reference, but this other reference tag, C91, doesn't appear on signs, 
is unique only to the local authority that issued it, and can't be used 
for navigation"?  It's not as simple as saying "all B road refs and 
signed and all C road refs are unsigned" - there are quite a few exceptions.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapping horse steps?

[Andy Townsend]

On 27/08/18 13:32, Edward Catmur wrote:
amenity=horse_dismount_block has 4 occurrences, all in the north of 
England.


I think I'm responsible for half of those - happy to pick a different 
tag if someone's got a better idea!


There are actually a selection of tags used for this sort of thing:

-- 
-- Horse mounting blocks
-- 
   if (( keyvalues["amenity"]   == "mounting_block"   ) or
   ( keyvalues["bridleway"] == "mounting_block"   ) or
   ( keyvalues["historic"]  == "mounting_block"   ) or
   ( keyvalues["horse"] == "mounting_block"   ) or
   ( keyvalues["horse"] == "mounting block"   ) or
   ( keyvalues["amenity"]   == "mounting_step") or
   ( keyvalues["amenity"]   == "mounting_steps"   ) or
   ( keyvalues["amenity"]   == "horse_dismount_block" )) then
  keyvalues["man_made"] = "mounting_block"
   end

https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L2211

all very low usage.

Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] AI detecting of buildings Idle thoughts

[Andy Townsend]

On 16/08/2018 12:35, Rory McCann wrote:

What's funny is that this import was (according to the changeset
comment) based on "DigitalGlobe extracted building data". A straight up
import of the original building geometries would probably be (i) less
contentious (since a building is a building is a building)


I think the problem here is that "a building is a building is a 
building" isn't really true.  There are many different kinds of 
structures in many different parts of the world, and many different 
light conditions, and different ground surfaces.


We saw this problem with the Facebook "roads import" in Egypt - whatever 
software they were using was detected many sharp edges in imagery 
(walls, canals, etc.) as roads.  If you train whatever you're using to 
detect stuff in one environment and try and use it in another 
environment it's going to get things wrong in unpredictable ways, and 
that's not really going to be obvious if you then (as here) estimate 
residential areas based on extracted buildings.  I can, however, see the 
sense of trying to do that (estimate residential areas based on 
extracted buildings) - in some areas actual buildings are likely to be 
ephemeral, but usage of areas not so much.


Best Regards,

Andy




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

Re: [Talk-GB] 'C' class roads references.

[Andy Townsend]

On 08/08/18 10:34, Dave F wrote:



On 08/08/2018 08:30, Andy Townsend wrote:
 The tags "highway_authority_ref" "admin_ref" and "official_ref" are 
assumed to be unsigned.


One of the items on my 'things to do' list was to search for & 
amalgamate any 'this road is signed' tags.




The last time I looked there were three ways of tagging these - 
"name:signed=no", "unsigned=yes" and "unsigned=true".


https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L227

The first is unambiguous, the others perhaps not so much.  If you can 
find any others I'll happily include a test for those too.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 'C' class roads references.

[Andy Townsend]

For completeness, I have updated https://map.atownsend.org.uk to show 
unsigned road names in brackets and unsigned refs in brackets at the end 
of the name.  The tags "highway_authority_ref" "admin_ref" and 
"official_ref" are assumed to be unsigned.


Examples:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135465545
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=18=54.099587=-1.0061
(neither the name nor the highway_authority_ref here appear on the road)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/148638397
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=19=52.90617=-1.450913
(the name is signed but the ref isn't)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/89182833
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20=54.2394176=-2.857967
(no name, and the admin_ref is presumably unsigned)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/55579162
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=21=52.6307176=1.3776586
(name but different ref and highway_authority_ref)


There are combinations that aren't handled perfectly (especially where 
roads have a mixture of different refs) and I'll look at some of these 
edge cases later.  Hopefully though as things stand it's useful to 
people who really want to see these "official" refs.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] 'C' class roads references.

[Andy Townsend]

"Public right of way references, along with stiles and kissing gates, are for 
example rendered on Andy Townsend's specialist walking map."

That already has an idea about "unsigned names and refs" and at some point I'll 
add various unsigned road refs in brackets like PROW refs and other 
combinations (like waterway locks).

On the "there shouldn't be a standard map" question I'm aware of people who 
think that the "standard" OSM rendering is OSM Carto, the Cycle layer, 
Facebook, MAPS.ME among others.

Best Regards,
Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Brewshop Tagging

[Andy Townsend]

On 29/07/18 14:33, SK53 wrote:
This is how I mapped the one I surveyed last year in West Norwood 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5139756811.


Avoid shop=beverage, these are shop=alcohol.


That's what I went with for 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4336173634 - that one is mostly 
bottle sales, but some on draught (and the last time I was there the 
owner was trying to figure out how to get more people in to drink the 
draught stuff).


Not so far away is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/253040122 which I 
went with amenity=pub for because it's more about draught sales now than 
bottles.


We also have the tag pub=micropub and/or micropub=yes, so pub=brewshop 
and brewshop=yes would fit with that scheme. (As an aside more than 
half (19/33 - or 34 w/w if you include one in LA) of these micropubs 
have been mapped in the East Midlands which suggests that many more 
have not been mapped explicitly, such as the Chesterfield Alehouse 
).


On 29 July 2018 at 12:49, Stephen Knox > wrote:



I can think of at least 5 of these establishments around me, and
while this might be just a SE thing, I think it is likely to
become prevalent across the country as traditional retailers and
pubs struggle, as it is a more flexible business model and taps
into the "experience" trend.



It's definitely not just a SE England thing.  As Jerry has said, there 
are lots in the East Mids, but for example there are relatively few in 
York (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4826706222 being about the only 
example that immediately springs to mind).  "what makes a micropub" is I 
guess a combination of things - partly it's a question of self-branding 
("this place is more worth visiting than that former John Smiths/Home 
Ales/Shippos place down the road"), partly size, partly restricted 
opening hours and partly the toilets are usually more restricted.  I can 
certainly think of some "shop conversion" micropubs that are bigger than 
some "proper" pubs.


If anyone's interested in an explicit "micropub" rendering I'll happily 
add one to map.atownsend.org.uk so that it appears alongside the other 
pub types at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=18=-24.986416=135.173906 
.


Cheers,

Andy

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-us] Sidewalks in Austin without any tags

[Andy Townsend]

On 25/07/2018 14:12, Bryan Housel wrote:

...

Find more productive ways to improve OSM than threatening to delete people’s 
work.


(ahem)

Hi Bryan,

What I'd normally suggest in a situation like this is that someone 
comment on some of the problem changesets and offer help and 
assistance.  However, it looks like people have tried to do that, at 
least a couple of months ago:


http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=3773201

but a reply hasn't come back yet.  That might mean that their email is 
misconfigured, or the account has been abandoned, or they're just too 
busy to respond.  There's no biographical info on the account in OSM to 
suggest any other ways of getting in touch, though the name might 
perhaps suggest to a casual observer that it's somehow connected to the 
University of Washington.  You've previously mentioned 
https://www.opensidewalks.com/ but that is unfortunatly quite low on 
meaningful content, and seems to mostly talk about an existing OSM 
proposal and the previous Seattle import attempt 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Seattle,_Washington/Sidewalk_Import 
(where thankfully actually mapping was done instead).


Do you (or does anyone else on this list) have a direct connection to 
the TaskarCenterAtUW account?  If so it'd be great to let them know that 
people have been trying to get in touch with them, and to get some 
information about the plans to add meaningful tags to the data that's 
been added already).  Obviously in-OSM contact methods exist but if 
someone reading this actually knows them they'd understand the context 
better.


Unfortunately just "more data" is not necessarily an improvement - 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/603909001 is an example of something 
that as it currently stands really does add no value. However it's clear 
that the user who added that was aware that there was more to be done - 
they wrote "Will use JOSM to put in the appropriate tags".  It'd be good 
to know if or when they plan to do that, or whether some other approach 
(Maproulette?) might be approriate if they're no longer able to do so 
and need other people to tidy up after them.


Best Regards,

Andy




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

Re: [OSM-talk] Database on readonly?

[Andy Townsend]

On 15/07/2018 11:29, Maarten Deen wrote:


What is the problem? Is there maintenance going on?


Nothing on the "announce" list 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/announce/ , but it was 
mentioned at https://mobile.twitter.com/osm_tech (and in last week's OSM 
weekly news)



Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

[Andy Townsend]

On 03/07/2018 11:44, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
3. Lipiec 2018 12:26 od t.pfei...@computer.org 
:


 > Removing the FIXME tag reduces the learning curve for map editors.
What specific skill is to be learned here?


Not skill but knowledge - that fixme and FIXME have exactly the same 
meaning.




Not exactly - when I wrote https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/Notes01 I 
specifically looked for "fixme" and not "FIXME" deliberately because I 
was specifically looking for entries that were tagged "fixme" and wanted 
to avoid older "can someone please map stuff here" entries such as 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/768440770 .  Certainly in the areas I 
map in you tend to get different sorts of "fixme" information in each 
(though there's substantial overlap of course), not least because of the 
earlier popularity of FIXME as has been mentioned elsewhere.


That said, compared to most "I think I can fix the tags in OSM" 
mechanical edits the impact is trivial.  The biggest change I'd likely 
see would be having to wade through a tiny bit more rubbish to get to 
stuff I can usefully fix (whenever I'm anywhere with a Garmin I'll have 
a file of local OSM notes and fixmes in it).  Of course, it wouldn't 
prevent people adding FIXME tags in the future.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

[Talk-GB] Guideposts and Public Footpath signs

[Andy Townsend]

Hi all,

I've noticed that a few people up in parts of North Yorkshire have been 
adding "information=guidepost" for public footpath / bridleway signs 
such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5570785235 .  At first glance 
this seemed odd - your typical GB public footpath sign doesn't have 
anything like the information on it that the example at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Dguidepost does 
(just the words "public footpath").  However, it turns out I was wrong - 
in this bit of the Howardian Hills someone's clearly got more cash to 
spend on things and these really are guideposts with destinations, long 
distance path memberships and designation information on them (for 
example, that example says "public bridleway", "Ebor Way" and a western 
destination on it).


The next question then is what would be appropriate to tag a public 
footpath sign which doesn't have other information on it? 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4853498733 is one of those - that 
says "public footpath" with no other information.  Over on the OSM GB 
organisation's loomio site 
https://www.loomio.org/d/pviAOkGR/challenge-footpaths/10 EdLoach 
suggested https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:guidepost%3Dsimple 
(currently only 57 uses worldwide at 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/guidepost#values , but it's a 
start).  Also see 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/guidepost#values - almost 
nothing at all there yet.


The OSM wiki (and tag use) seems somewhat unclear. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aguidepost suggests 
"guide_type" (almost unused worldwide - 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=guide_type ).  Also some of 
the examples on the wiki page look like the much more widely used 
"route_marker" or "trail__blaze" 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/information#values / 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/information#values .


Is anyone mapping public footpath signs that are just public footpath 
signs, and if so, as what?


Obviously I have an ulterior motive here - currently I render guideposts 
differently from e.g. route markers at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=17=-24.99939=135.17714 
, so I'd like to find a way of excluding public footpath signs from 
"proper guideposts" and route markers, which needs some sort of 
different tagging on them (but exactly what tags I'm not too bothered 
about).  I bet if anyone reading this just added the public footpath 
signs they saw _today_ it'd swamp any other tag usage for that feature 
in the UK :)


Cheers,

Andy

PS - A quick note on why the route_marker icon at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20=-24.997938=135.173467 
is purple rather than normal information brown - the idea eventually is 
to add the route name(s) that a route marker is a member of to the route 
marker, but that'd need me to make a change to osm2pgsql and that 
frankly is not going to happen while the weather is like this!






___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-au] Mapping houses and addresses in Sydney

[Andy Townsend]

On 03/06/18 20:12, Andrew Harvey wrote:
On 3 June 2018 at 21:48, Dion Moult > wrote:


I've started using OSM more and more and I find it frustrating
that many house addresses are not available in OSM. I would like
to help by tracing many houses using ESRI as a base map (feel free
to audit my history on OSM under the name "Moult").  I would also
like to add address information (addr:housenumber and addr:street)
to these ways however I don't think that we are meant to be
copying from Google maps. Is there another map source that has
addresses that we can use? Perhaps some form of government
cadastre map? Is that allowed?


What do you mean by "ESRI as a base map" do you mean the "ESRI World 
Imagery" available in ID and JOSM? ESRI's map layers are not allowed, 
just like Google Maps or Google Street View which must not be used as 
we don't have the copyright permissions to use these.




As a bit of background, see 
https://github.com/Esri/arcgis-osm-editor/issues/104 and 
https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-hub/constituent-engagement/esri-world-imagery-in-openstreetmap/?rmedium=redirect=blogs.esri.com%2Fesri%2Farcgis%2F2017%2F08%2F24%2Fworld-imagery-in-osm 
.  I'm not a lawyer, but that github issue has contributions both from 
ESRI and members of OSMF's LWG, so I'd definitely read it.


Best Regards,

Andy
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] poor business listing edits

[Andy Townsend]

(just to give a bit of an update)

Some single account "description" adders are back (example 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5658025380/history ), but they're not 
obviously part of the same group as the previous lot, so it's "as you 
were" with manual searching and reverting of obvious spam*, I'm afraid.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)

* and separating the spammers from the poor single-business owners 
trying to add their legit businesses to OSM, of course.



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway Platforms - Covered=yes are not shown in latest rendering

[Andy Townsend]

On 29/05/2018 14:53, Tony Shield wrote:


Checked that my changes had rendered ok but found to my horror that 
the platforms had disappeared. Investigations showed -


https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kocio/diary -


OpenStreetMap Carto release v4.11.0


Posted bykocio on 11 May 
2018 inEnglish (Englis h) 



  * Hiding railway=platform with location=underground, tunnels and
covered=yes



Personally I think that's an error on their part (although it's their* 
style not mine etc. etc.).  The relevant issue is 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3162 and no one 
said "it's a silly idea" so it's difficult to criticise the person who's 
idea it was going forward on that basis.


Have changed Chorley to delete covered tag - expect the render to show 
as expected for the surface.


If it was me I wouldn't change the tagging just to match one particular 
renderer - someone might come along and do something useful with the tag 
later, but they can only do that if the data's there.  Personally I've 
tended to do partially-covered station platforms as "building=roof" (if 
I've even remembered to do that) but I might be in a minority of 1 there.


In the meantime I'm sure that there are lots of maps that show covered 
railway platforms - I know that 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=18=53.653154=-2.626704 
does.




Looking at Manchester Piccadilly I can see that there are many 
opportunities to improve the data and thus the representation, anyone 
fancy a mapping party there?
I'm sure that you'd get a few takers for that - might be worth trying to 
contact the group that organised the "Joy Diversion" the other week and 
see if you can invite attendees to that along.


Best Regards,

Andy

* the people who put the hard graft into designing and developing the 
style are naturally the people who get most influence over how it looks.


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-au] poor business listing edits

[Andy Townsend]

Hi all,

just to let people know the admins have found a fair bit of commonality 
between the accounts behind the edits mentioned so far in this thread 
and have taken action* against them.  With a bit of luck, the spam 
torrent should reduce for a bit, but please let us know if it starts 
picking up again.


Best Regards,

Andy (not an admin, but from the Data Working Group and dealing with 
this complaint there)



* I'm not going into too much detail here for obvious reasons.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Railway level crossings

[Andy Townsend]

On 24/05/18 19:03, Andy Mabbett wrote:

On 24 May 2018 at 17:37, Jez Nicholson  wrote:


But Martin (and others) _could_ use the web site to prompt investigations
into crossing locations and manually add/edit in OSM.

+ 1

Or we could just ask them to release the data under an open licence.

Is this sort of stuff in the sectional appendix?  If so, it might 
already be available for use.  See 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UKRail_Project and 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Legolash2oLiam/diary/43115 .


Cheers,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-au] poor business listing edits

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/05/2018 12:33, Andrew Harvey wrote:

Thanks for doing the research on this!


... and thanks from me, too.



On 21 May 2018 at 19:32, Andrew Davidson > wrote:


After wasting many hours on this I've come to the conclusion that
a zero-tolerance policy is the only real option we have. So I've
now started to just revert them without bothering to look to closely.


I completely agree, my suspicions line up with what you're found, 
these edits are doing almost no good and a lot of harm.


