Re: [Talk-us] Deleting / Closing / Renaming all places in a chain
On 9/7/2016 2:38 PM, Brian Stromberg wrote: My point was only that applying an automated process nationwide without any consideration for on-the-ground verification seems likely to make a less accurate map. For the ITT case, there is presumably a reference on the web site that lists all schools. These can be cross-checked against the entity address or the nearby street if there was no address. There are no formal rules about which types of edits can be made without on-the-ground verification. At best, we want a chance to review all automated edits and make the call on a case by case basis. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Deleting / Closing / Renaming all places in a chain
On 9/7/2016 10:13 AM, Brian Stromberg wrote: Automated nationwide mapping seems like it would introduce more problems than it would solve. If maps are intended to represent the truth on the ground, then the only way to create a useful map is by reporting what is actually there rather than making assumptions. A map that is inaccurate because it is outdated is better than a map that is inaccurate because of a flawed process. Welcome to the list! I've been surprised by both what OSM data is applied to, as well as what it is not. Where it was used, having the maximum amount of current information made it the most useful. You are correct that using a flawed process will lead to inaccurate results - there was the famous worldwide edit "Fix and unify all MacDonald's restaurant names" which led to wrong results. The ITT closing case is both small enough and well defined that I expect a very high quality result. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Deleting / Closing / Renaming all places in a chain
On 9/7/2016 3:45 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Except those humans who could have used that outdated thing as a marker to tell them that the map is dated. Yes they could look at the last modification date of things or analyze how many contributors the area has or myriad other OSM insider things. But seeing a "Domino's Pizza" on the map doesn't need an API, or insider knowledge, it doesn't even need a web site - it is the universal language of map dating. I can't visualize a mapper that is so starved for places to resurvey that they rely on a list of stale POIs as a source instead of a more methodical system of date checking or any of the many OSM QA tools that automatically flag stale data such as a dead web site. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Deleting / Closing / Renaming all places in a chain
On 9/6/2016 5:36 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Automatically editing away something country-wide hides the fact that the map lacks attention in an area. I'm not sure that hiding lack of attention is such a bad thing. In some places I only update items of interest instead of taking the time to verify a whole row of POIs. In either case, the only way to be sure the entire area is current is to re-survey everything. But if one less thing is wrong or outdated, that makes the data more useful to all clients. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Analysis of usage of similar tags over time
On 9/1/2016 6:04 AM, Éric Gillet wrote: You can see on taginfo that there are indeed around 104k ATM on OSM : http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=atm Also 222000+ combined with amenity=bank as atm=yes , (a small % of those are atm=no) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] friendly notice: Atlanta road construction rendering imagery out-of-date
On 8/24/2016 9:14 PM, Jack Burke wrote: Since I'm on e-mail tonight, I thought I'd bring folks up-to-date on some ongoing road construction north and south of Atlanta that is rendering some pretty important imagery out-of-date. So before you go about trying to "fix" something that doesn't match the spy photos, please check around to be sure that what you're trying to change isn't already right. Thanks for the information! On local projects here, I always add an empty way matching the old image with a note stating that aerials before are out of date. I suppose that will be the next frontier in cleanup projects after imagery receives the next major update. On the plus side, since the new projects are often 1 or 2 GPS traces, removing them will remind me to compare with new aerials. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Check your turn:lanes
On 8/24/2016 6:19 PM, Jack Burke wrote: The problem is, it's breaking the values instead. I found a section of road that I'd added turn:lanes to in order to provide lane guidance at an exit. My original value of "none|none|none|none|none;slight_right" was replaced by "slight_right". I tried to hash this out on the tagging list, and the consensus seemed to be that the value 'none' was the correct terminology. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-June/029335.html I began commenting on changesets, some were corrected by the original fixer, others I just went back and fixed. This message was a direct comment about the task - https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-June/029339.html ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Uber most likely using OSM data
On 8/11/2016 10:53 AM, Dave F wrote: Just because it's very similar to OSM doesn't means it isn't using to some other database. You're arguing what I believe is called a 'false cause fallacy' Similarly, the Uber path could follow the OSM path but differ from both Google and Aerial imagery, for the case where both OSM and Uber derived their information from a cloud of GPS traces. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Map spam
On 7/10/2016 3:30 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote: It is just not that big of a problem. I am weirdly impressed by the odd combination of "quite well-formed data tagging, yet I can still (nearly always) determine that the node is spam." In other words, they are trying hard to fly in under our radar, but we (experienced OSM editors, AND the DWG's diligence) have pretty good radar. I have seen a number of these - at first there was some app generating invalid OSM tags, but excellent geolocation (to OSM standards, center of main business building).Then a handful recently with correct OSM tags and excellent geolocaction. In some cases I add further detail such as driveways, improving surrounding roads, perhaps adding a building. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-transit] GTFS, tools and pt tags generally
On 6/20/2016 5:18 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I really wonder how TriMet ultimately accomplished this, since that would seem like a decent-ish starting point since that system is in charge of a fairly multimodal system with above and below ground stations, split-level stations, and transit centers of almost every description. I don't know for sure, but I think TriMet's system uses GTFS as a primary transit planning reference in OpenTripPlanner, and OSM data is maintained to facilitate public transit connection to Pedestrian / Bike / Car.A quick glance at OSM's public transit layer in Portland shows that lots of bus routes have been entered into OSM, but I don't know if they have any function other than "there is a bus route or stop here". ___ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
Re: [OSM-talk] Duplicate house numbers
On 5/29/2016 7:13 PM, john whelan wrote: I suspect an import of some type but more importantly is the problem of cleaning up. They have the same values for addr:city addr:housenumber addr:street Re: cleanup check - I have created many duplicates like this, but they generally have different addr:unit numbers. In a few cases, I enter the duplicate address since that's all that was on the web site, but go back later to collect the addr:unit information. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Dual carriage way?
