Re: [talk-au] Assistance with ongoing disagreement regarding intersections

[osm.talk-au]

I’m in agreement with you that this is not the correct, widely accepted, way of 
mapping these intersections.

 

Ways should only split at the start of physical separations. Intersections of 
dual carriage ways should result in a # like pattern. Turn lanes without 
physical separation should be mapped using appropriate :lanes tags.

 

To give counterexamples of what I think are correctly mapped intersections:

 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-27.24256/153.02079

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-27.24173/153.02469

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-27.23018/153.02236

 

 

From: Dian Ågesson  
Sent: Friday, 4 March 2022 15:31
To: OSM Australian Talk List 
Subject: [talk-au] Assistance with ongoing disagreement regarding intersections

 

Hello,

I'd like some assistance resolving a disagreement I'm involved with regarding 
the correct mapping of dual carriageways at intersections. I have previously 
mentioned this topic on the mailing list here: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html 
 
.

To summarise briefly, a very active contributor prefers to model dual 
carriageway intersections in a manner that I don't believe is correct.

Turn lanes are split from main carriageways at the start of the new turn lane, 
then cross over each other in an "X" shape, rather than a Box shape that I've 
seen documented. (Examples, because I am bad at explaining: Burwood 
Hwy/Mountain Hwy  , Smith 
St/Dandenong Rd  , 
Burwood Hwy/Dorset Rd  , 
Princes Hwy/William Rd  ) 
Additional highways are introduced for left hand turns where there is no 
physical separation (eg, Mt Dandenong Tourist Rd/Mountain Highway 
 , Greville St N/Sturt St 
 , Glenleith St/Church St 
 ). This editor has been an 
extremely active contributor for many, many years: I found these examples by 
just zooming in on a given town or suburb, found intersection that was modelled 
this way, and checked the history to confirm the source.

I initially engaged with the user in September (111051481 
 ), and after some initial 
delay, we have engaged in a productive conversation 
  
since. To the user's credit, they have been patient and understanding in our 
interactions, and have made adjustments to their mapping style based on my 
feedback. Unfortunately, we have reached a fundamental point of disagreement 
 , and I don't believe 
further changeset discussions are going to be productive.

I'm now a little too close to this discussion to be objective, and I would 
really appreciate some assistance with this disagreement. Due to the 
extraordinary output of this user, simply avoiding editing in similar areas 
isn't going to be practical. But am I incorrect in my assessment of 
intersection modelling? Is this a question of style, or of accuracy?

Kind Regards,
Dian.

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

Re: [talk-au] Assistance with ongoing disagreement regarding intersections

[cleary]

I am not familiar with particular intersections and my mapping of urban 
intersections is limited. However I just looked at satellite imagery for three 
of the identified intersections and the current mapping seems to be an accurate 
reflection of what is on the ground.  While guidelines can be very influential, 
they rarely accommodate all the variations of objects in the real world.  If 
the maps are accurate and do not mislead anyone, I would support them staying 
as they are.  However, if they are inaccurate or misleading then they should be 
made accurate. Conformity with the guidelines is, in my view, secondary to 
accuracy.  In the longer term, the guidelines might need modification or 
clarification that there might be exceptions.


On Fri, 4 Mar 2022, at 4:30 PM, Dian Ågesson wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
> I'd like some assistance resolving a disagreement I'm involved with 
> regarding the correct mapping of dual carriageways at intersections. I 
> have previously mentioned this topic on the mailing list here: 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html 
> .
>
> To summarise briefly, a very active contributor prefers to model dual 
> carriageway intersections in a manner that I don't believe is correct.
>
> Turn lanes are split from main carriageways at the start of the new 
> turn lane, then cross over each other in an "X" shape, rather than a 
> Box shape that I've seen documented. (Examples, because I am bad at 
> explaining: Burwood Hwy/Mountain Hwy 
> , Smith St/Dandenong Rd 
> , Burwood 
> Hwy/Dorset Rd , 
> Princes Hwy/William Rd 
> ) Additional 
> highways are introduced for left hand turns where there is no physical 
> separation (eg, Mt Dandenong Tourist Rd/Mountain Highway 
> , Greville St 
> N/Sturt St , 
> Glenleith St/Church St 
> ). This editor has 
> been an extremely active contributor for many, many years: I found 
> these examples by just zooming in on a given town or suburb, found 
> intersection that was modelled this way, and checked the history to 
> confirm the source.
>
> I initially engaged with the user in September (111051481 
> ), and after some 
> initial delay, we have engaged in a productive conversation 
> 
>  
> since. To the user's credit, they have been patient and understanding 
> in our interactions, and have made adjustments to their mapping style 
> based on my feedback. Unfortunately, we have reached a fundamental 
> point of disagreement 
> , and I don't 
> believe further changeset discussions are going to be productive.
>
> I'm now a little too close to this discussion to be objective, and I 
> would really appreciate some assistance with this disagreement. Due to 
> the extraordinary output of this user, simply avoiding editing in 
> similar areas isn't going to be practical. But am I incorrect in my 
> assessment of intersection modelling? Is this a question of style, or 
> of accuracy?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Dian.
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

