Re: [Talk-ca] Annexation/amalgamation of towns/villages in Canada

[Stewart C. Russell]

On 2016-09-02 12:02 PM, yegbin wrote:
> 
> As Beverly no longer exists, is it best practice to delete this node or is 
> there a better way to tag it?

It shouldn't be in the map if it can't be verified on the ground.

As to tagging, please delete the gns:* tags and especially the is_in
tag. That last one's a dinosaur.

What do you hope to achieve by importing GNS place names? We have decent
place names available already. How will you avoid duplicates?

To avoid deletion, don't forget to follow the Import guidelines. As
we've recently seen on this list, they're not optional.

cheers,
 Stewart


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

Re: [Talk-ca] Forests/Land Use, was: Canvec reverts

[Pierre Béland]

Hi Frederik,

I prefer to discuss with the community and find solutions. And we have to 
understand what is the reality of certain countries, try to help the 
contributors and avoid ultimatums, more or less intimidation ("I dont bother 
what you did, I will press the button and erase everything"). We should not 
encourage such inflammatory behaviors.
I would like that contributors from other countries do not come as  preachers 
of orthodoxy with no flexibility but come with a constructive spirit and 
propose ways to respond to the challenge of mapping such huge areas while 
improving the quality of the data.   

See a comparison map of Germany with north of Quebec 
http://thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTUyMzYyMTg.MTM3MDg4NTc*MTQwOTk4NTg(ODE3MTYzNg~!DE*NTE2Nzg1Ng.MTMwNDIzOTY)MA
Germany is about half the size of north of Quebec where 35 000 people live in 
isolated habitats. Germany is probably 10 to 20 times smaller then northern 
areas of Canada. I dont know the official population size but probably in the 
range 250,000 - 500,000 people.
The map, the tools, the procedures to enhance the map should not be only 
thought for dense urbanised areas in Europe or southern parts of Canada, USA, 
etc.
I would say that you propose a Police intimidating contributors with  "If we 
are not satisfied of the quality of your work - and we dont want to listen to 
the canadian community - we will press the button and destruct everything."
Please, we should keep Star Wars games spirit outside of OSM and work with more 
harmony and respect.

If people have finished developping the map in their country, and look for 
challenges, they should do it with a positive behavior that respect OSM 
volonteers. If we can develop tools to spy canadian contributors changesets and 
diligently revert / destroy their efforts, we should surely be able to produce 
more productive tools to help this community and other similar communities to 
enhance the map.
Personnaly, I think that we have to be careful if we want to develop 
communities and build a better map to avoid inflammatory language and 
destructive actions. Community engagement this requires to respect volunteers, 
to give them the feeling that they are part of a community, that we are 
listening to them, that we are ready to support them.

regard  
Pierre 


  De : Frederik Ramm 
 À : talk-ca@openstreetmap.org 
 Envoyé le : vendredi 2 Septembre 2016 16h02
 Objet : Re: [Talk-ca] Forests/Land Use, was: Canvec reverts
   
Hi,

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Adam Martin wrote:
> That is the key here. Deleting information without replacing it with
> something more accurate is inherently destructive. There must be
> some thought as to what will be put back or one is essentially
> ripping the map up simply because you don't like how something looks
> or how it closely it follows a given rule.

On a general note, edits *have* been reverted in the past for the simple
reason of not following a given rule, without looking at whether the
edit improved the visuals or not.

For "normal mappers", OSM ususally encourages them to map what they can
or know - no need to do it perfectly. Even a street drawn from memory
("I know I took a left here and then popped out onto XY road later, so
let me pencil in that road...) is ok for manual mapping.

For imports, we expect a certain minimum quality and if the importer
cannot produce that then we ask them to simply hold off the import until
they (or someone else) can.

The reason for the difference in approaches is that a productive
importer can import data in one day that takes several person-years to
fix and that will even have a detrimental effect on manual mapping of
other features (what Paul Ramsey writes further down-thread), whereas
imperfect data contributed by normal mappers comes at a rate where it is
realistic to assume that other normal mappers can fix it.