Until they engage with the community and work with us instead of 
against us, I support auto-reverting. I've CC'd the DWG, in case they 
have any guidance or suggestions on what we can do to stop this.


I think that the approach that you're taking is pretty sensible - it's 
not "revert everything I don't understand" but "revert things that match 
the modus operandi of known spammers".


From a DWG perspective, it would be useful to have details of the 
accounts that have been "identified as spammers" (perhaps because 
they're adding nodes in the middle of Federation Square or around 
Circular Quay that you know from frequent visits obviously don't 
exist).  We'll have a look at see what commonality we can find (whether 
they're all from en-US locales, for example).


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)


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

[Talk-us] Amazon Logistics (was: Re: Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair)

[Andy Townsend]

Just to let people know who may not already have noticed, a number of 
these mappers (see for example 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ravsjith *) have an updated profile 
that says:


"I work for Amazon Logistics. At Amazon Logistics, we’ve been utilizing 
OSM in some cases related to our delivery programs. In connection with 
those delivery programs, we have collected information that we think is 
valuable to the OSM community such as names and info about new roads 
that are not currently in the map today, new data on turn restrictions, 
and road connectivity, to name a few. When we hear feedback, we’ve been 
editing to provide that information for the benefit of the entire OSM 
user community. If you have more questions, please contact 
osm-edit-escalati...@amazon.com  "


Best Regards,

Andy


* that's actually a new user; the previous "ravsjith" user is now 
"veerasatya"
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [OSM-talk] Issues with diffs

[Andy Townsend]

On 09/05/2018 19:21, Andrzej Kępys wrote:


OsmosisRuntimeException: The replication state doesn't contain a 
timestamp property.


Any idea where can I post/report this?


Here (or the dev list) is as good a place as any :)

What this normally means is that osmosis has somehow "become confused" - 
somehow some invalid replication data appeared, or you tried to reset 
the replication data and something failed, or you tried to reset the 
replication date for the first time since the http -> https move happened.


Here's what's in /var/lib/mod_tile/.osmosis/state.txt on a server of 
mine right now:


#Wed May 09 20:40:05 CEST 2018
sequenceNumber=2963281
timestamp=2018-05-09T18\:39\:01Z

You should have something similar.  If you have something other than a 
valid sequenceNumber / timestamp combination, try resetting the 
replication date to a known-good value.  Typically I'd do that with 
"openstreetmap-tiles-update-expire".  Note that when the OSM servers 
moved from http to https a change to that was needed to ensure that the 
files are obtained from https URLs (since osmosis didn't follow 
redirects).  In the version that I use (and the version referred to by 
the switch2osm guide) that is:


https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/mod_tile/blob/switch2osm/openstreetmap-tiles-update-expire#L114

Best Regards,

Andy





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

Re: [OSM-talk] highway="corridor" tag

[Andy Townsend]

On 05/05/2018 17:07, Richard Marsden wrote:

My code is being surprised by a number of corridors that are tagged
highway="corridor".

The two examples I have in-front of me are both in Dublin, Ireland; at
Stephen's Green Mall and St James Hospital.

I say surprised because the page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features does not list this
corridor tagging, and my code assumes unknown highway tags are
vehicle-routable (and filters out footpaths, stairs, etc).



That seems ... courageous*.  There are few enough values for "highway" 
at taginfo (see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/highway#values ) 
to be able to choose only the ones that you want.


Realistically, if you're blacklisting rather than whitelisting you'll 
potentially think that every typo (like 
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=apath ) is vehicle 
routable.  You probably don't want to do that.


Best Regards,

Andy


* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ik8JT2S-kBE


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[Andy Townsend]

On 05/05/2018 14:24, Adam Snape wrote:


However, we cannot know from our armchairs whether a store is disused 
but still signed, disused with all signage removed, demolished, or 
replaced by another business. Because if this we cannot fix the map 
merely by deleting the relevant shops. That is replacing a blatant 
errors in the map with less obvious ones.


Indeed  - and in the case of named stores (open or shut) which act as 
landmarks, there are at least some people (including me) actually 
consuming that data.  Please don't remove a name until it really has 
been removed.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[Andy Townsend]

Taking as read the arguments in for and against a mechanical edit for 
possibly closed shops* it'd be great if shops that we definitely know 
are now closed could be properly tagged as what they are now, so for 
example 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1485964357#map=19/53.98855/-1.09350 
can then be rendered as 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=21=53.988577=-1.0934931 
and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3265969285 as 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20=53.9879136=-1.049185 
.


I'm not making a case for any particular way of mapping vacant shops 
(I'll try and reflect what's in the database) but just deleting the shop 
nodes for them doesn't make sense when they're still major landmarks.  
Former BHSes are still pretty noticeable even long after closure; some 
former Blockbusters even more so (quite a few retain the colour scheme - 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116338603/history for example has new 
signage designed around it).


Best Regards,

Andy


* OSM's equivalent of brexit discussions - everyone just restates their 
case and no-one listens.



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [talk-au] Open Mapping team at Microsoft Australian edits

[Andy Townsend]

On 05/05/18 04:10, osm.talk...@thorsten.engler.id.au wrote:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/58382600

This user, which on his user page says "I am proud to be in Microsoft Open Maps team." 
Has been making a lot of "Fixed geometry" changesets.

...
I made a changeset comment to which I didn't get a reply, so I send a direct 
message to the user on 29th April to which I also didn't get a replay.


They haven't done anything in OSM in the last 8 days; maybe they saw 
your messages, forgot about them, and then went on holiday?  Or it might 
just be that their email isn't getting delivered*.  If they come back to 
OSM and don't reply then drop the DWG an email and we'll be able to let 
them know that people are trying to get in contact.  The "I've seen a 
problem; what should I do?" bit of 
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group should help.


Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG)

* insert your own outlook/hotmail joke here

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Implicit speed limits: What to tag in built-up areas?

[Andy Townsend]

On 01/05/2018 12:43, David Woolley wrote:

On 01/05/18 12:23, David Woolley wrote:
I don't know about your tool, but it is essential that every user has 
an explicit personal account with OSM, and that they are set up to 
receive emails if people add changeset comments, or post messages to 
their OSM account. maps.me has a high incidence of people who seem 
not to notice changeset comments.


In particular, apps need to be able to recognize that there is a 0 
hour block on a user and allow them to access the changeset comments 
to see the reason, and remove the block.  I don't know how the API 
distinguishes administrative blocks from other failures. 


From a DWG perspective, I don't think we're ever been asked to or 
needed to "0-hour block" a Street Complete user.  They know what OSM is, 
know what they signed up for and are aware that it's a community and 
that people might contact them about their edits.


We have had to block users of other problem apps - in one notable case 
because a "surveying" app added the same data, many times, at the same 
(incorrect) latitude each time (forming a nice ring just south of the 
equator).  Other users of "map" apps sometimes don't understand what OSM 
is at all; they don't realise that when they "add a note" they're adding 
a note to OSM, not just to their personal map.  That's an issue with the 
apps concerned though, and doesn't apply to Street Complete.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Implicit speed limits: What to tag in built-up areas?

[Andy Townsend]

On 01/05/2018 12:23, David Woolley wrote:


I don't know about your tool, but it is essential that every user has 
an explicit personal account with OSM, and that they are set up to 
receive emails if people add changeset comments, or post messages to 
their OSM account.  maps.me has a high incidence of people who seem 
not to notice changeset comments.


In addition I'd suggest that any such app ought to give a user the 
chance to reply "that is not a sensible question to ask" (perhaps with a 
bit of text as feedback to the app/quest developer explaining why) that 
doesn't change OSM, doesn't add a note and removes the question for at 
least that user from the app.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/04/18 10:54, Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com wrote:
... There are 6-8 new users who just started editing in and around 
Denver. Circumstantial evidence seems to indicagte they are part of a 
team in that they all started about the same time, their edits are 
remarkably similar and they all use the same changeset comment, 
"adding parking". They don't respond to changeset comments.


Just as a heads-up to people in the US, the DWG is still investigating 
changesets by these mappers.  One group of changes (by Bonya_23) is 
currently being reverted in 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/58500784 .


The reason, as noted in the changeset comment, is "see 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of 
issues; no communication".  Essentially other mappers have tried again 
and again to contact this user, but nothing useful happened.  Also, as 
you can see from the changeset discussion comments, this mapper has had 
continual problems with "mapping things that don't exist", and the lack 
of communication and poor quality leaves us with no option but to 
revert.  The way that the revert's done means that where other mappers 
have already tidied up afterwards these tidyings won't be lost.


