Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
On 29/03/2011 15:13, Paul wrote: I know this isn't strictly an OSM question but after hearing on here about Mapdust I thought I'd have a look but so far I can't seem to work out exactly what most of the bugs are meant to be Take http://www.mapdust.com/detail/157118 for example. This shows a start point on a motorway slip road, an end point on the motorway and has a roundabout symbol in the middle. The bug report says that routing on the roundabout is flawed. What roundabout? Can anyone try to explain what this bug is meant to be? Of the several bugs I've looked at so far only one made any sense and the OSM data is correct so it's a false positive anyway. The rest just don't seem to make sense. I agree. I think these are the same as ones displayed in Potlatch2. They're irritating because of their inaccuracy refusal to stay permanently off. Dave F. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
I think the roundabout symbol is where the user raised the bug - MapDust seams a rather apt name in my experience though - Dust doesn't serve any useful purpose (in reality) and neither does mapdust's bugs. Kev On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 15:13, Paul n...@pointdee.co.uk wrote: I know this isn't strictly an OSM question but after hearing on here about Mapdust I thought I'd have a look but so far I can't seem to work out exactly what most of the bugs are meant to be Take http://www.mapdust.com/detail/157118 for example. This shows a start point on a motorway slip road, an end point on the motorway and has a roundabout symbol in the middle. The bug report says that routing on the roundabout is flawed. What roundabout? Can anyone try to explain what this bug is meant to be? Of the several bugs I've looked at so far only one made any sense and the OSM data is correct so it's a false positive anyway. The rest just don't seem to make sense. Thanks Paul ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
Dave F wrote: I think these are the same as ones displayed in Potlatch2. They're irritating because of their inaccuracy refusal to stay permanently off. I got irritated too, so I closed all the ones with insufficient details to fix anything (usually with a no roundabout at this location, or more details required to identify actual problem type comment), and then checked and closed the rest after fixing them or deciding they were wrong. Once you get on top of them in an area, it is quite easy to stay on top. I did have to go and resurvey a couple of places to see whether the report was true or not (I wasn't entirely sure for example that they hadn't added a mini-roundabout in the middle of Dedham, but they hadn't), but usually I can tell from Bing (for the ones that are reporting something useful, such as missing turn restriction, or indeed a missing roundabout recently). Ed ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
On 29 March 2011 17:14, Kev js1982 o...@kevswindells.eu wrote: I think the roundabout symbol is where the user raised the bug - MapDust seams a rather apt name in my experience though - Dust doesn't serve any useful purpose (in reality) and neither does mapdust's bugs. Kev Despite the low signal to noise ratio I actually find mapdust quite encouraging as it is obvious that normal members of the public are using the maps which can only be a good thing for OSM. I would like the developers to get rid of the other issue type which is pretty useless and also try to differentiate between problems with the map data and problems with the skobbler app itself. Kevin ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
Despite the low signal to noise ratio I actually find mapdust quite encouraging as it is obvious that normal members of the public are using the maps... Are you certain about that? I get the impression many are automatic sends (default fault descriptions) random positioning (accidentally pressed touch screens). I've seen many 'wrong turn indicated' messages in residential areas, that I suspect have been sent in error by users when handling their phone after they've parked their car. Dave F. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
Well I find it encouraging that people are using OSM otherwise what is the point of us making it? The fact they are too stupid to work a satnav is probably true as most members of the crowd are unfortunately idiots. The mapdust folks just need to take that into account by stopping people raising bugs with no descriptions or vague bug types. Despite that I have picked up a couple of missing turn restrictions and some missing speed limits in my area so I think it has value even if you have to search for it. Kevin On 29 March 2011 18:40, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: Despite the low signal to noise ratio I actually find mapdust quite encouraging as it is obvious that normal members of the public are using the maps... Are you certain about that? I get the impression many are automatic sends (default fault descriptions) random positioning (accidentally pressed touch screens). I've seen many 'wrong turn indicated' messages in residential areas, that I suspect have been sent in error by users when handling their phone after they've parked their car. Dave F. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
On 29/03/2011 18:58, Kevin Peat wrote: Well I find it encouraging that people are using OSM otherwise what is the point of us making it? The fact they are too stupid to work a satnav is probably true as most members of the crowd are unfortunately idiots. The mapdust folks just need to take that into account by stopping people raising bugs with no descriptions or vague bug types. Despite that I have picked up a couple of missing turn restrictions and some missing speed limits in my area so I think it has value even if you have to search for it. How can erroneous bugs add value? They are time-wasting confusions. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 18:58 +0100, Kevin Peat wrote: Well I find it encouraging that people are using OSM otherwise what is the point of us making it? The fact they are too stupid to work a satnav is probably true as most members of the crowd are unfortunately idiots. The mapdust folks just need to take that into account by stopping people raising bugs with no descriptions or vague bug types. I think it is unfair to blame the general public for what appears to be bad design on the part of Skobbler. They put a report a bug button on the user interface of their iPhone app and that is what people are doing (however badly). Unfortunately, rather than routing those bugs to their tech support team and then promoting the relevant issues to the OSM community they seem to have decided to dump the whole lot on us. I'm at a loss to work out what they expect me to do about bugs like Great app. Was working fine, but no longer tracking my route. Alec.. Despite that I have picked up a couple of missing turn restrictions and some missing speed limits in my area so I think it has value even if you have to search for it. I'm glad you've managed to find some wheat amongst the chaff, personally I gave up looking a long time ago. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Mapdust Newbie Question
On 29/03/11 16:07, Craig Loftus wrote: Paul, Can anyone try to explain what this bug is meant to be? Are you familiar with the area? A note on the B6236 says to be surveyed, route has changed near M65 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/25363768/history), perhaps another roundabout has been added? That would seem to tie in with where the user's trace actually starts compared with where it is proposed to start? If not that I can't see anything more to go on. I am familiar with the area and there is definitely not a roundabout there, nor is there a missing road going over/under the motorway or anything else I can think of. I deliberately picked an area with which I was familiar so I could be certain that the bugs I was fixing were real. The B6236 changed several years ago so I have removed the fixme as the data is correct. Further to the SE along the B6236 there is a roundabout which was added about 18 months ago but you'll see that this is already in OSM as well Guess I'll go back to ignorance is bliss as far as Mapdust is concerned Cheers Paul ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
