Re: [OSM-talk] When two bots go to war

[Andrew Hain]

Is there a bot that does this or is someone prepared to write one?

--
Andrew


From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
Sent: 14 September 2023 10:39
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] When two bots go to war

Maybe there should be a general good-practice recommendation / policy
that bots running in this fashion to keep things in sync should only
automatically add/update/remove a tag that they've previously set if
the current state/value in OSM is unchanged from the last state/value
that the bot set. This way, bots could be used to keep things up to
date automatically, but would not automatically override any manually
applied changes by other mappers between runs. (A sensible bot owner
would have the bot send them a report of any tags that couldn't be
updated for manual review.)

Robert.

On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 08:41, Cj Malone
 wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 15:06 +0200, Snusmumriken via talk wrote:
> > My speculation is that Distriktstandvården (a chain of dental
> > clinics)
> > has taken "ownership" of "their" nodes and once a day check that the
> > values in osm database correspond to that of their internal database.
>
> I've added a more specific website tag to test this. If they restore it
> (Probably 03:00) to the generic home page I agree with you. They need
> to be informed that 1) there data needs improving (eg covid opening
> hours, POI specific not brand specific contact details) 2) they don't
> own these nodes, other people can edit them.
>
> CJ
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141243391


--
Robert Whittaker

___
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: [OSM-talk] Announcing State of the Map 2024: Join us in Nairobi and online on 6-8 September 2024!

[Andrew Hain]

I would like to congratulate the organising team in Nairobi and the SotM 
Working Group for doing this. Giving the worldwide community a broader 
understanding of the challenges of mapping Africa and using maps there is 
positive step for OSM’s inclusiveness as a truly worldwide map.

--
Andrew


From: Federica Gaspari 
Sent: 14 August 2023 18:56
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Announcing State of the Map 2024: Join us in Nairobi and 
online on 6-8 September 2024!


Dear all,



Get ready to meet and connect with old and new mappy friends from the global 
OpenStreetMap community again!



The State of the Map Organising Committee is thrilled to officially announce 
that the global conference of the OpenStreetMap community, State of the Map 
(SotM), will be making its way to Nairobi, Kenya from September 6th-8th 2024! 
This landmark event will bring together passionate mappers, data enthusiasts, 
technologists, and community members from all corners of the globe to celebrate 
the spirit of collaboration and open mapping.



Following the good feedback for State of the Map 2022 Firenze, the upcoming 
State of the Map 2024 will once again be held in a hybrid format. Building on 
the valuable lessons and experiences from the previous events, the SotM 
Organising Committee is committed to making this edition even more accessible 
to everyone who wishes to partake in this grand celebration of open mapping, 
sharing passionate voices with the entire community.



Learn more about the SotM 2024 announcement on the OpenStreetMap blog: 
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2023/08/14/announcing-state-of-the-map-2024-september-6-to-8-2024-join-us-in-nairobi-and-online/



More details about the organization will be soon communicated.



Federica Gaspari on behalf of the SotM Organising Committee


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

Re: [OSM-talk] mapilio? (street-level imagery)

[Andrew Hain]

Is there an imagery host that offers an OSM-friendly way to support mapping and 
is suitable for contributions using a smartphone or tablet?

--
Andrew

From: Greg Troxel 
Sent: 24 May 2023 13:31
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [OSM-talk] mapilio? (street-level imagery)

I just got spam from mapilio, implying that I was a "Mapilio
contributor".  This was, to my memory, the first I had heard of them.


I have avoided most street-level imagery schemes as not being
structurally similar to OSM (open source tooling, community project and
licensing scheme).

Looking briefly, it seems like a corporate thing with proprietary
tooling.  They talk about an app in proprietary app stores but do not
mention F-Droid :-) The point seems to be to monetize crowdsourced
contributions, in a gamified/rewards-ish sort of way.

I don't find a JOSM plugin that makes the imagery available in the way
that their web page implies it is licensed for OSM.

Thus, my approach will be to not deal with them at all and just block
their mail.


I am curious if anyone
  - thinks my assessment of the fundamentals is off
  - thinks there is a reasonable way to use their imagery in JOSM
  - anything else similar

  - has also been spammed (private replies please and I'll post a
followup if I get a bunch of comments)

Greg

___
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: [OSM-talk] Jhulto Pul/ Morbi bridge

[Andrew Hain]

And you can put a comment on the changeset that deleted it.

--
Andrew


From: Marc_marc 
Sent: 07 November 2022 13:48
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Jhulto Pul/ Morbi bridge

Le 06.11.22 à 20:25, Andy Mabbett a écrit :
> Someone has deleted the way for the pedestrian bridge at Morbi, India.

it's always a good idea to post an osm id or a geoloc :)
the bridge started at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5734380320
and is currently deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/604295549/history



___
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: [OSM-talk] remove link to Wikidata from infoboxes is a valid arg to remove it from wiki page and data items ?

[Andrew Hain]

The Wikidata links haven’t gone away; they’re in the OSM data items where they 
are easily machine readable and can be curated against accidental divergences 
between languages. The other description arguments could just as easily follow 
(there’s no problem with them being listed in the wiki infoboxes) but, given 
the similarities between data items and Wikidata, I suppose it makes sense to 
start here.

--
Andrew

From: Marc_marc 
Sent: 30 September 2022 11:59
To: talk 
Subject: [OSM-talk] remove link to Wikidata from infoboxes is a valid arg to 
remove it from wiki page and data items ?

Hello,

a few months ago, the community unfortunately voted [|] to "remove
alphanumeric code visible in infoboxes at OSM Wiki linking to Wikidata"
because for some tags, the item described by the tag was not the same
as the one described by the wikidata item (in my opinion it is better
to only delete the erroneous links instead of hiding everything)

today I see that a bot is deleting the wikidata, which is not
the same thing as "hide from the infobox"

therefore if I want to make an application that displays natural=tree
genus species in the user's language, I don't have access to the
translation base that is de facto wikidata (and I would have to do
like many tools: ask people to waste their time to encode the same
translation again)

so it's the previous vote to hide a valid arg to remove it ?
do we really want the community to waste its time remaking
a wikidata-osm out of ego not to use wikidata.org when
it describes the same concept?
is it useful ? what do we gain by breaking the link between
natural=tree and |wikidata=Q10884 ?
compare osm's translation list with wikidata
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q4723
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q10884
of course for some, it's even worse, for ex genus=* 30 <> 125
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q310
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q34740

it's already a sad waste to have to translate every tag
for the wiki + iD + josm+  + ... + ... without this

[1]
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/remove_link_to_Wikidata_from_infoboxes

Regards,
Marc



___
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-GB] Removing all stiles from bridleways

[Andrew Hain]

What distinction would you make between this and the cycle route over steps 
that was discussed recently or the signposted cycle route past cycle barriers 
in Barnes, London?

--
Andrew

From: Richard Fairhurst 
Sent: 14 December 2020 20:57
To: talk-gb OSM List (E-mail) 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Removing all stiles from bridleways

Neil Matthews wrote:
> Looks like there's been an attempt to remove all stiles from
> bridleways

Um, no there hasn't?

The changeset you've pointed to (which is one of mine) has a single stile moved 
to the side of a bridleway. I've done this a handful of times in the past, too, 
usually where the stile is clearly misplaced at a footpath/bridleway junction 
node rather than off to the side on a footpath, but occasionally at an isolated 
bridleway location like this.

A barrier=stile on a long-established UK bridleway is 99.9% a mapping error. 
Bridleways are open to horses and bikes, and so stiles are forbidden - PRoW 
officers are pretty hot on this. You will sometimes see a stile placed to the 
side of a gate: in OSM this is usually mapped as a highway=footway through the 
stile and highway=bridleway through the gate, though of course there's no 
distinct public footpath PRoW in this case.

OSM is an iterative process of fixup and improvement, and shouting "mechanical 
edit!" every time someone makes a change that hasn't been surveyed in walking 
boots and then manually etched onto the hard disc platters of a server 
somewhere in Amsterdam is not hugely helpful. I mean, just change it back and 
say "put back pending survey" if you feel that strongly, it doesn't need an 
entire mailing list thread.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive Behavior in the OSM Community

[Andrew Hain]

The big problem I have with this manifesto is that it brings divisive North 
American attitudes to a worldwide project. As a worldwide project, building a 
community of mappers from the whole world is our most important single 
diversity objective. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t encourage other 
underrepresented groups such as women, but we should step away from this kind 
of international combativeness and dog whistling. It may even be 
counterproductive: some feminists in my country think “diversity” has become a 
code word for misogyny.

--
Andrew


From: Celine Jacquin 
Sent: 09 December 2020 19:06
To: osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org ; 
talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Call to Take Action and Confront Systemic Offensive 
Behavior in the OSM Community

Hello everybody
I hope you are all well

We, several groups, chapters, organizations and individuals, have reacted to 
the conversation in the osm-talk-list 
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2020-December/085692.html) 
considering that it is an incident symptomatic of the problem we have faced for 
many years in the community, which is one of the greatest obstacles to 
diversity at all levels of OSM. Time to make a real change.
That is why we have developed a beginning of statement on the desirable 
mechanisms to work solidly on the rules of coexistence and improve diversity.

We bring it to your attention and invite anyone who feels represented to sign 
it. Translations are in preparation (any help is welcome):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/130JCTX9ve4H4ORXznmIVTpXiN3TX8nRGA8ayuTZ9ECI/edit?usp=sharing


On behalf of the signatories
Best regards

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

[Andrew Hain]

Keep Right flags web links that have gone offline.

--
Andrew

From: Philip Barnes 
Sent: 27 September 2020 18:49
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Hello world and automated change proposal: Add missing 
URL scheme on UK's Pubs websites

On Sun, 2020-09-27 at 16:28 +0100, Rodrigo Díez Villamuera wrote:
Hi all,

First of all, I would like to introduce myself on this email list and to thank 
you all for your contributions to OSM. Great work!

After some time using OSM as a user, I decided to make my first step as a 
contributor, hence this email and the proposal inside.

Please bear in mind that this is my first attempt to contribute with a proposal 
and, although I have done my best reading the community conventions and best 
practices, I am sure I have made some mistakes on the way. Be merciful! :P

To the point now.

I am importing a subset of nodes from UK (those tagged with amenity:pub) for a 
pet project.

When analysing the data I realised that some of these nodes contain a website: 
tag that does not contain an appropriate URL schema (http/https).

Ie: www.mypub.com rather than http://www.mypub.com or 
https://www.mypub.com

This goes in contradiction with the Wiki documentation for 
website.

I created a proposal for a one-off, scoped, automated edit for these nodes to 
find the appropiate scheme for the existing URL and retag the nodes.

I added the proposal to the Automated edits log. You can read it 
here.

Just wanted to share the proposal with the UK community, gather your feedback, 
comments and advises on how to proceed from here

One issue I can think of with pubs and websites is that they need checking to 
ensure they are still current.

The defacto method most pubs use to communicate with customers is facebook.

A more general fix of urls missing http(s)://, why only pubs?.  is probably a 
maproulette quest.

Phil (trigpoint)

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

[Talk-GB] Paths on Wimbledon Common

[Andrew Hain]

I have been doing some tidying based on Osmose, including the warning for 
highway=footway foot=yes, which is often left over from a preset in Potlatch 1.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/87672607

I got a changeset comment querying the edit.






  *   I note you have removed foot=yes from highway=footway. My understanding 
is that the default for a footway is foot=designated, but designated requires 
an explicit sign. the paths on Wimbledon Common do not have an explicit sign, 
but are legally accessible, hence foot=yes. Perhaps osmose is wrong.
  *   Any comments?
  *   --
  *   Andrew

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

Re: [Talk-GB] UPRN & USRN Tagging

[Andrew Hain]

If there are more than 19 UPRNs for the same building the reference will be 
longer than OSM’s tag value limit of 255 characters.

--
Andrew


From: Tony OSM 
Sent: 03 July 2020 15:31
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: [Talk-GB] UPRN & USRN Tagging


As we have access to the data and Robert Whittaker has produced a great UPRN 
locations map, how are we planning to tag OSM objects?

ref:UK:uprn and ref:UK:usrn

have been suggested as tags - I think this is the way to go.


There is also Key:ref:NPLG:UPRN:1 in the wiki.


Question: Should uprn be applied to the building outline or to a node?

The OS data applies them as nodes, they are assigned by local authorities to a 
location as a node.

The uprn is applied to many objects even bus shelters, and individual flats 
within a block; there may be what appear to be duplicates.

I suggest that for OSM buildings or building parts which are individually 
linkable to a uprn then the uprn is assigned to the building way outline; 
otherwise to an OSM node if the mapper deems appropriate

Tony Shield---   TonyS999
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Land Registry INSPIRE data - 1 July OGL release

[Andrew Hain]

A lightning talk could get some attention, including mappers with experience of 
datasets elsewhere in the world.

--
Andrew

From: Rob Nickerson 
Sent: 26 June 2020 20:49
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: [Talk-GB] Land Registry INSPIRE data - 1 July OGL release

Hi all,

Looks like 1 July will be a big open data release day. Not only do we get the 
USRN and UPRN data, but the land registry data will also be released:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/inspire-data-to-be-shared-under-open-terms

Should we attempt to coordinate something to prevent a mixture of uses across 
those OSMers who may want to do something with this date?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] our Q site help.openstreetmap.org is dying

[Andrew Hain]

We could also look at the software Codidact and Topanswers have been writing.

--
Andrew

From: Mateusz Konieczny via talk 
Sent: 20 May 2020 14:48
To: Tobias Wrede 
Cc: Talk 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] our Q site help.openstreetmap.org is dying




May 20, 2020, 09:28 by l...@tobias-wrede.de:
Can we involve any of the OSM organizations to find, maybe pay, someone?
The question is about the plan. Life support for this specific platform?

It sounds like an endless pit that can consume plenty of resources,
but maybe I am too pessimistic.

Migrate to Stack Exchange? Even assuming that this company will agree
it has plenty of potential issues.

Wait for someone to volunteer and fix? It would be nice, but not sure what
are chances of that.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Andrew Hain]

See 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2018/10/16#Q29637965
 for another artificial item.

--
Andrew


From: Andrew Hain 
Sent: 03 May 2020 18:22
To: Joseph Eisenberg ; osm 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

Getting rid of the search link is definitely a good idea, there are also links 
to artificial Wikidata items such as Q57977870 highway key in OpenStreetMap to 
consider.

--
Andrew


From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 03 May 2020 17:10
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys and 
tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata

"While it is sometimes possible to state that all OSM elements with that tag 
are an instance of some Wikidata item, it is not possible in other situations. 
For example, roads with bridge=yes crossing a man_made=bridge are not instances 
of "bridge". Furthermore, a lot of OSM tags don't represent an instance 
relationship with some class of objects at all, but are properties instead. So 
I doubt that mapping Wikidata onto OSM tags in that manner is feasible. 
--Tordanik 21:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)"

"I don't think the "Wikidata" link adds anything useful for OSM mappers and I 
would be in favour of dropping it. Also, if there is no Wikidata link set, then 
currently the template displays a "search in Wikidata..." link which gives the 
whole "linked data" religion unnecessary prominence. The template has many 
optional parameters, and "wikidata" is the only parameter where, when it is 
missing, Wiki users are nudged in the direction of researching and adding it. 
This makes it look as if adding the "wikidata" parameter was a more valuable 
use of an editor's time than completing other missing bits of information. This 
is a value judgement that I oppose. --Frederik Ramm 16:02, 8 November 2018 
(UTC)"

"Now we have our own Wikibase there’s another problem. The Wikidata link has a 
database link (Q number) that is different from the Q number in our own 
Wikibase instance. The WMF developers were very un-keen on Yuri’s suggestion of 
us using a different prefix letter to distinguish the two. Getting rid of the 
Wikidata parameter would solve this.--Andrew (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2018 
(UTC)"

I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like "craft=*" is 
not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would need to link to 
several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag in that case.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki (ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

[Andrew Hain]

Getting rid of the search link is definitely a good idea, there are also links 
to artificial Wikidata items such as Q57977870 highway key in OpenStreetMap to 
consider.

