Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Martijn van Exel]

> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny  
> wrote:
> 
> I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
> import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason to
> appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to GNIS data.
> 
> Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
> make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
> that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be done. 


Thanks for bringing the idea up. It actually did come up fairly recently on 
Slack https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV951/p1550176430103000 

My view is that we would be missing an opportunity to have mappers review these 
locations and update the areas concerned. These nodes exist mostly in 
‘undermapped' / remote areas that could use some human mapper attention. So I’d 
be in favor of trying to resolve this using some human driven cleanup first.

Martijn___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gated communities

[Paul Johnson]

I like this answer.  Behind the gates I tend to tag as private, but giving
one of the barriers access=destination should be enough for that to be the
default answer for going in, if implemented.

Not really something common in Oklahoma, usually gated communities have
only one way in or out that isn't an emergency access, pedestrian or
bicycle only gate.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 7:24 PM Evan Derickson 
wrote:

> What about marking the resident-only gates with access=private and the
> guest gate as access=destination?
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 16:03 Eric H. Christensen via Talk-us <
> talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
>> On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 6:38 PM, Frederik Ramm 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Should all roads inside the gated community be access=private?
>>
>> I wouldn't necessarily mark all the roads as private as I think that
>> would hinder the routing engines.
>>
>> > What tags should be applied to (a) the main gate where visitors and
>> > delivery services are expected to report, and (b) resident-only gates?
>>
>> I've mapped a neighborhood like this before and I think I got the routing
>> to work properly by using gates at non-manned areas with access=private and
>> something else at the guard houses with access=designated or something to
>> that affect.  I think that fits the model...
>>
>> Eric "Sparks"
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> Version: ProtonMail
>> Comment: https://protonmail.com
>>
>> wsFcBAEBCAAGBQJcksYxAAoJEIB2q94CS7PREZoQALxqnyFgf57KuZ8btd9G
>> Rh/ttSnL2ut/P3JBddk++vM3qvxD0N6dAEQDF5X1mMYvYtwkjJ3JUm5WeFSL
>> MTt3teOV1KIJWb7fk8VsysJUatz3Q3Ksty9fevG1t5W2l+9tkXn6eNzMIL5c
>> Ztdabtgrlx/6I04IpQnPcqAjJUh48g5aQYCitfMQf3A/67/CRt0YnsYEa/79
>> 0WmOUmtxLSDdofwOwi3g6CCma6oWiAttnrCfHLQhqbALSlM9e0+VLGICT2ma
>> c3eV0tzE7qvv6Xw3ngos6uVwsnJ5ppnslBax+ZDyRlc5De0ka+XAep/VWJQc
>> oU5Yd6gYj+7xiP+loFRLQoOR2gPSf1C/nPIVBKiD0tWgiEkPK/zHA8jA6C83
>> a+ZR+BNZ5LXQsSbHGn/4R5jyXBmRSRlsQ3UajVfcaDOteRKsvW2zNQUxQJn/
>> uzCPE6H1ZkuMjNzr2qT4/IT8TXc8Qyx+rZB/q0OiJfFa1QofNOmy9rsXkxzm
>> bDdcH+swBAe6eXz1snM/hYW8HDn0aba/TPYCK5+q5B3D9ynrIH9HktPVcIs9
>> wbt4/+qhBe4bxihA5A2vntZyrQJeHqObiMHvN8a4Zs1AiMvzEw70JAth6uYo
>> 0oNrFCnHC3GZrEHZzyyGK/pjKlcevupEn4NIUZvWO1T6ph3rMLiAr241eSSy
>> xykO
>> =y2bt
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
> --
>
> --
> Evan Derickson
> (360) 402-6494
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gated communities

[Evan Derickson]

What about marking the resident-only gates with access=private and the
guest gate as access=destination?

