Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12.09.19 06:27, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> It's always better to have this mapped based on confirmations on the
> ground, and it appears in this case that the local mapper Zhent, has
> been mapping based on local knowledge.

I have a feeling that Zhent's "foot=yes" might not mean "there is a sign
here allowing access" but more "I walked here and wasn't arrested" ;)

Question is, can we assume that any path leading into Conservation Lands
that does *not* have a sign forbidding something, allows it? Probably
not - NPWS can hardly be expected to continuously patrol the area for
new "things that look like paths". Mind you, some of the paths that were
added here have "sac_scale" and "trail_visibility" tags that do not
sound like these are obvious trails actually prepared by NPWS for walkers.

This might also tie in with the concept of "default rules" - for
example, if "everyone knows that horse riding is only permitted on
explicitly signed trails" in Conservation Lands then do we apply a
blanket horse=no to everything else, or not...

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Maarten Deen]

On 2019-09-12 06:30, Mark Wagner wrote:

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 20:54:17 +0200
Vladimir Vyskocil  wrote:


> On 11 Sep 2019, at 20:20, Mark Wagner  wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:33:05 +0200
> Vladimir Vyskocil  wrote:
>
>> A even crazier area regarding the abuse of the cliff tag !
>>
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724
>> 
>
> Doesn't look crazy to me.  From what I saw on the map, I expected
> there to be rock formations of the sort you'd find in south Utah.
> Switching to aerial imagery, I saw pretty much that, just with more
> trees.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/50.96391/14.06867
 really ?


Really.  The lack of leaves-off imagery means I can't see what's under
the trees, but the shadows in some of the imagery options are not
inconsistent with the sort of stepped cliff it appears to be mapping.


Some imagery of the area: 



Not that I'm defending the tagging, it seems excessive to me, but the 
area is filled with cliffs.


Regards,
Maarten

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Roland Olbricht]

Hello everybody,

first of all, I am grateful that the responses have all been calm and
well-thought. I will make room in the session to document the results of
this discussion.


Changing to a github-like system of version management


I thought of Git, not Github.

This is an important distinction: Git is as decentralized as possible -
whenever one works with a repo one gets the full data and history of the
project to the local disk drive.

The point about Git is that it groups related changes over multiple
files in a single structure called commit. This is opposed to the
Mediawiki approach which keeps changes to files in strict isolation.
Thus the question is: are contradictions between pages a problem? If yes
then a holisitic toolset may do better, if not then the holistic tool
has no advantage in this regard.

Opposed to this, Github is a profit oriented company essentially
offering web storage in a fancy way. Relying on Github or similar for
crucial ressources of OpenStreetMap is a no-no: Even if Github's geniune
business interests do not conflict with our needs, politics come into
play. Github had been targeted by 3rd country internet censoring, US
export restrictions, frivolous and substantial takedown requests, and
probably more. For the same reason I consider the silent integration of
Wikimedia resources into our Wiki for problematic: the last outage is
only a couple of days away, and has been neither to blame on Wikimedia
nor under their control. Yet it affected the usability of our Wiki.

Best regards,

Roland

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 13:45, Greg Lauer  wrote:

> Hi Frederick,
>
> There is 'authoratative' data available for NPWS estate -
> https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset?q=NPWS+track===_format=_id==score+desc%2C+metadata_modified+desc
>  and
> we have a waiver -
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue. The
> problem is that the data is not up to date, and in may cases conflicts with
> the 'on-the-ground' conditions. For example a track marked as open in the
> database has closed signs and vice versa, or a local Ranger may decide to
> close the track. This is common problem with data made available from state
> agencies as in many cases there is reluctance to make data public (or they
> don't have the resources to manage it).
>

+1 local mapping on the ground should prevail, and the open data can be
used as a guide to local mapping not as an absolute authority, for exactly
the reasons you've mentioned.


> These issues around the mapping of tracks has been an ongoing issue for as
> along as people have been creating maps! I am unsure how NWPS think that
> can sue someone for creating a track on a digital database (but this is not
> the first time they have threatened this). I believe there was an issue
> with a commercial publisher a few years back regarding some tracks in
> National Park that had been closed. That said, hopefully by engaging with
> these agencies we can effect change.
>

I agree. I do hope that if NPWS are interested in seeing OSM data more
accurate they can join our community and we can work together. We already
have NSW government departments working together with the OSM community to
improve mapping (Transport for NSW).
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Andrew Davidson]

On 12/9/19 05:31, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
Since then the pressure from the mountain bike community to has map 
everything has reduced,  presumably the mountain bike  community has 
realized that OSM is one of the tools the authorities use to locate 
illegal trails.


That's only going to work if they all learn not to use Strava. Two 
minutes is all it take for the authorities to login and see everywhere 
in the 'Gong where there are MTB tracks.


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

Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Andrew Harvey]

On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 06:23, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> On 9/11/19 21:31, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
> > The construction and use of unauthorized trails is illegal with large
> > penalties (though I have never heard of a prosecution).
>
> Are there sources that are not restricted by copyright that we could use
> to determine which trails are authorized and which are not?
>

Not that I'm aware of. NPWS do publish tracks as CC BY open data and they
have completed the waiver to allow OSM to use this data (see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue), however
local knowledge and local surveys should still prevail.


> It is an interesting topic for a general discusssion. Though in this
> concrete case I wonder how to determine whether what looks like a
> footpath in the Conservation Lands is legal to use or not... should
> *all* the trails drawn in the area be marked access=no? Should we ask
> the adminstration for a list?


If no access is the intention then they should put up signage saying no
access, then we can map that access accordingly.
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Mark Wagner]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 20:54:17 +0200
Vladimir Vyskocil  wrote:

> > On 11 Sep 2019, at 20:20, Mark Wagner  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:33:05 +0200
> > Vladimir Vyskocil  wrote:
> >   
> >> A even crazier area regarding the abuse of the cliff tag ! 
> >> 
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724
> >>   
> > 
> > Doesn't look crazy to me.  From what I saw on the map, I expected
> > there to be rock formations of the sort you'd find in south Utah.
> > Switching to aerial imagery, I saw pretty much that, just with more
> > trees.  
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/50.96391/14.06867
>  really ?

Really.  The lack of leaves-off imagery means I can't see what's under
the trees, but the shadows in some of the imagery options are not
inconsistent with the sort of stepped cliff it appears to be mapping.

-- 
Mark

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Andrew Harvey]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 23:40, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> the DWG was drawn into an edit war regarding several paths that were
> mapped in this area:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-34.3740/150.8761
>
> The argument is about in how far the (largely north-south running) paths
> are "illegal" and whether they need to be removed from the map because
> they would lead to people trespassing.


> The argument is two-fold; part applies to the paths that are on private
> land where, I understand, it is the land owner's prerogative to allow or
> disallow whatever they want, and another part applies to the paths that
> run into NPWS managed conservation lands.
>
> These paths were originally tagged "foot=yes" and with no further access
> descriptions; one had an "mtb:scale" added.
>
> From reading the Illawara Escarpment Plan of Management
> (
> https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Parks-reserves-and-protected-areas/Parks-plans-of-management/illawarra-escarpment-state-conservation-area-plan-management-180505.pdf
> )
> I get the impression that mountainbiking on any paths not explicitly
> open for it is illegal. But what about walking - the plan says a lot
> about maintained walking tracks but it does *not* explicitly say that
> walking is limited to these.
>
> There's also a published "draft strategy" for mountain biking in the
> area, however I don't know in how far a draft strategy would influence
> the current legal situation.
>
> Anyway, for the time being I have added an access=no to the paths on
> private land because the landowner doesn't want people to use them and I
> guess it is their prerogative; and I've removed the explicit foot=yes on
> the other paths (becasue I'm not sure) and added a "bicycle=no" to close
> them for mountainbiking. My changeset:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74355243#map=16/-34.3750/150.8730
>
> I would however be grateful for any input from the Australian community
> on this matter.
>

I'll break it down into two issues, 1. mapping the paths, 2. setting the
access restrictions.

On the first issue, my stance is that mapping these trails is fair game,
regardless of the legal ownership of the land and/or any access
restrictions. If there is a path on the ground it should be in OSM's
database, and would be harmful to delete and any edits which outright
deleted paths which do exist on the ground just because of access or use
restrictions should be blocked/reverted.

We have suitable lifecycle tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix which can be added to
paths which have been abandoned and no longer in use but still have
evidence on the ground. Paths which have been used in the past but are now
closed for remediation back to natural bushland can and should be mapped as
abandoned: or demolished:. This is important information for researches and
the public to understand conservation and remediation efforts taking place.

On the second issue regarding access restrictions, if the NPWS puts up
signage restricting cycling then we can correctly mark this with
bicycle=no, this could be at the path level or on park wide signage. If
there is a private property no access sign, then that would be access=no.

It's always better to have this mapped based on confirmations on the
ground, and it appears in this case that the local mapper Zhent, has been
mapping based on local knowledge.


> I've also been told that NPWS were keenly looking to sue whoever
> publishes "illegal" trails or uploads them to OSM; in fact such a legal
> threat was the reason why DWG got involved in the first place.
>

Gosh that's a big claim, if either individual contributors or OSMF are
being threatened like that, can this be backed up with evidence so we as
the community know what's happening and determine what if any support can
be provided to those being threatened?
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

[talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Greg Lauer]

Hi Frederick,

There is 'authoratative' data available for NPWS estate -
https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset?q=NPWS+track===_format=_id==score+desc%2C+metadata_modified+desc
and
we have a waiver -
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue. The problem
is that the data is not up to date, and in may cases conflicts with the
'on-the-ground' conditions. For example a track marked as open in the
database has closed signs and vice versa, or a local Ranger may decide to
close the track. This is common problem with data made available from state
agencies as in many cases there is reluctance to make data public (or they
don't have the resources to manage it).

I think your solution is appropriate in the circumstances but will make the
following comments.

1. Although we can mark as private or similar it really is up to the
rendering engine of the application that the user is looking at to display
this attribution (closed etc.). A quick a review of some of the common
applications seems to indicate this is a problem.

2. Other 'authoritative' data (for example https://maps.six.nsw.gov.au/ and
the 1:25,000 topographic maps) all showing conflicting data around track
and very little information on access rights.

3. The area in question is managed by three entities - state government,
local government and private landholders and they all have conflicting
views on access to the area.

These issues around the mapping of tracks has been an ongoing issue for as
along as people have been creating maps! I am unsure how NWPS think that
can sue someone for creating a track on a digital database (but this is not
the first time they have threatened this). I believe there was an issue
with a commercial publisher a few years back regarding some tracks in
National Park that had been closed. That said, hopefully by engaging with
these agencies we can effect change.

Thanks for taking the time to look into this and present an solution.

Greg


On Thursday, 12 September 2019, 6:23:34 AM AEST, Frederik Ramm <
frede...@remote.org> wrote:


Tony,

On 9/11/19 21:31, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
> The construction and use of unauthorized trails is illegal with large
> penalties (though I have never heard of a prosecution).

Are there sources that are not restricted by copyright that we could use
to determine which trails are authorized and which are not?

> The policy in OSM to map everything that exists ignores the fact that
> not all mapping is in the community interest. I would like to see a more
> nuanced policy.

There are indeed some nuances, for example there is general agreement in
the community not to map the nesting places of rare birds (lest eggs be
stolen), and a similar general agreement exists for things like women's
refuges. This is in addition to the respect for privacy that is shared
by most mappers - where the term "privacy" is generally interpreted
narrowly to mean "things about your life that you cannot see from the
aerial image".

Some people come to DWG claiming privacy because someone has traced
their driveway from aerial imagery; this is not usually a complaint we
entertain.

But the things I mentioned are not really codified anywhere, and there
are often corner cases that lead to lengthy debates. A remotely related
case for example was in Germany recently, where forest management and
tourism authorities had agreed to a careful scheme of "trekking" camp
sites in forests where camping would not normally be allowed. Their plan
was to keep the exact location of these places secret, and require prior
booking by users, who would only upon booking be told where exactly to
find the spot. This was part of the compromise they reached - the forest
authorities didn't want any people camping, the tourism people wanted to
offer something for nature lovers, so they agreed on this scheme which
at least promised that the places would not be overrun. You can imagine
how the story went on - things being kept secret piqued the interest of
mappers, and before too long all the places were mapped
(tourism=camp_site, camp_site=basic, backcountry=yes). The authorities
complained, but of course they have no legal recourse... still, this led
to some discussion in the German mapping community in how far official
wishes/demands for secrecy should be respected.

We certainly cannot respect *every* local government law or else we'd
likely have to purge our maps of all content in China, North Korea, and
some Arab countries, delete all military areas in many others...

It is an interesting topic for a general discusssion. Though in this
concrete case I wonder how to determine whether what looks like a
footpath in the Conservation Lands is legal to use or not... should
*all* the trails drawn in the area be marked access=no? Should we ask
the adminstration for a list?


Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
Talk-au mailing 

Re: [Talk-es] Toponimia en Galicia

[dcapillae]

Buenas noches, Diego.

Quisiera comentar algo respecto de esto que dices:


Diego García wrote
> Si quieres que tu lengua se imponga sobre otras, este no es el foro. Yo,
> por lo menos, no voy a seguir con ello y menos con gente que no razona.
> Puedes creerme si te digo que este tipo de "debates" me hace plantearme mi
> continuidad en el proyecto.

Estuve a punto de responderte en su momento, la primera vez que te leí, pero
me abstuve de hacerlo por motivos que espero que comprendas. Quería cerrar
este absurdo debate sobre los nombres en español y no alimentar más lo
prejuicios de la gente. No se puede razonar con personas que albergan en su
mente, en su corazón, o qué sé yo dónde, tantos prejuicios y odios contra
los demás, odios que les impiden cooperar como uno esperaría que cooperaran
en un proyecto como éste. No hay nada que hacer, es un caso perdido.

No obstante, aunque no te respondiera en su momento, voy a responderte
ahora. Me parece muy significativo que un mensaje como el tuyo pueda pasar
por este foro sin que nadie, absolutamente nadie, diga nada. Y créeme, nadie
va a decir absolutamente nada. Casi mejor así, para lo que tienen que decir
algunos. De todas formas, es muy significativo que solo yo vaya a responder
a tu mensaje. Yo, que no colaboro con esta comunidad por motivos más o menos
similares.

¿Qué te quieres ir porque no soportas que en esta comunidad se consientan
estos debates o que triunfen los prejuicios? Pues muy bien, adiós. No
esperes nada de esta comunidad, te lo digo por experiencia. Solo quisiera
aconsejarte que no te dejes confundir y que no abandones el proyecto por la
mezquindad de algunos. Abandona a esta comunidad si quieres. Si todo lo que
tiene que aportarte son estos debates absurdos cargados de odiosos
prejuicios ideológicos o políticos, manda a esta comunidad y sus miembros,
tanto a los silentes como a los prejuiciosos, a paseo. Ni unos ni otros
merece ni un minuto de tu tiempo.

No es sencillo cuando te toca en desgracia tener que compartir territorio de
mapeo con según que personas. OSM se articula a partir de sus comunidades
locales, lo que hace muy difícil trabajar sin tenerlas en cuenta. En
cualquier caso, no confundas esta comunidad con OSM.

Ánimo.

Atentamente,
Daniel



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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

[OSM-talk-fr] uMap en carafe ?

[severin.menard via Talk-fr]

Bonsoir,

Pour info, une erreur 502 Bad gateway apparaît depuis quelques heures lorsque 
l'on cherche à se connecter sur http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/.

Séverin___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

Re: [Talk-es] Traducción páginas wiki sobre Overpass (petición de ayuda)

[dcapillae]

Buenas noches.

Las traducciones de las páginas dedicadas a Overpass no han avanzado nada.
Lo tengo en mi lista de tareas pendientes. Si alguien quiere ayudar, solo
tiene que decirlo.

He estado ocupado eliminando el prefijo "WikiProject" de las páginas del
wiki. Ya se ha eliminado de las páginas de Estados Unidos, Nueva Zelanda,
Canadá, Australia, Reino Unido, Francia, Italia, Dinamarca, Noruega, Israel,
Filipinas, India, Alemania, Irlanda, Brasil, Portugal y todos los países de
habla hispana, incluido España.

España fue uno de los primero países en eliminar el prefijo "WikiProject" de
sus páginas de proyecto. Ya os comenté que sería buena idea. Recuerdo las
discusiones que tuvimos al respecto, tan desagradas y cargadas de prejuicios
como muchas de las que soléis tener en esta comunidad. También recuerdo los
señalamientos y las mezquinas acusaciones que se me hicieron cuando a Javier
y a mí se nos ocurrió remodelar la página de España. Dieron vergüenza ajena,
pero no cabe esperar nada más. En el resto de comunidades no he tenido
problemas, alguna anécdota, pero cero conflictos. Obviamente, es un dato muy
significativo. Lo que significa, que cada cual lo deduzca.

En cuanto pueda, me pongo con las traducciones de Overpass. Me lo tomaré con
calma, son muchas páginas y dispondré de poco tiempo a partir de mediados de
septiembre.



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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

[talk-ph] Help fix the road network in the Philippines with MapRoulette challenges

[Andrew Wiseman via talk-ph]

Hi OSM Philippines,

My name is Andrew, I work for Apple on the Maps team. We recently used our 
Atlas data analysis tool (https://github.com/osmlab/atlas 
) to look at a few types of potential issues 
related to roads and routing on OpenStreetMap, such as roads that have overly 
sharp angles, roads that cross but don't connect, routing problems, turn 
restrictions, places where navigation is impossible due to missing connections 
or potentially incorrect one-way roads, and other similar issues.

I've posted the results of those checks on MapRoulette, a tool that lets you go 
through potential issues one by one and either correct them or indicate they 
are not a problem. I wanted to let you know they are available in case others 
wanted to try fixing some of them — I also plan to go through some of them 
myself.

In MapRoulette you can either pick a random task to fix or click on a specific 
one. If you want to do tasks around a certain location, such as somewhere you 
are familiar with, you can click on one from the map view, and then click Next 
task: Nearby when you finish it.

The checks are:

Crossing roads: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8807
Routing problems: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8804
Floating and disconnected roads: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8810
Sharp angles: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8808
Road connectivity check: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8806
Invalid lanes: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8814
Invalid turn restriction: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8815
Malformed roundabouts: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8809
Road links: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/8813

Let me know if you have any questions or suggestions.

Thanks!

Andrew

Andrew Wiseman |  Maps | iPhone: +1.202.270.4464 | andrew_wise...@apple.com 

___
talk-ph mailing list
talk-ph@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph

Re: [Talk-es] Vías e instalaciones en zonas militares. Cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil

[dcapillae]

Incluyo enlaces a páginas similares que hay en el wiki, las ya mencionadas y
una adicional de Costa Rica:

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Bolivia/C%C3%B3mo_mapear_un
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Catalan/Com_mapejar_un
[3]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:C%C3%B3mo_mapear..._(en_Costa_Rica)




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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

Re: [Talk-es] Vías e instalaciones en zonas militares. Cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil

[dcapillae]

Hola, Jaume.

La página «Cómo mapear un» no es exhaustiva ni pretende serlo. Es una guía
rápida para resolver dudas recurrentes. Si alguien quiere ampliar
información sobre el uso de cada etiqueta, puede hacer clic en cada una de
ellas y el wiki le dirige a la documentación correspondiente. Cuento un poco
los antecedentes por si alguien no sabe todavía de qué va esa página.

Fue una idea que surgió en el grupo de Telegram hace algún tiempo. No
recuerdo se la idea fue de Lanxana o mía. Lo que es seguro es que ambos nos
decidimos a crearla siguiendo el ejemplo de la página de Bolivia [1] y con
el único objeto de evitar tener que responder siempre las mismas dudas que
surgían una y otra vez en el grupo sobre cómo se etiqueta esto o aquello.
Dudas no convencionales, sino que encerraban cierta dificultad por la propia
naturaleza de la característica a mapear y que generaban debates recurrentes
e innecesarios, siempre los mismos.

Otros muchas comunidades tienen páginas similares, unas más trabajadas y
otras menos, pero todas bajo la misma idea: proporcionar una guía rápida
para resolver dudas recurrentes y homogeneizar el etiquetado. La comunidad
catalana también tiene la suya, aunque no sé si se usa o no [2]

Respecto a cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil, la duda surgió en
este foro. La planteó Lanxana enlanzándola con la cuestión de cómo mapear
zonas de uso militar. Si lees el hilo desde el principio verás que no fui yo
quien planteó la pregunta, sino quien intento ayudar a resolverla.

Si me he decidido ahora a sintentizar la respuesta en un nuevo «cómo mapear
un» ha sido por pura casualidad, porque estaba traduciendo las páginas del
wiki relativas a instalaciones policiales, he visto cómo lo hacen en Francia
y me acordé de esta duda planteada por Lanxana. Pensé que sería bueno
recogerla en el wiki para ayudar a otros mapeadores que pudiesen tener la
misma duda.


Jaume Figueras i Jové wrote
> Como todos leemos en diagonal, las 4 líneas observaciones no creo que sea
> el mejor sitio donde explicar como se mapea algo que afecta al 25%
> (aprox.) del territorio.

Ya lo he dicho, la página «Cómo mapear un» no es una página exhaustiva. Es
una guía rápida con sugerencias, nada más. La página incluye cómo mapear un
barrio, un centro de salud y otras muchas cosas, algunas que afectan a todo
el territorio nacional. No me parece que haya ningún problema con esos. Ya
lo he explicado, no es una página que trate de documentar en exhaustividad
cómo se mapea cada cosa, se dan indicaciones generales de cómo lo hacemos en
España para que todos sigamos las mismas recomendaciones, pero si alguien
quiere profundizar en el tema, para eso están las páginas de documentación
de etiquetas. Se proporcionan enlaces a todas ellas. 


Jaume Figueras i Jové wrote
> Seguramente será más claro hacer 2 entradas y diferenciar como se mapea en
> Catalunya y Euskal Herria (?) y como en el resto del estado.

De nuevo, yo me he limitado a responder a un duda que se planteó en este
foro. No se preguntó como mapear una comisaría de policía, sino cómo mapear
un cuartel de la Guardia Civil. Con un comisaría de policía, como las
comisarias de las policías locales, autonómicas o la misma Policía Nacional,
entiendo que nadie tiene dudas, por eso nadie pregunta. Lógico, si pones
«comisaría» o «policía» en el wiki, te aparece la página de
«amenity=police». Por eso no se incluyen estas comisarias en la página «Cómo
mapear un», porque son dudas con soluciones demasiado evidentes. En el texto
introductorio de la página «Cómo mapear un» hay una breve explicación al
respecto.

La duda sobre los cuarteles de la Guardia civil, según se desprende de la
formulación inicial de Lanxana, o esa impresión me dio en su momento, surge
porque no se sabe con seguridad si los cuarteles de la Guardia Civil son
instalaciones policiales o militares. Es una duda comprensible y además
recurrente, aunque para algunos resulte bastante obvio el asunto. 


Jaume Figueras i Jové wrote
> Tu texto es perfectamente "entendible", pero si alguien mapea sin mirar
> las observaciones y se equivoca puede llevar a una persona con una
> urgencia  al sitio equivocado.

Si el texto es entendible, entonces, perfecto. De las equivocaciones ajenas,
no soy responsable. 


Jaume Figueras i Jové wrote
> Tambien se puede poner en primerísimo lugar de las observaciones y en
> rojo, que en Catalunya y Euskal Herria (?) no se debe poner el
> amenity=police para evitar errores.

No estoy de acuerdo. Se trata de dar indicaciones sobre cómo mapear cierta
característica, no de cómo se mapean otras. Lo que debe ir en primer lugar
es precisamente cómo se mapea la característica de la que se está hablando.
Lo que sí me parece correcto, e incluso conveniente, es incluir como
ejemplos adicionales las comisarías de la Ertzaintza y de los Mossos de
Esquadra, de la misma manera en que ya aparecen como ejemplo las comisarías
de Policía Nacional. Como en cada territorio hay una cuerpo distinto y
conviene que 

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Alberto]

>Ciao,
>
>ho iniziato con l'intento di estrarre ma mi fa piacere inserire quelli che ho 
>trovato online, con i tag correttamente suggeriti.

Bene Luca, mi piacerebbe riprendere a mapparli, però a questo punto se ci 
coordiniamo, evitiamo di ricontrollare gli stessi centri.
Tu ti stai occupando di qualche area geografica particolare e/o stai 
consultando un elenco in particolare?
Tempo fa io avevo individuato un elenco dei centri qui [1].
Ora si potrebbe continuare ad inserirli/aggiornarli, magari dividendoci il 
lavoro per aree geografiche.
Che ne pensi?


[1] http://www.recuperoselvatici.it/principale.htm

Alberto



---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 11. Sep 2019, at 22:11, Alfredo Gattai  wrote:
> 
> Normalmente un sentiero che finisce in un prato ha una continuazione logica 
> nello stesso per uscirne. Di solito si costeggia a lato o se ha delle piane 
> passa alla base di esse.


certo, capita anche questo spesso. Ma dei sentieri che finiscono ci stanno 
parecchi.

Ciao Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] problema default access in Italia

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 11. Sep 2019, at 16:31, Volker Schmidt  wrote:
> 
> Esistono divieti su base comunale, provinciale(?), regionali, parchi e simili 
> enti.


si, ma questi divieti devono poi trovare riscontro con la segnaletica che si 
trova sulla strada. Al livello comunale, provinciale o regionale credo non si 
possano imporre divieti di accesso sui percorsi di default che sono attivi 
senza essere indicati, o sì? 

In generale la pagina descrive i default nazionali, per quelli regionali si 
potrebbe fare una sottosezione con altri default, ma in Osm per essere sicuri è 
meglio essere esplicito e non fidarsi dei default (se non c’è niente potrebbe 
anche indicare che nessun mappatore conosce più dettagli).

Ciao Martin 
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-bo] Consulta

[Carlos E. Flores]

Gracias, Juan José.
Revisaré el material. Saludos desde Ecuador.
Atte.

El lun., 9 de sep. de 2019 a la(s) 16:17, Juan Jose Iglesias (
jjiglesi...@gmail.com) escribió:

> Saludos Carlos, para empezar lo major es tomar los Tutoriales:
> http://learnosm.org/es/
>
>
>
> Y
>
>
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Gu%C3%ADa_de_principiantes
>
>
>
> Slds JJ
>
>
>
> *From:* Carlos E. Flores [mailto:carlos.f.valeri...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 8, 2019 1:06 PM
> *To:* talk-bo@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* [Talk-bo] Consulta
>
>
>
> Cómo están.
>
> Mi nombre es Carlos Flores, soy periodista y vivo en Ecuador. Tengo una
> plataforma de periodismo de datos llamada Ojo al Dato
> . Les leo con frecuencia en esta lista (muy
> interesante), pero quisiera -perdonen que sea novato- si me pueden ayudar
> con algunas cosas básicas para entrar en el mundo del mapeo. ¿Por dónde
> debería empezar? Les agradeceré cualquier orientación al respecto :) Buen
> domingo!
>
> Atte.
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos E. Flores
>
> Periodista. Radialista. Marketing Digital
>
> Comunicación Política
>
> +593 9 87909589 <+593+9+87909589>
>
> carlos.f.valeri...@gmail.com
>
> www.kipudigital.com
>
> Quito, Ecuador
>
> [image: facebook] 
>
> [image: twitter] 
>
> [image: linkedin] 
>
> [image: instagram] 
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> Virus-free. www.avg.com
> 
>
>
>


-- 
Carlos E. Flores

Periodista. Radialista. Marketing Digital

Comunicación Política
+593 9 87909589 <+593+9+87909589>
carlos.f.valeri...@gmail.com
www.kipudigital.com
Quito, Ecuador
[image: facebook] 
[image: twitter] 
[image: linkedin] 
[image: instagram] 
___
Talk-bo mailing list
Talk-bo@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-bo

Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Frederik Ramm]

Tony,

On 9/11/19 21:31, fors...@ozonline.com.au wrote:
> The construction and use of unauthorized trails is illegal with large
> penalties (though I have never heard of a prosecution). 

Are there sources that are not restricted by copyright that we could use
to determine which trails are authorized and which are not?

> The policy in OSM to map everything that exists ignores the fact that
> not all mapping is in the community interest. I would like to see a more
> nuanced policy. 

There are indeed some nuances, for example there is general agreement in
the community not to map the nesting places of rare birds (lest eggs be
stolen), and a similar general agreement exists for things like women's
refuges. This is in addition to the respect for privacy that is shared
by most mappers - where the term "privacy" is generally interpreted
narrowly to mean "things about your life that you cannot see from the
aerial image".

Some people come to DWG claiming privacy because someone has traced
their driveway from aerial imagery; this is not usually a complaint we
entertain.

But the things I mentioned are not really codified anywhere, and there
are often corner cases that lead to lengthy debates. A remotely related
case for example was in Germany recently, where forest management and
tourism authorities had agreed to a careful scheme of "trekking" camp
sites in forests where camping would not normally be allowed. Their plan
was to keep the exact location of these places secret, and require prior
booking by users, who would only upon booking be told where exactly to
find the spot. This was part of the compromise they reached - the forest
authorities didn't want any people camping, the tourism people wanted to
offer something for nature lovers, so they agreed on this scheme which
at least promised that the places would not be overrun. You can imagine
how the story went on - things being kept secret piqued the interest of
mappers, and before too long all the places were mapped
(tourism=camp_site, camp_site=basic, backcountry=yes). The authorities
complained, but of course they have no legal recourse... still, this led
to some discussion in the German mapping community in how far official
wishes/demands for secrecy should be respected.

We certainly cannot respect *every* local government law or else we'd
likely have to purge our maps of all content in China, North Korea, and
some Arab countries, delete all military areas in many others...

It is an interesting topic for a general discusssion. Though in this
concrete case I wonder how to determine whether what looks like a
footpath in the Conservation Lands is legal to use or not... should
*all* the trails drawn in the area be marked access=no? Should we ask
the adminstration for a list?

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [Talk-es] Vías e instalaciones en zonas militares. Cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil

[Jaume Figueras i Jové]

Hola,


¿Has consultado la entrada del wiki? [1] En la sección «Observaciones» he


Sí, en mi correo he escrito: "Aunque en la wiki se observa que deben "

Como todos leemos en diagonal, las 4 líneas observaciones no creo que 
sea el mejor sitio donde explicar como se mapea algo que afecta al 25% 
(aprox.) del territorio.


Seguramente será más claro hacer 2 entradas y diferenciar como se mapea 
en Catalunya y Euskal Herria (?) y como en el resto del estado. Tu texto 
es perfectamente "entendible", pero si alguien mapea sin mirar las 
observaciones y se equivoca puede llevar a una persona con una urgencia 
al sitio equivocado.


Tambien se puede poner en primerísimo lugar de las observaciones y en 
rojo, que en Catalunya y Euskal Herria (?) no se debe poner el 
amenity=police para evitar errores.


Para otras etiquetas no diría nada, ya me parecería bien ponerlo en 
observaciones, pero para servicios de emergencias como la policía, 
urgencias médicas, bomberos, debemos hacer lo máximo para que nadie 
cometa el mas mínimo error.


Salut!




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

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[Alfredo Gattai]

Normalmente un sentiero che finisce in un prato ha una continuazione logica
nello stesso per uscirne. Di solito si costeggia a lato o se ha delle piane
passa alla base di esse. A volte semplicemente arriva al prato e li
finisce. Se ti sei fermato li e non hai visto se e dove continuava, fermalo
li senza altre indicazioni.

Alfredo



Il Mer 11 Set 2019, 18:41 demon_box  ha scritto:

> ciao, come faccio a segnalare in modo corretto (anche per gli altri
> mappers)
> che un sentiero
>
> 1) non è impraticabile da lì in avanti causa vegetazione
> (obstacle=vegetation)
> 2) non è che non sia stato eseguito il rilievo con il GPS da nessuno oltre
> quel punto (fixme=continue)
>
> ma invece semplicemente il rilievo col GPS io l'ho fatto ma questo sentiero
> si perde e finisce in un prato?
>
> grazie
>
> --enrico
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Nome forti

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

per le mura di un castello c'è anche barrier=castle_wall
non è diffuso però.

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Nome forti

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

Il 11/09/19 20:39, solitone ha scritto:
> Nella zona intorno a Briancon, in Francia, ci sono diversi forti (es. 
> Infernet e Croix de Bretagne) il cui nome non viene mostrato da Mapnik e 
> nemmeno da alcune vettoriali (come OpenAndroMaps).
> 
> Questo il forte della Croix de Bretagne:
> https://osm.org/go/xXXbi32P0--
> 
> Il muro perimetrale è stato taggato con:
> 
> barrier=retaining_wall
> historic=fort
> name=Fort de la Coix de Bretagne
> 
> E’ il modo corretto e, quindi, il nome non mostrato è un difetto dei renderer?

Credo sia a causa di questo nodo quà:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1810266205#map=19/44.87343/6.65487

E secondo me il tag name va su questo nodo rappresentativo di tutto il
forte, e togliere historic=fort dal muro perimetrale che secondo me è un
historic=yes.


-- 
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

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

Re: [Talk-it] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[Cascafico Giovanni]

Pubblicare in OSM è sicuramente utile per un utilizzo condiviso. In josm
chiunque può sovrapporre il gpx allo strato dei dati e le way mancanti da
osm saranno piuttosto evidenti. Però sei soprattutto tu a conoscere quei
tracciati: leggo tra i tag "mtb" quindi posso interpretarlo in osm come
path, però potrebbe essere track o footway od altro, mentre tu
probabilmente hai i ricordi per classificarlo meglio (p.es path, slope,
surface, trail_visibility ecc.).
Usa josm: non è complicato come sembra.

Il mar 10 set 2019, 17:56 Emanuele Petriglia <
openstreet...@emanuelepetriglia.com> ha scritto:

> Buonasera,
>
> Ho caricato[0] 129 file GPX raccolte negli ultimi quattro anni, sono
> tutte uscite in bici e la maggior parte sono concentrare nel Parco
> Regionale dei Castelli Romani, un posto che si trova poco sud di Roma.
>
> Per caricarli ho creato uno script personalizzato[1], oltre a caricare i
> file rimuove i punti vicini a delle coordinate fornite per un raggio di
> metri fornito (per privacy).
>
> Volevo chiedervi come mi devo comportare ora, so che il GPS è poco
> affidabile, sopratutto nei boschi. So però che può essere di aiuto.
> Conosco il territorio, ma non ho mai fatto modifiche serie in OSM. Ho
> chiesto anche nella mailing list talk-it-lazio per eventuali compaesani.
>
> Buona serata!
>
> [0]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ema-pe/traces
> [1]:
>
> https://gitlab.com/ema-pe/dotfiles/blob/1903a7e3b7baf68d5f4159e31f0a19af1623e02b/bin/osmgpx
>
> --
> Emanuele Petriglia (ema-pe)
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[forster]

Hi Frederik

This reminds me of a thread that I started on this list about 2 years  
ago. It related to illegal mountain bike tracks in Lysterfield Park,  
Victoria Australia.


The construction and use of unauthorized trails is illegal with large  
penalties (though I have never heard of a prosecution). An issue is  
that mapping these trails encourages use and consequent environmental  
damage. There is also the risk that innocent users will think that a  
mapped trail is legal and get prosecuted.


The compromise was to mark the trails as access=no but not delete them  
till they had been made untrafficable for sufficient time to become  
overgrown.


Since then the pressure from the mountain bike community to has map  
everything has reduced,  presumably the mountain bike  community has  
realized that OSM is one of the tools the authorities use to locate  
illegal trails.


The policy in OSM to map everything that exists ignores the fact that  
not all mapping is in the community interest. I would like to see a  
more nuanced policy. We might see a policy that addresses the following


Private land and the right of privacy
Military land
National Parks
Other public land.

Thanks
Tony



Hi,

the DWG was drawn into an edit war regarding several paths that were
mapped in this area:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-34.3740/150.8761

The argument is about in how far the (largely north-south running) paths
are "illegal" and whether they need to be removed from the map because
they would lead to people trespassing.

The argument is two-fold; part applies to the paths that are on private
land where, I understand, it is the land owner's prerogative to allow or
disallow whatever they want, and another part applies to the paths that
run into NPWS managed conservation lands.

These paths were originally tagged "foot=yes" and with no further access
descriptions; one had an "mtb:scale" added.

From reading the Illawara Escarpment Plan of Management
(https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Parks-reserves-and-protected-areas/Parks-plans-of-management/illawarra-escarpment-state-conservation-area-plan-management-180505.pdf)
I get the impression that mountainbiking on any paths not explicitly
open for it is illegal. But what about walking - the plan says a lot
about maintained walking tracks but it does *not* explicitly say that
walking is limited to these.

There's also a published "draft strategy" for mountain biking in the
area, however I don't know in how far a draft strategy would influence
the current legal situation.

Anyway, for the time being I have added an access=no to the paths on
private land because the landowner doesn't want people to use them and I
guess it is their prerogative; and I've removed the explicit foot=yes on
the other paths (becasue I'm not sure) and added a "bicycle=no" to close
them for mountainbiking. My changeset:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74355243#map=16/-34.3750/150.8730

I would however be grateful for any input from the Australian community
on this matter.

I've also been told that NPWS were keenly looking to sue whoever
publishes "illegal" trails or uploads them to OSM; in fact such a legal
threat was the reason why DWG got involved in the first place.

Bye
Frederik

DWG Ticket Ticket#201909011071
--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

_
This mail has been virus scanned by Australia On Line
see http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning







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

Re: [Talk-es] Vías e instalaciones en zonas militares. Cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil

[dcapillae]

¿Qué tal así? 


> Los cuarteles de la Guardia Civil de similares características a las
> comisarías de policía convencionales se mapean con «amenity=police». Añade
> «operator=Guardia Civil» para indicar que se trata de un cuartel de la
> Guardia Civil. Si se trata de una comisaria gestionada por otro cuerpo
> policial, usa el valor que corresponda, por ejemplo, «operator=Policía
> Nacional». Usa «police=*» para otro tipo de instalaciones policiales que
> no son comisarías. 

Es básicamente la misma redacción pero compuesta de otra manera y cambiando
algunos verbos:

1.- «Los cuarteles de la Guardia Civil de similares características a las
comisarías de policía convencionales». Diría que está clarísimo. ¿A alguien
le parece una redacción confusa?
 
2.- «Usa "police=*" para otro tipo de instalaciones policiales que no son
comisarias». Aquí he cambiado el «Véase también» por un «Usa». He cambiado
un imperativo por otro. Personalmente prefiero el «Véase» porque, aunque no
deja de ser una orden, parece casi una sugerencia. Suena más amable.

A mí me da lo mismo redactarlo así o de otra manera. Mi objetivo es que se
entienda. ¿Alguien no lo entiende?





--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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

[Talk-ca] OSMOSE change: split on admin_level=5 boundaries in Québec

[Matthew Darwin]

Hello,

Just a note to advise that OSMOSE QA tool now has smaller areas to 
process in Québec rather than one area for the entire province. The 
tool is now using the admin_level=5 boundaries.  This follows the same 
change done for Ontario earlier this year. The reason to split up a 
province into multiple pieces is to allow faster processing time.


OSMOSE Canada QA is run from a server located in Gatineau, Québec.

QA status: 
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/control/update_matrix?remote=07e9 
(value represents the time since last update, is in days)


Issue Map: 
http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=9=46.04=-74.32


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Vladimir Vyskocil]

> On 11 Sep 2019, at 20:20, Mark Wagner  wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:33:05 +0200
> Vladimir Vyskocil  wrote:
> 
>> A even crazier area regarding the abuse of the cliff tag ! 
>> 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724
>> 
> 
> Doesn't look crazy to me.  From what I saw on the map, I expected there
> to be rock formations of the sort you'd find in south Utah.  Switching
> to aerial imagery, I saw pretty much that, just with more trees.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/50.96391/14.06867 
 really ?

> 
> (Is now tempted to map Bryce Canyon in excruciating detail.)
> 
> -- 
> Mark
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-es] Vías e instalaciones en zonas militares. Cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil

[dcapillae]

Gracias, Jaume.

¿Has consultado la entrada del wiki? [1] En la sección «Observaciones» he
indicado claramente que el etiquetado se refiere a cuarteles de la Guardia
Civil con características similares a las comisarias de policía. He añadido
además una referencia a la etiqueta «police=*» para mapear otro tipo de
instalaciones que no son comisarias. ¿En qué no estás de acuerdo?

La página «Cómo mapear un» es una especie de guía rápida que usamos para
resolver dudas recurrentes de mapeadores de la comunidad. Las observaciones
deben ser breves, sin extenderse en detalles. Para extenderse en detalles ya
están las páginas de documentación de etiquetas. Se procura siempre
proporcionar un enlace al hilo de discusión por si el mapeador tiene duda,
desea ampliar información o formular alguna pregunta a la comunidad respecto
del etiquetado sugerido. También se puede incluir algún ejemplo, aunque no
es estrictamente necesario.

A mí me parece que la entrada es lo suficientemente clara, pero si me dices
cómo se podría mejorar sin extendernos más allá de lo necesario, lo podría
modificar.

Transcribo el contenido a continuación por si alguien no lo ha leído
todavía:

> Los cuarteles de la Guardia Civil que ofrecen atención al público se
> mapean igual que las comisarias o estaciones de policía de similares
> características, usando «amenity=police». Añade «operator=Guardia Civil»
> para indicar que se trata de un cuartel de la Guardia Civil. Si se trata
> de una comisaria de otro tipo gestionada por otro cuerpo policial, usa el
> valor que corresponda, por ejemplo, «operator=Policía Nacional». Véase
> también «police=*» para otro tipo de instalaciones policiales que no son
> comisarías.
> 
> Consulta el hilo de discusión sobre esta característica en el foro de la
> comunidad. 

 
¿Qué es lo que está mal?  La referencia a «instalaciones policiales que no
son comisarias» es clarísima. También está claro que estamos hablando de
cuarteles de la Guardia Civil de similares características a las comisarias
de policía. convencionales. ¿En qué no estás de acuerdo?


Atentamente,
Daniel



[1]



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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

[Talk-it] Nome forti

[solitone]

Nella zona intorno a Briancon, in Francia, ci sono diversi forti (es. Infernet 
e Croix de Bretagne) il cui nome non viene mostrato da Mapnik e nemmeno da 
alcune vettoriali (come OpenAndroMaps).

Questo il forte della Croix de Bretagne:
https://osm.org/go/xXXbi32P0--

Il muro perimetrale è stato taggato con:

barrier=retaining_wall
historic=fort
name=Fort de la Coix de Bretagne

E’ il modo corretto e, quindi, il nome non mostrato è un difetto dei renderer?



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Yves]

Vladimir, I see around https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724 an 
incredible work of micromapping, it can also look ugly in other context.
But OSM is glad to have climbing enthusiast in its ranks too! 
Probably worth opening an issue at 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto the cliff pattern really 
looks messy.
Yves 

Le 11 septembre 2019 19:26:42 GMT+02:00, Vladimir Vyskocil 
 a écrit :
>Hi ! 
>
>> On 11 Sep 2019, at 15:33, Vladimir Vyskocil
> wrote:
>> 
>> A even crazier area regarding the abuse of the cliff tag ! 
>> 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724
>
>What I see there is far from reasonable and far for common sens, it is
>just wrong and mad...
>All this bad information about cliffs in that area ie what common sens
>think is a real cliff and what is explained in the openstreetmap wiki
>page about this tag impact the usability of the data and I even don’t
>talk about the rendering, we are not tagging for the renderer but we
>easily could see that this tag was not designed for this mess !
>
>Now have a look please at the Grand Canyon in USA, for example :
>
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/36.0765/-112.1345
>
>
>This is useful information ! How do you think It had looked if every
>little stones or slopes were mapped as a cliff like it is in the area
>we are talking about ?
>
>Vladimir.
>
>> 
>> Vladimir.
>> 
>>> Le 11 sept. 2019 à 15:27, Vladimir Vyskocil
>mailto:vladimir.vysko...@gmail.com>> a
>écrit :
>>> 
>>> Hello Sarah,
>>> 
>>> I read carefully your response and looked at the picture. I didn't
>travelled exactly at this place but will go there in October ! However
>I've already been in Český ráj
>
>that is not too far from there and where the terrain is similar in many
>aspects.
>>> I still think that the usage of the tag is abused in this area…
>>> You may read the description of this tag here :
>>> 
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcliff
>
>>> 
>>> «  A cliff  is a vertical or
>almost vertical natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for
>example in form of coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff
>usually consists of bare solid rock but can occasionally also consist
>of clay, compacted sand, ice or other solid materials.» 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> « 
>>> When not to use
>>> natural =cliff <>
>should not be used for ridges, i.e. crests where there is a significant
>drop in terrain to both sides and neither of them is close to vertical.
>Use natural =ridge
> or natural
>=arete
> instead. Also
>do not usenatural
>=cliff <> just for
>mapping an inclined bare rock surface, use natural
>=bare_rock
> instead.
>>> 
>>> " 
>>> 
>>> This is not what I see when I look at this mapped area, I agree that
>some mapped cliffs here are really what should be considered a cliff
>but they are lost in lots of wrongly mapped and not relevant ones. 
>>> 
>>> You might look at this as a example in many many more :
>>> 
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.89893/14.28319
>
>>> 
>>> We are seeing it at level 19 and the density of cliffs is still
>crazy ! 
>>> 
>>> Or here : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.8791/14.3647
>
>>> 
>>> Could you tell me that all theses mapped cliffs really exists ? Or
>aren’t they just « a significant drop in terrain and neither of them
>are close to vertical » mapped as cliffs only looking at terrain model
>and that are completely disconnected from the reality of the terrain ?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Vladimir
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 Le 11 sept. 2019 à 00:17, Sarah Hoffmann > a écrit :
 
 Hi,
 
 On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 02:42:06PM +0200, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
> Around this area :
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/50.9034/14.2763
>
>> there is a
>flagrant misuse and abuse of the usage of the natural=cliff tag. It is
>used to map the iso altitude lines and not real cliff as stated in the
>WIKI :
> 
> A cliff 

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Mateusz Konieczny]

11 Sep 2019, 20:47 by o...@imagico.de:

> if the number of edits 
> and the time spent on these by those willing and able to diligently 
> pursue this path outnumbered edits of those who pursue other goals by a 
> fair margin.  This is not achievable i think.
>
It is not so bad.

Note that reverting is significantly
less time confusing than writing things.

More than once I needed less than minute
to spot and remove "hereby I redefine tag xyz"edit that needed far more time to 
write.
it is hard to say how far away we are from
this goal, especially for me, as part of wiki that 
I edit or at least monitor seem acceptable to me
because I already removed what I considered
as untrue/misguided/unwanted.
> And even if that worked it would still not produce the compact, well 
> condensed kind of documentation Richard has in mind of course.
>
Here I agree.
> Wikipedia has been experimenting with a system of this kind imposed on 
> top of the Mediawiki framework - but practically this is AFAIK used for 
> technocratic oversight to avoid vandalism and other clearly malicious 
> changes but not for editorial review regarding content quality:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reviewing_pending_changes
>
> I have not actually tried the technical implementation of this but given 
> how it is used i doubt it would be suitable for the kind of content 
> centered editorial review we are talking about here.
>
given that only choices are 
- accept
- revert

it is suitable only for combating
blatant vandalism.

Some way to discuss changes
would be needed to have useful
reviews before edit.

GitHub (or Gitlab or other equivalent)
would be better match for such requirements.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Mark Wagner]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 15:33:05 +0200
Vladimir Vyskocil  wrote:

> A even crazier area regarding the abuse of the cliff tag ! 
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724
> 

Doesn't look crazy to me.  From what I saw on the map, I expected there
to be rock formations of the sort you'd find in south Utah.  Switching
to aerial imagery, I saw pretty much that, just with more trees.

(Is now tempted to map Bryce Canyon in excruciating detail.)

-- 
Mark

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-es] Vías e instalaciones en zonas militares. Cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil

[Jaume Figueras i Jové]

Hola,

lamento estar en desacuerdo. En Catalunya, donde la guardia civil y 
policía nacional no tienen competencias de policía de atención y 
servicio al ciudadano, no se puede usar el amenity=police. Tal como dice 
la wiki: "A police station is a building that serves as a primary point 
of contact for the public, i.e. public-facing police facilities. Other 
police facilites shall be mapped as police=*", si no es el primer punto 
de contacto con el ciudadano no creo correcto amenity=police ya que no 
puedo ir a un cuartel de la guardia civil o policía nacional a denunciar 
un robo, por ejemplo.


De esta manera mi opinión es que **solamente** en Catalunya donde ni 
policía nacional ni guardia civil tienen competencias de policía 
integral, el mapeo debería ser:


police = barracks o police = detention
operator = Guardia civil

para los cuarteles de la guardia civil dado que su principal función es 
la defensa y seguridad fronteriza.


Las etiquetas:

police = offices
operator = Policía nacional

para la policía nacional, dado que sus principales funciones son 
administrativas, DNI, pasaporte y judicial.


Aunque en la wiki se observa que deben ser cuarteles con atención al 
público, se deberían diferenciar los casos. Seguramente lo que es normal 
y general en un territorio no existe en otro y puede causar confusión.


Desconozco las competencias en Euskal Herria, por lo tanto no me 
aventuro a dar una opinión.


Saludos.

On 11/9/19 17:09, dcapillae wrote:

Buenas tardes.

He añadido cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil a la página «Cómo
mapear un» [1]. Lo he recogido tal cual se comentó en este hilo.

Lo único adicional que debo comentaros es la clave «operator», que entiendo
podríamos usar para lo mismo que se usa en otros países, es decir, para
indicar el cuerpo que gestiona la comisaría de policía.

Por ejemplo, una comisaría de la Policía Nacional sería:

amenity=police
operator=Policía Nacional

Un cuartel de la Guardia Civil:

amenity=police
operator=Guardia Civil

Una comisaría de la Ertzainza:

amenity=police
operator=Ertzaintza

Y así con el resto de cuerpos policiales que operan en España. De esta forma
sería muy sencillo saber cuáles comisarías corresponden con qué cuerpo
policial. Filtrar los datos sería sumamente simple.

Muchas gracias.

Atentamente,
Daniel


[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Espa%C3%B1a/C%C3%B3mo_mapear_un#Cuartel_de_la_Guardia_Civil




dcapillae wrote

Buenas tardes.

Respecto de la pregunta sobre cómo mapear cuarteles de la Guardia Civil,
obviamente con «amenity=police». Si se quiere especificar alguna
instalación
en concreto, se puede hacer pero sin usar etiquetas reservadas para
instalaciones militares. En OSM existen etiquetas para instalaciones
militares y etiquetas para instalaciones policiales [1].

Tampoco es correcto usar «landuse=military» en un cuartel de la Guardia
Civil o de la Policía Nacional. La función de estos dos cuerpos es
fundamentalmente de seguridad, no de defensa, como en el caso de los
militares. Los que hayan cumplido algún servicio militar sabrán cuál es la
diferencia entre un cuartel militar y uno policial, como los que usan los
policias nacionales o los guardias civiles.

Que no nos confunda el nombre ni su estructura más o menos ligada con
fuerzas militares: los guardias civiles, los policías nacionales, los
carabineros italianos, los gendarmes franceses... todos son cuerpos
policiales y sus instalaciones se mapean con «amenity=police».


Atentamente,
Daniel

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:police



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

___
Talk-es mailing list



Talk-es@



https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es






--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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



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

Re: [Talk-es] Criterio de clasificación de entidades de población

[dcapillae]

Gracias, Iago.

Esperemos unos días por si alguien quiere decir algo. Si a nadie le parece
mal, lo ponemos en el wiki.

Gracias de nuevo por tu iniciativa.

Atentamente,
Daniel



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[emmexx]

On 09/11/2019 08:00 PM, Ivo Reano wrote:
> Scusa... Ma se il sentiero finisce. Che senso ha dire che continua?

Infatti è ciò che ho scritto. Nessun tag se finisce (o al più
noexit=true), mentre se continua fixme=continue

> Del noexit su un sentiero si era già discusso ed opinione comune è che
> si applica alle carrozzabili, un'auto potrtebbe avere problemi a fare
> manovra per tornare indietro, un pedone non si preoccupa.
> Io se perdo il sentiero o torno indietro o mi metto a ciondolare tra i
> boschi!

Non è ciò che c'è scritto nel wiki e anche la relativa discussione è
abbastanza confusa.
Io personalmente non ho mai dovuto usarlo.

ciao
maxx

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

Re: [Talk-it-lazio] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[flaminiatumino]

Per me ok il prossimo lunedì e anche il 30! Flaminia 



Sent from my Mi phoneOn Martin Koppenhoefer , Sep 11, 2019 5:57 PM wrote:Am Mi., 11. Sept. 2019 um 17:42 Uhr schrieb Emanuele Petriglia :
Preferirei il primo lunedì disponibile, di solito voi dove e a che ora
vi incontrate?negli ultimi mesi ci siamo incontrato a Roma, Garbatella: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rome/IncontroAlle ore 20 (o poco dopo). Secondo le esigenze abbiamo fatto dei piccoli rilievi / passeggiate nel quartiere, mappando dettagli degli edifici, civici e punti di interesse (con cellulare), ma ogni tanto siamo anche rimasti nella sala.Propongo prossimo incontro lunedì 16/9 e se vi va anche Lunedì 30 per ritornare nell'ordine.Ciao,Martin
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[Ivo Reano]

Scusa... Ma se il sentiero finisce. Che senso ha dire che continua?
Del noexit su un sentiero si era già discusso ed opinione comune è che si
applica alle carrozzabili, un'auto potrtebbe avere problemi a fare manovra
per tornare indietro, un pedone non si preoccupa.
Io se perdo il sentiero o torno indietro o mi metto a ciondolare tra i
boschi!


Il giorno mer 11 set 2019 alle ore 19:52 emmexx  ha
scritto:

> On 09/11/2019 07:15 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> >
> > si, se vuoi, mettici una nota per chi segue, un fixme non serve perché
> > non ci sta errore...
>
> Il wiki suggerisce di usare fixme=continue
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fixme
>
> Errore significa che i dati inseriti non coincidono con ciò che c'è sul
> terreno.
>
> ciao
> maxx
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[emmexx]

On 09/11/2019 07:15 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> 
> si, se vuoi, mettici una nota per chi segue, un fixme non serve perché
> non ci sta errore...

Il wiki suggerisce di usare fixme=continue

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:noexit
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fixme

Errore significa che i dati inseriti non coincidono con ciò che c'è sul
terreno.

ciao
maxx

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

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[Ivo Reano]

Non è assolutamente scritto da nessuna parte che un sentiero debba condurre
ad un paese o ad un colle. O a quello che pensi debba andare.
Potrebbe sembrare strano, ma a volte la destinazione di un sentiero è "un
prato".
Altre volte sono pascoli alpini. Zone di alpeggio dove finché ci sono i
prati il sentiero non si vede più... A volte prosegue a volte non più!
Sono d'accordo con Martin: una nota per indicare la fine del sentiero, in
modo che chi lo volesse percorrere sa che finisce lì, e un altro mappatore
non perde tempo a cercare lo sbocco che non c'è.
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 11 September 2019, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> Nearly 100% of my activity on wiki
> is attempting to do this (documenting
> tags and removal of what is in contrary to
> reality).

Yes, and you are not the only one who tries that.  But the bottom line 
is that this would only work in turning the wiki into an accurate 
documentation of the de facto meaning of tags if the number of edits 
and the time spent on these by those willing and able to diligently 
pursue this path outnumbered edits of those who pursue other goals by a 
fair margin.  This is not achievable i think.

And even if that worked it would still not produce the compact, well 
condensed kind of documentation Richard has in mind of course.

>
> wiki has version management and
> talk pages.
>
> editorial review equivalent is done via watchlists

No, with editorial review i mean advance review before edits make it to 
the version that is primarily used by consumers.

The function of such review would be twofold:  As quality control and to 
shift the incentive to participate in the whole thing towards the more 
qualified contributors.

Wikipedia has been experimenting with a system of this kind imposed on 
top of the Mediawiki framework - but practically this is AFAIK used for 
technocratic oversight to avoid vandalism and other clearly malicious 
changes but not for editorial review regarding content quality:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reviewing_pending_changes

I have not actually tried the technical implementation of this but given 
how it is used i doubt it would be suitable for the kind of content 
centered editorial review we are talking about here.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Mateusz Konieczny]

11 Sep 2019, 18:56 by frede...@remote.org:
> and it is very ahrd to do collectively in a "everyone just edits one
> tiny little bit and somehow a coherent whole will emerge" kind of way.
>
Very hard, but given that there is no
better alternative...

Is there somewhere git repository accepting
pull requests - or equivalent of something like
that with contents of this book?___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-es] Criterio de clasificación de entidades de población

[Iago Casabiell]

Ok, solicito permiso para cambiar el criterio de clasificación de Núcleos
de Población en España en la wiki (ES:España):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Espa%C3%B1a/Normalizaci%C3%B3n#N.C3.BAcleos_de_poblaci.C3.B3n
y los listados de ciudades (
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Normalizaci%C3%B3n/city,
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Espa%C3%B1a/Normalizaci%C3%B3n/town,
y
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Espa%C3%B1a/Normalizaci%C3%B3n/village
).

Núcleos de población

FIXME: Actualizar estandarización con la importación del EGRN
//no se como resolver ese fixme, así que lo dejo ahí, si alguien sabe algo
que indique que hay que hacer, pero creo que esto es del 2014.

Se marcan con la etiqueta place=*, según esta clasificación:
//arreglar el link {{tag|place}}

Ciudad grande: (place=city): 86 localidades
  -Las 50 capitales de provincia: capital=6
  -Las 2 capitales autonómicas que no son capitales de provincia (Mérida y
Santiago de Compostela): capital=4
  -Las 2 ciudades autónomas (Ceuta y Melilla): capital=4
  -Las otras 21 ciudades de más de 100.000 habitantes: population≥10
  -Las otras 11 ciudades incluidas en la Ley de Grandes Ciudades de España.

Ciudad pequeña: (place=town): listado //poner la cifra cuando esté la lista
completa
  -Las capitales comarcales: capital=7
  -Las capitales de los partidos judiciales: capital=7
  -Resto de capitales de municipio de más de 10.000 habitantes (en la
capital, no en el municipio): capital=8, population≥1

Pueblo: (place=village): listado //poner la cifra cuando esté la lista
completa
  -Resto de capitales de municipio de menos de 10.000 habitantes (en la
capital, no en el municipio): capital=8, population<1
  -Núcleos de población pertenecientes a un municipio, sin ayuntamiento
propio, de más de 1.000 habitantes: population≥1000 (place=suburb si el
núcleo es muy cercano o está integrado dentro del núcleo principal).

Aldea: (place=hamlet):
  -Núcleos de población pertenecientes a un municipio, sin ayuntamiento
propio, de menos de 1.000 habitantes: population<1000 (place=suburb si el
núcleo es muy cercano o está integrado dentro del núcleo principal).
  -Atención: en otras partes del mundo un place=hamlet tiene menos de 200
habitantes, en España algunos de estos pueblecitos están ya en el listado
de pueblos. //poner la cifra cuando esté la lista completa

// Lo cambiaré esta semana, a no ser que alguien discrepe.

Saludos
Iago
___
Talk-es mailing list
Talk-es@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Vladimir Vyskocil]

Hi ! 

> On 11 Sep 2019, at 15:33, Vladimir Vyskocil  
> wrote:
> 
> A even crazier area regarding the abuse of the cliff tag ! 
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724 
> 
What I see there is far from reasonable and far for common sens, it is just 
wrong and mad...
All this bad information about cliffs in that area ie what common sens think is 
a real cliff and what is explained in the openstreetmap wiki page about this 
tag impact the usability of the data and I even don’t talk about the rendering, 
we are not tagging for the renderer but we easily could see that this tag was 
not designed for this mess !

Now have a look please at the Grand Canyon in USA, for example :

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/36.0765/-112.1345 


This is useful information ! How do you think It had looked if every little 
stones or slopes were mapped as a cliff like it is in the area we are talking 
about ?

Vladimir.

> 
> Vladimir.
> 
>> Le 11 sept. 2019 à 15:27, Vladimir Vyskocil > > a écrit :
>> 
>> Hello Sarah,
>> 
>> I read carefully your response and looked at the picture. I didn't travelled 
>> exactly at this place but will go there in October ! However I've already 
>> been in Český ráj 
>>  that 
>> is not too far from there and where the terrain is similar in many aspects.
>> I still think that the usage of the tag is abused in this area…
>> You may read the description of this tag here :
>> 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcliff 
>> 
>> 
>> «  A cliff  is a vertical or almost 
>> vertical natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for example in form 
>> of coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff usually consists of 
>> bare solid rock but can occasionally also consist of clay, compacted sand, 
>> ice or other solid materials.» 
>> 
>> 
>> « 
>> When not to use
>> natural =cliff <> should 
>> not be used for ridges, i.e. crests where there is a significant drop in 
>> terrain to both sides and neither of them is close to vertical. Use natural 
>> =ridge 
>>  or natural 
>> =arete 
>>  instead. Also do 
>> not usenatural =cliff <> 
>> just for mapping an inclined bare rock surface, use natural 
>> =bare_rock 
>>  instead.
>> 
>> " 
>> 
>> This is not what I see when I look at this mapped area, I agree that some 
>> mapped cliffs here are really what should be considered a cliff but they are 
>> lost in lots of wrongly mapped and not relevant ones. 
>> 
>> You might look at this as a example in many many more :
>> 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.89893/14.28319 
>> 
>> 
>> We are seeing it at level 19 and the density of cliffs is still crazy ! 
>> 
>> Or here : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.8791/14.3647 
>> 
>> 
>> Could you tell me that all theses mapped cliffs really exists ? Or aren’t 
>> they just « a significant drop in terrain and neither of them are close to 
>> vertical » mapped as cliffs only looking at terrain model and that are 
>> completely disconnected from the reality of the terrain ?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Vladimir
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Le 11 sept. 2019 à 00:17, Sarah Hoffmann >> > a écrit :
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 02:42:06PM +0200, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
 Around this area : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/50.9034/14.2763 
  
 > there is a 
 flagrant misuse and abuse of the usage of the natural=cliff tag. It is 
 used to map the iso altitude lines and not real cliff as stated in the 
 WIKI :
 
 A cliff > is a vertical or almost vertical 
 natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for example in form of 
 coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff usually consists of 
 bare solid rock but can occasionally also consist of clay, compacted sand, 
 ice or other solid materials.  
>>> 
>>> I know that area very well and I can assure 

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mi., 11. Sept. 2019 um 19:06 Uhr schrieb emmexx :

> On 09/11/2019 06:40 PM, demon_box wrote:
> > ma invece semplicemente il rilievo col GPS io l'ho fatto ma questo
> sentiero
> > si perde e finisce in un prato?
>
> Penso convenga utilizzare una logica inversa. Se un sentiero continua ma
> non lo hai percorso metti un fixme o una nota. Se non continua, va bene
> così.



si, se vuoi, mettici una nota per chi segue, un fixme non serve perché non
ci sta errore...

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[emmexx]

On 09/11/2019 06:40 PM, demon_box wrote:
> ma invece semplicemente il rilievo col GPS io l'ho fatto ma questo sentiero
> si perde e finisce in un prato?

Penso convenga utilizzare una logica inversa. Se un sentiero continua ma
non lo hai percorso metti un fixme o una nota. Se non continua, va bene
così.

ciao
maxx

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

[Talk-it] Sentiero che si perde nel prato

[demon_box]

ciao, come faccio a segnalare in modo corretto (anche per gli altri mappers)
che un sentiero 

1) non è impraticabile da lì in avanti causa vegetazione
(obstacle=vegetation)
2) non è che non sia stato eseguito il rilievo con il GPS da nessuno oltre
quel punto (fixme=continue)

ma invece semplicemente il rilievo col GPS io l'ho fatto ma questo sentiero
si perde e finisce in un prato?

grazie

--enrico




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Italy-General-f5324174.html

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Mateusz Konieczny]

11 Sep 2019, 13:43 by o...@imagico.de:

> On Wednesday 11 September 2019, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
>>
>> The main thing we're missing is curated, simple information on the
>> main tags that are _used_.
>>
>
> Indeed.  And i would go even further:  Any documentation of the de facto 
> use of tags written by humans (i.e. that goes beyond automatic analysis 
> like taginfo), written and maintained in a way that ensures it actually 
> does document the de facto situation, would be immensely useful and 
> important
>
Nearly 100% of my activity on wiki
is attempting to do this (documenting
tags and removal of what is in contrary to
reality).
>> It needs an
>> editor/curator/whatever, to have clear editorial guidelines, and
>> probably to run on the pull request model rather than open editing.
>>
>
> Is there any mature and writer centric software that implements this 
> kind of model?  I mean that from the perspective of a documentation 
> author offers a wiki like functionality with decent preview and 
> formatting but at the same time comes with a kind of version management 
> and functions to facilitate editorial review and discussion.
>
wiki has version management and
talk pages.

editorial review equivalent is done via watchlists

MediaWiki software and OSM Wiki
community has plenty of warts
but I am unaware about real alternatives,
and I am not planning to make one.___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[mbranco2]

Ciao Emanuele,
cosa vuoi fare precisamente?  Inserire in OSM dati ricavati dai tuoi gpx?
In questo caso si tratta di prendere le eventuali tracce (o parti parziali
di tracce) che ancora non sono mappate in OSM e inserirle.
Non conosco la tua zona, io qualche anno fa ero nella tua stessa
situazione, ma con mia grande sorpresa scoprii che erano già tutte
inserite, anche i più remoti sentierini.
L'operazione comunque va fatta con un editor di OSM, ti consiglio Josm.

Ciao,
Marco



Mail
priva di virus. www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Il giorno mar 10 set 2019 alle ore 17:56 Emanuele Petriglia <
openstreet...@emanuelepetriglia.com> ha scritto:

> Buonasera,
>
> Ho caricato[0] 129 file GPX raccolte negli ultimi quattro anni, sono
> tutte uscite in bici e la maggior parte sono concentrare nel Parco
> Regionale dei Castelli Romani, un posto che si trova poco sud di Roma.
>
> Per caricarli ho creato uno script personalizzato[1], oltre a caricare i
> file rimuove i punti vicini a delle coordinate fornite per un raggio di
> metri fornito (per privacy).
>
> Volevo chiedervi come mi devo comportare ora, so che il GPS è poco
> affidabile, sopratutto nei boschi. So però che può essere di aiuto.
> Conosco il territorio, ma non ho mai fatto modifiche serie in OSM. Ho
> chiesto anche nella mailing list talk-it-lazio per eventuali compaesani.
>
> Buona serata!
>
> [0]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ema-pe/traces
> [1]:
>
> https://gitlab.com/ema-pe/dotfiles/blob/1903a7e3b7baf68d5f4159e31f0a19af1623e02b/bin/osmgpx
>
> --
> Emanuele Petriglia (ema-pe)
>
> ___
> Talk-it mailing list
> Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
>
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 11.09.19 17:27, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> My concern is less that of centralized 
> decision making and control over an important resource but that it will 
> be difficult to find, motivate, select and retain qualified people to 
> work on this.

Jochen and I, authors of the 2010 printed OpenStreetMap book, have
unsuccessfully tried to morph that book into some kind of open source
project; we were contacted by different people over time who wanted to
have a go at and we played along it but it never came to a point where
there was any hope of it becoming a sustainable project.

Of course that book went far beyond just tagging, attempting to also
document how various editors work and how to make maps. I've kind of
lost hope that anything could ever become of that - it's a lot of work
and it is very ahrd to do collectively in a "everyone just edits one
tiny little bit and somehow a coherent whole will emerge" kind of way.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Richard Fairhurst]

Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> Changing to a github-like system of version management would 
> require some people to serve as "maintainers" or "moderators" 
> of the new, curated list of Map Features / Tags, wouldn't it? While 
> this could be an improvement in the quality and consistency of 
> how decisions are made, it would also limit participation and 
> centralize decision-making.

You misunderstand. I'm not proposing "changing to" anything, but rather,
providing an _additional_ source of edited/curated documentation. The wiki
would continue doing what the wiki does. Same principle as switch2osm.

Richard




--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 11 September 2019, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>
> Changing to a github-like system of version management would require
> some people to serve as "maintainers" or "moderators" of the new,
> curated list of Map Features / Tags, wouldn't it? While this could be
> an improvement in the quality and consistency of how decisions are
> made, it would also limit participation and centralize
> decision-making.

I think we all realize that and i am not in any way a fan of formalized 
power structures and hierarchies.  But we also can see that the wiki 
does not work as a means to document the de facto meaning of tags.

OpenStreetMap is a broad community of people with very different 
abilities and skills.  Not everyone is equally capable for every task 
within the project and hardly anyone is able to accurately assess their 
level of capability on everything and selflessly act accordingly.  In 
the field of mapping the do-ocratic approach has been relatively 
successful in dealing with that (as long as we were talking about 
independent and unpaid local mappers only of course) because it is the 
base level of the project and is naturally grounded in the locally 
observable reality.  But as i pointed out in my diary entry the same 
approach will not work on the meta-level of tag documentation where - 
if the documentation serves its purpose - what is written or modified 
by a single contributor is multiplied in effect and read and considered 
by many who use the documentation.  This distorts the incentives and 
put bluntly leads to the wrong people dominating the wiki.  And this is 
not solved by getting more prople involved in editing it.  The 
community as a whole tries to compensate for that by giving less weight 
to the wiki as a source of information on tags but as Richard mentioned 
this leaves a big gap in terms of accurate, clear and precise 
documentation.

Note curated documentation based on agreed on editorial principles does 
not necessarily mean a top-down imposed framework.  Such documentation 
would naturally be under an open license and therefore could be forked 
so if someone at some point is dissatisfied with how this works they 
could always initiate a competing project with a different curating 
team and/or principles.  My concern is less that of centralized 
decision making and control over an important resource but that it will 
be difficult to find, motivate, select and retain qualified people to 
work on this.

And documentation of the de facto meaning of tags, potentially focused 
on the most important ones, is of course - though evidently important - 
only one aspect of what Roland wants to discuss here.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it-lazio] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[Emanuele Petriglia]

Buonasera!

Ho letto le vostre email e sono molto interessanti, sopratutto perchè
non conoscevo JOSM e le critiche di iD.

> Io in particolare mappo nei castelli e oltre. Quindi appena posso dò
uno sguardo ai dati importati.

Perfetto! Oggi ho caricato un'altra traccia GPX, fatta questa mattina
sempre per i boschi.

> È inoltre probabile che i percorsi che hai registrato in bici siano
già presenti nel database. In quel caso oltre a verificarne il giusto
tracciato, ed a seguito di un contatto con chi ha inserito il dato, si
procede con un aggiornamento. Si modifica il percorso e si aggiungono
dettagli, caratteristiche del percorso sempre cercando di tenerlo
congiunto con gli altri percorsi presenti.

Sì, la maggior parte sono già presenti nel database, sopratutto quelli
ufficiali (ossia i percorsi gestiti dall'ente del parco). Il fatto è che
ci sono tanti altri percorsi non ufficiali, che vengono creati durante
le operazioni di taglio e scompaiono dopo vari anni. Ogni anno infatti
andrebbe aggiornato, poichè la situazione cambia di volta in volta.

> Se vogliamo fare un incontro, visto che ne abbiamo saltati alcuni in
estate, per me si potrebbe fare anche lunedì prossimo (in aggiunta a
quello di fine mese). Cosa ne pensate?

Preferirei il primo lunedì disponibile, di solito voi dove e a che ora
vi incontrate?

Buona serata!


On 9/11/19 4:15 PM, Flaminia Tumino wrote:
> Ciao a tutti,
> e benvenuto Emanuele!
> Per me va benissimo vedersi questo mese visto che abbiamo saltato gli
> incontri nei mesi estivi.
> io ci sono sia lunedì 16 che lunedì 30. Il 23 invece no.
> Flaminia
> 
> Il giorno mer 11 set 2019 alle ore 12:03 Martin Koppenhoefer
> mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>> ha scritto:
> 
> Benvenuto anche dalla parte mia!
> 
> Per l'editore, in sostanza ci sono (sul computer fisso), 2 editori
> principali: iD e Josm. Josm è l'editore più completo, iD potrebbe
> essere più facile all'inizio, ma potrebbe anche essere più lento una
> volta presa pratica. Ci sono più persone che usano iD ma ci sono più
> edit fatti con Josm. Per il lavoro con le tracce gpx io utilizzerei
> Josm, perché è nato così ed è ottimizzato per il workflow con le
> tracce, ma ammetto che non ho usato iD con le tracce da tanto tempo
> e potrebbe aver acquisito nel frattempo più capacità.
> Un'altro problema con iD: viene sviluppato in sostanza da 2 persone
> che sono pagate da 2 società, e fanno come li pare, infatti ci sono
> un po' di tensioni, per esempio c'è questa pagina che elenca i
> recenti problemi con iD (cose che sono state segnalate dalla
> community ma "iD" ha deciso di fare diversamente comunque):
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ID/Controversial_Decisions
> 
> Mentre JOSM si può scaricare ed installare, c'è anche la possibilità
> di usarlo con java webstart (java deve essere attivo nel browser):
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/download/josm.jnlp
> più informazioni qui: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/
> e qui: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM
> 
> 
> 
> Se vogliamo fare un incontro, visto che ne abbiamo saltati alcuni in
> estate, per me si potrebbe fare anche lunedì prossimo (in aggiunta a
> quello di fine mese). Cosa ne pensate?
> 
> Ciao
> Martin
> ___
> Talk-it-lazio mailing list
> Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-it-lazio mailing list
> Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio
> 

-- 
Emanuele Petriglia (ema-pe)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio

Re: [Talk-es] Vías e instalaciones en zonas militares. Cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil

[dcapillae]

Buenas tardes.

He añadido cómo mapear un cuartel de la Guardia Civil a la página «Cómo
mapear un» [1]. Lo he recogido tal cual se comentó en este hilo.

Lo único adicional que debo comentaros es la clave «operator», que entiendo
podríamos usar para lo mismo que se usa en otros países, es decir, para
indicar el cuerpo que gestiona la comisaría de policía.

Por ejemplo, una comisaría de la Policía Nacional sería:

amenity=police
operator=Policía Nacional

Un cuartel de la Guardia Civil:

amenity=police
operator=Guardia Civil

Una comisaría de la Ertzainza:

amenity=police
operator=Ertzaintza

Y así con el resto de cuerpos policiales que operan en España. De esta forma
sería muy sencillo saber cuáles comisarías corresponden con qué cuerpo
policial. Filtrar los datos sería sumamente simple.

Muchas gracias.

Atentamente,
Daniel


[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Espa%C3%B1a/C%C3%B3mo_mapear_un#Cuartel_de_la_Guardia_Civil




dcapillae wrote
> Buenas tardes.
> 
> Respecto de la pregunta sobre cómo mapear cuarteles de la Guardia Civil,
> obviamente con «amenity=police». Si se quiere especificar alguna
> instalación
> en concreto, se puede hacer pero sin usar etiquetas reservadas para
> instalaciones militares. En OSM existen etiquetas para instalaciones
> militares y etiquetas para instalaciones policiales [1].
> 
> Tampoco es correcto usar «landuse=military» en un cuartel de la Guardia
> Civil o de la Policía Nacional. La función de estos dos cuerpos es
> fundamentalmente de seguridad, no de defensa, como en el caso de los
> militares. Los que hayan cumplido algún servicio militar sabrán cuál es la
> diferencia entre un cuartel militar y uno policial, como los que usan los
> policias nacionales o los guardias civiles.
> 
> Que no nos confunda el nombre ni su estructura más o menos ligada con
> fuerzas militares: los guardias civiles, los policías nacionales, los
> carabineros italianos, los gendarmes franceses... todos son cuerpos
> policiales y sus instalaciones se mapean con «amenity=police».
> 
> 
> Atentamente,
> Daniel
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:police
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html
> 
> ___
> Talk-es mailing list

> Talk-es@

> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-es





--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Spain-f5409873.html

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

Re: [Talk-it] problema default access in Italia

[Volker Schmidt]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2019 at 16:20, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

> tanto un path non consente per la maggior parte dei veicoli motorizzati di
> transitare, perché è troppo stretto, parliamo quindi in sostanza di
> motocicli e motorini.
>

Si, certo, ma sono questi i casi problematici. Esistono divieti su base
comunale, provinciale(?), regionali, parchi e simili enti.
Per questo motivo metterei un default che limita l'accesso a foot, bicycle,
horse
Escluderei per default veicoli motorizzati, e, per precauzione, anche
wheelchair.

Volker
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mi., 11. Sept. 2019 um 15:30 Uhr schrieb Vladimir Vyskocil <
vladimir.vysko...@gmail.com>:

> ... I didn't travelled exactly at this place but will go there in October !
>


great, so you can tell us more after you have visited the place. From what
I have seen here, I agree with Christoph and Sarah, and see no systematic
"abuse" of the cliff tag as defined in the wiki.

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] problema default access in Italia

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Sa., 7. Sept. 2019 um 17:53 Uhr schrieb Volker Schmidt :

> Sarebbe da guardare nella parte International Equivalence (dove si dice
> che particamante la maggior parte dei trunk in Italia è motorroad=yes.
> Questo parla anche di highway=trunk a crregita unica (due corsie) come
> trunk.
> Penso anche qua c'è una verifica da fare: penso di aver incontrato anche
> in Italia delle strade di questo tipo con divieti autostradali, ma solo una
> carreggiata (il famoso San Bernardo, che è addirittura autostrada).
>
>

appunto, il criterio di trunk è senza incroci a raso, mentre motorroad=yes
si può aggiungere anche ad una primary (è anche implicito su
highway=motorway).



> Per il "path" bisogna probabilmente fare un discorso molto più
> approfondito. Ho pura che la situazione legale è complicata e molto
> frammentata. Il mio approccio lì sarebbe di limitare per default a
> pedoni/bici/cavalli. Con i permessi per veicoli motorizzati andrei piano
> con un approccio di aggiungere solo permessi, quando il mappatore sa di
> fonte sicura che il passaggio è legale
>


tanto un path non consente per la maggior parte dei veicoli motorizzati di
transitare, perché è troppo stretto, parliamo quindi in sostanza di
motocicli e motorini.


Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

Re: [Talk-it-lazio] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[Flaminia Tumino]

Ciao a tutti,
e benvenuto Emanuele!
Per me va benissimo vedersi questo mese visto che abbiamo saltato gli
incontri nei mesi estivi.
io ci sono sia lunedì 16 che lunedì 30. Il 23 invece no.
Flaminia

Il giorno mer 11 set 2019 alle ore 12:03 Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Benvenuto anche dalla parte mia!
>
> Per l'editore, in sostanza ci sono (sul computer fisso), 2 editori
> principali: iD e Josm. Josm è l'editore più completo, iD potrebbe essere
> più facile all'inizio, ma potrebbe anche essere più lento una volta presa
> pratica. Ci sono più persone che usano iD ma ci sono più edit fatti con
> Josm. Per il lavoro con le tracce gpx io utilizzerei Josm, perché è nato
> così ed è ottimizzato per il workflow con le tracce, ma ammetto che non ho
> usato iD con le tracce da tanto tempo e potrebbe aver acquisito nel
> frattempo più capacità.
> Un'altro problema con iD: viene sviluppato in sostanza da 2 persone che
> sono pagate da 2 società, e fanno come li pare, infatti ci sono un po' di
> tensioni, per esempio c'è questa pagina che elenca i recenti problemi con
> iD (cose che sono state segnalate dalla community ma "iD" ha deciso di fare
> diversamente comunque):
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ID/Controversial_Decisions
>
> Mentre JOSM si può scaricare ed installare, c'è anche la possibilità di
> usarlo con java webstart (java deve essere attivo nel browser):
> https://josm.openstreetmap.de/download/josm.jnlp
> più informazioni qui: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/
> e qui: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM
>
>
>
> Se vogliamo fare un incontro, visto che ne abbiamo saltati alcuni in
> estate, per me si potrebbe fare anche lunedì prossimo (in aggiunta a quello
> di fine mese). Cosa ne pensate?
>
> Ciao
> Martin
> ___
> Talk-it-lazio mailing list
> Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio
>
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio

Re: [Talk-at] golem.de: Lyft verbessert Openstreetmap automatisiert <- https://www.golem.de/news/kartendaten-lyft-verbessert-openstreetmap-im-vorbeifahren-1909-143759.html

[Andreas]

Hallo,

danke für das Teilen des Artikels.

Ich habe diesen auch gleich in die OSM Wochennotiz (WN478) aufgenommen,
da dies sicherlich auch noch andere außerhalb der AT-Community
interessieren wird.

lg
Andreas (geologist)

Am 11.09.19 um 15:17 schrieb Marcus MERIGHI:
> FYI, ich wusste davon bislang nichts; wichtigstes Zitat:
> 
> In seinem [49]Engineering-Blog schreibt der
> Fahrdienst-Vermittler Lyft, dass das Unternehmen Tausende von
> Fehlern in Openstreetmap behoben hat. Das Auffinden und Beheben
> der fehlerhaften Daten geschieht demnach nicht manuell wie bei
> den sonst üblichen Bearbeitungen durch die
> Openstreetmap-Community, sondern hauptsächlich automatisch.
> 
> 
> https://www.golem.de/news/kartendaten-lyft-verbessert-openstreetmap-im-vorbeifahren-1909-143759.html
> 
> Kartendaten: Lyft verbessert Openstreetmap im Vorbeifahren
> 
>Der Fahrdienst-Vermittler Lyft hat einen Algorithmus
>entwickelt, der fehlerhafte [41]Openstreetmap-Daten durch das
>Verhalten seiner Fahrer verbessert.
>Artikel veröffentlicht am 10. September 2019, 13:00 Uhr,
>Kristian Kißling/Linux Magazin
> 
>Lyft verbessert automatisch die Openstreetmap-Daten. Lyft
>verbessert automatisch die Openstreetmap-Daten. (Bild:
>[48]Sam Barnes/Collision via Sportsfile)
> 
>In seinem [49]Engineering-Blog schreibt der
>Fahrdienst-Vermittler Lyft, dass das Unternehmen Tausende von
>Fehlern in Openstreetmap behoben hat. Das Auffinden und
>Beheben der fehlerhaften Daten geschieht demnach nicht
>manuell wie bei den sonst üblichen Bearbeitungen durch die
>Openstreetmap-Community, sondern hauptsächlich automatisch.
> 
> 
>Detailsuche
> 
>Das Vorgehen von Lyft ist dabei nicht ohne Eigennutz, denn
>das Unternehmen verwendet, wie andere Anbieter auch,
>Openstreetmap (OSM) als Basis für das eigene Kartenmaterial.
>So misst das Unternehmen Wegdistanzen und errechnet die dafür
>benötigte Fahrzeit, lokalisiert Fahrer und Kunden und sucht
>die kürzesten Wege.
> 
>Allerdings ist das OSM-Material aus verschiedenen Gründen
>nicht vollständig, denn Städte verändern sich permanent.
>Einerseits fehlen alte und neu gebaute Straßen, wegen
>Bauarbeiten geschlossene Straßen sind wieder offen oder es
>gibt neue Gebäude. Zumindest für den Einsatzbereich, in dem
>sich die Lyft-Fahrer bewegen (meist urbane Räume wie
>Innenstädte), kann Lyft das Material verbessern, weil die
>Lyft-Fahrer permanent Smartphone-Daten an das Unternehmen
>schicken.
> 
>Der von Lyft entwickelte Algorithmus (semi-interacting
>Multiple Model, sIMM) verbindet dabei einen Kalman-Filter
>(der ungebundene GPS-Daten erzeugt) mit einem
>Map-Matching-Algorithmus auf Basis des Hidden Markov Model
>(HMM). Lyft erfährt aus diesen Daten dann, ob die
>GPS-Positionen auf das in den Karten verzeichnete Straßennetz
>passen.
> 
> Zwei Fehlertypen für bessere Daten
> 
>Dafür gibt es zwei Typen von Fehlermeldungen. Die erste
>erscheint, wenn ein Fahrer dort langfährt, wo es laut OSM
>keine Straße gibt. Hier fehlen also Straßen in der Map und
>der Kalman-Filter kommt zum Einsatz. Der zweite Fehlertyp
>tritt dort auf, wo laut Map eine Straße existiert, aber der
>Fahrer eine andere Route nimmt, weil die Straße in der
>Realität nicht existiert oder nicht befahrbar ist (HMM).
> 
>Beide Fehlermeldungen betreffen auch die Richtungen von
>Einbahnstraßen und die Existenz von Wendemöglichkeiten. Typ 1
>zeigt also, wo Straßen auf der Karte fehlen, Typ 2 zeigt, ob
>Straßen in der Realität fehlen oder nicht befahrbar sind, die
>die Karte aber anzeigt.
> 
>Anhand der Unterschiede zwischen dem Kartenmaterial und den
>von den Lyft-Fahrern gesendeten Daten erkennt Lyft so also
>Defizite und repariert sie in Openstreetmap. Beispiele aus
>Minneapolis und Details zu den Problemen beim Tracken von
>GPS-Daten erklärt der Blogpost.
> 
>So funktioniert etwa die Typ-1-Fehlererkennung auf breiten
>Straßen oft nicht gut. Auch wenn die Karte in diesem Fall
>stimmt, aktiviert die Software häufig den Off-Road-Modus. Das
>liegt daran, dass OSM zwar ein Tag für die Breite von Straßen
>besitzt, dieses aber selten richtig zum Einsatz kommt.
> 
> ___
> Talk-at mailing list
> Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at
> 




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Talk-at mailing list
Talk-at@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-at

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 11 September 2019, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
>
> I read carefully your response and looked at the picture. I didn't
> travelled exactly at this place but will go there in October !
> However I've already been in Český ráj
> > that is not too far from there and where the terrain is similar in
> many aspects. I still think that the usage of the tag is abused in
> this area…

I suggest you be more specific here and point to individual features you 
consider inaccurately tagged as cliff.

I looked over the area and while i see some of the drawing of cliffs 
being a bit too slavishly drawn after the DGM there does not seem to be 
anything systematically wrong here.  Personally i think the focus on 
mapping details in cliffs is so far not adequately matched by a similar 
level in detail in landcover mapping - there are for example many 
cliffs mapped within a continuous forest area without there also being 
a bare_rock area mapped.  But it is every mapper's right to map 
selectively what they find interesting.

The mapping of cliffs strongly tied to the DGM leads to some derivations 
from the reality in situations like this with vertical or even back-cut 
rock faces where accurately mapped cliffs would often touch, near touch 
or even intersect and which the DGM essentially separates into a 
uniform stacking.  This is what you might have wrongly interpreted as 
contour line mapping with cliffs.  But IMO that is not really wrong, 
that is just somewhat inprecise (and really hard to do better 
practically).

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu]

Il 11/09/19 09:17, Luca Moiana ha scritto:
> Ciao,
> 
> mi interessano principalmente quelli per l'avifauna, che siano LIPU o altro.
> 
> Grazie
> 
> L
> 

Sul sito della LIPU italiana, c'è un menu edicato ai centri, con le
rispettive pagine/blog, che a sua volta porta ai rispettivi siti web, se
ci sono, ed ho visto, per esempio, in quello di Bologna che è presente
un file PDF contenente gli indirizzi dei centri abilitati in
Emilia-Romagna, però non ci sono coordinate, alcuni ho visto già mappati
ma senza tag adeguati, comunque può aiutare ad individuare i siti, anche
se per i civici o la posizione esatta bisognerebbe essere del posto per
essere sicuri.

Vai n basso sulla mappa basta cliccare sulle casette e ti compare il
centro singolo, della LIPU in questo caso.

http://www.lipu.it/sos-animali-feriti-copia#centri-recupero

-- 
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

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

Re: [Talk-it] Rimozione festa dell'unità nazionale

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mo., 9. Sept. 2019 um 15:09 Uhr schrieb Damjan Gerl :

> Molto difficile, perché ogni comune ha il suo patrono ed in Italia ci sono
> 7914 comuni...
> Non è un dato che va in db mappa ma nel javascript opening hours...
>
> Però si potrebbe pensare ad un tag sulla relazione del comune e poi il
> javascript che va a vederlo. Sarebbe da parlarne sul sito tagging e con
> l'autore di opening_hours.js



forse si, sarebbe meglio avere il tag del santo che definisce il patrone
(oppure i patroni, esempio Roma ha i SS. Pietro e Paolo, ma poi ci sarebbe
anche il 21 Aprile (Natale di Roma), quindi con i solo santi non ci siamo
ancora.

Poi ci sono feste e feste. Alcuni (tanti) negozi sono aperti a certe feste,
anche se poi non sono aperte a queste: 1 gennaio, 25 aprile, 2 giugno, 29
giugno, 15 agosto, 25 e 26 dicembre.

Quest'ultimo fatto mi fa spesso ommettere l'informazione "PH", perché non è
chiaro.

Ciao,
Martin
___
Talk-it mailing list
Talk-it@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it

[talk-au] Paths in Illawarra Conservation Lands

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

the DWG was drawn into an edit war regarding several paths that were
mapped in this area:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-34.3740/150.8761

The argument is about in how far the (largely north-south running) paths
are "illegal" and whether they need to be removed from the map because
they would lead to people trespassing.

The argument is two-fold; part applies to the paths that are on private
land where, I understand, it is the land owner's prerogative to allow or
disallow whatever they want, and another part applies to the paths that
run into NPWS managed conservation lands.

These paths were originally tagged "foot=yes" and with no further access
descriptions; one had an "mtb:scale" added.

From reading the Illawara Escarpment Plan of Management
(https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Parks-reserves-and-protected-areas/Parks-plans-of-management/illawarra-escarpment-state-conservation-area-plan-management-180505.pdf)
I get the impression that mountainbiking on any paths not explicitly
open for it is illegal. But what about walking - the plan says a lot
about maintained walking tracks but it does *not* explicitly say that
walking is limited to these.

There's also a published "draft strategy" for mountain biking in the
area, however I don't know in how far a draft strategy would influence
the current legal situation.

Anyway, for the time being I have added an access=no to the paths on
private land because the landowner doesn't want people to use them and I
guess it is their prerogative; and I've removed the explicit foot=yes on
the other paths (becasue I'm not sure) and added a "bicycle=no" to close
them for mountainbiking. My changeset:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74355243#map=16/-34.3750/150.8730

I would however be grateful for any input from the Australian community
on this matter.

I've also been told that NPWS were keenly looking to sue whoever
publishes "illegal" trails or uploads them to OSM; in fact such a legal
threat was the reason why DWG got involved in the first place.

Bye
Frederik

DWG Ticket Ticket#201909011071
-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Vladimir Vyskocil]

A even crazier area regarding the abuse of the cliff tag ! 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.9610/14.0724 


Vladimir.

> Le 11 sept. 2019 à 15:27, Vladimir Vyskocil  a 
> écrit :
> 
> Hello Sarah,
> 
> I read carefully your response and looked at the picture. I didn't travelled 
> exactly at this place but will go there in October ! However I've already 
> been in Český ráj 
>  that 
> is not too far from there and where the terrain is similar in many aspects.
> I still think that the usage of the tag is abused in this area…
> You may read the description of this tag here :
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcliff 
> 
> 
> «  A cliff  is a vertical or almost 
> vertical natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for example in form 
> of coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff usually consists of 
> bare solid rock but can occasionally also consist of clay, compacted sand, 
> ice or other solid materials.» 
> 
> 
> « 
> When not to use
> natural =cliff <> should not 
> be used for ridges, i.e. crests where there is a significant drop in terrain 
> to both sides and neither of them is close to vertical. Use natural 
> =ridge 
>  or natural 
> =arete 
>  instead. Also do 
> not use natural =cliff <> 
> just for mapping an inclined bare rock surface, use natural 
> =bare_rock 
>  instead.
> 
> " 
> 
> This is not what I see when I look at this mapped area, I agree that some 
> mapped cliffs here are really what should be considered a cliff but they are 
> lost in lots of wrongly mapped and not relevant ones. 
> 
> You might look at this as a example in many many more :
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.89893/14.28319 
> 
> 
> We are seeing it at level 19 and the density of cliffs is still crazy ! 
> 
> Or here : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.8791/14.3647 
> 
> 
> Could you tell me that all theses mapped cliffs really exists ? Or aren’t 
> they just « a significant drop in terrain and neither of them are close to 
> vertical » mapped as cliffs only looking at terrain model and that are 
> completely disconnected from the reality of the terrain ?
> 
> Regards,
> Vladimir
> 
> 
> 
>> Le 11 sept. 2019 à 00:17, Sarah Hoffmann > > a écrit :
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 02:42:06PM +0200, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
>>> Around this area : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/50.9034/14.2763 
>>>  
>>> >> > there is a 
>>> flagrant misuse and abuse of the usage of the natural=cliff tag. It is used 
>>> to map the iso altitude lines and not real cliff as stated in the WIKI :
>>> 
>>> A cliff >> > is a vertical or almost vertical 
>>> natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for example in form of 
>>> coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff usually consists of 
>>> bare solid rock but can occasionally also consist of clay, compacted sand, 
>>> ice or other solid materials.  
>> 
>> I know that area very well and I can assure you, that natural=cliff is no 
>> misuse
>> under this definition. The area is full of rock towers like those:
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20171124195DR_Lohmen_Basteiaussicht_zum_Sieberturm.jpg
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> That's what you see on the map.
>> 
>>> I already removed the natural=cliff ways mapped by MichaOSM after asking 
>>> him to fix this but without response the changeset comment was : 
>>> 
>>> "Felsen, Riffe, Topografie nach GeoSachsen digitale 
>>> Geländemodellhoehenlinien 2.5m, digitales Geländereliefmodell, DTK10, 
>>> topografische Karte”
>>> 
>>> For example this changeset : 
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66373825#map=15/50.9016/14.3093 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> It say that it used a 2.5m topographic map to map all these false cliffs in 
>>> this area, he was mapping the topography (MNT) and this is 

Re: [OSM-talk] Abuse of natural=cliff tag

[Vladimir Vyskocil]

Hello Sarah,

I read carefully your response and looked at the picture. I didn't travelled 
exactly at this place but will go there in October ! However I've already been 
in Český ráj 
 that is 
not too far from there and where the terrain is similar in many aspects.
I still think that the usage of the tag is abused in this area…
You may read the description of this tag here :

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcliff 


«  A cliff  is a vertical or almost 
vertical natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for example in form of 
coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff usually consists of bare 
solid rock but can occasionally also consist of clay, compacted sand, ice or 
other solid materials.» 


« 
When not to use
natural =cliff <> should not 
be used for ridges, i.e. crests where there is a significant drop in terrain to 
both sides and neither of them is close to vertical. Use natural 
=ridge 
 or natural 
=arete 
 instead. Also do not 
use natural =cliff <> just for 
mapping an inclined bare rock surface, use natural 
=bare_rock 
 instead.

" 

This is not what I see when I look at this mapped area, I agree that some 
mapped cliffs here are really what should be considered a cliff but they are 
lost in lots of wrongly mapped and not relevant ones. 

You might look at this as a example in many many more :

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.89893/14.28319 


We are seeing it at level 19 and the density of cliffs is still crazy ! 

Or here : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.8791/14.3647 


Could you tell me that all theses mapped cliffs really exists ? Or aren’t they 
just « a significant drop in terrain and neither of them are close to vertical 
» mapped as cliffs only looking at terrain model and that are completely 
disconnected from the reality of the terrain ?

Regards,
Vladimir



> Le 11 sept. 2019 à 00:17, Sarah Hoffmann  a écrit :
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 02:42:06PM +0200, Vladimir Vyskocil wrote:
>> Around this area : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/50.9034/14.2763 
>>  there is a flagrant 
>> misuse and abuse of the usage of the natural=cliff tag. It is used to map 
>> the iso altitude lines and not real cliff as stated in the WIKI :
>> 
>> A cliff  is a vertical or almost 
>> vertical natural drop in terrain topography as it occurs for example in form 
>> of coastal cliffs or escarpments. The face of the cliff usually consists of 
>> bare solid rock but can occasionally also consist of clay, compacted sand, 
>> ice or other solid materials.  
> 
> I know that area very well and I can assure you, that natural=cliff is no 
> misuse
> under this definition. The area is full of rock towers like those:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20171124195DR_Lohmen_Basteiaussicht_zum_Sieberturm.jpg
> 
> That's what you see on the map.
> 
>> I already removed the natural=cliff ways mapped by MichaOSM after asking him 
>> to fix this but without response the changeset comment was : 
>> 
>> "Felsen, Riffe, Topografie nach GeoSachsen digitale 
>> Geländemodellhoehenlinien 2.5m, digitales Geländereliefmodell, DTK10, 
>> topografische Karte”
>> 
>> For example this changeset : 
>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66373825#map=15/50.9016/14.3093 
>> 
>> 
>> It say that it used a 2.5m topographic map to map all these false cliffs in 
>> this area, he was mapping the topography (MNT) and this is forbidden in OSM.
> 
> You missunderstood, he was mapping rock edges. A terrain model is more helpful
> for that task than arial imagery. We have permission to use the terrain model
> for OSM as far as I know.
> 
> I would kindly request that you reinstate deleted natural=cliffs for
> the moment. If you are still not convinced from the photo above that the
> tagging is correct then we need to have a fundamental discussion first about
> how to tag these kind of rock towers. But that would rather be something for
> the tagging mailing list (or talk-de if you want to get the locals involved).
> 
> Sarah

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org

[Talk-at] golem.de: Lyft verbessert Openstreetmap automatisiert <- https://www.golem.de/news/kartendaten-lyft-verbessert-openstreetmap-im-vorbeifahren-1909-143759.html

[Marcus MERIGHI]

FYI, ich wusste davon bislang nichts; wichtigstes Zitat:

In seinem [49]Engineering-Blog schreibt der
Fahrdienst-Vermittler Lyft, dass das Unternehmen Tausende von
Fehlern in Openstreetmap behoben hat. Das Auffinden und Beheben
der fehlerhaften Daten geschieht demnach nicht manuell wie bei
den sonst üblichen Bearbeitungen durch die
Openstreetmap-Community, sondern hauptsächlich automatisch.


https://www.golem.de/news/kartendaten-lyft-verbessert-openstreetmap-im-vorbeifahren-1909-143759.html

Kartendaten: Lyft verbessert Openstreetmap im Vorbeifahren

   Der Fahrdienst-Vermittler Lyft hat einen Algorithmus
   entwickelt, der fehlerhafte [41]Openstreetmap-Daten durch das
   Verhalten seiner Fahrer verbessert.
   Artikel veröffentlicht am 10. September 2019, 13:00 Uhr,
   Kristian Kißling/Linux Magazin

   Lyft verbessert automatisch die Openstreetmap-Daten. Lyft
   verbessert automatisch die Openstreetmap-Daten. (Bild:
   [48]Sam Barnes/Collision via Sportsfile)

   In seinem [49]Engineering-Blog schreibt der
   Fahrdienst-Vermittler Lyft, dass das Unternehmen Tausende von
   Fehlern in Openstreetmap behoben hat. Das Auffinden und
   Beheben der fehlerhaften Daten geschieht demnach nicht
   manuell wie bei den sonst üblichen Bearbeitungen durch die
   Openstreetmap-Community, sondern hauptsächlich automatisch.


   Detailsuche

   Das Vorgehen von Lyft ist dabei nicht ohne Eigennutz, denn
   das Unternehmen verwendet, wie andere Anbieter auch,
   Openstreetmap (OSM) als Basis für das eigene Kartenmaterial.
   So misst das Unternehmen Wegdistanzen und errechnet die dafür
   benötigte Fahrzeit, lokalisiert Fahrer und Kunden und sucht
   die kürzesten Wege.

   Allerdings ist das OSM-Material aus verschiedenen Gründen
   nicht vollständig, denn Städte verändern sich permanent.
   Einerseits fehlen alte und neu gebaute Straßen, wegen
   Bauarbeiten geschlossene Straßen sind wieder offen oder es
   gibt neue Gebäude. Zumindest für den Einsatzbereich, in dem
   sich die Lyft-Fahrer bewegen (meist urbane Räume wie
   Innenstädte), kann Lyft das Material verbessern, weil die
   Lyft-Fahrer permanent Smartphone-Daten an das Unternehmen
   schicken.

   Der von Lyft entwickelte Algorithmus (semi-interacting
   Multiple Model, sIMM) verbindet dabei einen Kalman-Filter
   (der ungebundene GPS-Daten erzeugt) mit einem
   Map-Matching-Algorithmus auf Basis des Hidden Markov Model
   (HMM). Lyft erfährt aus diesen Daten dann, ob die
   GPS-Positionen auf das in den Karten verzeichnete Straßennetz
   passen.

Zwei Fehlertypen für bessere Daten

   Dafür gibt es zwei Typen von Fehlermeldungen. Die erste
   erscheint, wenn ein Fahrer dort langfährt, wo es laut OSM
   keine Straße gibt. Hier fehlen also Straßen in der Map und
   der Kalman-Filter kommt zum Einsatz. Der zweite Fehlertyp
   tritt dort auf, wo laut Map eine Straße existiert, aber der
   Fahrer eine andere Route nimmt, weil die Straße in der
   Realität nicht existiert oder nicht befahrbar ist (HMM).

   Beide Fehlermeldungen betreffen auch die Richtungen von
   Einbahnstraßen und die Existenz von Wendemöglichkeiten. Typ 1
   zeigt also, wo Straßen auf der Karte fehlen, Typ 2 zeigt, ob
   Straßen in der Realität fehlen oder nicht befahrbar sind, die
   die Karte aber anzeigt.

   Anhand der Unterschiede zwischen dem Kartenmaterial und den
   von den Lyft-Fahrern gesendeten Daten erkennt Lyft so also
   Defizite und repariert sie in Openstreetmap. Beispiele aus
   Minneapolis und Details zu den Problemen beim Tracken von
   GPS-Daten erklärt der Blogpost.

   So funktioniert etwa die Typ-1-Fehlererkennung auf breiten
   Straßen oft nicht gut. Auch wenn die Karte in diesem Fall
   stimmt, aktiviert die Software häufig den Off-Road-Modus. Das
   liegt daran, dass OSM zwar ein Tag für die Breite von Straßen
   besitzt, dieses aber selten richtig zum Einsatz kommt.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Mi., 11. Sept. 2019 um 14:30 Uhr schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>:

>  Perhaps the current wiki-based system is
> fine, as long as enough people are invested in maintaining it.
>
>

+1
Btw, sometimes tiny details can make huge differences. Some years ago, the
default action to automatically watch a wiki page when you modified it, was
activated, and since then I'm monitoring changes to the pages I care about.
Since this setting was introduced/changed, more eyes are on the pages (but
it isn't helping for problematic new pages, naturally, I guess there are
similar streams for new pages, and I hope some people are having an eye on
these, but I'm not sure).



> It might be helpful to agree that Tag: and Key: pages on the
> Openstreetmap wiki should document "de facto", actual mapping practice
> rather than what a particular person thinks should be done - this
> being reserved for Proposal pages.
>


yes, although it is hard to tell, often, because when you go checking some
instances, ideally you need to know the "thing" that is represented, so
everybody will have a very limited view of very few examples she personally
knows.
And it is also clear that there will always be some outliers. When you
discover them, you can either change the docs to include them, or you can
remap them to more appropriate tags ;-) If we go always with the first
solution, we will end up in the long run with all tags meaning everything
(or nothing) ;-).

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Joseph Eisenberg]

"curated, simple information on themain tags that are _used_"

Originally this was maintained at Map Features
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features), and this page is
still somewhat "curated"; not just any tag can be added, most of the
very common tags are included, and many people are watching the page
for changes

But this is a wiki page, so sometimes rare or proposed tags are added
without discussion. I've removed a few of these over the past few
months. In theory new tags should be added either because they are
already "de facto" accepted, as shown by frequent use in many places
mappers, and support by database users, but tags can also be added to
Map Features through the Proposal Process with discussion on the
mailing list and wiki.

Changing to a github-like system of version management would require
some people to serve as "maintainers" or "moderators" of the new,
curated list of Map Features / Tags, wouldn't it? While this could be
an improvement in the quality and consistency of how decisions are
made, it would also limit participation and centralize
decision-making.

I've recently tried to start discussions about how new tags should be
added to Map Features and have asked specifically about adding some
"in use" / "de facto" tags. Perhaps the current wiki-based system is
fine, as long as enough people are invested in maintaining it.

It might be helpful to agree that Tag: and Key: pages on the
Openstreetmap wiki should document "de facto", actual mapping practice
rather than what a particular person thinks should be done - this
being reserved for Proposal pages.

- Joseph

On 9/11/19, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 September 2019, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>>
>> The main thing we're missing is curated, simple information on the
>> main tags that are _used_.
>
> Indeed.  And i would go even further:  Any documentation of the de facto
> use of tags written by humans (i.e. that goes beyond automatic analysis
> like taginfo), written and maintained in a way that ensures it actually
> does document the de facto situation, would be immensely useful and
> important.
>
>> It needs an
>> editor/curator/whatever, to have clear editorial guidelines, and
>> probably to run on the pull request model rather than open editing.
>
> Is there any mature and writer centric software that implements this
> kind of model?  I mean that from the perspective of a documentation
> author offers a wiki like functionality with decent preview and
> formatting but at the same time comes with a kind of version management
> and functions to facilitate editorial review and discussion.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-de] Spielregeln fürs Tagging

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Am Di., 10. Sept. 2019 um 07:44 Uhr schrieb Florian Lohoff :

>
> > Die Tag-Übersetzungen mischen sich mit einem anderen Problem:
> > verschiedene Features können sehr unteschiedlich in verschiedenen
> > Regionen aussehen. Z.B. sehen ein highway=primary und
> > highway=unclassified gegenüber highway=track in Deutschland deutlich
> > anders aus als in Island oder dem ländlichen Afrika. Es passiert
> > schnell, dass lokale Unterschiede nur in die Übersetzung der jeweils
> > dominanten Sprache eingehen, obwohl z.B. die Tagging-Anforderungen in
> > den französischsprachigen Ländern Belgien, Kanada und Niger spürbar
> > verschieden sind. Umgekehrt gibt es keinen sinnvollen Grund, die
> > Tagging-Regeln in Brüssel pro Häuserblock zu ändern.
>
> Das Thema Track/Unclassified etc vor allem wenn wir in Länder kommen
> die nicht alles Asphaltieren eine andere Geschichte.
>
> Hier ist IMHO das Problem das wir zwar "Map whats on the ground" haben
> aber das bei Straßen eben nur teilweise gilt. Hier mappen wir
> die Nutzungsart die ja nicht sofort sichtbar ist und attributieren
> nach der physischen Beschaffenheit. Das ist eben nicht intuitiv.




ich behaupte mal, dass "diesselben" Features sehr unterschiedlich aussehen
(können), kommt nicht nur bei Straßen vor*1. Schon im Vergleich von
Deutschland mit Italien, also "quasi Nachbarländern", gibt es z.T.
erhebliche Unterschiede, z.B. wie Tankstellen in der Stadt aussehen, oder
Kneipen. Oder z.B. Metzgereien (hier gibt es nur Fleisch, in Deutschland
gibt es sehr oft Mittagstisch, und fast immer auch Wurst und Aufschnitt,
Salate etc.). oder oder oder. Je unterschiedlicher die Kulturen sind, um so
mehr Unterschiede wird es vermutlich auch bei solchen alltäglichen Objekten
mit ähnlichen Anforderungen geben. Inwiefern man jeweils neue tag
Typologien einführt oder ggf. auf bereits etablierte Konzepte zurückgreift,
müssen die Mapper vor Ort jeweils unterscheiden. Dass es hier noch kaum zu
neuen tags für Sachen gekommen ist, die es so nur in Asien (z.B.) gibt,
liegt vermutlich daran, dass entweder die tags verwendet werden ohne
Diskussion auf der internationalen Liste, oder dass die Bedeutung von tags
sehr weit aufgefasst wird, oder dass das erst noch kommt, und bisher noch
nicht genug gemappt wird, als dass die Karenzen stören würden.

Grundsätzlich vertrete ich immer die Idee, dass die Wikiseiten in anderen
Sprachen Übersetzungen der einzigen verbindlichen, englischen Originalseite
sein sollten. Das benachteiligt zwar in gewisser Weise andere Kulturräume,
aber wenn man tags in allen Sprachen definieren könnte wäre die Lage
sicherlich noch schlimmer (BabelStreetMap).

Gruß,
Martin


*1 ob es sich dabei um "diesselben" Features handelt hängt natürlich nur
von der Definition ab.
___
Talk-de mailing list
Talk-de@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 11 September 2019, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
> The main thing we're missing is curated, simple information on the
> main tags that are _used_.

Indeed.  And i would go even further:  Any documentation of the de facto 
use of tags written by humans (i.e. that goes beyond automatic analysis 
like taginfo), written and maintained in a way that ensures it actually 
does document the de facto situation, would be immensely useful and 
important.

> It needs an
> editor/curator/whatever, to have clear editorial guidelines, and
> probably to run on the pull request model rather than open editing.

Is there any mature and writer centric software that implements this 
kind of model?  I mean that from the perspective of a documentation 
author offers a wiki like functionality with decent preview and 
formatting but at the same time comes with a kind of version management 
and functions to facilitate editorial review and discussion.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-it-lazio] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

Benvenuto anche dalla parte mia!

Per l'editore, in sostanza ci sono (sul computer fisso), 2 editori
principali: iD e Josm. Josm è l'editore più completo, iD potrebbe essere
più facile all'inizio, ma potrebbe anche essere più lento una volta presa
pratica. Ci sono più persone che usano iD ma ci sono più edit fatti con
Josm. Per il lavoro con le tracce gpx io utilizzerei Josm, perché è nato
così ed è ottimizzato per il workflow con le tracce, ma ammetto che non ho
usato iD con le tracce da tanto tempo e potrebbe aver acquisito nel
frattempo più capacità.
Un'altro problema con iD: viene sviluppato in sostanza da 2 persone che
sono pagate da 2 società, e fanno come li pare, infatti ci sono un po' di
tensioni, per esempio c'è questa pagina che elenca i recenti problemi con
iD (cose che sono state segnalate dalla community ma "iD" ha deciso di fare
diversamente comunque):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ID/Controversial_Decisions

Mentre JOSM si può scaricare ed installare, c'è anche la possibilità di
usarlo con java webstart (java deve essere attivo nel browser):
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/download/josm.jnlp
più informazioni qui: https://josm.openstreetmap.de/
e qui: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM



Se vogliamo fare un incontro, visto che ne abbiamo saltati alcuni in
estate, per me si potrebbe fare anche lunedì prossimo (in aggiunta a quello
di fine mese). Cosa ne pensate?

Ciao
Martin
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging Governance

[Richard Fairhurst]

Roland Olbricht wrote:
> Imperfect Flow of Information
>
> Although many parts of the OpenStreetMap project are well 
> translated, the tagging documentation has substantial deficiencies.

Yep. Documentation is the biggest problem with tagging.

I don't actually think it's the wiki per se that's the issue. The wiki is...
wiki-like. It's an untidy encyclopaedia of people's preoccupations at the
time they were moved to edit it. Yes, it does have problems: as you say,
"tag definitions being changed after the tag is in widespread use" (remember
the infamous edit that added access=no as a default for all barrier=
values?). But the challenge is bigger than that.

The main thing we're missing is curated, simple information on the main tags
that are _used_. Just as switch2osm took the infinite pages of install docs
on the wiki and boiled them down to one how-to, we need a simple guide to
the common tags in OSM: if you are a data consumer, these are the tags you
need to understand. Wikis don't work for this. It needs an
editor/curator/whatever, to have clear editorial guidelines, and probably to
run on the pull request model rather than open editing.

We're also missing a single-page explanation of OSM tagging principles. One
of the frustrations of watching this list is that there are quite a lot of
plain bad proposals that betray a misunderstanding of basic principles
(verifiability, rich meaningful tags, optimise for the mapper, no-one is
obliged to parse your new tag, etc. etc.). Life is too short to explain this
to everyone and, to be honest, the uber-keen tag proposer doesn't want to
hear their proposal rubbished in the first five minutes so won't listen
anyway. Writing down "this is how OSM tags work" would solve a lot of this
heartache.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Greffon tag2link de JOSM et supports ANFR

[osm . sanspourriel]

Là tu sors du greffon tag2Link, et tu peux utiliser un greffon
OpenSwitchMaps pour FF ou Chromium.

C'est dommage qu'il ne soit pas personnalisable (tu peux proposer soit
d'étendre le greffon soit de suggérer l'ajout d'une liste de sites
supplémentaires).

Ça te permet par exemple de passer facilement de osm.org à osmose : un
petit globe à droite de ta barre d'adresse et hop :

As-tu essayé :lat, :lon ? ce sont des pseudo clés disponibles dans
Overpass, il serait cohérent de les ajouter : tu peux créer ta propre
extension de https://github.com/openstreetmap/josm-plugins et demander
la fusion.

Sinon Vincent étant le développeur de tag2link, tu peux poser un ticket
si tu ne trouves pas ton bonheur
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/query?status=assigned=needinfo=new=reopened=~tag2link=priority.

Le 11/09/2019 à 11:12, Yves P. - yves.prat...@gmail.com a écrit :


Je veux générer un lien dans JOSM, Osmose... qui permet d'afficher
un support radio sur Cartoradio.
PS: ça peut-être utile pour d'autres sites ?

Aussi pour voir les stations radioamateurs sur https://aprs.fi

Pour le noeud 4900725350
 aux coordonnées
*41.1398684, -79.754033*, on obtient
https://aprs.fi/#!addr=*41.1398684*%2C*-79.754033*


--
Yves

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Greffon tag2link de JOSM et supports ANFR

[Yves P.]

> Je veux générer un lien dans JOSM, Osmose... qui permet d'afficher un
> support radio sur Cartoradio.
> PS: ça peut-être utile pour d'autres sites ?
>
Aussi pour voir les stations radioamateurs sur https://aprs.fi

Pour le noeud 4900725350 
aux coordonnées *41.1398684, -79.754033*, on obtient https://aprs.fi/#!addr=
*41.1398684*%2C*-79.754033* 

--
Yves
___
Talk-fr mailing list
Talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-fr

[Talk-dk] Status på Mapillary i nogle danske kommuner

[Soren Johannessen]

Hej alle sammen

I april skrev Niels Elgaard Larsen om Mapillary  "Lad os håbe at det
spreder sig til alle kommuner"
(Kilde https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-dk/2019-April/005189.html
)

Siden er april er der sket en del i nogle forskellige kommuner, som
jeg godt vil fortælle lidt om til jer. Først lidt om kommuner der har
lavet Mapillary billeder.

Rødovre har kørt deres vejnet igennem for første gang og har taget
360° billeder.
Brøndby og Furesø har sommeren igennem kørt deres vejnet igennem for
anden gang med et GoPro Fusion kamera. Nu har de to kommuner to
sæsoner med et vejnet af 360° billeder på Mapillary.

Frederiksberg har fået firmaet Tvilum Landinspektørfirma til at tage
360° billeder af kommunen. De første ca. 40.000 360° billeder er lagt
op på Mapillary. Mange flere billeder er på vej.

På Ballerups 34 km2 areal, der rundede kommunen over 500.000 Mapillary
billeder i juni.

Pga flere og flere kommuner er blevet interesseret i Mapillary, så har
Furesø Kommune og Ballerup Kommune oprettet en kommunal erfa-gruppe
ved navn Erfa-gruppen Mapillary EastDK i august. Gruppen er i første
omgang for alle kommuner øst for Storebælt. Der er 10 kommuner øst for
Storebælt som har tilsluttet sig indtil videre (hvilke kan ses i næste
link). Det første nyhedsbrev fra erfa-gruppen udkom i fredags 6/9 og
det kan læses online her
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17X8foxGaBfEZi8uFJVYjRsdrjFd2Y2YU/view

En af de ting som er begyndt at interessere kommunerne er machine
learning delen af objekter fra Mapillary og især trafikskilte her i
første omgang. Da ikke alle trafikskilte algoritmer har lige god
performance (mange falske hits), så er den del med at kunne træne dem
op til at blive bedre ved at crowd source opgaverne med Mapillary
Verifier tool også en del Erfa-gruppens virke.

Ballerup og Furesø har indtil videre sat 67 danske trafikskilte
træningssæt (flere er på vej) op hvor man giver feedback i form af
"Thumbs up" eller "Thumbs down" til om en Mapillary algoritme har fået
det relevante trafikskilt (to personer skal mene det samme sandt eller
falsk om et objekt før opgaven er løst) . Erfa-gruppen har udgivet
online hjælpe/startguide.
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/e/2PACX-1vTgZTslPJjfChWENST0V4HfRQ9tuVLu20PojsnFAWNm4Zvz-JvNrmCTUILz2pH55zyluQZPvO5FivK2/pub?start=false=false=3000=id.i0

Alle 67 opgaver og trafikskiltenes danske navne kan ses i dette online
regneark Klik på URL ude til højre for starte. Alle der har en
Mapillary konto er velkommen til at prøve.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSfXYS_4qZuBqn_dFCEc1sqko9Rm2lAhWj13U7DYBDSkJvGHXWlNk82xhA3swinu9N-LUW4Zif_Wp0C/pubhtml

At rydde op i falske hits fra trafikskilte betyder fx at det Mapillary
trafikskiltelag som kan ses i OSM værktøjerne iD/JOSM også bliver
ryddet op i.


Tal og fakta om Mapillary EastDK området (4. september 2019)

• Ca. 4 millioner Mapillary billeder (360° eller alm. 2D billeder)
• Ca. 9.800 km veje/stier er fotograferet i Mapillary
• Vej og stinettet er ca. 53.000 km (vejlængde beregnet fra
OpenStreetMaps geodata)
• Ca. 81, 5 % af vej- og stinettet mangler at blive fotograferet til Mapillary

Erfa-gruppen håber at der kommer flere kommuner (samt kommer med i
erfa-gruppen)  i gang med at fotografere deres vej- og stinet og
dermed kan OpenStreetMapDK også få gavn af billeder.

Disclaimer - jeg er tilknyttet Ballerup Kommune som ekstern GIS
konsulent og ovenstående er skrevet som privat person. Intet i den
nystiftet Erfa-gruppe er hemmeligt og alt materiale, nyhedsbreve mm.
vil være online tilgængeligt.

Med venlig hilsen

Søren Johannessen

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

Re: [OSM-talk-fr] Limitation pour les véhicules "en transit".

[osm . sanspourriel]

J'aurais dit 3.5 ;-)

Le 11/09/2019 à 06:54, Balaïtous via Talk-fr - talk-fr@openstreetmap.org
a écrit :

Bonjour,

Merci pour ces réponses. J'ai opté pour la solution de Stéphane (avec
destination au lieu de delivery), d'autant que je viens de tomber sur
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions

qui donne l'exemple:
 maxweight=2.5
 maxweight:conditional=none @ destination

Balaitous

On mar., 2019-09-10 at 10:20 +0200, Stéphane Péneau wrote:

Autre possibilité plus précise que j'ai utilisée pour un poids max
de
7.5 tonnes sauf livraison :
maxweight=7.5
maxweight:conditional=none @ delivery

Stf

Le 10/09/2019 à 09:30, Stéphane Péneau a écrit :

Salut !

hgv=destination n'est pas suffisant ?

Stf

Le 10/09/2019 à 06:55, Balaïtous via Talk-fr a écrit :

Bonjour,

Je ne sais pas trop comment traduire une limitation valide
uniquement
pour les véhicules en transit. Il s'agit d'un poids maximal de
3.5 t.

D'après le wiki, il faut compléter le maxweight par un
maxweight:vehicle=???

Après recherche sur taginfo, j'ai trouvé que certains
contributeurs ont
déjà utilisé des access=visitors, j'ai donc mis
maxweight:vehicle=visitors.

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/access#values
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1083245

Ce qu'il faudrait c'est la négation de
maxweight:vehicle=destination.

D'autres idées ?

Balaitous



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


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


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


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

[Talk-bo] Varias mejoras en La Paz

[Marco Antonio]

Hola,

En anteriores días estuve mejorando en la zona de La Paz:

* nodos de poblaciones dentro de limites municipales de casi todo el
área metropolitano de la paz
* límites del municipio de el alto y municipios colindantes
* barrios de la paz del centro, este, norte, creo que faltan muchos mas
* patrimonios naturales de la zona este del muncipio de la paz

vendía bien si alguien local de LaPaz puede revisar los barrios

sobre las áreas protegidas en La Paz no son todas, en próximas
ediciones voy a completar varias de sur o oeste del municipio

Abrazos,

Marco Antonio

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

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Luca Moiana]

Ciao,

ho iniziato con l'intento di estrarre ma mi fa piacere inserire quelli che ho 
trovato online, con i tag correttamente suggeriti.

L


From: Alberto 
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 9:05 PM
To: talk-it@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

Ciao Luca,
sono l'autore della proposta (a suo tempo approvata) per gli animal_shelter.
I tag che hai cercato sono giusti.
Per la fauna selvatica in generale si usa:

amenity=animal_shelter
+
animal_shelter=wildlife
+
animal_shelter:release=yes

Se invece accolgono solo uccelli o mammiferi, o solo alcune specie, si 
inserisce il valore corrispondente (in inglese) al posto di wildlife.
Ci sono esempi nella pagina del wik [1]i.

Qualche tempo fa avevo iniziato ad inserire i centri recupero fauna selvatica 
in Italia ed in Francia, poi per mancanza di tempo ho dovuto sospendere.
Luca, ma tu vuoi solo estrarre i dati da OSM o inseriresti anche i centri 
mancanti?


[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Danimal_shelter

Ciao
Alberto



---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

[Luca Moiana]

Ciao,

mi interessano principalmente quelli per l'avifauna, che siano LIPU o altro.

Grazie

L


From: liste DOT girarsi AT posteo DOT eu 
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2019 4:24 PM
To: talk-it@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-it] Centri di recupero fauna selvatica

Il 10/09/19 18:16, Federico Cortese ha scritto:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 1:06 PM Luca Moiana  wrote:
>>
>> ho recuperato un po' di risultati, anche se non tutti hanno il tag 
>> "animal_shelter" valorizzato.
>>
>
> Qualche tempo fa avevo usato un generico amenity=veterinary per
> l'ospedale degli animali selvatici dell'Osservatorio Faunistico di
> Lecce (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6655365275), ma credo siano
> più opportuni i tag specifici segnalati, quindi correggo.
>
> Ciao,
> Federico
>

Cerchi solo quelli della LIPU o tutti i centri in generale?


--
_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
Simone Girardelli

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

Re: [Talk-it-lazio] Caricamento di diverse decine di file GPX

[Marcello Pelato via Talk-it-lazio]

 Ciao a te.Nel fine mese l'ultimo lunedì di solito riusciamo ad incontrarci con 
alcuni mappatori, ma ora è da vedere perché con l'arrivo dell'estate gli 
incontri si sono interrotti.Comunque se hai interesse possiamo incontrarci per 
quella data.Io in particolare mappo nei castelli e oltre. Quindi appena posso 
dò uno sguardo ai dati importati.
Comunque hai più strumenti per inserire dati e dettagli nel database OSM.Il più 
rapido é ID per le modifiche da browser.Nel wiki di openstreetmap trovi inoltre 
una breve guida per iniziare che ti consiglio di leggere.
È inoltre probabile che i percorsi che hai registrato in bici siano già 
presenti nel database. In quel caso oltre a verificarne il giusto tracciato, ed 
a seguito di un contatto con chi ha inserito il dato, si procede con un 
aggiornamento. Si modifica il percorso e si aggiungono dettagli, 
caratteristiche del percorso sempre cercando di tenerlo congiunto con gli altri 
percorsi presenti.
Tieni a mente che ogni utente, più o meno esperto, potrebbe aver correlato il 
tracciato con altri creando una relazione. Quindi fai attenzione a non 
modificarla o quantomeno mantenerla attiva ed integra.
Benvenuto.
M.P.

On Tuesday, September 10, 2019, 05:55:46 PM GMT+2, Emanuele Petriglia 
 wrote:  
 
 Buonasera,

Ho caricato[0] 129 file GPX raccolte negli ultimi quattro anni, sono
tutte uscite in bici e la maggior parte sono concentrare nel Parco
Regionale dei Castelli Romani, un posto che si trova poco sud di Roma.

Per caricarli ho creato uno script personalizzato[1], oltre a caricare i
file rimuove i punti vicini a delle coordinate fornite per un raggio di
metri fornito (per privacy).

Volevo chiedervi come mi devo comportare ora, so che il GPS è poco
affidabile, sopratutto nei boschi. So però che può essere di aiuto.
Conosco il territorio, ma non ho mai fatto modifiche serie in OSM. Ho
chiesto anche nella mailing list talk-it per chiedere aiuto.

Buona serata!

[0]: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ema-pe/traces
[1]:
https://gitlab.com/ema-pe/dotfiles/blob/1903a7e3b7baf68d5f4159e31f0a19af1623e02b/bin/osmgpx

-- 
Emanuele Petriglia (ema-pe)
___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio
  ___
Talk-it-lazio mailing list
Talk-it-lazio@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it-lazio