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

Re: [talk-au] Assistance with ongoing disagreement regarding intersections

[Brendan Barnes]

I do see on
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes#Motorway_with_lanes_and_destinations,
at least in a motorway context, it is to be mapped as one way until there
is a physical separation, which at that point it separates into separate
ways. Although it specifically describes motorways, I don't see why the
same style wouldn't apply to primary and lesser-grade roads (but please
correct me if I've missed something!)

Also on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dual_carriageway it says don't
map as two carriageways if it's just a paint or other non-physical barrier.

But I'm keen to hear some clarification on the mapping style. In the past,
I myself used to branch-off right turn lanes as their own way. But back
then it seemed to be the abundant style in the Australian areas which I
contributed, so I just continued mapping the same way.

If the "no separate way for painted turn lanes" is the agreed style for the
community, I'm happy to assist in fixing some. But it will be a lot of work
to standardise, and ensure the many complex intersection relations are
preserved.


On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 at 16:33, Dian Ågesson  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'd like some assistance resolving a disagreement I'm involved with
> regarding the correct mapping of dual carriageways at intersections. I have
> previously mentioned this topic on the mailing list here:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html
> 
> .
>
> To summarise briefly, a very active contributor prefers to model dual
> carriageway intersections in a manner that I don't believe is correct.
>
> Turn lanes are split from main carriageways at the start of the new turn
> lane, then cross over each other in an "X" shape, rather than a Box shape
> that I've seen documented. (Examples, because I am bad at explaining: Burwood
> Hwy/Mountain Hwy , Smith
> St/Dandenong Rd , 
> Burwood
> Hwy/Dorset Rd , Princes
> Hwy/William Rd )
> Additional highways are introduced for left hand turns where there is no
> physical separation (eg, Mt Dandenong Tourist Rd/Mountain Highway
> , Greville St
> N/Sturt St , Glenleith
> St/Church St ). This
> editor has been an extremely active contributor for many, many years: I
> found these examples by just zooming in on a given town or suburb, found
> intersection that was modelled this way, and checked the history to confirm
> the source.
>
> I initially engaged with the user in September (111051481
> ), and after some initial
> delay, we have engaged in a productive conversation
> 
> since. To the user's credit, they have been patient and understanding in
> our interactions, and have made adjustments to their mapping style based on
> my feedback. Unfortunately, we have reached a fundamental point of
> disagreement , and I
> don't believe further changeset discussions are going to be productive.
>
> I'm now a little too close to this discussion to be objective, and I would
> really appreciate some assistance with this disagreement. Due to the
> extraordinary output of this user, simply avoiding editing in similar areas
> isn't going to be practical. But am I incorrect in my assessment of
> intersection modelling? Is this a question of style, or of accuracy?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Dian.
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Assistance with ongoing disagreement regarding intersections

[Dian Ågesson]

Hello,

I'd like some assistance resolving a disagreement I'm involved with 
regarding the correct mapping of dual carriageways at intersections. I 
have previously mentioned this topic on the mailing list here: 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html 
[1].


To summarise briefly, a very active contributor prefers to model dual 
carriageway intersections in a manner that I don't believe is correct.