Best Regards,

Andy

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

Re: [Talk-us] Undiscussed mass-revert by user Nakaner-repair

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/04/2018 16:13, Ian Dees wrote:


Some questions:

Was this action made under the auspices of the Data Working Group?


No


Has the "directed mapping" policy been approved by the OSMF?


No, although the refusal to interact with other mappers and the mass 
creation of sock-puppet accounts to avoid doing so would I think qualify 
under the ban policy https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Ban_Policy .


To be clear - there are a number of different mappers here.  They appear 
to be using the same customised copy of iD; we don't know what imagery 
they're using or whether it's licence-compatible with OSM (I suspect 
based on comments that at least some isn't, but can't be sure).  The 
mappers involved have been less than informative about who they're 
working for (of course, they may not actually know who this is - I'm 
guessing that this is organised through a "mechanical turk"-type site).  
They should, at least, be able to say what rules they are following 
though - and none of them that I have seen has given a reply that 
explains that yet (see for example 
https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/58023538 ).


Throughout this process I've tried to engage with each of the mappers 
involved (see the top of 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=61942 
for examples) but have generally failed to do so.


Their changes have been of mostly two sorts - "fixing routing problems" 
and "missing service roads".  The "fixing routing problems" was reported 
on talk-gb initially where at a guess 80% of the access changes were in 
error - a typical example is 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/57929974 , where an access 
restriction was changed because whatever rules they were following 
simply did not understand it.  The German forum thread also found many 
issues caused by "fixing routing problems" in Germany.


The US situation is of course different - there are few access 
restrictions that might impede motor traffic mapped (and probably fewer 
physically per mile of road too).  Many more of the US edits were of the 
"missing service roads" type, and there's generally less to go wrong 
there (although these do still warrant checking - I suspect that in 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/57730894 the assumption is that 
people drive on the left in Washington). Interestingly I note that in 
that mapper's case (see 
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=7511407 ) the 
revert excluded North and South America, so there are still errors 
introduced by that particular mapper than need fixing.  Other problems 
in the US include mapping roads likely to be private as 
residential/unclassified, which will cause some "interesting" routing, 
but that's a smaller subset.


One thing that would really help here would be if anyone has any idea 
who's behind this mapping to ask them to say who they are (either to the 
DWG, or to the communities in the places that they are editing).  Given 
the concentration on places like LA and Denver it's likely to be someone 
who wants to do last-mile motor vehicle routing in the US.  It's clear 
that they need a bit of help about how access tags in OSM work 
(including access not for motor vehicles) and I'm sure that lots of 
people in the OSM community would like to help with that.  The current 
situation (leaving comments for mappers, having those comments ignored, 
being blocked temporarily for ignoring comments, creating sock-puppet 
accounts, rinse and repeat) is clearly not satisfactory.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Bottle Kilns

[Andy Townsend]

On 05/04/2018 13:18, Russ Phillips wrote:
I'm intending to map the bottle kilns in Stoke on Trent. For those 
that don't know, they're an important part of the area's industrial 
heritage (there were several thousand of them at the height of the 
pottery industry). There are 47 now, and just under half are currently 
mapped.




Great idea - if someone can knock up an icon I'll add it to 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html (easiest way - pick an 
existing icon from 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/openstreetmap-carto-AJT/tree/master/symbols 
and edit it with something like Gimp).


Best Regards,
Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Help me build an OSM Community Index

[Andy Townsend]

On 31/03/18 13:25, Bryan Housel wrote:

I’ve started building an index of OSM community resources here:
https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index

"Resources" can be links to forums, meetups, Slack groups, Facebook 
groups, mailing lists, and so on. Anything that mappers, especially 
beginners, might find interesting or helpful.





I think that's an excellent idea - quite often I'd like to recommend 
something to a mapper in a country that I'm not familiar with, and it 
can be difficult to do that if you're unfamiliar with the local 
community (and especially if they're using non-open communication 
channels that can be less easy to "just drop in on").


However I'm a bit confused about what sort of contributions you want - 
https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index/issues/new loads a 
template that seems to be looking for something in Markdown format (one 
per resource) with a geojson file (I think - it's really not clear).  
I'd be happy to provide information that you could use to create the 
content you want, but I've no idea how to provide what the site seems to 
be asking for (and I suspect I won't be alone in that).


For example, for GB I'd suggest:

o That international resources such as the help site and the wiki are 
likely to be the first best point of contact


o That the most commonly used local resource is probably the talk-gb 
mailing list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb (but note 
that the part of the UK that is on the island of Ireland is best served 
by https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie), and there's also 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-scotland and other 
regional lists.


o That there's usually someone able to respond to "ad hoc" questions in 
#osm-gb on IRC (but I'd link to that via http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/IRC as 
other international channels may be relevant too).


o There are regular meetups in at least London 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/London#Upcoming_Events , Scotland, 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Edinburgh#Social_Events , West 
Midlands https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mappa_Mercia#Meetings, and 
East Midlands https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nottingham/Pub_Meetup .


o There's a "loomio" site (accessible from 
https://osmuk.org/pinned/join-the-conversation/) associated with the 
OSMF chapter in the UK https://osmuk.org/ , although that is very low 
volume right now (though that may change, of course).


There are also I'm sure a bunch of twitter accounts associated with 
individuals and groups - but I'd hesitate to try and sort the wheat from 
the chaff there.  I'm sure I'll have missed stuff too (and another 
person's list of resources might differ from my subjective list.


Is that sort of information useful?

Best Regards,

Andy

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians

[Andy Townsend]

On 05/03/2018 11:49, Richard wrote:

this one problem could be (somewhat) solved by conditional restrictions,


No, this is not an access restriction - people are allowed to go there 
whenever they like; it might just not be advisable.


I'd be against mapping non-quantifiable risks like this because it fails 
the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability test - as has 
already been discussed, one person might feel safe; another may not.  A 
"feeling of safety" likely has little bearing on actual risk (for 
example, during the breakup of Yugoslavia someone was worried about me 
visiting Prague) and there are many problems associated with assuming 
that one reflects the other (see e.g. 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/08/12/the-many-problems-with-sketchfactor-the-new-crime-crowdsourcing-app-that-some-are-calling-racist/ 
).


As to actual tagging of anything _quantifiable_, then perhaps the 
"tagging" list is the better place for that.


Best Regards,

Andy




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

Re: [Talk-us] how can we fix anonymous spam comments

[Andy Townsend]

On 27/02/2018 09:10, Badita Florin wrote:


This anonymous user is leaving a comment with hundred of 



You can see an example here https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1257677


I've hidden the original note, since someone's readded the sensible bits 
of it to a new note.  (I can unhide if anyone really wants to see it).  
There are admin-level ways to try and prevent specific types of note 
abuse; the original reason for the complaint at 
https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1543 was 
stopped that way.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

[Andy Townsend]

On 19/02/2018 22:03, Clifford Snow wrote:

 Can I steal your road styles?


Sure.

BTW - I can't see the difference between a plain residential and a 
unpaved residential. Unclassified stands right out, but not residential.


That's arguably a bug :)  I added support (downgrading to track) for 
unpaved unclassified (as visible at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=16=-24.99447=135.03725 
) and from memory there's support elsewhere for _gravel_ residential; 
but not unpaved.


For the US, however, you'd want to do something other than just 
"downgrading to track".  There are a couple of options I suspect:


One is to split unpaved roads out as a separate "road type" altogether 
(that's how sidewalk and verge are handled as seen at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15=-24.99273=135.02137 
).  The other is to have some sort of modifier (like "bridge", but 
different).  that's how "long fords" and embankments at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=15=-24.99958=135.0693 
are handled.


I use a lua style file 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua 
to do both of these, but that might not be an acceptable approach to the 
OSM Standard Style if that's your target (for entirely valid reasons to 
do with database reload), so you may have to do the selection just in 
the "project" file and the "roads" files.  With a test such as "unpaved" 
that should be doable though.


The place to start though is to get a working copy of the style 
locally.  I tend to use 
https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-16-04-2-lts/ for 
that; if you use Docker already then 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/DOCKER.md 
is surely going to be easier.


Once you've got some of your own tiles to play around with I'd suggest 
just experimenting with the various parts in a style (e.g. the "fill", 
the "casing" and "text") that make up a road 
(https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/38988 has a bit of 
info about that, but there have got to be better examples) and seeing 
what effect various changes have.


Best Regards,
Andy


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

Re: [Talk-us] Rural US: Correcting Original TIGER Imported Ways

[Andy Townsend]

On 19/02/2018 15:24, Dave Mansfield wrote:

I agree. To me having paved and unpaved show on the osm.org default render 
would be the biggest improvement to OSM I can think of.



If anyone wants any help setting up a server to experiment with options 
for rendering "unpaved" let me know.  I've done similar things - surface 
is a factor in rendering of the style at 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=16=-24.99447=135.03725 
for example.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-it] Di nuovo l'utente pasticcione

[Andy Townsend]

On 18/02/18 10:21, Alecs wrote:

Thanks for the help Andy,
but a new account is already in place, same editing style, changing every
unclassified road to residential (he did some hundred times a few days ago
in Turin): http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=56442146 deleting and
re-drawing objects, adding silly names:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/352874691/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/81694855/history
Not much of a damage, for now at least.
I hope his personal contributions (artwork names, benches and other small
details) are genuine, which is ususally hard to believe when such edits span
so many places in the world (many cities in Italy plus Malta, Amsterdam,
Madrid, Barcelona, Chicago and other places in the US in less than a week).



https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/hamoweyukuma/history

That user is 8 edits, all in Italy.  As ever I'd start by adding a 
"hello and welcome" message on one of the changesets, and also explain 
why some of the names are silly.  The names used are similar to the user 
who's just been blocked, but this is also done by new users who "just 
want to put a description on the standard map style at osm.org".  Send 
them a friendly welcome message offering to help them and see if they reply.


Best Regards,
Andy



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

Re: [Talk-it] Di nuovo l'utente pasticcione

[Andy Townsend]

On 11/02/2018 12:24, Alecs wrote:

Ciao a tutti,
vi segnalo il probabile nuovo account del buon vecchio "select" ...


For info:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1762
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1770
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1771
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1772

Best Regards,
Andy (DWG)


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Roundabouts - why is a separate segment required?

[Andy Townsend]

On 15/02/2018 16:49, Dave F wrote:
Again, the way containing the shared node has junction=roundabout in 
it. You are entering & exiting a roundabout


Using that argument elsewhere, if I drive northwest up the A446 at 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1165#map=17/52.55098/-1.73102 "the way 
containing the shared node" (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/25244878 
) is part of a motorway link.  That doesn't means I'm not allowed to 
cycle around the roundabout.


More generally, if you find yourself in a discussion and _everyone else_ 
disagrees with you, isn't that perhaps a bit of a hint that you might 
want to reconsider what you're saying?


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Roundabouts - why is a separate segment required?

[Andy Townsend]

On 14/02/2018 18:57, Dave F wrote:



On 14/02/2018 18:32, Andy Townsend wrote:
Having one exit node not joined to the next entry node better 
represents the real-world situation*.


Disagree.
Sharing a node should make no difference to the real world or a 
router's perception of it. 


With separate nodes, you travel along the roundabout way for a small 
distance (as you do in real life).  With a shared node, you don't. 
They're topologically different.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Roundabouts - why is a separate segment required?

[Andy Townsend]

(... snip ...)
Technically speaking you are not because you are just touching one 
node of the roundabout.


Yes you are. You may not be on there very long, but you approach the
roundabout, pass the signs saying it's a roundabout, give way to those
already on it, you enter it & then indicate that you're leaving it.


Not from a data standpoint.


OSM's "lines and points" abstraction is just an abstraction of the real 
world.  In the real world you're on a road, and you're joining the 
roundabout, staying there for a bit and then leaving it again on the 
next road.  Having one exit node not joined to the next entry node 
better represents the real-world situation*.


Best Regards,
Andy


* unless you happen to be riding a Spherical Cow along one of those 
"frictionless surfaces" I remember from Applied Maths at school many 
years ago.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mapnik styling

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/01/2018 13:21, Jez Nicholson wrote:


I am currently working with mapnik to render Ordnance Survey VectorMap 
District.


Which is the 'best' stylesheet format to use? Mapnik XML or CartoCSS 
or a.n.other?


Of the two I'd definitely suggest CartoCSS rather than raw Mapnik XML - 
I've tried to edit a map style in raw Mapnik XML and really wouldn't 
recommend it.  Obviously other tile technologies are available - this is 
all assuming that you want "normal" raster tiles (as you'd get at 
osm.org) and don't want to be locked in to a third party provider.


Given that you're essentially creating a map style from scratch I 
wouldn't start with anything so complicated as OSM Carto - a quick and 
dirty search of github* via 
https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93=project+extension%3Amml=Code=searchresults 
will find lots, and I bet you'll find something "just for landuse" to 
start with. "Mapnik" is just the software that does the rendering based 
on the XML, so it makes sense that its website doesn't mention the 
"Carto" preprocessor.


I'd suggest having a look at 
https://ircama.github.io/osm-carto-tutorials/ - there's lots of stuff 
there that you'll find useful.


If you can persuade it to run on whatever system you're running, you can 
use something like TileMill or Kosmtik to visualise changes "as you go", 
although to be honest I tend not to bother - I just use one of a couple 
of shell scripts to update the rendering of which 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/update_carto.sh 
is for "I've changed the map style and don't need to reload the data".  
It's designed around the map style that I use but you could easily 
modify it to get a map style from somewhere else.


Other stuff that might be useful includes 
https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-16-04-2-lts/ , 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/DOCKER.md 
(which is for OSM Carto but should be adaptable) and 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/42617 if you're on 
Windows 10.


Best Regards,

Andy


* thanks to Zverik for that


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Automatically generated changeset discussion comments by OSMCha

[Andy Townsend]

On 12/01/2018 14:52, Bryan Housel wrote:

- “To European eyes the comments look like they were written by a six-year-old”


Be nice everyone!


Bryan, this is "being nice" in English.  It's a reply that incorporates 
a certain amount of humour (quotes around sarcasm, link to 
not-entirely-serious article containing an example where "Punctuation 
saves lives", smiley at the end).  It's an attempt to say that yes, 
there really is a problem here to be fixed, but doing it in a way that 
attempts to get that message across in a humorous way to distract from 
the necessarily negative message.


 Best Regards,
Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Automatically generated changeset discussion comments by OSMCha

[Andy Townsend]

On 12/01/2018 14:07, Michael Reichert wrote:

Hi,

OSMCha started posting comments to changesets a few days ago when a user
marks a changeset as good or bad.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/wille/diary/43101
I would like to ask the author(s) of OSMCha to disable this feature.


The example given at 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/wille/diary/43101 is certainly 
"insufficiently localised" to European eyes (alternatively, "written by 
a six-year-old") - every sentence ends with an exclamation mark*.


More seriously, any automatic use of OSM messages is problematical 
because it devalues the messages that we want people to actually read - 
the ones that are composed by and sent be a human, and have actual 
useful information in them (and I'm glad to see that Mike N said "I 
haven't used this yet because I wanted to add my own detail to the 
message" - that's exactly what should be happening).


Best Regards,
Andy

* apparently, according to 
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20170301-what-overusing-exclamation-marks-says-about-you 
, this is a matter of life and death :)



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

Re: [Talk-us] Parks, again

[Andy Townsend]

On 06/01/2018 21:11, Doug Hembry wrote:

(lots snipped, pretty much all of which I agree with)


IMHO, AT THE VERY LEAST, the background green fill for leisure=park
could and should be dropped by openstreeetmap-carto - it is unnecessary,
causes problems, and can be replaced by natural=* or landcover=* . This
would reduce one incentive for inappropriate use, and if still used
inappropriately, it wouldn't matter so much.
There's a discussion that touches on this at 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/603 - it was 
initially proposed there to replace the rendering of 
leisure=nature_reserve with rendering protected_area.


leisure=park and leisure=nature_reserve were both designed for specific 
on-the-ground features, but there's been significant usage of both to 
"turn areas green" in the OSM Carto map style.




While on the topic of rendering "parks", I do agree with Steve (again,
if I'm understanding correctly) that  it would be valuable, if possible
at some point in the future - both for map clarity as well as providing
useful information to users - for carto to use different colors for
different types of boundaries. I differ with Steve in that IMO the
coloring should be based off protect_class (or at least for several
bands of protect_class if there are too many distinct values for
separate colors) rather than jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is less
meaningful to users than level of protection, and in any case is usually
obvious from the area name and other tags. Further, boundary rendering
should indicate access restrictions (access=yes/no/permit) by some means
- perhaps a dashed line as is presently done for highways.


To be honest, I wouldn't "suggest that OSM Carto do X" here - there's 
been a lot of discussion already and no conclusions there. What I'd 
suggest instead is that someone knocks up a rendering of California 
based on what it would look like if boundary=protected_area, or 
protect_class, or whatever is used instead of park, nature_reserve 
and/or national_park.  It's not that complicated to do that - there are 
basic instructions for creating a tile server at 
https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-16-04-2-lts/ and 
California is small enough in OSM terms to fit on a virtual machine on 
an average desktop PC.


I did something similar for the UK - here 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/c342d0e42aeec0219777535a16e4c025a8886bf1/style.lua#L362 
is a simple example of "it it's tagged like X, make it render like Y", 
and the result is the dashed lines around e.g. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144944672 on this map: 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=12=53.3107=-1.7177 
.  If anyone wants any help with that, please ask.  There's quite a lot 
of useful information around already, bt it is spread out in different 
places.


Best Regards,

Andy





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

Re: [Talk-us] Potential vandalism in Northern California (Pokémon Go?) (Andy Townsend)

[Andy Townsend]

On 30/12/2017 01:28, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:

(some bits snipped)

1)  Let's agree that what our wiki says in leisure=park defines what we mean by "a park is a 
park, like this, even if it doesn't seem like that is what other parks look like, exactly."  
In other words, what OSM says is a "park" is a short definition, but it is an elastic one 
which encompasses a big and generous solution space to include parks.


Currently the wiki page 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark defines an OSM 
"leisure=park" using a few words, and illustrates it with a picture of 
part of Central Park in New York.  It then goes on to say that 
"leisure=park" shouldn't be used for national parks.  It uses Yosemite 
at http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=10/37.8230/-119.5060 as an example 
national park ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1643367 for info ).


I'd suggest that the state and county parks in CA such as for example 
Joseph D Grant https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3003169 are less 
like Central Park than they are like Yosemite.   They might not be close 
enough to warrant a "boundary=national_park" tag, and some other tag 
(some sort of protected_area?) might be more appropriate, but they're 
definitely not an OSM "leisure=park" in a "does it quack like a duck" 
sense as per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Duck_tagging.  On 
Joseph D Grant someone has added a "park:type=county_park" tag to try 
and help data consumers distinguish it from other "leisure=park"s, but 
that doesn't really say anything about what it's like, just who looks 
after it.




2)  Landuse is not landcover and vice versa.


Indeed (and OSM is confusing about how it tags both of those) but that's 
not really relevant to the current discussion.  Bits of a state park may 
be covered with trees, and some of those trees might be primarily there 
for future logging (or not) but that is a separate issue to the legal 
status of the state park and who owns and operates the land.  There may 
be rules about uses that people can't use the land in a state or 
national park for, but that's normally different what it is currently 
used for.  OSM has tags that start "landuse=", "natural=" and to a 
lesser extent "landcover=", but those landuse tags aren't just about 
land use and not all "natural" things are truly natural.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Standard map style contributions

[Andy Townsend]

On 28/12/2017 10:45, Daniel Koć wrote:


However after almost half a year we still don't have too many 
contributions from other people and I'm curious what are the main 
obstacles which prevent it and what else could we possibly change to 
make it easier? There's also more basic question: how many people are 
interested in contributing to osm-carto at all?


Speaking entirely personally, the main issue is just 
selfishness/laziness.  I don't use the OSM Carto style much myself 
(there'd be too much information missing at the zoom levels I typically 
use) so I wouldn't get much benefit myself from an accepted change.  In 
case it helps anyone who does want to contribute but doesn't quite know 
where to start I've added a diary entry 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/43041 that explains 
what I needed to do to submit 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/2966 . There's 
actually a surprisingly large amount that needs to be done to support 
(in this case) 7 lines of changed code.


I'd also not assume that everyone is familar with CSS.  In addition, the 
somewhat arcane way that some of the selections for layers are done in 
project.mml is, shall we say, not always that easy to follow.


Another reason why I've not added more pull requests is that in some 
cases I don't think that they'd be accepted.  If I offered to "fix" the 
main problem described by 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/765 I'm 
pretty sure that it wouldn't be accepted.  As described in 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md 
, OSM Carto has somewhat conflicting goals - both as "an important 
feedback mechanism for mappers" and as an "exemplar stylesheet". Any map 
style will always be a compromise of course; you can't have "everything 
louder than everything else" which is why the requests for some features 
to be rendered will be denied (although I suspect that we underestimate 
how much more opportunity these is for rendering features at high zoom 
levels only).


Another reason is I suspect the "jumping through hoops" needed to get 
something accepted.  See for example the discussion on 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2355 - it's 
clear that there's unlikely to be complete agreement there, and the 
result is no solution at all (essentially "perfect is the enemy of good").


With the last two issues it's difficult to know what to suggest - there 
has to be an overall style "direction" otherwise you just end up with 
something that is a bit of a mess.  Likewise there have to be some 
standards, but sometimes I suspect that if the maintainers actually want 
to see a fix to a particular problem that they'll need help potential 
contributors a bit more.  Obviously the docker info is a step in the 
right direction (I've not tried that myself so I can't point to specific 
pitfalls there).


Anyway, I hope the above helps (and please understand that it's not 
meant as a criticism either of the style or the maintainers - it's just 
trying to provide answers to the questions that were asked).


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [Talk-us] Potential vandalism in Northern California (Pokémon Go?)

[Andy Townsend]

On 06/12/2017 17:49, dilys...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure whether this has anything to do with Pokémon Go but a 
mapper has been adding parks on top of existing boundary relations 
(National Parks, National Forests, Wilderness Areas) in a systematic 
manner in Northern California, creating quite a mess.


Hello US folks,
The mapper who made these original edits is long gone from OSM, so what 
remains is largely a "data tidying exercise".


For info, I've looked at Shasta-Trinity National Forest and deleted the 
main _duplicate_ Shasta-Trinity NF way 
http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=487220873 (the original 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/70010/ hasn't been edited for 12 
months as so is presumably OK).  I'll also look at the smaller 
duplicates added by http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/47829109 .


It'd be great if other people could have a look at some of the 
duplicates highlighted within the parent post with a view to removing 
duplicates in the other ones too.  Someone's already (correctly in my 
view) removed "leisure=park" from at least some of these.


There's also scope to map the landuse etc. within the national forest 
boundaries such as http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/418301052 better, 
but that will need more local mappers with local knowledge (of whom 
there are never enough to go around).  Currently in that example there 
seems to be only http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/64298706 , which is 
another import.  It's clear for example that the trees in the imagery at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=17/40.61757/-122.94615 don't match 
what has been imported.  Areas such as this are a good drive from major 
population centers, but there are newish mappers popping up around 
Eureka and Redding so it'd be great if they continue and in the future 
add what they know about these areas too.


Best Regards,
Andy Townsend (DWG member and very occasional hiker in Northern California)


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

Re: [talk-au] Rendering of BBQs

[Andy Townsend]

On 25/12/17 23:37, Arthur Geeson wrote:

Is there a reason that BBQs are not being rendered?



Just out of interest, what would the tag be?  There isn't much that's 
too obvious at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=barbeque#values .


A related issue is for firepit, in 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/2910 .


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM tagging validation lib

[Andy Townsend]

On 24/12/17 18:41, john whelan wrote:

True but it's to do with data quality and avoiding the need to validate.


I don't think that different presets will "avoid the need to validate" 
in any scenario (HOT or otherwise) - the only thing that will do that is 
education and training - and having those educated and trained people 
come back again to do more mapping.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM tagging validation lib

[Andy Townsend]

On 24/12/17 11:49, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:



It would be cool to have such library running on osm2pgsql import, 
fixing and complaining/skipping all the mistaked tag usage it can 
detect. This can possibly resurrect some objects that are lost because 
of typos or old tagging schemes.




