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

[Pierre Béland]

Hi Frederik
The Overpass query shows me this morning that with your last redaction the 
names are back for the 620 highways.
Thanks
 
Pierre 
 

Le mercredi 11 octobre 2017 13:08:42 HAE, Pierre Béland  
a écrit :  
 
 Re-visiting this changeset I see that of the 620 ways with tag 
"source:name"="geobase.ca", 552 ways have no name restored. See for example way 
32798176 where I validated the name + added source:name Overpass query 
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/sh6

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

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

[Kevin Kenny]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Kevin Kenny
 wrote:
> With that in hand, I can probably finish up New Jersey this week.

Noo Joisey is done.

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

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

[Kevin Kenny]

On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
>
> A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
> information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
> ok, and plan to remove or change the names on these remaining ones. (To
> avoid misunderstandings: There's a column in the file that says what I
> plan to do, either "change to XYZ" or "delete", but that does NOT mean
> "delete the object", just "delete the name tag"!)

Thanks for taking care of this. Could I make a suggestion for future work
of this kind: add a note:redaction (or some similar key) with value
identifying the particular redaction that the object belongs to? At Max's
suggestion, I was doing Overpass queries with the set of way ID's
looking for ones that were still last modified by 'woodpeck_repair',
but I realize that if the ways had an identifiable tag, I could easily
hack up a reusable script to say, "give me the next object from
this redaction" - and remove the tag when the object is re-uploaded.
Simply having a tag like "note:redaction=chdr_20171008" on
the redacted way would do it.

I may be too much of an old woman here, worrying about identifying
objects from the wrong repair. It appears that for this particular
incident,
way(newer:"2017-10-07T00:00:00Z")(user:"woodpeck_repair")({{bbox}});
is a perfectly workable Overpass query for "tell me the work to do
in this particular bbox".

With that in hand, I can probably finish up New Jersey this week.

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

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

[Pierre Béland]

Re-visiting this changeset I see that of the 620 ways with tag 
"source:name"="geobase.ca", 552 ways have no name restored. See for example way 
32798176 where I validated the name + added source:name Overpass query 
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/sh6

Pierre 
 

Le mercredi 11 octobre 2017 11:26:35 HAE, Frederik Ramm 
 a écrit :  
 
 Hi,

On 10.10.2017 03:16, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I still have the raw data and I'll write a quick script
> that finds these cases and restores the names.

Should be done here

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52829433

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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Pierre Béland]

Great, thanks Frederik.
 
Pierre 
 

Le mercredi 11 octobre 2017 11:26:35 HAE, Frederik Ramm 
 a écrit :  
 
 Hi,

On 10.10.2017 03:16, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I still have the raw data and I'll write a quick script
> that finds these cases and restores the names.

Should be done here

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52829433

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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10.10.2017 03:16, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I still have the raw data and I'll write a quick script
> that finds these cases and restores the names.

Should be done here

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52829433

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

[Andrew Matheny]

Just a heads up for everybody-

I'll handle the redactions in the Dallas-Fort Worth area of Texas (Collin,
Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Tarrant, Johnson, and Wise Counties)

Thanks,

Andrew Matheny

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Max Erickson  wrote:

> I reviewed about 40 ways in New York. Here's an Overpass script for
> finding the ways that have not been changed since the redaction:
>
> https://gist.github.com/maxerickson/e02651cce99af983949b91f8d471fb23
>
> The ways are clustered quite a lot.
>
>
> Max
>
> ___
> 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] [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Max Erickson]

I reviewed about 40 ways in New York. Here's an Overpass script for
finding the ways that have not been changed since the redaction:

https://gist.github.com/maxerickson/e02651cce99af983949b91f8d471fb23

The ways are clustered quite a lot.


Max

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

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

[Kevin Kenny]

On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
>
> A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
> information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
> ok, and plan to remove or change the names on these remaining ones. (To
> avoid misunderstandings: There's a column in the file that says what I
> plan to do, either "change to XYZ" or "delete", but that does NOT mean
> "delete the object", just "delete the name tag"!)

Thanks, Frederik, this makes things easier.

I'm getting started on the New York morass.

This evening, did the ways with ID's 5610940-5714662

New York has a big enough pile of ways that this probably
could use an OSM task. I don't think I'm going to have time
to finish in very short order.

I've been sweeping up some TIGER turds as I go. It's not
just renaming.

For what it's worth http://maps.nyc.gov/doitt/nycitymap/ is a clean
reference for the New York City boroughs.
The underlying data are all in NYC Planimetry, which
is effectively in the public domain as per Local Law 11 of 2012,
section 23-502
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doitt/initiatives/open-data-law.page

I used that to sort out some questionable TIGER 2017 data.

Kevin

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

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

[Pierre Béland]

Thanks 
Pierre 
 

Le lundi 9 octobre 2017 21:16:19 HAE, Frederik Ramm  a 
écrit :  
 
 Hi,

On 10/10/2017 02:54 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:
> Hi  Frederik, as a bad armchar mapper, I have revised  the Quebec
> highway names before redaction, validating names with an acceptable
> source + adding source:name=geobase.ca.

I took some precautions to "save" names; if you have indeed modified a
name then it should not have been affected. If the name stayed the same
and you just added the source tag then I'll probably have killed the
name. I had that on the radar once (check for added source:name) but it
seems I forgot. I still have the raw data and I'll write a quick script
that finds these cases and restores the names.

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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/10/2017 02:54 AM, Pierre Béland wrote:
> Hi  Frederik, as a bad armchar mapper, I have revised  the Quebec
> highway names before redaction, validating names with an acceptable
> source + adding source:name=geobase.ca.

I took some precautions to "save" names; if you have indeed modified a
name then it should not have been affected. If the name stayed the same
and you just added the source tag then I'll probably have killed the
name. I had that on the radar once (check for added source:name) but it
seems I forgot. I still have the raw data and I'll write a quick script
that finds these cases and restores the names.

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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Pierre Béland]

Hi  Frederik, as a bad armchar mapper, I have revised  the Quebec highway names 
before redaction, validating names with an acceptable source + adding 
source:name=geobase.ca. After redaction, names are removed + even if I try to 
re-import - review all the conflicts throug JOSM, I loose all my changes! 

Not much time to loose as a bad armchair, I am going outside bicycling ;) 
Pierre 
 

Le samedi 7 octobre 2017 19:50:16 HAE, Frederik Ramm  
a écrit :  
 
 Hi,

On 27.09.2017 21:49, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> That is helpful. Let us know when you have re-executed the analysis and
> posted the results.

http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details

A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
ok, and plan to remove or change the names on these remaining ones. (To
avoid misunderstandings: There's a column in the file that says what I
plan to do, either "change to XYZ" or "delete", but that does NOT mean
"delete the object", just "delete the name tag"!)

I'll start doing that in ~ 20 hours from now.

I'll then redact the versions that carried the "bad" name.

The redaction will also affect a few historic objects that *used* to
have a "bad" name and where the name has meanwhile been changed again,
or where the object has been deleted; these redactions will be of little
consequence.

Bye
Frederik

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

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

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

[Tod Fitch]

FYI, I reviewed the ways with redacted names in California (all in San Diego 
County) and where possible set the names per Tiger 2017 data. In most cases the 
names set by chdr matched the Tiger names but there were some exceptions.

There are a roads that did not have names showing in the Tiger 2017 overlay 
image layer in JOSM. Unfortunately there was no Mapillary imagery for guidance 
on those so they were left unnamed.

Tod

> On Oct 7, 2017, at 4:47 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 27.09.2017 21:49, Martijn van Exel wrote:
>> That is helpful. Let us know when you have re-executed the analysis and
>> posted the results.
> 
> http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
> 
> A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
> information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
> ok, and plan to remove or change the names on these remaining ones. (To
> avoid misunderstandings: There's a column in the file that says what I
> plan to do, either "change to XYZ" or "delete", but that does NOT mean
> "delete the object", just "delete the name tag"!)
> 
> I'll start doing that in ~ 20 hours from now.
> 
> I'll then redact the versions that carried the "bad" name.
> 
> The redaction will also affect a few historic objects that *used* to
> have a "bad" name and where the name has meanwhile been changed again,
> or where the object has been deleted; these redactions will be of little
> consequence.
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
> 
> -- 
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> 
> ___
> 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: [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 27.09.2017 21:49, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> That is helpful. Let us know when you have re-executed the analysis and
> posted the results.

http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details

A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
ok, and plan to remove or change the names on these remaining ones. (To
avoid misunderstandings: There's a column in the file that says what I
plan to do, either "change to XYZ" or "delete", but that does NOT mean
"delete the object", just "delete the name tag"!)

I'll start doing that in ~ 20 hours from now.

I'll then redact the versions that carried the "bad" name.

The redaction will also affect a few historic objects that *used* to
have a "bad" name and where the name has meanwhile been changed again,
or where the object has been deleted; these redactions will be of little
consequence.

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

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 27.09.2017 21:49, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> That is helpful. Let us know when you have re-executed the analysis and
> posted the results.

http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details

A new list (CSV file) with way id, coordinates, and country/state/county
information. I've eliminated all objects that have been reported to be
ok, and plan to remove or change the names on these remaining ones. (To
avoid misunderstandings: There's a column in the file that says what I
plan to do, either "change to XYZ" or "delete", but that does NOT mean
"delete the object", just "delete the name tag"!)

I'll start doing that in ~ 20 hours from now.

I'll then redact the versions that carried the "bad" name.

The redaction will also affect a few historic objects that *used* to
have a "bad" name and where the name has meanwhile been changed again,
or where the object has been deleted; these redactions will be of little
consequence.

Bye
Frederik

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

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

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

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi Frederik,

That is helpful. Let us know when you have re-executed the analysis and
posted the results.

A list of IDs per county would be helpful. We can work together as US
community to identify viable sources for re-assessing the correct names, as
well as organizing mapping efforts for surveying. We can encourage people
to use StreetComplete as well, which already has a missing names
'challenge', if I remember correctly.

On the topic of StreetComplete, does anyone know how often their challenges
are refreshed? I will add Tobias to the thread, perhaps he can shed some
light on this.

Thanks,
Martijn


On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 27.09.2017 06:43, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> > In your email from Aug 28 you proposed to wait a while as a first step
> > to gather some feedback on your assessment. Did you receive any? When do
> > you think you want to proceed with the redaction? Anything we can do to
> > help?
>
> I haven't received any feedback other than what came over the lists.
> I'll re-do my analysis and try to take into account changes that people
> have made after chdr and where they mentioned a particular source.
>
> > I can assist with preparing the MapRoulette challenge to re-tag the
> > redacted roads.
>
> > We can take steps to ensure that people use legit
> > sources: run a separate challenge for each region and point to specific
> > sources that can be used for that region, for example.
>
> Frankly, in those regions where we've just a couple 100 affected roads,
> maybe we don't have to do anything at all - the roads will show up on
> generic "name missing" debug views like in OSMI, and will be fixed
> sooner or later. If we concentrate on countries losing 500 names or
> more, that'd be ~ 15 country-wide challenges which should be manageable?
> I could make a list of way IDs per country.
>
> I was hoping to get things over with this month which is going to get a
> bit tight but I'm still planning that. Unless there's a reason to wait?
>
> 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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 27.09.2017 06:43, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> In your email from Aug 28 you proposed to wait a while as a first step
> to gather some feedback on your assessment. Did you receive any? When do
> you think you want to proceed with the redaction? Anything we can do to
> help?

I haven't received any feedback other than what came over the lists.
I'll re-do my analysis and try to take into account changes that people
have made after chdr and where they mentioned a particular source.

> I can assist with preparing the MapRoulette challenge to re-tag the
> redacted roads. 

> We can take steps to ensure that people use legit
> sources: run a separate challenge for each region and point to specific
> sources that can be used for that region, for example.

Frankly, in those regions where we've just a couple 100 affected roads,
maybe we don't have to do anything at all - the roads will show up on
generic "name missing" debug views like in OSMI, and will be fixed
sooner or later. If we concentrate on countries losing 500 names or
more, that'd be ~ 15 country-wide challenges which should be manageable?
I could make a list of way IDs per country.

I was hoping to get things over with this month which is going to get a
bit tight but I'm still planning that. Unless there's a reason to wait?

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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Martijn van Exel]

Hi Frederik,
In your email from Aug 28 you proposed to wait a while as a first step to 
gather some feedback on your assessment. Did you receive any? When do you think 
you want to proceed with the redaction? Anything we can do to help?
I can assist with preparing the MapRoulette challenge to re-tag the redacted 
roads. We can take steps to ensure that people use legit sources: run a 
separate challenge for each region and point to specific sources that can be 
used for that region, for example. If you can shed some light on when you want 
to proceed, I can time that work accordingly.
Martijn

> On Sep 19, 2017, at 12:34 AM, Greg Morgan  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Bianca Hambasan  > wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> We, the map analysts team from Telenav started editing in Phoenix by adding 
> and reviewing the road geometry and road name, so we found this issue too. In 
> our area of interest, we found about 5 200 ways with this tag. We want to 
> help with this since we already edit in the area. Do you have any suggestions 
> if we can contribute without overlapping our work? We can also use Map 
> Roulette challenges, so anyone can be involved. If you have any other 
> suggestion, we are open to them.
> 
> As a source, we use Tiger data and Open Street Cam. What do you think about 
> the accuracy of them?
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Frederik,
> 
> What is the status of your name redaction?  chdr impacted many of the streets 
> that I made edits to.  I'd like to start fixing the names with the Tiger 2015 
> layer.  However, I need to wait on your redaction.  I marked the streets that 
> need to be attended to by the chdr_USA_AZ_name_fixup_required tag. I am not 
> sure if your redaction will remove my name tag target or not.  Can you 
> localize you redaction to just Arizona so that I can get going?  As noted by 
> Bianca, Telenav is in the area editing right now and would love to help with 
> the fix up effort.
> 
> Please Advise,
> Greg
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

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

[Greg Morgan]

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Bianca Hambasan  wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> We, the map analysts team from Telenav started editing in Phoenix by
> adding and reviewing the road geometry and road name, so we found this
> issue too. In our area of interest, we found about 5 200 ways with this
> tag. We want to help with this since we already edit in the area. Do you
> have any suggestions if we can contribute without overlapping our work? We
> can also use Map Roulette challenges, so anyone can be involved. If you
> have any other suggestion, we are open to them.
>
> As a source, we use Tiger data and Open Street Cam. What do you think
> about the accuracy of them?
>
>
>

Frederik,

What is the status of your name redaction?  chdr impacted many of the
streets that I made edits to.  I'd like to start fixing the names with the
Tiger 2015 layer.  However, I need to wait on your redaction.  I marked the
streets that need to be attended to by the chdr_USA_AZ_name_fixup_required
tag. I am not sure if your redaction will remove my name tag target or
not.  Can you localize you redaction to just Arizona so that I can get
going?  As noted by Bianca, Telenav is in the area editing right now and
would love to help with the fix up effort.

Please Advise,
Greg
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

[Bianca Hambasan]

Hi,

We, the map analysts team from Telenav started editing in Phoenix by adding and 
reviewing the road geometry and road name, so we found this issue too. In our 
area of interest, we found about 5 200 ways with this tag. We want to help with 
this since we already edit in the area. Do you have any suggestions if we can 
contribute without overlapping our work? We can also use Map Roulette 
challenges, so anyone can be involved. If you have any other suggestion, we are 
open to them.
As a source, we use Tiger data and Open Street Cam. What do you think about the 
accuracy of them?

Thank you!

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr (Spain)

[alan_gr]

Thanks Frederik - I will pass that on to talk-es. 

My next question was going to be about name:xx, but you beat me to it!



--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Redacting-75-000-street-names-contributed-by-user-chdr-tp5901701p5901775.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr (Spain)

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 30.08.2017 09:29, alan_gr wrote:
> However there is confusion about the process. Several mappers on talk-es
> think that if the name of the affected streets can be verified using the
> cadastre ahead of time, this will avoid them being deleted. Some mappers
> have already started checking streets and tagging them as "source=Cadastro
> España". 

This is not what I had in mind. What I had in mind was people suggesting
a refinement to my selection process, for example telling me that "if
the name change is simply expanding Av to Avenida then you can ignore that".

I can cater for such edits as you describe and refrain from removing
names where a source tag has been added after chdr, but I don't have a
good feeling about it. I think it would be the cleanest way to delete
all names and then have them re-added, perhaps with the help of
Maproulette or similar.

> - exactly what will happen on "redaction day", including the impact on ways
> that have been edited by other mappers AFTER chdr

The current plan is to re-set the name tag to whatever it was before
chdr has edited the name (including "empty" if it was a name added by
chdr), EXCEPT where the name has meanwhile been changed by someone else,
and also EXCEPT where chdr has made primitive edits like a name expansion.

I have noticed that chdr has sometimes also added name:xx attributes
that would have to meet a similar fate.

> - approximately when "redaction day" is likely to happen

I'd say not before 15th September, but in September.

> - what mappers should do (or not do) now.

Ideally, look at a few samples from my list and check if they do indeed
represent a name that was added by chdr, and shout if they find that my
script has identified a case where chdr didn't indeed add meaningful
information.

Mikel has already identified one issue where the script didn't properly
recognize a simple "N"->"North" expansion, and there might be more.

I have uploaded a slightly reduced file that now shows the following counts:

  16331 "Mexico"
  15108 "Brazil"
  11944 "United States of America"
   6763 "RSA"
   2802 "Spain"
   2608 "Australia"
   1922 "Argentina"
   1672 "Nigeria"
   1535 "India"
   1428 "Canada"
952 "Malaysia"
744 "Botswana"
701 "Philippines"
619 "Indonesia"
553 "Italy"
414 "Turkey"
290 "Hungary"
283 "Chile"
245 "Kenya"
127 "Saudi Arabia"
107 "Paraguay"
106 "Panama"
100 "Morocco"

The counts have changed mainly for the US, and the per-state numbers
look like this:

   5150 "Arizona"
   5102 "Texas"
592 "New York"
132 "New Jersey"
129 "New Mexico"
105 "Illinois"
 96 "California"
 90 "Hawaii"
 81 "District of Columbia"
 79 "Colorado"
 61 "Iowa"
 49 "Rhode Island"
 46 "Michigan"
 27 "Nebraska"
 27 "Missouri"
 26 "Kansas"
 25 "Pennsylvania"
 20 "West Virginia"
 19 "Maryland"
 16 "Georgia"
 14 "Ohio"
 14 "Nevada"
 13 "Minnesota"
  9 "South Dakota"
  8 "Virginia"
  8 "Indiana"
  3 "Connecticut"
  1 "North Carolina"
  1 "Maine"

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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr (Spain)

[alan_gr]

(I will continue in Nelson's thread as my post also relates to a specific
"other country")

The impact on Spain is currently being discussed in the talk-es mailing
list:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-es/2017-August/015416.html

Spain has a legitimate source of street names in the form of the official
cadastre, so this shouldn't be a huge issue.

However there is confusion about the process. Several mappers on talk-es
think that if the name of the affected streets can be verified using the
cadastre ahead of time, this will avoid them being deleted. Some mappers
have already started checking streets and tagging them as "source=Cadastro
España". I think this is based partly on the paragraph in the first post
about "suggesting a refinement that would leave more names in place". If I
have understood the original thread correctly this editing doesn't really
achieve anything, as the names will be redacted anyway and the mappers will
need to edit all the ways a second time. But that thread has grown in to
something quite intimidating, even for a native English speaker, and it is
difficult to pick out the bits that would make this clear.

It would be useful to state (or restate) 
- exactly what will happen on "redaction day", including the impact on ways
that have been edited by other mappers AFTER chdr
- approximately when "redaction day" is likely to happen
- what mappers should do (or not do) now.











--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Redacting-75-000-street-names-contributed-by-user-chdr-tp5901701p5901706.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

[OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Nelson A. de Oliveira]

(sorry to break the thread; I was following the discussion through the
archive, but I wasn't subscribed)

Simon Poole wrote:
> Our concern should be more about Mexico, Brazil and other countries
> where it is at least not obvious to me if the local communities are
> aware of the issue and if we have any plan at all how we possibly could
> mitigate the impact.

Most of the affected data in Brazil is located in São Paulo city,
where we have data available from the city hall.
In other areas we have data from IBGE.
We can fill most (if not all) of the street names back again using licit data.

We are aware of the affected areas and streets.

And I guess that we can't say that all the data was copied from Google.
In some places it differs from Google, while being too similar to Bing
(unless that Google data from 6+ years ago was the same as the current
Bing data).

For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/113013110

In OSM we have "Rua Rosa Marly de Souza"
In Google we have "R. Rosa Marli de Souza"
in IBGE we have "Rua Rosa Marli de Souza"
In the official city map we have "Rua Rosa Marli de Souza"
And, in Bing, we have "Rua Rosa Marly de Souza"

See the word "Marly" (in OSM and Bing) and "Marli" (everywhere else)

Another example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48514142

In OSM we have "Rua Professora Maria José Baroni F. da Silva"
In Google we have ""R. Profa. Maria José Barone F. da Silva""
in IBGE we have "Rua Professora Maria José Barone F. da Silva"
In the official city map we have "Rua Professora Maria José Barone
Fernandes da Silva"
And, in Bing, we have "Rua Prfa. Maria José Baroni F. da Silva"

R. expands to Rua
Profa. and Prfa. expands to Professora

Take a look at "Baroni" (in OSM and Bing) vs "Barone" (in everywhere else)

Another https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/131816621

In OSM we have "Rua das Margaridas"
In Google we have "Rua Margarida"
In IBGE we have "Rua Margarida"
In the official city map we have "Rua Margarida"
In Bing "Rua das Margaridas"

"Rua das Margaridas" (OSM/Bing) vs "Rua Margarida" (other places)

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

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

[Pierre Béland]

Simon Poole wrote 
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you want to do, but it would seem as if that 
just amounts to doing the work twice.
After revising 126 elements, I agree with Simon. Let's avoid doing the job 
twice.
Below is an evaluation for Quebec / Canada with a sample of 126 of 1,316 id's 
from Frederik list. I see that we cannot assure in this sample what is the name 
source for 98% of the ways modified.  

Since there are often references to Canvec, I did an Overpass query. It appears 
that 53 ot the 1,316 have the tag "canvec:UUID" and this tag was sometimes 
modified. But without confirmation from chdr it is difficult to assess if it 
did really come from Canvec.
Then, yes, for Canada at least where we have opendata available, let's simply 
redact all the names except the typos that are easily identiable and start 
over. 

   2 typo corrections (ie. place to Place, St- to Saint-)
110 Name added  14 Name revision (it could be adding Street, Avenue, Rue, 
Place, Croissant, etc) I saw one Google artefact where Rue was modified to 
Avenue while Rue is specified on the OpenData source
 
regard 
Pierre 






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

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

[Simon Poole]

Am 28.08.2017 um 14:43 schrieb Pierre Béland:
> Simon Poole wrote
>
> PS: naturally simply assuming that all name expansions are
> legit is a bit iffy, consider Circle vs. Circuit  and other
> expansions that you often can't decide without external
> sources, I don't know if there are  any such cases in the
> affected data, but it seems to be silly to start wasting time
> on something that is  essentially a non-problem (revert the
> name to the original and re-expand it using current TIGER if
> possible).
>
> To respect contributors participation, I think that it is important to
> avoid deleting valid contributions.
Naturally. In my experience the DWG goes to great lengths to avoid
unnecessary damage, however in cases like we have at hand that requires
cooperation from the contributor (identifying legit vs non non-legit
contributions), which hasn't been forthcoming.
 
>
> Before redaction, what I propose to do for Quebec / Canada :
>
> I will go through thee chdr list provided by Frederik, and will verify
> the history for the name and add either
> source:verify tag=chdr name addition without source
> confirmationsource:verify tag=chdr name typo correction
>
> After redaction, it will be easy to select the redacted ways and add
> the name from legit source.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you want to do, but it would seem as if
that just amounts to doing the work twice.

Simon
>
> regard
>  
> Pierre
>
>



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

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

[Pierre Béland]

Simon Poole wrote

PS: naturally simply assuming that all name expansions are legit is a bit iffy, 
consider Circle vs. Circuit  and other expansions that you often can't decide 
without external sources, I don't know if there are  any such cases in the 
affected data, but it seems to be silly to start wasting time on something that 
is  essentially a non-problem (revert the name to the original and re-expand it 
using current TIGER if possible).

To respect contributors participation, I think that it is important to avoid 
deleting valid contributions.
 Before redaction, what I propose to do for Quebec / Canada :
 I will go through thee chdr list provided by Frederik, and will verify the 
history for the name and add either
source:verify tag=chdr name addition without source confirmationsource:verify 
tag=chdr name typo correction

After redaction, it will be easy to select the redacted ways and add the name 
from legit source.
regard
 
Pierre 


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

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

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

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

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

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

I think the best course of action would be:

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

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

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

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

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

Bye
Frederik

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

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

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

[Simon Poole]

Am 28.08.2017 um 12:16 schrieb James:
> As Stewart has pointed out there are some changes that are valid(name
> expansion). I think Mr.Ramm needs to revise his selection algorithm
> before mass deletion
I'm not quite sure why we are again discussing the center of the known
universe again, but I do want to point out that in for the majority of
the US the names will revert back to their original TIGER values. For
example for the street Clifford pointed to, from Seeton Road to East
Seeton Road, which is no worse than before somebody decided to start
cheating and not a major disaster.

Simon

PS: naturally simply assuming that all name expansions are legit is a
bit iffy, consider Circle vs. Circuit and other expansions that you
often can't decide without external sources, I don't know if there are
any such cases in the affected data, but it seems to be silly to start
wasting time on something that is essentially a non-problem (revert the
name to the original and re-expand it using current TIGER if possible).

>
> On Aug 28, 2017 6:05 AM, "joost schouppe"  > wrote:
>
> 2017-08-28 10:27 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole  >:
>
> What surprises me most about the discussion up to now that it is
> centered around the impact on the US and Canada were the
> removals are
> rather small both relatively and absolute*, actually are more
> at the
> nuisance level than anything else, and can easily be added
> back, likely
> in a couple of days  from sources that are already pre-approved as
> reference material.
>
> Our concern should be more about Mexico, Brazil and other
> countries
> where it is at least not obvious to me if the local
> communities are
> aware of the issue and if we have any plan at all how we
> possibly could
> mitigate the impact.
>
>
> I can't say I'm surprised by that myself. This is a conversation
> in English, on a mailing list, bot things not very popular in
> Latin America.
> I've posted this thread to the Latam telegram group, with an offer
> to translate if needed.  
>
> -- 
> Joost Schouppe
> OpenStreetMap
>  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Meetup
> 
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
>
>



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

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

[Stewart C. Russell]

I agree with John that many ways flagged by Frederik look like they are
legitimate CanVec imports. In a random sampling of chdr's flagged ways
in Canada, fewer than 15% were created by that user. Some had existing
names cleaned up (eg: Libersan → Rue Libersan in way 23456048) by chdr.
Perhaps more dodgy are the ones where chdr added a name to an existing
way where none had been before, as there is no change in source tagging
in chdr's version.

Many of chdr's ways have been deleted and replaced by other imports by
other users (see changeset 2386572 for a good example) that reused the
same way ID. So we can't delete these.

Some on Frederik's list (such as way 27877549) weren't named by chdr,
either. So those should stay, too.

The criteria for clearing up chdir's edits in Canada needs to be
tightened up a lot before it is implemented.

 Stewart


On 2017-08-27 10:26 AM, john whelan wrote:
> In Canada as James has said CANVEC which has been accepted as Open
> Source acceptable to OSM has most street names in Canada.  There are a
> few exceptions locally where the city has renamed streets and these
> changes have not yet been reflected in CANVEC.
> 
> I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were more
> than likely derived from CANVEC sources thus it is extremely unlikely
> that anyone would claim copyright on them.  I am aware of the issues
> involved in respecting copyright.
> 
> Perhaps other Canadian mappers may have some thoughts, although with a
> todo list in JOSM we could probably repair the damage fairly quickly.
> 
> Cheerio John
> 
> 
> 
> On 27 August 2017 at 09:58, James  > wrote:
> 
> If we validate via survey say in Canada, will we be able to remove
> the id from the revert list? Canada has Canvec we can reference to
> as well as OpenStreetCam and Mapillary
> 
> On Aug 27, 2017 9:50 AM, "Frederik Ramm"  > wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>in 2010 I was privately contacted by another OSM user with the
> suspicion that user "chdr" might be copying names from Google maps
> (there were few "easter eggs" in Oman that were only on Google
> and not
> in the real world, and they suddenly popped up on OSM). "chdr" was
> contacted at the time, but continued unfazed. In 2013 another mapper
> lodged a complaint with DWG about edits by chdr, and I emailed chdr
> asking him about his sources. At that point chdr stopped mapping. He
> never replied about his sources though, even when I set an
> ultimatum (of
> 31st August 2013) threatening to remove all names he contributed
> if he
> can't tell us his source. We do have to assume that all names
> contributed by chdr are copyright violations.
> 
> (chdr has added names all around the world, making a harmless survey
> unlikely.)
> 
> For various reasons I neglected to act on this, and was only
> reminded
> now, 5 years later, when DWG received a complaint from a user in
> Brazil
> where chdr has even used "source=google" occasionally. (But as I
> said,
> the suspicion is that Google was used throughout.)
> 
> I have now compiled a list of all street names that were
> contributed by
> chdr and are still visible today; we're talking about almost 75,000
> street names world wide. The most affected countries are:
> 
>   18023 "United States of America"
>   16345 "Mexico"
>   15109 "Brazil"
>6791 "RSA"
>2802 "Spain"
>2614 "Australia"
>1923 "Argentina"
>1673 "Nigeria"
>1569 "India"
>1441 "Canada"
> 954 "Malaysia"
> 744 "Botswana"
> 717 "Philippines"
> 619 "Indonesia"
> 553 "Italy"
> 414 "Turkey"
> 290 "Hungary"
> 284 "Chile"
> 250 "Kenya"
> 127 "Saudi Arabia"
> 107 "Paraguay"
> 106 "Panama"
> 100 "Morocco"
> 
> I've left out those countries with less than 100 affected ways.
> 
> For the US, I can break it down by state:
> 
>5696 "Arizona"
>5116 "Texas"
>2294 "New York"
>1164 "District of Columbia"
> 740 "Iowa"
> 494 "Colorado"
> 416 "New Jersey"
> 339 "Illinois"
> 268 "Michigan"
> 239 "Pennsylvania"
> 181 "Missouri"
> 147 "Georgia"
> 129 "New Mexico"
> 123 "North Carolina"
> 115 "California"
> 106 "Virginia"
> 
> The breakdown for Mexico:
> 
>7749 "Baja California"
>2084 "Puebla"
>1964 "Chihuahua"
>

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

[Greg Morgan]

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Nicolás Alvarez  wrote:

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



> And it's
> impossible to know if people are really verifying anything or just
> blindly marking them as verified.
>
>
Nicolás is there any chance you can refrain from slimming the community
like that?



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

If you are in another country than the US and Canada, then you may not have
a second legal source and you would make this statement.  In my case, I
have had a series of tiger name layers work from over the years..  So what
Fredrick wants to do based on his list is to wipe out my work with his
purposed blind revert.  As an example, here is way
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103141172 .  I cleaned up the geometry
two years ago.  I added access tags and what not.  I make it a habit of
removing all tiger tags when I am finished cleaning up and verifying names
with the tiger layer.  Way 103141172 is on Fredrick's list.  If he performs
is revert, then I am going to have to go back and add the name back that I
have already checked on.  Hence, I do not agree with either of your
statements.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

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

[Mikel Maron]

> we can find a good workflow for that. I wasn't expecting the community to 
>start working on this pre-redaction but if people prefer that to fixing issues 
>later...
Absolutely, let's do this!
Also, Frederik, I think your script picked up false positives. Spot checked in 
DC, and these are expansions of both the street and the quadrant ("St NW" -> 
"Street Northwest"(. Can we fix the script and regen the list?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109419946/historyhttp://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109431926/history
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109431927/history

-Mikel
 * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

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

 

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Martijn van Exel  
wrote:

Happy to help. All we'd need for MapRoulette is a list of locations and a 
proper description of the work we'd expect people to do. Anyone can create the 
challenge but I'd be happy to do it.Martijn

Martijn,
I'd would be great if you can break this down to an area.  For example, I have 
a list of Arizona streets.  I'd prefer to work on this as an Arizona challenge 
verses one big chdr challenge.
Please Advise,Greg
___
talk mailing list
t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


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

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

[john whelan]

On balance I'd go rip it out then go back in and clean it up.

Cheerio John

On 27 August 2017 at 12:04, James  wrote:

> As Mr.Ramm said, there can be trap streets, which should be removed.
>
> When I inspected the data, it seems most of it is in Québec and wouldnt be
> hard to validate streetnames for 1400 something items.
>
> On Aug 27, 2017 11:24 AM, "Paul Norman"  wrote:
>
>> On 8/27/2017 7:26 AM, john whelan wrote:
>>
>>> I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were more
>>> than likely derived from CANVEC sources
>>>
>>
>> What makes you believe this to be so?
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[talk-ph] Fwd: [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[maning sambale]

FYI, 717 roads will be affected by this redaction in the Philippines.
Let's discuss next actions.

-- Forwarded message --
From: Frederik Ramm 
Date: Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 7:19 PM
Subject: [OSM-talk] Redacting 75,000 street names contributed by user chdr
To: Talk Openstreetmap ,
"talk...@openstreetmap.org Openstreetmap" 


Hi,

   in 2010 I was privately contacted by another OSM user with the
suspicion that user "chdr" might be copying names from Google maps
(there were few "easter eggs" in Oman that were only on Google and not
in the real world, and they suddenly popped up on OSM). "chdr" was
contacted at the time, but continued unfazed. In 2013 another mapper
lodged a complaint with DWG about edits by chdr, and I emailed chdr
asking him about his sources. At that point chdr stopped mapping. He
never replied about his sources though, even when I set an ultimatum (of
31st August 2013) threatening to remove all names he contributed if he
can't tell us his source. We do have to assume that all names
contributed by chdr are copyright violations.

(chdr has added names all around the world, making a harmless survey
unlikely.)

For various reasons I neglected to act on this, and was only reminded
now, 5 years later, when DWG received a complaint from a user in Brazil
where chdr has even used "source=google" occasionally. (But as I said,
the suspicion is that Google was used throughout.)

I have now compiled a list of all street names that were contributed by
chdr and are still visible today; we're talking about almost 75,000
street names world wide. The most affected countries are:

  18023 "United States of America"
  16345 "Mexico"
  15109 "Brazil"
   6791 "RSA"
   2802 "Spain"
   2614 "Australia"
   1923 "Argentina"
   1673 "Nigeria"
   1569 "India"
   1441 "Canada"
954 "Malaysia"
744 "Botswana"
717 "Philippines"
619 "Indonesia"
553 "Italy"
414 "Turkey"
290 "Hungary"
284 "Chile"
250 "Kenya"
127 "Saudi Arabia"
107 "Paraguay"
106 "Panama"
100 "Morocco"

I've left out those countries with less than 100 affected ways.

For the US, I can break it down by state:

   5696 "Arizona"
   5116 "Texas"
   2294 "New York"
   1164 "District of Columbia"
740 "Iowa"
494 "Colorado"
416 "New Jersey"
339 "Illinois"
268 "Michigan"
239 "Pennsylvania"
181 "Missouri"
147 "Georgia"
129 "New Mexico"
123 "North Carolina"
115 "California"
106 "Virginia"

The breakdown for Mexico:

   7749 "Baja California"
   2084 "Puebla"
   1964 "Chihuahua"
   1539 "Coahuila"
   1161 "Mexico"
   1040 "Chiapas"
342 "Tamaulipas"
241 "Sonora"
185 "San Luis Potosi"
129 "New Mexico"

and Brazil:

  10904 "São Paulo"
   2605 "Paraná"
945 "Rio de Janeiro"
270 "Rio Grande do Sul"
154 "Goiás"

and South Africa:

   4422 "Gauteng"
750 "KwaZulu-Natal"
600 "Eastern Cape"
439 "Western Cape"
400 "Northern Cape"
179 "Mpumalanga"

- each time leaving out a couple others under 100.

We believe that only names, not geometries have been taken from other
maps so we'll remove and redact the names only. In identifying "names
contributed by chdr" I took care to really only pick up the names that
were introduced by them, not names that were there before, and also when
chdr split a way that had a name I will make sure that the newly created
way doesn't count as "named by chdr". Additionally, I have ignored those
cases where chdr simply performed a TIGER expansion (St->Street etc) of
a name that was there before.

My process has two weak points (that I am aware of):

1. It doesn't properly "follow" a chrdr-contributed name through way
splits performed by other users; if someone has split a way created by
chdr, then the name will remain on the bit that was created by this
user. This is somewhat unsatisfying but after having manually checked a
random sample I think the problem is small enough to be ignored.

