Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels
In the case of the Somerset Levels, is there actually an authoritative boundary, or is it a fuzzy boundary like a mountain range? Are we looking for something that doesn't exist, or is this a battle between differing opinions? In any case I would suggest using the source and note tags to state where the OSM boundary comes from, such that a future mapper can judge whether it can be improved from a better source. --colin On 2016-11-26 09:42, Jason Woollacott wrote: > How inaccurate should something be though? We accept that things will not > be exact, and GPS tolerances and Bing offsets are a fact of life we need to > accept. > > However we have proper extracts for counties/districts/Parish areas, and all > the National Parks have extracts. > > My issue with the Somerset Levels was that it wasn't the Somerset Levels, it > was an interpretation of what the levels were, based on NPE contours, (which > in themselves aren't exact) and was miles and miles off in places. If you > look at the BBC link the levels stays well below Weston-Super-Mare, yet the > OSM relationship ploughed right through WSM and out the other side. > > - > > FROM: Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> > SENT: 25 November 2016 23:23 > TO: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > SUBJECT: Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels > > If you think that the data must be 100% accurate you will have a blank map > ... therebe dragons. > > The world standard for 1 kilogram mass is an artefact (a physical object) in > Paris. > > You might think that it is 100% accurate and you'd be wrong. The surface > corrodes, gets dust on it .. that adds weight .. so you polish it .. how much > do you polish it? Too much and you remove weight, not enough and you leave > weight behind. > > Everything has some level of uncertainty. > The JOSM way simplifier is set for a maximum displacement of 3 meters. Is > that acceptable? > Remember that the original data has some level of uncertainty too. Typically > a GPS would be 10 meters. Average a few and you might get down to 5 meters. > > Personally I'd rather have an indication that something is there even if > 'inaccurate' ... compared to a blank bit of paper. > > On 26-Nov-16 09:18 AM, Dave F wrote: Good. > > Bearing in mind that nothing* in OSM is 100% accurate (& the Somerset Levels > do exist), how accurate do you need the data to be for them to be good enough > for inclusion? > > * No, honestly, it's not. > > DaveF > > On 25/11/2016 15:12, Jason Woollacott wrote: > > in the description i remember it stated it was based on the 10ft and 25ft > contours. > > ----- > > FROM: Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> > SENT: 25 November 2016 14:07 > TO: Jason Woollacott; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > SUBJECT: Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels > > Not 100% sure, but wasn't it based on contour levels? > > On 24/11/2016 17:35, Jason Woollacott wrote: > > HI, > > Yes, I removed this as I felt that it was incorrect and did not reflect the > conditions on the ground. It was specifically removed under one change > back in September 2016, whilst I was working on addressing some of the other > mapping errors around that area. The Change was deliberately done under > one change set, so that it should be easily restored if there was ever a need > for it. However the boundary was a guestimate at best and did not reflect > the actual area of the Somerset Levels, (going through Bridgwater & Weston > Super Mare). > > An example of what is really defined as the Somerset Levels is here > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-26080597 but there isn't an > extract, that I've found, that we could use for tracing. > > I'm not sure what benefit reinstating this change would give. > > Jason (UniEagle) > > - > > FROM: Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> > SENT: 23 November 2016 12:55 > TO: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > SUBJECT: Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels > > It appears it was deleted by user UniEagle > http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42348215 > You may wish to contact him & ask to participate in this discussion. > > FYI > Undeleting using Potlatch 1 > If you know a location where the boundary was, zoom in as close as > possible, then amend the URL & open in P1. This is an example near > Bridgwater: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=potlatch <
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels
If you think that the data must be 100% accurate you will have a blank map ... therebe dragons. The world standard for 1 kilogram mass is an artefact (a physical object) in Paris. You might think that it is 100% accurate and you'd be wrong. The surface corrodes, gets dust on it .. that adds weight .. so you polish it .. how much do you polish it? Too much and you remove weight, not enough and you leave weight behind. Everything has some level of uncertainty. The JOSM way simplifier is set for a maximum displacement of 3 meters. Is that acceptable? Remember that the original data has some level of uncertainty too. Typically a GPS would be 10 meters. Average a few and you might get down to 5 meters. Personally I'd rather have an indication that something is there even if 'inaccurate' ... compared to a blank bit of paper. On 26-Nov-16 09:18 AM, Dave F wrote: Good. Bearing in mind that nothing* in OSM is 100% accurate (& the Somerset Levels do exist), how accurate do you need the data to be for them to be good enough for inclusion? * No, honestly, it's not. DaveF On 25/11/2016 15:12, Jason Woollacott wrote: in the description i remember it stated it was based on the 10ft and 25ft contours. *From:* Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> *Sent:* 25 November 2016 14:07 *To:* Jason Woollacott; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Not 100% sure, but wasn't it based on contour levels? On 24/11/2016 17:35, Jason Woollacott wrote: HI, Yes, I removed this as I felt that it was incorrect and did not reflect the conditions on the ground. It was specifically removed under one change back in September 2016, whilst I was working on addressing some of the other mapping errors around that area. The Change was deliberately done under one change set, so that it should be easily restored if there was ever a need for it. However the boundary was a guestimate at best and did not reflect the actual area of the Somerset Levels, (going through Bridgwater & Weston Super Mare). An example of what is really defined as the Somerset Levels is here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-26080597 but there isn't an extract, that I've found, that we could use for tracing. I'm not sure what benefit reinstating this change would give. Jason (UniEagle) *From:* Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> *Sent:* 23 November 2016 12:55 *To:* talk-gb@openstreetmap.org *Subject:* Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels It appears it was deleted by user UniEagle http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42348215 You may wish to contact him & ask to participate in this discussion. FYI Undeleting using Potlatch 1 If you know a location where the boundary was, zoom in as close as possible, then amend the URL & open in P1. This is an example near Bridgwater: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=potlatch <
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels
HI, Yes, I removed this as I felt that it was incorrect and did not reflect the conditions on the ground. It was specifically removed under one change back in September 2016, whilst I was working on addressing some of the other mapping errors around that area. The Change was deliberately done under one change set, so that it should be easily restored if there was ever a need for it. However the boundary was a guestimate at best and did not reflect the actual area of the Somerset Levels, (going through Bridgwater & Weston Super Mare). An example of what is really defined as the Somerset Levels is here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-26080597 but there isn't an extract, that I've found, that we could use for tracing. I'm not sure what benefit reinstating this change would give. Jason (UniEagle) From: Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> Sent: 23 November 2016 12:55 To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels It appears it was deleted by user UniEagle http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42348215 You may wish to contact him & ask to participate in this discussion. FYI Undeleting using Potlatch 1 If you know a location where the boundary was, zoom in as close as possible, then amend the URL & open in P1. This is an example near Bridgwater: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=potlatch
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels
It appears it was deleted by user UniEagle http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/42348215 You may wish to contact him & ask to participate in this discussion. FYI Undeleting using Potlatch 1 If you know a location where the boundary was, zoom in as close as possible, then amend the URL & open in P1. This is an example near Bridgwater: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=potlatch
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
FYI http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=83157src=eoa-iotd On 06/02/2014 00:24, Dave F. wrote: Hi About a week ago user Jestr88 added large areas tagged natural=water; name=flooding. to indicate the flooded areas on the Somerset levels. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258412163 Apart from the inaccuracy of these (water levels vary hourly) I thought temporary information was frowned upon. I think they should be removed or am I missing something? Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
On 7 February 2014 12:37, John Baker rovas...@hotmail.com wrote: Always to play the devils advocate. We have all heard about mapping for the renderer but are you mapping for the third party data providers that is slow at updating the planet data. Define slow for a printed atlas? Should we be pulping them each minute? Day? Week? I think we all have different opinions on this (it will likely take months for the work to be done at least 6 weeks was the latest I heard this morning) and don't we pride ourselves about having the most up-to-date information and what is on the ground?! There's a difference between providing up-to-date data, and being unnecessarily misleading. For example, there's a section of the A82 on Loch Lomond that was only one lane wide, and controlled by traffic lights. It was marked as two-way, but at any one instant it is, of course, one-way. Should we have marked it as one-way and flipped the direction every 90 seconds? Of course not. Should remove a railway line when it's closed for overnight engineering works? Is a field flooded for a week now a lake? Permanent versus temporary is very subjective and people will have different opinions. As with anything. But I suspect that a sensible group of people will come to a sensible answer in every case. In the two at hand, the railway is still a railway, and the Levels are fields, not lakes. Unless, of course, there are people who are deliberately looking for an argument... Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
On 07/02/2014 12:37, John Baker wrote: Always to play the devils advocate. We have all heard about mapping for the renderer but are you mapping for the third party data providers that is slow at updating the planet data. They should use the data correctly. It is annoying the stale content that some devs/providers provide, maybe it would encourage them to put some effort into updating the content for frequently. Something along the lines of http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/temporary would help, though I think it would benefit from some way of specifying that the start end dates are estimates only. That proposal seems to be languishing, though. -- Cheers, John ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
Define slow for a printed atlas? Should we be pulping them each minute? Day? Week? Printed atlas!? So insensitive I carry a globe around. I wonder however what about the providers that do want update their data, say, daily are at a disadvantage if we don't mark these cases. Hence why I suggested maybe a month or so in this broken state maybe we should edit. These parameters will vary between mappers but a threshold maybe we could agree open here. Maybe some still consider estimated 1 year bridge closures is not long enough to consider updating the map. Also maybe it should have more weight to the mapper local to the area (hence your Putney example). And/or how quick it will be monitored and updated.*Shrug* Unless, of course, there are people who are deliberately looking for an argument... ;-) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 12:52:16 + Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding From: gravityst...@gmail.com To: rovas...@hotmail.com CC: l...@lorp.org; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org On 7 February 2014 12:37, John Baker rovas...@hotmail.com wrote: Always to play the devils advocate. We have all heard about mapping for the renderer but are you mapping for the third party data providers that is slow at updating the planet data. Define slow for a printed atlas? Should we be pulping them each minute? Day? Week? I think we all have different opinions on this (it will likely take months for the work to be done at least 6 weeks was the latest I heard this morning) and don't we pride ourselves about having the most up-to-date information and what is on the ground?! There's a difference between providing up-to-date data, and being unnecessarily misleading. For example, there's a section of the A82 on Loch Lomond that was only one lane wide, and controlled by traffic lights. It was marked as two-way, but at any one instant it is, of course, one-way. Should we have marked it as one-way and flipped the direction every 90 seconds? Of course not. Should remove a railway line when it's closed for overnight engineering works? Is a field flooded for a week now a lake? Permanent versus temporary is very subjective and people will have different opinions. As with anything. But I suspect that a sensible group of people will come to a sensible answer in every case. In the two at hand, the railway is still a railway, and the Levels are fields, not lakes. Unless, of course, there are people who are deliberately looking for an argument... Cheers, Andy ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
Hi - I do add temporary things such as road closures, construction sites. Generally only if it will be there for a while, e.g. a month or more. I agree with Brian's perspective. Dan 2014-02-06 Brian Savidge a_sn...@hotmail.com: I thought temporary information like closures of paths and roads were good to put on the map, if nothing else to allow routing to avoid them. The water I agree is likely to be a bit inaccurate and isn't going to help with the routing, but like a road, those areas will be wet for quite some time (weeks to months), so as long as the person doing it keeps it relatively up to date, I guess there is no real problem. The real problem comes when its not maintained. Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 00:24:31 + From: dave...@madasafish.com To: talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding Hi About a week ago user Jestr88 added large areas tagged natural=water; name=flooding. to indicate the flooded areas on the Somerset levels. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258412163 Apart from the inaccuracy of these (water levels vary hourly) I thought temporary information was frowned upon. I think they should be removed or am I missing something? Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
I think it would be useful to have a means of indicating road closures etc which are different from simply pretending the road doesn't exist or doesn't allow certain users for a while. This would allow renderers to mark closures rather than just gaps or not visible at all, so people see there is a problem; so that user types can be indicated (sometimes bikes can get through a closure, but not cars, or cars but not trucks); and so that (perhaps estimated) end dates can be given so that the restriction can be ignored when the closure didn't get removed - they are easily forgotten. Routers too could say 'I would have taken you this way, but it is closed when you want to travel' I was surprised someone hasn't already removed a section of railway at Dawlish yesterday! But it would be much better IMO if the railway remained, but marked as closed so the map could show, eg, a big red X at that point to illustrate an anomaly, rather than a short gap not really visible at all but the largest scales, David Hi - I do add temporary things such as road closures, construction sites. Generally only if it will be there for a while, e.g. a month or more. I agree with Brian's perspective. Dan 2014-02-06 Brian Savidge a_sn...@hotmail.com: I thought temporary information like closures of paths and roads were good to put on the map, if nothing else to allow routing to avoid them. The water I agree is likely to be a bit inaccurate and isn't going to help with the routing, but like a road, those areas will be wet for quite some time (weeks to months), so as long as the person doing it keeps it relatively up to date, I guess there is no real problem. The real problem comes when its not maintained. Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 00:24:31 + From: dave...@madasafish.com To: talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding Hi About a week ago user Jestr88 added large areas tagged natural=water; name=flooding. to indicate the flooded areas on the Somerset levels. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258412163 Apart from the inaccuracy of these (water levels vary hourly) I thought temporary information was frowned upon. I think they should be removed or am I missing something? Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding
How about having theKey: accessandValue: no or possibly Value: delivery or customers if its roads. If you wanted it to showup on the map as red, setting the Value to 'private' as in keep out its a building site would work. Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 09:43:55 + From: da...@frankieandshadow.com To: danstowell+...@gmail.com CC: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding I think it would be useful to have a means of indicating road closures etc which are different from simply pretending the road doesn't exist or doesn't allow certain users for a while. This would allow renderers to mark closures rather than just gaps or not visible at all, so people see there is a problem; so that user types can be indicated (sometimes bikes can get through a closure, but not cars, or cars but not trucks); and so that (perhaps estimated) end dates can be given so that the restriction can be ignored when the closure didn't get removed - they are easily forgotten. Routers too could say 'I would have taken you this way, but it is closed when you want to travel' I was surprised someone hasn't already removed a section of railway at Dawlish yesterday! But it would be much better IMO if the railway remained, but marked as closed so the map could show, eg, a big red X at that point to illustrate an anomaly, rather than a short gap not really visible at all but the largest scales, David On 6 February 2014 08:40:22 GMT, Dan S wrote: Hi - I do add temporary things such as road closures, construction sites. Generally only if it will be there for a while, e.g. a month or more. I agree with Brian's perspective. Dan 2014-02-06 Brian Savidge : I thought temporary information like closures of paths and roads were good to put on the map, if nothing else to allow routing to avoid them. The water I agree is likely to be a bit inaccurate and isn't going to help with the routing, but like a road, those areas will be wet for quite some time (weeks to months), so as long as the person doing it keeps it relatively up to date, I guess there is no real problem. The real problem comes when its not maintained. Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 00:24:31 + From: dave...@madasafish.com To: talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding Hi About a week ago user Jestr88 added large areas tagged natural=water; name=flooding. to indicate the flooded areas on the Somerset levels. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258412163 Apart from the inaccuracy of these (water levels vary hourly) I thought temporary information was frowned upon. I think they should be removed or am I missing something? Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb ___ 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] Somerset Levels Flooding
Indeed this is surely the right approach. Many people use OSM inside products where the map data is updated rarely: all the offline map apps for mobile come to mind. Temporary states have no place in these apps, and it’s unfair on their devs to force them to work out a long-term state to offer their users. - L On 6 Feb 2014, at 14:36, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 February 2014 09:43, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: I think it would be useful to have a means of indicating road closures etc which are different from simply pretending the road doesn't exist or doesn't allow certain users for a while. I work on the principle of marking the permanent state of features, as much as possible. Obviously everything changes, but if a situation is deliberately temporary (e.g. a road closed for crane operations, or for a fortnight for digging, etc) then I don't change the 'permanent state' of the feature. We had a trunk road in Putney that was one-way for three months, but I didn't change the map to correspond since it was clearly not permanent. And I'd encourage people not to mark flooding as natural=water, or removing bits of railway when they are certainly going to repair it, or even adding access=no tags to something that might be fixed by the weekend. If it's deemed important by people to mark the temporary state somehow, then please use a separate tagging system. Cheers, Andy ___ 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] Somerset Levels Flooding
I thought temporary information like closures of paths and roads were good to put on the map, if nothing else to allow routing to avoid them. The water I agree is likely to be a bit inaccurate and isn't going to help with the routing, but like a road, those areas will be wet for quite some time (weeks to months), so as long as the person doing it keeps it relatively up to date, I guess there is no real problem. The real problem comes when its not maintained. Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 00:24:31 + From: dave...@madasafish.com To: talk-GB@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Talk-GB] Somerset Levels Flooding Hi About a week ago user Jestr88 added large areas tagged natural=water; name=flooding. to indicate the flooded areas on the Somerset levels. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258412163 Apart from the inaccuracy of these (water levels vary hourly) I thought temporary information was frowned upon. I think they should be removed or am I missing something? Dave F. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ___ 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