That already exists - the lua tag transformation process can do exactly 
that.  Here's an example:


https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L2056

Obviously whether a particular map style wants to render typing / 
tagging errors is a different matter entirely.


Best Regards,

Andy




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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mistagging of old telephone boxes

[Andy Townsend]

For info:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility

most of the editors there have a reasonable history of discussing these 
things so there's a good chance they know what they're talking about 
(more so than me when it comes to licences, certainly) so I'd be tempted 
to trust that page.


Best Regards,

Andy



On 23/12/17 19:13, Dave F wrote:
Not an expert, but I'm surprised if that's true. Isn't BY attribution 
the same that OSM asks of map producers?


I note Mapillary are also CC BY-SA

DaveF

On 22/12/2017 23:26, David Woolley wrote:

On 22/12/17 22:32, Dave F wrote:

To double check -  CC BY-SA 2.0 is compatible with OSM?


The problem is going to be the BY part.


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



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


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Website Data

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/12/2017 09:15, Ilya Zverev wrote:

...
Or do you think the map does not need imports and that every shop and amenity 
will be mapped without them before they are out of business?



Maybe it's worth having a look at an example.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/245390956 is a petrol station in South 
Normanton, not that far from me.  It's not that out of the ordinary.  It 
was already mapped in OSM as a Shell petrol station (as most were) 
before Navads came along.


Here's the data that Navads was able to provide:

 * Postcode
 * Phone number


But here's the data that Navads didn't add and was already in OSM

 * There's a Post Office here
 * There's an ATM
 * There's a Spar convenience store
 * There's a branch of WHSmith


Clearly being able to provide e.g. licence-unencumbered postcode data is 
useful, but if we relied _just_ on the likes of Navads we'd have a 
pretty poor view of what's available here.


Similarly, Mark Goodge's point ("Inaccurate data is worse than missing 
data") is a good one, but in this case we do have a source on the 
changeset (see e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/69974213 up the 
road and http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/54785385 ) so if stuff 
is contradicted by future survey it's clear where it came from and can 
be easily updated.


Best Regards

Andy

___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-it] Regno di Andany, Sardegna

[Andy Townsend]

On 15/12/2017 14:05, Maurizio Napolitano wrote:


segnalazione al DWG?


Thanks - it's been raised with us and we're looking at it.

Best Regards,

Andy (DWG)


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Request for mapping assistance Hull

[Andy Townsend]

and Hull, apparently:

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=60752


On 14/12/17 13:47, SK53 wrote:
Just crossposting this message from the forum regarding mapping in 
Leamington Spa: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=60753


Jerry


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Planned rendering changes of protected areas

[Andy Townsend]

On 30/11/17 13:46, Daniel Koć wrote:

Hi,

I'm thinking about changes in rendering of protected areas on 
osm-carto and I wanted to give community a hint, because it's a 
popular kind of objects. There is a fresh discussion about it from 
this comment on:


https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/603#issuecomment-347879897 



In short:

1. Currently leisure=nature_reserve (old scheme) and boundary=* (new 
scheme) are frequently tagged in parallel, and it looks like the old 
scheme is used as a hack just to make it visible on default map.


(snipped)

Actually one more thing (prompted by SK53 on IRC) - the area of a nature 
reserve is sometimes != the protected area, as noted here:


https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/603#issuecomment-348480276

I can think of a few examples locally - one for example is signed as an 
SSSI* but not a nature reserve:


http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53745064/history

also apparently the "reserve" area at Muston 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/52.9219/-0.7766 doesn't match the 
protected area.


Obviously this is orthoganal to what gets rendered and what doesn't, but 
there's certainly a case for using both tags.


Best Regards,
Andy


* Site of Special Scientific Interest.  Probably maps onto a 
"protect_class" or something.



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

[Talk-GB] Display of brand/operator in GB/IE (was: Re: Importing Shell fuel stations)

[Andy Townsend]

On 03/11/2017 17:51, Ilya Zverev wrote:

... and I removed the "operator" tag.


Somewhat related, 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=21=53.1927324=-1.3428004 
now shows brand (or operator) in brackets after name if both are set and 
just brand (or operator) if name isn't.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] How to show school icons ?

[Andy Townsend]

On 24/11/2017 12:23, Daniel Koć wrote:

W dniu 24.11.2017 o 08:57, David SAUVAGE pisze:

What would be the process to change this situation in order for school
icons to be displayed on osm map with the same priority of a library ?


Let me quote what I've just wrote in the osm-carto issue tracker:

"We had a PR which was almost ready, but we were unable to decide how 
to deal with label scaling, because we do this for schools and the 
icon is not to be scaled. There are also other similar objects (like 
hospitals etc), which use the icon, but don't use text scaling, so 
that would be inconsistent.


So the most important thing is to find a rule for all such objects. If 
we have it, rendering education icons could be made quite easily."


As an aside, if the discussion (which is now at 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/120 ) doesn't 
work out, it may also be possible to create your own map tiles based on 
a style that you create.  If you want to create the same sort of map 
tiles that you can see at OpenStreetMap.org you can follow instructions 
at https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-16-04-2-lts/ 
.  There are other options too (see 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rendering for some of those). If 
you're trying to follow instructions such as those and get stuck you 
could try asking on IRC (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IRC ) - 
the #osm and #osm-dev channels are English-language ones, but there will 
be people available to help there, and there's also #osm-fr in French 
where I'm sure people will be able to help too.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [talk-au] Pokemon / doodles in Noranda, Perth?

[Andy Townsend]

On 22/11/2017 20:34, m.james wrote:

Kill it, kill it all

Thanks!  Someone's already deleted it.  A couple more questions though:

One is the names of bits of parkland such as 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/260221961/history .  That was added by 
the same mapper looks like it might be either misspelt or made up.  
Similar are https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/479426260 and a couple of 
other "named parks" round there.  Can a local check that these are sensible?


Secondly, I've undeleted Government House Gardens 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147056810/history .  That was deleted 
by the same mapped, and seems mostly plausible (though you might want to 
create a hole in it at least for Government House itself).  If it's a 
problem, just delete it.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

[talk-au] Pokemon / doodles in Noranda, Perth?

[Andy Townsend]

It looks dodgy, and presumably is just a Pokemon-style edit, but I 
figured that someone more local would be more likely to know for certain 
one way or the other:


https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4725585201/history#map=19/-31.87776/115.88667

I'm happy to tidy up if you'd like me to - just let me know :)

Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Effecting change in OpenStreetMap

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/11/2017 13:47, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote:


I've posted a -dev mail about reusing nighttime of tile rendering 
servers. Some likes on GitHub, some reviews from passer-by's, no 
merge, nothing about "what to fix to get it merged". For a year. 
Patience you say?

https://github.com/openstreetmap/mod_tile/pull/152


Whilst I'm not a contributor to the repository there, I do have some 
familiarity with the code.  What you seem to be doing is interpreting 
the mod_tile repository as "part of the infrastructure of 
OpenStreetMap.org", and you seem to be viewing OpenStreetMap.org as an 
end-user Google Maps competitor, not as a "creating map data enabler".  
I regularly use mod_tile on memory-limited machines and would be 
concerned if I was suddenly not able to process as large data extracts 
that I could previously.  I don't see any thought given in what you're 
proposing to what the knock-on effects of your change would be.




/map call is technically 40x slower than it should be, but issue is 
being closed with "we are not complete idiots" comments. No action 
taken wherever.

https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/135


The second line of your issue starts "This causes hatred when editing 
something", which is not exactly helpful if you want an in-depth 
investigation of a perceived performance problem.  Despite this, the 
conversation that follows covers in detail the status of the problem, 
and a suggestion to you where you can help.  Your contributions there 
(at https://github.com/zerebubuth/openstreetmap-cgimap/issues/122 ) 
stopped after a day.


I've said elsewhere the developing things _around_ OpenStreetMap and 
with OpenStreetMap data has a surprisingly low barrier to entry - you 
just download the data and off you go; there's no API with Ts and Cs to 
negotiate.  However, _changing_ the way that the the project or the 
existing osm.org infrastructure does something will necessarily require 
a series of arguments to be made and people to be persuaded, and it 
seems to me that you haven't successfully done that yet, just as Yuri 
didn't with his approach to mechanical editing, which led indirectly to 
the WeeklyOSM article and the thread that this one developed from.


Where there are competing requirements (and there are always competing 
requirements) you can't always expect everyone to agree the your view of 
the requirements is the "most valid" one - see for example 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/765 .  I took 
the hint from that to create something else with OSM data that was (for 
my purposes) better; perhaps you could do the same?


Best Regards,

Andy

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

Re: [Talk-us] Multipolygonizing

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/11/2017 23:30, Ian Dees wrote:


Please remember to stay on topic and friendly. This thread seems to be 
drifting off into a discussion about the merits of OSM editors.


Well, my comment about editors wasn't supposed to be offtopic, since the 
question of data being "... far easier to understand and maintain, 
especially for novice mappers" was one of the points raised at the very 
top of the thread.


It's perhaps worth mentioning that in each of iD, P2* and JOSM (without 
plugins) it's possible to swap without too much difficulty between the 
two relations and the constituent ways at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/36.62063/-121.90621  P2's internal 
visualiser fails with the park visualisation though, and I can't see a 
way to select the marine nature reserve without deliberately selecting 
the "relations this way is a member of" at the left, so I'm still not 
convinced that this area is as newbie-friendly as it was before.


Best Regards,
Andy


* if you are surprised by this perhaps you haven't looked at one or 
another editor for a while - it might be worth revisiting.


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

Re: [Talk-us] Multipolygonizing

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/11/2017 19:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:

Come on, JOSM itself is difficult, but everyone
who groked JOSM, never returns to Potlach.


Untrue.  Each of the OSM editors has strengths and weaknesses - it's 
simply a case of finding the best tool for the job.  In some cases that 
might be JOSM; in some cases it might be something completely different 
(StreetComplete?).  JOSM isn't the best at everything - it has a user 
interface out of the fifth circle of hell and seems intent on dragging 
the user straight back there.  It fails with some stuff that is "basic" 
to e.g. Potlatch (mapping with waypoints recorded with information in 
them as you go for example).  See questions such as 
https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/7675/josm-is-it-possible-to-convert-an-individual-waypoint-in-a-gpx-file-to-a-node 
for a bit more discussion on that.


Best Regards,
Andy


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

Re: [Talk-us] Multipolygonizing

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/11/2017 17:58, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:

...  Glebius is right in my backyard and I've found his coastal "restructurings" (e.g. 
http://www.osm.org/changeset/46756097) to be bizarre and unnecessary, often overwriting correct official (county GIS 
imported) data simply to not "share some nodes" or "improve the mess."  He claims that "the 
consensus in Russia is that advanced polygons is the way to go."  Well, not here, I assure both Glebuis and the 
talk-us list of that unequivocally.


I'm not a local, just an occasional visitor to the area, but have 
certainly had similar conversations with non-local mappers deciding that 
(for example) a car park near me should be composed of 4 separate ways 
each part of 2 or 3 multipolygons.  The thing that's in shortest supply 
in OSM is mappers, and anything that prevents people from contributing 
should be frowned upon.


I'm guessing he won't be reading talk-us but he does read and reply to 
changeset comments, so I'd suggest commenting there on any particular 
changes worth talking about.


Best Regards,

Andy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

[Andy Townsend]

On 17/11/2017 22:52, Clifford Snow wrote:


Frederik,
I think we are all thankful for the newsletter. And believe they are 
free to publish to their own standards. However, because they use OSM 
resources by publishing on our mailing lists they need respect our 
values. I don't think asking a publication to be respectful to 
individuals is asking too much.


Clifford,
Being "respectful" is a two-way street.  This is a situation that's been 
going on for almost exactly a year now.  During that time this 
individual has shown contempt for the OSM community, including on 
occasion telling outright untruths.  Conversations with him were very 
repectful at first (conducted in changeset discussions rather than on 
mailing lists), but it gradually became clear that any statements such 
as "I have already stopped changing any objects except" were simply 
worthless.  At some point you have to call a lie a lie, and I can't 
think of a way of doing that without "being disrespectful".


Also, I have to object to the use of "they" and "our" in your comment.  
The OSM Weekly is produced by and for people from the OSM community, 
exactly the same community that the mailing lists are run by and for.  
The use of that sort of divisive language ("they") reminds me of a visit 
to South Africa back in the 90s, and not in a good way.


Best Regards,

Andy

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

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

[Andy Townsend]

On 17/11/2017 17:52, Mikel Maron wrote:
Yes, doing this is hard work, and appreciate the job WeeklyOSM has to 
do. Point is, statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and 
tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate, and 
there are many better ways to summarize the topic.


Well to be fair, the article as written didn't actually say that - it 
said "is perceived by many as unreasonable".


Full disclosure - I'm an occasional contributor to the weekly OSM 
newsletter.  I didn't add or edit that article (actually I didn't 
contribute to any last week - you can usually tell the ones I've written 
because they have more links and perhaps too many words in them), but 
although perhaps a little over-concise I don't think you could argue 
with "perceived by many as unreasonable" - just wade through the recent 
archives of the talk mailing list again and weigh the arguments for and 
against.  Also, there is such a thing as "fake balance".  Imagine you're 
running an article about someone who's discussing ways to offset the 
problems caused by the Mercator projection; you don't then need to also 
quote someone from the Flat Earth Society for the sake of impartiality.


Secondly - and this is a point that applies to many other areas of OSM 
too - there seem far more people willing to contribute their 
copy-editing skills here on a mailing list than actually helping put 
_next_ week's newsletter together.  It's not a new phenomenon - a short 
while ago WeeklyOSM had a complaint from an OSM-centric organisation 
(let's call it "X") that "we never report on what's happening with X".  
It was politely suggested to the complainer that perhaps they ought to 
volunteer themselves; then they could submit all the articles they 
like.  It went very quiet after that.


It's a similar situation with technical discussions elsewhere ("you 
ought to render X like Y", "you ought to change how the osm.org website 
works so I don't have to build infrastructure for $project", "Nominatim 
ought to support my $odd_non_address_search_example").


Although there's always room for improvement, much of what's around OSM 
now has a surprisingly low bar for entry, whether it's creating a map 
based on OSM data that shows $favourite_but_quite_rare_tag, or answering 
questions on the help site or forum, or as here, volunteering to submit 
and review a few news articles a week.


Best Regards,
Andy

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Welsh language map

[Andy Townsend]

https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=10=51.8697=-5.068 
also shows Welsh names in Welsh-speaking parts of Wales (using a .poly 
from Jerry, actually), but that's really a solution to a different 
problem (described at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/42069 ).


On 15/11/2017 15:24, SK53 wrote:
I heartily agree that both english & welsh names need to be shown side 
by side, for this reason can I suggest that when editing names to add 
a Welsh name if the existing name is English (London Road for 
instance) also add a name:en tag. If we can work just with name:cy & 
name:en tags in rendering we can achieve a lot more.


"Displaying side by side" (perhaps one bracketed after the other) is 
very doable in lua; 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=18=53.233295=-0.991688 
is an example of that in another context.


The basic overlay idea works for street & place names (and one can 
offset welsh language names in one direction and english names in the 
opposite ones. Finding colours which dont create conflicts and 
legibility issues is another thing. I'll see if I can fish out an 
example from my carto rendering experiments.


I suspect that an overlay may not be the way to go (if possible) because 
you won't get collision avoidance between the overlay and the main 
map*.  Here's an example of that: 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=16=53.2387=-1.01152 
those two names apply to the same bit of track but Mapnik's clever 
enough to ensure there's no clash.


Best Regards,

Andy

* although maybe having the overlay also containing every other piece of 
text, but in "transparent on a transparent background", may work!


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] The OSM UK map

[Andy Townsend]

(somewhat belatedly, re crossings)

On 02/11/2017 15:42, Dave F wrote:



Apologies, forgot to permalink. Try:
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20=51.3779057=-2.35836 



Yes, the way these are shown is a bit rubbish.  I'm assuming that it's 
not possible to render a symbol for a node "parallel to the way that it 
is part of", but any suggestions for a same-size replacement for 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/openstreetmap-carto-AJT/blob/master/symbols/highway_crossing.png 
and optionally 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/openstreetmap-carto-AJT/blob/master/symbols/highway_crossing2.png 
would definitely be considered.  See also 
https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/openstreetmap-carto-AJT/commit/2077839ba0f51a565991cad7be2697896d0737d2 
.


Best Regards,
Andy


___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb