[Talk-GB] Zebra crossings being lost in iD - how to respond

[Rob Nickerson]

Hi all,

*Before I start this message, I would like to say that I am looking for
solutions and not wishing to open the flood gates on abuse of the iD
editors. On the whole they do a great job and even when we disagree it
should be with respect. Right now on to the message itself:*

It seems like the iD editor's "upgrade this" feature is replacing
crossing=zebra with crossing=marked but NOT adding crossing_ref=zebra to
the node. If lots of users make use of this "feature" in the UK then we
stand to lose some valuable data. Taginfo UK says there are 4,710
crossing=zebra features in the UK.

I have added a comment on to the GitHub issue but no reply yet.
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6962

An alternate option is that we attempt to strike first - before the iD
editors amend the data. There seems to be two options here: an automated
edit adding the crossing_ref=zebra tag to all crossing=zebra features in
the UK, or we make use of the new MapRoulette "Quick Fixes" feature to
visually inspect each. See:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/390984

What do you think?

P.S. This also applies to the UK's other crossing types. The MapRoulette
option wouldn't be an option for all of these.

Thank you,
*Rob*
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] FIXME/fixme/OSm Notes Quarterly Project

[Rob Nickerson]

So far I have looked at two regions in the UK for fixmes: Warwickshire and
the North West.

In Warwickshire it can be difficult to resolve the fixmes as most (but not
all) require a lot of work. I found a completely different story in the
North West. I found a good number of fixmes there which had already been
resolved and therefore all I had to do was remove the redundant fixme=*
tag. I also found a lot of fixme tags that could be resolved just by using
the latest aerial imagery and/or GPS traces. Once again it has been a
reminder of the differences between places within a few hours of each other.

As for adding new fixme tags, I personally haven't needed to do this yet. I
am curious as to where "peak fixme" lies. If we had 10% more contributors
would we end up with 10% more fixme tags or do you eventually get to a a
point where you turn the corner and start ticking off all these quality
assurance issues?

P.S. The number of Notes is on the up again as well. There are a lot of
good descriptions in the Notes that can be used to update the map. Check
them out at
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-notes-country?c=United%20Kingdom

Best regards,
*Rob*
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Reference numbers for UK admin areas?

[Edward Bainton]

Super, thanks for all replies.

I'll post another question soon with the full scope of this contact's
queries: at this stage just kicking the tyres on it, but it seems Overpass
will do just about whatever you want it to, if you ask nicely.

On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 17:17, Dave F via Talk-GB 
wrote:

> Try this:
> https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Nor
>
> area(3601608485); // Sutton
> //node[amenity=grit_bin]
> nwr[building](area);
> out meta center;
>
> As you want a specific area, the way I do it is to get the relation
> boundary's id (from the link you gave in the forum)   & add it to
> 36 (which is the start of the databases numbering for relations
> so they don't overlap with ways & nodes).
>
> DaveF
>
> On 23/10/2019 16:32, Edward Bainton wrote:
> > This is Sutton the parish within the City of Peterborough unitary
> authority
> > (there is another in Beds and another in Norfolk).
> >
> > OP here: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=67698
> >
> > The challenge was to get Overpass to return grit bins in *this *Sutton,
> and
> > not in all places called Sutton.
> >
> > The context (not in OP) was a query from someone who works with parish
> > councils asking whether OSM is a feasible GIS for their asset management
> -
> > because (1) parish councils are third parties to the Public Sector
> Mapping
> > Agreement and (2) they have just had a lot of  assets (or should that be
> > liabilities?) devolved to them from higher tiers of government.
> >
> > Edward
> >
> > On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 16:25, Dave F via Talk-GB <
> talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Which Sutton?
> >>
> >> Could you post the OP?
> >>
> >> DaveF
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 23/10/2019 15:49, Edward Bainton wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all
> >> On the forum marczoutendijk gave me an Overpass query to find grit-bins
> in
> >> Sutton.
> >>
> >> He added an admin-level to distinguish the parish of Sutton from the
> London
> >> borough.
> >>
> >> The only issue is, there are at least three Suttons at admin_level=10
> (as
> >> it happens, not far from each other).
> >>
> >> They have ref numbers thus: ref:gss=E04001120 (for example)
> >>
> >> Does anyone know what these are? There is a webpage in the wiki here,
> but I
> >> can't make sense of it.https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q2647
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Edward
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Talk-GB mailing listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://
> lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Talk-GB mailing list
> >> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
> >>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb