Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 01:35:41PM +, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 05/03/2018 11:49, Richard wrote: > >this one problem could be (somewhat) solved by conditional restrictions, > > No, this is not an access restriction - people are allowed to go there > whenever they like; it might just not be advisable. should have been more precise, the syntax defined in that wiki page could be easily reused for this. > I'd be against mapping non-quantifiable risks like this because it fails the > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability test - as has already been > discussed, one person might feel safe; another may not. A "feeling of > safety" likely has little bearing on actual risk (for example, during the > breakup of Yugoslavia someone was worried about me visiting Prague) and > there are many problems associated with assuming that one reflects the other > (see e.g. > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/08/12/the-many-problems-with-sketchfactor-the-new-crime-crowdsourcing-app-that-some-are-calling-racist/ > ). of course. The jews will encounter different problems than Germans or LGBT folks. Which imho does not mean that all of these have legitimate concerns. Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On 05/03/2018 11:49, Richard wrote: this one problem could be (somewhat) solved by conditional restrictions, No, this is not an access restriction - people are allowed to go there whenever they like; it might just not be advisable. I'd be against mapping non-quantifiable risks like this because it fails the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability test - as has already been discussed, one person might feel safe; another may not. A "feeling of safety" likely has little bearing on actual risk (for example, during the breakup of Yugoslavia someone was worried about me visiting Prague) and there are many problems associated with assuming that one reflects the other (see e.g. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/08/12/the-many-problems-with-sketchfactor-the-new-crime-crowdsourcing-app-that-some-are-calling-racist/ ). As to actual tagging of anything _quantifiable_, then perhaps the "tagging" list is the better place for that. Best Regards, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 12:19:19PM +, Ben Oliver wrote: > Surely then that is enough and we shouldn't need to flag 'dangerous' areas? many other things can also be decuded like this and we still prefer to tag them explicitly. If someone wants to tag it I am against disallowing it for political or ideological reasons. Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On 18-03-05 13:00:10, Richard wrote: On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 11:10:40AM +0100, Tom Pfeifer wrote: Besides the verifiability problem, such tagging would discriminate one demographic group against another, and increase the cultural bias in OSM. where does such political correctness end? Consider that mapping brothels, landfills, busy roads and many other features will allow someone to draw conclusions about the socioeconomic status of the Area. Most of the time you can deduce income status purely by the geometry of houses and roads. Richard Surely then that is enough and we shouldn't need to flag 'dangerous' areas? I think if you were to do something like this you would have to underpin it with crime stats or something. As a semi-off-topic aside - this was actually the subject of an episode of 'The Good Wife'...! ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 11:10:40AM +0100, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > Besides the verifiability problem, such tagging would discriminate one > demographic group against another, and increase the cultural bias in OSM. where does such political correctness end? Consider that mapping brothels, landfills, busy roads and many other features will allow someone to draw conclusions about the socioeconomic status of the Area. Most of the time you can deduce income status purely by the geometry of houses and roads. Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 11:23:27PM -0600, Rodrigo Rodríguez wrote: > I know I could map if the streets are well iluminated or how is their > surface, but that's not enough to what happens on those streets (gangs > and violence, for example). I could also use the class=bicycle tag and > "hack" a routing service to properly identify these tags, but that's > doesn't give me the real reflect of reality: I can move around those > street by day, not on the night. this one problem could be (somewhat) solved by conditional restrictions, eg sunset-sunrise https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions Not that any routing engine I am aware of would understand those. Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On 27.02.2018 12:58, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Mapping perceived danger has been discussed some years ago, and AFAIR wasn't considered to be verifiable. Tried to find the discussion but couldn't, you might try yourself with your favorite search engine. It was on the tagging list, see the start here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-November/030581.html Besides the verifiability problem, such tagging would discriminate one demographic group against another, and increase the cultural bias in OSM. I remember when I asked a car rental agent for zones to avoid, he kindly marked areas on the map for me, but it was not printed on them. tom ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