2. It is possible that, like with a recent case in Switzerland where I
had to do a similar redaction, some of these chdr-contributed names will
have been confirmed by others in a survey, i.e. someone else surveyed
the area and checked the name, but saw no need to change it in any way
since it was already correct. Sadly my process will now remove the name
even though, had the name not been there in the first place, that person
could have added the name. This is not nice but I don't see how it could
be avoided.

Here's a list of way IDs affected, with country and state:

http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details

I am trying to keep the damage to OSM to a minimum while at the same
time respecting copyright. If anyone wants to spot check a few names in
their area and can suggest a refinement of the process that would leave
more names in place because there's reason to assume they are legit, I'm
all ears.

It has been suggested to me that 

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

[Nicolás Alvarez]

Then it wouldn't be hard either to add the names again from a legal source 
after the redaction.

> El 27 ago 2017, a las 13:04, James  escribió:
> 
> As Mr.Ramm said, there can be trap streets, which should be removed.
> 
> When I inspected the data, it seems most of it is in Québec and wouldnt be 
> hard to validate streetnames for 1400 something items. 
> 
>> On Aug 27, 2017 11:24 AM, "Paul Norman"  wrote:
>>> On 8/27/2017 7:26 AM, john whelan wrote:
>>> I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were more 
>>> than likely derived from CANVEC sources
>> 
>> What makes you believe this to be so?
>> 
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

[James]

As Mr.Ramm said, there can be trap streets, which should be removed.

When I inspected the data, it seems most of it is in Québec and wouldnt be
hard to validate streetnames for 1400 something items.

On Aug 27, 2017 11:24 AM, "Paul Norman"  wrote:

> On 8/27/2017 7:26 AM, john whelan wrote:
>
>> I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were more
>> than likely derived from CANVEC sources
>>
>
> What makes you believe this to be so?
>
> ___
> 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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[john whelan]

Either directly or indirectly, and it is a suggestion only.

Cheerio John

On 27 August 2017 at 11:21, Paul Norman  wrote:

> On 8/27/2017 7:26 AM, john whelan wrote:
>
>> I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were more
>> than likely derived from CANVEC sources
>>
>
> What makes you believe this to be so?
>
>
> ___
> 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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Pierre Béland]

What do you think is  google source for names in Canada ;)
 
Pierre 


  De : Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com>
 À : talk@openstreetmap.org 
 Envoyé le : Dimanche 27 août 2017 11h24
 Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr
   
On 8/27/2017 7:26 AM, john whelan wrote:
> I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were 
> more than likely derived from CANVEC sources

What makes you believe this to be so?

___
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] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Paul Norman]

On 8/27/2017 7:26 AM, john whelan wrote:
I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were 
more than likely derived from CANVEC sources


What makes you believe this to be so?

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

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

[Pierre Béland]

As James said earlier, canvec/geobase opendata provides the street names. This 
can be easily corrected. But we need to establish a procedure and identify 
which ways chdr originally added the name.
We can look simply at the history with a link to the OSM APIexample adding the 
id after way/ : 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/api/0.6/way/110941725/history
Looking at the list Frederik provided for Quebec, Canada for the first 10 
elements, I see that for 7 of 10, chdr simply modified the typo.
1. names originally added by chdr 
example: id=103339404, 103339466, 1205299902. chdr simply modified the typo
example id=102499927, 102501108, 104524659, 104524663, 110941725,  117091567, 
119245374

regard
 
Pierre 


  De : Frederik Ramm 
 À : Talk Openstreetmap ; "talk...@openstreetmap.org 
Openstreetmap"  
 Envoyé le : Dimanche 27 août 2017 9h51
 Objet : [OSM-talk] Redacting 75,000 street names contributed by user chdr
   
Hi,

  in 2010 I was privately contacted by another OSM user with the
suspicion that user "chdr" might be copying names from Google maps
(there were few "easter eggs" in Oman that were only on Google and not
in the real world, and they suddenly popped up on OSM). "chdr" was
contacted at the time, but continued unfazed. In 2013 another mapper
lodged a complaint with DWG about edits by chdr, and I emailed chdr
asking him about his sources. At that point chdr stopped mapping. He
never replied about his sources though, even when I set an ultimatum (of
31st August 2013) threatening to remove all names he contributed if he
can't tell us his source. We do have to assume that all names
contributed by chdr are copyright violations.

(chdr has added names all around the world, making a harmless survey
unlikely.)

For various reasons I neglected to act on this, and was only reminded
now, 5 years later, when DWG received a complaint from a user in Brazil
where chdr has even used "source=google" occasionally. (But as I said,
the suspicion is that Google was used throughout.)

I have now compiled a list of all street names that were contributed by
chdr and are still visible today; we're talking about almost 75,000
street names world wide. The most affected countries are:

  18023 "United States of America"
  16345 "Mexico"
  15109 "Brazil"
  6791 "RSA"
  2802 "Spain"
  2614 "Australia"
  1923 "Argentina"
  1673 "Nigeria"
  1569 "India"
  1441 "Canada"
    954 "Malaysia"
    744 "Botswana"
    717 "Philippines"
    619 "Indonesia"
    553 "Italy"
    414 "Turkey"
    290 "Hungary"
    284 "Chile"
    250 "Kenya"
    127 "Saudi Arabia"
    107 "Paraguay"
    106 "Panama"
    100 "Morocco"

I've left out those countries with less than 100 affected ways.

For the US, I can break it down by state:

  5696 "Arizona"
  5116 "Texas"
  2294 "New York"
  1164 "District of Columbia"
    740 "Iowa"
    494 "Colorado"
    416 "New Jersey"
    339 "Illinois"
    268 "Michigan"
    239 "Pennsylvania"
    181 "Missouri"
    147 "Georgia"
    129 "New Mexico"
    123 "North Carolina"
    115 "California"
    106 "Virginia"

The breakdown for Mexico:

  7749 "Baja California"
  2084 "Puebla"
  1964 "Chihuahua"
  1539 "Coahuila"
  1161 "Mexico"
  1040 "Chiapas"
    342 "Tamaulipas"
    241 "Sonora"
    185 "San Luis Potosi"
    129 "New Mexico"

and Brazil:

  10904 "São Paulo"
  2605 "Paraná"
    945 "Rio de Janeiro"
    270 "Rio Grande do Sul"
    154 "Goiás"

and South Africa:

  4422 "Gauteng"
    750 "KwaZulu-Natal"
    600 "Eastern Cape"
    439 "Western Cape"
    400 "Northern Cape"
    179 "Mpumalanga"

- each time leaving out a couple others under 100.

We believe that only names, not geometries have been taken from other
maps so we'll remove and redact the names only. In identifying "names
contributed by chdr" I took care to really only pick up the names that
were introduced by them, not names that were there before, and also when
chdr split a way that had a name I will make sure that the newly created
way doesn't count as "named by chdr". Additionally, I have ignored those
cases where chdr simply performed a TIGER expansion (St->Street etc) of
a name that was there before.

My process has two weak points (that I am aware of):

1. It doesn't properly "follow" a chrdr-contributed name through way
splits performed by other users; if someone has split a way created by
chdr, then the name will remain on the bit that was created by this
user. This is somewhat unsatisfying but after having manually checked a
random sample I think the problem is small enough to be ignored.