On 5/14/2016 12:13 PM, Eric Ladner wrote: I've converted a lot of "FIXME" single ways into dual one way highways, but I've never converted one back the other way. Before I embark on converting it to a single way, just wanted to get the thoughts of other US mappers. I ran into this also in one local region where I converted many miles of dual carriageway TIGER into a single way because there was no divider, but mostly just had a center turning lane. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Improving coverage of exit numbers and destinations on motorways
On 5/4/2016 4:18 AM, Greg Morgan wrote: At one time there was a discussion on the list about moving exit_to tags as destination tags on the ramp. I moved most of the exit_to tags that I mapped to the ramps. Here you are proposing something different by leaving some exit_to tags and adding destination tags occasionally. Just to add to this - someone has added ref:left and ref:right to split exits near me, but it appears that this is an abandoned proposal. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Per-State relations for the Appalachian Trail
On 5/2/2016 11:41 AM, Elliott Plack wrote: This got me thinking, is there any specific need to have the route broken up by state? Unlike interstate highways, where maintenance changes across state lines, at the border, the AT maintenance is handled by a trifecta of federal agencies and a non-profit. There are also 31 clubs that share some of the maintenance on some sections. The advantage of breaking up a relation into smaller relations is to minimize the probability of edit conflicts. I don't know how often things change, or more detail is added on the Appalachian Trail. My tendency would be to leave it separated, but I have no strong opinion either way. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] US 221 (NC) Median U-Turns
This is just a new road configuration (to me). NC Onemap aerials updated to show the latest road configuration after they expanded 10 miles of dual carriageway on US221 in NC. They used Median U-turn configurations along the length rather than straight cross traffic for the crossroads OSRM shows the routing http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car=35.1950%2C-81.8381%3B35.1956%2C-81.8447#map=17/35.19743/-81.84066 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=osrm_car=35.3009%2C-81.9085%3B35.2962%2C-81.9236#map=15/35.3001/-81.9176 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] [Talk-us] license changes
On 2/22/2016 4:38 AM, Simone Cortesi wrote: Looking at previous discussions about "yet another licence change" I wonder if the real client of the exercise really isn't OpenStreetMap US but some company whose name starts with Map* Speaking as an OSM US participant and not affiliated with any company, I would find it interesting if OSM would become more than an academic curiosity in the US. That is, to power more services than Craigslist. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Smartphone App that searches OSM addresses?
On 1/10/2016 12:54 AM, Greg Morgan wrote: I am using the Android version of Maps.ME and there is a IOS version. Thanks - I took a look at it and it worked for me, including the voice turn by turn directions! I have ended up with 13 apps in my "OSM Nav" folder, and they excel at different tasks, but this was the only app I could find that uses OSM data and has turn-by-turn directions. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Smartphone App that searches OSM addresses?
In the case where a county completely revamps its road network and addressing scheme for E911 purposes, then authorizes its road and address data to OSM, and it's properly imported, are there any Smartphone apps for both Android and IOS that would search those addresses? And have turn by turn routing. My cursory review: OffMaps2 - Yes on address search, no on routing GPS Nav - uses commercial address reference over OSM address Scout - " " OSMAnd - theoretically Yes on Android (I haven't tried it), I can't get any OSM address search to work on iPhone Any suggestions? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim weakness
On 12/13/2015 6:47 PM, Jorge Gustavo Rocha wrote: ii) Nominatim can search only within a bounding box. You can get the map extent and append to the nominatim query (viewboxlbrt parameter). Why does the default OSM search box include the world instead of the viewport? Is it because no one has submitted a pull request or is there some other reason? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Find missing roads plugin - JOSM
On 12/9/2015 9:58 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Thanks for reporting Mike - I will pass this on to our dev right away so we can look into it. Any additional contextual information that may help reproduce is more than welcome. Martijn I checked it again - the problem has cleared up on the server for now.I think it can be reproduced by either firewalling off access to that server so that a connect takes a long time, otherwise the dev will need to connect to a dummy instance of the server that holds the connection but never responds. It's possible that the plugin function needs to be asynchronous or release some resource so that the rest of JOSM isn't affected by a future server or network problem. Regards, Mike Nice ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Find missing roads plugin - JOSM
I ran into a small problem with the missing roads plugin in JOSM. When I have it selected, it goes active when I first download something. There is some sort of problem with the missing roads search web service at http://missingroads.skobbler.net/missingGeoService Wireshark shows that the server goes into some sort of error sequence with duplicate ACKs and retransmissions. I'm CC'ing the list because JOSM shows some strange behavior when this happens - the missingroads server conversation must first time out (several minutes) before anything can be uploaded or downloaded again. No error message until the timeout - dialogs just disappear with no action. I've uninstalled the plugin for now. Thanks, ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Deleting standalone empty nodes?
On 12/7/2015 8:39 PM, Steve Friedl wrote: Most of them are by bots – OSMF Redaction Account, woodpeck_fixbot – and they appear to be spurious, but I’m not sure if they are there for a reason. Is there ever any benefit in a standalone node with no tags, especially if it doesn’t appear to be in an “interesting” location relative to underlying imagery? There are 2 common reasons for this: 1 - an import with a partial failed upload that hasn't been cleaned up. Most of the early orphan nodes have been mechanically removed. 2 - The license change redaction process may have left these nodes when the attached way was redacted. If the standalone nodes are recent, don't delete them for at least 2 weeks in case an approved import is in process and will resume later and need to use those nodes. Also be sure they are not contained in a relation (I'm not sure how clearly all editors show relation membership). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Railway = racetrack ?!
I've never noticed this sort of oval railyard in the US before. At first glance, I was thinking railway=racetrack, but of course it isn't. It seems to be some sort of grain depot, but that's the fanciest rail network I've ever seen for a grain depot. http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/36.2834/-89.1455 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Railway = racetrack ?!
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/36.2834/-89.1455 It seems to be the Green Plains ethanol production plant in Obion, TN. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Notes: View them based on age?
On 10/20/2015 7:06 PM, Dave F. wrote: Is there a way to view OSM Notes (right hand side of map) based on the date created? It's a bit of a pain to remember which of the notes I've already clicked on. I've found the RSS feed very helpful for highlighting only new or closed notes within a watch area. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Notes#RSS_feed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] OpenStreetMap US elections: October 12 townhall with candidates
On 10/14/2015 1:33 PM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: One idea would be to have a mapping party doing TIGER fixup for one rural county, then contact the local newspaper, write an article what has been done and ask for help regarding wrong/incomplete road names, wrong data caused by outdated imagery, etc. My guess would be that newspapers in rural towns would be happy about every article regarding their local area that they can get. I agree with this - just some armchair work from existing mappers won't increase overall participation in rural areas, but some preliminary work (untangling TIGER is *hard* for new mappers), followed by newspaper announcements to check road names, etc would bring in some people. Also suggesting to add parks, park details, trails, etc would further attract some people. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Find missing roads
On 10/4/2015 3:32 PM, Greg Morgan wrote: 3.) It would be helpful to put in a count of tiles in the red dot. I was surprised to see some large red dots contain only three tiles while others contained many. It did not feel like the intuitive dot size matched the actual size of the effort. Also, it would be useful to change the red dots to green or remove them after the tiles have been marked as solved. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Find missing roads
On 9/30/2015 2:40 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: I do find two things remarkable about this plugin's output: 1. It seems to have picked out an incomplete set based on the paths relative to imagery. 2. I have no way of being able to survey the exact location of the GPS output from the plugin from the ground (it's inside a fence factory, /of course/ it's fenced off!), so I can only assume the GPS was located on one of those big diesel-powered forklifts. I had a look at the plugin - it does find some interesting things. I find that truckers use the Scout App, and the profile where they drive around a huge factory to pick up / drop off a load appears the same as if a car is going through a previously unknown subdivision. So once the plugin identifies an area of interest, confirm with imagery or TIGER for the next step - add driveways to a factory - Add new road(s) from TIGER - Schedule the area for a survey The odd cloud of points comes from random inaccuracies of a smartphone inside a vehicle, and excluded for a certain distance from existing roads to minimize false positives. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Should driveways be on OSM?
On 9/28/2015 1:33 AM, Tom Bloom wrote: TIGER drew thousands of driveways that are often simply wrong. They are tagged private and in my opinion spoil the map appearance with little red squiggles all over the place. No other map I've found includes them. Looking around the country, I notice some areas where they were removed, changed to service roads, drawn de novo, and one area (near Rosebud, OR) where they were inexplicably changed to living_street, which they just aren't. I change them to type 'driveway' highway=service/service=driveway when it's clear that's what they are. If they're in the wrong place with wrong geometry, then it's OK to delete them. I think driveways do belong in OSM - we're not necessarily like other maps. If they're cluttering the main map, then it's a rendering issue that can be submitted on the bug tracker. However they aren't the default tagging as imported from TIGER (highway=residential / possibly private). > I've been deleting them if wildly wrong, and would like to delete all > I encounter. Any ideas? I don't know of any automated solutions for this. If they really follow a driveway, I'd rather see them changed to type driveway rather than a deletion. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] THIS is the kind of enthusiasm some would reject
On 9/12/2015 3:02 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: If I were trying to drum up support for OSM in the US, I'd probably also welcome someone who maps abandoned railways, so that I'm not alone at the monthly meetup There's some truth to that in the US - one of the 3 regular mappers here in a several hundred mile radius add lots of general OSM input based on travels, but also researches old railways and maps them - some disused, some dismantled, etc. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] Strategy for 'updated' TIGER regions
There have been analysis and strategy about fixing TIGER 'Deserts'[1], but what is the best way to manage regions that have been thoroughly updated to match TIGER, and possibly enhanced beyond that with local knowledge? Background - An essential task in keeping OSM updated and relevant in the US has been to compare existing OSM data to the latest TIGER data and add new roads. This generally means adding the endless new streets for subdivisions or possibly a single new cul-de-sac development street. The problem is that once an area has been completely synchronized to TIGER, what is the best way to update it in the future? The problem comes when revisiting a completed area looking for new roads. What if someone had deleted or modified those streets based on local research or knowledge? The old TIGER street shows up as a 'new' street, and there's no way an armchair mapper would know what to do.[2] The street or segment gets added back to the map and OSM becomes a museum relic holding old TIGER data unless someone knowledgeable happens to notice. I'm starting to keep an empty way with a note on the old TIGER trace, but I suspect that almost no one has historically done this in the US. I propose 2 changes to TIGER challenge tasks - 1. Future TIGER challenges in completed areas should highlight only changes relative to the previous year, or 2010 and not treat all TIGER data as authoritative. Roads are sometimes accidentally deleted in OSM but those could be flagged by telemetry from Scout. 2. Focus on areas that desperately need alignment, but may not have even updated TIGER. Just aligning streets to aerial imagery will make the area usable by navigation systems. Admittedly since those areas are also likely to be low population, there may not be a payback for paid mappers to help. This is not meant to be anti-armchair mapping but a way to continue to make better use of armchair mapping resources. Mike --- [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TIGER_fixup#TIGER_desert [2] In the past, I demonstrated OSM's local mapping advantage to a friend by comparing Skobbler's turn by turn to Garmin soon after this frontage road access was closed for safety reasons. Google and Garmin finally corrected their routing after some years, but OSM went back to the old days - http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/30249051 More armchair mapping challenges - http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33549289 ! https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/32398213 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/32373023 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Abandoned Rails
On 8/23/2015 2:03 PM, Dave F. wrote: Are you saying if a building gets demolished replaced with a new one, you wouldn't remove the original outline from OSM? In my case, I've begun to do just that, adding a note to alert the 'Bing tracers' that something has changed. But I would eventually remove it after Bing is updated. Only historic or notable buildings would go into OHM. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenge - fix railway crossings
On 8/4/2015 4:59 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Also, please even if you see the crossing rendered, do go in and check, because I have seen more than once that the crossing node is not a shared node between way and rail. (Hint, use 'j' to join node to way and 'm' to merge nodes that are (almost) on top of each other.) I noticed something interesting about JOSM - if I select an intersection that may or may not have 2 duplicate nodes, in some cases where there were 2 nodes, the JOSM 'M' command has no effect the first time. Now I always watch and try again if the merge was ignored. But that can be another post-challenge fixup - duplicate nodes on rail crossing. Other notes: Please don't (C)ombine sections of railway unless there is a good reason. I don't know if anyone is combining currently, but there was a long span across South Dakota spanning 2 counties and 400 nodes which was shifted (perhaps to correct a local problem). Mappers fixed various crossings, and the long way was shifted 2 more times. I finally just manually reviewed and fixed the entire shifted way. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/33235552 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Arm chair mapping challenges
On 8/18/2015 10:27 AM, Tod Fitch wrote: Some other mapper has updated the area to remove the old buildings and streets and marked the area as under construction. All of that seems correct from what I’ve read in the paper and what little I can see on the ground. But it means the area differs from the Tiger data for the area. And now I am seeing multiple change sets from mappers I don’t recognize as local re-instating the now missing features. For example:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/366208964#map=15/37.3338/-122.0097 To borrow from the Stop deleting abandoned railroads thread, nothing should be deleted. g But seriously, I now leave an empty way with a note saying that Bing is out of date. That will head off some problems. Of course, this leaves lots of empty cruft floating around, and discourages new editors who are confused by all the jumble. A number of the “fixes” have a mention ofhttp://osmlab.github.io/to-fix/?error=tigerdelta-named#/task/tigerdelta in their change set comments. A partial technical improvement is that the challenge on osmlab.github.io should only flag missing TIGER data that was added to TIGER since the original 2007 import. But that misses the very real problem when someone accidentally deletes an existing street. But definitely comment politely on the changeset. I'm a firm believer in the value of armchair mappers and what they're doing. A bit of feedback helps them learn and improve, since I'm sure they mean to do well. [ PS - 3 out of 5 of the Bing is right edits have come from local mappers ] ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] NAIP US Aerial Imagery
From the USGS help, it appears that there is some delay. http://www.usgs.gov/faq/categories/9861/3655 I spot checked some places in SC, and it looks like it isn't using the latest NAIP yet. So I would find the ability to always use the latest NAIP to be useful. Hopefully it wouldn't be hard to set up as a new layer. On 8/12/2015 5:01 PM, Ian Dees wrote: Last I checked the latest and greatest NAIP is included in the USGS's large scale imagery layer, which is tiled and cached on the OSM US tile server. I don't have a layer specific to the latest NAIP-only imagery, though. Is that something you're interested in? On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Mike N nice...@att.net mailto:nice...@att.net wrote: Does anyone know about current NAIP aerial imagery? SC 2015 imagery has been acquired and can be viewed, but the page no longer lists WMS as a format - http://gis.apfo.usda.gov/arcgis/rest/services/NAIP/South_Carolina_2015_1m/ImageServer SC 2013 WMS imagery has already been removed. Does this mean that NAIP will be removing WMS from future services and will only support JSON and SOAP? (which I cannot get JOSM to accept). ___ 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
Re: [Talk-us] NAIP US Aerial Imagery
On 8/12/2015 5:51 PM, TC Haddad wrote: Just to comment on this one point: As a federal agency, the USDA is *required* to support the open standard option of the WMS service type, so it *should* be available. In looking at all the different state NAIP imagery sets listed in their directory here: http://gis.apfo.usda.gov/arcgis/rest/services/NAIP, every single other state lists the WMS option, so it's clearly an error that South Carolina is missing it. Hopefully the service maintainers will catch on and correct soon, but if you or others have a contact it is worth an email to make them aware, both of the mistake, and of the customer base for the open standard option. It might be that it is still at some review or implementation stage and they haven't generated WMS yet. I'll keep an eye on it and contact them if it doesn't show up eventually. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] NAIP US Aerial Imagery
Does anyone know about current NAIP aerial imagery? SC 2015 imagery has been acquired and can be viewed, but the page no longer lists WMS as a format - http://gis.apfo.usda.gov/arcgis/rest/services/NAIP/South_Carolina_2015_1m/ImageServer SC 2013 WMS imagery has already been removed. Does this mean that NAIP will be removing WMS from future services and will only support JSON and SOAP? (which I cannot get JOSM to accept). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenge - fix railway crossings
On 8/4/2015 5:21 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: I didn't want to make the instructions too convoluted. We can always go back in and manually check for these 'unjoined crossings'. I am just mentioning Yes - this should be relatively easy to detect afterwards: duplicate node where one or more are marked as level_crossing. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenge - fix railway crossings
It was a pleasant dive into the latest MapRoulette challenge - my impression now is that most road-rail intersections in the US have previously been touched. The stats for the fix railway challenge seem to confirm this: 75% are skipped or have been previously completed. A far cry from the All roads from TIGER are junk and no one touches them. But there are still pockets of tangled roads in West Virginia for example. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] New MapRoulette challenge - fix railway crossings
Fantastic! One question - it recommends to skip the task if you can see the X already. But doesn't this place that challenge back on the queue where it will stay forever as long as people keep using 'skip'? On 7/31/2015 6:42 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Hi all, Partly inspired by Google making noise about saving lives by warning people about crossings (see for example http://www.transportation.gov/fastlane/fra-google-team-to-incorporate-rail-data-in-maps) I decided to take that same railroad crossings data from the Federal Railway Administration, massage it a bit and turn it into a MapRoulette challenge! Here it is: http://maproulette.org/#t=fix-railway-crossings I filtered out all 'historic' records in the original FRA file, but I did not cross check against existing OSM crossing tags. Even if you see a rendered crossing already, please do go in and check though - I find that sometimes the crossing node is actually not a shared node between the road and the railway. Have fun! Martijn van Exel skype: mvexel ___ Talk-us mailing list 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
Re: [Talk-us] Am I mapping this wrong, or should the router be fixed for this?
2) There should be some cost in a routing engine for making a u-turn so as to discourage such routes even if there was an extra set of signals. Making a u-turn does take time (one can not go from the posted speed limit in one direction to the posted speed limit in the other direction instantly). The presence of other traffic in the opposing directly would add further to the time needed to make a u-turn as one would have to wait for an opening. I agree that the cost of a U-turn is not high enough if it is less than a shorter route via traffic signal. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Railway crossing challenge for MapRoulette
On 7/8/2015 2:43 PM, Greg Morgan wrote: I see the why Martijn would be hard pressed to exclude crossings that are already in the OSM. He's using the Federal Railway Administration, FRA, data as a punch list in this challenge. Perhaps you can add additional features to a crossing in this challenge, if you know that bells and whistles exist at a crossing. I was thinking of NY State for example, where all crossings already exist in OSM. Those would just be empty tasks. Since they're all points, it should be easy to do a pre-conflation to exclude existing matches. But I haven't looked at FRA data - perhaps it doesn't include GPS location? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Railway crossing challenge for MapRoulette
On 7/6/2015 10:46 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Please share your corrections / feedback so I can improve this if necessary before I push it live. (In particular I am never sure whether to use crossing or level_crossing.) Thanks for doing that challenge - it sounds like a great fit for MapRoulette! My only feedback is not to include the OSM already has a crossing points, or - is this confirmation that the specific challenge task has been complete? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Mechanical edits
On 6/29/2015 11:12 AM, Michael Reichert wrote: That's why I think that there should be no restriction on API side. Either people realize that mechanical edits have to be disussed first (after revert of their first undiscussed mechanical edit) or they get blocked if they refuse contact with the community. Also even if there was a restriction on the API for area of edit, a mechanical editor would just first break the edit into smaller sections, hit 'Upload' and walk away as all the sections are automatically uploaded. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] SOTM-US - Great Videos!
I couldn't make it to SOTM-US because of time constraints, but wanted to thank the sponsors and all who made the great videos! http://stateofthemap.us/program/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] a plea to armchair mappers
On 6/11/2015 12:46 PM, Mike N wrote: I've seen this problem also - an area marked for construction, all roads bulldozed out, - the roads re-appear due to a TIGEROSM comparison test because they're in Bing. Speaking of which, one of those came back to life yesterday. I tried the README trick on an empty object this time. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Truck stop gas stations as caravan_site
On 6/1/2015 10:34 AM, Jack Burke wrote: I was wondering if it is appropriate to tag truck stops with tourism=caravan_site. I've noticed a lot of them tagged this way, presumably because many of the truck stop chains allow overnight parking of RVs, some have dump stations, etc. It may have started in the early days when caravan_site rendered but there was no tourism = truck_stop or whatever might make more sense. There is no harm in defining a tagging scheme that makes more sense, but I'd not want to change any existing tagging until the rendering catches up. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Detection of suspicious edits
On 5/18/2015 7:13 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: At first glance it really looks as if the user did nothing more than random deletions across the country. I wonder why it hasn't been noticed before. In the US, it's probably related to the number of regular mappers per unit area. If no mappers regularly monitored for changes in these areas, the most likely way to detect this type of action would have been a TIGER to OSM comparison fixup task. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Chain Store Cleanup
On 5/1/2015 11:07 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: That's a very computer person approach to take. In fact, the McDonald's issue has already been tried by someone in the past with an undiscussed mechanical edit, promptly falsifying a few non-chain non-fastfood places that*really* were called McDonalds just as you mention. The proposed edit doesn't seem to match the previous mass Search/Replace edit. It should also be possible to confirm each location against the McDonalds store locator or a store list from McDonalds. It is also an easy fallacy to think that if the marketing people of some chain decide to spell their name differently, we could or should simply replace all names to what they should be - no we don't, we only change the name when the store changes its lettering. I as a local mapper would never notice such a change in 100 years of going back to audit POIs. A remote mapper change would correct this properly if checked against corporate data, complete with proper tagging for old_name - this would assist searches for the new name. The argument is strongly *for* informed, remote changes, assuming that the data in OSM is to be of some use to data consumers. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] what happens to an OSM account if the user dies
On 4/8/2015 7:26 AM, maning sambale wrote: Sad news that my friend and OSM contributor died from a vehicular accident. I'm curious, what happens to an OSM user account if this happens? Sorry to hear this.In the past with the license change, the contributions were summarily deleted at the time of conversion to ODBL. Fortunately I believe that the user's contributions will be preserved if there were to be another license modification in the future. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
