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

[Kevin Kenny]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:27 PM Mateusz Konieczny
 wrote:
> Is there way to mark challenge as for armchair users/requiring local survey?
>
> And show from the second group only when explicitly required?
>
> I remember that on my attempt to use MapRoulette many were not doable without 
> local survey.

That's supposed to be what the selection, "too hard" is for - too hard
to do in MapRoulette.

The problem with that selection is that it appears to return the
object to the pool, and the users who chase numbers and standings view
that as a challenge. Selecting "too hard" appears to be a virtual
guarantee that someone else will map the object incorrectly. (I've
seen this happen, when I've selected "too hard" because I've known
from local knowledge that there was new construction and road
relocation that didn't show up in the aerials!)

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

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

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 22, 2019, 3:22 PM by m...@rtijn.org:

>> On Mar 22, 2019, at 4:08 AM, Mark Wagner <>> mark+...@carnildo.com 
>> >> > wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:23:48 -0600
>> Martijn van Exel <>> m...@rtijn.org >> > wrote:
>>
 On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner < mark+...@carnildo.com 
  >
 wrote:

 On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
 Martijn van Exel < m...@rtijn.org   
 >>> m...@rtijn.org  >> wrote:

>> On Mar 20, 2019, at 9:01 AM, Mateusz Konieczny
>> <>> matkoni...@tutanota.com >> > 
>> 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.
>

 My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.

 There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
 unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them
 left around me, but the most common result was that an armchair
 mapper would drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building,
 trace the building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one
 of these was actually a school.

>>>
>>> Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better
>>> instructions?
>>>
>>
>> No, I don't.  Sorting out which GNIS nodes are outdated and which are
>> merely misplaced isn't something that can reliably be done from aerial
>> imagery.  For something like "(historical)" GNIS nodes, it's better
>> just to delete all of them.
>>
>
> Short of messaging individual mappers, do you see a way in which MapRoulette 
> could be a ‘better citizen’?
> I’m thinking perhaps a way to ‘report’ challenges. (Not sure how that would 
> work though.)
>
Is there way to mark challenge as for armchair users/requiring local survey?

And show from the second group only when explicitly required?

I remember that on my attempt to use MapRoulette many were not doable without 
local survey.

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

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 22, 2019, at 4:08 AM, Mark Wagner  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:23:48 -0600
> Martijn van Exel  wrote:
> 
>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
>>> Martijn van Exel mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
>>> 
> 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.  
>>> 
>>> My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.
>>> 
>>> There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
>>> unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them
>>> left around me, but the most common result was that an armchair
>>> mapper would drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building,
>>> trace the building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one
>>> of these was actually a school.
>>> 
>> 
>> Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better
>> instructions?
> 
> No, I don't.  Sorting out which GNIS nodes are outdated and which are
> merely misplaced isn't something that can reliably be done from aerial
> imagery.  For something like "(historical)" GNIS nodes, it's better
> just to delete all of them.
> 

Short of messaging individual mappers, do you see a way in which MapRoulette 
could be a ‘better citizen’?
I’m thinking perhaps a way to ‘report’ challenges. (Not sure how that would 
work though.)

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

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

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Mar 22, 2019, 9:51 AM by rich...@systemed.net:

> The other automated edits you're proposing would be better done by adding
> the keys to editor blacklists because the tags aren't actually harming
> anyone. 
>
Main harm is that
- it is one more tag that people, especially newbies need to understand (
or be confused by it)
- its presence encourages adding more tags like this or adding
is_in:continent to additional objects

I agree that it is matter of opinion is this harm significant enough to justify
automated edit, but it certainly exists.

Anyway, based on earlier comment by Frederik Ramm I just created
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/17504 

"consider is_in:continent for automatic dropping or validator warning with 
autofix removal"

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

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

[Mark Wagner]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:23:48 -0600
Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> > On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:35 PM, Mark Wagner 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:46:59 -0600
> > Martijn van Exel mailto:m...@rtijn.org>> wrote:
> >   
> >>> 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.  
> > 
> > My experience is that this will mostly just make things worse.
> > 
> > There was a MapRoulette task a while back for cleaning up
> > unmodified GNIS-imported schools.  There were only a few of them
> > left around me, but the most common result was that an armchair
> > mapper would drag the node to a nearby non-house-looking building,
> > trace the building, and merge it with the imported node.  Not one
> > of these was actually a school.
> >   
> 
> Do you think this could have been prevented had there been better
> instructions?

No, I don't.  Sorting out which GNIS nodes are outdated and which are
merely misplaced isn't something that can reliably be done from aerial
imagery.  For something like "(historical)" GNIS nodes, it's better
just to delete all of them.

-- 
Mark

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

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

[Richard Fairhurst]

Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> 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 think it's an excellent idea. I've deleted these nodes when I've
encountered them during general TIGER fixup but there are a lot, and often
in completely untenable locations.

The other automated edits you're proposing would be better done by adding
the keys to editor blacklists because the tags aren't actually harming
anyone. But the data in this case is actively misleading (it breaks, for
example, "nearest post office"-type searches) so should be deleted.

Richard



--
Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/USA-f5284732.html

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