Re: [talk-au] Suspicious amount of removed bicycle tags
Hey all, Sorry to be a tattle-tale, but this user's behaviour is continuing, despite increasing demands on them to engage. https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=11210886 In the most recent conversation, they have converted a powerline way into a footpath in error. Not sure what the appropriate next steps would be? On 2021-09-23 12:27, Andrew Harvey wrote: On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 22:02, wrote: I have looked back at months of changesets by this user. Nearly all involve retagging which is at best arguable and at worst wrong. It appears to be largely done from satellite images and not survey. The largest category is changes of paths, (typically not those beside roads, not what are generally termed footpaths in Australian English) from dual use to bicycle=no on the logic that all paths are footpaths unless otherwise signed under Victorian law. This argument is questionable at best, these changes are not in "road related areas" (See rules 11-13 of the Road Rules) and not covered by the Victorian no riding on footpaths rule. Another category of changes is strange instances of bicycle=no. For example you could ride a horse into the Eastern Sewage Plant but not a bicycle. You can drive a car or walk into Wilson Botanic Gardens but not enter on a bike. You can enter the Quarter Circuit residential subdivision by any mode of transport except bicycle. You can travel Browns Lane Aspendale by any mode of transport except a bicycle. A third category is removal of bicycle=designated, it would require a site visit to establish whether there was signage to designate cycle use and whether this tag should remain. A fourth is changes of narrow lanes servicing a number of houses to service=driveway despite the wiki indicating that "A driveway is a minor service road leading to a specific property" They have not edited for the past 3 days. They have had changeset comments on 19 changesets from 10 different commenters but replied to only 3 and accepted that they were in error in 0. There are 636 changesets by this person with many ways retagged. An estimated 5000 ways have been retagged. An enormous amount of work if each way was to be properly assessed. Do I have community support for the proposal that they be invited to respond in a constructive way to all the changeset comments and if they do not respond in a timely matter the community should consider mass reversion of all changesets? Is this a matter that can be managed effectively through talk-au or should the DWG be involved? I deeply regret suggesting that all of a users work might be deleted but the amount of work to check each way is prohibitive. If any one can devise an automated process to protect the few constructive edits, that would be great. The shared driveway point was raised by Tom on talk-au today, and it seems like the driveway=pipestem tag could be used in these cases so mark it as a shared driveway. Regarding the other changes, I agree with your points, hopefully the mapper can respond to their changeset comments and hopefully work this out though discourse. Failing that, having good changes caught up in reversions is never good, but I understand it's a lot of effort otherwise, wish the tooling handled this better. ___ 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] Suburb, or Town?
Hello, Hopefully this is a quick question! Should metropolitan suburbs be recorded as suburbs, or as towns? I've seen some contrasting approaches in the same city; compare Keillor Park, Melbourne with Keillor Downs, Melbourne. Which is correct, or are both acceptable?___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Shared driveways
Hey Graeme, While I understand your reasoning about naming the driveways, but I don't believe it is a good idea. It isn't really the name of the roadway. By analogy, a sign saying "Entrance" at a hotel wouldn't make name of the driveway "Entrance". A numbered letter box next to a driveway is an entrance sign in a different form. Perhaps a relation with type 'entrance' would be the most appropriate way to capture this connection from street->building? On 2021-09-24 00:02, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 09:40, wrote: Hi I see that you have named the driveways. How does this sit with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only I don't "think" it goes against the grain of anything listed there? No, driveways aren't (usually) signposted, but there will usually be a mail box beside them saying "32" - is that good enough to use as a street sign? As mentioned, I did it that way to help people find the property - if there's overwhelming objection to it, I'll stop! Thanks Graeme ? Tony On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 20:17, Tom Brennan wrote: Graeme - are you saying that you are tagging them all the same? Just as separate ways? Yep. Here's one that I did recently: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/-28.07919/153.23456, which was apparently a single property that was sub-divided. (Notes: I've just repositioned 32b's driveway as new imagery shows it further over to the side, & 32d could have it's own short stub, but it's not visible) Anybody (particularly Emergency Services!) can see that to get to 32 you go down here, & B is over there, C down that way, D right beside the road & A is right up the end. "32" is a service=driveway (+ access=private) from the road in to the A / C junction, & each of the other three are exactly the same from 32 to each house. Thanks Graeme ___ 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] Albert Park Grand Prix Track
Thanks Ben and Tony, Interesting to see the other precedents for tagging a street circuit in Australia. It seems like the separated way for the racetrack should be deleted, and the relation updated to use the relevant segments from Aughtie, Lakeside, etc. D On 2021-09-22 22:31, Benjamin Ceravolo wrote: Other examples may be (though more street tracks) Adelaide, Newcastle, Gold Coast Get Outlook for Android [1] - From: fors...@ozonline.com.au Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 8:25:14 AM To: Benjamin Ceravolo Cc: Diacritic ; talk-au@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [talk-au] Albert Park Grand Prix Track I can't find a similar equivalent in Australia to compare it to (not a big petrol-head) but Monaco, for example, doesn't have a raceway drawn across its roads, just a relation. Hi maybe this example helps Relation: Mount Panorama Circuit (6942508) Tony Links: -- [1] https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Albert Park Grand Prix Track
Hello, The Albert Park Grand Prix track is currently drawn as a separate 'raceway', broken up into sectors, using some nodes of Lakeside Drive and Aughtie Drive. It's pretty cool t see the route, but I'm not sure it's correct to have it drawn in that way. The race track only exists for one month a year (COVID and construction notwithstanding), and the wiki seems to support the notion that temporary features shouldn't be included. Leaving the raceway there 24/7 might give non-locals the impression the track is in service all year. I can't find a similar equivalent in Australia to compare it to (not a big petrol-head) but Monaco, for example, doesn't have a raceway drawn across its roads, just a relation. (Well, mostly. It looks like there are frequent changes, but the raceway only exists in the ways that aren't normal roads.) Thoughts? D.___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