Turn lanes are split from main carriageways at the start of the new turn 
lane, then cross over each other in an "X" shape, rather than a Box 
shape that I've seen documented. (Examples, because I am bad at 
explaining: Burwood Hwy/Mountain Hwy [2], Smith St/Dandenong Rd [3], 
Burwood Hwy/Dorset Rd [4], Princes Hwy/William Rd [5]) Additional 
highways are introduced for left hand turns where there is no physical 
separation (eg, Mt Dandenong Tourist Rd/Mountain Highway [6], Greville 
St N/Sturt St [7], Glenleith St/Church St [8]). This editor has been an 
extremely active contributor for many, many years: I found these 
examples by just zooming in on a given town or suburb, found 
intersection that was modelled this way, and checked the history to 
confirm the source.


I initially engaged with the user in September (111051481 [9]), and 
after some initial delay, we have engaged in a productive conversation 
[10] since. To the user's credit, they have been patient and 
understanding in our interactions, and have made adjustments to their 
mapping style based on my feedback. Unfortunately, we have reached a 
fundamental point of disagreement [11], and I don't believe further 
changeset discussions are going to be productive.


I'm now a little too close to this discussion to be objective, and I 
would really appreciate some assistance with this disagreement. Due to 
the extraordinary output of this user, simply avoiding editing in 
similar areas isn't going to be practical. But am I incorrect in my 
assessment of intersection modelling? Is this a question of style, or of 
accuracy?


Kind Regards,
Dian.

Links:
--
[1] 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/014968.html,

[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8917929878
[3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2951838115/history
[4] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8925914559/history
[5] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/779286918/history
[6] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/113685299/history
[7] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/97655/history
[8] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/75040109/history
[9] https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/111051481
[10] 
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=206929commented

[11] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118038711___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Mass fix-me's with very strange comments

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

There's also a heap of his other changes where he has deleted the entered
Source, but hasn't fixed existing Fix-Me's (apparently mainly created by
the Microsoft Team) asking for street & roundabout names.

Thanks

Graeme


On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 at 11:43, Graeme Fitzpatrick 
wrote:

> Thanks!
>
> Resulting in: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gC0 :-(
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 at 11:23, Phil Wyatt  wrote:
>
>> This might help for a start via overpass
>>
>>
>>
>> [out:json][timeout:25];
>>
>> (
>>
>>   nwr["fixme"](user:"aaronsta")({{bbox}});
>>
>> );
>>
>> out meta;
>>
>> >;
>>
>> out skel qt;
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Graeme Fitzpatrick 
>> *Sent:* Friday, 4 March 2022 11:09 AM
>> *To:* OSM-Au 
>> *Subject:* [talk-au] Mass fix-me's with very strange comments
>>
>>
>>
>> Fixing a note yesterday arvo to add a cafe in Perth
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118044124#map=19/-31.90414/115.86993=N,
>> but when I moused over the next house just to check the street number, it
>> had a Fix-Me on it, saying "21".
>>
>>
>>
>> Thinking that may be a street address, despite being next door to Number
>> 4, I checked further along the street & all the mapped houses have Fix-Me
>> 21 on them, while across the street has Fix-Me 22?
>>
>>
>>
>> Having a good look this morning & there are apparently 1000+ of them! :-(
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-31.90392/115.87030
>>
>>
>>
>> Checking one of them further, & what do we find?:
>>
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424520629#map=19/-31.90435/115.87189=N
>>
>>
>>
>> Does the name aaronsta mean anything to anybody? /s :-(
>>
>>
>>
>> Any way of clearing 1000+, on the surface, apparently pointless Fix-Me
>> comments? 5 years old so they may be difficult to just wind back?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Mass fix-me's with very strange comments

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Thanks!

Resulting in: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gC0 :-(

Thanks

Graeme


On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 at 11:23, Phil Wyatt  wrote:

> This might help for a start via overpass
>
>
>
> [out:json][timeout:25];
>
> (
>
>   nwr["fixme"](user:"aaronsta")({{bbox}});
>
> );
>
> out meta;
>
> >;
>
> out skel qt;
>
>
>
> *From:* Graeme Fitzpatrick 
> *Sent:* Friday, 4 March 2022 11:09 AM
> *To:* OSM-Au 
> *Subject:* [talk-au] Mass fix-me's with very strange comments
>
>
>
> Fixing a note yesterday arvo to add a cafe in Perth
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118044124#map=19/-31.90414/115.86993=N,
> but when I moused over the next house just to check the street number, it
> had a Fix-Me on it, saying "21".
>
>
>
> Thinking that may be a street address, despite being next door to Number
> 4, I checked further along the street & all the mapped houses have Fix-Me
> 21 on them, while across the street has Fix-Me 22?
>
>
>
> Having a good look this morning & there are apparently 1000+ of them! :-(
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-31.90392/115.87030
>
>
>
> Checking one of them further, & what do we find?:
>
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424520629#map=19/-31.90435/115.87189=N
>
>
>
> Does the name aaronsta mean anything to anybody? /s :-(
>
>
>
> Any way of clearing 1000+, on the surface, apparently pointless Fix-Me
> comments? 5 years old so they may be difficult to just wind back?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Graeme
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Mass fix-me's with very strange comments

[Phil Wyatt]

This might help for a start via overpass

 

[out:json][timeout:25];

(

  nwr["fixme"](user:"aaronsta")({{bbox}});

);

out meta;

>;

out skel qt;

 

From: Graeme Fitzpatrick  
Sent: Friday, 4 March 2022 11:09 AM
To: OSM-Au 
Subject: [talk-au] Mass fix-me's with very strange comments

 

Fixing a note yesterday arvo to add a cafe in Perth 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118044124#map=19/-31.90414/115.86993 

 =N, but when I moused over the next house just to check the street 
number, it had a Fix-Me on it, saying "21".

 

Thinking that may be a street address, despite being next door to Number 4, I 
checked further along the street & all the mapped houses have Fix-Me 21 on 
them, while across the street has Fix-Me 22?

 

Having a good look this morning & there are apparently 1000+ of them! :-(

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-31.90392/115.87030

 

Checking one of them further, & what do we find?:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424520629#map=19/-31.90435/115.87189 

 =N

 

Does the name aaronsta mean anything to anybody? /s :-(

 

Any way of clearing 1000+, on the surface, apparently pointless Fix-Me 
comments? 5 years old so they may be difficult to just wind back?

 

Thanks

 

Graeme

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

Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

& on a related subject:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2022-March/015920.html :-(

Thanks

Graeme


On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 23:17,  wrote:

> As I said before, I don't think I'm qualified to decide what exactly, if
> anything of his changes to keep or not. So my plan was to just revert it
> all and then invite him to discuss his changes here first and he can redo
> whatever finds general approval.
>
> To facilitate that, I've committed a few key versions of the wiki source
> of the ATG into git:
>
>
> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/471231032645910529/948193462963015700/unknown.png
>
> https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/558999688670609448/948929961580986418/unknown.png
>
> then branched from the oldest one, and cherry picked the changes not from
> Aaronsta
>
> The result, which I've attached to his message, should contain the up to
> date source of the ATG wiki page, with only the changes made by Aaronsta
> reverted, while preserving changes made by everyone else.
>
> At this point, reverting Aaronsta's changes, and only his, should be as
> easy as editing the ATG page and pasting the contents of the attached
> atg.txt as new source for the whole page.
>
> Cheers,
> Thorsten
>
> -Original Message-
> From: fors...@ozonline.com.au 
> Sent: Thursday, 3 March 2022 20:37
> To: osm.talk...@thorsten.engler.id.au
> Cc: Graeme Fitzpatrick ; Dian Ã?gesson <
> m...@diacritic.xyz>; OSM Australian Talk List 
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?
>
> Hi OSM community
>
> Regarding the case of Aaronsta's edits.
> I have been unsuccessful for the last week in contacting Aaron.
> The DWG has placed a zero hour block on Aaron's account Aaron has not
> accessed his account for the last two days and has not read the block
> information.
>
> Thorsten, for the community's benefit, can you please detail your planned
> roll back of Aaron's wiki edits. I presume the community will support your
> plans, if they do please action them.
>
> Thanks
> Tony
>
> __
> > Hi Aaron
> >
> > My sincere thanks on behalf of the Australian Open Street Map
> > community for your many contributions to the map.
> >
> > Unfortunately, there is some dissatisfaction in the Australian Open
> > Street Map community with some of your larger edits including wiki
> > changes on bikes and paths and the deletion of the Perth bike route
> > network.
> >
> > We ask you to seek consensus from the community before making large
> > changes, particularly changes which reverse prior understandings and
> > are large in scope.
> >
> > Your changes to the wiki on bikes and paths are a particular issue in
> > this letter. We propose a six step process in reverting the Australian
> > Tagging Guidelines to community understandings of tagging practice.
> >
> >  1 get community support from talk-au for this process
> >  2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement
> >  3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state
> >  4 Dian tidies up the wiki
> >  5 Aaron does not edit the wiki until Dian has finished
> >  6 we do not call for DWG intervention unless a party will not follow
> > the agreed process
> >
> > We are at step 2. It is important that we know you have read this
> > letter. Please reply by changeset comment or better by a post to
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/
> >
> > This is your opportunity to put your case. There is a lot of
> > discussion on talk-au regarding your edits. I suggest you read it and
> respond.
> > Please let us know whether you agree with the 6 step process and if
> > you do not agree, your reasons.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Tony Forster
> >
> > __
> >> Yep, great plan.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Graeme
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 05:28,  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all
> >>> Can I suggest the following
> >>>
> >>> 1 get community support from talk au for this process
> >>> 2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement
> >>> 3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state
> >>> 4 Dian tidys up the wiki
> >>> 5 Aaron does not edit the wiki until Dian has finished
> >>> 6 we do not call for DWG intervention unless a party will not follow
> >>> the agreed process
> >>>
> >>> Tony
> >>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Mass fix-me's with very strange comments

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

Fixing a note yesterday arvo to add a cafe in Perth
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118044124#map=19/-31.90414/115.86993=N,
but when I moused over the next house just to check the street number, it
had a Fix-Me on it, saying "21".

Thinking that may be a street address, despite being next door to Number 4,
I checked further along the street & all the mapped houses have Fix-Me 21
on them, while across the street has Fix-Me 22?

Having a good look this morning & there are apparently 1000+ of them! :-(
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-31.90392/115.87030

Checking one of them further, & what do we find?:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424520629#map=19/-31.90435/115.87189=N

Does the name aaronsta mean anything to anybody? /s :-(

Any way of clearing 1000+, on the surface, apparently pointless Fix-Me
comments? 5 years old so they may be difficult to just wind back?

Thanks

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

Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

[osm.talk-au]

As I said before, I don't think I'm qualified to decide what exactly, if 
anything of his changes to keep or not. So my plan was to just revert it all 
and then invite him to discuss his changes here first and he can redo whatever 
finds general approval.

To facilitate that, I've committed a few key versions of the wiki source of the 
ATG into git:

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/471231032645910529/948193462963015700/unknown.png
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/558999688670609448/948929961580986418/unknown.png

then branched from the oldest one, and cherry picked the changes not from 
Aaronsta

The result, which I've attached to his message, should contain the up to date 
source of the ATG wiki page, with only the changes made by Aaronsta reverted, 
while preserving changes made by everyone else.

At this point, reverting Aaronsta's changes, and only his, should be as easy as 
editing the ATG page and pasting the contents of the attached atg.txt as new 
source for the whole page.

Cheers,
Thorsten

-Original Message-
From: fors...@ozonline.com.au  
Sent: Thursday, 3 March 2022 20:37
To: osm.talk...@thorsten.engler.id.au
Cc: Graeme Fitzpatrick ; Dian Ã?gesson 
; OSM Australian Talk List 
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

Hi OSM community

Regarding the case of Aaronsta's edits.
I have been unsuccessful for the last week in contacting Aaron.
The DWG has placed a zero hour block on Aaron's account Aaron has not accessed 
his account for the last two days and has not read the block information.

Thorsten, for the community's benefit, can you please detail your planned roll 
back of Aaron's wiki edits. I presume the community will support your plans, if 
they do please action them.

Thanks
Tony

__
> Hi Aaron
>
> My sincere thanks on behalf of the Australian Open Street Map 
> community for your many contributions to the map.
>
> Unfortunately, there is some dissatisfaction in the Australian Open 
> Street Map community with some of your larger edits including wiki 
> changes on bikes and paths and the deletion of the Perth bike route 
> network.
>
> We ask you to seek consensus from the community before making large 
> changes, particularly changes which reverse prior understandings and 
> are large in scope.
>
> Your changes to the wiki on bikes and paths are a particular issue in 
> this letter. We propose a six step process in reverting the Australian 
> Tagging Guidelines to community understandings of tagging practice.
>
>  1 get community support from talk-au for this process
>  2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement
>  3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state
>  4 Dian tidies up the wiki
>  5 Aaron does not edit the wiki until Dian has finished
>  6 we do not call for DWG intervention unless a party will not follow 
> the agreed process
>
> We are at step 2. It is important that we know you have read this 
> letter. Please reply by changeset comment or better by a post to 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/
>
> This is your opportunity to put your case. There is a lot of 
> discussion on talk-au regarding your edits. I suggest you read it and respond.
> Please let us know whether you agree with the 6 step process and if 
> you do not agree, your reasons.
>
> Thanks
> Tony Forster
>
> __
>> Yep, great plan.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Graeme
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 05:28,  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all
>>> Can I suggest the following
>>>
>>> 1 get community support from talk au for this process
>>> 2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement
>>> 3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state
>>> 4 Dian tidys up the wiki
>>> 5 Aaron does not edit the wiki until Dian has finished
>>> 6 we do not call for DWG intervention unless a party will not follow 
>>> the agreed process
>>>
>>> Tony
>>




{{Australia/Tabs}}
{{Cleanup|[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2022-February/015855.html
 See talk_au mailing list discussion]}}

The following guidelines are an attempt to document the result of discussions 
that have taken place on the Australian mailing list, and that become common 
practice in OSM mapping in Australia.  If you would like to comment, please 
join the mailing 
[https://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk-au list] and 
discuss there.

== Australia’s First People ==

===Cultural Sensitivity  - a word of caution...===

When editing Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander place names, editors need to 
be respectful of the community, their language and their wishes. Australia has 
a vast number of Indigenous communities, countries and nations and there is not 
one clear broad statement about what can and cannot be published. Some nations 
are more open to rendering names than others and editors should respect their 
decisions. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples 

Re: [talk-au] Anyone mind if I tidy the wiki a bit?

[forster]

Hi OSM community

Regarding the case of Aaronsta's edits.
I have been unsuccessful for the last week in contacting Aaron.
The DWG has placed a zero hour block on Aaron's account
Aaron has not accessed his account for the last two days and has not  
read the block information.


Thorsten, for the community's benefit, can you please detail your  
planned roll back of Aaron's wiki edits. I presume the community will  
support your plans, if they do please action them.


Thanks
Tony

__

Hi Aaron

My sincere thanks on behalf of the Australian Open Street Map community
for your many contributions to the map.

Unfortunately, there is some dissatisfaction in the Australian Open
Street Map community with some of your larger edits including wiki
changes on bikes and paths and the deletion of the Perth bike route
network.

We ask you to seek consensus from the community before making large
changes, particularly changes which reverse prior understandings and
are large in scope.

Your changes to the wiki on bikes and paths are a particular issue in
this letter. We propose a six step process in reverting the Australian
Tagging Guidelines to community understandings of tagging practice.

 1 get community support from talk-au for this process
 2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement
 3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state
 4 Dian tidies up the wiki
 5 Aaron does not edit the wiki until Dian has finished
 6 we do not call for DWG intervention unless a party will not follow
the agreed process

We are at step 2. It is important that we know you have read this
letter. Please reply by changeset comment or better by a post to
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/

This is your opportunity to put your case. There is a lot of discussion
on talk-au regarding your edits. I suggest you read it and respond.
Please let us know whether you agree with the 6 step process and if you
do not agree, your reasons.

Thanks
Tony Forster

__

Yep, great plan.

Thanks

Graeme


On Wed, 23 Feb 2022 at 05:28,  wrote:


Hi all
Can I suggest the following

1 get community support from talk au for this process
2 Contact Aaron and get his agreement
3 Thorsten rolls back the wiki to an agreed state
4 Dian tidys up the wiki
5 Aaron does not edit the wiki until Dian has finished
6 we do not call for DWG intervention unless a party will not follow
the agreed process

Tony








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