On 4/3/2015 5:32 PM, Eleanor Tutt wrote: I'm interested in hearing more about how and why people contribute to the map. It's just a hobby for me, a way to get out and learn some obscure facts about a place. Most contributions come from a GPS survey or local observation. Although I believe I could get permission from my county and an adjoining county for importing buildings and addresses, I'm intentionally not bothering with that import because I'm not sure who would use the data yet anyway. (In the US, everyone uses Google, so they shrug at OSM). In the meantime, I am adding addresses of most POIs / landmarks that I enter into OSM. There are now 3 major contributors in my area, up from 1 for many years. One pulls extensively from survey data he collects from daily travels. The other one has created some detailed landuse coverage for the region. I'm ashamed to admit that he hasn't actually traversed each landuse area with a GPS, but is instead using Bingg, and by the way NOT AN IMPORT. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] perceptions of OHM and other similar projects
On 4/3/2015 9:17 AM, Richard Welty wrote: i think the long term future of OSM will probably involve more OHM like projects to supplement OSM. my question is how will the core OSM community treat them? right now it seems very mixed. I think it's a great idea. There may be some definition about when to add things to OHM. For Ghost tracks for example, should it be added when - The track is not operational? The bleachers are dismantled? The track is torn up? When the banked oval no longer leaves a depression in the terrain? When the variation in tree growths no longer take the shape of the oval? When an archeologist digging in the area would not reasonably expect to find any racing artifacts? OHM would be something to get used to. Now I'm all too happy to obliterate all items in a construction zone when the bulldozers and wrecking ball arrive on site. I'm not sure any random buildings would be of interest to OHM unless they had some special significance. I can see Russ's point that even if the dismantled tracks are moved to OHM, it breaks the relation and continuity of railroad track analysis. I hope that we can postpone railway deletions until we have had a chance to explore the issues and come up with some solutions. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Facts about the world
On 4/4/2015 1:04 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote: I wonder if it was even about the resolution in some counties. It's as if the data was traced off a cartogram, or maybe reconstructed from a table of intersections. Or recorded with a GPS back in the days when the signal was scrambled, that is with the deliberate random error measured by non-military grade GPS receivers. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] New North America coverage of Osmose QA
Thank you for the addition of this valuable quality tool! ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] For comment: import of amenity=bicycle_repair_stations
I happened to be near one of these today, and I had to move it about 8 meters. REVERT! (not really, just kidding) I think this was a useful dataset for import. And if there were some variations on the actual position, I don't see how this is any different from typical mapping errors, such as the POI that someone had placed on the wrong building, resulting in a 30 meter error. My only comment about this import would be that I don't think that it is useful to accompany an import with mass notes or FIXMEs. If someone notices that the position is off, they'll correct it or leave a note. In this case it wasn't too serious because the number of data points is low, but would be more of a problem with a larger dataset. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Routing across parks
Are there routers that do shortest-path routing across areas? I do not have an example of an area without additional roads ready. I'm not aware of any routers that routes across areas. There's some prior work in OpenTripPlanner - http://blog.openplans.org/2012/06/b-roll-david-solves-the-plaza-problem-with-help-from-de-berg-and-matt-conway/ . The odd cases come up quickly when there is a convex or concave area and deciding when to traverse it. I'm not sure if that work was rolled up into the current OpenTripPlanner repository though. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Problem with usage of other values than yes for key building
On 3/11/2015 6:37 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: nd common editor presets. In iD without expert mode / all tags the only values for the building key are yes and unknown (which will not set any key I believe), if other tags like amenity etc. are also set. No way to enter free text then. FWIW, I've just yesterday filed a ticket for this: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2550 I just noticed a user changing all my specific building types to 'yes' with ID. I'm still trying to find out why before undoing that. I would consider a global change to 'building=yes' without saving that information in another key to be equivalent to vandalism due to the amount of information loss. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Routing across parks
On 3/10/2015 12:56 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote: If I understand correctly that you want routing to cross a park as long as the way in and the way out are connected to the perimeter of the park. This is only correct in parks where you are free to walk anywhere. Most parks in continental Europe do not work this way. Typically, but not always, you have to stay on the paths. To solve this, one needs possibly a new (?) tag for parks like stay_on_path=yes|no I agree - there needs to be areas of general walk permission established before a router can include that area. FYI - OpenTripPlanner includes some form of routing for highway=pedstrian areas. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] Why does the USA currently lag in OSM map quality?
FYI - there's a general discussion on Why does the USA currently lag in OSM map quality? over on a web forum: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30121 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Why does the USA currently lag in OSM map quality?
On 2/17/2015 3:30 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: A pile of automatically imported or collected data is really not all that interesting or complete. I think in the USA the way forward involves finding user communities not served by other maps (e.g. Bear Boxes, above). I've found that after a quorum of parks has the typical level of OSM detail added, they become quite interesting to community recreational planners because no other map: government or Google matches it. But this is only a microscopic slice of users in comparison to consumers of trip routing data. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] this has to stop: iD user mistakes all over the place
On 2/11/2015 2:49 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Read through the issue tracker: It's clear that issues reported are pushed back on by the core iD developers. It's very tightly held. I disagree (not a developer here). The interesting thing that came out of this discussion is the realization that none of the key problems that people are seeing have an outstanding pull request. If the pull request is rejected, then you have a point. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging addresses on area's
On 2/4/2015 11:25 PM, Greg Morgan wrote: addr:housenumber contains both the number and the building letter in the same field. The map is useful because you can find the building. How have other people tried to handle these situations? I haven't tried in any meaningful way. It's too early to guess how an address matching utility might work. Until now I have used both addr:housenumber=724D and addr:housenumber=724 + addr:unit=D depending on whether the address specified by the owner's web site included the letter. More recently, I've gravitated towards separating the addr:unit even if the owner specified it as one word, but I'm not sure it's the most useful. The addr:housenumber doesn't render anyway if the building has also been tagged as another POI that renders. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Updating tagging of public transport
On 2/3/2015 3:31 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: Is the new style backwards compatible with the old style? The new Public Transport style is backward compatible and offers a more uniform tagging style with some additional capabilities (in my opinion). Especially in regards to potentially having OSM as being the dataset for the official GTFS feed in an area where the official data presently sucks, it'd be a travesty if the new style makes going to and from GTFS /more/ difficult for marginal (and primarily German micromapping) gains. Generally, it is not feasible to use OSM as a dataset backing an official GTFS feed. This is because the probability of the GTFS dataset being uploaded to Google and thereby violating the license if the street centerlines or stops were derived from OSM. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Should this be a dual carriageway?
