Re: [talk-ph] Proposal to update the PH resources in the osm-community-index
Hi folks, Can we also add the HOT Ph Facebook page and Telegram chat on the list? Thanks! Best, Nick On Thu, 30 Jan 2020, 04:57 Eugene Alvin Villar, wrote: > Hello all, > > If you have ever edited in OSM using the iD editor, you may have noticed a > list of communication channels on the left sidebar after you have saved > your edits. This list comes from the osm-community-index: > https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index > > I would like to propose some changes to the list for the Philippines: > • Remove Slack since we no longer use this communication channel > • Update the order as follows: Telegram group, talk-ph mailing list > (this one), Facebook page > • Update descriptions and add extended descriptions > > You can see the detailed changes in the following GitHub commit: > > https://github.com/OSMPH/osm-community-index/commit/4a8a8ee9dc2158bec3c74e76e62214dd56d88988 > > Please do review the changes and provide feedback and suggestions. Once we > have consensus for the changes, I will submit a pull request to have the > changes integrated into the main index. > > Thanks! > Eugene > ___ > talk-ph mailing list > talk-ph@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph > ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Proposal to update the PH resources in the osm-community-index
Hi Nick, I personally think this is OK. But the question will be on the ordering. My preference is to put general channels ahead of thematic (e.g., humanitarian) channels. The reasoning is that a random mapper editing in iD would be more interested to learn more about the broader mapping community. A mapper who is more focused on humanitarian mapping would likely be already aware of HOT PH and therefore does not need to be reminded of the Facebook page or the Telegram group after they edit in iD. ~Eugene On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 4:40 PM Nick Brown wrote: > Hi folks, > Can we also add the HOT Ph Facebook page and Telegram chat on the list? > > Thanks! > > Best, > Nick > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2020, 04:57 Eugene Alvin Villar, wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> If you have ever edited in OSM using the iD editor, you may have noticed >> a list of communication channels on the left sidebar after you have saved >> your edits. This list comes from the osm-community-index: >> https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index >> >> I would like to propose some changes to the list for the Philippines: >> • Remove Slack since we no longer use this communication channel >> • Update the order as follows: Telegram group, talk-ph mailing list >> (this one), Facebook page >> • Update descriptions and add extended descriptions >> >> You can see the detailed changes in the following GitHub commit: >> >> https://github.com/OSMPH/osm-community-index/commit/4a8a8ee9dc2158bec3c74e76e62214dd56d88988 >> >> Please do review the changes and provide feedback and suggestions. Once >> we have consensus for the changes, I will submit a pull request to have the >> changes integrated into the main index. >> >> Thanks! >> Eugene >> ___ >> talk-ph mailing list >> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph >> > ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Proposal to update the PH resources in the osm-community-index
Agreed! Best, Nick On Thu, 30 Jan 2020, 18:48 Eugene Alvin Villar, wrote: > Hi Nick, > > I personally think this is OK. But the question will be on the ordering. > My preference is to put general channels ahead of thematic (e.g., > humanitarian) channels. The reasoning is that a random mapper editing in iD > would be more interested to learn more about the broader mapping community. > A mapper who is more focused on humanitarian mapping would likely be > already aware of HOT PH and therefore does not need to be reminded of the > Facebook page or the Telegram group after they edit in iD. > > ~Eugene > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 4:40 PM Nick Brown wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> Can we also add the HOT Ph Facebook page and Telegram chat on the list? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Best, >> Nick >> >> On Thu, 30 Jan 2020, 04:57 Eugene Alvin Villar, wrote: >> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> If you have ever edited in OSM using the iD editor, you may have noticed >>> a list of communication channels on the left sidebar after you have saved >>> your edits. This list comes from the osm-community-index: >>> https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index >>> >>> I would like to propose some changes to the list for the Philippines: >>> • Remove Slack since we no longer use this communication channel >>> • Update the order as follows: Telegram group, talk-ph mailing list >>> (this one), Facebook page >>> • Update descriptions and add extended descriptions >>> >>> You can see the detailed changes in the following GitHub commit: >>> >>> https://github.com/OSMPH/osm-community-index/commit/4a8a8ee9dc2158bec3c74e76e62214dd56d88988 >>> >>> Please do review the changes and provide feedback and suggestions. Once >>> we have consensus for the changes, I will submit a pull request to have the >>> changes integrated into the main index. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Eugene >>> ___ >>> talk-ph mailing list >>> talk-ph@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph >>> >> ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] RFC: Revised road classification scheme (round 2)
We may be fine adopting this new scheme. So far, the last revision to the classification scheme is in 2015, but there hasn't been any discussion in the mailing list, and this could be the only major revision that has been discussed since we wrote the guidelines back in ~2007. --TagaSanPedroAko On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 1:45 PM Jherome Miguel wrote: > In addition, just to repeat and back up my contentions about the present > definition of primary under the present guidelines, I won't think something > called a "Camino real" (some kind of obsolete term for a main street of a > city or town) be tagged a primary at most cases. > > Getting back, about the present definition of trunk, I agree with the > existing definition of "National transportation backbones" (except for some > additions to accommodate major roads resembling expressways), but I don't > agree with the "tree chop" method as suggested by Rally to to determine > trunk routes in OSM. I agree trunk roads are non-expressway highways that > connect large cities (with populations of 100,000+) and of national > strategic importance, but I don't think frequent closures and the presence > of equally important alternate routes make them fail trunk classification. > Most of what the national government has been designating as "national > primary roads" (with 1 or 2-digit route numbers) fit that criteria, but not > those within densely populated areas (e.g. Metro Manila and environs, Metro > Cebu). > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:29 PM Nick Brown wrote: > >> Dear Jherome, >> Seems reasonable to me. Your support documenting the results of the >> conversation will be very helpful and valuable to us as we'll be working >> with thousands of mappers this year and need quality guidance on things >> like this. >> >> I've looped in Feye, HOT Ph's Technical & GIS Specialist, to continue the >> discussion and give her thoughts. >> >> Best, >> Nick >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 8:31 AM Jherome Miguel >> wrote: >> >>> Moving on, I am also considering special exceptions for roads in small >>> islands or island provinces (e.g. Marinduque, Romblon, Catanduanes, >>> Siquijor) where the networks may have nothing else higher than secondary as >>> many roads there connects municipalities with a population usually below >>> 100,000 (whole area, not just the town proper), which does not fit the >>> criteria for primary. I'm also considering writing guides for road >>> classifications in each province or region (with specifics whenever >>> possible) to supplement the general guidelines. >>> >>> Returning back to the proposal, I think we must narrow down the >>> definition of primary from "roads providing access to all town centers" to >>> "roads connecting small cities (population <100,000) and large >>> municipalities (population >=100,000)" as the former is too broad. The >>> international OSM definition of a highway=primary is a "road that connects >>> large towns", and under our present definition of primary, we got short >>> sections of a local street connecting the highway with the "poblacion", >>> downtown, or city/town proper (or bypassed and downgraded alignments of >>> older national highways) and rural highways linking small municipalities >>> arbitrarily tagged as such even where they can be classified lower based on >>> the road network topology and other possible criteria (official >>> classification, purpose, physical characteristics, traffic usage). >>> >>> For secondary, it's an improvement to provide a second definition for >>> those in rural areas, as this would be the better fit for many of the rural >>> roads linking a small town and is presently tagged as primary. In many >>> countries, the OSM secondary classification usually goes to the >>> roads/highways between small towns, and our present guidelines only specify >>> it on roads in urban areas (though in practice, there are already some >>> rural roads tagged as secondary, especially those mapped as part of HOT >>> mapping projects using the guidelines designed for African countries). >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 7:55 PM Nick Brown >>> wrote: >>> This makes complete sense to me. As it is a highway tag, I just think it's definition should be clarified and codified in the wiki, especially as you're bringing up the discussion on road classifications. Erwin defined it for me as " travel route between dwellings, remote settlements, or water sources, and for livestock movement. May be the primary access route for isolated settlements. Not necessarily paved. Connection way by foot within an urban area. Possibly not passable for regular vehicles with 4 wheels. This is often incorrectly tagged as highway=track." Best, Nick On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 12:48 PM Jherome Miguel < jheromemig...@gmail.com> wrote: > I usually use the path tag on informal pedestrian tracks across vacant > land (in rural areas) and narrow unnamed alleyways
Re: [talk-ph] Follow-up on possible LGU-led mapping in Batangas
I deleted most of the of suspicious POIs in question, on changesets where I also made major edits to improve building and road alignment with existing imagery, adding/remapping municipal and barangay boundaries to include barangays mapped as part of the Taal Volcano eruption response. I think those can be remapped on an future mapping party. --TagaSanPedroAko On Sat, Jan 25, 2020, 3:04 AM Jherome Miguel wrote: > I'm getting more suspicious about the mapping activity when I noticed some > of the POIs added seems to have been copied wholesale from Google Maps, > especially around Taal. Not only that, some duplicate those already mapped > and many also are on odd places (such as the bunch of POIs along the > Diversion Road at barangays Halang and Latag), quite typical of GMaps > coverage in the Philippines. > > --TagaSanPedroAko > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 11:05 AM Jherome Miguel > wrote: > >> I'm agree it's possibly not the right time to contact the LGUs in >> question for the meantime, but what I don't know is whether any of you >> attempted communication with them since I opened the papercut_fix ticket >> last December. I repeatedly posted updates and pinged you on the GitHub >> ticket, but there has been no response as well. Pardon me, but I'm aware >> you might be too busy for Christmas that we haven't gave this urgent issue >> much attention, and only this time I escalated this matter since attempts >> to communicate with some of the users involved in the suspicious organized >> editing activity failed. >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 7:54 PM maning sambale < >> emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> TagaSanPedroAko, >>> >>> > and asked GOwin and maning on GitHub to contact directly any of the >>> LGUs involved, but there has been no response since then. >>> >>> I'm not sure what else I can do here, you mentioned that you already >>> contacted 3 users and there was no response. >>> Secondly, these LGUs are likely swamped with work due to the Taal >>> response, asking about this issue at this time seems inappropriate. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 4:35 AM Jherome Miguel >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > It has been a month ago since I raised quality issues on map data >>> added on a possible local government-led mapping project in some >>> municipalities in Batangas near Taal Volcano. Last December, we have seen a >>> spike in mapping activity around the municipalities of Taal, Lemery, San >>> Luis, San Nicolas, and Santa Teresita in Batangas, and involves around 24+ >>> users, many mapping using accounts with their real names. I opened a >>> papercut_fix ticket (https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/56), >>> partially cleaned up the questionable edits, sent private emails to some of >>> the users involved, and asked GOwin and maning on GitHub to contact >>> directly any of the LGUs involved, but there has been no response since >>> then. Since the 2020 eruption of Taal Volcano, I have thought of a >>> possibility the organized mapping project has something to do with disaster >>> preparedness (taking in account the location of those municipalities around >>> Taal Volcano), though it also equally possible the editing is also for land >>> use planning (for Comprehensive Land Use Plan maps) and other purposes. Can >>> someone follow up attempts to contact the LGUs, especially through their >>> disaster risk reduction/management or planning/development offices (though >>> this may not be possible due to the lockdown on the volcano danger zone), >>> or bring up any previous attempts to contact them? >>> > >>> > >>> > --TagaSanPedroAko >>> > ___ >>> > talk-ph mailing list >>> > talk-ph@openstreetmap.org >>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> cheers, >>> maning >>> -- >>> "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden >>> https://github.com/maning >>> http://twitter.com/maningsambale >>> -- >>> >> ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
