Re: [Talk-GB] Import Progress

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 19 March 2017 at 20:55, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
> However, just because I no longer spend my time batting back and forth to
> every post on the lists, that does not mean I have the right to ignore the
> same community guidelines which everyone else follows.

Can you show where you have sought community support when making the
following change to the Import Guidelines?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Import/Guidelines&diff=702968&oldid=687101

Or is your post simply a request for all people to follow *your* rules?

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Propose automated edit to update NAPTAN data in the west mids

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 3 February 2017 at 19:29, Stuart Reynolds <
stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk> wrote:

> Also, there is often some confusion about what name goes into which fields
> - people will insist on compounding names, for example, because that’s what
> their consuming system wants, rather than getting the consumer to read the
> data properly. But that’s too much to go into here, and if reviewing the
> names is in scope then I would be happy to offer to help. One of my other
> “hats" is as the Public Transport Data Standards Advisor / Expert for DfT,
> which includes advising on NAPTAN.
>
> Hi Stuart,

Great to have your support. I noticed that there are a few stops in the
West Midlands where the name in Naptan doesn't match the name on the flag
(unfortunately I don't remember by heart which ones). This means the visual
announcement in the announcement in the bus (and the information in online
timetables) is different from the name on the flag, so from a usability
perspective it would make sense to fix this. Is there any process of
reporting situations like that?

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Propose automated edit to update NAPTAN data in the west mids

[Matthijs Melissen]

Hi Brian,

Great to see this going forward! Some technicalities:

> Process overview

This is not very clear to me. I think this section either needs more
detail, or less (with the detail moved to the individual steps). Also, what
do you mean with opening a csv in JOSM?

> Each chunk will create a separate changeset in OSM

This is not correct, all chunks will be uploaded within one changeset. See
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Help/Action/Upload for how uploading in
chunks in JOSM work.

On the process detail: what will happen with current bus stops in OSM that
do not have Naptan tags? Perhaps it would be best to add the NaptanCode (or
AtcoCode) manually for these stops first? Can't be too many of them.

"Use a proximity script to determine presence of duplicates. How to handle
duplicates?" I don't think we need a proximity script or anything like
that, we can just do matching on NaptanCode or AtcoCode. So: for all bus
stops, if there is a bus stop with a matching NaptanCode already in OSM,
update that bus stop; if not, create a new bus stop.

The Naptan database contains abbreviations like Rd, Ln, St. Will we leave
those, or are we going to expand them into Road, Lane, Street etc, as is
usually done in OSM? The bus stops in West Midlands have the abbreviations
written out as well.

In general, I think it would be good to have some more information in the
process detail before going ahead - but I'm sure this will sort itself out
over the next weeks.

Good luck with the import, it's a great step forward!

-- Matthijs

On 3 February 2017 at 18:52, Brian Prangle  wrote:

> Hi everyone
>
> We have an opportunity to work with the regional transport authority TfWM
> to update this data which is 8 years old and partially edited by OSM users.
> They have assigned 2 developers to work on this and I'm spending a half day
> each week working with them.
>
> We've agreed and discussed this in our mappa mercia group and also
> contacted a prolific local public transport OSM editor who's not part of
> our group.
>
> In line with the automated edits policy there's a wikipage
> 
> with full details
>
> Comments welcome as this exercise might be useful elswhere as the state of
> NAPTAN data will be in a similar state
>
> regards
>
> Brian
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Restoring a usable map service!

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 31 October 2015 at 03:09, Lester Caine  wrote:
> new indistinguishable rendering primary routes and motorways

For my information, could you take the test on
http://enchroma.com/test/instructions/ and tell me what it says? It's
ok if you prefer to respond off-list.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] New St station platform alignments

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 25 September 2015 at 14:56, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> Does anyone know whether the alignment of the platforms under the concourse
> is based on anything other than pure guesswork? The alignment at either end
> where they can be seen in Bing doesn't look right either. I'm trying to get
> the concourse layout to match the platforms for lifts and escalators and
> they're not quite matching currently.

I'm not sure about the platforms, but I do know that the track
alignment on the Wolverhampton side is not fully correct, and possibly
copied from Bing without a field survey. It would be nice if somebody
could fix this as well.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths and Footways

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 18 August 2015 at 10:20, Andy Townsend  wrote:
> On 18/08/2015 07:43, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
>
> On 18 Aug 2015 03:56, "Andy Townsend"  wrote:
>> There's no interest to do this in the OSM "standard" style because it is
>> abundantly clear that any new attempts at changes that make rural navigation
>> possible* in OSM-carto would be rejected based on the ones that already have
>> been over the last year.
>
> This is not true, a different rendering based on hiking routes or public
> rights of way is something we could certainly consider.
>
>
> As I said previously, changes such as this aren't really relevant "if you
> can't see the paths themselves at all at a zoom level you'd use for planning
> a route over them.".
>
> However, now you're saying "... a different rendering ...".

I meant that we could consider changing the current Default rendering.

> In the
> immediately previous message you said:
>
> "So far there is little interest to do this on the OSM default render style
> which seems odd to me given how much fuss there has been on this list to
> recent changes to the footway/path style (over the last year)!"

I didn't write that (or anything you address in the rest of your
message) - I am not Rob Nickerson.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths and Footways

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 18 Aug 2015 03:56, "Andy Townsend"  wrote:
> There's no interest to do this in the OSM "standard" style because it is
abundantly clear that any new attempts at changes that make rural
navigation possible* in OSM-carto would be rejected based on the ones that
already have been over the last year.

This is not true, a different rendering based on hiking routes or public
rights of way is something we could certainly consider.

Please stop antagonizing the default rendering as if it is on a mission to
make your life as hard as possible, it comes across very childish and is a
counterproductive way of discussing.

> Although it hasn't been explicitly stated, the direction of travel of
that style is clear - some people want a map style that's useful for
navigation, others want something that "looks nice"; based on comments on
the issues raised it's clear that the people maintaining the style are in
the latter group rather than the former.

Not true either - our main criterium for the recent changes is
"readability", and that definitely includes being able to use the map for
navigation.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths and Footways

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 16 August 2015 at 22:57, ajt1...@gmail.com  wrote:
> Until I provided a counter-example there, the only example on
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/747 was of a
> well-mapped central European city.  If there is evaluation of the results in
> both rural and urban settings in multiple countries, it's not getting posted
> to Github.

This is the PR only, other areas were discussed in the corresponding
issue: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/211

Also, Luxembourg is not in central Europe.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Paths and Footways

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 16 August 2015 at 21:06, ajt1...@gmail.com 
> That makes some sense, but OSM-Carto's biggest problem is that a number of
> the changes over the last year have been dedicated to making well-mapped
> central European urban areas "look nice" at the expense of the rest of the
> planet.

I would like to point out that this statement is incorrect. For all
change requests, we always evaluate the consequences for both rural
and urban settings, and changes are always tested on multiple
countries.  Also, only one out of the four maintainers of the
stylesheet is located in central Europe.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Retain existing style sheets for UK server

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 8 August 2015 at 22:55, Lester Caine  wrote:
> What is the best way of cloning the existing style setup for a UK tile
> server?

Some useful resources:

https://switch2osm.org/serving-tiles/manually-building-a-tile-server-14-04/
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/657#issuecomment-56023323
https://git.openstreetmap.org/chef.git/

Let me know if you have any specific questions.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK style rendering port ...

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 27 July 2015 at 09:06, Lester Caine  wrote:
> With the discussion on a more self contained 'UK' group I'd like to
> highlight one area that is becoming perhaps more urgent for some of us,
> the idea of a UK style tile set.

