Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
On 10 February 2015 at 12:19, Jo Walsh metaz...@fastmail.net wrote: I wish to float this draft page for discussion and possibly future approval! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map I welcome this page, I think it is very useful. One small comment - I oppose the following sentence: | OpenStreetMap has very few rules on tagging. There are tagging | standards but they evolve instead of being pushed through. There is no consensus on this point, and including it in official 'How we map' guidelines would falsely suggest that there exists such a consensus. It is also not true that we map in this way: many tags that we are using have been proposed before they were used, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Proposed_features_%22Approved%22. Also, the meaning of this sentence is not clear: what does it mean for a tagging standard to 'evolve', and what does it mean for a tagging standard to be 'pushed through'? In any case, I would like to thank you for drafting this document. -- Matthijs ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015, at 07:39 PM, Matthijs Melissen wrote: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map I welcome this page, I think it is very useful. One small comment - I oppose the following sentence: Thank you for the comment Matthijs, I've added it to the discussion page here, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:How_We_Map In any case, I would like to thank you for drafting this document. The original longer draft was a collective effort on the part of the DWG some time before i joined up, and Frederik did all the hard work of writing it up, so I can only accept a tiny modicum of credit for compressing it :) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
Hi, On 02/12/2015 08:53 PM, Jo Walsh wrote: so I can only accept a tiny modicum of credit for compressing it :) ... from a dry and almost legalese long-form that nobody wanted to read into something that radiates community spirit. Credit whom credit is due ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Jo Walsh metaz...@fastmail.net wrote: OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection. Could both terms be more elaborated on? Does data perfection in practice mean adding true but not really useful things, often in not-well-thought-out way? Because otherwise, we should strive to be perfect. Michał ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection. Could both terms be more elaborated on? Does data perfection in practice mean adding true but not really useful things, often in not-well-thought-out way? Because otherwise, we should strive to be perfect. Ah, this is exactly where i start whipping out classic references to Jorge Luis Borges. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Exactitude_in_Science In that Empire, the Art of Cartography attained such Perfection that the map of a single Province occupied the entirety of a City, and the map of the Empire, the entirety of a Province. In time, those Unconscionable Maps no longer satisfied, and the Cartographers Guilds struck a Map of the Empire whose size was that of the Empire, and which coincided point for point with it. The following Generations, who were not so fond of the Study of Cartography as their Forebears had been, saw that that vast map was Useless, and not without some Pitilessness was it, that they delivered it up to the Inclemencies of Sun and Winters. The wording here was an attempt not to set OSM up for a cultural fall by saying anything along the lines of data quality is not as important to us as successful community. Suggestions for easier wording of this statement, on the Talk page for the draft, would be appreciated. I see this point has already been raised there: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:How_We_Map#Community_cohesion ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
Already a great piece. This should go out to all new signups. On Feb 10, 2015, at 4:19 AM, Jo Walsh metaz...@fastmail.net wrote: dear all, I wish to float this draft page for discussion and possibly future approval! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map The page is a summary of a draft Mappers' Code written by Frederik some time ago after extensive discussion with the rest of the DWG. When I signed up to the DWG I tried to condense that draft into a single-screen, single-page, easily digestible version appropriate to show to new mappers and to put on the registration pages. My ideal for the doc is that it expresses the core principles of contributing to OSM without besetting anyone with rules, and that it's as short as possible without missing out anything important to know. I encourage people to post scathing critiques on the Talk: page in addition to here on the list. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:How_We_Map For the benefit of the really lazy or bandwidth-deprived, I include the full text of How We Map as it stands now, below the fold. be well all, OpenStreetMap is a social activity; it is a teamwork effort by hundreds of thousands of people around the globe. OpenStreetmap has a tradition of making as few rules as possible. Contributions to OpenStreetmap should be: Truthful - means that you cannot contribute something you have invented. Legal - means that you don't copy copyrighted data without permission. Verifiable - means that others can go there and see for themselves if your data is correct. Relevant - means that you have to use tags that make clear to others how to re-use the data When in doubt, also consider the on the ground rule: map the world as it can be observed by someone physically there. OpenStreetMap has very few rules on tagging. There are tagging standards but they evolve instead of being pushed through. OpenStreetMap values local knowledge highly, but mappers should welcome edits from outsiders. OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection. You do not have to ask permission before modifying existing data. If you believe that you can improve something, then do it. In talking to other mappers, always assume good intentions. If you have a conflict with another mapper that you cannot solve amongst yourselves, involve other project members - via the local community meetup, the regional mailing list or areas of the forum, or by messaging them directly. Occasionally you will be contacted by other mappers about edits you have made. Please do not ignore them; if the other mapper has taken the time to look at your edit and ask you a question, they deserve an answer. Do not delete data unless you know (or have very strong reason to believe) that it is incorrect. Do not engage in large-scale cleanups without securing the agreement of the relevant community, or talking to the people whose work you aim to clean. You may believe your third-party dataset should be added to OSM. Do not bulk import data from other sources without first discussing and securing agreement on the imports list. -- Jo Walsh metaz...@fastmail.net ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