--
Andrew


From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 03 May 2020 17:10
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Remove Wikidata parameter from Infobox on wiki 
(ValueDescription, KeyDescription boxes)

I propose removing the "wikidata=" parameter from the descriptions of keys and 
tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki. See discussion:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:ValueDescription#Wikidata

"While it is sometimes possible to state that all OSM elements with that tag 
are an instance of some Wikidata item, it is not possible in other situations. 
For example, roads with bridge=yes crossing a man_made=bridge are not instances 
of "bridge". Furthermore, a lot of OSM tags don't represent an instance 
relationship with some class of objects at all, but are properties instead. So 
I doubt that mapping Wikidata onto OSM tags in that manner is feasible. 
--Tordanik 21:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)"

"I don't think the "Wikidata" link adds anything useful for OSM mappers and I 
would be in favour of dropping it. Also, if there is no Wikidata link set, then 
currently the template displays a "search in Wikidata..." link which gives the 
whole "linked data" religion unnecessary prominence. The template has many 
optional parameters, and "wikidata" is the only parameter where, when it is 
missing, Wiki users are nudged in the direction of researching and adding it. 
This makes it look as if adding the "wikidata" parameter was a more valuable 
use of an editor's time than completing other missing bits of information. This 
is a value judgement that I oppose. --Frederik Ramm 16:02, 8 November 2018 
(UTC)"

"Now we have our own Wikibase there’s another problem. The Wikidata link has a 
database link (Q number) that is different from the Q number in our own 
Wikibase instance. The WMF developers were very un-keen on Yuri’s suggestion of 
us using a different prefix letter to distinguish the two. Getting rid of the 
Wikidata parameter would solve this.--Andrew (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2018 
(UTC)"

I've also noted that often the links are wrong, because a tag like "craft=*" is 
not the same as the wikidata definition of "crafts". You would need to link to 
several wikidata concepts to describe one OpenStreetMap tag in that case.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Adding missing roads using Facebook detections

[Andrew Hain]

Also seen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/84550786

--
Andrew


From: Chris Fleming 
Sent: 03 April 2020 14:06
To: Guthula, Jothirnadh 
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Adding missing roads using Facebook detections

I've spotted some edits using this, such as:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=82807938=true

After a ropey start, in general I've been quite impressed by Amazon's edits, 
but this one looks quite ropey, the service road drawn in is very ropey and it 
looks like you've missed the connection back to the main road (shown in OS 
Openview), in addition I don't think that 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/785788619 loops back on itself, or at least I 
wouldn't draw that conclusion from imagery?

Cheers
Chris

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 10:02, Guthula, Jothirnadh via Talk-GB 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:

Hi UK OSM community,



As you might already know, Facebook released its AI-based detections publicly 
on 08/09/2019 
(https://github.com/facebookmicrosites/Open-Mapping-At-Facebook/wiki/Available-Countries).
 With a team of mappers @Amazon we are planning to improve missing roads in UK 
using Facebook detections as a source. Please let us know if you have any 
ongoing projects using this data source. While adding missing roads, we will be 
adding all the associated access tags as per available on-ground resources. Our 
team will edit roads manually using a normal iD editor and satellite imageries 
available with FB detections as a background source and will not use RapidID 
editor or JOSM. Also changeset comments will be addressed by our team on top 
priority.



Regards,

Jothirnadh



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?

[Andrew Hain]

I wonder if Tfondie who created the Wikipedia page may be the same person.

--
Andrew


From: Andrew Hain 
Sent: 23 March 2020 20:18
To: Colin Smale 
Cc: Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?

There is now a place name Stadium Village just north of Twickenham town centre 
that is unfamiliar to me (I live across the Thames). The linked Wikipedia page 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadium_Village,_Middlesex exists but reads oddly.

--
Andrew

From: Andrew Hain 
Sent: 21 March 2020 11:18
To: Colin Smale 
Cc: Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?

Further issues:

Richmond rugby ground tagged addr:city=London Borough of Hounslow
Middlesex changed to county
Fulwell bus garage tagged name=Fulwell Bus Garage (Middlesex)

There are some legitimate edits there such as shop=supermarket for Lidl 
Fulwell, payment tags for M Food To Go in Twickenham may be legitimate and 
the department store tagging was by another mapper by an editor preset.

--
Andrew


From: Colin Smale 
Sent: 20 March 2020 18:46
To: Andrew Hain 
Cc: Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?


On 2020-03-20 19:36, Andrew Hain wrote:

Also changing the name tag for Eel Pie Island.

Yeah, that was the first thing I noticed. I changed that one back, and left 
comments on a couple of other changes, but when I saw the rest I gave up.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?

[Andrew Hain]

There is now a place name Stadium Village just north of Twickenham town centre 
that is unfamiliar to me (I live across the Thames). The linked Wikipedia page 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadium_Village,_Middlesex exists but reads oddly.

--
Andrew

From: Andrew Hain 
Sent: 21 March 2020 11:18
To: Colin Smale 
Cc: Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?

Further issues:

Richmond rugby ground tagged addr:city=London Borough of Hounslow
Middlesex changed to county
Fulwell bus garage tagged name=Fulwell Bus Garage (Middlesex)

There are some legitimate edits there such as shop=supermarket for Lidl 
Fulwell, payment tags for M Food To Go in Twickenham may be legitimate and 
the department store tagging was by another mapper by an editor preset.

--
Andrew


From: Colin Smale 
Sent: 20 March 2020 18:46
To: Andrew Hain 
Cc: Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?


On 2020-03-20 19:36, Andrew Hain wrote:

Also changing the name tag for Eel Pie Island.

Yeah, that was the first thing I noticed. I changed that one back, and left 
comments on a couple of other changes, but when I saw the rest I gave up.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Taking a break and a call for help

[Andrew Hain]

When you aren’t sure of the exact nature of a service road it makes perfect 
sense to leave out the service= tag. If that makes it more prominent it’s the 
fault of the renderer.

--
Andrew


From: Greg Troxel 
Sent: 22 March 2020 16:46
To: Dave F 
Cc: Dave F via talk ; OpenStreetMap talk-us list 

Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Taking a break and a call for help

Dave F  writes:

> On 21/03/2020 20:59, Greg Troxel wrote:
>>
>> This really seems unfair.
>>
>> When someone maps for OSM because they want to, they have goals and a
>> typically a good attitude about community norms.
>>
>> When someone is a a paid mapper, their goals come from the person who is
>> paying them, and they don't necessarily care about the overall health of
>> OSM.
>>
>> So this "paid mapping is a bit scary" notion is 100% accurate.
>
> You've made a leap in logic there. From guessing to 100% true.

No leap, and no guessing.

I have made a logical conclusion about a situation with a structural
conflict of interest.

It is entirely normal in our greater society to recognize conflicts of
interest and to mitigate them.  In open source, we don't talk about it
much, but usually contributions come in chunks and are reviewed.  OSM
doesn't have a review process, really (not a complain - just that
review-before-merge isn't something that can address COI in OSM.

I did not say (and do not mean) any of

  all paid mappers are bad people

  all edits done by paid mappers are bad

My point is that when people are paid to map, there is a structural
conflict of interest between the good of OSM and the goals/incentives
impressed on the paid mapper.  Again, that doesn't mean it's always
misaligned - it means that the possibility is very real, and we
currently don't have a way to deal with this.  So I find the general
situation inherently fraught.

(There's also the issue of misalignment between the good of OSM and the
goals of the employer, but I'm assuming that the employer's goals flow
down to paid mappers goals, for a competent employer.)


>> That doesn't mean all paid apping is bad; were I to take money from
>> the local chamber of commerce to make sure all their businesses were
>> on the map with opening hours and other details, all of it would be
>> done in a way that other mappers would think is correct, or at least
>> just as correct as if I were doing it for fun.  But the idea that
>> people are hired into a position and given instructions might lead to
>> bad outcomes is quite sensible.  Really these edits are not so
>> different from mechanical edits, and I think the organizers need to
>> own the responsibilility for high quality, and the standard should be
>> quite a bit better than normal hand mapping norms.
>
> What's the betting you'd be the first to complain when your parcel is
> 30 minutes after it's allocated delivery time, because the driver
> couldn't find the right driveway.

Now you have crossed into ad hominem and strawmen.

Note that what you quoted from me said "might lead to bad outcomes", not
"always will".

I did not say that anybody, Amazon included, adding driveways following
existing norms was a bad thing.  Around me the average edit quality for
driveway additions has been good -- and I have not complained about
them.  There have been some with not quite right tagging, but mostly
they've been ok, and its been things like "highway=service" without
"service-driveway" -- not egregious, still better than before addition,
but too heavy on the render, as well as not quite right.

My belief is that a bunch of paid mappers with a narrow focus and
basically only adding missing things is quite likely to be mostly ok.
Once you get into changes with more nuance, I expect more trouble.

I did say that when someone pays a lot of people to map, then that
becomes a large scale edit.  Again I didn't say that was always bad --
but I did say that the company needs to be responsible for making the
problems that could happen not happen actually.  I really don't
understand why you consider that to be so offensive.

> This is all AL are doing, completing the final quarter of a mile of
> their journey in areas not easily accessible to the general public.
> It is *not* a mechanical* edit, but taken from on the ground surveys
> using GPS, in *exactly* the same way many voluntary contributors map.

Are you associated with AL in any way?  I'm guessing not, but your
reaction to pointing out a structural conflict of interest is remarkably
strong.

> Please don;t assume, go on the evidence of the contributions. I
> believe they're improving the quality of the OSM database.

My memory of which paid editor did which is blurred, and I think it
wasn't amazon, but in the last year or two I have had to clean up a
number of things where conservation land was touched and local-consenus
tags, put there by local mappers, were removed by far-awy paid mappers.
While I could talk via changeset comment to one paid mapper, another
paid 

Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?

[Andrew Hain]

Further issues:

Richmond rugby ground tagged addr:city=London Borough of Hounslow
Middlesex changed to county
Fulwell bus garage tagged name=Fulwell Bus Garage (Middlesex)

There are some legitimate edits there such as shop=supermarket for Lidl 
Fulwell, payment tags for M Food To Go in Twickenham may be legitimate and 
the department store tagging was by another mapper by an editor preset.

--
Andrew


From: Colin Smale 
Sent: 20 March 2020 18:46
To: Andrew Hain 
Cc: Talk-GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?


On 2020-03-20 19:36, Andrew Hain wrote:

Also changing the name tag for Eel Pie Island.

Yeah, that was the first thing I noticed. I changed that one back, and left 
comments on a couple of other changes, but when I saw the rest I gave up.


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?

[Andrew Hain]

Also changing the name tag for Eel Pie Island.

--
Andrew


From: Colin Smale 
Sent: 20 March 2020 17:11
To: Talk-GB 
Subject: [Talk-GB] Anyone in South-West London?


If there is anyone who keeps a weather eye on South-West London, in particular 
the Twickenham area, would they like to cast their eye over the changesets of a 
brand-new user "tommyf5"? He has been busy today making many changes that I 
would class as "fiddling" and don't look right, but a local eye would be 
beneficial. Examples are demoting St Margarets from suburb to neighbourhood, 
and renaming ways adjacent to a junction as "Whitton Road Intersection".

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tommyf5

Thanks!

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

[Talk-GB] C roads again

[Andrew Hain]

Is there a resource I can point anyone who puts C numbers in the ref tag of 
roads at?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags

[Andrew Hain]

I strongly disagree.

It is perfectly useful to document the existence of tags in the database with 
data items. For example one was created for the key sub_sea:type 
[https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q4506] and it has been possible to 
add this it is a discardable tag that the main OSM editors remove when editing. 
While it is possible in principle to add a long form tag documentation page, 
and indeed the presence of the data item is a record that one may be worth 
writing, it needs a different set of skills to research its content. As such 
the data item and others like it are useful on their own.

--
Andrew

From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 18 February 2020 17:28
To: osm 
Subject: [OSM-talk] Creation of "Data Items" by bot for undocumented tags

Data Items should not be created by bot for undocumented tags.

According to 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_items#Item_Creation_Process
the Data Items (aka "Wikibase" or "Wiki Data items") are automatically
created by a bot, even before a tag is documented, if a tag has a
certain standard format and more than 10 uses in the database.

The data item is created in this case with the text "‎Created a new
Item: Auto-updating from Wiki pages" - e.g.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Item:Q19947=history

This is confusing to users. For example, Item:Q19947 above,
"landuse=research" was created before there was a wiki page. Then
yesterday a user documented the tag with a page, but did not
understand why there was already a data item:

"Wikibase entry: evidence for preceding deletion? I've just created
landuse=research, but the data item
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Item:Q19947=history
was already existing in December '19. How was the data item then
created?"
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki=#Wikibase_entry:_evidence_for_preceding_deletion.3F

Besided the potential confusion caused by creating these items by
bots, I think it is a bad idea to encourage wiki users to start
editing these data items without first creating an actual
human-readable wiki page to document the tag.

In theory, the "Data Items" can be useful if they properly document
how tags are used, in a way that is easier for computers to handle,
but this only works if the data is maintained and updated.

Creating a new wiki page (by human) will alert other users via
"Special:Recent" and "Special:NewPages", while the stream of items
created by bots is too much for humans to maintain, and the page names
are too obscure (Item: Q19947 is meaningless) to be scanned by humans.

Therefore, I propose that Yurikbot be changed to only add new data
items for documented tags which already have a wiki page in at least
one language. I do not see a benefit to creating date items for
undocumented tags.

Joseph Eisenberg

___
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: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

[Andrew Hain]

Have you talked to the Data Working Group about this?

--
Andrew

From: 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk 
Sent: 03 November 2019 16:47
To: talk@openstreetmap.org 
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper


I find myself being stalked by one mapper, (using the stalking tools, WHODIDIT:



OpenStreetMap Changeset Analyzer and mapbox/osmcha)



who clams edit ownership over a 3,000 sq. mile bus system, who is at least 20 
miles



away from me, and i am on the ground mapping, (in my profile, shows mappers up 
to



8 km away 4 + miles and not one of them is a mapper and have tried to friend me 
?)



and sending me messages that i am wrong  and re editing every thing i do



in this catorry.



i am on the standard map, iD (in-browser editor) and he appears to be in the 
transit map



which he has copied the routes from yahoo.


From: Maarten Deen
Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2019 5:15 AM
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Maintaining privacy as a casual mapper

On 2019-11-03 11:42, Philippe Latulippe wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> I like to improve OSM casually, making small fixes as I use the map in
> my day-to-day life. However, doing so without any precautions would
> reveal a great deal of information about where I've been, since my
> edits cover exactly the places where I'm active. A look at my edit
> history would reveal where I live, where I work, where I've traveled.
> If last night I had added a detailed POI of a restaurant and nothing
> else, one could correctly assume that I was at that restaurant
> recently.
>
> I've managed to protect my privacy somewhat by creating one account
> for every neighbourhood I want to map. This is time consuming and
> error prone, and it's held me back from making improvements to the
> map.
>
> Are there better ways to maintain some privacy while editing the map?
> Are there some tools? Or is there a way to make edits in a way that
> doesn't reveal my username to regular users?

What do you use your OSM username for? Is there any reason not to create
an anonymous username like anon65498?

I mean, sure your mailadres suggests your name is Philippe Latulippe and
I can find some people with that name on the internet, but how do I know
that is your real name and not an alias?

Regards,
Maarten

___
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-GB] Subject: Re: Thomas Cook shops

[Andrew Hain]

We can check for properties where the brand:wikidata tag was left behind by 
checking the other tags, particularly name= and shop=.

--
Andrew

From: SK53 
Sent: 28 September 2019 17:32
To: Silent Spike 
Cc: Talk GB 
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Subject: Re: Thomas Cook shops

The specific problem with that suggestion is that you miss lots of Thomas Cook 
shops (particularly old Co-op Travel & Ilkeston Co-op travel): it hits about 3 
within 15 miles of Nottingham whereas there are nearer 11 (for obvious 
reasons), and one of those is apparently is 
not now a travel agent.

This latter aspect shows that editors other than iD may not surface 
Wikipedia/wikidata tags & that therefore such data needs to be cross-checked, 
and bulk edits may inadvertently change other things. In many ways I prefer 
that we acquire new local mappers (like OftenResident in Alfreton) who notice 
that an area is out-of-date & set about getting it up-to-date, rather than 
doing a partial update and missing other info (like the shop is now a 
hairdresser). Obviously others think we should keep everything as up-to-date as 
the information we have available. I don't think we have ever reached a 
consensus on this.

Jerry

On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 at 16:41, Silent Spike 
mailto:silentspike...@gmail.com>> wrote:
It's unclear to me if there's a consensus on the tagging here. Personally I 
like the `disused:` prefix.

I couldn't see if it was mentioned anywhere, but we can also query for all the 
locations explicitly marked as part of the Thomas Cook brand using the 
`brand:wikidata` tag: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/MFP

All of the results here can really be automatically re-tagged as disused or 
vacant since we explicitly know they were locations belonging to Thomas Cook 
(the beauty of wikidata tagging). You might say some may already have been sold 
and re-signed, but that can always be tagged after - we at least know for 
certain that none of them are Thomas Cook travel agency shops anymore.
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Mali

[Andrew Hain]

Is there any sign of mappers being part of an organised activity or of someone 
having encouraged them to contribute?

--
Andrew

From: John Whelan 
Sent: 29 June 2019 23:49
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Cc: Pierre Béland via HOT
Subject: [OSM-talk] Mali

I've been going over Mali adding in missing villages and hamlets working in the 
southern and eastern part of Mali and cleaning up as I go.  Adding nodes to 
highways that cross but have no nodes, adding tags to untagged ways etc.  I 
even try to make sure each village has one highway at least leading to it.

However as I work west I'm coming across areas that have lots of buildings and 
lots of errors.  I've zapped more than a few hundred duplicate buildings.  I 
confess I have not put a comment on every changeset especially when the mapper 
has less than 30 edits.  I'm seeing three buildings mapped on top of each other 
by the same mapper.  One is untagged and its not just once.  Interestingly some 
of the changesets are tagged "untangling the spaghetti" and I have sympathy 
with that mapper.

In particular I'm seeing whole villages marked as a single building=yes, 
villages with highways that don't meet in the middle.  Villages connected by 
tracks which doesn't match up with the African Highway wiki page.

Most errors are mapped by mappers with not that much experience.  The buildings 
in some ways are a nuisance as they both seem to be mapped from different 
imagery so often have been mapped crossing highways etc but the other problem 
is they fill the map so much so other features are difficult to spot like 
highways that don't quite meet.

Are there any local Mali mappers around to chat with to see if we can get 
something organised?  In particular we need the highway classification sorting 
out.  The African highway wiki is fine as far as it goes but something 
connecting a village to a highway comes out as unclassified especially if there 
are square roofs in the village.  In order to differentiate the highways that 
these connect to that connect a number of villages probably should be tertiary 
and the ones that connect towns and major villages probably something else.

However I'd be much more comfortable with some local mappers making these calls.

I'm not sure quite what to do.  It needs a more organized approach.  An Apple 
mapper has been in demoting highway=tertiary to unclassified and yes we did 
have a conversation however I'm fairly certain they are working remotely from 
imagery.

Thoughts?

Thanks John

--
Sent from Postbox
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki pages?

[Andrew Hain]

Some more advantages:

Data item descriptions can be added for tag values that have no need for 
long-form documentation separate from the key.

Descriptions can be added in extra languages before anyone has the time to 
write full documentation in that language; with support from Taginfo this means 
that Map features tables can be generated automatically in all languages and 
not just English.

--
Andrew

From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 10 June 2019 13:30
To: Tobias Knerr
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki 
pages?

> A potential benefit of data items is that language-independent
information does not need to be manually copied to each translation.

But right now, instead of just checking the English page and the
translated page (eg Bahasa Indonesia), I have to check the English
page, the wikibase data item, and the Bahasa Indonesia page to make
sure they all match.

> The current situation with content duplicated between
data items and wiki pages isn't really ideal. But there's probably still
some work left until data items can fully replace the existing systems.

So for there to be any benefit, we would have to get rid of the
existing templates and switch to only using the wikibase data items,
correct?

I think we need to discuss if this is desired, before any more time is
spent on adding all of those data items.

-Joseph

On 6/10/19, Tobias Knerr  wrote:
> On 09.06.19 13:59, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> Has this wikibase feature been discussed and approved by the community
>> in some forum? Perhaps it happened before I was involved with OSM? I
>> don't quite understand how it works.
>
> The way it works is that every tag has a "data item". This is the one
> for natural=isthmus, for example:
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q19327
>
> Of course, you're not expected to find this numeric URL yourself. You
> can get there from the wiki page for that tag by clicking on a "pencil"
> icon next to the description in the infobox, or by using an
> "OpenStreetMap Wiki data item" link that appears in the left-hand menu
> on every page that has a data item associated with it.
>
> The idea behind data items is actually quite similar to how templates on
> the wiki work: There is a number of possible properties that you can
> fill in with information. The properties which are currently available
> are mostly identical to the ones used by the templates: Whether the tag
> can be used on nodes/ways/..., links to related/required/implied tags,
> an image, and descriptions in various languages.
>
> If some information is omitted from a wiki page, the infobox will pull
> it in from the tag's data item. Otherwise, the information written
> directly on the page will take precedence.
>
> A potential benefit of data items is that language-independent
> information does not need to be manually copied to each translation. And
> while software like Taginfo has been able to extract information from
> the wiki for a long time, the hope is that this kind of extraction will
> eventually become easier thanks to data items.
>
> I do not believe there has been a community decision to stop adding
> information directly on wiki pages. So the other wiki contributor's edit
> was probably premature.
>
> Of course, though, the current situation with content duplicated between
> data items and wiki pages isn't really ideal. But there's probably still
> some work left until data items can fully replace the existing systems
> (updating data consumers, plus working on usability and documentation).
>
> Tobias
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

___
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: [OSM-talk] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki pages?

[Andrew Hain]

Every tag documentation page has a grey pencil icon next to the description to 
edit the data message. Maybe it could be made clearer.

--
Andrew

From: Joseph Eisenberg 
Sent: 09 June 2019 12:59
To: osm
Subject: [OSM-talk] Wikibase items instead of usual templates for wiki pages?

While checking out the Map Features osm wiki pages, I noticed a few
items that were missing descriptions or had very short,
self-referrential ones (eg. "A peninsula" for natural=peninsula and
"An isthmus" for natural=isthmus), even though the wiki page actually
has a good description, which was approved as part of the proposal
process for each feature.

When I edited the pages to add the description to the usual template
(the ValueDescription template), I was surprised to see that this box
was missing. I ended up reverting the last edits which removed the
box, so that I could edit it.

I was then informed that there is now a "data item" in a tool called
"wikibase" where this information can be edited. Another osm wiki user
thought this is now the correct place to store information like a tag
description.

Has this wikibase feature been discussed and approved by the community
in some forum? Perhaps it happened before I was involved with OSM? I
don't quite understand how it works.

Description of wikibase data items (rather confusing to me):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_items

___
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-GB] sidewalks

[Andrew Hain]

I am inclined to agree with this though I would distinguish between 
non-traversable paths that can be mapped with their connections and 
continuously connected traversable ones that should just have their existence 
marked on their ways.

--
Andrew

From: SK53 
Sent: 02 June 2019 14:10
To: Andy Townsend
Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] sidewalks

I recently 
extended
 some already mapped pavements in N. Cambridge. I'm not really a fan of the 
current approach because I don't think it works particularly well, and I'm not 
aware of any good routers using this type of data for wheelchairs.

The problems I see (and I've said this before):

  *   The scope for missing interconnections is trebled.
  *   It's more or less worthless unless done systematically (places like 
university & hospital campuses are viable from this viewpoint.
  *   In Britain, at least, it requires introduction of many arbitrary crossing 
points to allow any kind of sensible pedestrian routing (i.e., not 
well-supported by on-the-ground features such as dropped kerbs & tactile 
paving). You can see the ones I felt it necessary to introduce around Roseford 
Road & Perse Way. Note that many crossings, e.g., at the Harris Way/Perse Way 
intersection are not complete.
  *   It breaks existing applications. The reason why I noticed the issue in 
North Cambridge is that the Traveline South East app started giving me 
unfeasibly long times to walk to a bus stop. It turned out that it routed me 
all the way along a pavement to Histon Road & then back along Histon Road 
adding a good 500 m to the journey. This was because the original mapping just 
stopped without connecting the end of the pavement to anything.
  *   I'm not completely convinced that wheelchair users, blind people etc can 
put the same degree of trust in this type of data as the ordinary pedestrian 
can for current pedestrian routing. My feeling is that the information really 
needs to be tailored to the user: there's a massive difference between how a 
powered wheelchair or mobility scooter and a manual/pushed wheelchair can cope 
with non-flush kerbs for instance.
  *   I'm not sure if anyone has done any work to show how separately mapped 
sidewalks can be merged with the main highway to provide generalised pedestrian 
routing such as we have now.
  *   Probably to be useful in the UK, all driveways should be mapped too (as 
in Andy's dev server example): in my experience of pushing my late mother 
around in a wheelchair driveways are often much better than many shoddy dropped 
kerb installations.
  *   Naming of sidewalks can create problems (although it can also resolve 
them in cases where the two sides of a street have different names).
  *   It's a pig to survey well in places where dropped kerbs have not been 
installed systematically (as in my Cambridge example).

On the plus side:

  *   It allows more relevant details of pavements to be tagged (width, surface 
etc).
  *   The current sidewalk model is probably much more appropriate in countries 
with specific legislation preventing pedestrians crossing roads at any other 
than designated crossing points (jay walking).
  *   It's always been good publicity for OSM: even if actual real usage is 
limited.
  *   Inevitably OSM will move in the direction of capturing more information & 
this is just one example.

I guess I would have preferred : sidewalks to be mapped with a key other than 
highway (something analogous to area:highway); more research to be done on ways 
to post-process the data (in both directions from 
highway=footway,footway=sidewalk and from sidewalk=*); and good references for 
actual user experience of wheelchair routing using separately mapped sidewalks. 
One way to have our cake & eat it would be to use both sidewalk= and have 
separately mapped sidewalks & allow the consumer to choose which to use, 
although the current sidewalk=separate does not say if its both, left or right. 
Personally I think this is still reasonable in the context of one feature one 
element; sidewalk is an attributive property of the street and potentially 
difficult to derive without resorting to convoluted approaches (such as 
relations).

In summary the problem from my perspective is that mapping them separately can 
often make OSM less useful, whereas most other mapping of additional features 
enhances OSM incrementally.

Jerry



On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 at 15:08, Andy Townsend 
mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 01/06/2019 13:55, Michael Collinson wrote:
>
> ... I tried, then going out to "just verify" and found that I was
> hopelessly inaccurate. It defeats the point, to get a highly accurate
> localised network for folks who might depend on it.
>
>
I did something similar on the dev server a while back here:

https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/54.0167/-1.0486

(turn the data layer on to 

Re: [Talk-GB] road relations

[Andrew Hain]

It is documented at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:associatedStreet , the terracer 
plugin used to create it a lot but now doesn’t by default. The Germans have 
been stripping it out of the database recently [ 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=65510 ] and I’d be relaxed if 
we did the same.

--
Andrew
associatedStreet-Relationen entfernen? / users: Germany / OpenStreetMap 
Forum
Die Relationen bei mir in der Gegend wurden teilweise seit Jahren nicht mehr 
aktualisiert oder überhaupt verändert. Die meisten Versionsänderungen sind 
vermutlich durch Teilungen der Straßenabschnitte entstanden und zudem auch 
größtenteils unvollständig.
forum.openstreetmap.org

Relation:associatedStreet - OpenStreetMap 
Wiki
Using relations to associate addresses and streets. The addr:street =* tag 
provides a link between streets and belonging addr:housenumber =* based on 
geographic proximity. This link can be made explicit by using a type = 
associatedStreet relation.. Tags
wiki.openstreetmap.org


From: Jez Nicholson 
Sent: 01 June 2019 11:10
To: Talk-GB
Subject: [Talk-GB] road relations

Has anyone else come across relations grouping road assets? i.e. the road 
itself plus shops, buildings, street objects? e.g. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1866997 Has this format become accepted 
elsewhere in the world or is it experimental?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Anyone who likes to organize an ID discussion panel at SotM?

[Andrew Hain]

This would be a good idea and it shouldn’t be confined to iD. This is just a 
particularly acute example of something that sometimes happens in OSM. Ideally 
there would be several developers there including iD.

--
Andrew

From: Christine Karch 
Sent: 29 May 2019 10:55
To: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
Cc: program-sotm
Subject: [Osmf-talk] Anyone who likes to organize an ID discussion panel at 
SotM?

Hi,

reading the discussions about the direction of ID development and how
the community wants the ID at the OSM website I had the idea that there
could perhaps be a panel at SotM. Does anyone want to organize an ID
discussion panel at SotM? Please tell me or us (program committee in CC)
and we can consider it. At the moment it would be sufficient to have
someone (or more) who wants to organize it. All details could be defined
later.

As ID is a core feature at the OSM website I think this would be
suitable for the main program at SotM.

Additionally it is always possible to organize informal meetings, panels
during SotM in the unconference space (we will provide a lot of it).

By the way ticket sales is open. The Early Bird phase is until 7 July.
Program announcement will be around 20 June.

We will have our schedule meeting at 8 June. So it would be good to know
if an ID panel should be planned. Details for the program booklet should
be provided until end of July.

Cheers

Christine

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

Re: [OSM-talk] mass iD validation arrives in NYC

[Andrew Hain]

Just out of idle curiosity, do we know of any data consumers that understand 
crossing=marked?

--
Andrew

From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
Sent: 28 May 2019 19:00
To: Dave F
Cc: osm
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] mass iD validation arrives in NYC



Am Di., 28. Mai 2019 um 19:56 Uhr schrieb Dave F via talk 
mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>:
I notice these changesets were completed in 30/60 seconds respectively.
I don't use iD. How is this possible? Does it have a JOSM like mass edit
ability?

   I don't see asking users to split the changesets as a solution to
what is the clear problem of mass adding/amending tags to
unknown/undocumented ones.



indeed, I see no way to judge whether the iD suggestion to change objects from 
crossing=zebra to crossing=marked makes sense, because there is no 
documentation of crossing=marked. Going by the words, probably any zebra 
crossing can be seen as a marked crossing so it may not be introducing errors, 
just reducing specificity/detail.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Remove validation rule asking to add highway=footway to railway/public_transport=platform

[Andrew Hain]

Also:

Have a new team of developers code from the codebase of iD.

Write a new online editor from scratch.

Abandon online editing and tell everyone to use an offline editor.

--
Andrew

From: Simon Poole 
Sent: 27 May 2019 11:07
To: talk@openstreetmap.org; osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Remove validation rule asking to add highway=footway to 
railway/public_transport=platform

The problem with this (and the longer thread on tagging), that it has
had exactly 0 effect.

As I see it we can choose between

- doing nothing (seems to be most popular currently)

- wage an edit war by reverting any edits that clearly do not correspond
to best practices (not good)

- put in place a code of conduct for developers that want their code
deployed on osm.org and other OSMF sites with minimum requirements on
transparency and community interaction (the irony of this is not lost on
me, and it is not clear who would enforce this)

- deploy from a forked iD that is selective with respect to which
commits are integrated (IMHO too much work)

- engaging with the respective employers and ask them to rectify the
situation (obviously there's a big hole in this one)

That's probably about it.

Simon

Am 23.05.2019 um 18:11 schrieb Markus:
> Hello Bryan, hello everyone,
>
> I'm posting this reply to Bryan's message on GitHub
> (https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6409#issuecomment-495231649)
> here, as the issue has been locked by Bryan.
>
>> Hey all, I've locked this topic. Inviting other people to jump on the thread 
>> just to express disagreement is not very helpful.
> While i really appreciate the work you and the other developers have
> put into iD, i find it demotivating and harmful that you refuse other
> opinions.
>
>> Some people will disagree, and that's ok.
> So far, everybody except you disagreed. If there is a clear majority,
> i expect the iD developers to follow it.
>
> Moreover, this validation rule infringes upon these policies or guidelines:
>
> * Automated Edits code of conduct
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct):
> You take advantage of mappers unconsciously adding highway=footway to
> platforms. This is an automated edit.
> * Map what's on the ground
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground):
> A platform is not a footway.
> * Don't map for the renderer
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_for_the_renderer):
> It's rater "don't map for the router", but the effect is the same.
>
>> There exists no master list of all the routable features in OSM. This is 
>> because people are always making up tags. It is unreasonable to expect 
>> mappers and data consumers to "just know" what all the tags are that are 
>> routable.
> If the problem is the lack of a list of all routable features in OSM,
> then it should be solved by creating such a list, not by mapping for
> the router. (By the way, routable tags aren't added very frequently.)
> I guess it should also be possible to create a "routable" property for
> Wikibase (data items).
>
> I kindly ask you to reconsider your decision, to not block opinions
> that differ from yours and to listen more to the community.
>
> Best regards
>
> Markus
>
> ___
> 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-GB] Missing Captcha when adding event in OSM wiki

[Andrew Hain]

Have you tried using the link at the bottom of the page to switch between 
mobile and desktop view before you edit?

--
Andrew

From: n...@posteo.net 
Sent: 27 April 2019 15:19
To: Talk GB
Subject: [Talk-GB] Missing Captcha when adding event in OSM wiki


Hi

I attempt to add an event to the list on 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Current_events. However, when it comes to 
saving the edit, the alert Your edit includes new external links. To protect 
the wiki against automated spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following 
CAPTCHA: comes up, with no Captcha appearing for me to be solved. Is someone 
familiar with adding events or editing the OSM wiki in general and could help, 
please?

I hope this isn't the wrong place for my question. Otherwise please point me 
into the right direction.

Thank you
Nora

[cid:part2.145692B4.4602BA69@posteo.de]
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

[Andrew Hain]

Is it worth mechanically removing any of the existing discardable tags from the 
database as well?

--
Andrew

From: Dave F via talk 
Sent: 17 March 2019 21:09
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of 
osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

Mateusz
There's also a few osmarender:renderName in the UK. Maybe check osmarender:* to 
collate all?

Simon
Never comprehended the reluctance to remove dead items. Does stepping the 
version /really/ cause any harm?
Contributors, especially newbies, often copy tags from existing examples with 
redundant tags often propagating as result.

We allow everybody to add data (which I agree with), but there's an increasing 
resistance to anybody suggesting tag removal.

If it improves database quality, then go for it.

DaveF


On 15/03/2019 20:13, Simon Poole wrote:

Why would we want to create new versions of objects just to remove a tag
that is not hurting anybody in any way?

The correct way to handle this is to add the tag to the list of
deprecated tags that should be automatically removed (essentially iD has
a list and JOSM has one too), when and if the objects are ever edited
the tags will then be removed.

Simon

Am 15.03.2019 um 20:16 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:


osmarender:nameDirection=* is an old tag that is case of tagging for
the renderer.
Additionally, Osmarender is defunct anyway.

I propose to purge this tag from database as useless, confusing and
encouraging
tagging for renderer.

This edit would remove about 2000 osmarender:nameDirection=* tags
worldwide,
with most of them in Germany and England.

osmarender:nameDirection is described on OSM Wiki as

"By default Osmarender will draw street names left-to-right along ways.
It uses the longitude (horizontal position) of the start and end
points of the
way to determine the direction.

In some cases, for example, very winding roads, the automatically chosen
name direction is not ideal. In this case the way can be tagged with
osmarender:nameDirection=-1 or osmarender:nameDirection=1 as a
hint to tell Osmarender which way to draw the name. "

Automated edit page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/elimination_of_osmarender:nameDirection_-_blatant_tagging_for_the_renderer

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







___
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-GB] Road name contradictions in the UK

[Andrew Hain]

Is this something that could go in Survey Me?

--
Andrew

From: Oisin Herriott (Insight Global Inc) via Talk-GB 

Sent: 22 February 2019 20:47
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Road name contradictions in the UK


Hi Everyone,



Our Open Maps team 
(https://github.com/microsoft/open-maps)
 has been continuing to work on analyzing OSM in the UK.  Some of you may have 
seen my session in Milan where we talked about Microsoft’s ongoing OSM work in 
Australia.



We’ve created a list of the top 1500 streets in the UK that appear to be 
missing names along with the name that we suspect should be there. We are not 
100% certain if our suspicious are correct and, not being local to these areas 
we are not remotely trying to fill these in. If there are folks that know these 
areas we could use your help closing these gaps.



The complete list is available here:

https://1drv.ms/x/s!As04HHdPPfhgg4lYigS4IiWjp2JJiw



These are not major roads but they are associated with a large number of 
residential addresses so end up having a big impact.  We may also create a 
Maproulette challenge for these as well if that is preferable?



Thanks,

Oisin

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/herriotto





Sent from Mail for Windows 10


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Fw: Road name contradictions in the UK

[Andrew Hain]

Some roads tagged service look like reasonable candidates:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/346182691
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]

Way: 346182691 | OpenStreetMap
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use 
under an open license.
www.openstreetmap.org



--
Andrew

From: Jez Nicholson 
Sent: 07 March 2019 14:19
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Fw: Road name contradictions in the UK

I'm also wondering whether you should exclude Service Roads as it indicates an 
access road with no name, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/225081816

On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 2:10 PM Jez Nicholson 
mailto:jez.nichol...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I randomly found 2 good examples: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/634592359 
and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/478481882 which are both new housing 
estateswhich would fit why a road with a lot of houses is unnamed. They may 
have been mapped prior to them receiving official road names.

The case that Greg already noted, mobile home parks, e.g. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/230945815 may have road names but are 
sometimes private property and not accessible to mappers.

Perhaps there is extra processing that could classify them?

On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 1:57 PM Gregory Marler 
mailto:i...@nomoregrapes.com>> wrote:
Hi Oisin,

I've taken a very quick look at this spreadsheet (oops, getting distracted from 
work).

1) Can you elaborate on the source(s) of suspected road names?
2) It would helpful if each of us could look at your list in a more localised 
aspect. Either including county would be more helpful, or at least having 
latitude and longitude in separate columns makes it easier to use in other 
tools usually.
3) There's some obvious reasons why some of those aren't in OSM just by looking 
at the first 5.
3a) One was on a caravan park, so it might not have an official name or even a 
sign (again I would like to question the source).
3b) A way was about 3 metres to connect one road to another, it's debatable 
whether it should be named itself but could be fixed without a survey.
3c) There are lots of abbreviated names in your spreadsheet, even "Clos" which 
I presume is a strange shortening of "Close".

A Maproulette challenge might tempt people to copy the names from your 
spreadsheet (the legality and suitability of that is very unknown!).

All the best from Chester-le-Street,
Gregory.


On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 13:38, Oisin Herriott (Insight Global Inc) via Talk-GB 
mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
Hello again,

Wondering if there was any discussion on the previously submitted question, 
which is inline below? Happy to elaborate anyway I can where there is any 
ambiguity 

Thanks,
Oisin


From: Oisin Herriott (Insight Global Inc)
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 12:47 PM
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Road name contradictions in the UK


Hi Everyone,



Our Open Maps team 
(https://github.com/microsoft/open-maps)
 has been continuing to work on analyzing OSM in the UK.  Some of you may have 
seen my session in Milan where we talked about Microsoft’s ongoing OSM work in 
Australia.



We’ve created a list of the top 1500 streets in the UK that appear to be 
missing names along with the name that we suspect should be there. We are not 
100% certain if our suspicious are correct and, not being local to these areas 
we are not remotely trying to fill these in. If there are folks that know these 
areas we could use your help closing these gaps.



The complete list is available here:

https://1drv.ms/x/s!As04HHdPPfhgg4lYigS4IiWjp2JJiw



These are not major roads but they are associated with a large number of 
residential addresses so end up having a big impact.  We may also create a 
Maproulette challenge for these as well if that is preferable?



Thanks,

Oisin

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/herriotto





Sent from Mail for Windows 10



___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

[Andrew Hain]

Will the board be following up with additional information as promised?

--
Andrew

From: Martijn van Exel 
Sent: 10 December 2018 16:55:42
To: OSM Talk; OSMF Talk
Cc: OSMF Board
Subject: [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

Hi all,

On November 17, the OSMF Board of Directors received a request to review the 
Nov 14, 2018 Data Working Group decision regarding Crimea.

The Board decided that this decision is to be reversed and the previous 
situation, as laid out in the May 5, 2014 Data Working Group minutes, is to 
further remain in effect.

The board highly values the Data Working Group’s work and appreciates the 
difficulty and complexity of the cases they are asked to review on an ongoing 
basis.

A more comprehensive statement will follow in the next weeks.

Best regards,
Martijn van Exel
Secretary, OpenStreetMap Foundation
___
osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

[Andrew Hain]

A question both to the current board and the candidates: Do you support normal 
levels of Board transparency on this issue?
--
Andrew

From: Martijn van Exel 
Sent: 10 December 2018 16:55:42
To: OSM Talk; OSMF Talk
Cc: OSMF Board
Subject: [Osmf-talk] Board decision on Crimea complaint

Hi all,

On November 17, the OSMF Board of Directors received a request to review the 
Nov 14, 2018 Data Working Group decision regarding Crimea.

The Board decided that this decision is to be reversed and the previous 
situation, as laid out in the May 5, 2014 Data Working Group minutes, is to 
further remain in effect.

The board highly values the Data Working Group’s work and appreciates the 
difficulty and complexity of the cases they are asked to review on an ongoing 
basis.

A more comprehensive statement will follow in the next weeks.

Best regards,
Martijn van Exel
Secretary, OpenStreetMap Foundation
___
osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-t...@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-GB] Climbing new heights in “interesting” tagging

[Andrew Hain]

Road signs tagged natural=peak:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5890628170
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5890628171

--
Andrew
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]

Node: ‪Give way sign‬ (‪5890628171‬) | 
OpenStreetMap
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use 
under an open license.
www.openstreetmap.org


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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Wikibase is now live

[Andrew Hain]

Could you give some examples so that the wider OSM community can do something 
about it?

--
Andrew


From: Christoph Hormann 


We already have quite a few people on the wiki who try to forbid mappers
accurately documenting widely used tags because these tags are bad in
terms of certain systematics and should not 
exist.

[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png]
 Virus-free. 
www.avg.com
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

[Andrew Hain]

Richmond cricket club play in the Middlesex league and Middlesex sometimes play 
at their Old Deer Park 
ground[https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/51.46911/-0.29533]. Neighbouring 
Sheen Park[https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/51.4579/-0.2708] play in both 
the Middlesex and Surrey leagues.

--
Andrew

From: Robert Skedgell 
Sent: 19 September 2018 21:24
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database



On 19/09/2018 16:04, Andrew Black wrote:
> There is a very big difference
>
> - ceremonial counties exist now and so are in scope for OSM.  As you say
> here are differences between them and admin counties when unitary
> authorties are involved
>  - traditional counties are an attempt to recreate the past
> So I don't think these trad counties have any ceremonial existence any
> more.  Which means they are just causing confusion.
>
> I live in London. The place I live in has been inb the county of London
> since 1889. But the traditional county beast says I live in Surrey.

I also live in London, east of the River Lea (historical Essex). It
certainly makes a difference for the purposes of athletics: my running
club is the other side of the Lea and affiliated to Middlesex, but I am
ineligible to compete in Middlesex County AA races. I suspect people
participating in other sports at club level are affected by historic
counties.

I do not have any strong views on whether or not they should be included
in OSM, but even now they are not entirely irrelevant.

--
Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)



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

Re: [Talk-GB] Wickham Market, Suffolk

[Andrew Hain]

Does it measure importance sensibly or is it a category only weakly related to 
importance like the authority that maintains roads?

--
Andrew

From: Mark Goodge 
Sent: 07 September 2018 14:51
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Wickham Market, Suffolk



On 07/09/2018 13:06, Martin Wynne wrote:
>
>> But that only applies to that particular street. What do you do when
>> somewhere has some streets that are fully lit and some that aren't?
>> Are you planning to go round every street in a settlement, check the
>> street lights, total them all up and then use that to decide whether
>> it's a town or a village? Especially when you can just look it up!
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> If you can just look it up, you don't need to do anything else.

But that's my point. We can just look it up, if we start from the
assumption that the Local Government Act distinction between a town and
a village (technically, between a town and a parish, but that's just
terminology) is definitive. So observation doesn't need to come into it.

Mark

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

Re: [Talk-GB] GB does not include Northern Ireland

[Andrew Hain]

Although Dave’s edits left out Northern Ireland, 
(https://www.mail-archive.com/talk-gb@openstreetmap.org/msg16162.html) the 
question of whether similar edits should take place there was left open.

--
Andrew

From: Brian Prangle 
Sent: 29 August 2018 13:20
To: Dave F; Talk GB; Killyfole and District Development Association
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] GB does not include Northern Ireland

 I thought that you said  c roads would remain in NI but judging by Clive's 
reaction I thought something must have changed. He's obviously not convinced 
that c roads are going to remain in NI so perhaps you should  make it even more 
abundantly and explicitly clear that this is the case and have it documented 
clearly in all the right places. Can I suggest that perhaps you might also 
benefit from your own advice when making  future country-wide automatic edits

Regards

Brian

On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 21:42, Dave F 
mailto:davefoxfa...@btinternet.com>> wrote:


On 28/08/2018 20:24, Brian Prangle wrote:
>  I suggest at the very least that the change is reverted for NI.
>

I wish people would read before putting their hands anywhere near a
keyboard.

DaveF

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

Re: [Talk-GB] GB does not include Northern Ireland

[Andrew Hain]

Imposing strict boundaries on OSM communication channels (in this case a 
non-ISO3166 meaning for a talk list) is out of order and is not a proper 
response to any disagreement anyone may have about tagging.

--
Andrew

From: webmas...@killyfole.org.uk 
Sent: 28 August 2018 13:04:20
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] GB does not include Northern Ireland

Hi folks,

As it has been pointed out to me on IRC that GB doesn't include Northern
Ireland, and I should keep my opinions to myself.  So having left the IRC
channel, I am now leaving this mailing list as well.

I will also be canceling my OSMUK membership or failing that, not renewing in
December 2018.  I can still be reached via OSM username:KDDA or on the Talk IE
mailing list.

Thanks to all who have helped me over the years,

Clive aka KDDA







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

Re: [Talk-GB] Road refs

[Andrew Hain]

Toby, I really think you need to read through the conversation archived at 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2018-August/thread.html and 
answer the points discussed there.

--
Andrew

From: Toby Speight 
Sent: 27 August 2018 19:15
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] Road refs

Recently, all the tertiary roads in my region had their ref tags
removed, and replaced with "highways_authority_ref".  A week later the
unclassified and residential roads suffered similar attack.

* Who is supposed to benefit from hiding these data?
* Who is responsible for documenting what this tag means, and when it
  should be used in place of the standard tagging?  So far, there's no
  mention of it on its own tag wiki, nor on key:ref
* Who is responsible for coordinating the related changes to software -
  editors, renderers, converters and QA tools - that are required?  I
  see no sign of any of this having started.

In short, what's going on, what's wrong with the standard tagging, and
how can we get the data back where they belong?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Hain]

Do you know whether the latitude and longitude on the plaque are in the WGS84 
that we use?

From: Andrew Errington 
Sent: 11 August 2018 10:56
To: mmd
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open 
Location Code to the OSM search?

I tag survey points with latitude and longitude (taken from the plaque on the 
survey marker). Then it is possible to see if they have been moved 
accidentally, and for users to check that they are actually in the surveyed 
location.

Andrew

On Sat, Aug 11, 2018, 21:24 mmd mailto:mmd@gmail.com>> 
wrote:
Am 10.08.2018 um 19:46 schrieb Christoph Hormann:
> The idea of tagging encoded coordinates is so ridiculous to anyone with
> a bit of understanding of computer programming, data processing and
> data maintainance that even after ignoring all the arguments in
> substance that have been voiced this should be universally rejected if
> for no other reason then because it would make OSM the laughing stock
> of the whole geodata world.

With all due respect, I think we've long crossed that point:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/KSJ2%3Alat
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ngbe%3Alat_ed50
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/gns%3ALAT
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/latitude

--



___
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: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Hain]

If they did sue, could Nomination, Osmand or OSM be liable if we implement it?

--
Andrew

From: Simon Poole 
Sent: 11 August 2018 09:43
To: Blake Girardot
Cc: OpenStreetMap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open 
Location Code to the OSM search?



Am 10.08.2018 um 23:25 schrieb Blake Girardot:
> Is that not the reason OSM was started in the first place?   :)

It is slightly different in more than one way for a monopoly owner to
pre-emptively create and promote a free system  to stop a competitor
from gaining a foothold in a potential new market (and the goog is
obviously spending a fair bit of small change on the whole thing). I
suspect suing the goog is plan b for the w3w investors if they are not
successful with the company as such.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

[Andrew Hain]

This looks to be very comfortably within the computational ability of mobile 
phone apps (“You could calculate it with AI” is a much less attractive 
deletionist argument) so everyone who has implemented it by conerting 
coordinates on the fly would seem to be doing the right thing.

--
Andrew

From: Paul Norman 
Sent: 10 August 2018 23:00:39
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open 
Location Code to the OSM search?

On 2018-08-10 1:06 PM, Blake Girardot HOT/OSM wrote:
> Learning the real world use cases and where the proper technological
> solutions work and if there really genuinely are places where dynamic
> generation is just not possible.
>
> This seems totally in line with things done in the past and should
> work well here.

Speaking as a developer, it's much easier to add PlusCode support
properly than to try and parse another address tag. Don't add them
thinking it makes it easier.

___
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: [OSM-talk] highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

[Andrew Hain]

The wiki has definitely had problems recently and we should have a good 
discussion about what we want from it.

--
Andrew

From: Paul Johnson 
Sent: 10 August 2018 18:13:36
To: Tomasz Wójcik
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] highway=* + area=yes vs area:highway=*

Sounds fine by me.  Seems there's a decent sized contingency working the wiki 
independently of how things are actually tagged anymore, it's been getting hard 
to point to the wiki as a usable reference for a couple years now.

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018, 05:08 Tomasz Wójcik mailto:tom...@wp.pl>> 
wrote:
So basing on your opinions, it looks like highway=* + area=yes isn't
incorrect, it's just not documented. What do you guys think about adding
a better documentation of combination with area=yes to some of highway=*
Wiki pages?


___
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-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

[Andrew Hain]

Postal counties (mainly a outer London and Manchester thing in this context) 
are essentially defunct.

--
Andrew

From: Martin Wynne 
Sent: 10 August 2018 13:00:40
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] 'historic' county boundaries added to the database

> The "historic" boundaries, though, whatever particular snapshot of them
> you choose as the most important one, don't have any relevance to
> everyday life.

Are not some of them still relevant to post-code areas and postal counties?

Lots of useful stuff appears on OSM for which there is nothing physical
on the ground. Bus stops in rural areas are frequently timetabled as
"Rose & Crown" or the name of a side road. There is nothing on the ground.

In this area I was taken to task for adjusting an unexplained boundary,
which turned out to be the local "PlusBus" area boundary for inclusive
fares from the nearest railway station:

  http://plusbus.info/

Martin.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] 'C' class roads references.

[Andrew Hain]

Are you offering to create a map with this level of special cases for every 
country in the world? I’d love to see the result.

--
Andrew

From: David Woolley 
Sent: 04 August 2018 09:55
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] 'C' class roads references.

On 04/08/18 00:47, Dave F wrote:
>
> After many discussions over the years about the referencing of 'C' class
> roads there appeared to be a general consensus to keep them in the
> database but provide a unique tag to allow them not to be rendered.

I assume you mean the reference is not rendered rather than the road.

It seems to me that, in the UK, class C roads should be exactly the set
of roads with highway=tertiary, so there is no need for a new tag.  Even
if that is not true, the correct solution would be to test the reference
in the renderer and suppress it if within the UK.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Lua modules are here: Improving OSM wiki templates

[Andrew Hain]

It would be interesting to know how much of the problem is because of the large 
number of languages tested, many with no pages on the wiki written in that 
language.

--
Andrew

From: mmd 
Sent: 29 July 2018 19:37:04
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Lua modules are here: Improving OSM wiki templates

Am 29.07.2018 um 14:57 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> * Much better performance compared with wiki template language

Sounds great. One of the major pain points on many Wiki pages is the
whole topic around Language / LanguageSwitch templates.

Verdy_p has written a lengthy analysis of the current situation, which
I'm mostly unable to follow as I'm not really familiar with Mediawiki
internals:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Verdy_p#Performance_impact_due_to_translation_templates

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than myself could take a look, if it is
worthwhile throwing in some Lua for better performance in this case, or
maybe trying something different.

Thanks!

--





___
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-GB] Updates to 'Survey Me!' tool

[Andrew Hain]

Where I live businesses that are still open sometimes drop out of FHRS. Your 
mileage may very.

--
Andrew


From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
Sent: 23 July 2018 10:52
To: talk-gb
Subject: [Talk-GB] Updates to 'Survey Me!' tool

A couple of minor updates to my 'Survey Me!' tool at
http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/survey/ to tell you about:

First there is a new category of FHRS (Food Hygiene Rating System)
reference mismatches. This includes items where the number in the
fhrs:id=* tag doesn't match a current number in the official FHRS
database. The data comes from Greg's comparison tool at
https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/ and wlil hopefully be
updated daily. A small number of these mismatches may be typos in the
original data entry, but the rest will either be because a business
has closed (survey probably required) or because a business has
changed in some way causing a new number to be issued (could possibly
be fixed by reference to the FHRS comparison tool).
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous notes spam?

[Andrew Hain]

Can we find out what software is being used to send these notes?

--
Andrew

From: Doug Hembry 
Sent: 20 July 2018 14:26:13
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] anonymous notes spam?

Yes. In the San Francisco Bay Area. Single letters "f", "k", and "l".
Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/778721#map=15/37.5009/-122.3032=N
BTW, is there a simple way to delete such note comments?

On 7/20/2018 2:32 AM, maning sambale wrote:
> I'm getting several single letter notes comments since yesterday.
> Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/562375
> Are people noticing the same?
>

___
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: [OSM-talk] API a lot slower?

[Andrew Hain]

Will there be a local team or does whatever can’t be done remotely need a visit?

--
Andrew

From: Grant Slater 
Sent: 17 July 2018 13:55:05
To: Daniel Koć
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] API a lot slower?

On 17 July 2018 at 13:42, Daniel Koć  wrote:
> W dniu 17.07.2018 o 12:22, Grant Slater pisze:
>> Our primary hardware is moving to a new data centre next week, and
>> will take some time to get up and running.
>
> What data center do you mean? Is it the one which OSMF was looking for
> at the beginning of the year?
>
> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2018/02/19/osmf-request-for-proposals-data-centre-2018/
>
> Could you give some more details about it?
>

Yes. We are moving some core servers to an Equinix data centre in Amsterdam, NL.

OpenStreetMap's Brexit ;-) 

Kind regards,

Grant
Part of the OSM Operations team.

___
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-GB] New Data in PRoW Comparison Tool

[Andrew Hain]

Could we follow the signage for the prow_ref format where the authority puts it 
on signs?

--
Andrew

From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
Sent: 05 July 2018 09:17:10
To: talk-gb
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] New Data in PRoW Comparison Tool

On 3 July 2018 at 15:10, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists)
 wrote:
> I've just added another county -- East Sussex -- to my PRoW Comparison
> Tool: http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/east-sussex/

Devon now added as well: http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/progress/devon/

There were a number of different prow_ref formats in use in Devon. The
most popular was of the form "Chivelstone Bridleway 6" (with the
parish name and the RoW type spelt out). This also what the county
council uses on their online interactive map. So for now I've set my
tool to use this style for Devon. Other formats with significant use
in Devon include "Chivelstone BR 6" (with the RoW type abbreviated),
"Chivelstone 6" (without the type at all), "211BR11" (presumably the
211 is a parish code), and "DN|Bampton|2" (which is the artificial
format used by rowmaps.com).

I don't think we can have a single standard for prow_ref formats
across the whole county, but I do think we should adopt a single
format within each authority area. Given the usage (in OSM and by the
Council), I'd suggest going with the "Chivelstone Bridleway 6" style
for Devon. I'm going to invite some of the mappers who've been working
on Devon PRoWs to comment here with their thoughts.

Robert.

--
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

[Andrew Hain]

Should we ask for validation steps in editors to flag FIXME as a likely tagging 
mistake going forwards?

--
Andrew

From: Mateusz Konieczny 
Sent: 02 July 2018 18:42
To: Talk
Subject: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

fixme tag is a standard way to mark fixmes.
Editors wishing to finish mapping in their area would (directly or
indirectly, for example using JOSM) look through objects tagged with
fixme tags.

FIXME tag is an unexpected way to mark fixmes, retagging this duplicate to
fixme key would improve tagging without any information loss.

It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
discover and implement support for this duplicated key.

Between X and Y objects are expected to be edited. See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/FIXME#map for a
geographic distribution.

Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
bounding boxes. As this tag may be on extremely large objects (for example 
relations representing long routes) it may be unavoidable to make some edits 
with very large bounding boxes.

For documentation page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_FIXME_to_fixme
For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account

Please comment - especially if there are any problems with this idea.
Please also comment if you support this edit, in case of no response
at all edit will not be made as there would be no evidence that
this idea is supported.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [HOT] Why the HOT obsession with low quality buildings in Africa ?

[Andrew Hain]

Generally, of course, yes, but there was a talk by someone who had estimated 
the population of a seasonally inhabited village by mapping buildings that are 
demolished each year.

--
Andrew

From: Jean-Marc Liotier 
Sent: 02 July 2018 15:25:38
To: Vao Matua
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org; HOT Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [HOT] Why the HOT obsession with low quality buildings 
in Africa ?

On Mon, July 2, 2018 2:59 pm, Vao Matua wrote:
> When you say "low quality" buildings, do you mean the quality of the
> polygon data or are you judging someone's home to be of low value?

The tracing of course - mud shacks and posh villas are all equal before
Openstreetmap contributors !


___
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: [OSM-talk] WMF: "Interactive maps, now in your language"

[Andrew Hain]

One of OSM’s strengths is, or should be, that we are a truly worldwide map. 
Multilingual names are part of this. Excluding actual names from the map 
database as “ought not” is no different from omitting casinos in a stand 
against gambling or leaving the road number of the high street in your town off 
the map.

It is unfortunate that a few people have sought to limit the contribution of 
names by our mappers.

--
Andrew

From: Andy Mabbett 
Sent: 29 June 2018 12:21:06
To: OSM talk mailing list
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] WMF: "Interactive maps, now in your language"

On 29 June 2018 at 11:57, Simon Poole  wrote:

>> On 29.06.2018 12:18, Andy Mabbett wrote:

>>> New Wikimedia Foundation blog post:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/06/28/interactive-maps-now-in-your-language/

> they should not be calling for their users to vandalize OSM.

Nor are they.

I expected some negativity in response to this remarkable good news;
but this hyperbolic response is beyond acceptable.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
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-GB] Local names of bits of trunk roads

[Andrew Hain]

You might want to ask for Nominatim to return relations for queries of road 
names.

--
Andrew

From: Paul Berry 
Sent: 25 June 2018 15:59:36
To: David Woolley
Cc: Talk GB
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Local names of bits of trunk roads

Someone's had a brave go at defining that very relation: 
http://osm.org/relation/2776562

Feel free to extend it, bearing in mind the Great North Road != A1 (M or 
otherwise).

Regards,
Paul

On 25 June 2018 at 14:44, David Woolley 
mailto:for...@david-woolley.me.uk>> wrote:
On 25/06/18 14:13, Stuart Reynolds wrote:
So how should I tag this? I want to have the correct name for the sections of 
A1, yet I don’t know how far these extend (my data lists the street names at 
points, not over lengths), and equally I don’t want to lose the Great North 
Road tag - just to demote it.


I would say that the name should be that which is locally sign posted, for 
which you will need an on the ground survey.

I think I would agree with the discussion that suggests "Great North Road" for 
the entirety, should be a [route] relation.



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

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Local names of bits of trunk roads

[Andrew Hain]

You could also check the way histories to see if the local road names have been 
mapped in the past.

--
Andrew

From: Adam Snape 
Sent: 25 June 2018 17:11:04
To: Stuart Reynolds
Cc: Talk GB
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Local names of bits of trunk roads

And, to actually deal with your question, I'd do a ground survey to see where 
the name changes. Failing that, the OS Open Map Local roads vector layer will 
show where the OS thinks the road name changes.

Kind regards,

Adam

On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, 17:01 Adam Snape, 
mailto:adam.c.sn...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Stuart,

Sorry, to clarify I meant the Great North Road relation.

It is entirely right that the verifiable current names are mapped.

Kind regards,

Adam

On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, 16:41 Stuart Reynolds, 
mailto:stu...@travelinesoutheast.org.uk>> 
wrote:
What do you mean by the “this” that is to be mapped? Do you mean “Great North 
Road” or High Road / London Road, etc. The latter are not historic - they are 
current (as you can verify on e.g. Postcode Finder looking for 11 High Road, 
Beeston, Sandy)

Regards,
Stuart


Stuart Reynolds
for traveline south east & anglia




On 25 Jun 2018, at 16:38, Adam Snape 
mailto:adam.c.sn...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi,

If this is to be mapped  shouldn't it be as a historic feature rather than a 
(current) road route?

By the way I tend to use loc_name for a colloquial name regardless of whether 
it is just used by local people.

Kind regards,

Adam



On 25 June 2018 at 15:59, Paul Berry 
mailto:pmberry2...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Someone's had a brave go at defining that very relation: 
http://osm.org/relation/2776562

Feel free to extend it, bearing in mind the Great North Road != A1 (M or 
otherwise).

Regards,
Paul

On 25 June 2018 at 14:44, David Woolley 
mailto:for...@david-woolley.me.uk>> wrote:
On 25/06/18 14:13, Stuart Reynolds wrote:
So how should I tag this? I want to have the correct name for the sections of 
A1, yet I don’t know how far these extend (my data lists the street names at 
points, not over lengths), and equally I don’t want to lose the Great North 
Road tag - just to demote it.


I would say that the name should be that which is locally sign posted, for 
which you will need an on the ground survey.

I think I would agree with the discussion that suggests "Great North Road" for 
the entirety, should be a [route] relation.



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


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


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

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

[Talk-GB] Bing maps

[Andrew Hain]

I had a look at the Bing map of Richmond this morning. It now has houses on it, 
or rather it has some of them. The resulting map looks, shall I say, familiar 
if a bit out of date.

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Has someone just given us (the start of) access to the crown jewels?

[Andrew Hain]

The property extents might be something that can be turned into landuse 
polygons. The existing ones where I live are very low quslity.

--
Andrew

From: Tim Waters 
Sent: 14 June 2018 14:09:57
To: OSM - Talk GB
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Has someone just given us (the start of) access to the 
crown jewels?

I think master map buildings could be really good for use for imagery offsets 
and to effectively ground truth surrounding traced features.

Just property extents: perhaps okay for positioning fences, walls etc?

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

[Talk-GB] House of Fraser

[Andrew Hain]

House of Fraser today announced today that half their branches are to close, 
listing which ones. Although shops should not yet be removed does it make sense 
with this announcement (or others like it in the future) to put notes or fixmes 
in the 31 locations involved?

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

[OSM-talk] Tool to change dual carriageway to sinjle preserving route relations?

[Andrew Hain]

Is there a tool that preserves bus route relations properly whlle correcting a 
road currently mapped as dual carriageway to predominantly single carriageway?

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

[Andrew Hain]

And some with an apostrophe: 
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=Lloyd+TSB#values

--
Andrew

From: Rob Nickerson 
Sent: 08 May 2018 00:19:36
To: Brian Prangle
Cc: Talk-GB
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Toys R Us

>Lloyds and TSB  banks demerged 5 years ago - yet we still have 180 branches 
>with the old name.

We also have 7 mapped as "LLoyds TSB", 5 as "Lloyds TSB Bank", 4 as "Lloyds TSB 
Scotland" 3 as (dubious) "Lloyds/TSB", 1 as "LLoyds TSB Bank", 1 as "Lloyds  
TSB" (double space), 1 as "Lloyd's TSB", 1 as "Lloyds TSB Bank Plc", 1 as 
"Lloyds TSB Bank PLC" and 1 as "Lloyds-TSB".

But on the plus side... um, no, that's lost on me!

Sigh.

Rob


On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 20:27, Brian Prangle 
> wrote:
The answer to the question I posed originally seems to be either  "never" or 
"immediately". Maplin I understand waiting some more time for the liquidation 
process to complete. For clarity the mechanical edit would be shop=vacant and 
previous_name=  whichever variant of the Toys R us name is present; which 
preserves the shop amenity  with a change of use and preserves the "landmark" 
data, which I hope answers some of the concerns raised so far. Maintaining map 
data surely has to be a mix of automation and hand-crafted, not a zealot 
position of one to the exclusion of the other. If we know data to be inaccurate 
and there is an easy fix surely we're bounden to users of our map to make it 
the best we can. If we adopt Frederick's position(which I see, rightly or 
wrongly, as a quest for ideological purity) we put community  before users, 
when I see it has to be a balance between the two. What's the point of  
building a map if we don't make it as accurate and complete as possible, as 
soon as possible? Otherwise it's in danger of becoming purely a thing of beauty 
hand-crafted by dedicated hobbyists, with  no thought for all those who have 
decided to use our map.

How long should we wait for a mapper to verify something that's changed? Lloyds 
and TSB  banks demerged 5 years ago - yet we still have 180 branches with the 
old name. Likewise the Territorial Army changed name 6 years ago and we still 
have 27 instances of the old name. So how about  volunteers for a campaign to 
contact local mappers and gently encourage them to update the map?

Regards

Brian


On 5 May 2018 at 11:57, Rob Nickerson 
> wrote:
And for the balance: I disagree with Frederik on this one.

If we know the map is wrong we should fix it. We should not leave it just 
because it may encourage others to fix it and then go on to do other local 
edits.

Frederik's view is that a crap map encourages more people to edit. I'm not 
convinced. A crap map could also put people off - "why bother, OSM is so far 
behind, I'll contribute to/just use Google maps instead"

I agree that a blank map encourages new mappers, but that was 10 years ago! 
Less convinced that an out of date map does. At least not with our current 
homepage or if we do get a new mapper its most likely to be a single edit 
(maybe with MapsMe) rather than a new prolific mapper.

So I'm happy with this mechanical edit (full removal preferred, but addition of 
disussed ok too).

Rob

P.s. Do we still have cases of Lloyds TSB in OSM?

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


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

[Talk-GB] Dentist with name of person

[Andrew Hain]

If a dental practice has the name of the dentist in large letters on the fascia 
(rather than any other name) does that count as a business name to be mapped or 
personal information to be kept private?

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

[Talk-GB] Addressing of flats: review best practice

[Andrew Hain]

I have been mapping a complex of flats that consists of a series of blocks each 
with its own entrance, tagging each section with addr:housename and addr:flats 
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/580234651]. The standard layer repeats the 
name of the whole block for each section, which I find a bit clunky 
(Humanitarian doesn’t label anything at all). Before I discuss this with the 
map renderers, am I doing the best thing for tagging?


--

Andrew

[https://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]

Way: 580234651 | OpenStreetMap
www.openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use 
under an open license.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] External contact channels and GDPR

[Andrew Hain]

The issue would be that we are asking someone to trust an external provider. At 
worst we could be responsible for propagating their noncompliance with the GDPR.

--
Andrewm

From: Kathleen Lu <kathleen...@mapbox.com>
Sent: 16 April 2018 23:11:11
To: Andrew Hain
Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] External contact channels and GDPR

Hi Andrew,
It's not clear to me why GDPR would make it unacceptable in general to ask 
someone to discuss something, whether a controversial edit or not, in one forum 
or another, OSMF or not. What would be the concern?
-Kathleen


On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9:18 PM Andrew Hain 
<andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk<mailto:andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk>> wrote:
When we ask mappers to discuss controversial edits or imports is it ever 
acceptable under GDPR to direct people to a contact channel that is not 
directly run by the OSMF?

--
Andrew
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] External contact channels and GDPR

[Andrew Hain]

When we ask mappers to discuss controversial edits or imports is it ever 
acceptable under GDPR to direct people to a contact channel that is not 
directly run by the OSMF?

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

[Talk-GB] Post offices where different services open for different times

[Andrew Hain]

The post office at 86 Southampton Row (London) 
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2326348566] has both shop and post office 
opening times posted in the window. The shop has longer hours (which I tagged 
opening_hours), the post office has two times listed. The full service is 
available for a shorter time (which I tagged opening_hours:post_office) with 
some (unspecified) services available for the same opening times as the shop. 
The POL list [http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postoffice/branch/134810] gives the 
longer opening times. Any comments on how it should be mapped?


--

Andrew

[https://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]

Node: ‪Ryman‬ (‪2326348566‬) | 
OpenStreetMap
www.openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use 
under an open license.


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

[Talk-GB] Post offices that have closed

[Andrew Hain]

What is a suitable way to identify post offices no longer in use such as 
http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postoffice/branch/19408 to the maintenance tools?

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

[Andrew Hain]

You could say that every existing edit is by an “old” account and new ones 
going forwards are by main site accounts which occasionally have the same name. 
Perhaps you could link some of the old wiki accounts to the OSM user names 
where they are known to be the same person.


--

Andrew



From: Nicolás Alvarez 
Sent: 19 March 2018 04:51
To: osm-talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

El 18 mar. 2018, a la(s) 20:50, François Lacombe 
> escribió:


2018-03-19 0:38 GMT+01:00 Michael Kugelmann 
>:
Am 18.03.2018 um 20:45 schrieb Richard:
fundamental decission - maybe osm and osm-wiki accounts should be the same?
This had been independent in the very old history. And now you have conflicts 
=> will not work w/o huge effort...
There had been requests like this 5 years ago or so w/o success. Not because 
nobody wanted to implement but because it was not possible.

This is a great idea.

Can you sum up what are the technical issues which make it not possible please ?

Suppose user 'John' currently has a wiki account called 'JohnW'. That's 
currently possible, since the accounts are independent. What do you do if you 
unify the accounts? Does OSM user John get a new wiki account called John? What 
if that wiki account already exists? Or does he have to manually connect the 
OSM and Wiki accounts?

What if an OSM user called JohnW also exists (but never used the wiki yet), 
what wiki account do you create for him if the name JohnW is already taken on 
the wiki?

Users can rename OSM accounts. What happens if a user has accounts on both OSM 
and the wiki, with the same name, but changes his user name to "Javiersanp"? 
That name isn't taken in OSM, but it's taken in the wiki. Does the rename get 
rejected?

There are different OSM users "nicolas" and "Nicolas". Wiki usernames always 
have a uppercase first letter, so if accounts get unified, those two different 
OSM users can't get different wiki accounts. There is a similar problem with 
the wiki considering " " (space) and "_" (underscore) equivalent, while OSM 
doesn't.


I would love it if wiki accounts and OSM accounts were unified, but that would 
need to be done since the start. Now it seems too hard to do it; too many 
conflicts with existing accounts.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

[Andrew Hain]

Interesting idea. The wiki dates from before OAuth of course, even before the 
fiddle we implemented for trac and the forum. It must be just about the only 
internal communication space not using the main accounts.


--

Andrew



From: Richard 
Sent: 18 March 2018 19:45
To: James
Cc: OpenStreetMap talk mailing list
Subject: [OSM-talk] Unify Mapping and wiki accounts? -- WAS: Vote cheating?

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:18:38AM +, James wrote:
> You could also argue the opposite way: Not everyone in OSM edits the wiki,
> thus probably doesnt have an account, thus to participate, they need to
> create an account to vote

fundamental decission - maybe osm and osm-wiki accounts should be the same?

I have recent reports from one mapper sending me messages through OSM messaging
that he had trouble setting up a wiki account and commenting on my talk page so
clearly there is some confusion about the accounts and by my estimate only a 
tiny
minority of mappers could ever have any use for separate mapping and wiki
accounts.

Richard

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk Info Page - lists.openstreetmap.org Mailing 
Lists
lists.openstreetmap.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the talk Archives. 
Using talk: To post a message to all the list members, send email to ...


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Petrol stations again

[Andrew Hain]

Are the changes to names specifically being discussed?


--

Andrew



From: Simon Poole 
Sent: 09 March 2018 07:46
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Petrol stations again

Different area naturally, but at least here the newly created stations
in the list seem to have a roughly 50% error/something weird rate,
naturally I haven't looked at a very large sample yet and it could well
be that it is a specific problem with conflation in CH, but it clearly
is far to high for the "s**w validation just dump it in to OSM" approach
Ilya is suggesting.

The other problem that I've seen, is that Ilya is using different
capitalisation in the brand values as both presets and common use in OSM
have used up to now (for example AVIA vs. Avia), just as a general
principle is so many objects are being changed it would seem to be a
good idea to at least adjust the presets.

Simon


Am 09.03.2018 um 03:33 schrieb Paul Norman:
> On 3/8/2018 1:28 PM, SK53 wrote:
>> Remarks about individual items to be added which I have examined
>> (mainly, I thin, for Ilya's benefit):
>
> Were the 8 errors from the full set of 400, or a subsample of them?
>
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Talk-GB Info Page - 
OpenStreetMap
lists.openstreetmap.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the Talk-GB 
Archives. Using Talk-GB: To post a message to all the list members, send email 
...




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

[OSM-talk] Fw: Nominatim on the main page

[Andrew Hain]

From: Andrew Hain <andrewhain...@hotmail.co.uk>
Sent: 19 February 2018 21:50
To: Sarah Hoffmann
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim on the main page


It’s unfortunate that a new user mapping mistake has such unfortunate 
consequences.


--

Andrew



From: Sarah Hoffmann <lon...@denofr.de>
Sent: 19 February 2018 09:17
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Nominatim on the main page

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 08:12:45PM +0100, Maarten Deen wrote:
> On 2018-02-18 20:07, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Maarten Deen <md...@xs4all.nl>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 2018-02-18 19:28, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > > I can't comment about how the algorithm works because I don't know
> > > anything about it. I'm just saying that we do tell it the viewbox
> >
> >  It appears to me that the bounding box is used when searching places
> > (towns, cities) or streets, but not when searching objects like shops
> > or restaurants.
> > For instance, searching for a McDonald's always gives me the
> > McDonald's at 1351, George Dieter Drive, El Paso City, El Paso County,
> > Texas, 79936, Verenigde Staten van Amerika

To fix that please delete all the wikipedia=McDonalds tags from
the McDonalds restaurants that show up inappropriately. Nominatim uses
the wikipedia links to determine how well known a place might be and
ranks places with a wikipedia tag higher. That naturally only works
when the wikipedia tags actually link to a wikipedia page that
describes the object. It leads to funny results when the link goes
to category pages or, like in this case, to the company description.

Alternatively: I've proposed a GSoC to overhaul the Wikipedia
importances that Nominatim uses. Getting rid of this particular
problem from the Nominatim side would be part of this job.

For more information, see:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code/2018/Project_Ideas#Nominatim

There are also two other topics proposed and if you have another particular
itch you want to sratch, there are surely ways they can be transformed into
a GSoC topic. Just send me a email or open an issue in github. It would be 
wonderful, if
we find some students interested in geocoding this year.

Kind regards

Sarah

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk Info Page - lists.openstreetmap.org Mailing 
Lists<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>
lists.openstreetmap.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the talk Archives. 
Using talk: To post a message to all the list members, send email to ...


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

Re: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

[Andrew Hain]

Hopefully anyone who revives the topic will find a way to avoid the 
circumstances of the original list’s demise.


--

Andrew



From: Rory McCann 
Sent: 19 February 2018 09:47
To: Sérgio V.; talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

Shame that it's gone. It's nice to be able to contact people in OSM who
are interested in diversity.

GMane, which is a mailing list-to-NNTP service still seems to be still
up and hosting it as a newsgroup, so you can post messages to that
newsgroup.

On 17/02/18 20:56, Sérgio V. wrote:
> Hi, I've just realized that in the
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity
Diversity - OpenStreetMap Wiki
wiki.openstreetmap.org
How can we increase diversity in OSM? Gender; Sexuality; Race/ethnicity; 
Disability; Age; Religion; Class; Region; Language; other? Discussions 
within/about OSM


> at the bottom, /Resources,
>
> there's no such link to
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/diversity-talk
>
> If you click there , or search for it, it returns "No such list
> diversity-talk".
>
> Is it still alive?
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs
[http://www.openstreetmap.org/assets/osm_logo_256-cde84d7490f0863c7a0b0d0a420834ebd467c1214318167d0f9a39f25a44d6bd.png]

smaprs | OpenStreetMap
www.openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use 
under an open license.




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
talk Info Page - lists.openstreetmap.org Mailing 
Lists
lists.openstreetmap.org
To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the talk Archives. 
Using talk: To post a message to all the list members, send email to ...


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

Re: [Talk-GB] New Post Office Data and Comparison Tool

[Andrew Hain]

Best not to use the type key for anything other than relation types (such as 
type=multipolygon).

--
Andrew


From: Mark Goodge 
Sent: 19 February 2018 15:33:10
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] New Post Office Data and Comparison Tool



On 19/02/2018 14:37, David Woolley wrote:
> On 19/02/18 13:29, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
>> The raw branch list data can be found at
>> http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postoffice/data/  and it licensed under
>> the Open Government Licence v3. It includes ID numbers, branch names,
>> addresses, locations, and opening hours.
>
> What does type=Crown mean, as one of those near me is marked as this,
> but is actually a concession in a W H Smith's?

A Crown Post Office is one that is either managed directly by Post
Office Ltd, or is provided as part of a national franchise agreement
with a major retailer.

AIUI, WH Smith is, so far, the only retailer that has currently entered
into such an arrangement, but I may be wrong.

The difference between a franchised Crown Post Office and a normal sub
Post Office is that in the latter, the management of the Post Office and
the non-PO retail are the same (typically, of course, a village shop
that combines the role of Post Office and general store), whereas in a
Crown franchise, the Post Office section is managed separately to the
normal retail operation even if they share non-managerial staff.

Mark

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

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

Re: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

[Andrew Hain]

According to the Wayback Machine the last message was posted early in 2015.

--
Andrew


From: Sérgio V. 
Sent: 17 February 2018 19:56:57
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] diversity-talk: No such list

Hi, I've just realized that in the

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Diversity
at the bottom, /Resources,

there's no such link to

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

If you click there , or search for it, it returns "No such list diversity-talk".

Is it still alive?


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sérgio - http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/smaprs

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

Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS info when pub has been taken over.

[Andrew Hain]

My experience has been that although a missing FHRS entry is a useful warning 
of what to resurvey, there are too many false positives to remove businesses 
without checking on the ground.

--
Andrew

From: Gregrs 
Sent: 21 January 2018 21:25:07
To: Rob Nickerson
Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] FHRS info when pub has been taken over.

Hi Rob,

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 03:58:37PM +, Rob Nickerson wrote:

>I don't think it has been mentioned, but having the link to FHRS is one
>way of keeping on top of changes in places where we have fewer active
>mappers. That is, by monitoring for changes in FHRS we can identify
>closures, takeovers, new cafes etc (assuming a detectable change in the
>source data). In a way this is similar to the ref:navads tag that was
>added to Shell petrol station data -> it is now a much simpler task of
>finding out what has changed by comparing to third party data thus
>allowing mappers to hone in on relevant areas.
>
>If anyone wants to have a go at building something that would be
>amazing. Similarly we still have the idea of visualising a "crap data"
>map floating around (e.g. map of Lloyds TSB, map of Total petrol
>stations, BHS etc..).

FHRS is certainly a good way to keep on top of changes, and in fact you
can already use my FHRS/OSM comparison tool
[https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhrs/] to view fhrs:id tags that
don't currently match an establishment in the FHRS database, such as an
establishment that has closed down. You can look out for red blobs on
the map (which may also be matched OSM entities with mismatched/missing
postcodes) or examine the table with the heading 'Mismatched fhrs:id
tags'.

Hope it's useful.

Thanks,
Greg

--
Twitter: @gregrs_uk
http://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org
PGP key ID: 64907C8A
Fingerprint: EBD1 077F CCDD 841E A505 3FAA D2E8 592E 6490 7C8A

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

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM data, how can we contribute to keep it to a reasonable size?

[Andrew Hain]

Or a mass change from Name=Untitled Polygon (wasteful but not wrong) to 
name=Untitled Polygon.

--
Andrew

From: Mark Wagner 
Sent: 18 January 2018 19:07:20
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM data, how can we contribute to keep it to a 
reasonable size?

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 19:44:47 +0100
Oleksiy Muzalyev  wrote:

> Imre,
>
> It is very good and surprising idea.
>
> I discovered on the page "Error categories" a tool
> https://www.keepright.at/ with the help of which I found already
> dozens obviously misspelled tags. It functions quite intuitively,
> just select "misspelled tags" check box and move the map to an area
> of interest.

But make sure they're really misspelled.  I recently saw a change that
fixed a dozen instances where the key "brand" was misspelled as "band"
-- except that one of the "band" tags was correct, describing the fact
that a radio antenna operated in the two-meter band.

--
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: [OSM-talk] Wiki Proposals: An OSM Echo Chamber?

[Andrew Hain]

I would suggest that this is part of a wider malaise that the mission of the 
wiki has become unclear.

--
Andrew

From: Roland Olbricht 
Sent: 04 December 2017 08:42:46
To: osm-talk
Subject: [OSM-talk] Wiki Proposals: An OSM Echo Chamber?

Hi all,

We recently had an experienced and productive community member, Ilya,
putting a lot of time in a Wiki Proposal just to see the whole process
fail. Given the feedback from the process, this has been due to a whole
bunch of hard-to-control problems
- the whole thing has been too complex
- the wording did cause misunderstandings
- attempt to discuss the matter in an unsuitable medium

If even an experienced member cannot handle the process then we should
reconsider whether the process of Wiki Proposals makes sense at all.

I suggest to replace the Proposal process by three more specialized
and therefore much simpler processes. They are structured by what they
can affect.

In particular, the discussion should go to better suited places than the
infamous Wiki page discussion shadow pages:

Ilya complained that at the wiki discussion page turned into a complete
mess of "56K text". I do agree that the wiki page is a hard-to-read
mess, but yet it has only the content of 10-30 messages.
There had even been expressed deprecation that the discussion spilled
into the voting section because it is so difficult to read.

For comparison: My mail client currently handles more than 100'000
messages and is still fast and comfortable to use. Even in the forum
where users are stuck with what the web interface allows, it is easy to
have discussions with some hundred responses.

This should remind us that the wiki discussion facility is unsuited for
any nontrivial discussion but it disguises as sufficient discussion
facility.

Note that on the same time there is a group of 350 community members
who have indicated to be interested in public transport. Ilya stated as
a reson that the corresponding mailing list has "less than 3 messages"
per month. The content equivalence of "3 messages" on a wiki discussion
page already would make the impression of a heated discussion.
Apparently the wiki discussion pages have distracted him from the real
audience.

Please note:
It does not make sense to discuss the redesign of one communication
channel in another communication channel. But the wiki does not have a
suitable place to discuss the issue. Hence I cross-post to the forum to
at least reach also a large portion of the less tech-savvy community
members.

I suggest the following three specialized replacements for the Proposal
process:

=== Distinguished Documentation ===

OSM could profit in a lot of cases from a good how-to map for particular
subjects. But at the same time exists poor documentation and people do
not necessary know which to trust. Writing a good documentation will
become more rewarding if we can offer a process to indicate general
acclaim and distinguish excellent documentation.

The voting confirms that the claims of the documentation reflect actual
mapping practice. That way, it makes the effort a distinguished
documentation.

It des not affect any existing wiki pages.
It does not affect the OSM database.

=== Wiki Cleanup ===

Amongst the real problems of OSM is that our wiki documentation has lots
of poorly maintained pages. There exist even contradictions between
different pages. For an unexperienced users it is difficult to figure
out which wiki pages are really applicable.

We need a decision process which of the contradictive statements can be
discarded. The hurdles should not be too high because we generally do
have too few maintenance of the wiki content. Nonetheless, as this does
give some rulesets a spin in favour of others, it should be subject to a
voting.

There should be left a success notice after the cleanup has actually
been done.

The document must state which wiki pages are considered authoriative.
It should state which wiki pages are to be changed.
It can list the used tags, tagging combinations, or data constellations
that are in scope of the document at all.
It should state which used tags, tagging combinations, or data
constellations will after the change newly contradict the wiki.

Affects the wiki.
Does not affect the OSM database.

=== Tag Disambiguation ===

Sometimes different people tag different types of objects with the same
tags. This is a problem because you do no longer know what is really
there. It is the core concern of the old Proposal process.
Given that backwards compatbility is nowadays an important virtue,
the preferred solution is to add an extra tag to distinguish the
different situations.

The voting is to check that the disambiguation is logically sound
and that it covers the vast majority of applicable constellations.

Affects the wiki: the description of the affected tags and tag
combinations are changed.
Affect the OSM database: mappers are adviced to systematically change

Re: [Talk-GB] NatWest / RBS Branch closures

[Andrew Hain]

Are there quality assurance tools that flag out of date names like Lloyds TSB?

--
Andrew

From: Paul Berry 
Sent: 01 December 2017 13:18:33
To: co...@thespillers.org.uk
Cc: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] NatWest / RBS Branch closures

There are still "Lloyds TSB" branches to mop up too over 4 years since their 
demerger (over 600 matches based on March 2017 GB OSM extract), Are we able to 
list all of these points of interest conveniently in a tool? Overpass Turbo 
query: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/tsq

Regards,
Paul

On 1 December 2017 at 12:08, Colin Spiller 
> wrote:

Lloyds Banking Group will close some bank branches (listed at 
https://www.lloydsbank.com/contact-us/branch-closures.asp ) and Yorkshire 
Building Society will close more (listed at 
http://www.ybs.co.uk/changes/index.html ).

It's a fairly general problem. Recording the list & annotating the OSM features 
sounds a good idea.

Colin


On 01/12/17 11:35, SK53 wrote:
RBS are planning another massive round of branch closures (a full list 
here).

I was wondering what the best approach might be to track these:

  *   Notes on all relevant branches. We've done this in the past for smaller 
chains (Netto, American Apparel) and the notes do get closed eventually when 
someone re-surveys an area. Easier to spot now through phone apps like Vespucci 
& OSMAnd
  *   Fixmes on the branches. As above, but a little less visible
  *   A wiki page listing branches & their equivalent OSM Id
  *   A umap instance

Any thoughts?

Jerry



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



--
Colin Spiller
co...@thespillers.org.uk

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


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

[Andrew Hain]

There is another dataset you can use, the food hygiene ratings 
[https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_Food_Hygiene_Rating_System] at 
http://ratings.food.gov.uk that has postcodes for shops selling food, which 
includes many petrol stations. It includes Northern Ireland but not the Isle of 
Man or the Channel Islands.

--
Andrew

From: Chris Hill 
Sent: 03 November 2017 19:10:27
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Importing Shell fuel stations

On 03/11/2017 18:45, David Woolley wrote:
> On 03/11/17 17:51, Ilya Zverev wrote:
>> postcodes, should they be removed from the import? Is there a
>> database that I can check these against?
>
> There is a database, but one of OSM UK's big bug bears is that it is
> not licensed in a way that allows it to be used for OSM.  About the
> limit of what you could do is find wrong postcodes, and then use other
> means to correct them.  I think removing a postcode on a mismatch
> might be too close to using the data.
>
> I'm, of course, referring to Royal Mail's Postal Address File (PAF).
There is a list of GB postcodes (not Northern Ireland) which, being OGL,
is compatible with the OSM licence. I maintain an overlay of postcodes
using that data, which you can see more about here:
https://raggedred.net/codepoint/

I am, of course, referring to the dataset Codepoint Open, supplied from
Royal Mail and distributed on the Ordnance Survey open data page.
https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendatadownload/products.html

There is a version also supplied by the Office of National Statistics
which is based on Codepoint Open, but with some extra information for
each postcode. This also contains expired postcodes too.

Both of these datasets do not show each delivery point, but just a
centroid (in OSGB grid ref) for all the delivery points.

--

cheers
Chris Hill (chillly)


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

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

Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

[Andrew Hain]

It is not only his language ability that he overestimates. His Mediawiki 
programming has a cargo cult flavour and he has a fetish for links going to the 
“right” place 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Iotw_text/2017-43=1516878=1516754
 being a typical recent example) that he takes as far as special cases in 
templates just to satisfy it, this was the root of the current calendar 
argument.

--
Andrew

From: Richard <ricoz@gmail.com>
Sent: 30 October 2017 13:10:49
To: Tobias Knerr
Cc: talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 12:13:14AM +0100, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> On 28.10.2017 12:06, Andrew Hain wrote:
> > His behaviour over the past years makes him a contributor of net
> > negative value.
>
> I have to disagree here. He's probably the single most active wiki
> contributor, and is also performing a lot of useful maintenance work
> that no one else would bother doing.

Agree.
At the same time, exactly as he is a respected and experienced
contributor the cost of every single missstep is disproportionately
higher than if "gaer3jfkk4ej555_I_want_to_fuck_OSM" does it.

An exceptionally high self esteem regarding foreign language skills
does not help either. ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/escada/diary/40120 )

> This does not mean that he should be exempt from the rules, of course.
> To the contrary: What I would hope for is consistent enforcement of the
> rules, with gradually increasing penalties. Jumping straight from spotty
> enforcement to a permanent ban, though, seems wasteful and needlessly cruel.

Rules can help - if they can be enforced by simple technical means. For some
contributors lets say a limit like
* 2 edits to a single page within 14 days
* 5 edits to talk pages per 7 days
* 1 revert per 14 days

Nothing personal but very few people here have the time to follow
dozens of changesets so this would help a lot.

Maybe for some contributors a personal blacklist banning every edit with
the word "you" in every language and declination can help.

Richard

___
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: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

[Andrew Hain]

It is now time to talk about banning Verdy p from the wiki permanently.

His behaviour over the past years makes him a contributor of net negative value.

It is exceptionally difficult to correct any mistake that he makes and as a 
result people have cut down their contributions to the wiki or given up 
completely.

He likes to tell people that they have made mistakes without trying to teach 
them what he thinks they did wrong and obfuscates changes with mass 
reformatting. It is often unclear whether he is addressing a problem that 
actually exists.

He often projects his own personality deficiencies onto other people.

Even in the current case where there is software that could be made more 
flexible, he only offers handwaving rather than assistance.

--
Andrew

From: weeklyteam 
Sent: 28 October 2017 08:47:48
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [OSM-talk] weeklyOSM #379 2017-10-17-2017-10-23

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 379,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things 
happening in the openstreetmap world:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/9571/

Enjoy!

weeklyOSM?
who?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
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-GB] Quarterly Project: Addresses and Postcodes

[Andrew Hain]

Are you saying that anything with a postcode beginning with SW should be tagged 
addr:city=London and anything beginning with TW9 or TW10 should be tagged 
addr:city=Richmond?

--
Andrew

From: Adam Snape 
Sent: 19 October 2017 09:35:40
To: Steve Doerr
Cc: Talk GB
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project: Addresses and Postcodes

I'm convinced that many such addresses are unnecessarily long (are there really 
multiple Weldons in the Swanscome postal area?). Nevertheless we should have a 
way of mapping them if they are the official address. I agree that more general 
guidance would aid consistency. My address mapping practice is as follows. I 
would welcome correction if others feel I am doing something incorrectly::


  *   The post town 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_post_towns_in_the_United_Kingdom is 
tagged as addr:city (whether or not it is a city or indeed whether an otherwise 
more important place is nearer). Though this should all be in upper case when 
used I add the tag in lower case with an initial capital letter as it would 
normally be written in a sentence.

  *   For sub divisions of this area the wiki has documented tags addr:suburb 
and addr:hamlet. I tend to default to suburb everywhere except when dealing 
with an actual isolated hamlet. Where there are two subdivisions as in Steve's 
example, I'd use hamlet for the smaller one  and suburb for the larger one.

  *   The wiki suggests to avoid addr:street and addr:place together but I use 
them for things like named retail/business parks where there is also a street 
address eg. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/527520264

  *   I do not tag the name of the property separately if it is the same as the 
main name=* tag

  *   Counties have not been formally part of postal addresses for many years. 
Royal Mail permits people to optionally add the name of the old Postal County, 
modern administrative or ceremonial county, or traditional county to their 
address according to their personal preference, but this plays no role in 
delivery. So I do not tag a county in the address.

So I'd tag Steve's example: name=The Spring River, addr:street=Talbot Lane, 
addr:hamlet=Weldon, addr:suburb=Ebbsfleet Valley, addr:city=Swanscombe, 
addr:postcode=DA10 1AZ

I hope that helps

Adam


On 18 Oct 2017 11:49 p.m., "Steve Doerr" 
> wrote:
On 10/10/2017 19:07, Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote:
It doesn't seem to have been mentioned here yet, but this quarter's UK
mapping project is to improve addresses and postcodes:
https://osmuk.org/uncategorized/jump-in-to-our-quarterly-mapping-project/



It would be useful to have some guidance on tagging for UK addresses. For 
instance, how would you tag the different elements of the following address for 
a pub/carvery that opened recently near me:

The Spring River
Talbot Lane
Weldon
Ebbsfleet Valley
SWANSCOMBE
DA10 1AZ

Regards,
Steve


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

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

Re: [Talk-GB] "an extraordinary quirk in the UK address system"

[Andrew Hain]

Anyone up to filling in http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/53.5308/-2.3532 
then?

--
Andrew

From: Andy Mabbett 
Sent: 12 September 2017 22:22:35
To: OSM GB mailing list
Subject: [Talk-GB] "an extraordinary quirk in the UK address system"

This may interest some of you:

   http://www.paulplowman.com/stuff/house-address-twins-proximity/

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Andrew Hain]

How much use are you making of tools developed for identifying contributions to 
be redacted in the licence change?

--
Andrew

From: Frederik Ramm 
Sent: 28 August 2017 13:43:44
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by 
user chdr

Hi,

On 08/27/2017 08:51 PM, Mikel Maron wrote:
> Also, Frederik, I think your script picked up false positives. Spot
> checked in DC, and these are expansions of both the street and the
> quadrant ("St NW" -> "Street Northwest"(. Can we fix the script and
> regen the list?

I have modified my "name equality rule" to consider "N" equal to "North"
etc., also it will ignore case, whitespace, and as before the usual
street type expansions (St->Street etc).

This brings the number of problematic objects down by around 5500, and
practically all of them are in the US. However, I noticed that I forgot
to account for "Saint"->"St", and will re-do the numbers yet again
before publishing an updated list.

I think the best course of action would be:

1. Wait a while, until various communities (potentially pointed to this
conversation via the widely-read weekly new roundup) have had the time
to check whether my automated assessment of which names count as
"contributed" by chdr is correct. Mikel has found the issue above and I
fixed it; it is quite possible that there are others.

2. Run the redaction, and remove all names contributed by chdr. At
present it looks as if less than 10% of these objects had a different
name before; more than 90% had not name at all. Perhaps it is indeed
best to remove the name in these cases as well instead of reverting to
the old name.

3. Load the IDs of all affected objects in a MapRoulette task or
similar, so people can check the names by survey, or from different
sources. (I assume that, as Simon pointed out, open data will not be
available for all countries affected. I fear that, with MapRoulette
geared towards armchair mapping, there might be a temptation for people
to yet again fill in the blanks from inadmissible sources. Maybe we
should limit the use of MapRoulette to countries where we know that open
sources exist, and use fixme tags or notes for other countries?)

I think that would be cleaner than verifying the names ahead of time.
Also it would create an audit trail - from the object history, you could
then see that the name was removed for copyright reasons, and you could
then see that user XYZ has added a new name. If it should later turn out
that this name was also copied from an indadmissible source, we know
that user XYZ is at fault, whereas people creating lists with
independently verified names is not something that would give us such a
recording.

I must apologize for not having given a time frame in my initial email;
there's absolutely no reason to panic. This matter has been sitting idle
for years, and a few more weeks won't kill us. We can sort this out
calmly and then do the right thing.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Andrew Hain]

There was a script during the licence change that assessed whether or not 
changes to names were copyrightable.

--
Andrew

From: Mikel Maron 
Sent: 27 August 2017 19:51:05
To: Greg Morgan; Martijn van Exel
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; Steve Friedl; Tod Fitch; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by 
user chdr

> we can find a good workflow for that. I wasn't expecting the community to 
> start working on this pre-redaction but if people prefer that to fixing 
> issues later...

Absolutely, let's do this!

Also, Frederik, I think your script picked up false positives. Spot checked in 
DC, and these are expansions of both the street and the quadrant ("St NW" -> 
"Street Northwest"(. Can we fix the script and regen the list?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109419946/history
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109431926/history
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/109431927/history

-Mikel


* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


On Sunday, August 27, 2017 2:45 PM, Greg Morgan  wrote:




On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Martijn van Exel 
> wrote:
Happy to help. All we'd need for MapRoulette is a list of locations and a 
proper description of the work we'd expect people to do. Anyone can create the 
challenge but I'd be happy to do it.
Martijn

Martijn,

I'd would be great if you can break this down to an area.  For example, I have 
a list of Arizona streets.  I'd prefer to work on this as an Arizona challenge 
verses one big chdr challenge.

Please Advise,
Greg

___
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: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

[Andrew Hain]

Presumably it means something like the 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:odbl%3Dclean tag. It may not be as much 
use hete though.
--
Andrew

From: Nicolás Alvarez 
Sent: 27 August 2017 20:01:16
To: Frederik Ramm
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by 
user chdr

I don't understand what people mean with 'verifying' objects. We're
not trying to find factually-incorrect data. The data is legally
tainted. It's questionable whether looking at the current names
imported from GMaps, comparing to another source, seeing they match
and marking them as "verified" will legally change anything. And it's
impossible to know if people are really verifying anything or just
blindly marking them as verified.

I think the only clean way to solve this is to redact and then re-map
from legal sources.

--
Nicolás

2017-08-27 14:39 GMT-03:00 Frederik Ramm :
> Steve:
>
> thank you for your work. I'll save your list. It appears that others
> might be eager to do the same, maybe we can find a good workflow for
> that. I wasn't expecting the community to start working on this
> pre-redaction but if people prefer that to fixing issues later, it is of
> course an option. I certainly prefer out-of-band "marking" of verified
> objects to adding a new tag to each!
>
> Tod:
>
> On 08/27/2017 07:31 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:
>> When you reviewed Orange County, how did you do it so quickly? The only way 
>> I know to go through this is looking at each one, one at a time.
>
> I could of course make a page with links to the ways, even per county if
> that helps, or we could upload the list to some suitable tool. Ian
> mentioned MapRoulette but I'm not sure if that would make things easier.
> I'm certainly happy to try. Maybe Martijn would like to chip in about
> MapRoulette?
>
> 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

___
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-GB] Are Northern Ireland, Wales & England 'states'?

[Andrew Hain]

Should we go a bit further and strip out all is_in tags not used by Nominatim 
across Britain (which may mean all of them), or are there other uses we should 
consider? The community in France did that when they finished mapping communes.

--
Andrew

From: Dave F 
Sent: 20 August 2017 22:57:06
To: Andrew Black; Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Are Northern Ireland, Wales & England 'states'?

I will revert

DaveF

On 12/08/2017 22:39, Andrew Black wrote:


On 12 August 2017 at 13:12, Dave F 
> wrote:
Hi
I'm unsure if Northern Ireland, Wales & England should be tagged as 'states'.

A new user's changeset comment:
Adding more info. is_in:country_code was missing. Also classified Northern 
Ireland as a state so it appears in the same priority as Wales. Was 
unclassified before


Doesn't make sense to me.

"A high-level sub-national political entity ([Wikipedia-16px.png] Federated 
state) in several large 
countries such as USA ("State"), Australia ("State"), Canada ("Province"). May 
also be applicable in other countries and languages, "Provincia", "Estado", 
"Land" - whether is should be used is up to you and mappers in your own 
country."

 We are not a federated country. Suggest we revert it. Why is Wales a state in 
the first place.

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Highway=trunk : harmonization between countries ?

[Andrew Hain]

While you can do that, it diminishes one of our most important offers, that we 
have a map of the whole world.

--
Andrew

From: ajt1...@gmail.com 
Sent: 20 August 2017 11:46:28
To: talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Highway=trunk : harmonization between countries ?

On 20/08/2017 11:36, djakk djakk wrote:
>
> Why I want to do that ? To improve openstreetmap, this is a worldwide
> map and the renderer can't be adapted by countries.
>

Sure it can - it's perfectly possible for a render to use a
location-sensitive rendering (I've just done it myself).

Best Regards,

Andy


___
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-GB] Quarterly Project Summer 2017 July-Sept

[Andrew Hain]

There are some State of the Map talks this year that may be relevant:
Jungle Bus: Public transport networks mapping made easy
Challenges of open data in Japanese public transport
Bus stop maintenance in Switzerland (lightning talk)

Hopefully anyone unlucky enough not to see them live can get a video.
--
Andrew


From: Brian Prangle 
Sent: 10 July 2017 12:51
To: Talk GB
Subject: [Talk-GB] Quarterly Project Summer 2017 July-Sept

Hi everyone

This will be to improve bus route relations and station entrances, by popular 
vote on OSMUK Loomio channel.

Bus route relations can be tricky for the uninitiated ( and even for the 
initiated ) so perhaps this quarterly project could do with its own wiki page, 
pointing to existing tutorials or developing some new ones. Any volunteers?

Regards

Brian


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

Re: [Talk-GB] Shared Public Rights of Way

[Andrew Hain]

You can add route relations for each number, that way you can search for the 
real prow_ref, not hidden between semicolons.

--
Andrew

From: Bob Hawkins 
Sent: 04 July 2017 12:05:25
To: Ed Loach; talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Shared Public Rights of Way

Ed
I must not have made clear the situation: the bridleway is coincident with the 
borders of two parishes, carrying a route code for each parish, not  a way 
crossing parish boundaries.
Bob


[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]
  Virus-free. 
www.avast.com
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Re: [Talk-GB] Museums in Berwick-upon-Tweed

[Andrew Hain]

What is the easiest way to locate national grid references on the map? We could 
then put notes on the map if there is no-one to check.

--
Andrew

From: Frederik Ramm 
Sent: 28 May 2017 10:24:19
To: OSM GB mailing list
Subject: [Talk-GB] Museums in Berwick-upon-Tweed

Hi,

   someone from Berwick-upon-Tweed has written to the OSMF board, mainly
to ask if it is ok to use our map in a local history book, but along the
side pointed out two issues with the map:

"The two Museum symbols at NU 00023 52563 and NT 99988 52538 are no
longer relevant as the museums closed several years ago and the area is
now private housing."

I'll leave it to you to figure out what these coordinates mean and which
museums may need to be checked ;)

Bye
Frederik

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

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Proposed Import of UK Shell Filling Stations

[Andrew Hain]

Is it actually better to use the website as a unique identifier instead of a 
magic number? That way you can check the information online  and tools such as 
Keepright will alert you if the web page disappears.

--
Andrew

From: Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) 
Sent: 12 May 2017 08:58:06
To: talk-gb
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Proposed Import of UK Shell Filling Stations

On 11 May 2017 at 23:25, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> Link to discussion so far on imports@:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2017-May/004956.html
>
>> My concern would be from where to they get their geocoding.  Most
>> businesses, and particularly chain businesses, tend to use postcode
>> centroids, which are not accurate enough, probably get them from Google.
>
> I voiced the same general concern, but a random sample I checked of the
> (actually rather few) stations that are proposed to be newly added
> seemed to be impeccably placed.

In which case, there is a different concern: have they done their
geo-coding from an acceptable source for use in OSM? If they've e.g.
used Address Base (or a similar product) or got coordinates from a
non-OpenData OS map, then there could be problems. I think we need
more information on the data sources here.

Some other comments:

* If a ref/id is to be used, it should probably be Shell's branch
reference number, not that of the third-party data provider. (These do
exist, and at least in some cases are verifiable on the ground, as
I've found at least one on a pump at a Shell garage up the road from
me.)

* There's an addressing edge-case error on a station near me, which is
located on the Five Ways Roundabout near Mildenhall:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/478902268 . We currently have
(incorrectly) "addr:place=5 Ways Roundabout", but the script is
proposing adding "addr:street=Ways Roundabout" and
"addr:housenumber=5".

* The script shouldn't just add source=Navads to objects it's only
modifying, as that would imply the whole object was sourced from
there. If existing tags and position are retained, then this needs to
be acknowledged somehow. If there's an existing source tag, then
Navads could just be added to the list (I haven't checked to see if
this is the case). If not, then there's more of a challenge. The
script current just adds source=Navads in this case. I think the
importers need to propose a better solution for this.

* As others have said, there needs to be more information about what
happens if there are multiple amenity=fuel objects within 50m, and
also what happens if any existing tags conflict with what the script
would like to add.

* The proposed website tag appears to point to http://www.shell.co.uk
for all the branches. Would it be better pointing to a specific URL
for that branch (assuming this exists)?

* The opening_hours from the import script for
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/248030653 don't match those displayed
on Shell's own website for the same station. One as open till 11pm on
Saturday, the other only 10pm. So is the data accurate / up-to-date?

Robert.

--
Robert Whittaker

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

Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-london] New OSM London Meetup - Invite

[Andrew Hain]

Does it include stations belonging to Network Rail?

--
Andrew

From: Stuart Reynolds 
Sent: 08 May 2017 23:44:56
To: Derick Rethans
Cc: Bjoern Hassler; talk-gb-lon...@openstreetmap.org; osm-gb
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] [Talk-gb-london] New OSM London Meetup - Invite

Hi All,

For reference, virtually all of the entrances are contained within the London 
NaPTAN data (https://data.gov.uk/dataset/naptan) which is the data that begins 
with the prefix 4900. The tube entrances all begin 4909ZZLU followed by a three 
letter code for the station plus a digit to distinguish between different 
entrances. For example, 4909ZZLUBNK0 would be an entrance to Bank, while 
4900ZZLUTWH0 would be Tower Hill.

While these do not give you accessibility information, they are all maintained 
by TfL and should give you accurate positional information.

Regards
Stuart

Sent from my iPad

On 8 May 2017, at 21:02, Derick Rethans 
> wrote:

Hi,

I think this is a good idea. We have something UK wide, but doing it a
local way makes a lot of sense (and easier to complete). Happy to do
this "fix the tube network" thing over a few weekends (After the General
Election that is).

cheers,
Derick

On Thu, 4 May 2017, Bjoern Hassler wrote:

Dear Grant, dear all,

thanks for putting on the meeting, and thanks for the sponsored pizza! Good
meeting last night, and god to have met you all.

Following up on the "Missing Maps London" idea, I thought we could may do
some "map challenges" that look at specific things that need work. It might
be a nice community building activity, and provide some continuity between
meetings?

As an experiment, I've formulated one such challenges here
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/London_public_transport_tagging_scheme/Map_Challenges
and added images / interactive maps / help for new mappers.

See what you think and let me know whether there's interest. Results could
be announced at the next meeting?

All the best,
Bjoern


On 30 April 2017 at 17:30, Grant Slater 
> wrote:

Hi All,

We trying a new format OpenStreetMap evening meetup in London this
Wednesday 3rd May 2017... We'd love for you to come along:

https://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Q-A-Meetup/events/239366249/

New to OpenStreetMap and want to learn more or need some help getting
started? Already mapping or using OSM and have any Questions or
Challenges or want to see what others are up to? This is the event for
you.

We already have 3 great speakers lined up for the evening:

* Andy Allan - OpenCycleMap / Thunderforest
* Astrid Thorseth - Missing Maps
* Derick Rethans - London Mapper

We have a great venue (bias, I work there), there will be pizza and
soft drinks provided.

I'd love to hear any suggestions on how we could improve the event or
what works elsewhere.

Kind regards,
Grant

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



--
https://derickrethans.nl | https://xdebug.org | https://dram.io
Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: https://xdebug.org/donate.php
twitter: @derickr and @xdebug

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

Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

[Andrew Hain]

According to http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2762871 
edits in Brazil, Russia, the United Arab Emirates and Senegal have also 
attracted criticism from locally knowledgeable mappers, looking like someone 
who is at best out of their depth.

--
Andrew

From: Marco Boeringa 
Sent: 08 February 2017 20:46:10
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?

Hi all,

I now had a very preliminary and short look at some of the changesets
involved in the Wales area, which was revealing. I now noticed most of
these features seem to have been added by multiple users / accounts:

- Sam888, e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/413378224

- Glucosamine: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405845733

- Dyserth: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388818928

There may be more... All of these "users" are prolific, leave almost no
changeset comments, and seem to be editing all day. It seems to me these
are editors working professionally for some OSM related company.

Andy: Is there any chance the DWG could figure out which company these
people are working for, so the company could be contacted about this
specific issue and asked not to add these type of difficult to identify
natural features?

There are so many changesets involved, I guess doing reverts is almost
impossible, lest one wants to see also more useful stuff being removed
as well, like roads and large and small patches of forest that I also
see being part of these changesets.

I have the feeling the most offending stuff is primarily the false
natural=heath. So maybe it is a better course of action to select the
heath features in the affected regions in JOSM, and delete only those in
a new changeset. I think this is by far the easiest solution. Of course,
a bit of caution and review will be required to not include properly
digitized heath features by regular OSM users.

Any other ideas?

Marco

> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:09:24 +
> From: ael 
> To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Large swaths of "heath" in Wales?
> Message-ID: <20170208130924.wdbn72h2r6rk7n6f@shelf.conquest>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:22:30AM +, Andy Townsend wrote:
>> On 08/02/2017 10:49, Brian Prangle wrote:
>>>   It would be great in my opinion if we moved on as a community and
>>> actually decided to act on our discussions.
> I agree that at least those changes that have not been subsequently
> modified by a "legitimate" mapper should be reverted. I thought
> something like that was going to happen.
>
> As I have noted before, I have encountered this rubbish in the South
> West and have partly corrected some areas where I have directly
> surveyed, but it was still problematical. I didn't touch adjacent areas
> although I was sure they were wrong.
>
> In the light of these discussion, I now feel more bold about perhaps
> just deleting more of this junk unless someone/ some group undertakes
> bulkish reversion.
>
> ael
>


---
Dit e-mailbericht is gecontroleerd op virussen met Avast antivirussoftware.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Destructive new 'contributor'

[Andrew Hain]

You could put a note on the map in New Orleans saying what you think needs 
checking locally.
--
Andrew

From: Dave F 
Sent: 22 January 2017 10:50:19
To: OSM Talk
Subject: [OSM-talk] Destructive new 'contributor'

Hi

Some one from China has made some meaningless & erroneous edit in
Bristol, UK which I've reverted, but there's one in New Orleans which
someone with local knowledge needs to look at.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/45365148#map=11/29.9244/-90.2323

Is there someone here who can repost to Talk-US?

On side note: Do users of editors like mapswithme receive changeset
comments?

DaveF.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


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