I also think it's a good idea for the UK to create there own rendering
server, just like German/France/the Netherlands have their own
rendering servers. I agree this is getting even more urgent now the
default rendering is becoming less UK-centric.

If you would like any technical help with this, please let me know and
I'll try to assist where I can.

One thing I'd like to warn for is not to underestimate the time it
takes to create a rendering, or even to make changes to an existing
rendering.

I hope this project will be a success, and indeed I look forward to
the moment the default style can start borrowing idea from the UK
style! In the past - in the past we have already been borrowing ideas
from the French rendering.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Thrapston viaduct

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 13 July 2015 at 14:13, Philip Barnes  wrote:
> I think this, and blue motorways, is a good argument for why we need a
> UK render of the map.

I agree a UK-specific rendering would be very useful, especially now
the Default style is getting less and less UK-centric.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Thrapston viaduct

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 13 July 2015 at 09:53, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> I don't want fudge things to just "tag for the renderer", but is there
> a relevant tag missing, or should we change the rendering styles to
> show such objects?

You might be interested in this PR which is currently under review:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1633

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Ref names on Residential roads

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 12 May 2015 10:57, "Bob Kerr" 
wrote:
>
> On residential roads where there has been a ref= added is being
rendered on Mapnik. Is this something new since I have not been checking
recently.

No, rendering has not changed in this respect.

Maybe the tag unsigned_ref is an outcome?

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] OS OpenData now OGL

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 17 February 2015 at 22:38, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> At long last the open data licence scene in the UK has now become a lot
> simpler as OS have ditched their OS OpenData Licence and replaced it with
> the standard OGL

At first sight this seems good news.

However:

| In particular, one of these sticking points concerned the issue of
sublicensing
| and giving greater clarity as to the applicability of OGL terms to
sublicensees,
| a matter that has been addressed in this new version of the OGL.

OS's sublicensing terms were the reason OS ODL and ODbL are incompatible:
http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/notes/os-open-data.html

I could imagine that OGL-3 has imported OS ODL's clause on
sublicensing that caused incompatibility with ODbL, which would make
OGL-3 incompatible with ODbL.Do we have confirmation that this is not
the case, i.e. that OGL-3 and ODbL are compatible?

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Unsigned road names (was "Fix the road name!")

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 24 January 2015 at 20:33, SomeoneElse  wrote:
> However, there are names where the name in OSM is what the local authority
> uses, and what local people would agree that it is called, but there's no
> sign on the ground.  How do we reflect that?

I just wanted to add that this does not necessarily only concern small
rural tracks, which you might expect to be unsigned. An example of a
major road that is unsigned is Paradise Street in Birmingham city
centre.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hanbury Meeting

[Matthijs Melissen]

Thanks for organizing Jerry!

I added a couple of housenumbers and POI, but I didn't record traces
or things others have surveyed as well, so I think others can take
over the editing now.

I also mapped the shops in Burton:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/693129386#map=17/52.80216/-1.63206

-- Matthijs

On 3 January 2015 at 20:00, SK53  wrote:
> Just to say thank you to everyone who came for a very damp day in the
> countryside.
>
> I hope that we can follow up several of the many useful discussions we had
> whilst walking and in the pub.
>
> If people have ideas for a follow-up mapping event, do let me know. It seems
> Saturdays are reasonably convenient. I will try and schedule something for
> April (probably avoiding Easter & the SotM-Fr weekend). One idea we did
> briefly discuss is the National Memorial Arboretum: no shortage of things to
> map, plenty of interest and another reasonable halfway house.
>
> Jerry
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Totesport

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 21 December 2014 at 12:33, SomeoneElse  wrote:
> I'd be tempted to add OSM notes for these containing a link to the problem
> node or way since http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1117527074 hasn't been
> touched for four years; it's likely that other shops have changed hands too.

I don't want to paralyze the notes system by adding too many notes, so
for the time being I'm not adding more notes related to shop tagging
than are being resolved. In the meanwhile, 8 notes added by me have
been resolved, so I added now 8 new notes for the Totesport shops.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-westmidlands] Fwd: Post-Christmas Midlands OSM Meet-up

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 29 December 2014 at 17:42, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> Also if anyone wants to do some mapping from home before we head out there's
> quite a bit to be done aligning roads, mapping landuse and/or tracing
> buildings.

I have traced the buildings in Hanbury.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Totesport

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 21 Dec 2014 14:40, "David Woolley"  wrote:
> In my view, they are not really bookmakers.  For fixed odds, bookmaking
requires no skill and for the horses, I imagine that all the bookmaking is
done at head office.

We decided on shop=bookmaker some time ago:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Gambling#Voting
I don't feel strongly either way, but I think it's best to stick with the
decision taken by the community.

Note also that the shop=betting tag is ambiguous: it was used for
bookmakers, adult gaming centres and lottery shops (the latter being
popular in Spain). They are all quite different, so I guess it's good to
get rid of the ambiguity.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Totesport

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 21 Dec 2014 13:57, "SK53"  wrote:
> Notably there are lots of "Phones 4 U" shops (under a variety of names).
All the one's I've physically checked have been closed and have a notice
from the receivers.

I spotted a few that have been taken over by Vodafone and EE. I think all
of them need to be checked indivdually.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Totesport

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 21 Dec 2014 12:34, "SomeoneElse"  wrote:
>
> On 21/12/2014 12:02, Andrew Hain wrote:
> I'd be tempted to add OSM notes for these containing a link to the
problem node or way since http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1117527074
hasn't been touched for four years; it's likely that other shops have
changed hands too.

Yes, I agree this is a textbook example of a case where adding notes is the
best solution. There are relatively few of them, so it won't flood the
notes system, and some of them will have closed in the meanwhile or not
been taken over in the first time, so there is no way to solve this
remotely.

Feel free to go ahead. I can address the Birmingham ones when I'm around.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] No more voting on mechanical edits

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 19 December 2014 at 12:10, SomeoneElse  wrote:
> For iD, names are suggested via
> https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/ , and
> https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/blob/master/canonical.json
> is the "canonical list of known good ones".

I have written a pull request to name-suggestion-index to include the
names from the current RFC. See
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/16. I have of
course no control over if and when it will get merged.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] No more voting on mechanical edits

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 19 December 2014 at 12:10, SomeoneElse  wrote:
> I suggested that any plan for changes to the shop names and
> values that we have now would also need to address how new users decide
> which ones to use.
>
> For iD, names are suggested via
> https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/ , and
> https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/blob/master/canonical.json
> is the "canonical list of known good ones".  I suggested to Matthijs that
> some sort of localisation might make sense there, since shop names do vary
> (and thinking further about it shop functions do too - an Australian
> Woolworths is very different to what a UK Woolworths was).  He was aware of
> name-suggestion-index but didn't seem to be aware of the canonical list.

I am in fact aware of the canonical list. Dan has already taken up
adding part of my changes:
https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/12/files I'd be
happy to help him. I don't think we necessarily need to coordinate the
mechanical edit and the correction of name-suggestion-index, though.

As the rest of your e-mail mainly consists of points that have been
addressed before, I'm not sure if it's useful to respond to them
again. If there is any particular issue you would like my response to,
please let me know.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-3 Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 18 December 2014 at 12:18, Jonathan Bennett  wrote:
> However, if local mappers could somehow be alerted to this small
> discrepancy, they would probably spot other things in the same area that
> needed updating at the same time. They might not go looking for them
> otherwise.
>
> Finding small problems like this does have an advantage, but it looks like
> fixing them mechanically is actually missing the opportunity to improve the
> map in other ways at the same time.

I have tried contacting local mappers before (in the case of the
betting/bookmaker change), but response has been very limited (less
than 5% of the contacted mappers responded). So this is not really a
solution.

An alternative would be to create Notes for every misspelling.
However, that would result in the creation of hundreds of new Notes,
and I doubt people would be really happy with that.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-3 Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

This is only an issue with the demo I generated, not with the proposal
itself (in the proposal itself, I explicitly restrict changes to
objects with a shop key). Thanks for pointing out this discrepancy.

I generated an improved Overpass Turbo link: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6Aj

-- Matthijs

On 18 December 2014 at 11:46, Ian Caldwell
 wrote:
> You are not checking that the entities are shops. In my area the  Overpass
> Turbo finds the following node http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/502411262 a
> bus stop, from a NaPTAN import.
>
>
> Ian

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-3 Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 18 Dec 2014 10:40, "SomeoneElse"  wrote:
>
> On 18/12/2014 02:10, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
>>
>> If you oppose this proposal, or if you want to register particular
>> areas or objects for an opt-out, please edit the wiki page under the
>> section 'Oppositions and opt-out'.
>
>
> At the risk of restating the obvious,
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy must still be
followed, including the bit where it says "You must not go ahead with your
plans if there is noticeable opposition".
>
> So this particular proposal is not "opt out".  If there is "noticeable
opposition", then it shouldn't go ahead.

That is indeed how I intended the proposal. Mappers have both the
opportunity to opt out, and the opportunity to voice their opposition. If
you believe this is not clear from the text of the proposal, feel free to
suggest an improvement to the text.

Kind regards,
Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] RFC-3 Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

I have created a new version of my proposal to unify the names of
chain shops within the UK. The list is now significantly shorter, and
only contains clear
errors, rather than interpretation problems of shop signs.

For details, please see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names.

Please note in particular that there is an Overpass Turbo link to see
which objects would be affected: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6zT

If you oppose this proposal, or if you want to register particular
areas or objects for an opt-out, please edit the wiki page under the
section 'Oppositions and opt-out'. If you prefer, you can also reply
to this e-mail to me or to the list - in that case, I will add your
comments to the Wiki page in your name.

As the proposal has changed significantly, please let me know if you
oppose this proposal even if you have let me know before that you
opposed previous versions of the proposal.

I would like to thank everyone for the feedback previously received,
which has taught me a lot about the UK retail landscape, and allowed
me to improve the proposal.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

[Talk-GB] No more voting on mechanical edits

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

The DWG has decided not to allow votes for mechanical edits. Andy
Townsend wrote me privately, on behalf of the Data Working Group:

> Please also don't try and organise "votes" for subsequent mechanical edits -
> the consensus of the comments on the talk-gb list is clear that it's _not_ an
> appropriate mechanism.

For the sake of transparency, I thought it would be good to share this
message also with the list.

It is not clear to me why the DWG believes that the consensus on this
list is that voting is not an appropriate mechanism. During the
procedure for my mechanical edits, I had the impression that while
some members, perhaps a majority, were against voting, there were also
members who supported the voting process, or at least thought it is
the best process available.

Personally, I also don't think this decision is particularly helpful
for the community. For the three mechanical edit proposals I have run,
voting has helped me a lot to gauge the amount of support within the
community. From discussion alone it's hard to estimate if there exists
opposition - often people ask critical questions, which might lead one
to think they oppose the edit, but then these people still express
support when confronted with an approve/oppose question. Also, the
mechanical edit policy states that 'As a rule of thumb, you should
have 90% of the community behind you when you make the edit'. It's
unclear how someone who proposes a mechanical edit can find out what
part of the community he has behind him, when polling the community is
not permitted.

In any case, the citation above is the decision of the DWG. I respect
this decision, and I will therefore not use voting as a means to gauge
the community's opinion in further mechanical edit proposals.

Finally, I would like to thank Andy and the rest of the DWG for their
hard work. Even though I don't agree with their decision in this
particular instance, I realize they do a lot of unpaid hard work that
is invaluable for the community.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

This change has now been carried out. The number of shop=betting shops
in the UK has been reduced from 356 to 77.

The remaining shop=betting shops, i.e. the ones not part of one the
the large chains, might not be all bookmakers, so we need to rely on
local knowledge. Some might be better tagged as amenity=casino,
leisure=adult_gaming_centre (like Cashino), or shop=lottery, for
example.

To see the remaining shops tagged with shop=betting in your area, you
can use Overpass Turbo:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6zO
Browse through your area and press 'Run'. The shops you find in this
way still need to be corrected. It would be great if local mappers
could help with that.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

On 18 December 2014 at 00:19, Matthijs Melissen
 wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> In October, I proposed the following edit.
>
> For all objects within the UK tagged with shop=betting and name
> Betfred, Coral, Ladbrokes, Paddy Power or William Hill, the tag
> shop=betting will be changed into shop=bookmaker.
>
> More information can be found here:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/Betting.
>
> No opposition has been raised, and no opt-outs have been received. I
> will therefore go ahead with this edit.
>
> The data working group have indicated that they have issues with
> voting used as a procedure to approve mechanical edits - I will come
> back to that in a separate e-mail. However, as the community seems to
> be unanimous in favour of this edit, I believe there is no reason to
> further postpone this edit.
>
> I would like to thank everyone who contributed to the discussion.
>
> Kind regards,
> Matthijs

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

[Talk-GB] Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

In October, I proposed the following edit.

For all objects within the UK tagged with shop=betting and name
Betfred, Coral, Ladbrokes, Paddy Power or William Hill, the tag
shop=betting will be changed into shop=bookmaker.

More information can be found here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/Betting.

No opposition has been raised, and no opt-outs have been received. I
will therefore go ahead with this edit.

The data working group have indicated that they have issues with
voting used as a procedure to approve mechanical edits - I will come
back to that in a separate e-mail. However, as the community seems to
be unanimous in favour of this edit, I believe there is no reason to
further postpone this edit.

I would like to thank everyone who contributed to the discussion.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM University of Liverpool exercise (or 200 free(ish) volunteers)

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 27 November 2014 at 21:09, SK53  wrote:
> One other point about metrics such as POI collection: it will greatly depend
> on POI density (city centre vs. suburbs) and the current number of POIs
> already mapped. It's fundamentally easier to map somewhere de novo rather
> than identifying what is missing and what has changed in somewhere which has
> already been partially mapped.

Interesting to see how our mapping styles are so different. For me
re-mapping an already mapped area is much faster than mapping from
scratch. Probably also something to do with the fact that I'm mapping
with my phone. Maybe it's time for a new phone battery for you by the
way?

I know this is not relevant to Nick, sorry for hijacking the topic...

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM University of Liverpool exercise (or 200 free(ish) volunteers)

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 27 November 2014 at 16:35, SK53  wrote:
> I have metrics from my own surveys of this type, but would expect a shopping
> street 200 metres long would occupy a student for perhaps a couple of hours
> (certainly my first shopping street, Floral Street in London, took quite a
> long time). In general data collection is much faster than data entry (a
> ratio of 1:3 or 1:5 for experienced mappers probably more for inexperienced
> mappers).

I think this really depends on the mapper and the method used. My
collection:entry rate is somewhere between 1:1 and 2:1. In retail
areas, I collect roughly 80 points of interest per hour, and I can
enter, very roughly, about 100 points of interest per hour.

I collect data by adding POI as favourites in OsmAND (using both the
map and Bing layers), and then I export my favourites to JOSM. That
way, I don't need to type out POI names twice (still a check for typos
made on mobile is necessary of course), so it goes relatively quick.

Of course, metrics like this are not useful to estimate the time
students will spend on an assignment. I was taught that at university
level, students will take roughly eight times as much time to complete
an exercise as their instructor, and I think in this case the factor
will even be larger.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] OSM University of Liverpool exercise (or 200 free(ish) volunteers)

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 27 November 2014 at 13:50, Nick Bearman  wrote:
> I'm looking for someone who has completed something similar in the past and
> has any recommendation on how to do this most effectively, and what areas in
> Liverpool would benefit most from the students contribution. Currently,
> giving the time available to the students, I would be thinking of a
> desk-based digitisation exercise, but this can be flexible. I've already
> contacted John McKerrell but I'm interested to talk to other mappers in
> Liverpool that can suggest areas that need the most attention and/or who
> might like to be involved.

Nice initiative! I think adding building outlines is quite useful, and
has relatively low risk that the students break things (an important
consideration, especially with such a large group). West of the
Mersey, most buildings are added, but East of the Mersey, there are
hardly any building outlines yet. I think with such a large group, you
should be able to cover the entire city even if you give everyone a
tiny area to do. Probably best to split the city into several 'tasks'
yourself to prevent overlap?

Make sure that your students have a reference to your contact details
somewhere, in their profile or changeset comment perhaps, so that
mappers can contact you if something goes wrong.

I am not a local mapper in Liverpool, make sure to also get support /
approval from the locals.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Suburbs in London/Brum - big edits

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 20 November 2014 08:51, Andy Robinson  wrote:
> It’s not likely to be as simple as saying everywhere within a city boundary
> is a suburb. A simple example is the town of Sutton Coldfield which recently
> regained it Royal Town status, Its officially a town in every traditional
> sense yet it is part of Birmingham though devolution of powers back to the
> town from Birmingham is slowly (very slowly) happening with time. There is
> no gap in the conurbation between what is known as Sutton Coldfield and the
> rest of Birmingham. It’s not considered a suburb of Birmingham as it’s a
> town destination in its own right and locals who hail from it would always
> say they were from the town and not the city of Birmingham.

Why don't we follow post towns?

In the Birmingham area, that would give us cities/town/villages
Birmingham, Alcester, Bromsgrove, Halesowen, Cradley Heath, Rowley
Regis, Smethwick, Oldbury, West Bromwich, Sutton Coldfield, Tamworth,
Studyley, Solihull, Henley-in-Arden, and Redditch.

Places like Moseley, Kings Heath, and Bournbrook would become suburbs,
which is quite reasonable in my opinion - these places are clearly
part of the settlement Birmingham.

In most other countries, deciding between village and suburb is a bit
easier because villages have their own town sign (usually functioning
as built-up area sign as well), while suburbs have no such sign. Post
towns in such countries, at least in the Netherlands, are usually
equivalent to signed towns.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 2 November 2014 13:24, Matthijs Melissen  wrote:
> Because I think
> it is important to act as carefully as possible when executing
> automatic edits, I have stopped the voting, and will bring this
> proposal back to the discussion phase.

Thank you all for your input.

From the discussion, it appears that there are diverging opinions on
the use of capitals in Aldi, Spar, Lidl, and Asda. I therefore think
that it is not appropriate to carry out an automatic edit at this
point, and I have removed these shops from the proposal.

The same holds for Brantano Footwear. It seems the company is not
consistent in the way they call themselves, so an automatic edit is
not applicable. The same holds for Maplin Electronics versus Maplin,
B&M Bargains versus B&M, Carphone Warehouse versus The Carphone
Warehouse, Cotsworld Outdoor versus Cotsworld, and Three versus 3. All
of them I have removed from the proposal as well.

Could you please have a look at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names
if there are any other changes that need removing or changing?

If not, I will open up a poll again to see if the proposal has
sufficient support.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 4 November 2014 22:17, Chris Hill  wrote:
> I would write what it says on the sign on the shop. That's why I tag ASDA as
> ASDA, that's what it says on the sign. I don't look at their website, their
> advertising or their letter heads. I use ground truth. I'm not a trademark
> junkie, I'm a mapper who tries to get it right.

Would you also write name=PRIMARK, name=LLOYDS BANK, name=PIZZA
EXPRESS, and name=wagamama?

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 4 November 2014 18:55, Philip Barnes  wrote:
> According to wikipedia SPAR is an acronym of Door Eendrachtig
> Samenwerken Profiteren Allen Regelmatig, although the DE has been
> dropped.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spar_(retailer)#Etymology

Yes, but according to the newspaper article I linked, the name and
icon were chosen first, and the slogan was only chosen later to match
the name. Which would make sense, because 'Door Eendrachtig
Samenwerken Profiteren Allen Regelmatig' sounds rather artificial in
Dutch.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 4 November 2014 12:55, Philip Barnes  wrote:
> ALDI, LIDL, ASDA and SPAR are all abbreviations of their full names, in
> the same way as NATO, AIDS, BBC, OSM or GNU are.

Whether Spar is an abbreviation is doubtful. Spar is Dutch for spruce
(a species of tree), hence the logo. According to this article [1] (in
Dutch), the name originally only referred to the tree, and only later
a slogan was made up of which the initials corresponded to the letters
in 'De Spar'.

> I would prefer to keep things correct although usage in OSM does seem to
> have gone heavily away from this. Even the Germans can't decide with
> ALDI and LIDL.

I think everybody prefers to keep things correct, but I honestly don't
know what 'correct' in this context means. What is your idea of
correctness?

> In the late 70s, early 80s when ADSA arrived as the new kid on the
> block, everyone seemed to know it was short for Associated Dairies, but
> that has probably long since been forgotten.

According to Wikipedia, it actually stands for 'Asquith and Dairies'.
In any case, this abbreviation doesn't explain the capitals - given
the abbreviation, one would expect AsDa, not ASDA.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 4 November 2014 10:25, Ed Loach  wrote:
>> Are there still objections against "Brantano"?
>
> Yes. It says "Brantano Footwear" as the name on the sign on at least the two 
> nearest stores to me. I have no objections to brand or operator being 
> Brantano, but not the name field.

As I said before, shops commonly list the products they sell under the
shop name on a shield. Example:
http://i801.photobucket.com/albums/yy292/dennoir/Artistic/290320092891hamersmith.jpg
I suppose you wouldn't tag this shop as 'Sweets & News cold drinks
magazines newspapers sweets bus passes'?

So the question is - what makes you think that 'Footwear' is part of
the name, rather than a description of the products they sell?

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 4 November 2014 15:20, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
> On reflection, it would be more helpful, and less controversial, if you were
> to describe this process as a "poll" rather than a "vote".

That's a good suggestion, I think the word 'poll' better expresses
what the intention is. I will refer to it as such from now on.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 2 November 2014 16:01, SK53  wrote:
> So in summary: let all work on the documentation, discussions, but please
> work for consensus and recognise that allowing time to build that will
> result in an overall better dataset.

I agree that seeking consensus is important, which is why I stopped
the vote (even though the proposal had 2/3 support at the point I
stopped it). Given the comments, the proposal was clearly not good
enough yet. I certainly don't think voting should be used as a
substitute for seeking consensus.

It is also clear that mechanical edits should not be carried out
without community support. I don't think a single person objecting
should be able to block a mechanical edit, but 'no significant
objection' for a mechanical edit is not implied by a majority vote
either. That's why I used 2/3 support as a threshold in my proposal,
but maybe it should have been even 90% or 95%. In any case, I think we
should have a way to measure the amount of support a proposal has in
the community. I agree that the process of voting is far from optimal,
but it's the best way to gauge the community's opinion we have. I
think voting is better than looking at mailing list replies alone to
decide whether a proposal is supported by the community, as 1) the
number of voters is typically larger than the number of people taking
part in the discussion, and 2) people objecting are more likely to
comment on a proposal, making it harder to understand from mailing
list replies alone whether an objection is 'significant' or not.

I therefore think inviting list members to vote in order to make the
position of the community explicit - in addition to taking comments on
the mailing list into account, not as a replacement of it - is the
safest way to proceed.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 2 November 2014 16:11, Andy Street  wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 13:24:46 +
> Matthijs Melissen  wrote:

>> - 'Brantano Footwear' versus Brantano

> Whilst company names do not necessarily reflect trading names I'd be
> inclined to take "Brantano (UK) Limited" as further evidence for
> "Brantano" over "Brantano Footwear".

Are there still objections against "Brantano"?

>> - Capitalization of Aldi, Lidl, Spar, Asda

> What do people think about using upper case for names that are
> pronounced as a series of letters and mixed case for names that are
> pronounced as a word? Whilst not ideal (until the widespread adoption
> of the talking shop sign!) this would give us a rule of thumb that
> should be easy enough to follow in the majority of situations.

I'm not sure if this would be a good general rule, it would look
strange in abbreviations like NATO, AIDS, or GNU (not sure if all of
them occur in topographic names).

Maybe we could follow the spelling the organization uses themselves in
running text? That would give us Lidl, Aldi, and Asda, but SPAR.
Alternatively, we could follow the spelling other media use to refer
to those shops (which is the rule Wikipedia uses), which would
probably give us Lidl, Aldi, Asda, and Spar. The latter also
corresponds with current use. What do you think?

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Post-processing shop values (was mechanical edit)

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 3 November 2014 12:19, SK53  wrote:
> Broadly I'm not in favour of the various mechanical edits suggested.
> Bringing together bookmaker tags is harmless, but does little to gather in
> the long tail. More extensive edits both deny the undoubted value of
> revisiting an area (either in life or from an armchair), and are
> unnecessary.

Thank you for your input to the discussion.

I don't think post-processing is the right way to go. Of course,
everything that can be done with mechanical edits can be done with
post-processing, but in my opinion, it is bad practice to not worry
about data quality in the source data, with the argument that it can
be corrected in post-processing just as well. This would mean that
every single data consumer would need to write post-processing code
(and keep it up to date), which will simply not happen. Correcting the
data at a single point, the source, is much more efficient than
correcting it at all points of consumption.

In fact, post processing would likely make data consistency even
worse, because mappers won't notice that they are entering incorrect
or non-standard data (and for this reason, such post-processing rules
would likely not be included in the standard rendering style).

Of course regular surveys are important, but surveying is not mutually
exclusive with correcting the data mechanically where we can.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 1 November 2014 12:50, Richard Fairhurst  wrote:
> Mechanical edits stand or fall by their own merits. They cannot be ok-ed by
> a vote.
>
> From the Automated Edits Code of Conduct: "We do not require or recommend a
> formal vote, but if there is significant objection to your plan - and even
> minorities may be significant! - then change it or drop it altogether."
>
> We historically have a low tolerance of mechanical edits and imports in the
> UK; we prefer to make large-scale changes by hand. That is one of the
> reasons why the OSM map of the UK is so good. A "come one, come all" vote on
> the wiki can be trivially gerrymandered into supporting your proposals
> without any proof of approval by the people who are affected by such a bulk
> change, i.e. UK mappers.
>
> I am not sure where you got the idea of a "vote" for mechanical edits
> (Wikipedia? wiki.osm.org tag pages?), but there is no precedent for it in
> OSM and I would ask you to withdraw it.

Thank you for your comments, I understand your worries. I agree that
voting is not the ultimate means of deciding whether a mechanical edit
can go ahead or not - I'm sorry if my phrasing made you believe
otherwise.

The ultimate authority to decide whether an automatic edit is
acceptable or not is the OSMF, who delegate this responsibility to the
DWG.  We (unfortunately) don't know exactly what criteria the DWG use.
However, the DWG has repeatedly indicated that they strongly rely on
the position of the community. To avoid a long trail of 'me too'
reactions, as well as to avoid giving too much weight to the loudest
voices, I think voting is the best way to determine the position of
the community.

The DWG has in the past never made decisions that go against the
preference of the community. So I think it is likely that a decision
taken with (significant) community support will also pass the scrutiny
of the DWG. I agree however this is by no means a guarantee -
especially in cases, like you point out, where there is strong
evidence that the voting results do not reflect the opinions of the
community.

It is by the way not true that there is no precedent to use votes for
mechanical edits - the retagging of musical instrument shops has been
discussed in a similar way, see
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/Musical_instrument
and the corresponding discussion on the tagging list.

I hope this clarifies this procedure, and I also hope it at least
takes part of your worries away.

Kind regards,
Matthijs Melissen

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

[Talk-GB] RFC-2 mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

During the voting phase, a number of comments on the shop renaming
proposal have been brought forward that were not voiced during the
discussion phase (both here and on the voting page). Because I think
it is important to act as carefully as possible when executing
automatic edits, I have stopped the voting, and will bring this
proposal back to the discussion phase. My apologies to those who voted
already.

The main points of discussion, apart from those by people who don't
support automatic edits in general, were as follows. Note that in all
cases, we have the option to choose either of both options, but also
the option to do nothing at all.

- 'Brantano Footwear' versus Brantano
Some shops signs include the 'Footwear' text, others don't. I would
argue that 'Footwear' in the logo is not part of the title, but a
description of the shop's activities. For example, we also don't tag
'name=Cafe Nero The Italian coffee company' or 'name=Poundland
Everything's £1'. We currently have 116 times Brantano and 12 times
Brantano Footwear in the UK. The shop's website doesn't include the
word 'Footwear', but their Twitter does. Opinions?

- Capitalization of Aldi, Lidl, Spar, Asda
There is no agreement on whether these names should be capitalized or
not. The spelling on the sign is not sufficient evidence, unless we
believe that Jones Bootmaker, Lloyds Bank, Halifax, Pizza Express,
Cafe Rouge, Greggs, Primark, and Max Spielmann should be tagged in
uppercase too. The fact that the names are abbreviations is not a
reason to capitalize either: ASDA stands for Asquith and Dairies, so
the etymology gives no reason for capitalizing the S, at least. Aldi
and Lidl use lowercase on their website, while SPAR uses uppercase,
and Asda/ASDA uses a mix. I'm not sure what to do here.

- The change for Jewson was given in the wrong direction in the
initial proposal. The name Jewsons should be changed to Jewson, and I
will change the proposal accordingly.

The current proposal can be found here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names
Please let me know what you think of these issues, and if there are
any other changes you want to discuss.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 1 November 2014 10:50, Will Phillips  wrote:
> Here is a survey photo of mine, which is similar to the ones Ed posted:
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/97133921@N03/15494864347/
>
> We should be using the name displayed on the sign, which in the examples
> above is clearly 'Brantano Footwear'.  I would object to any change to the
> name tagging in these examples.

It is quite common for shops to list the products they sell under the
shop name on a shield. Example:
http://i801.photobucket.com/albums/yy292/dennoir/Artistic/290320092891hamersmith.jpg
I don't think anyone would add this shop as 'Sweets & News cold drinks
magazines newspapers sweets bus passes'. One could argue that the text
'Footwear' likewise indicates the products the shop sells, rather than
it being part of the name. Note that the term 'footwear' does not
appear on their website: http://www.brantano.co.uk However, on other
channels, like their Twitter, they do apparently use the term Brantano
Footwear: https://twitter.com/Brantano_Shoes, so the situation is not
entirely clear.

Please let me know what you think after this explanation. If you (or
anyone else) still disagrees with this change, I will remove it from
the proposal.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Consolidated views of notes, fixmes, musical chairs, etc.

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 1 November 2014 13:52, SomeoneElse  wrote:
> It's not his fault if an armchair mapper appears to engage editor before
> brain and applies changes suggested by notes.  In order to try and avoid
> people being overcome by temptation, I very often** say "needs survey" in
> the text of the note.  To be fair to armchair mappers, they may be new to
> the project and may not even be familar with the _concept_ of surveying, and
> until someone tells them that actually "going out to have a look at
> something" is the best way of finding out what's actually there now, they
> won't necessarily be aware of the issues (redevelopment, misleading and
> offset imagery, etc.) that people who've been mapping for years take for
> granted.

I in fact even proposed incorporating a system that makes this
explicit in the notes API:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2014-August/070423.html
Unfortunately, my suggestion in that thread didn't gain traction.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 1 November 2014 01:06, Lester Caine  wrote:
> Brantano (UK) Limited shops are all branded 'Brantano Footwear' that is
> their shop 'Logo'

We currently have 116 times Brantano and 12 times Brantano Footwear in
the UK. I would argue, apparently like most mappers, the the
'Footwear' in the logo is not part of the title, but a description of
their activities.

> On the whole the changes seem logical, but I'd rather they were applied
> manually than setting a precedent to allow changes that may not ACTUALLY
> apply as some small outlet is being a little economic with the name they
> are using ...

I would guess that's a rather hypothetical situation. Do you have any example?

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Hi Frederik,

Thank you for your comments.

On 1 Nov 2014 00:49, "Frederik Ramm"  wrote:
> However, is this not leading us down a path where we'll have to repeat
> such edits time and time again, to fix all the misspellings that have
> been introduced in the mean time?

I don't think it will be necessary to repeat this edit. First, such a
wide-scale edit hasn't been done before, so the current edit basically
corrects 10 years of misspellings. Second, if there is a standard
agreed on by the community, we can document it and will be much easier
for people to decide how to call a shop. Third, there is now much more
software support for standardizing names then there used to be in the
past, like for example name-suggestion-index
(https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index) which is used by iD
and Vespucci. So I think there won't be that much misspellings
introduced in the future anymore as we have now.

> And to make another mass change if
> chain A is bought out by chain B and the name changes? And make another
> mass change if the PR guys of "Best-One" decide that they'd from now on
> prefer to be called "BestOne"? And... where does it stop?

I think in general, there are two absolute requirements for mechanical
edits. They must not introduce any incorrect data (i.e., they cannot
use heuristic methods), and they must have wide community support. I
think the two examples you mention would likely satisfy both
requirements. We must not carry out mechanical changes that do not
satisfy these requirements.

> Will such a mass edit not make data consumers believe that the shop will
> always be B&Q and never B & Q or anything else, and create an
> expectation setting that before too long requires of us to make sure our
> editors only add the correct spelling (whatever the corporate PR wants
> it to be at the moment)?

If we want machine-readable data, we will need standard names. We can
decide that we don't care about standard names, but in that case,
interpreting the data will be much harder. Of course, we cannot expect
from individual users that they remember the spelling conventions of
all shop names, but for that, software such as name-suggestion-index
will help. Of course, there might still be a small number of incorrect
shops being introduced, but as the number will likely be low and this
proposal defines standardized shop names, they will be much easier to
correct by local mappers.

In any case, it is up to the (UK) community to decide. I feel that
standardizing shop names will increase the usefulness of the data, and
I believe that a mechanical edit is the most effective way to bring
about this change. But we will see what the community thinks.

-- Matthijs

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

[Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

Voting is now open for the proposal to unify the names of chain shops
within the UK by renaming them.

Please cast your vote at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names.
More information can be found on this page as well.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 25 October 2014 10:44, Ian Caldwell  wrote:
> You say "we manually exclude bus stops (highway=bus_stop) " I would have
> thought you should only be changing where there is a shop tag.  If not your
> "Cotswold -> Cotswold Outdoor" would change
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146053979.

Some shops are missing a shop tag, and I think for example a large
building on a retail park named ASDA will be save to change, even if
the shop tag is missing.

However, you are right, doing this purely mechanical would probably
create lots of issues like this. To prevent this, I will manually
check (for objects without relevant shop tag) if changing the object
name makes sense, based on tags and location, erring towards the side
of caution. I updated the proposal to take this into account.

-- Matthijs

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

[Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

Voting is now open for the following proposal.

For all objects within the UK tagged with shop=betting and name
Betfred, Coral, Ladbrokes, Paddy Power or William Hill, the tag
shop=betting will be changed into shop=bookmaker.

Please cast your vote at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/Betting.
More information can be found on this page as well.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 23 October 2014 12:57, Dave F.  wrote:

>
> Could you add Blackhouse bet http://www.backhousebet.com/p/shop-locator
> to the list please
>

There is only one Blackhouse bet with shop=betting, so I don't think an
automatic edit is necessary or useful in this case.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Mechanical shop edits (Was: RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names)

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 24 October 2014 19:07, Matthijs Melissen  wrote:
> Could you indicate how these changes relate to the Nottingham tagging
> scheme? Were all old tags seen as correct by your scheme?

SK53, you haven't responded yet to this question. I think it's
important to join the discussion, especially after having asked for a
revert. Of course, no problem to respond later if you're busy at the
moment.

> I have reverted my edits of today and yesterday.

I have now added Notes as a replacement for my (reverted) edits.
I invite you to check your local area for new Notes, close them if you
disagree with them, and fix them otherwise.

Note that I checked for each object manually whether a change (in my
opinion) would be useful, so automated QA tools wouldn't be able to
generate such notes. I realize that it is easy to flood the note
system and its users by adding too many notes, so I won't be adding
any new large amount of Notes for the time being.

As an aside, just a reminder that it is possible to generate an RSS
feed of new Notes in any area you're interested in. See for example
http://tyrasd.github.io/osm-qa-feeds/ for an easy to use interface.

As always, hoping that this will have a positive effect on the quality
on the map.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 24 October 2014 14:44, Matthijs Melissen  wrote:
> I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For
> details, please see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names.

Thank you for all comments so far. Based on the comments, I made the
following changes:

- I removed most changes to the co-operative stores, as their
inconsistent signs means that they require a local visit.
- Majestic (Wine (Warehouse)) is a difficult case because they're very
inconsistent in the way they use their brand. I decided to go with
Majestic Wine Warehouse, which is the current most popular name.
- I dropped the Nisa change.
- Marks & Spencer Simply Food is now changed to M&S Simply Food,
instead of the other way around.

People mentioned the Wilkinsons to Wilko change, but please note that
I never proposed to automatically change this. As not all shops have
been changed, we cannot handle this in an automated way.

The brand tag, as well as moving location information into a different
tag, would be worth looking at to, but I consider it out of scope of
the current changes.

Please let me know if there are more changes that need to be made to
the proposed list.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mechanical shop edits (Was: RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names)

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 24 October 2014 17:46, SK53  wrote:

AFAIK the Nottingham area is the only place in the UK, and one of the very
few places in the world, where there has been a systematic approach to
mapping shops (by Paul Williams, Kev Swindells, Will Phillips and myself).
The tags chosen have been chosen with care and represent a very valuable
data set for evaluating how one might develop the tagging scheme for shops
in the future.


That's interesting, and a project I certainly appreciate. Is there any 
documentation on this tagging scheme?


Of course the risk is that other local communities might come up with an 
equally well-thought out, but incompatible tagging scheme, which does 
not help global data consumers.


I just checked, and I touched 5 objects in the Nottingham area:

shop=funeral_director to shop=funeral_directors
shop=video to shop=music for HMV
shop=hearing_aid to shop=hearing_aids
shop=chocolatier to shop=confectionery (Thorntons)
shop=car_repair;car_parts to shop=car_repair

Could you indicate how these changes relate to the Nottingham tagging 
scheme? Were all old tags seen as correct by your scheme?



I would ask you to revert edits made in the UK over the past few days, and
for you to abstain from further mechanical edits in the area.


I don't agree with all of your arguments, and I believe (globally) 
standardizing tagging schemes is the way to go.


However, I agree we should not make mechanical changes that are 
controversial, so I have reverted my edits of today and yesterday.


Kind regards,
Matthijs


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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 24 October 2014 15:24, Tom Hughes  wrote:
> Note that by "propose" what Matthijs means is "have already started doing"
> if the number of "Correct tagging of XXX shops" changesets by him in the
> last 24 hours are anything to do by:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Math1985/history

Hi Tom,

No, your presumption (which you phrased in a way to make it sound like
a statement rather than an presumption, by the way) is not true. I
have not started with any of the proposed changes here.

The proposed changes in this thread involve changes to name tags of
shops, while my changeset involves the shop tag - and that only
involving small numbers of shops, in cases where a clear community
consensus already exist. If there are any particular of my change
sets, or even all of them, you have a problem with, please let me know
and I will gladly revert them.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

[Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: UK Shop Names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

I am proposing to unify the names of chain shops within the UK. For
details, please see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/UK_Shop_Names.

Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further
comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I
will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Hi Will,

On 24 October 2014 11:42, Will Phillips  wrote:
> I'm confused by your actions. Yesterday you started the formal process for
> making an uncontroversial change to the tagging of bookmakers, but since
> then you have made a series of considerably more controversial edits with no
> discussion at all. I wish to register my objection to these changes.

As far as I am aware, the bookmaker tagging is more controversial than
the changes I did today and yesterday.  Bookmaker versus betting is a
longstanding controversy, with (until recently) nearly equal tagging
and strong proponents for both sides. Moreover the numbers for the
bookmaker changes are quite large (hundreds on both sides). On the
other hand, the changes I made today and yesterday are shops where
mappers have expressed a strong preference for a particular tagging,
and only involve small numbers (mostly less than 10 shops), so easy to
revert manually.

> You are standardising the tagging for particular brands, removing the
> original judgements made by mappers who looked at them on the ground. I find
> it particularly de-motivating when these mass changes strip meaning from my
> tagging, changing a specific tag to a more general one. I'm not against my
> tagging being changed through discussion, but distinctions should be kept,
> even if moved to a sub-tag (e.g. shop=bed versus shop=furniture
> furniture=bed).

I agree with that. Can you give examples of changes where I stripped
meaning from tags? That should not have happened. I noticed the
shop=bed situation myself, and already concluded myself that it would
be good to carry out this change, but not without advance discussion.

> I have other concerns about these sorts of edits:
>
> Are you sure all the shops belonging to a chain sell the same thing and
> offer the same services? In my experience this isn't always the case. For
> example, WH Smith at train stations and airports sell a much narrower range
> than their larger high street stores.

I have surveyed 3016 shops myself (no, I'm not only an armchair
mapper), so I think I have a fairly good understanding of what
products shops sell. I might always have made a mistake of course, so
if you spot any, feel free to point them out. I know WHSmith is a
difficult case, so I won't touch it without prior discussion.

> Where you are 'correcting' tagging based just on the name tag, how can you
> be sure its not an administrative office, distribution depot or something
> else other than a shop?

I look at location of course. I only changed high street / retail
centre locations. In other cases, I added OSM notes.

So personally I think I have sufficient checks in place to not
overwrite useful data.

That said, I don't mind reverting some or all of my changes if you
consider them controversial, and discussing them beforehand. If so,
please specify which changes you refer to.

-- Matthijs

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

[Talk-GB] UK Retail chains

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

I have made a large update to the UK retail chain page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Retail_Chains

For all shops with more than 10 occurrences in Great Britain, it now
lists the most common way of tagging, as well as alternative tagging
options. This list was automatically generated from the OSM database.

I hope this page will make it easier for retail mappers to find the right tag.

I think the page also highlights some problems with the way some shops
are currently tagged.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 23 October 2014 11:48, SK53  wrote:
> Further to my previous mail. I have added a section about bookmakers on the
> UK Retail Chain page which I set up recently (at least in part to make it
> easier to know what the consensus tagging was for various chains).

Have you seen the Dutch sister page?

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dutch_chain_stores

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 23 October 2014 12:19, SK53  wrote:
> The geojson can be converted into a shp file and read into PL2 or JOSM. Most
> useful is to use this to generate a task list in JOSM and step through them
> (I've done this to find postal delivery offices (based on places with lots
> of overlapping postcodes, and then looking for car parks full of red vans))
> and for Co-op shops (which suffer from a plethora of names despite current
> branding being "The Co-operative XXX" where XXX is usually Food or Pharmacy
> (not for much longer).

I'm not sure if this can be done without local knowledge. For the
Tesco-cleanup, I was caught (by you in fact) proposing a Tesco
building as supermarket while it in fact as a Tesco Petrol station.
And I also spotted (not in the UK) a fireworks shop named 'Lidl'.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 23 Oct 2014 11:48, "SK53"  wrote:
>
> Further to my previous mail. I have added a section about bookmakers on
the UK Retail Chain page which I set up recently (at least in part to make
it easier to know what the consensus tagging was for various chains).

That's a great page, I was just thinking of creating something like this.

I agree solving the tail values is useful too. I started yesterday already
with adding OSM Notes for all elements in the tail of Asda, Tesco and Aldi.

In the case of bookmakers, I think it's good to have the bookmaker/betting
controversy out of the way before looking at the tail.

> Note that we have a long way to go before we have all UK bookmaker shops
mapped (only around 10% of Ladbrokes). I'll seek figures for the other
chains.

I heard from many mappers that they are confused by the different tagging
options for shops, so having a page with all shop types of chain stores
hopefully also enables more mappers to start mapping shops.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 23 Oct 2014 11:53, "Dave F."  wrote:
>
> Would it be worth adding a fixme tag to the unnamed shops that explains
'= betting' is discouraged & to add a proprietor's name if known?

I noticed that nobody ever looks at fixme tags, I think adding an OSM Note
(through the website or JOSM plugin) is much more effective.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

[Talk-GB] RFC Mechanical edit: shop=betting to shop=bookmaker for selected names

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

For all objects tagged with shop=betting and name Betfred, Coral,
Ladbrokes, Paddy Power or William Hill, I am planning to change the
tag shop=betting into shop=bookmaker.

Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Math1985/Betting
for more information.

Please let me know if you have any comments. If there are no further
comments, I will invite list members to vote on this automatic edit. I
will not proceed without at least 8 votes with 2/3 approval.

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK use of highway=living_street

[Matthijs Melissen]

Hi Rob,

On 31 August 2014 12:51, Rob Nickerson  wrote:
> I've see an increased use of block paving as a road surface on new housing
> developments.

In the Netherlands, we have highway=secondary roads with block paving:

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=51.584857,4.762444&spn=0.00672,0.042186&sll=53.23797,5.548353&sspn=0.014332,0.042186&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.585691,4.76283&panoid=OOv3aPiuGcK0BvcgiFiYGw&cbp=11,225.32,,0,13.18

So block paving alone is not a good reason for a special highway type.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] City names translation

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 6 August 2014 14:18, Marc Gemis  wrote:
> Paris (France) is Parijs in Dutch
> Paris (Texas) is Paris (as far as I know)

London (UK) is Londres in French, but London (Ontario) is London. Very
confusing when booking on Air France's website: if you search for
'London', it tries sending you to Ontario.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Recent edits to estate agents / companies adding their own branches to OSM

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 31 July 2014 21:59, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

>
> I have occasinally seen people do this because they liked the rendering
> of building=yes more than that of some other building type. Don't know
> if this is still an issue.
>

No, the stylesheet has been adapted in the meanwhile so this is no longer
an issue.

-- Matthijs
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] highway=trunk Roads and Cycle Navigation

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 28 July 2014 14:07, Dave F.  wrote:
> I must be missing something in your question, because what's wrong with
> adding the sub tags bicycle/foot = yes/no? Some users have been adding
> bicycle=no to UK motorways for this specific reasons.

Agree. I think renderers and routers should not need to worry about
regional mapping conventions when interpreting the data. Adding
foot=no and bicycle=no to all trunk roads outside the UK seems to me
the best solution.

I also agree that the 'amateur mapper' versus the 'commercial data
consumer' is a false dichotomy. Many people working on data consumers,
including people contributing to the main map, are not professionals.

-- Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UK Open Government Licence

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 24 January 2014 11:00, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
 wrote:
> If you read to the end of the OGL, you'll find that it helpfully says:
>
> "These terms are compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution
> License 4.0 and the Open Data Commons Attribution License, both of
> which license copyright and database rights. This means that when the
> Information is adapted and licensed under either of those licences,
> you automatically satisfy the conditions of the OGL when you comply
> with the other licence."
>
> So you can be confident that if you have data under the OGL then you
> would have sufficient rights to allow re-distribution under the ODC-By
> licence, which in turn implies it's ok for OSM to distribute it under
> the ODbL.

One thing that confuses me is how different licenses that require
attribution can be compatible, or even how a work under one license
requiring attribution can be re-used under that same license. The OGL
requires the attribution 'Contains public sector information licensed
under the Open Government Licence v2.0' (or a more specific
attribution). Openstreetmap requires '© OpenStreetMap contributors'.
So if someone re-uses Openstreetmap data that contains OGL data and
only attributes it with '© OpenStreetMap contributors', would that not
be a violation of the license of the OGL data, because the government
is not attributed? Can someone clarify that?

Kind regards,
Matthijs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Upcoming changes to OpenStreetMap.org website

[Matthijs Melissen]

Hi Brian,

The website changes have been announced on the talk mailing list
before it went live:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2013-November/068555.html

(And yes, before it went live, many people suggested to remove the
Welcome box as well.)

-- Matthijs

On 2 December 2013 13:04, Brian Prangle  wrote:
> Hi Tom
>
> What would I have done differently? I wouldn't be composing emails
> complaining! ;-). The close issue is really not the issue - I don't like it
> but I can live with it. The main issue is I want to feel that I'm part of a
> community- unannounced changes make me feel that I'm just another user in
> corporate land.
>
> Regards
>
> Brian
>
>
> On 1 December 2013 19:41, Tom Hughes  wrote:
>>
>> On 01/12/13 19:14, Brian Prangle wrote:
>>
>>> @Rob - I know you communicated this change and asked for feedback  for
>>> which I'm grateful- I'm just pissed  off that there was no obvious
>>> communication  of the date of implementation - at best that's just
>>> unprofessionally poor communication, at worst it's taking the community
>>> for granted.
>>
>>
>> Why does the date of implementation matter?
>>
>> There was a long discussion with, thanks to Rob, much more community
>> involvement that any previous changes. Those comments were discussed and
>> many changes and improvements made and the discussion had largely come to an
>> end so I did a technical review of the code and got a few more issues fixed
>> and then merged it.
>>
>> I would probably have left it longer after the merge before going live
>> except that yesterday was a a hack day when we had lots of people in one
>> place and ready to fix issues and such like so it seemed like a sensible
>> time to do it.
>>
>> What difference would it have made to you to have been told a specific
>> date and time? That's not an attempt to be nasty or anything, it's a genuine
>> question so we can try and do things better in the future.
>>
>> If we have announced it would go live at 11am yesterday what things would
>> you have done differently as a result?
>>
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> --
>> Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
>> http://compton.nu/
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Talk-GB] Mechanically setting name tag of Naptan data

[Matthijs Melissen]

On 27 November 2013 00:39, SomeoneElse  wrote:
> I can't comment on bus stops in Birmingham, but elsewhere in some cases
> (Notts) "name" seems to have been set to naptan:CommonName - see for here:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/502389340

Yes, the situation really from city to city. The main rule is that we
should set the name to whatever is written on the bus stop. In
Birmingham, that is Street+CommonName. In Birmingham, CommonName by
itself is not unique, while in Notthingham it seems to be.

> This far removed from the original naptan import, you'd really need to vet
> each uploaded bus stop, in order to try and reconcile:
>
> o duplications (stops that were mapped before the original import), such as
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/502389340 .
>
> o "invalid" changes where someone's used or misused a bus stop node for
> something else (for example, new mappers sometimes see a bus stop with a pub
> name and add "amenity=pub" to it), or where someone's deleted a bus stop by
> mistake.
>
> o "valid" changes where someone's moved a naptan-imported stop to a more
> accurate location, or deleted a bus stop because buses no longer stop there.
>
> o Updated information from Naptan to stops verified (or not verified) in
> OSM.

I will not overwrite stops that have already a name tag. I am also not
doing a new import, I am only updating the names of existing stops
with Naptan data. I think that should avoid these problems.

> A "guided merging" approach has been tried in the past, with DfT cycling
> data:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potlatch_2_merging_tool
>
> Maybe something like that could work?

I think merging is not really a problem given that I only look at
stops without name tag, so I think to do it with a script would be
better.

-- Matthijs

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

[Talk-GB] Mechanically setting name tag of Naptan data

[Matthijs Melissen]

Dear all,

In Birmingham, all bus stops have been imported from Naptan, but
during the import, the name tag has not been set. I am considering
adding the name tag, by setting it to something like:

camelcase(naptan:Street) + ' / ' + naptan:CommonName

That way, the name tag in OSM will match the name on the bus stop.

I am currently discussing whether this change is desirable on the
local mailing list [1]. Apart from whether this change is desirable,
what would be the easiest way to achieve it?

I suppose it's best to download the data with xapi, use a scripting
language to create a change set based on this data, and then upload
the change set? Is there someone who has already done something
similar, and can perhaps give me some demo code on to how walk through
the xapi output and how to to create the changeset? Or would there be
an easier way to achieve this?

Thanks in advance.

-- Matthijs

[1] 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb-westmidlands/2013-November/001462.html

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