2018-03-05 7:57 GMT+01:00 Maarten Deen : > On 2018-03-05 06:23, Rodrigo Rodríguez wrote: > >> These are sort of the things I would appreciate I could be able to >> map in OSM. Even with the subjective point of view that might >> represent to tag a way as insecure or not, it is easily achievable to >> determine a way or schema in wich you could identify wether a street >> is safe to walk or pass through under determinated conditions. >> > > I disagree. Nothing is more subjective than a sense of danger. There are a > few roads in my home town that I hear from one or two people are "very > dangerous" and "should be avoided by bicycle" where I have no problem with > those roads at all and use them daily. > How can I determine that from a very subjective "dangerous" tag. I would > have to see that road for myself to determine if I find it dangerous or > not, making that tag useless. > > If you want such a classification, you would need to tap into crime and > accident statistics for that road. I agree that there can be roads and areas one wants to avoid, for many reasons, including having fear of perceived or actual danger. As this is subjective and hard or even intrinsicly impossible to verify, I don't think we should have these in OSM though. I would suggest using a routing engine that allows for avoidance of given areas, e.g. ORS. These areas could also be stored in some crowdsourced system, but I don't know if this is already available. Cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
On 2018-03-05 06:23, Rodrigo Rodríguez wrote: These are sort of the things I would appreciate I could be able to map in OSM. Even with the subjective point of view that might represent to tag a way as insecure or not, it is easily achievable to determine a way or schema in wich you could identify wether a street is safe to walk or pass through under determinated conditions. I disagree. Nothing is more subjective than a sense of danger. There are a few roads in my home town that I hear from one or two people are "very dangerous" and "should be avoided by bicycle" where I have no problem with those roads at all and use them daily. How can I determine that from a very subjective "dangerous" tag. I would have to see that road for myself to determine if I find it dangerous or not, making that tag useless. If you want such a classification, you would need to tap into crime and accident statistics for that road. Regards, Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Danger zone for pedestrians
These are sort of the things I would appreciate I could be able to map in OSM. Even with the subjective point of view that might represent to tag a way as insecure or not, it is easily achievable to determine a way or schema in wich you could identify wether a street is safe to walk or pass through under determinated conditions. For example, I've been wondering if I could use class=bicycle to properly identify bicycle friendly streets in my city, considering we have no cycleways. In that process, I have found that some routing engines send me by streets I can't pass through by night nor alone, because they are very dangerous. I know I could map if the streets are well iluminated or how is their surface, but that's not enough to what happens on those streets (gangs and violence, for example). I could also use the class=bicycle tag and "hack" a routing service to properly identify these tags, but that's doesn't give me the real reflect of reality: I can move around those street by day, not on the night. I guess this scenario is similar to the one you mention, so I would propose two things: use a similar scheme tagging as class=bicycle for pedestrian (that it may be developed), and to propose a time-based tagging (hourly or night/day). On the other hand, some weeks ago I read about these kind of projects and tags within the map feaures, and how they could be misguided the OSM project to other things that are not included in the initial mission of the global project (to create a geo-database for scienteific and academic purpose). But I guess we can discuss how much would OSM as a service or OSM as a databse for social science research might be excellent to the whole global initiative and for incursioning in other research fields involving OSM. On 27/02/18 02:50, Jack Armstrong dan...@sprynet.com wrote: > I came across an interesting node while correcting map errors. > Thoughts on something like this? Delete it? Modify it? Does OSM care > to map this type of local information? > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?node=4602572938#map=20/21.01482/-101.25210 > > The note; "Peligroso en la noche o para mujeres solas. No llevar a la > vista cosas de valor", translates as, "Dangerous at night or for > single women. Do not carry things of value in plain sight." > > > ___ > 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] Danger zone for pedestrians
Mapping perceived danger has been discussed some years ago, and AFAIR wasn't considered to be verifiable. Tried to find the discussion but couldn't, you might try yourself with your favorite search engine. Cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