On 1/8/2015 3:13 PM, Zontine, Chris -(p) wrote: Thanks for the research. I will change the highway to trunk and leave as a single carriageway. I found this old photo http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/mid-cape/ , which seems to approximately match the recent Bing. If it's still in this configuration, a single carriageway is probably best. The double double yellows would imply no turns and no U, but I haven't reviewed the state or regional laws. (Of course a survey and local knowledge is best...blah...blah) ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Should this be a dual carriageway?
On 1/8/2015 5:51 PM, Richard Welty wrote: I found this old photo http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/mid-cape/ , which seems to approximately match the recent Bing. If it's still in this configuration, a single carriageway is probably best. The double double yellows would imply no turns and no U, but I haven't reviewed the state or regional laws. i don't think this photo is relevant to the section that Chris is talking about; it's a different section of US 6. i think this road is in dire need of a ground survey. Oops - I forgot to mention that it was the middle photo. I think this one will work http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/mid-cape/img10.gif ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Change: How mature is OpenStreetMap?
On 1/6/2015 4:23 AM, Andreas Goss wrote: I have this with fitness centre/gym now again. A few replies and then nobody cares. I'm pretty sure that now I tag each fitness centre randomly differently. I'd prefer a single convention, but I can see that there will never be agreement. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] MEP - pipelines
On 1/6/2015 6:47 AM, Chris Hill wrote: If the new scheme is adopted in staged way that would be better than a single mass edit, though it can still break data use for people who don't follow OSM's mailing lists. I don't blame the proposer of the scheme; he's just following the daft guidelines in the wiki. He probably hasn't realised what a phoney, broken procedure voting is. Let's stop using voting. There's nothing wrong with voting - there just needs to be a well defined way to stage changes so that consumers are informed and can adapt to them as they come in. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Tagging outdoor US shopping centers
On 12/23/2014 9:40 PM, Doug Hembry wrote: I'm a relative newbie, and here's a question I've been puzzling over for a while: What's the best practice for tagging a north American outdoor shopping center? I agree with all the previous advice, and have also run into some minor quirks when addressing. As far as I can see, the addr:* fields refer to the postal address. I'm not sure whether there is an easy way to indicate the city of government, particularly if the boundary has changed (I don't have an updated boundary - just information that these stores have one postal city but they're a member of a separate city government). I'm using addr:unit freely now, even though it's not on the JOSM presets. In some cases, a merchant will put 307G Cycletree Ct on their web site, but a different merchant in the same center will put 307 Cycletree Ct / Suite G. Proportionally, there aren't many occurrences of addr:unit in the entire OSM database. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki - contact: Tag Map Features
On 12/19/2014 3:47 PM, Dave F. wrote: From memory the original claim was all 'contacts' could be filtered out in one go, but it was pointed out that post filtering would still need to be performed, and I'm no programming expert, but I was led to believe parsing a string like 'contact:email' is slow. In one go, there's this: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=contact . As a programmer, I would tend to be in the contact: camp. As an OSM contributor, I have since long sided with the non-contact: camp since the data consumers have been very slow on the uptake of the contact: form - if anyone is even using it at all yet. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] OSM Mapwear
I don't remember seeing this mentioned here... http://monochome.com/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] Directional suffixes on roads: yes or no?
On 12/1/2014 12:55 AM, Elliott Plack wrote: When you say that most people don't refer to it as such, that can definitely pose a challenge to cartographers. My opinion is to use the full name with the post directional and let map data users (or humans) choose what to ignore. I also feel that the data belongs in order to have the full information from the original source, and also to be able to disambiguate an address. Some time ago, someone saw the un-abbreviated post-directionals already present in OSM and wanted to remove them because locals didn't use the post-directional, as well as the clutter from the long name. Hopefully map rendering will continue to advance to show abbreviations in the US. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Updating tagging of public transport
On 11/27/2014 3:08 PM, Saikrishna Arcot wrote: Not sure if this is the right list or the tagging list is better, but I see some bus and subway routes in the Atlanta area that use the older version of tagging public transport routes. Should these be updated to use the newer version of tagging? I would say to go for it. Be aware that one or more of the popular map rendering style sheets only render the old style transport, so retain the old style tags if you need it rendered everywhere it currently shows. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Detrimental validation software
On 10/13/2014 6:48 AM, Dave F. wrote: This, other similar types of software is being misused to insert errors into the OSM database. Without local knowledge there is no way users can be sure of the accuracy of there edits. They should stick to what they know. I believe this type of validation software should be discouraged, if not banned completely. This could be a valid use of noexit=yes so that it won't be back on the QA tool? https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2014-April/017367.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[Talk-us] TIGER 2014 update
Just out of curiosity, I did a dumb road name comparison between TIGER 2013 and TIGER 2014 for the surrounding dozen counties. I was surprised to find that my local county had a bunch of new roads added. So the TIGER data can get a major update for a reason other than the census workers traversing every street and finding a new street. None of the other counties had new roads added though. Since the new roads were flagged, I was able to bring them into OSM. (All manually checked for connectivity, smoothing, etc). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Taxiways and runways in mapnik?