Data imports can have a negative effect on map quality (not even talking
of community engagement). "It looks nice on the map" can be a
treacherous criterion; beneath the surfaceit can still be rubbish, and
rubbish should not be imported into OSM even if it looks nice.

Bye
Frederik

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

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


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

Re: [Talk-ca] Forests/Land Use, was: Canvec reverts

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Adam Martin wrote:
> That is the key here. Deleting information without replacing it with
> something more accurate is inherently destructive. There must be
> some thought as to what will be put back or one is essentially
> ripping the map up simply because you don't like how something looks
> or how it closely it follows a given rule.

On a general note, edits *have* been reverted in the past for the simple
reason of not following a given rule, without looking at whether the
edit improved the visuals or not.

For "normal mappers", OSM ususally encourages them to map what they can
or know - no need to do it perfectly. Even a street drawn from memory
("I know I took a left here and then popped out onto XY road later, so
let me pencil in that road...) is ok for manual mapping.

For imports, we expect a certain minimum quality and if the importer
cannot produce that then we ask them to simply hold off the import until
they (or someone else) can.

The reason for the difference in approaches is that a productive
importer can import data in one day that takes several person-years to
fix and that will even have a detrimental effect on manual mapping of
other features (what Paul Ramsey writes further down-thread), whereas
imperfect data contributed by normal mappers comes at a rate where it is
realistic to assume that other normal mappers can fix it.

Data imports can have a negative effect on map quality (not even talking
of community engagement). "It looks nice on the map" can be a
treacherous criterion; beneath the surfaceit can still be rubbish, and
rubbish should not be imported into OSM even if it looks nice.

Bye
Frederik

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

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

Re: [Talk-ca] Annexation/amalgamation of towns/villages in Canada

[James]

You can use the disused tag

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:

If you really dont want to delete it

On Sep 2, 2016 12:03 PM, "yegbin"  wrote:

> Hi all.
>
> First post from a new contributor so initially want to say I am enjoying
> being a part of this OSM Canadian community.
>
> I would like some local opinions on Beverly.
>
>  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/51970574
>
> The former town of Beverly was amalgamated into Edmonton in 1961 (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly,_Alberta). The area is now a number
> of named neighbourhoods (none of which are named Beverly).
>
> As Beverly no longer exists, is it best practice to delete this node or is
> there a better way to tag it?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> yegbin
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

[Talk-ca] Annexation/amalgamation of towns/villages in Canada

[yegbin]

Hi all.

First post from a new contributor so initially want to say I am enjoying being 
a part of this OSM Canadian community.

I would like some local opinions on Beverly.

 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/51970574

The former town of Beverly was amalgamated into Edmonton in 1961 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly,_Alberta). The area is now a number of 
named neighbourhoods (none of which are named Beverly).

As Beverly no longer exists, is it best practice to delete this node or is 
there a better way to tag it?

Kind regards,

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

Re: [Talk-ca] unnamed roads

[Stewart C. Russell]

On 2016-09-01 06:43 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
> A correct example link is http://maproulette.org/map/342/362184 rather
> than the one in my previous message. Due to a bug in either MapRoulette
> or Leaflet you would need to zoom out 1 level to see the map context. 

Yeah, I'm getting no background unless I zoom out quite a bit. Also,
don't forget that we're the True North Strong & Free from Decent Aerial
Imagery, so most of these are hidden in a couple of fuzzy pixels.

Also, what's with the red "You are somewhere on earth" popup? That
either needs to be useful or not there. Pick one.

Also, please select the way when you're opening iD for editing.

Geobase WMS has the NRN (National Road Network) with road names:


There are a whole bunch of other fun OGL-CA licensed things from the
Canadian goverment. We have a Leaflet tile server, apparently:


 Stewart

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

[Talk-ca] weeklyOSM #319 08/23/2016-08/29/2016

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 319,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things 
happening in the openstreetmap world:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/8042/

Enjoy!

weeklyOSM is brought to you by ... 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Languages
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca