Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping
Andy Allan wrote:
> [2] Originally meaning "this is a legally declared 'Public
> Footpath', it was ambiguously confused with a general
> legal right of walking (e.g. on a bridleway). Automatic
> inclusion on all footpaths of any type by potlatch1 for
> a number of years
[Brief historical footnote: P1 only ever included it on its "public
footpath" and "bridleway" presets (and note that the former was indeed
"public footpath" rather than "footpath" or "footway" or anything). I think
the original intention was that other people might contribute tag presets
for their own countries' path systems, but this was all about six years ago
when I was still young and green enough to think that people might ever
contribute tag presets. I'm not sure I ever thought that foot=yes meant
"this is a legally declared public footpath", I've always understood it to
have the second meaning ("public right of way for people on foot").]
As you were...
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Help-with-remapping-tp7187743p7192089.html
Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping
On 15 January 2012 19:27, Ed Avis wrote: > If you reposition the new node in same place as the old one, this hasn't > really > achieved anything. At best, it has obscured the history a bit so it's no > longer > quite so clear that the node was originally added by a CT-decliner. It rarely ends up in exactly the same place - when I'm doing these node replacements I take time to remodel junctions, improve curves and so on. The contribution is my own, not an obfuscation of history. The "O" keypress is just a little labour saving, not a "charade". > Rather than going through this charade why not just add odbl=clean to the > node? Because that would be incorrect. The odbl=clean is not a "I somehow assert that I would do the same, therefore ignore the IPR record". The tag is to indicate "where their contribution have "washed out" and where the contributor(s) in question cannot reasonably claim any rights to the current feature"[1] - i.e. subsequent edits have entirely overwritten any IPR in the non-acceptor's contributions. It's easy to see that the tag is therefore completely inappropriate for adding to any v1 objects, for a start. Of course, since the odbl=clean tag is so widely misinterpreted, by you and seemingly by many others, the tag becomes as meaningless as foot=yes[2] . It wouldn't actually make any difference during a changeover anyway - that's the whole point of the tag, after all, to indicate that even if you removed every conceivable trace of non-accepting edits from this feature, then end result would be the same - so there seems little point in adding it. So it's a bizarre tag - when misunderstood it's applied incorrectly, and when understood fully it barely makes sense to use it anyway. Cheers, Andy [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:odbl%3Dclean [2] Originally meaning "this is a legally declared 'Public Footpath', it was ambiguously confused with a general legal right of walking (e.g. on a bridleway). Automatic inclusion on all footpaths of any type by potlatch1 for a number of years, it became effectively meaningless as a designator for Public Footpaths, and a new tag (designation=public_footpath) was eventually created. ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping
Andy Allan writes: >>1.) Assume you need to replace a node which is in the intersection of >>several ways. >Using Potlatch 2, select the junction node and press "O". This deletes >the node and attaches a new node to the cursor - you need to click to >position it. If you reposition the new node in same place as the old one, this hasn't really achieved anything. At best, it has obscured the history a bit so it's no longer quite so clear that the node was originally added by a CT-decliner. Rather than going through this charade why not just add odbl=clean to the node? -- Ed Avis ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping
On 14 January 2012 15:35, Eike Ritter wrote: > I'm trying to do some remapping, and would be grateful for some help in > situations I've encountered. > > 1.) Assume you need to replace a node which is in the intersection of > several ways. If I simply delete the node and re-create it, I'd have to > adjust all the ways the node is part of. This is slow and error-prone. > Is there an easier way of achieving this replacement? Using Potlatch 2, select the junction node and press "O". This deletes the node and attaches a new node to the cursor - you need to click to position it. Doing it this way sorts out all the ways for you. Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping
Hi, On 01/14/2012 04:35 PM, Eike Ritter wrote: 2.) Quite often the changes by a non-accepter are trivial (eg additional tag "created by JOSM" is the only difference. What's the best way of dealing with this? So far, I've left those nodes alone, but they will still show in the OSM-inspector despite being really OK. Is there any way to delete this tag other than re-creating this node which marks it as clean in the OSM-inspector? OSMI makes an effort to highlight as problematic only those nodes where the removal of decliner content will make a meaningful difference. It should treat the created_by tag as "harmless", i.e. these objects should just appear in yellow which is not cause for concern. In fact I wonder if I should ditch the "harmless" layer altogehter and have nothing that is coloured yellow, it seems to confuse people more than necessary. The idea behind the yellow "harmless" thing was to signal to the mapper "this object has been touched by a decliner but is still considered ok, you don't have to remap it". I did that hoping that people would occasionally check if OSMI does the right thing ;) but maybe the time of the yellow stuff is over. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Help with remapping
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012, Eike Ritter wrote: > 1.) Assume you need to replace a node which is in the intersection of > several ways. If I simply delete the node and re-create it, I'd have to > adjust all the ways the node is part of. This is slow and error-prone. > Is there an easier way of achieving this replacement? I don't think so :-/ > 2.) Quite often the changes by a non-accepter are trivial (eg additional > tag "created by JOSM" is the only difference. What's the best way of > dealing with this? So far, I've left those nodes alone, but they will > still show in the OSM-inspector despite being really OK. Is there any > way to delete this tag other than re-creating this node which marks it > as clean in the OSM-inspector? I'd mark them as odbl=clean (or whatever that tag was). cheers, Derick ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