On 11 Feb 2015 17:53, Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de wrote: Am 11.02.2015 um 17:51 schrieb Mikel Maron: Already a great piece. +1 As a suggestion for improvement: I'd love to have a clear statment in the way that somebody new in the project should at least inform himself about practice/methods and tagging conventions used since years before inventing the wheel again. Perhaps that could be part of a Getting Started page or a How To Map page rather than the How We Map page which I think looks pretty good. Ed ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
Hi, Am 2015-02-11 um 17:51 schrieb Mikel Maron: Already a great piece. This should go out to all new signups. I agree, too. It is short enough to be shown at the signup page. Best regards Michael -- Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. I prefer GPG encryption of emails. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
Am 11.02.2015 um 17:51 schrieb Mikel Maron: Already a great piece. +1 As a suggestion for improvement: I'd love to have a clear statment in the way that somebody new in the project should at least inform himself about practice/methods and tagging conventions used since years before inventing the wheel again. That is something which buged me some times within the last months... = first have a detailled look on how the community is doeing something since years and then afterwards suggest/discuss a possible change. Cheers, Michael. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How We Map
Agreed with all of the above, this is a great, concise, and friendly piece. I would love for this to be accessible not just for new signees but available for old timers looking for a nice refresher — Sent from Mailbox On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Ed Loach edlo...@gmail.com wrote: On 11 Feb 2015 17:53, Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de wrote: Am 11.02.2015 um 17:51 schrieb Mikel Maron: Already a great piece. +1 As a suggestion for improvement: I'd love to have a clear statment in the way that somebody new in the project should at least inform himself about practice/methods and tagging conventions used since years before inventing the wheel again. Perhaps that could be part of a Getting Started page or a How To Map page rather than the How We Map page which I think looks pretty good. Ed___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] How We Map
dear all, I wish to float this draft page for discussion and possibly future approval! http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map The page is a summary of a draft Mappers' Code written by Frederik some time ago after extensive discussion with the rest of the DWG. When I signed up to the DWG I tried to condense that draft into a single-screen, single-page, easily digestible version appropriate to show to new mappers and to put on the registration pages. My ideal for the doc is that it expresses the core principles of contributing to OSM without besetting anyone with rules, and that it's as short as possible without missing out anything important to know. I encourage people to post scathing critiques on the Talk: page in addition to here on the list. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:How_We_Map For the benefit of the really lazy or bandwidth-deprived, I include the full text of How We Map as it stands now, below the fold. be well all, OpenStreetMap is a social activity; it is a teamwork effort by hundreds of thousands of people around the globe. OpenStreetmap has a tradition of making as few rules as possible. Contributions to OpenStreetmap should be: Truthful - means that you cannot contribute something you have invented. Legal - means that you don't copy copyrighted data without permission. Verifiable - means that others can go there and see for themselves if your data is correct. Relevant - means that you have to use tags that make clear to others how to re-use the data When in doubt, also consider the on the ground rule: map the world as it can be observed by someone physically there. OpenStreetMap has very few rules on tagging. There are tagging standards but they evolve instead of being pushed through. OpenStreetMap values local knowledge highly, but mappers should welcome edits from outsiders. OpenStreetMap values community cohesion over data perfection. You do not have to ask permission before modifying existing data. If you believe that you can improve something, then do it. In talking to other mappers, always assume good intentions. If you have a conflict with another mapper that you cannot solve amongst yourselves, involve other project members - via the local community meetup, the regional mailing list or areas of the forum, or by messaging them directly. Occasionally you will be contacted by other mappers about edits you have made. Please do not ignore them; if the other mapper has taken the time to look at your edit and ask you a question, they deserve an answer. Do not delete data unless you know (or have very strong reason to believe) that it is incorrect. Do not engage in large-scale cleanups without securing the agreement of the relevant community, or talking to the people whose work you aim to clean. You may believe your third-party dataset should be added to OSM. Do not bulk import data from other sources without first discussing and securing agreement on the imports list. -- Jo Walsh metaz...@fastmail.net ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