2. It is possible that, like with a recent case in Switzerland where I
had to do a similar redaction, some of these chdr-contributed names will
have been confirmed by others in a survey, i.e. someone else surveyed
the area and checked the name, but saw no need to change it in any way
since it was already correct. Sadly my process will now remove the name
even though, had the name 

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

[john whelan]

In Canada as James has said CANVEC which has been accepted as Open Source
acceptable to OSM has most street names in Canada.  There are a few
exceptions locally where the city has renamed streets and these changes
have not yet been reflected in CANVEC.

I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were more
than likely derived from CANVEC sources thus it is extremely unlikely that
anyone would claim copyright on them.  I am aware of the issues involved in
respecting copyright.

Perhaps other Canadian mappers may have some thoughts, although with a todo
list in JOSM we could probably repair the damage fairly quickly.

Cheerio John



On 27 August 2017 at 09:58, James  wrote:

> If we validate via survey say in Canada, will we be able to remove the id
> from the revert list? Canada has Canvec we can reference to as well as
> OpenStreetCam and Mapillary
>
> On Aug 27, 2017 9:50 AM, "Frederik Ramm"  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>in 2010 I was privately contacted by another OSM user with the
>> suspicion that user "chdr" might be copying names from Google maps
>> (there were few "easter eggs" in Oman that were only on Google and not
>> in the real world, and they suddenly popped up on OSM). "chdr" was
>> contacted at the time, but continued unfazed. In 2013 another mapper
>> lodged a complaint with DWG about edits by chdr, and I emailed chdr
>> asking him about his sources. At that point chdr stopped mapping. He
>> never replied about his sources though, even when I set an ultimatum (of
>> 31st August 2013) threatening to remove all names he contributed if he
>> can't tell us his source. We do have to assume that all names
>> contributed by chdr are copyright violations.
>>
>> (chdr has added names all around the world, making a harmless survey
>> unlikely.)
>>
>> For various reasons I neglected to act on this, and was only reminded
>> now, 5 years later, when DWG received a complaint from a user in Brazil
>> where chdr has even used "source=google" occasionally. (But as I said,
>> the suspicion is that Google was used throughout.)
>>
>> I have now compiled a list of all street names that were contributed by
>> chdr and are still visible today; we're talking about almost 75,000
>> street names world wide. The most affected countries are:
>>
>>   18023 "United States of America"
>>   16345 "Mexico"
>>   15109 "Brazil"
>>6791 "RSA"
>>2802 "Spain"
>>2614 "Australia"
>>1923 "Argentina"
>>1673 "Nigeria"
>>1569 "India"
>>1441 "Canada"
>> 954 "Malaysia"
>> 744 "Botswana"
>> 717 "Philippines"
>> 619 "Indonesia"
>> 553 "Italy"
>> 414 "Turkey"
>> 290 "Hungary"
>> 284 "Chile"
>> 250 "Kenya"
>> 127 "Saudi Arabia"
>> 107 "Paraguay"
>> 106 "Panama"
>> 100 "Morocco"
>>
>> I've left out those countries with less than 100 affected ways.
>>
>> For the US, I can break it down by state:
>>
>>5696 "Arizona"
>>5116 "Texas"
>>2294 "New York"
>>1164 "District of Columbia"
>> 740 "Iowa"
>> 494 "Colorado"
>> 416 "New Jersey"
>> 339 "Illinois"
>> 268 "Michigan"
>> 239 "Pennsylvania"
>> 181 "Missouri"
>> 147 "Georgia"
>> 129 "New Mexico"
>> 123 "North Carolina"
>> 115 "California"
>> 106 "Virginia"
>>
>> The breakdown for Mexico:
>>
>>7749 "Baja California"
>>2084 "Puebla"
>>1964 "Chihuahua"
>>1539 "Coahuila"
>>1161 "Mexico"
>>1040 "Chiapas"
>> 342 "Tamaulipas"
>> 241 "Sonora"
>> 185 "San Luis Potosi"
>> 129 "New Mexico"
>>
>> and Brazil:
>>
>>   10904 "São Paulo"
>>2605 "Paraná"
>> 945 "Rio de Janeiro"
>> 270 "Rio Grande do Sul"
>> 154 "Goiás"
>>
>> and South Africa:
>>
>>4422 "Gauteng"
>> 750 "KwaZulu-Natal"
>> 600 "Eastern Cape"
>> 439 "Western Cape"
>> 400 "Northern Cape"
>> 179 "Mpumalanga"
>>
>> - each time leaving out a couple others under 100.
>>
>> We believe that only names, not geometries have been taken from other
>> maps so we'll remove and redact the names only. In identifying "names
>> contributed by chdr" I took care to really only pick up the names that
>> were introduced by them, not names that were there before, and also when
>> chdr split a way that had a name I will make sure that the newly created
>> way doesn't count as "named by chdr". Additionally, I have ignored those
>> cases where chdr simply performed a TIGER expansion (St->Street etc) of
>> a name that was there before.
>>
>> My process has two weak points (that I am aware of):
>>
>> 1. It doesn't properly "follow" a chrdr-contributed name through way
>> splits performed by other users; if someone has split a way created by
>> chdr, then the name will remain on the bit that was created by this
>> user. This is somewhat unsatisfying but after having manually checked a
>> random sample I think the problem is small enough to be ignored.
>>
>> 2. It is possible that, like with a recent 

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

[john whelan]

In Canada as James has said CANVEC which has been accepted as Open Source
acceptable to OSM has most street names in Canada.  There are a few
exceptions locally where the city has renamed streets and these changes
have not yet been reflected in CANVEC.

I would suggest that any street names added by chdr in Canada were more
than likely derived from CANVEC sources thus it is extremely unlikely that
anyone would claim copyright on them.  I am aware of the issues involved in
respecting copyright.

Perhaps other Canadian mappers may have some thoughts, although with a todo
list in JOSM we could probably repair the damage fairly quickly.

Cheerio John



On 27 August 2017 at 09:58, James  wrote:

> If we validate via survey say in Canada, will we be able to remove the id
> from the revert list? Canada has Canvec we can reference to as well as
> OpenStreetCam and Mapillary
>
> On Aug 27, 2017 9:50 AM, "Frederik Ramm"  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>in 2010 I was privately contacted by another OSM user with the
>> suspicion that user "chdr" might be copying names from Google maps
>> (there were few "easter eggs" in Oman that were only on Google and not
>> in the real world, and they suddenly popped up on OSM). "chdr" was
>> contacted at the time, but continued unfazed. In 2013 another mapper
>> lodged a complaint with DWG about edits by chdr, and I emailed chdr
>> asking him about his sources. At that point chdr stopped mapping. He
>> never replied about his sources though, even when I set an ultimatum (of
>> 31st August 2013) threatening to remove all names he contributed if he
>> can't tell us his source. We do have to assume that all names
>> contributed by chdr are copyright violations.
>>
>> (chdr has added names all around the world, making a harmless survey
>> unlikely.)
>>
>> For various reasons I neglected to act on this, and was only reminded
>> now, 5 years later, when DWG received a complaint from a user in Brazil
>> where chdr has even used "source=google" occasionally. (But as I said,
>> the suspicion is that Google was used throughout.)
>>
>> I have now compiled a list of all street names that were contributed by
>> chdr and are still visible today; we're talking about almost 75,000
>> street names world wide. The most affected countries are:
>>
>>   18023 "United States of America"
>>   16345 "Mexico"
>>   15109 "Brazil"
>>6791 "RSA"
>>2802 "Spain"
>>2614 "Australia"
>>1923 "Argentina"
>>1673 "Nigeria"
>>1569 "India"
>>1441 "Canada"
>> 954 "Malaysia"
>> 744 "Botswana"
>> 717 "Philippines"
>> 619 "Indonesia"
>> 553 "Italy"
>> 414 "Turkey"
>> 290 "Hungary"
>> 284 "Chile"
>> 250 "Kenya"
>> 127 "Saudi Arabia"
>> 107 "Paraguay"
>> 106 "Panama"
>> 100 "Morocco"
>>
>> I've left out those countries with less than 100 affected ways.
>>
>> For the US, I can break it down by state:
>>
>>5696 "Arizona"
>>5116 "Texas"
>>2294 "New York"
>>1164 "District of Columbia"
>> 740 "Iowa"
>> 494 "Colorado"
>> 416 "New Jersey"
>> 339 "Illinois"
>> 268 "Michigan"
>> 239 "Pennsylvania"
>> 181 "Missouri"
>> 147 "Georgia"
>> 129 "New Mexico"
>> 123 "North Carolina"
>> 115 "California"
>> 106 "Virginia"
>>
>> The breakdown for Mexico:
>>
>>7749 "Baja California"
>>2084 "Puebla"
>>1964 "Chihuahua"
>>1539 "Coahuila"
>>1161 "Mexico"
>>1040 "Chiapas"
>> 342 "Tamaulipas"
>> 241 "Sonora"
>> 185 "San Luis Potosi"
>> 129 "New Mexico"
>>
>> and Brazil:
>>
>>   10904 "São Paulo"
>>2605 "Paraná"
>> 945 "Rio de Janeiro"
>> 270 "Rio Grande do Sul"
>> 154 "Goiás"
>>
>> and South Africa:
>>
>>4422 "Gauteng"
>> 750 "KwaZulu-Natal"
>> 600 "Eastern Cape"
>> 439 "Western Cape"
>> 400 "Northern Cape"
>> 179 "Mpumalanga"
>>
>> - each time leaving out a couple others under 100.
>>
>> We believe that only names, not geometries have been taken from other
>> maps so we'll remove and redact the names only. In identifying "names
>> contributed by chdr" I took care to really only pick up the names that
>> were introduced by them, not names that were there before, and also when
>> chdr split a way that had a name I will make sure that the newly created
>> way doesn't count as "named by chdr". Additionally, I have ignored those
>> cases where chdr simply performed a TIGER expansion (St->Street etc) of
>> a name that was there before.
>>
>> My process has two weak points (that I am aware of):
>>
>> 1. It doesn't properly "follow" a chrdr-contributed name through way
>> splits performed by other users; if someone has split a way created by
>> chdr, then the name will remain on the bit that was created by this
>> user. This is somewhat unsatisfying but after having manually checked a
>> random sample I think the problem is small enough to be ignored.
>>
>> 2. It is possible that, like with a recent 

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

[James]

If we validate via survey say in Canada, will we be able to remove the id
from the revert list? Canada has Canvec we can reference to as well as
OpenStreetCam and Mapillary

On Aug 27, 2017 9:50 AM, "Frederik Ramm"  wrote:

> Hi,
>
>in 2010 I was privately contacted by another OSM user with the
> suspicion that user "chdr" might be copying names from Google maps
> (there were few "easter eggs" in Oman that were only on Google and not
> in the real world, and they suddenly popped up on OSM). "chdr" was
> contacted at the time, but continued unfazed. In 2013 another mapper
> lodged a complaint with DWG about edits by chdr, and I emailed chdr
> asking him about his sources. At that point chdr stopped mapping. He
> never replied about his sources though, even when I set an ultimatum (of
> 31st August 2013) threatening to remove all names he contributed if he
> can't tell us his source. We do have to assume that all names
> contributed by chdr are copyright violations.
>
> (chdr has added names all around the world, making a harmless survey
> unlikely.)
>
> For various reasons I neglected to act on this, and was only reminded
> now, 5 years later, when DWG received a complaint from a user in Brazil
> where chdr has even used "source=google" occasionally. (But as I said,
> the suspicion is that Google was used throughout.)
>
> I have now compiled a list of all street names that were contributed by
> chdr and are still visible today; we're talking about almost 75,000
> street names world wide. The most affected countries are:
>
>   18023 "United States of America"
>   16345 "Mexico"
>   15109 "Brazil"
>6791 "RSA"
>2802 "Spain"
>2614 "Australia"
>1923 "Argentina"
>1673 "Nigeria"
>1569 "India"
>1441 "Canada"
> 954 "Malaysia"
> 744 "Botswana"
> 717 "Philippines"
> 619 "Indonesia"
> 553 "Italy"
> 414 "Turkey"
> 290 "Hungary"
> 284 "Chile"
> 250 "Kenya"
> 127 "Saudi Arabia"
> 107 "Paraguay"
> 106 "Panama"
> 100 "Morocco"
>
> I've left out those countries with less than 100 affected ways.
>
> For the US, I can break it down by state:
>
>5696 "Arizona"
>5116 "Texas"
>2294 "New York"
>1164 "District of Columbia"
> 740 "Iowa"
> 494 "Colorado"
> 416 "New Jersey"
> 339 "Illinois"
> 268 "Michigan"
> 239 "Pennsylvania"
> 181 "Missouri"
> 147 "Georgia"
> 129 "New Mexico"
> 123 "North Carolina"
> 115 "California"
> 106 "Virginia"
>
> The breakdown for Mexico:
>
>7749 "Baja California"
>2084 "Puebla"
>1964 "Chihuahua"
>1539 "Coahuila"
>1161 "Mexico"
>1040 "Chiapas"
> 342 "Tamaulipas"
> 241 "Sonora"
> 185 "San Luis Potosi"
> 129 "New Mexico"
>
> and Brazil:
>
>   10904 "São Paulo"
>2605 "Paraná"
> 945 "Rio de Janeiro"
> 270 "Rio Grande do Sul"
> 154 "Goiás"
>
> and South Africa:
>
>4422 "Gauteng"
> 750 "KwaZulu-Natal"
> 600 "Eastern Cape"
> 439 "Western Cape"
> 400 "Northern Cape"
> 179 "Mpumalanga"
>
> - each time leaving out a couple others under 100.
>
> We believe that only names, not geometries have been taken from other
> maps so we'll remove and redact the names only. In identifying "names
> contributed by chdr" I took care to really only pick up the names that
> were introduced by them, not names that were there before, and also when
> chdr split a way that had a name I will make sure that the newly created
> way doesn't count as "named by chdr". Additionally, I have ignored those
> cases where chdr simply performed a TIGER expansion (St->Street etc) of
> a name that was there before.
>
> My process has two weak points (that I am aware of):
>
> 1. It doesn't properly "follow" a chrdr-contributed name through way
> splits performed by other users; if someone has split a way created by
> chdr, then the name will remain on the bit that was created by this
> user. This is somewhat unsatisfying but after having manually checked a
> random sample I think the problem is small enough to be ignored.
>
> 2. It is possible that, like with a recent case in Switzerland where I
> had to do a similar redaction, some of these chdr-contributed names will
> have been confirmed by others in a survey, i.e. someone else surveyed
> the area and checked the name, but saw no need to change it in any way
> since it was already correct. Sadly my process will now remove the name
> even though, had the name not been there in the first place, that person
> could have added the name. This is not nice but I don't see how it could
> be avoided.
>
> Here's a list of way IDs affected, with country and state:
>
> http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/chdr.details
>
> I am trying to keep the damage to OSM to a minimum while at the same
> time respecting copyright. If anyone wants to spot check a few names in
> their area and can suggest a refinement of the process that would leave
> more names in place because