On 9/8/2014 3:30 PM, stevea wrote: What happened to taxiways (and runways?) in mapnik recently? Take a look at any airport with taxiways near you and see if it isn't re-rendering in a oops, something is missing kind of way. Issues are being worked on - There is indeed an issue with aeroways, which are currently not rendered when tagged as ways: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/927 A solution has already been written, but it hasn't been accepted yet: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/928 ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Dirt Roads (formerly: Abandoned railway)
On 9/1/2014 11:27 PM, Nick Hocking wrote: I think thrse ways can easily be identified by... 1) They are original TIGER data import 2) They have not been edited since import 3) They are higway=residential 4) They are unnamed Another way to select roads having suspicious routing would be: Unnamed residential connecting between roads having name and/or ref. That set of roads may be small enough to be suitable for MapRoulette where they could be re-marked as track / service / etc if appropriate. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Dirt Roads (formerly: Abandoned railway)
On 9/1/2014 7:53 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: I think the other half of the equation, however, is actually getting this fixed across the country. At present it appears to be just a small number of mappers doing it in their areas; To be honest, I don't really get the problem with excessive 'residential', or what I'd do to fix it. If I had to study the roads where I live, a few would be upgraded to tertiary or changed to unclassified, and all unnamed residential would be changed to driveway, but the end result would have very few changes (with the exception of unnamed residential - which could be done with a bot). ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Dirt Roads (formerly: Abandoned railway)
On 9/1/2014 9:59 AM, Wolfgang Zenker wrote: I guess you haven't done much in the rural parts of the US yet. Have a look at Lincoln County MT: You will find A LOT of tracks. Most of these had been tagged as residential highway in the TIGER import (with horrible distorted geometry of course), and no way could this have been fixed with a bot. Took me about two years to get this county into the current state. I agree that rural areas with tracks need to be manually corrected, but that's more of an issue in some areas than others. I'm wondering about the typical small town or suburb with reasonable geometry, this village for example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/34.9673/-82.4367 Perhaps another tertiary or 2, but everything else would remain residential except for the driveways. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Dirt Roads (formerly: Abandoned railway)
On 9/1/2014 11:27 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Except I don't know if they're at all cyclable, or if I need to take the bike with knobbly tyres, or even if they exist at all. OSM in the US just isn't reliable to that level, whereas it is in Western Europe, and the Australians are also working on the issue. But in the US, I couldn't use OSM for planning a route by hand, let alone with a router, which would merrily send me down the shortest highway=residential with no knowledge of whether it's suitable or not. For the rural case and accurate route planning, it will take ground truthing to get accurate bike / foot routing - it's probably not something that could be tasked to MapRoulette/etc. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Abandoned railway
On 8/30/2014 4:33 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Seriously, OSM in the US, outside a few cities, is still way beyond broken. You can open it at any random location and the map is just fictional. (I did, just now:http://www.osm.org/edit#map=13/36.1938/-103.6446 . Landing on the high plains desert in the west does not make a good case that OSM in the US is broken. Desert imagery cues do not match those of conventional climates. Those roads likely do exist, but are barely visible in contrast to the surroundings. We city-folk would classify them as tracks, but a desert prospector or park ranger would consider them secondary. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] Detrimental to the OSM database
On 8/24/2014 10:48 AM, Russ Nelson wrote: I do wish I could tell it Only show me things in New York State, because screw everybody else, this is a competition and I'm here to win. Go NY! Go NY! Your wish has been granted. At the top of the Select a different challenge dialog, press I want to select an area to work in and follow directions. It's an area within a radius, but has a much closer scope than world. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Detrimental to the OSM database
On 8/23/2014 5:20 AM, Lester Caine wrote: http://openstreetmap.us/iD/release/#background=Bingmap=17.00/-83.15249/36.43657 is the one I'm currently on and leaving as it's impossible to see any detail in iD ... how do people cope with the dark images? In iD, select the imagery layer New Misaligned TIGER. The new TIGER won't always be better than the original; check it against visible road to judge its quality.It is often much improved and I use it to map through forested areas. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] (Was) How is Scout?
On 7/18/2014 9:49 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: I thought I'd read up on all the stuff I needed to tag lanes=*, lanes:forward=*, lanes:backward=*, turn:lanes=*, turn:lanes:forward=*, turn:lanes:backward=*, etc. But I totally missed the existence of placement:*=* I totally missed *placement: also - it's mentioned only in passing at the bottom of one of the pages.Lane marking appears to be a complicated system. I downloaded the JOSM turnlanes plugin, but it wants to tag via relations. In my experience, the relation method is nearly impossible to force onto the OSM topology for many intersections, so I gave up on that early. I found the JOSM Lane and road attributes, but noticed that it's complaining about missing attributes on an intersection that I did but I think the style is wrong. I'm going to dig into the code to see what it's doing. Needless to say, I don't expect newbies to easily pick up on lane tagging.The good part about tagging lanes without relations is that they won't be breaking turn lane relations by accident. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] (Was) How is Scout?
On 7/19/2014 3:37 PM, Paul Johnson wrote: What's the node number at the intersection? So far, I started on just one of the ways - it's at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/292617988 . I found my problem: the JOSM Land and Road Attributes style was correct. I had used a colon instead of a | , but it had passed the JOSM turnlanes validator. Between all the ;,|,: - the style is the only way to check it.It sure takes a bunch of fields to specify everything. As the style page suggests, I think I'm going to poke around Graz, Austria in Read-only mode to get a feel for how they tagged lanes there. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] More road name expansion thoughts
On 7/19/2014 2:38 PM, Dale Puch wrote: I say retest the script detection and use it regularly for the start/end abbreviations. Expand it to other detection if it can be shown to be reliable. I think the idea of some additional automated expansion is a good idea. Let's circulate the idea for a while to see if anyone knows of cases which will fail. For the end cases Dr, Rd, St, Ave, Ln, Blvd, Cir, Pl and Hwy - I believe it will work better than 99.9%. But in the starting position, I already know of 2 cases that will produce a false directional and false prefix type.Perhaps the edge cases can be tagged to eliminate them from any automated expansion. Throw in a semi regular MapRoulette task to look for more complicated or vague abbreviations and the problem can be kept under control. This can also be used to verify advanced scripts reliability by offering a suggested expansion on the harder names. St / Saint on a prefix can be so specialized that only a local could sort it out. I suspect that most of the unusual cases would be too complicated for MapRoulette because of the need to consult with a governmental reference. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] More road name expansion thoughts
On 7/19/2014 6:06 PM, Paul Norman wrote: On 2014-07-19 2:46 PM, Mike N wrote: I suspect that most of the unusual cases would be too complicated for MapRoulette because of the need to consult with a governmental reference. Or actually survey them. Aside from first-hand knowledge being superior, there tends to be a high error rate in official databases for the unusual cases. In my case, if I see Ext on a sign - does it stand for Extension or Extended? Only the local authority or convention would tell me. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] How is Scout?
On 6/23/2014 3:15 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: We launched Scout for iOS powered by OpenStreetMap a little over a month ago now, followed by the Android version in early June. While the feedback in general has been overwhelmingly positive, I am really curious to hear about your experiences. Have you tried Scout? What are your impressions? Have you given any feedback using the map error reporting function in the app? I've finally got Scout installed on IOS and working the way I'd like to use it. I have a few notes: 1. After reviewing the tags in the Wiki that are noted - I see that highway=service is not used for through routing. In one case I've seen, that could still be useful if there is no other way to exit a space such as this: http://mapq.st/1p3a3QX From A, I was advised to just go to S Pleasantburg Drive, whereas Skobbler tells you turn by turn. From point A, there are 1 or more parking_aisle + driveway segments to traverse before coming to the roundabout and a named road. 2. A very minor thing: When it got to Douglas W Brister Boulevard, the voice announced it as Douglas West Brister Blvd :-) Otherwise the text to speech works very well - is there any way to hint that the W is not a directional? 3. If it advises to keep left on a 2 lane road, oneway=no, I'm assuming that the number of lanes isn't marked and that if the lanes=2 was added, that the keep left would be omitted for that case. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Beach routing
On 7/10/2014 2:58 PM, Jim McAndrew wrote: I would make sure that you add tags like bicycle=no, even though bicycles are probably not forbidden, bicycles and sand generally do not mix. The key word being generally http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OIK5OAowFPQ/TaWSb5XILAI/CMk/kPaJ7BKDnts/s1600/Custom_Beach_Bike.jpg ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] routing tags used by actual routing applications
On 7/1/2014 7:18 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: With that said I agree fully that having a resource that*is* trustworthy (containing references to which router supports certain conventions) is becoming increasingly important I would also find this very helpful - not to tag for a particular router but to know which tags actually describe a way properly for routers to interpret. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] exit_to vs destination
On 6/23/2014 6:58 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: While motorway_junction= + exit_to= is much more common here in the US than destination= for freeway exit tagging, we seem to be the exception globally. I have no objection to changing to a system that is more informative and adaptable. exit_to gained popularity in the US because it was the first tagging scheme available at the time the Interstates were being identified. Most of this could be automatically converted to 'destination=', except that there is a growing dislike of any botlike edits. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] exit_to vs destination
On 6/23/2014 7:16 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote: Most of this could be automatically converted to 'destination=', except that there is a growing dislike of any botlike edits. We should approach automated edits with a great deal of caution - but that's a separate discussion. I think converting exit_to to destination would be hard to do anyway because exit_to is added to the motorway_junction node, whereas destination is on a way. That could get ugly really fast, don't you think? I haven't examined the destination tag, but just moving the information from the node to the correct attached way would be straightforward.Of course any non-regular cases could be flagged for manual work - such as terminating in a Y with an exit_to:left and exit_to:right. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: USBRS WikiProject seeks volunteer mappers
On 6/3/2014 5:34 AM, Simon Poole wrote: Route USBR 10 nicely illustrates my point about GIGO. It starts of in untouched TIGER country and continues. Implying that nothing has been surveyed along the route, clearly requiring large amounts of clean up before even thinking about adding the roads to a route relation (well at least if you don't want the relation to break n-times when somebody actually does the clean up). As a counterpoint to GIGO: the only clean road at the start point is part of the preliminary bike route. Cleanup is a known science - many US and state route relations were added before a geometry review. Bike routes would break no more than existing routes that are being cleaned up by MapRoulette. Further the area not being surveyed implies that all the value add that we can offer a cyclist is not there (surface, lanes, shoulders etc). Blocking bike routes until everything is surveyed is not realistic - we'd need to map every parking spot with a potential car door zone, every storm drain that may cause a road hazard, as well as every road width in addition to the surface, lanes and shoulders. Blocking bike routes only ensures that TIGER deserts remain as deserts for any number of years until someone randomly happens to take interest, if ever. Having a bike route will motivate people to start with armchair improvements and follow with incremental improvements to the roads that the bike route cover. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Fwd: USBRS WikiProject seeks volunteer mappers
On 6/2/2014 3:27 PM, Simon Poole wrote: To put it differently: if the import was combined with systematic surveying of the routes by OSM contributors instead of them just sitting at their desk then it would be a lot more palatable. I think the appeal to local mappers to pitch in with the new bike route relation definitions is part of the logic here.For example, I already am familiar with the roads of one of the theoretical future bike routes in my area.There's a good chance that a local mapper in that state already knows part or all of the roads in the official bike route. [ Of course, I'm not putting anything in OSM since it's not even under any sort of official development yet. But if it were, I would be able to evaluate the official route definitions against my knowledge of the roads. ] ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USBRS WikiProject seeks volunteer mappers
On 6/1/2014 12:32 AM, Russ Nelson wrote: Why would that necessarily be imported? And how do you import a route, anyway? Similarly, there have been projects to add route relations to state and county routes. Depending on the availability of sources from the state, the mapper may end up working from PDFs of varying quality and making judgement calls in order to create those relations.Do we treat these projects as imports as well? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] USBRS WikiProject seeks volunteer mappers
On 5/31/2014 6:43 PM, stevea wrote: It really does seem as important as Interstate highways, but for bicyclists. For my input: I agree - in the US, having a reliable source of bike routes is as important as Interstate highways. If anything, OSM suffers from too few data consumers and a lack of interest in the US, and this is one area OSM can choose to participate in and gain data consumers, and likely future contributors. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Telenav goes OSM with Scout
Congratulations on the switch - I'm looking forward to this. On 5/20/2014 2:30 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: We have done a good chunk of work improving OSM to be ready for this, mostly in the very same way everyone here improves the map: by opening up our favorite editors and manually editing the data[1]. But also by analyzing the data and pointing out errors, which we have started to feed to MapRoulette. Do you see reported errors being handled through Maproulette, Notes or a combination of those? ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Telenav goes OSM with Scout
On 5/20/2014 2:13 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: Makes me wonder, how many of you use Mapdust? What types of things do you end up fixing most? I did use Mapdust back in the day - there isn't much new showing up, so I only monitor Notes these days. For regional fixes, I would schedule a missing speed limit report for a video speed limit survey. It was great at calling out missing 1-way streets, but it would require a survey. I think Scout covers that already with statistics which is better. Sometimes it would call out missing roads that I could add from TIGER. Maproulette / TIGER battleship has addressed the many of the missing streets already. A few would be wrong street names or bad geometry telling them to turn at the wrong place - that could be fixed from Bing. There might be an occasional report of a wrong street name - and a case where the refreshed TIGER confirmed the report and I could make the correction. The remainder would be an address in the wrong place. Most of those would have taken a survey or public address data to correct. Recently, I found an OSM note in which an Android routing App incorrectly routed a long distance around a closed part of a major secondary road. Upon inspection, it appeared to be a tiny road segment that was accidentally deleted.Now that many major roads have route relations, those could be monitored for a break - and then called out for a check to see if is a temporary construction closure or accidental deletion. Mike ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [OSM-talk] TIGER to OSM comparison
On 5/2/2014 7:29 AM, Hans De Kryger wrote: Has anyone ever thought of developing a program to compare street names from tiger to street names in osm? I know I've come across plenty of errors in which the street name is misspelled or completely wrong. http://maproulette.org/battlegrid/ I'm not sure if it only compares geometry, or if it also compares names. It would be an easy platform to begin with to add a test for name comparison. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] TIGER to OSM comparison
On 5/2/2014 11:32 AM, Murry McEntire wrote: Are you assuming the Tiger values are more accurate than what is in OSM? If so, rethink that. For armchair mapping, the only thing that might be safe is that new TIGER is more accurate than old TIGER. But any such TIGER comparison must not override a previous correction from a mapper (who should also remove the tiger:reviewed=no to help notify other mappers that the name is derived from a survey or local knowledge). For best results, name comparison should only flag differences against unedited or bot-edited TIGER ways. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [Talk-us] OSM Inspector and streets with E/N/S/W in their name
On 4/30/2014 11:59 PM, David K wrote: If a street has name=Elm Street but a house has addr:street=S Elm St, I consider this perfectly valid (in a city that in fact has only one Elm Street). (Sidebar: I use USPS abbreviations in addr:street values because that's how USPS prefers mail to be addressed.) To have a program present this as an error will could editors to change the presentation of good data against established local conventions. I'm not at all clear about OSM conventions in representing USPS mailing addresses VS city boundary of residence. I've never attempted to handle OSM notes of the sort I'm in X city, but CraigsList shows me in Y city. Most new OSM contributors would enter the S Elm St form, but this is different from the established convention of creating road names without abbreviations. ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