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 16:03 Eric H. Christensen via Talk-us <
talk-us@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 6:38 PM, Frederik Ramm 
> wrote:
>
> > Should all roads inside the gated community be access=private?
>
> I wouldn't necessarily mark all the roads as private as I think that would
> hinder the routing engines.
>
> > What tags should be applied to (a) the main gate where visitors and
> > delivery services are expected to report, and (b) resident-only gates?
>
> I've mapped a neighborhood like this before and I think I got the routing
> to work properly by using gates at non-manned areas with access=private and
> something else at the guard houses with access=designated or something to
> that affect.  I think that fits the model...
>
> Eric "Sparks"
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: ProtonMail
> Comment: https://protonmail.com
>
> wsFcBAEBCAAGBQJcksYxAAoJEIB2q94CS7PREZoQALxqnyFgf57KuZ8btd9G
> Rh/ttSnL2ut/P3JBddk++vM3qvxD0N6dAEQDF5X1mMYvYtwkjJ3JUm5WeFSL
> MTt3teOV1KIJWb7fk8VsysJUatz3Q3Ksty9fevG1t5W2l+9tkXn6eNzMIL5c
> Ztdabtgrlx/6I04IpQnPcqAjJUh48g5aQYCitfMQf3A/67/CRt0YnsYEa/79
> 0WmOUmtxLSDdofwOwi3g6CCma6oWiAttnrCfHLQhqbALSlM9e0+VLGICT2ma
> c3eV0tzE7qvv6Xw3ngos6uVwsnJ5ppnslBax+ZDyRlc5De0ka+XAep/VWJQc
> oU5Yd6gYj+7xiP+loFRLQoOR2gPSf1C/nPIVBKiD0tWgiEkPK/zHA8jA6C83
> a+ZR+BNZ5LXQsSbHGn/4R5jyXBmRSRlsQ3UajVfcaDOteRKsvW2zNQUxQJn/
> uzCPE6H1ZkuMjNzr2qT4/IT8TXc8Qyx+rZB/q0OiJfFa1QofNOmy9rsXkxzm
> bDdcH+swBAe6eXz1snM/hYW8HDn0aba/TPYCK5+q5B3D9ynrIH9HktPVcIs9
> wbt4/+qhBe4bxihA5A2vntZyrQJeHqObiMHvN8a4Zs1AiMvzEw70JAth6uYo
> 0oNrFCnHC3GZrEHZzyyGK/pjKlcevupEn4NIUZvWO1T6ph3rMLiAr241eSSy
> xykO
> =y2bt
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-- 

--
Evan Derickson
(360) 402-6494
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Gated communities

[Eric H. Christensen via Talk-us]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 6:38 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Should all roads inside the gated community be access=private?

I wouldn't necessarily mark all the roads as private as I think that would 
hinder the routing engines.

> What tags should be applied to (a) the main gate where visitors and
> delivery services are expected to report, and (b) resident-only gates?

I've mapped a neighborhood like this before and I think I got the routing to 
work properly by using gates at non-manned areas with access=private and 
something else at the guard houses with access=designated or something to that 
affect.  I think that fits the model...

Eric "Sparks"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: ProtonMail
Comment: https://protonmail.com
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=y2bt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

[Talk-us] Gated communities

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

DWG have been contacted by a resident of a gated community in Florida.
They were unhappy about our routing which apparently leads people
through an unmanned "residents only" gate where they won't get in,
instead of to the manned main gate.

I wonder how to deal with this, firstly from a "what is correct on the
ground" perspective, but then also from a "what is useful routing-wise"
perspective.

Should all roads inside the gated community be access=private?

What tags should be applied to (a) the main gate where visitors and
delivery services are expected to report, and (b) resident-only gates?

Bye
Frederik

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

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

Re: [Talk-us] Michigan Forest Land

[Marcus W. Davenport]

For those interested, I've started a post on the OSM US forum:
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=65666
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Rails-to-Trails data

[OSM Volunteer stevea]

An update.  Seeing Mark's recent post about is_in reminded me that it has been 
two weeks since I politely asked the Rails-To-Trails Conservancy to donate to 
OSM the same trail data they donated to Google Maps.  I did receive a reply 
that my message was forwarded to their "TrailLink group that handles all GIS 
data, you should hear back from someone soon."  However, as of 3/20 (today), 
nothing.  Yes, I checked my Spam folder, still nothing.

For years (2012-2015) I used to get a monthly e-newsletter (email) from 
railstotrails.org, but then in March, 2015 these mysteriously stopped arriving. 
 Fingers crossed this request goes somewhere, these really are choice data and 
will help OSM in the USA be a map containing yet more excellent hiking and 
biking trails.

SteveA
California
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent in USA

[EthnicFood IsGreat]

Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 08:03:04 +0100 (CET)
From: Mateusz Konieczny 
To: Talk Us 
Subject: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent
in USA

is_in:continent=* is subjective as both division Earth landmass into 
continents[1] and boundaries between continents[2] are mostly subjective. There 
are many competing ways to split world into continents and OSM is not proper 
place to record all of them or one selected system.

In rare cases where one desires to assign locations to continents it can be 
done using location data inherently included in OSM objects and explicit tags 
added to part of objects are not really useful anyway.

is_in:continent tag should be removed to avoid confusing newbies and discourage 
adding new instances of this undesirable tag.

I propose to run an automated edit restricted to USA that will remove all 
instances of this tag.

Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not make the 
edit without a clear support so please comment if you think that it is a good 
idea and if you think that it should not be done.

[...]



I'm in favor.

Mark




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

[Talk-us] Call for Abstracts - Academic Track @ SotM 2019

[Levente Juhász]

Dear all,

Sorry for cross-posting. Please see the announcement of the Academic Track
at the global State of the Map 2019 in Heidelberg, Germany. We are looking
for scientific contributions (abstracts between 500 and 800 words) by May
10, 2019. This is a great opportunity to showcase your OSM related
research. Students are encouraged to submit, too! Limited number of
scholarships are also available. Application deadline for scholarships is
March 30.

For more info, please consult the call [1].

Cheers,
Levente


We are happy to invite you to submit your abstracts and present your
research at the Academic Track of the State of the Map 2019 in Heidelberg!
The Call for Academic Abstracts is now open [1].

Join us for a full day of academic talks in Heidelberg, home to one of the
largest GIScience research groups in the world. We believe that the
Academic Track is a wonderful opportunity to connect the OpenStreetMap
community with the academic community and to provide a platform to exchange
ideas and opportunities for increased collaboration.

Abstracts should be between 500 and 800 words in length, and should be
submitted via the conference management system [2] by no later than May 10,
2019. For more information please consult the call [1]. Questions directed
to the scientific committee should be sent to
academic-s...@openstreetmap.org.

Please feel free to distribute the call within your networks.

Scientific Committee @ State of the Map 2019

[1] https://2019.stateofthemap.org/calls/academic/
[2] https://pretalx.com/sotm2019-at/cfp
-- 
Levente Juhasz
https://blog.jlevente.com/
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove objects that are not existing according to source of GNIS import that added them

[Mateusz Konieczny]

There are thousands of objects mistakenly imported to OSM from GNIS.
Objects proposed to be deleted were documented in GNIS database as not
existing at time of the import, but were imported anyway.

Edit would remove many nonexisting objects that are currently
misleading users of OSM data and confuse mappers. There are many
amenity=post_office, amenity=place_of_worship and other mapped in USA
that in reality are not existing. There are also thousands of object
retagged to hide them in standard rendering but this entries also
should be deleted as unwanted and usually incorrect (for example
abandoned:amenity=post_office).  

Some of them are present for a decade or more like for example
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/357118918/history

Examples of other objects that would be deleted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/358721524#map=16/33.1701/-83.2385
[https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/359023261
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/359290731/#map=15/41.6947/-72.6189


I plan to run an automated edit that will revert part of the GNIS
import that added them and delete objects that never had any reason to
appear in the OSM database in any form, at least according to GNIS data.

Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not
make the edit without a clear support so please comment if you think
that it is a good idea and if you think that it should not be done. 

Plan is as follows:

I will take full responsibility for all edits and if anything goes
wrong I will fix it.

To avoid deleting objects that were not imported from GNIS following
filters will apply
* Only objects created in specific changesets that were importing GNIS
* Only objects with name tag that has "(historical)" part (this is how
GNIS indicates nonexisting objects, see documentation page for details)
* Only objects with gnis:feature_id and name tags that were not changed
from import to 2019-03-10
* Only objects that have gnis:feature_id and name tags, where name tag
has "(historical)" part at time of edit
* Nodes that are now parts of ways or relations will be skipped, ways
and relations (if any, it seems that only nodes were imported) that are
now parts of relations will be skipped

All must apply, otherwise item will not be deleted.

List of changesets that added objects that I want to delete (most of
objects added in GNIS import will not be deleted):

* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/747176 (includes notification
  of author of edits)
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/748530
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/749606
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/751242
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/755766
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/756644
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/758594
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/763672
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/764755
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/766700
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/767554
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/770127
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/774950
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/777367
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/780743
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/781903
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/783501
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/784670
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/786350
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/794649

Each changeset created by a bot will contain a single element or group
of close elements to avoid edits spanning across large areas (it is
impossible in cases where edited object itself spans very large area).

Documentation page with full info on OSM Wiki is at
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/remove_objects_that_are_not_existing_according_to_source_of_import_that_added_them

This message will be crossposted to OSM USA slack channel 

I have experience with automatic edits. This edit will be done
carefully to avoid damage to OSM data.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent in USA

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 20, 2019, 2:59 PM by ric...@nakts.net:

> On 20.03.19 12:14, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
>>
>> Mar 20, 2019, 9:21 AM by >> frede...@remote.org 
>> >> :
>>
>>  Mateusz,
>>
>>  as far as I am concerned, *all* is_in tags are unnecessary at best and
>>  potentially misleading, and could be removed. I'd prefer adding these
>>  tags to the auto remove list in editors though, rather than running
>>  mechanical edits to remove them.
>>
>> Unfortunately there are some people that see value in keeping some
>> of them, that is also reason why this edit is proposed only for
>> one that is utterly broken.
>>
>
> What use do they see?
>
Cached geocoding results.

IMHO not a good reason to keep it.

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent in USA

[Rihards]

On 20.03.19 12:14, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> 
> Mar 20, 2019, 9:21 AM by frede...@remote.org:
> 
> Mateusz,
> 
> as far as I am concerned, *all* is_in tags are unnecessary at best and
> potentially misleading, and could be removed. I'd prefer adding these
> tags to the auto remove list in editors though, rather than running
> mechanical edits to remove them.
> 
> Unfortunately there are some people that see value in keeping some
> of them, that is also reason why this edit is proposed only for
> one that is utterly broken.

What use do they see?

> I was not considering auto remove list before, I will think about it
> and maybe I will propose adding it to a delete list of JOSM and iD
> (maybe also Vespucci if it has one).
> 
> For "prefer" - is it "against automated edit" or "against automated
> edit if auto remove list would be rejected" or "some other solution
> would be better but automated edit is acceptable"?
> 
> 
> I strongly object to doing this in a *recurring* fashion for two
> reasons:
> 
> OK, I will drop recurring part. Documented:
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/remove_is_in:continent_in_USA=1823334=1823287
> 
> If you intend to run a bot like that in regular intervals
> (which I would recommend not to do), then you need to provide a
> mechanism for individual mappers to ask the bot to keep its hands off
> something ("matkoniecz:bot=no" or so).
> 
> So far nobody requested it (there is opt-out section in documentation on
> wiki
> that explicitly mentions it as a possibility), but I would implement it
> probably by
> skipping objects ever edited by specific user (would require making
> one more call before editing each object).
> 
> Certainly I would not require adding pointless tags to OSM database
> (this would be ridiculous especially as most my bot edits are "this tag
> should be
> gone as it is pointless/confusing").
-- 
 Rihards

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent in USA

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 20, 2019, 9:21 AM by frede...@remote.org:

> Mateusz,
>
> as far as I am concerned, *all* is_in tags are unnecessary at best and
> potentially misleading, and could be removed. I'd prefer adding these
> tags to the auto remove list in editors though, rather than running
> mechanical edits to remove them.
>
Unfortunately there are some people that see value in keeping some 
of them, that is also reason why this edit is proposed only for
one that is utterly broken.

I was not considering auto remove list before, I will think about it
and maybe I will propose adding it to a delete list of JOSM and iD
(maybe also Vespucci if it has one).

For "prefer" - is it "against automated edit" or "against automated 
edit if auto remove list would be rejected" or "some other solution
would be better but automated edit is acceptable"?

>
> I strongly object to doing this in a *recurring* fashion for two reasons:
>
OK, I will drop recurring part. Documented:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/remove_is_in:continent_in_USA=1823334=1823287


> If you intend to run a bot like that in regular intervals
> (which I would recommend not to do), then you need to provide a
> mechanism for individual mappers to ask the bot to keep its hands off
> something ("matkoniecz:bot=no" or so).
>
So far nobody requested it (there is opt-out section in documentation on wiki
that explicitly mentions it as a possibility), but I would implement it 
probably by
skipping objects ever edited by specific user (would require making
one more call before editing each object).

Certainly I would not require adding pointless tags to OSM database
(this would be ridiculous especially as most my bot edits are "this tag should 
be
gone as it is pointless/confusing").

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

Re: [Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent in USA

[Frederik Ramm]

Mateusz,

as far as I am concerned, *all* is_in tags are unnecessary at best and
potentially misleading, and could be removed. I'd prefer adding these
tags to the auto remove list in editors though, rather than running
mechanical edits to remove them.

I strongly object to doing this in a *recurring* fashion for two reasons:

1. I don't want us to go down the wikipedia route where we have an army
of bots running to "clean up" contributions. If there's a consensus that
a tag is unnecessary then put it in the major editors.

2. I am in favour of mapper freedom. It is ok to recommend not using a
certain tag, but it is a whole different game to automatically and
regularly remove certain tags from the database so that even if someone
made the conscientious decision to use a tag, they are *still*
overruled. If you intend to run a bot like that in regular intervals
(which I would recommend not to do), then you need to provide a
mechanism for individual mappers to ask the bot to keep its hands off
something ("matkoniecz:bot=no" or so).

Bye
Frederik

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

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

[Talk-us] Proposed mechanical edit - remove is_in:continent in USA

[Mateusz Konieczny]

is_in:continent=* is subjective as both division Earth landmass into 
continents[1] and boundaries between continents[2] are mostly subjective. There 
are many competing ways to split world into continents and OSM is not proper 
place to record all of them or one selected system.

In rare cases where one desires to assign locations to continents it can be 
done using location data inherently included in OSM objects and explicit tags 
added to part of objects are not really useful anyway.

is_in:continent tag should be removed to avoid confusing newbies and discourage 
adding new instances of this undesirable tag.

I propose to run an automated edit restricted to USA that will remove all 
instances of this tag.

Please comment no matter what you think about this idea! I will not make the 
edit without a clear support so please comment if you think that it is a good 
idea and if you think that it should not be done.

Plan is as follows:

I will take full responsibility for all edits and if anything goes wrong I will 
fix it.

Each changeset contains a single element or group of close elements to avoid 
edits spanning across large areas (it is impossible in cases where edited 
object itself spans very large area).

This is proposed as reoccurring edit and may be made as soon as new 
is_in:continent tags appear.

Documentation page on OSM Wiki is at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/remove_is_in:continent_in_USA

I have experience with automatic edits. I already made automated edits to 
remove tags across Poland and I recently processed old-style Wikipedia tags 
across USA.


This message is crosposted to OSM USA slack channel 

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Continental_models-Australia.gif
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundaries_between_the_continents_of_Earth
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us